Talk:Plasma cosmology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Physics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Astronomy (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Plasma cosmology is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Alternative Views (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative Views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Notice: Elerner is banned from editing this article.
The user specified has been banned by the Arbitration committee from editing this article indefinitely. The user is not prevented from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page.

Posted by Thatcher131 03:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC) for the Arbitration committee. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience.

POV Article with Erroneous Facts?[edit]

The article appears to be written with a definite POV bias. I also noted the statement that the predictions of the plasma cosmology model would require galactic currents on the order of 10^17 to 10^19 amps, something which "simply isn't measured." I wonder if the writer has seen the results of P. P. Kronberg et al. in 2011 which actually provided a measurement of the bipolar galactic jets at 3C203, and it yielded a result of 3x10^18 amps? Alanwilliams101 (talk) 23:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanwilliams101 (talkcontribs) 23:21, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

If you could clarify what you found biased, that would be helpful. As would offering any specific changes backed up by reliable sources. Woodroar (talk) 23:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Plasma cosmology is supposed to explain the whole universe not just one object's bipolar galactic jets from 3C203. Plasma cosmology openly rejects black holes, but the likely cause of the these jets is a super massive black hole (SMBH) in the heart of a galaxy. Our own galaxy's massive black hole has much evidence to support it, based observationally on the orbital motion of the components dense nuclear cluster.
The 3C 203 paper you mentions nothing at all about 'plasma cosmology', and the cause of the jets is stated as a SMBH. The magnetic field was not actually observed but was estimated and assumed in their analysis, and is highly dependant on the flow regime into the SMBH and the particle density. There are several discussions in the associated papers giving alternative explanations in the article citations.
Again. What heck has this to do with plasma cosmology? How? (Magnetic fields exist in space, but that doesn't equate that now the whole universe is alive with possible fields as active as 3C 203. Most of the fields in the universe are extremely weak, as clearly verified by polarimetry. 3C 203 is certainly a rarity in the universe.)
Also your POV bias is more with a lack of evidence to support the rather nebulous/vague connection with plasma cosmology.
Note: Please sign all post with the four tildes, otherwise it is hard to take your suggestions on face value, even if they are valid.. Arianewiki1 (talk) 23:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Electric Universe[edit]

The page Electric Universe (physics) redirects here, although that term does not actually appear in the body of this article. Could someone who is familiar with this topic either add a reference to that in the article? Or, if it's an erroneous redirect, fix it or nominate the redirect for deletion? Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 05:02, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

No. It would be rejected. This is also not a primary source. Electric Universe (physics) is a constructed fiction based on misinformation and an agenda. (Thank you for bring this to my attention, though.) Arianewiki1 (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
That's what I suspected. You should feel free to nominate the redirect for deletion; deletion reasons 5 ("The redirect makes no sense") and 10 ("...the target article contains virtually no information on the subject") might apply. I would normally do something like that myself but I don't know anything about the topic. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 17:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)