I have been watching your channel for awhile. It interested me because I was always a little shocked at how some scientists just spoke of dark matter as a real thing when in reality they took observations and backed into an explanation and then it was somehow real. Not until your channel did I have access to an alternative view. I am excited about what looks like a reset may be coming. This will be huge for physics. The only reason it would be frightening is if you have staked your life's work on an overstated assumption without allowing for alternatives until you had more proof of your own hypothesis. This isn't scary, this is a moment of clarity. Mother nature still has secrets. Whst a great time. I hope you get more recognition and your theories are put to the test as well. I will keep an eye out for updates.
_"Not until your channel did I have access to an alternative view. "_ He doesn't have a valid alternative. The only real scientific hypotheses that have been proposed to explain dark matter observations are MOND and entropic gravity. Both fail trivially at large scales. I'm afraid, from your point of view, that the more observations we make, the more secure the LCDM model becomes. There is a reason Lerner only puts this nonsense on youtube. And in books.
@@ianw_xvi8784 I think you are missing my point. The bigger issue is the scientific community is perfectly OK accepting a hypothesis they like and then talking about it in terms that are beyond what the data shows. I don't need another hypothesis until one is warranted.
@@tomusmc1993 Seems you don't know how real scientists work. They don't accept a hypothesis because they like it. They accept it when the evidence starts to show that it is correct. And the evidence for LCDM is overwhelming. If you think they are making claims in the literature that are inappropriate, then you should be able to link to them. I'll give one example - the BICEP 2 claims that they had detected the B-mode polarisation which we hope to see to confirm inflation. It was other scientists that subjected that to scrutiny, and showed it to be in error. Despite the fact that they would really like to see that signal. And likely will in the next decade.
@@ianw_xvi8784 " Seems you don't know how real scientists work" AHAHAHAHAH the same "real" scientists that will kick you out of university for talking about race and iq? " They accept it when the evidence starts to show that it is correct. " No they do not, that is not how any of that works, scientist accepts for the most part whatever is standard practice and things change when people die. You have zero insight into human psychology. "the more secure the LCDM model becomes" ????? meaningless statement. "And likely will in the next decade." BASED ON WHAT, years of searching without any evidence but backwards justifications? you sir are the ones that have just made shit up and just proclaimed shit out the ass like "it wil likely be proven", what you have observed it before to know that it will be proven or what? maybe learn what the word likely means. you have found pixie dust and a method to gain endless funding by proclaiming a invisible "thing" that can never be found. AND yes they do accept hypothesis because they like it, BECAUSE its easy, see the geocentric model, or heck the history of science the last 2000 years, you are just spouting nonsense, you have found 0 evidence of whatever you are proposing only backwards justfying nonsense claiming it is a thing, quite literally observing behaviour that contradicts establisehd theory and then applying some mental gymnastics to claim it doesnt.
I >REALLY< appreciate your videos! You explain such a heavy topic in a very easy to understand way. Thank you! Also, this format, the way you record your videos now, is great! You sound clear, good use of the "picture", nice! I so hope you do manage to solve the fusion-stability-problem. Wishing you all the best.
I thought stability was solved in fusion rectors. Two being, a pioneering reactor in Britain is gearing up to start pivotal tests of a fuel mix that will eventually power ITER - the world's biggest nuclear-fusion experiment. ... In December, and researchers at the Joint European Torus (JET) started conducting fusion experiments with tritium - a rare and radioactive isotope of hydrogen.Feb. 22, 2021
@@Barbreck1 Why? Because he believes in scientifically impossible gibberish. That is why. Do you know the temperatures and pressures that liquid metallic H can exist at? Have a look at a phase diagram of H. Those conditions do not exist on or in the Sun. We can look through the solar 'surface' at the limbs. It is known as limb darkening. We can see spectroscopically what it is made of, we can calculate the temperatures and the plasma density. It ain't LMH! It is an idiotic idea. He claims that his LMH Sun can create all the elements. Idiocy. The fusion of everything heavier than Fe consumes energy! We would see the signatures in the neutrino data. They aren't there. Unsurprisingly, as fusion in LMH is impossible. He has no mechanism for forming stars. He thinks planets came hurtling out of his LMH Sun, and turned into rock! He thinks the CMB is caused by the Earth's oceans! We can see the CMB photons being subject to the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect as they pass through large scale structure (galaxy clusters, etc). Proving that it is behind that LSS. We can see it being lensed by distant structure. Etc, etc. He is a complete fruitloop.
