Indian Balloon Experiment Nets Three New Bacteria

Article written: 16 Mar , 2009
Updated: 24 Dec , 2015
by

[/caption]

Indian scientists flying a giant balloon experiment have announced the discovery of three new species of bacteria from the stratosphere.

In all, 12 bacterial and six fungal colonies were detected, nine of which, based on gene sequencing, showed greater than 98 percent similarity with reported known species on earth. Three bacterial colonies, however, represented totally new species. All three boast significantly higher UV resistance compared to their nearest phylogenetic neighbors on Earth.

The experiment was conducted using a balloon that measures 26.7 million cubic feet  (756,059 cubic meters) carrying 1,000 pounds (459 kg) of scientific payload soaked in liquid Neon. It was flown from the National Balloon Facility in Hyderabad, operated by the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR). 

An onboard cryosampler contained sixteen evacuated and sterilized stainless steel probes. Throughout the flight, the probes remained immersed in liquid Neon to create a cryopump effect. The cylinders, after collecting air samples from different heights ranging from 20 km to 41 km (12 to 25 miles) above the Earth’s surface, were parachuted down and retrieved. The samples were analyzed by scientists at the Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad as well as the National Center for Cell Science in Pune for independent confirmation.

One of the new species has been named as Janibacter hoylei, after the astrophysicist Fred Hoyle, the second as Bacillus isronensis recognizing the contribution of ISRO in the balloon experiments which led to its discovery, and the third as Bacillus aryabhata after India’s celebrated ancient astronomer Aryabhata (also the name of ISRO’s first satellite).

The researchers have pointed out in a press release that precautionary measures and controls operating in the experiment inspire confidence that the new species were picked up in the stratosphere.

“While the present study does not conclusively establish the extra-terrestrial origin of microorganisms, it does provide positive encouragement to continue the work in our quest to explore the origin of life,” they added.

This was the second such experiment conducted by ISRO, with the first one in 2001. Even though the first experiment had yielded positive results, the researchers decided to repeat the experiment while exercising extra care to ensure that it was totally free from any terrestrial contamination.

Source: Indian Space Research Organisation

Additional links: Center for Cellular and Molecular BiologyNational Center for Cell Science, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research


76 Responses

  1. KG6YRA says

    It goes to show that life takes hold in the most unexpected places. From the deepest depths of the seas, the stratosphere, and in the cores of fission reactors.

    It makes me wonder, what could be swirling in the upper atmosphere of Venus?

  2. Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravitation.

  3. Also, big up the fact that Janibacter hoylei was named after Fred Hoyle who rejected Big Bang mythology and biogenic fossil fuel mythology.

    “There’s no explanation at all of the cosmic microwave background in the Big Bang Theory. All you can say for the theory is that it permits you to put it in if you want to put it in. So you look and it’s there so you put it in. That’s it; it isn’t an explanation.” — Fred Hoyle, cosmologist, 2000

    “The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.” — Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist, 1982

  4. bill says

    Hi All,

    So the Indians find germs in a balloon flying over India that are 98 percent identical to the other germs in India? By the way did I tell you I watched STS 119 blast off, it lit up the whole sky and it took about 8 minutes for the sound of it to reach me.

  5. Naoviotaire says

    Oills is a sensible pioneer, just like Fred Hoyle.

  6. Hans Bausewein says

    I wonder how large the difference is between the air pressure and temperature in this part of Earth’s atmosphere and the lower parts of Mars’ atmosphere.

    The UV adaptation suggests that these Earth bacteria were found in their habitat.

    Maybe the chances for life on Mars’ surface should be reconsidered.

  7. Adam says

    @ Bill:

    … its not the 98% of normal bacteria they found, had you read the whole article you would realize the three strains that were NOT related to ground-based bacteria are the real story here.

    /2ndgradeteacher.

