Dancing David
6th April 2011, 08:41 AM
I know you didn't just say that I'm the one who's falling into a trap with my understanding of theory.
This from a guy who thinks an object the size of an asteroid is spinning around at half the speed light, while being made entirely of neutrons, and it is ejecting a beam of light that is visible across galactic distances because the beam is being rotated directly at the earth like a lighthouse.
LOL
By the way, how are those double layers treating you guys in those MHD simulations you run?
Oh my...
um , so you reject the known physics because it doesn't match your internal reality. The fact that the forces that lead to the conclusion of neutron stars are measured and match the model is not a barrier for you... so which parts of the theory don't you accept?
Strong force, weak force, EM force and gravity.
Which is measured incorrectly and modeled incorrectly, what leads you to believe there are not neutron stars?
How does your theory explain the measured forces and model them correctly.
Here we go , rather than derail that thread.
This from a guy who thinks an object the size of an asteroid is spinning around at half the speed light, while being made entirely of neutrons, and it is ejecting a beam of light that is visible across galactic distances because the beam is being rotated directly at the earth like a lighthouse.
LOL
By the way, how are those double layers treating you guys in those MHD simulations you run?
Oh my...
um , so you reject the known physics because it doesn't match your internal reality. The fact that the forces that lead to the conclusion of neutron stars are measured and match the model is not a barrier for you... so which parts of the theory don't you accept?
Strong force, weak force, EM force and gravity.
Which is measured incorrectly and modeled incorrectly, what leads you to believe there are not neutron stars?
How does your theory explain the measured forces and model them correctly.
Here we go , rather than derail that thread.