Have only just watched this video. I always thought that there was a conflict between the lamdaCDM model and Hubble's law ie the expansion in the L CDM model does not seem to fit with the straight line through the origin of Hubble's graph.
It's an Effect or a Side-Effect of the Collective activity of Blackholes and the Surrounding Material in the Galaxies throughout it's 'History'! A History of Continuously Forming Co-entangled Relationships between the Matter Within a Galaxy(Nonlocal Newtonian Gravity, GR & Nonlocal QSECD3/QCD3 Vacui Pressure/Forces=SFT)! You All Question what doesn't need Questioned, and you don't Question what needs to be Questioned(Biases especially religious, political-economic, cultural and Ego beliefs)!.
Safire proves that a piece of metal will glow and melt when heated. Quite what that has to do with Astrophysics I fail to see. Perhaps you can explain it better than they can?!
Theoretical Physicists deal in dream physics. Believe what you want to believe. While the SAFIRE project received major funding these guys above are still asking for money from TH-camrs. Dr. Robataille invented the MRI and has a pretty good handle on real laws of physics. Thermal dynamics has a couple laws that fill the black holes. Why aren't the galaxies imploding. Why don't theoretical Physicists accept Tesla as real science? Oops The LHC recently built a Tesla Linear Accelerator. Ooooooh it might shoot faster than the speed of light... With electricity not gravity. Your opinions have been noted. I learned Physics in the Navy and the Navy is all about Tesla and spend alot of time laughing at Einsteins crazy haircut
@@mcburcke No, we have already seen. PC has no explanation for the CMB. It has no explanation for dark matter observations. It cannot explain galaxy rotation curves. It cannot explain the light element abundance. And so on. Nobody bothers with it these days, other than electric universe Velikovskian crackpots.
@@ianw_xvi8784 There are no dark matter observations. Dark matter is just a mathematical construct. If I was told by Amazon there are 22 baseball cards in the pack I ordered, but i only count 20, I can't say there must be 2 dark cards that nobody can see. That's dark matter. You have assume Relativity is true at all scales, just like I have to assume Amazon never makes a mistake in packaging.
@@ianw_xvi8784 really??? Send me a link to a paper where they have observed dark matter or stfu. What they think is dark matter doesn’t count. Proven observations only.
My theory is so advanced, no one can believe it. I guess I will have to wait until they are advanced enough to pick up waves from neutrons to even begin to understand it. Thank you for reminding me that science is always a religion and never just theories.
The new music Tonal Scale is as thus: 12 7 5 2 3 : 1 4 5 9 14 Not 12 with 7 & 5 BUT 14 with 9 & 5 [2^(1/14)] These are the Tonal Scales growing from f (by cycles of fifths): All Scales build from the first mode: equivalent to Lydian f, or more correctly the brightest mode. White keys are = & Black keys are | 12 with 7 & 5 [2^(1/12)] =|=|=|==|=|= {1,8,3,10,5,12,7,2,9,4,11,6} 1thru7are= 8thru12are| 7 with 5 & 2 [2^(1/7)] ===|==| {1,3,5,7,2,4,6} 1thru5are= 6&7are| 5 with 2 & 3 [2^(1/5)] =||=| {1,3,5,2,4} 1&2are= 3thru5are| Now evolving up the other end 5 with 4 & 1 [2^(1/5)] ==|== {1,3,5,2,4} 1thru4are= 5is| 9 with 5 & 4 [2^(1/9)] =|=|=|==| {1,8,3,7,5,9,2,4,6} 1thru5are= 6thru9are| 14 with 9 & 5 [2^(1/14)] =|=|===|=|===| {1,12,3,14,5,7,9,11,2,13,4,6,8,10} 1thru9are= 10thru14are| Joseph Yasser is the actual originator of the realization, that scales develop by cycles of fifths. www.seraph.it/blog_files/623ba37cafa0d91db51fa87296693fff-175.html www.academia.edu/4163545/A_Theory_of_Evolving_Tonality_by_Joseph_Yasser www.musanim.com/Yasser/ The chromatic scale we use today is divided by 2^(1/12) twelfth root of two Instead of moving to the next higher: the 19 tone scale 2^(1/19) nineteenth root of two I decided to go all the way down and back up the other end: So 12 - 7 is 5 & 7 - 5 is 2 & 5 - 2 is 3 Now we enter to the other side: 2 - 3 is (-1)* & 3 - (-1) is 4* & (-1) - 4 is (-5)* & 4 - (-5) is 9* & (-5) - 9 is (-14)* ignoring the negatives we have * 1 4 5 9 14 Just follow the cycles how each scale is weaved together, as shown above. Each scale has its own division within the frequency doubling, therefore the 14 tone scale is 2^(1/14) fourteenth root of two Also see my Pan-diatonic Theory: www.mediafire.com/file/pe718z4s19r9gnb/Modality_Theory.zip/file
