[opportunity (OP)]

Its no small thing to link EM with gravity, yet if it can done in the lab, what could that do to astrophysics? Will astrophysics theory bend to what we can achieve in the lab?

[opportunity (OP)]

We could be not cutting to a chase if we depend on astrophysics to provide an answer to the link between gravity and electromagnetism. What if we could do it more quickly in the lab? Is that a no no?

[opportunity (OP)]

My point is, if we get the answer in a lab, and it doesn't match up with astrophysics...….should that lab research be withheld until our theoretical knowledge base of astrophysics properly fits with that undisclosed discovery?

[Kryptid]

This is all very strongly dependent upon the nature of the link between electromagnetism and gravity. Modern physics already predicts that gravity and electromagnetism become indistinguishable from each other at incredibly high energies that we won't be able to produce for the foreseeable future.

[opportunity (OP)]

Well, yes.

My question is laced with innuendo also.

Its almost an ideological question.

[Kryptid]

Nothing we discover in the laboratory is going to somehow cancel out what we observe in the night skies. It can't retroactively change the measurements we made in the past. Data is data. At the very most, it would either change our interpretation of that data or demonstrate that the laws of physics are different here than they are in other parts of the Universe (both of which would be very significant discoveries).

[opportunity (OP)]

Every single facet of data provided by telescopes I do "not" challenge. There's another explanation though for the red shift effect, for CMB radiation, for neutron stars, for black holes, for dark matter. Trust me.

[Kryptid]

Trust me.

Once that explanation is well-supported by peer-reviewed experimentation and observation, I will.

[opportunity (OP)]

Yeah....

So it will be quite a paper.

[opportunity (OP)]

My point is though, where does priority in physics theory take root? The lab or the stars?

[opportunity (OP)]

To be honest, having done all the research I have in science, I think science has done a spell on itself in saying everything came from a big bang, because when someone believes that story everything has to be explained in the stars......think about that.

What a draw-back for lab-based research....

[opportunity (OP)]

It's kind of funny when you think about it.

[Kryptid]

My point is though, where does priority in physics theory take root? The lab or the stars?

That depends on what's being studied. You want to study atoms? Use a laboratory. You want to study orbits? Use a telescope.

[opportunity (OP)]

I'm happy with the solar system and how we study that.

When we play with light years of light though, with all that light bouncing in a house of mirrors which hasn't been taken into account.....that's another thing.....with so many question about how light behaves beyond the Oort cloud.

[opportunity (OP)]

Selling the stars is not a project I'm interested in. The stars according to theory are too far away, and not the investment a planet like us should consider as a priority.

[opportunity (OP)]

So I prefer a more lab-based approach to what is accessible, not what light-years offer.

[opportunity (OP)]

My theory of the stars suggest that phenomena is nothing more than light emanated from matter-debris tracks of our own solar system placed such emanating light reminiscent of atomic behaviour.....endlessly reflected in a Fibonacci sequence of time.....the end zone of reflection literally no one can comment on other than saying it is an end-zone of physical matter.

[opportunity (OP)]

To consider that statement requires a theory behind why that statement is possible.

[Kryptid]

with all that light bouncing in a house of mirrors which hasn't been taken into account

What house of mirrors? Space is almost completely empty.

My theory of the stars suggest that phenomena is nothing more than light emanated from matter-debris tracks of our own solar system placed such emanating light reminiscent of atomic behaviour.....endlessly reflected in a Fibonacci sequence of time.....the end zone of reflection literally no one can comment on other than saying it is an end-zone of physical matter.

This big run-on sentence is very difficult for me to understand, but are you suggesting that nothing we observe outside the Solar System is real or what?

[opportunity (OP)]

You're asking if I am right......can I ask if you're right?