Jump to content
Science Forums

Hasanuddin

Members
  • Content Count

    163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Hasanuddin last won the day on July 28 2011

Hasanuddin had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Hasanuddin

  • Rank
    Questioning

Converted

  • Location
    Boston, MA USA
  • Interests
    Gardening & chopping wood
  • Occupation
    Physics & Chem instructor
  1. Dear Sman, I hope you realize that your reply did not contain any mechanism that would account for a higher salinity level 100M years ago, given that that was a time which was substantially warmer than it is today, hence less water would be trapped in glaciers than is today; therefore one should expect lower salinity. Thank you for the article, but I already acknowledged that salinity levels are both complex and connected to glaciation, therein lays the paradox. One hundred million years ago, scientific consensus of multiple studies puts it about 4C higher than today. http://www.google.com
  2. I found this article and am perplexed as to the merit of the scientific logistics inherent in the data described: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v503/n7475/full/nature12714.html Can anyone describe a mechanism how the oceans would have been much more salty 100M years ago, as this study claims, even though the planet was warmer (i.e., and the ice caps would've been more melted) and 100M year of salt leaching from the land had yet to happen??? Popular wisdom would suggest that the ancient oceans were less salty, not more, than they are today. Assuming that popular wisdom holds true, th
  3. A picture speaks 1000 words, let's try 21 pictures. The linked article discusses and documents 25 sinkholes http://truthfrequencynews.com/?p=4665 Only four of these occurred before the start-up of LHC… while 21 occurred in the short two years since start-up. Although I never specifically spelled out sinkholes as being a result of the worst-case scenario, i.e., where the Dominium Model is correct; LHC does succeed in generating man’s first (and last) black-hole specimen; and the Earth is subsequently compacted down to annihilation—this reported phenomenon is 100% in-line with the prediction
  4. Turtle … you just told me to shut-up, go away, and take the theory that annoys you with me. However, other than your personal visceral dislike of words/logic, you give no reason why the Dominium Model is not correct or worth considering. Let me remind you that your emotional ad-Hominum response echoes many sentiments of the past: ptolomites vs Galileo, or the reception given Maxwell or even to Einstein. Until you supply evidence/reasoning your reaction puts me in very fine company... thanx, I guess. Please set aside the ancillary barbs and please address the model itself. Science is bas
  5. Dear CraigD (long time … Asalam alai’kum) First I apologize for the overused and misused quotation marks—natural fluctuations—should have been italics. There is a very vague paragraph that you quote. Actually, the news organization, IrishWeather, should never have clumped those words with the rest of the article at all The problem here is that this paragraph is a stand alone issue unrelated to the article itself. It is IrishWeather that is guilty of this Fallacy of Composition. In this case the issue is time. Very true, as seismologists have steadily increased their monitoring and ass
  6. Very Funny new features to this website: the ability to "vote" about scientific discourse but not back up their opinions! Since when did Science become of opinion and not fact????? In the last posting I laid out evidence that verifiably matches a direct prediction of the Dominium Model in the worst case situation for the repercussions had LHC “succeeds” in producing man’s first (last) sample of black-hole material. Cool. Wild assertions? Yes, but they are backed up by strong statistical evidence. The response?? Somebody “voted down” the entry. Huh? An anonymous opinion w/out any back
  7. Good news: the scabs appear to be popping up everywhere. When this thread began a google search for “gravitational repulsion” yielded ziltch. Which BTW, is a phrase that I coined and have always insisted on (see the very first discussions of this thread) opposed to the old status-quo dismissive term “antigravity.” "Antigravity" was the primary term used several years ago, and notice the resistance of early Dominium Model detractors to use "gravitational repulsion" in its stead. Today, however, there is a crowd of folks with recently written papers/books trying to lay claim to aspects of thi
  8. Here is an interesting bit of number crunching that seems to back up this hypothesis. http://www.irishweatheronline.com/news/earthquakesvolcanos/number-of-recorded-earthquakes-rises-sharply/20688.html Notice that the graphs at the end of the article compare half a year’s data for 2011 with full years’ data for all other years, 2000-2010, which is why they say that we’ve already surpassed the full year's data for 2002 & 2003 w/in the first six months of this year. True, I agree that this could all be due to “natural fluctuations” as the article discusses. However, these statistics are
  9. Dear Polymath, Twice you have referred to the dogmatic assumption that black-holes must evaporate harmlessly away. Yes that is a core question. This dogma is also paradoxically intertwined with LHC itself. Did you know that this assumption is referred to as “Hawking Radiation” (HR) and that there has never been any experimental or empirical confirmation of this suggested phenomenon? Did you also know that one of the goals of LHC was to find evidence that this hypothesis was actually valid? Isn’t it a bit scary that LHC proponents have traditionally used the notion of “Hawking Radiation” a
  10. Dear Exhausted Gondolier, Revelent correlation? I agree, what has been put forward certainly does seem to have a degree of post hoc ergo propter hoc to it. Had I not put down in published ink that a stabile black-hole would lead to series of increased seismic activity and volcanism then I wouldn’t have much to stand on. The fact that the prediction is that both frequency and magnitude would steadily increase, coupled with the fact that the Japan quake was the biggest in its history align with these theoretical predictions. I hope you notice that within the post, and again in this one, I am
  11. Could it have really happened?? The evidence is mounting that it may have. The autonomous experimental institution, CERN, disregarded much publicized warnings that their biggest project could generate man’s first synthetic black-hole material. They went ahead with the LHC project despite concerns. What would happen if they were “successful” and created stable synthetic black-hole material? First, it wouldn't be instant because of the same principles preventing all the sand of an hour-glass to fall through when turned; though eventually all grains will fall they cannot pass through at once. A
  12. Hi Moontainman, I really have been away from this for a LONG TIME …. WOW!!!! This really is cool!! I love the fact so that they’re spinning it that the Dominium’s revolutionary and new prediction of antimatter galaxies, is just what everyone agrees is a valid probability and known commodity. This tone was most acute in a summarization in the 8th paragraph where they state: The way that this reads to me is: with the first line the author props up the notion of antimatter galaxies as something NASA and everyone else, had always considered it. Despite the reality of the fact that the Domi
  13. Sorry for the break from this dialogue, life called. Please understand. I’d like to absolutely agree with Eric’s concern.
  14. Dear tharan000 Please let me apologize for not replying earlier, my attention has been diverted. Now, let me try to understand your positions. In the 1st paragraph, I’m assuming that you’re referring to moments just after the Big Bang, when you state True, that must be done. And if the Dominium is correct, eventually it will be done. Though I take issue with the notion that the person doing this must be ”scientifically credible.” I resent, yet understand, such a remark. Does the fact that I teach AP Physics to a motley crew of inner-city Dorchester youths detract from the fact that I gr
  15. A member sent me a personal message saying that I ought to check out this thread and that maybe the question of a 5th dimension could be addressed via the Dominium Model. I’m glad I followed that recommendation. To address this question I will pay respects to the views/insights posted thus far. To this insight' date=' I whole-heartedly agree. The Dominium model would see the 4th dimension as the interactions with the supermatrix of galaxies. Forces of magnitude beyond anything achieved in a lab must be interplaying between galaxies. Those forces would have been strongest during the first nan
×
×
  • Create New...