Well "you just look at it" and see how BBT makes perfect non sense mathematically. No matter how much you want an easy answer for displacing authority and responsibility.
Back in the 60s when redshift was first detected there was discussion of what it meant. The relationship between redshift and distance was obvious. However, they couldn't tell what the redshift represented. One option was that photons were redshifted due to the intersteller medium that they traveled through--the tired light theory. Another view was that redshift was caused by radial velocities of the objects. How did they justify abandoning the former and going with the latter?
@@sverkere Observations. Plural. If tired light were true, we would see blurring. We don't. If it were true, we wouldn't see redshift matching time dilation in supernova 1a observations. We do. If it were true we would not see the CMB as a blackbody spectrum. We do. It is trivially false. Nobody sane takes it seriously. Only crackpots. www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm
@@ianw_xvi8784 "pure woo". Why are you here, ian? Your almost hysterical defense of the big bangers is as puzzling as it is inane. Have you ever had even one physics course? There are some good videos of Richard Feynman explaining science and the scientific method. You would benefit from watching and learning from them.
The sound effects take away from the presentation. Something as simple as this could have a huge impact on funding. How are investors going to take this seriously if the editing is comical. Dr lerner should be making headlines with his tremendous knowledge and research.. he should be on Joe Rogan dispelling all of the scientific community misinformation and talking points
you're not wrong that it could be better, but it's not that bad. He's a great scientist, not a media guy. It's tragic he doesn't have a nephew or something that could help. Maybe a few thousand of the investor money could be put towards hiring somebody to do more regular updates and script these informationals.
@@justinadams5446 All great scientist have been propelled or suppressed by the Media and a little coverage of his work could help his R&D enormously and all of us as well. His work can potentially get us out of this Scientific Dark Ages were going through but if nothing is done regarding the issue of energy as of now, we may face a more dire situation for our future generations
I’m beginning to believe the government has much better theories and has been giving grants to misdirect people to chase dark matter. Meanwhile their scientists at the national labs are light years ahead.
Personally, I disagree. The comical sound effects are yet another reflection of the sovereign mind not conforming to formality and taking a polished expression so da*n serious - the same mind that is able to present this fresh view on our cosmos. It reminds me of Trump's polemics against being “presidential.”
Dude, I've been following your focus fusion stuff since 2005. I had faith. Now your busy talking about the bing bang. What happened to focus fusion? what happened to raising money to build a test machine???
2005.. oof. Man, you've been following a while. I just started paying attention in the last year. I've been excited by all the recent upgrades, figured we'd see new shots by now. Hope all's going well
You always find the latest news on the fusion device here, it never stopped steadily progressing: facebook.com/LPPFusion/ There is no difference between understanding cosmology and fusion power. As Riemann said, breakthroughs will come when we look in the very small and in the very large.
that's good news, actually. I'll check it out. I'd really like to see it get done before china starts mining helium 3 off the moon. the more i look at it, stellerators and projects like ITER seem like a dead end, not to mention an environmental nightmare.
you guys look like that poor people some years ago that was thinking the earth was flat, here again with the universe! The universe is simply infinite, there is no origin and no end.
