07.03.2013 Views

A Beginner's View of Our Electric Universe - New

A Beginner's View of Our Electric Universe - New

A Beginner's View of Our Electric Universe - New

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Comets were first described in 1950 by the American astronomer Fred Whipple as dirty snowballs melting in<br />

the radiated heat <strong>of</strong> the Sun. They have now been closely inspected by sensitive measuring equipment carried<br />

on space probes, and some being pointed at them from the ground. To those with open minds who remain<br />

receptive, the data returned tells us that comets are not the dirty snowballs that astro-science would have us<br />

believe. And in terms <strong>of</strong> how many there are, despite the problem <strong>of</strong> coming up with a figure in the first place,<br />

an estimate <strong>of</strong> around 6 billion was originally statistically predicted.<br />

This number was found to be far too low when better data<br />

analysis was conducted and computer simulations were<br />

carried out, so it was raised to a figure <strong>of</strong> ~400 billion.<br />

Overall, this has turned out to be a big issue for cometary<br />

scientists, because there now seem to be far too many<br />

comets to suit the preferred story about their origin and the<br />

calculations used to come up with predictions about them.<br />

To address this and accommodate the larger figure, ideas<br />

were revised to claim that beyond those left over from our<br />

own solar system's formation, the Sun must have captured<br />

most <strong>of</strong> its comets from other stars billions <strong>of</strong> years ago<br />

when those stars came close to our solar system. This is quite a wild piece <strong>of</strong> speculation and it has no basis<br />

in anything whatsoever. However, being just another guess from their limited gravity toolbox, it highlights yet<br />

again that sticking plasters are quite happily applied by astro-science to patch up their theories. The sad thing is<br />

that it is mostly the public purse that funds the highly questionable work <strong>of</strong> mainstream astro-science and that<br />

currently at least, most <strong>of</strong> those involved enjoy well-paid jobs, rosy futures and the prospect <strong>of</strong> nice pensions.<br />

Digressing for a moment, there are a couple <strong>of</strong> things to underline. University students entering astro-science<br />

disciplines should not be faced with this type <strong>of</strong> attitude for it may influence the direction <strong>of</strong> their careers.<br />

A few may be tempted to go along, but I prefer to think that most others would take a more responsible and<br />

independent approach. It is also apparent that the public shows little interest in science in general, for many <strong>of</strong><br />

us do not see much within it playing a significant role in our daily lives. However, reasons do exist for us to<br />

consider this attitude carefully and for us to think more about what is going on in science research; outcomes<br />

from which have already determined much <strong>of</strong> our own and our children's futures. If we were to take a moment<br />

to lift our heads out <strong>of</strong> the daily grind, we would be giving ourselves a chance to realise this is very important<br />

stuff and that we should be paying more attention to it.<br />

41 | We are waiting for answers to these questions<br />

The two tails <strong>of</strong> a typical comet nearing the Sun © author

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!