It's easy to get lost in the Lyman-alpha forest.

Nice1.

Space Trucker wrote:As well the magnetic field of the birthing galaxy would become too massive for its parent to hold on to, it has to eject sooner or later or the parent will die. So in other words it pushes itself out. Oh crap I forgot, this too, the baby galaxies are ejected along the axis of the parent.

WOW. Those are some strong magnets. How do they work?

Space Trucker wrote:Now if anything, that's mother nature throwing a curve ball. Like instead of lithium and its isotopes, you have a strange element in between lithium and beryllium that could act like silicon, and all sorts of really weird shit.

Interesting. A previously undiscovered element with more than 3 and less than 4 protons. How does that work exactly?

CdesignProponentsist wrote:

Space Trucker wrote:As well the magnetic field of the birthing galaxy would become too massive for its parent to hold on to, it has to eject sooner or later or the parent will die. So in other words it pushes itself out. Oh crap I forgot, this too, the baby galaxies are ejected along the axis of the parent.

WOW. Those are some strong magnets. How do they work?

Interesting. A previously undiscovered element with more than 3 and less than 4 protons. How does that work exactly?

yea, pulsars are pretty strong magnets. 10^8 - 10^11 tesla is pretty f-ing strong. Makes those neodymium magnets with 1 tesla look like play toys.



This freak also says pulsars are the true centers of both young and old galaxies, not what he calls "fictional black holes".

To me it makes more sense to put an object we can actually see at the center of galaxies, not things we have to rely on faith for.

As to how a magnet works? Shit I have no idea. One thing is for sure though, nature is connected without matter even being present, cause magnets work inside of vacuum.

Ah! Opening time I see.

Space Trucker wrote:As to how a magnet works? Shit I have no idea. One thing is for sure though, nature is connected without matter even being present, cause magnets work inside of vacuum.

So it seems you know the same amount about magnets as you do about astrophysics given what you have posted here.

campermon wrote:Ah! Opening time I see.

I have a Guinness please.

Space Trucker wrote:As to how a magnet works? Shit I have no idea.

Well that is certainly obvious.

You are talking about an entire galaxy becoming a bar magnet which would require all the pulsars to align their poles. They don't for a very good reason, the magnetic influence between stars is insignificant compared to their gravitational influences.

Even if it weren't so, every magnetic body in both galaxies would have to have their magnetic poles aligned in order to only repel and do it evenly.

You either have no idea what you are taking about or this is just a silly troll. From your posting style I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and leaning to the latter.

kennyc wrote:

campermon wrote:Ah! Opening time I see.

I have a Guinness please.

Here you go:

I fancy a pint of this myself;

Space Trucker wrote:To me it makes more sense to put an object we can actually see at the center of galaxies, not things we have to rely on faith for.

And apparently it makes more sense to invent your own physics to fit your own world view.

campermon wrote:

Here you go:

I fancy a pint of this myself;

I'll have just have one at the moment Camp, otherwise they will fly apart before I get a chance to drink 'em.

"Barman! you heard the man!"

I'll have one of these please -

CdesignProponentsist wrote:

Space Trucker wrote:As to how a magnet works? Shit I have no idea.

Well that is certainly obvious.

You are talking about an entire galaxy becoming a bar magnet which would require all the pulsars to align their poles. They don't for a very good reason, the magnetic influence between stars is insignificant compared to their gravitational influences.

Even if it weren't so, every magnetic body in both galaxies would have to have their magnetic poles aligned in order to only repel and do it evenly.

You either have no idea what you are taking about or this is just a silly troll. From your posting style I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and leaning to the latter.

um, pulsars are spinning because they are ejecting matter like fire sprinklers. Come back when you understand what "spinning" means.

Oh and for those who wish to understand what psychological projection is, it means you call people names based of what you see inside of yourself. So yea.

That is unless we want to expose people's mommy and daddy issues here I suggest not going there. Making people off themselves isn't exactly my plan.

I suppose you have evidence that pulsars spin because they are ejecting material, rather than that they eject material due to their spin?

EDIT for clarification - current accepted theory states that pulsars have high spin rates because they retain the angular momentum of their progenitor pre-supernova stars - when they collapse into the pulsar, the spin rate is massively increased. However, it seems that you are stating that pulsars spin is due to a reaction to them ejecting material - do you have any evidence supporting this assertion?

Oh and to address the "posting style", I have lots of people here who think pasting a "beer" is a good post. I guess that's not trolling? Or is this place the hotbed of neurosis and psychosis as I predicted?

I am just trying to discuss someone's theory with some sort of civility. Yet, people find me threatening, this means there is some sort of fear being induced, or else they wouldn't even be posting or wasting their time on this thread.

No, posting a beer is not trolling - it's just a way of laughing at your posts.

I don't think anyone here finds you threatening.

I also don't think you have a theory - merely a weak hypothesis without any evidentiary support.

Weaver wrote:I suppose you have evidence that pulsars spin because they are ejecting material, rather than that they eject material due to their spin?

No, I actually think they are not spinning at all (as there is something else happening) but I'm trying to get a grip on this person's idea of them. You wouldn't think that with all the trolls on this thread.

How do you explain the observed phenomena of pulsars without spin?

Weaver wrote:No, posting a beer is not trolling - it's just a way of laughing at your posts.

I don't think anyone here finds you threatening.

I also don't think you have a theory - merely a weak hypothesis without any evidentiary support.

Again, you are not paying attention clearly its not my theory, it is this Jeffrey character's. I'm just trying to argue for it.

Plus, I bet you can't even state what the theory even covers! Because you probably have not even read anything on it! Just dismissing and pasting beer pictures is probably your agenda.