electric universe

File: 1454511491013.jpg (68KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x500px

> Stephen J. Crothers (born 1957) is a handyman/gardener and part-time amateur scientist who claims that black holes do not exist, and are neither predicted by nor compatible with General Relativity.[2] His body of work consists primarily of articles that he posts at either viXra or his own personal website,[3][4] thus steering clear of the peer review process.

>>8838427
I mean sure, if you want to discredit this guy's idea by simply calling his character into question that's one way.. but I think addressing the substance of what he's found seems rather important. Not to mention,

>Albert Einstein was a patent office clerk

>>8838413
Is this the guy who says stars don't burn, electromagnetism makes them switch on like light bulbs?

>>8838519
yes, he believes in a plasma model. have you ever measured a star extinguish?

>>8838440

He's a quack with no formal physics nor math education spewing shit out of his ass.. what exactly is the 'substance' in what he has 'found'? Everything he says has been thoroughly discredited by any expert who bothers to read it

Here's a nobel laureate who bothered to read some of his claims
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gravitating_misconceptions

>Here are a few of the many schoolboy howlers from "the Miles Mathis of cosmology": Stephen J. Crothers:

>There has been a deliberate suppression of scientific truth by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole and the big bang.[4]

>There is no theoretical basis whatsoever for the existence of black holes.[22]

>Neither Newton's theory nor Einstein's theory predict black holes; both theories preclude it.[4]

>Black holes are the result of David Hilbert’s corruption of the so-called Schwarzschild solution.[4]

>Schwarzschild's "coordinate singularity" at r=2m is non-removable.[23]

>The Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates are just unmitigated rot; built upon a set of invalid assumptions.[24][25]

>The (Penrose-Hawking) singularity theorems are not theorems at all, as they are based upon false concepts.[26]

>It is possible to have M3 and E3 in one-to-one correspondence. [27][28][29]

>Einstein's gravitational waves are fictitious.[30]

>Einstein's pseudo-tensor is a meaningless concoction of mathematical symbols.[31]

>The Universe is not expanding.[4]

>The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is not cosmic in origin, it is produced by the Earth’s oceans.[32]

>The big bang is creationist claptrap.[33]

what did he mean by this?

>>8838413
Current mathematical models are ridiculously good, and they assume the standard model of physics.

These guys are loons who don't do any math, and they won't be taken seriously in the least until they start doing math.

>>8838413
>Can anyone disprove what this guy says?
no, but if you want ad hominen you've come to the right place

>>8838613
>These guys are loons who don't do any math, and they won't be taken seriously in the least until they start doing math.
but the guy in OP's video literally showed 4 proofs where he actually used mathematics

are you retarded? most people here just dismiss him because of what other "established scientists" have written about him without even looking at his stuff

>>8838669
No, I didn't watch the video. I commented based some pre-existing passing familiarity. Let me watch some of the video for shits and giggles.

>>8838669
Oh god, he positively mentioned "quasar ejection"? That shit was consistent with some of the earlier data, but as more data came in, that shit was ruled out.

Wait, did he mean that reference pejoratively? I think he did. But that makes no sense, because that shit is just as outside the mainstream as he is, and to ascribe that to the mainstream is just dishonest.

>>8838669
So, this guy's argument for the first half loosely is:
>Look! No one has an exact solution to Einstein's field equations that have a small point mass (an observer) and a black hole.
>Therefore black holes do not exist.

I was like "wait what?". Because you could just as easily make the argument:
> Look! No one has an exact solution to Einstein's field equations that have a small point mass (an observer) and solar-mass point mass.
> Therefore, general relativity is wrong.

Which is absurd.

PS: I hope he doesn't make that argument.

>>8838669
And he looks so full of himself when he says that the radius of a black hole is directly related to the Gaussian curvature of the spacetime of the black hole. My response: No shit Sherlock.

And a singularity appears? Of course. Again, no shit Sherlock.

This guy is a bad snake-oil salesman. He doesn't even have charisma, and his arguments are of the worst kind.

>>8838719
>It's a function of the curvature.
>Therefore, it's not a radius.

What is this!? This is the first part that I've been able to follow fully, and fully appreciate just how full of shit this guy is.

For a normal everyday ball, the radius of the ball is also a function of the Gaussian curvature. Does that mean it's a not a radius!?!?!!!!1111one

And I've successfully been trolled. I'm done.

Crothers is a proper fucking nut. People have tried to have polite debates with him but he'll never concede a single point. If you're an academic you'll know him as the man who spams all of astronomy via email, a pretty clear sign of what kind of crank he is. Nobel Laurate Gerard 't Hooft famously replied to his ideas but Crothers made cannot let anything go.

http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gravitating_misconceptions.html

I personally got into a debate with crothers about some of his more ridiculous claims about the cosmic microwave background. The more it went on the clearer it was that he didn't really understand the points he was making and was just regurgitating what Robitaille and was incapable of thinking for himself. If you're unfamiliar they claim the CMB doesn't exist, it's just emission from the oceans and they give a shitty reason why each space mission is flawed. Their claims are totally wrong and easily disproven by evidence like the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect which has been used to find hundreds of galaxy clusters using the Planck CMB maps, this would be completely impossible if the CMB didn't exist as they claim but it is historical fact. And yet Crothers could only put this down to magic, he couldn't even entertain the possibility that something he ignorantly claimed could be wrong. He didn't even understand basic signal processing in the CMB like the fact that if you have any source in the microwave sky you have a monopole moment. Through the debate he just sank further into ignoring the evidence without explanation despite me showing him some fun experiments with the Planck data disproving some of his claims. I stopped wasting my time after it was clear he wasn't interested in reasonable debate, after a while of feeling threatened he demanded I prove black holes exist and 20 other claims he doesn't like which had nothing to do with our discussion. In summary he's an autist and I don't believe a single one of his claims.

File: sPznMOY.png (621KB, 642x894px) Image search: [Google]

621KB, 642x894px

>>8838787
One of the plots I used to disprove Cothers claims just to show I'm not bullshitting. He claims the CMB is just noise and yet you can split the data from the Planck mission in half and you get exactly the same map with Gaussian noise.

Furthermore the electric universe is complete pseudoscientific nonsense. Crothers is probably the closest they come to credibility, at least he bothers to write fake papers, the rest of them just make youtube videos but it's the same idea. Make stupid claims and ignore all criticism.

>>8838440
Albert Einstein worked in a patent office after getting his BA in physics, so he didn't completely lack a formal physics education at the time.

>>8838413
He appears to be pissed off because he can't understand what a vacuum solution is. Pro tip: Fields have energy as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_solution_(general_relativity)

Also Schwarzschild solution doesn't describe blacks per se, it describes the geometry around [math] \color { red } { any } [/math] spherical body, it's just that you can get singularities out of that solution.

>>8839684
your answer is here
>>8838576
>>8838787
>>8838793