@@C3l3bi1 Silly comment. If you knew anything about the subject you would know what the evidence is, wouldn't you? Try the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect on CMB photons. Baryon acoustic oscillations, and Sn 1a observations. Explain them. If you don't understand physics to at least Masters level, don't even bother trying.
Seems you’ve made a second YT account. Going around claiming people are liars and crockpots for having different views. Interesting, are you sure you’re not projecting? You seem to have to inject that you have a master’s degree (might not!) into your comments, good for you you want a cookie? You’re not a very good representation of the scientific community by sounding so closed minded and calling others names etc. in fact, you’re only proving that many in the SC may have too much invested into incorrect assumptions and their weak egos can’t handle it. It is a risky job, one’s life work can be concentrated on a false assumption.
@@shinedown394 _"Seems you’ve made a second YT account."_ More than two! That's what happens when you deal with the unqualified mythologists of EU - they shadow ban you whenever you disagree with their nonsense, and try to explain it scientifically. Like all cults, they do not want their fanboys learning real science. _"You seem to have to inject that you have a master’s degree (might not!)"_ I do. BSc (Hons) Astronomy, Univ. of Canterbury, New Zealand; MSc Astrophysics, Liverpool John Moores Univ., UK. Not that you need a Master's to debunk the impossible nonsense of EU. A bright high school physics major could do it, given access to the relevant literature. _"You’re not a very good representation of the scientific community by sounding so closed minded"_ How can anyone be closed minded to stuff that is scientifically impossible, and doesn't even exist in the scientific literature? It is nothing to do with closed mindedness. it is about pointing out that it is scientifically impossible. _"calling others names etc"_ Ever heard the denigrating terms used by crackpots like Thornhill and Scott about real scientists? If you can't stand the heat....... _"in fact, you’re only proving that many in the SC may have too much invested into incorrect assumptions"_ Your cult hasn't shown any incorrect assumption in the standard models. They don't have any scientists. And neither have you or the previous commenters shown any. When were you thinking of starting? _"It is a risky job, one’s life work can be concentrated on a false assumption."_ Then you'll be able to point to a false assumption, and describe, scientifically, why it is a false assumption. None of your high priests have done so as yet. Would you like to be the first? You see, the poster I was replying to ran away when I asked him to explain the evidence from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect on CMB photons., baryon acoustic oscillations, and Sn 1a observations. Are you going to run away as well? My prediction? Yep. Because you don't even know what those things are.
Modern cosmology: The BBT can't possibly be wrong.
Occams' Razor: Hold my beer
I have been watching your channel for awhile. It interested me because I was always a little shocked at how some scientists just spoke of dark matter as a real thing when in reality they took observations and backed into an explanation and then it was somehow real. Not until your channel did I have access to an alternative view.
I am excited about what looks like a reset may be coming. This will be huge for physics. The only reason it would be frightening is if you have staked your life's work on an overstated assumption without allowing for alternatives until you had more proof of your own hypothesis.
This isn't scary, this is a moment of clarity. Mother nature still has secrets. Whst a great time. I hope you get more recognition and your theories are put to the test as well. I will keep an eye out for updates.
_"Not until your channel did I have access to an alternative view. "_
He doesn't have a valid alternative. The only real scientific hypotheses that have been proposed to explain dark matter observations are MOND and entropic gravity. Both fail trivially at large scales. I'm afraid, from your point of view, that the more observations we make, the more secure the LCDM model becomes. There is a reason Lerner only puts this nonsense on youtube. And in books.
@@ianw_xvi8784 I think you are missing my point. The bigger issue is the scientific community is perfectly OK accepting a hypothesis they like and then talking about it in terms that are beyond what the data shows. I don't need another hypothesis until one is warranted.
@@tomusmc1993 Seems you don't know how real scientists work. They don't accept a hypothesis because they like it. They accept it when the evidence starts to show that it is correct. And the evidence for LCDM is overwhelming. If you think they are making claims in the literature that are inappropriate, then you should be able to link to them. I'll give one example - the BICEP 2 claims that they had detected the B-mode polarisation which we hope to see to confirm inflation. It was other scientists that subjected that to scrutiny, and showed it to be in error. Despite the fact that they would really like to see that signal. And likely will in the next decade.
