Come to think of it, I haven’t read in the European Union info where gravity and General Relativity are wrong either.
You’re overlooking one very important fact. Electric fields from positive and negative charges cancel each other out. There’s no such thing as negative mass (as far as we’re aware of) that can provide a similar effect with gravity. That’s why gravity, although much weaker than electromagnetism, can predominate over it on a cosmic scale.
Then your understanding obviously doesn’t include basic maths, some of which gets taught in school. Such as:
F = ma
F = G \frac {m_1m_2} {r^2}
And of course, if you want to discuss electric anything, let alone the Electric Universe, you need to make sure you understand Maxwell’s Equations first:
\nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac {\rho} {\epsilon_0}
Electric Universe. I guess our joking around about it above probably didn’t help things. But Klax gave the helpful link above. The Wikipedia article on it didn’t mince words. (Another celebration of Wikipedia. …watcha wanna bet that mainline encyclopedias wouldn’t even have any entry at all for that?)
My bad - thanks for the correction. And after I bragged on Wikipedia over it too! Now that I check, Wikipedia only appears to have other entries on that phrase, and not that specific one. Just as well that way too, I suppose.
Yeah, “particular POV” was a charitable phrase, to say the least! Lots of sarcasm and snide remarks about anything they deem irrational. Here is a typical example that I came across during my research of AiG.
I genuinely cannot tell if this is sarrcasm or not, either way i wanted to ask you as to what your take is on russia invading ukraine and do you think they will stop with ukraine or continue to try and reclaim old territory?
Well, that sums up how difficult it is for new ideas to take root. I’m not qualified to explain the Electric Universe concepts and don’t have the time to try, and it’s pretty obvious that most defenders of BioLogos don’t want to take the time, to investigate the peer reviewed papers either, which is no surprise. All this EU stuff challenges what is considered to be facts to the Big Bang beginnings of the cosmos. Electrical currents connecting galaxies and stars is considered just another idea like the flat earth idea. Or as one post here said, they don’t believe gravity exists and don’t think the theory of relativity works. I have not seen that anywhere in the EU info.
So the Big Bang theory lives on. This was my point previously as to why the narratives of current cosmology and evolution will live no matter what new evidence is presented.
Many at BioLogos have excellent backgrounds in physics, some with PhDs, and can tell at first glance that EU is a crock. It is not a ‘new idea’ that has even the slightest chance of ‘taking root’ except with conspiracists, the same sort that disregard other established science that modern culture, medicine and technology depends on.
Some of us take mainstream science seriously because we use its “narratives” to Get Things Done. If you’re going to bring new concepts and ideas to the table, your new concepts and ideas need to do the same.
“Peer review” is meaningless if your “peer reviewed papers” are all published in predatory journals. Instead, point us to patents, practical applications, and companies that are turning your “new ideas” into profits through selling actual products that demonstrate that your “new ideas” actually work.
3 Likes
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
38
What peer reviewed papers? With what scientometric scores?
Well, yeah! Because it makes sense of lots of stuff, whereas the EU ‘theory’ … doesn’t.
Let me ask you this: would you drop your current preoccupations and spend lots of your time giving answer to a flat-earther’s challenges? Presuming that you would join most of us in not dedicating much time to that effort, the flat-earther can then gloomily declare: “well, I guess ‘round-earthism’ lives on.”
