Galaxies that break the Big Bang theory by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That can accurately be summarized as, all of them. The big bang is religion, not science.

Astronomers spotted shock waves shaking the web of the universe for the first time by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Certainly. It is just shocking how little astronomers know about real-world plasma behavior.

Astronomers spotted shock waves shaking the web of the universe for the first time by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

These people need to learn about Birkland currents.

Astronomers spotted shock waves shaking the web of the universe for the first time by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

sciencenews.org has problem connecting. right now.
The article is about observations of the universe web structure.
This structure is visible via the Zeeman effect and polarized light caused by magnetic fields.
Nova-explosions seem to be causing waves in this structure.

BOKEH: Black holes can be everywhere if you have no focus by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't buy into the standard models either. Every single new piece of evidence found in the past several decades further disproves those models. I don't understand why people are still clinging to the theories wich have objectively failed in all predictions. Even worse, most believe that those models have been proven correct somehow, and speak of them as undeniable truth.

$100 Billion Dark Matter Failure (Nothing has been found) by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]IkeConn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe it just wants to be dark.

The Black Hole Image - Data Fabrication Masterclass! by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A shorter version by Steven Crothers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=NoyIEGCIDXQ

A better theory? by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are now many reports of a new black hole image generated from the hidden center of the milky way.

My explanation for the new and old "black hole" images:

How it works: The many radio telescope groups joined together to form one huge artificial lens spread over earth. It is a great way to increase the resolution. You take the raw data from the microwave telescopes, and by adding all the waves together you simulate a huge lens.

The noise:
This raw wave data is of course hindered and distorted by weather and atmospheric conditions. And hindered / distorted due to the interstellar matter around the milky-way center.

Sadly there is also systematic error in the way the radio telescopes are positioned. So I am looking forward for the raw data analysis, and the noise reduction algorithms that they used. And how they worked out the real world resolution, without the over-optimistic guessing (that seems to be standard in astronomy to promote new findings)

The bokeh effect as standard error:
The algorithms and expected lack of focus increase the Bokeh effect. This is bokeh: https://i.imgur.com/exgBT9X.jpg

It projects light spots towards the image in the pattern that is placed in front of the lens. It is well-known in photography, but in astronomy we see more likely the cross shaped distortions caused by diffraction.

And this is one red laser dot out of focus: https://i.imgur.com/4OSEHn5.jpg

The 4 points are arranged in the positions of the radio telescope groups, when seen from far away from earth.

This is with a bit better focus. https://i.imgur.com/Nfhz9vV.jpg

And it looks already very similar to the "black hole" So the systematic error in the data has a bias towards the "black hole" shape.

Machine learning to "enhance" the image When machine learning is used, we can be pretty certain that the algorithm has made up non-existent data to work towards the wanted result.
That is how machine learning works. That is why we have sites like "ThisPersonDoesNotExist"
It is as imaginary as CSI enhance.

In both images they needed machine learning to "correct" for all the noise.
They did not just select the data that was without noise and in focus, because that information was unavailable.
You need a good reference to know what is in focus and what is noise at these extreme resolutions.
You can only find out what the noise is compared to the nearest telescopes. And in the first image we even know that they did used data with almost 100% noise compared to the nearest telescopes. So this data was completely useless most of the time. Especially the data that was necessary to focus.

Sky Scholar (Radio imaging expert) on the black hole image.
Black hole image = not science
Scientific analysis
The data fabrication

And here are the options that the algorithm generated from the previous "black hole":
https://i.imgur.com/KPqvIK6.png
These variations were from 4 different groups, and they depend on which part of the noisy data you would prioritize.
From the distance the "black hole" is a very bright object with a beam coming out of it on two opposite sides.
And this is still an option, but was probably not in the machine learning database.

Here is a video: VFX artists debunk CSI enhance effects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT2sAz3e2yc

This all means that we need a damned good skeptical reality check of the raw data and the algorithms.

BOKEH: Black holes can be everywhere if you have no focus by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. The Pyramid shape of UFOs were caused by the BOKEH produced by certain infra-red cameras.
These exact cameras had triangle-shaped openings, which get projected onto the sensor when you are not in focus.

In a few days there will be a new black hole picture of the Milky Way.
And on this sub I criticize the bad science of the NASA.

In this post I am referring to the BOKEH that is produced by the radio-telescopes which are arranged in a circle (most of the time).
And if you have them in a circle, you get circle shaped bokeh image.

And I am fairly certain that this principle produced the "black hole" image last time, and will produce it again.
They also used completely noisy data from certain telescopes to tune their other telescopes.
And to this they added a combination of interpolation, computer processing and poorly understood AI manipulation. \

Here are all the images produced by their statistical processing
And here is my Bokeh image of a single point, using holes in my lens.
The holes were placed in places where a rough estimate of the distribution of the radio-telescopes on earth.
This should be corrected for additional factors, but it already shows the principle of the BOKEH problem in black hole images.

BOKEH: Black holes can be everywhere if you have no focus by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]fatman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Learned that word from Mick West and his debunking of some UFO videos

Dark Matter Illusion - See The Pattern by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That was a fun listen. Goes to show we don’t know much.

Seismology & Surface Tension - on the Sun [SkyScholar] by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This Video Was Made from 400,000 Photos of Comet 67p Taken by Rosetta by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Note: The spots/speckles that you see in the images are not snow, but dust. There was hardly any snow one the comet. And this was all predicted by the Electric comet model. In that model, the tails are mainly caused by electro-chemical reactions with the solar wind.

TOP 20 Pieces of Evidence from Halton Arp: Quasars form Galaxies, Quantisation & More (Redshift by Plasma is misinterpreted as distance) by zyxzevn in PlasmaCosmology

[–]zyxzevn[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From laboratory tests, we know that plasma can redshift light, depending on the electron density.
And probably there are many other ways.
The astronomy refuses to give this any consideration, and clings on to a 100 year old theory.