@@ianw_xvi8784 " Seems you don't know how real scientists work"
AHAHAHAHAH the same "real" scientists that will kick you out of university for talking about race and iq?
" They accept it when the evidence starts to show that it is correct. "
No they do not, that is not how any of that works, scientist accepts for the most part whatever is standard practice and things change when people die. You have zero insight into human psychology.
"the more secure the LCDM model becomes"
????? meaningless statement.
"And likely will in the next decade."
BASED ON WHAT, years of searching without any evidence but backwards justifications?
you sir are the ones that have just made shit up and just proclaimed shit out the ass like "it wil likely be proven", what you have observed it before to know that it will be proven or what? maybe learn what the word likely means.
you have found pixie dust and a method to gain endless funding by proclaiming a invisible "thing" that can never be found.
AND yes they do accept hypothesis because they like it, BECAUSE its easy, see the geocentric model, or heck the history of science the last 2000 years,
you are just spouting nonsense, you have found 0 evidence of whatever you are proposing only backwards justfying nonsense claiming it is a thing, quite literally observing behaviour that contradicts establisehd theory and then applying some mental gymnastics to claim it doesnt.
I >REALLY< appreciate your videos! You explain such a heavy topic in a very easy to understand way. Thank you!
Also, this format, the way you record your videos now, is great! You sound clear, good use of the "picture", nice!
I so hope you do manage to solve the fusion-stability-problem.
Wishing you all the best.
Thanks, glad you find them useful. We're busy in the lab still getting ready for next experiments!
I thought stability was solved in fusion rectors. Two being, a pioneering reactor in Britain is gearing up to start pivotal tests of a fuel mix that will eventually power ITER - the world's biggest nuclear-fusion experiment. ... In December, and researchers at the Joint European Torus (JET) started conducting fusion experiments with tritium - a rare and radioactive isotope of hydrogen.Feb. 22, 2021
Noted improvement in audio and video. Glad to see you're always working on the production quality! Interesting discussion as always Eric. Thank you 😊
Good to see that You are well, loving the sound effects 😂
I'm a new subscriber; really enjoying watching back through the evolution of this channel. Bravo!
I liked the Doesn't Mater that fixes everything
But you make great points.....
Also Dr. Pierre Marie Robataille inventor of the MRI machine he has a TH-cam channel Sky Scholar... Cheers
He's a clueless creationist.
I also recommend Dr Robitaille's TH-cam channel. He has some videos about the blackbody radiation issue that Dr Lerner mentions here.
@@justinadams5446 Robitaille is seriously clueless.
@@ianw_xvi8784 Why?
@@Barbreck1 Why? Because he believes in scientifically impossible gibberish. That is why. Do you know the temperatures and pressures that liquid metallic H can exist at? Have a look at a phase diagram of H. Those conditions do not exist on or in the Sun. We can look through the solar 'surface' at the limbs. It is known as limb darkening. We can see spectroscopically what it is made of, we can calculate the temperatures and the plasma density. It ain't LMH! It is an idiotic idea. He claims that his LMH Sun can create all the elements. Idiocy. The fusion of everything heavier than Fe consumes energy! We would see the signatures in the neutrino data. They aren't there. Unsurprisingly, as fusion in LMH is impossible. He has no mechanism for forming stars. He thinks planets came hurtling out of his LMH Sun, and turned into rock! He thinks the CMB is caused by the Earth's oceans! We can see the CMB photons being subject to the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect as they pass through large scale structure (galaxy clusters, etc). Proving that it is behind that LSS. We can see it being lensed by distant structure. Etc, etc. He is a complete fruitloop.
The big bang fan boys still clutching to a straw...LOL
Thank you!
Thanks, one criticism I may offer is to go easier on the sound effects. I think they are funny, just too often.
At least for this video I like the change. It's like 'hillbilly' production values.
I agree, "less is more," in this regard.
Please make the next video about black body radiation. Thank you.
