In stellar metamorphosis the central object is a pulsar that is dying, not a black hole.
Sparky
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
If you say so, I really don't know what is out there....
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
A pulsar is short for "pulsating star".
This is another huge language issue. Pulsars are not stars at all. Here are some differences:
The term pulsar means pulsating star to 20th century scientists. This is very problematic for 21st century scientists because pulsars are much different than stars. Some differences are listed below to explain why stars are not pulsars.
1. Pulsars emit beams of electromagnetic radiation. Stars shine in all directions evenly.
2. Stars outnumber pulsars by many hundreds of billions this means pulsars are exceedingly rare compared to actual stars. There are only a couple thousand pulsars found in our galaxy.
3. Pulsars have extraordinarily powerful magnetic fields. Some are measured to be well into the 10^15 Gauss, which is incredible as opposed to the polar magnetic field strength of the largest star in our system (the Sun) of only 1-2 Gauss. This is 1,000,000,000,000,000 times stronger than the Sun!
4. Pulsars are really small some only a couple miles in diameter. Stars are many thousands of miles in diameter.
5. When pulsars die they eject their material so that stars can form this is understood by 21st century scientists as galaxy formation. When stars die they cool and shrink becoming what is called a "planet".
6. Pulsars resemble superconducting magnetic storage mechanisms. Stars resemble large cohesive thermodynamic dissipative events.
7. Pulsars are embryonic galaxies. Stars surround a dying pulsar (aging galaxy).
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
If anything its pulsars (embryonic galaxies) that EU should be looking at. NOT stars. Stars are radiating collapsing dust clouds that cool and shrink becoming what are called "planets".
I mean look at this video! You can't convince me this is a star!
Sure it is radiant, but what causes it to radiate is probably vastly different in mechanism than a "star". Embryonic galaxies are vastly more energetic than stars. When these things go off they create entire galaxies.
Notice how he mentions NOTHING about planet formation. Oopppss.
It's the 800 lb gorilla in the room.
Who cares about black holes or big bang creationism (which is incredibly ironic how he supports creationism when his site is suppose to expose creationism)?
Explain how the GROUND came to be! I don't care what caused its fissures, or craters or mountains, all I want to know is how the hell ROCKS clumped together absent:
1. a heat source 2. outside a gravitating body 3. pressure 4. charged material 5. without mechanism for angular momentum loss (given it formed from a big disk)
This is what their accepted nebular hypothesis does, ignore mechanisms for rock formation (liquid or solid) and just ridicule those who question it. No wonder they are lost in the sauce!
It would be interesting to see the actual signals being received.
Definitely electrical in nature, I proposed that they are actually giant superconducting magnetic energy storage mechanisms or just "embryonic galaxies". They store incredible amounts of energy in the form of magnetic fields which slowly are amplified as the object gets stronger and bigger. Eventually the magnetic fields of the object get so great that it ejects itself from a galaxy and starts spewing out material in vast amounts.
In other words, a pulsar is not a star at all. Its something else entirely. I think it is the core to a baby galaxy before it grows arms and matures.
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
I can falsify the standard solar model in easy to understand language:
1. Standard solar model has the Sun being in thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment, this is called LTE or Local Thermodynamic equilibrium.
A. If this were true the Sun would have a temperature of its environment of around 2-4 Kelvin.
B. The Sun has a surface temperature of 5,778 Kelvin.
Conclusion, the Sun is far from thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment, and thus is not in LTE or Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium.
If the standard solar model were correct, then the surface of the Sun would be colder than Pluto, which is on average 44 Kelvin. The temperature of the Sun is observed to be vastly higher than its environment, thus the standard solar model is wrong and needs to be thrown in the trash. The simple fact that stars are radiating by massive amounts contradicts the Standard Solar Model.
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
After going though what I've gone though I have come to the conclusion that there are no, "old wise men at the top of the sciences, making sure we don't do anything really dumb".
There are no old wise men at the top of the sciences. It is mob rule.
By the mob, for the mob. Thus genuine thinkers who have original, creative, problem solving capabilities are ridiculed and peer-reviewed (censored by the mob).
It is the truth. It has always been like this. Very valuable lesson really, I hope to share this with others. As a child "science" is NOT what they tell you it is, it is full of bigotry, vanity, pride, lies, deceit, egos, politics, mob rule and nonsense. That is the true nature of "science".
It took me 2 1/2 years to figure this out fully. But then again, I had to unlearn what I was conditioned into believing. The more astute of the readers of this thread will (if they have common sense) come to the same conclusion as I have. Appearances are deceiving.
Sparky
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
1. Standard solar model has the Sun being in thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment, this is called LTE or Local Thermodynamic equilibrium.
Unless I am not understanding that page's info....
Thermal equilibrium has absolutely nothing to do with energy generation.
All it means is that Body A matches the temperature of Body B.
The Sun is WAY hotter than outer space.
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
the main problem why they do not realize this is because in their "models" they treat the Sun as if it were a body that does not have an environment. In other words, math makes it possible to close the radiating body in a giant celestial box with math equations (assuming it is in LTE) and pretend it doesn't radiate and lose mass to the solar wind and flares.
Possibly electric in nature.
