Friday, 9 May 2025

Rapidly Varying Ionization Features in a Quasi-periodic Eruption: A Homologous Expansion Model for the Spectroscopic Evolution


https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/adb972


Once again anything that the Black hole clerics don’t understand, they call a black hole. Or dark energy if they are really desperate. Odd that they’re still at it considering all of the only 3 “images” of supposed ‘black holes’ to date have no accretion discs. Their flimsy excuse is that by some 1/30,000 coincidence all three Black holes images to date are exactly face on to us here on earth. A ‘fact’ even NASA admits is extremely odd and statistically very unlikely. They just can’t admit these images aren’t black holes.


Although one can only speculate on the real nature of the data from another galaxy referred to in this paper cited above, I prefer the variable speed solar Dynamo model to explain the data rather than using the extremely rapid spinning object model as the above cited paper suggests. The variable speed model of the solar Dynamo cycle is a 22 year cycle consisting of two 11 year phases. For 11 years the inner core of the sun rotates faster than its photosphere, and for the next 11 years slower. Etc. 

And this solar Dynamo model can be used to also model other repeating phenomena like quasars and pulsars. In that these repeating bursts in X-ray or other frequencies are signs of a very short time scale slowing down and speeding up of the stars inner core relative to its outer plasma shell.


So why have a model of a massive star spinning multiple times per second when it’s more realistic to suggest that the objects in question are spinning much slower in hours or days. And instead, as the variable speed solar Dynamo style model proposes, have the inner core and outer photosphere both spinning in the same direction but slowing down and speeding up relative to each other over seconds. Less drastic and unrealistic assumptions are made in the solar Dynamo style model. 

But as mentioned above this dynamo cycle is much faster than the suns 22 year cycle and lasts only just days. And thus being much more energetic. Hence the profuse x ray emissions. 

We should be glad our suns cycle is a long 22 year cycle.

Saturday, 4 January 2025

Scientists Found a Quantum Surprise in Ordinary Light

 https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-found-a-quantum-surprise-in-ordinary-light/

Isolating the classical and quantum coherence of a multiphoton system. Chenglong You et al. 2024


Once again the theorists forget that their coincidence counters, called correlation counters in this study, are the magic card trick mechanisms creating the imaginary quantum effects which the researchers claim are being observed. In reality the observed data has nothing to do with spooky magic action at a distance. 

No wonder they supposedly found that classical light sources seem to behave as if they were being subjected to quantum effects. When all that really happens in these ridiculous experiments is that light from different detectors with different polarised states, arrives at the coincidence counter. Where the data is collected , collated and then later matched up as “coincidences” by researchers to make their imaginary quantum effects appear. Where in truth there are none. It can all be explained classically with polarisation. 

It’s a simple card trick used by Quantum researchers ever since the early days of the fakery of quantum eraser experiments as described at the link below.

Basically what all these Quantum experiments do is divide the original light beam into three paths to three detectors. One is the original beam going to a master detector D1 measuring all states of vertical V and horizontal H polarisations. etc. V,H,V,H,V,....etc

Then two more paths with either only V or H beams go to two other detectors D2 and D3. So for instance, D2 gets only the Vertical polarised portion of the cycle and the other detector D3 only receives the Horizontal polarised portion of the cycle. Notice now that a correlation counter will match detections from D2 to D1 but at the same point in time...NO DETECTIONS from D3 to D1 will be recorded. Because the original emitted beams polarisation alternates and therefore peaks at different times between the vertical and horizontal polarised states each cycle. 

This isn’t quantum magic. This is creative accounting making classical polarisation look like quantum magic.

http://physicsexplained.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-main-illustrationbelow-is-schematic.html

Thursday, 2 January 2025

Scientists pin down the origins of a fast radio burst (MIT)

“Magnetospheric origin of a fast radio burst constrained using scintillation. Kenzie Nimmo2024”

Once again the ‘experts’ continue to make up ridiculous fantastical scenarios to try to explain why FRB’s do not conform to relativity and its constant speed of light in all frames nonsense. A sad history of ignoring the facts that started in 1928 when Hubble found that light changed frequency over distance which refuted Einsteins photon model. And by association refuted his relativity theories which relied on the erroneous assumption that a photon can NOT change frequency over distance.

The real story of FRB’s is that they are just very fast GRB’s. The length of a GRB lightcurve is usually in the order of seconds with the optical counterpart in hours and radio in days as modelled hereBut an FRB, being just a very fast short GRB, will have its gamma lightcurve last only in nano seconds, its optical curve in slightly longer nanosecond timescales and the radio transient being the only observable lightcurve, lasting in microseconds. Just long enough to capture as an event in the radio data.