Have only just watched this video. I always thought that there was a conflict between the lamdaCDM model and Hubble's law ie the expansion in the L CDM model does not seem to fit with the straight line through the origin of Hubble's graph.
Dr Lerner needs to go on Joe Rogan's podcast!
Yep. practically every other crackpot has!
The so called 'dark matter' had created a "dark mystery" for cosmology? 'Quelle surprise.'
It's an Effect or a Side-Effect of the Collective activity of Blackholes and the Surrounding Material in the Galaxies throughout it's 'History'! A History of Continuously Forming Co-entangled Relationships between the Matter Within a Galaxy(Nonlocal Newtonian Gravity, GR & Nonlocal QSECD3/QCD3 Vacui Pressure/Forces=SFT)! You All Question what doesn't need Questioned, and you don't Question what needs to be Questioned(Biases especially religious, political-economic, cultural and Ego beliefs)!.
@@lucaspierce3328 I'm sure glad there are people smart enough to under stand these things out there - somewhere.
Curious have you guys connected with the SAFIRE fusion project? Interesting results with their plasma machine
Safire is a scam.
Safire proves that a piece of metal will glow and melt when heated. Quite what that has to do with Astrophysics I fail to see. Perhaps you can explain it better than they can?!
@@Barbreck1 They can't explain it. They have no physicists! They did have a plasma physicist for 6 years, but he called them out as frauds.
Theoretical Physicists deal in dream physics. Believe what you want to believe. While the SAFIRE project received major funding these guys above are still asking for money from TH-camrs.
Dr. Robataille invented the MRI and has a pretty good handle on real laws of physics. Thermal dynamics has a couple laws that fill the black holes. Why aren't the galaxies imploding. Why don't theoretical Physicists accept Tesla as real science? Oops The LHC recently built a Tesla Linear Accelerator. Ooooooh it might shoot faster than the speed of light... With electricity not gravity. Your opinions have been noted. I learned Physics in the Navy and the Navy is all about Tesla and spend alot of time laughing at Einsteins crazy haircut
Oh yah.... When did Einstein become a Physicist. Patent Clerk turned Astrophysicist... At least Tesla was a dapper man
Thermal dynamics at play! Maybe? Don't think we will ever truly know.🤔
I love this guy
Time for the real deal: Plasma cosmology. Too bad so much academic funding is tied up fiddling with the Standard Model.
Plasma cosmology is long since dead. It is only followed by crackpots these days.
@@mcburcke No, we have already seen. PC has no explanation for the CMB. It has no explanation for dark matter observations. It cannot explain galaxy rotation curves. It cannot explain the light element abundance. And so on. Nobody bothers with it these days, other than electric universe Velikovskian crackpots.
@@ianw_xvi8784 There are no dark matter observations. Dark matter is just a mathematical construct. If I was told by Amazon there are 22 baseball cards in the pack I ordered, but i only count 20, I can't say there must be 2 dark cards that nobody can see. That's dark matter. You have assume Relativity is true at all scales, just like I have to assume Amazon never makes a mistake in packaging.
@@davruck1 Wrong. There are plenty of dark matter observations.
@@ianw_xvi8784 really??? Send me a link to a paper where they have observed dark matter or stfu. What they think is dark matter doesn’t count. Proven observations only.
My theory is so advanced, no one can believe it. I guess I will have to wait until they are advanced enough to pick up waves from neutrons to even begin to understand it. Thank you for reminding me that science is always a religion and never just theories.
I'd like to hear about your theory
@@mace3632 Cosmic plain theory?
The new music Tonal Scale is as thus: 12 7 5 2 3 : 1 4 5 9 14
Not 12 with 7 & 5 BUT 14 with 9 & 5 [2^(1/14)]
These are the Tonal Scales growing from f (by cycles of fifths):
All Scales build from the first mode: equivalent to Lydian f,
or more correctly the brightest mode.
White keys are = & Black keys are |
12 with 7 & 5 [2^(1/12)] =|=|=|==|=|= {1,8,3,10,5,12,7,2,9,4,11,6}
1thru7are= 8thru12are|
7 with 5 & 2 [2^(1/7)] ===|==| {1,3,5,7,2,4,6} 1thru5are= 6&7are|
5 with 2 & 3 [2^(1/5)] =||=| {1,3,5,2,4} 1&2are= 3thru5are|
Now evolving up the other end
5 with 4 & 1 [2^(1/5)] ==|== {1,3,5,2,4} 1thru4are= 5is|
9 with 5 & 4 [2^(1/9)] =|=|=|==| {1,8,3,7,5,9,2,4,6} 1thru5are= 6thru9are|
14 with 9 & 5 [2^(1/14)] =|=|===|=|===| {1,12,3,14,5,7,9,11,2,13,4,6,8,10}
1thru9are= 10thru14are|
Joseph Yasser is the actual originator of the realization,
that scales develop by cycles of fifths.
www.seraph.it/blog_files/623ba37cafa0d91db51fa87296693fff-175.html
www.academia.edu/4163545/A_Theory_of_Evolving_Tonality_by_Joseph_Yasser
www.musanim.com/Yasser/
The chromatic scale we use today is divided by 2^(1/12) twelfth root of two
Instead of moving to the next higher: the 19 tone scale 2^(1/19) nineteenth root of two
I decided to go all the way down and back up the other end:
So 12 - 7 is 5 & 7 - 5 is 2 & 5 - 2 is 3
Now we enter to the other side:
2 - 3 is (-1)* & 3 - (-1) is 4* & (-1) - 4 is (-5)* & 4 - (-5) is 9* & (-5) - 9 is (-14)*
ignoring the negatives we have * 1 4 5 9 14
Just follow the cycles how each scale is weaved together, as shown above.
Each scale has its own division within the frequency doubling,
therefore the 14 tone scale is 2^(1/14) fourteenth root of two
Also see my Pan-diatonic Theory:
www.mediafire.com/file/pe718z4s19r9gnb/Modality_Theory.zip/file
Well "you just look at it" and see how BBT makes perfect non sense mathematically. No matter how much you want an easy answer for displacing authority and responsibility.
Back in the 60s when redshift was first detected there was discussion of what it meant. The relationship between redshift and distance was obvious. However, they couldn't tell what the redshift represented. One option was that photons were redshifted due to the intersteller medium that they traveled through--the tired light theory. Another view was that redshift was caused by radial velocities of the objects. How did they justify abandoning the former and going with the latter?
Because tired light is pure woo. Observation shows it to be wrong. Trivially.
@@ianw_xvi8784 Which observation?
@@sverkere Observations. Plural. If tired light were true, we would see blurring. We don't. If it were true, we wouldn't see redshift matching time dilation in supernova 1a observations. We do. If it were true we would not see the CMB as a blackbody spectrum. We do. It is trivially false. Nobody sane takes it seriously. Only crackpots.
www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/tiredlit.htm
@@ianw_xvi8784 Yes. Thanks for the link.
@@ianw_xvi8784 "pure woo". Why are you here, ian? Your almost hysterical defense of the big bangers is as puzzling as it is inane. Have you ever had even one physics course? There are some good videos of Richard Feynman explaining science and the scientific method. You would benefit from watching and learning from them.
I watch LPPFUSION and Arvin Ash just so I can remain baffled and confused.
@@Mrch33ky You'll have to explain that one to me.
The sound effects take away from the presentation. Something as simple as this could have a huge impact on funding. How are investors going to take this seriously if the editing is comical. Dr lerner should be making headlines with his tremendous knowledge and research.. he should be on Joe Rogan dispelling all of the scientific community misinformation and talking points
you're not wrong that it could be better, but it's not that bad. He's a great scientist, not a media guy. It's tragic he doesn't have a nephew or something that could help. Maybe a few thousand of the investor money could be put towards hiring somebody to do more regular updates and script these informationals.
@@justinadams5446 All great scientist have been propelled or suppressed by the Media and a little coverage of his work could help his R&D enormously and all of us as well. His work can potentially get us out of this Scientific Dark Ages were going through but if nothing is done regarding the issue of energy as of now, we may face a more dire situation for our future generations
I’m beginning to believe the government has much better theories and has been giving grants to misdirect people to chase dark matter. Meanwhile their scientists at the national labs are light years ahead.
Personally, I disagree. The comical sound effects are yet another reflection of the sovereign mind not conforming to formality and taking a polished expression so da*n serious - the same mind that is able to present this fresh view on our cosmos. It reminds me of Trump's polemics against being “presidential.”
@@HBrobjerg Don't compare Eric Lerner with Donld Trump
Dude, I've been following your focus fusion stuff since 2005. I had faith. Now your busy talking about the bing bang. What happened to focus fusion? what happened to raising money to build a test machine???
2005.. oof. Man, you've been following a while. I just started paying attention in the last year. I've been excited by all the recent upgrades, figured we'd see new shots by now. Hope all's going well
You always find the latest news on the fusion device here, it never stopped steadily progressing: facebook.com/LPPFusion/
There is no difference between understanding cosmology and fusion power. As Riemann said, breakthroughs will come when we look in the very small and in the very large.
They got a beryllium cathode.... Looks sweet.
that's good news, actually. I'll check it out. I'd really like to see it get done before china starts mining helium 3 off the moon. the more i look at it, stellerators and projects like ITER seem like a dead end, not to mention an environmental nightmare.
you guys look like that poor people some years ago that was thinking the earth was flat, here again with the universe! The universe is simply infinite, there is no origin and no end.
Nor does dark energy
Then you'll be able to explain all the evidence that shows that it does, eh?
@@ianw_xvi8784 what evidence? unexpected effects of the world that dont fit in? must be the matter dang
@@C3l3bi1 Silly comment. If you knew anything about the subject you would know what the evidence is, wouldn't you? Try the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect on CMB photons. Baryon acoustic oscillations, and Sn 1a observations. Explain them. If you don't understand physics to at least Masters level, don't even bother trying.
Seems you’ve made a second YT account. Going around claiming people are liars and crockpots for having different views. Interesting, are you sure you’re not projecting? You seem to have to inject that you have a master’s degree (might not!) into your comments, good for you you want a cookie? You’re not a very good representation of the scientific community by sounding so closed minded and calling others names etc. in fact, you’re only proving that many in the SC may have too much invested into incorrect assumptions and their weak egos can’t handle it. It is a risky job, one’s life work can be concentrated on a false assumption.
@@shinedown394 _"Seems you’ve made a second YT account."_
More than two! That's what happens when you deal with the unqualified mythologists of EU - they shadow ban you whenever you disagree with their nonsense, and try to explain it scientifically. Like all cults, they do not want their fanboys learning real science.
_"You seem to have to inject that you have a master’s degree (might not!)"_
I do. BSc (Hons) Astronomy, Univ. of Canterbury, New Zealand; MSc Astrophysics, Liverpool John Moores Univ., UK.
Not that you need a Master's to debunk the impossible nonsense of EU. A bright high school physics major could do it, given access to the relevant literature.
_"You’re not a very good representation of the scientific community by sounding so closed minded"_
How can anyone be closed minded to stuff that is scientifically impossible, and doesn't even exist in the scientific literature? It is nothing to do with closed mindedness. it is about pointing out that it is scientifically impossible.
_"calling others names etc"_
Ever heard the denigrating terms used by crackpots like Thornhill and Scott about real scientists? If you can't stand the heat.......
_"in fact, you’re only proving that many in the SC may have too much invested into incorrect assumptions"_
Your cult hasn't shown any incorrect assumption in the standard models. They don't have any scientists. And neither have you or the previous commenters shown any. When were you thinking of starting?
_"It is a risky job, one’s life work can be concentrated on a false assumption."_
Then you'll be able to point to a false assumption, and describe, scientifically, why it is a false assumption. None of your high priests have done so as yet. Would you like to be the first? You see, the poster I was replying to ran away when I asked him to explain the evidence from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect on CMB photons., baryon acoustic oscillations, and Sn 1a observations. Are you going to run away as well? My prediction? Yep. Because you don't even know what those things are.
Follow Suspicious Observers on TH-cam he's proved this does not exist
He's a clueless, failed lawyer, who knows even less about the science than Lerner.