  8. Hans Bausewein says

    Hmm, the temperature increases with height in the stratosphere:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratosphere

    so it’s much warmer than at 10 km

  9. Feenixx says

    I reckon they may perhaps have named the little critter after Fred Hoyle for his ideas about Panspermia.

    btw – I’d expect any kind of organism from anywhere in the Universe to have similar DNA – it’s the laws and principles of science which give rise to life, and they are the same throughout the Universe.
    I hope to live to see the discovery of some kind of life “elsewhere”, any kind, any minute blob will do, just to see it confirmed that they’ll be similar, if not identical to us.

    I’m fascinated: Hoyle hypothesized that new strains of Influence generally originate in central Asia, where the tallest mountains reach above the biosphere, giving potential “alien invaders” a chance to adapt to life on Earth. However, he didn’t know about extremophile life at the time…. ah, well.

    OilIsMastery observes:
    “Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravitation”

    I say: “Just wait and see. Eventually, they’ll all come down with a Big Bang”
    (or else, the expanding Earth will rise to meet them)

  10. marcellus says

    Just because the Indians found these bacteria in their balloon experiment doesn’t mean they’re “new”. They could be as old as anything in the Universe.

  11. ThereIsNoSuchThingAsMagic says

    Thank you again OilIsMastery for your insightful and facinating comments.

    “Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravitation”
    I must admit i initially thought this to be a laughable assumption, due to its lack of basic physics knowledge, but as you have stated it, so it is truth. I shall re-educate myself on this ( as we all should do ). I am ashamed for doubting you OilIsMastery.

    And i must admit to having a chuckle at your Hoyle quotes…any intelligent person would recognise instantly that quoting somebody does not make something true. But as you have implied it, it therefore must be absolute truth. Again, i am ashamed for doubting you OilIsMastery. I shall re-educate myself on this matter.

    Oh OilIsMastery, may you lead us forwards yet again with your enlightened brilliance.

  12. Luke Garratt says

    Will be interesting to see what genes and hence properties these bacteria have to make them more UV resistant.

    Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravity through temperature-induced air mixing, wind, space/flight program contamination and a myriad of other factors.

  13. Luke Garratt,

    “Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravity through temperature-induced air mixing, wind, space/flight program contamination and a myriad of other factors.”

    I guess Newton’s occult so-called “law of universal gravitation” has been emprically falsified. Welcome to the 21st century.

  14. ThereIsNoSuchThingAsMagic says

    “I guess Newton’s occult so-called “law of universal gravitation” has been emprically falsified. Welcome to the 21st century.”

    Good spotting OilIsMastery! Absolutely, here is yet more proof from our resident genius that the universal law of gravitation is false. Of course the physics that govern how dust motes ( or any light objects ) stay suspended in the outside air also apply to bacteria in the stratosphere due to the tiny amount of mass that bacteria has, and therefore all of that physics is false as well. Remember, any evidence to the contrary is just part of that big ole conspiricy against OilIsMastety, to attempt to hide us from is true genius.

    Time to update our textbooks guys!!! He has spoken.

  15. ThereIsNoSuchThingAsMagic says

    On a related note, OilIsMastery, when will you be gracing us with the *truth*, you know, since gravity doesnt exist and all, when do we get to be awed and left speechless with your alternative theory. This will be one for the history books, let me tell you!

    Oh rapture! i so cant wait….

  16. Luke Garratt says

    # OilIsMastery Says:
    March 16th, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    Luke Garratt,

    “Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravity through temperature-induced air mixing, wind, space/flight program contamination and a myriad of other factors.”

    I guess Newton’s occult so-called “law of universal gravitation” has been emprically falsified. Welcome to the 21st century.

    —–

    Well, if you’re not even going to try to discuss and just resort to ambiguous statements then I’m not going to bother. I thought you may have actually been interesting, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

  17. salil says

    It the first time the bacteria have been found on Earth

  18. trux says

    OilIsMastery Says:
    “Bacteria in the stratosphere defy gravitation.”
    Oills, are you telling gravitation does not exist and we are attracted to the Earth just because of our ignorance? Can you fly? If you believe gravitation does not exist, but that we are rather attracted due to EM effects, can you answer this one question: why don’t objects inside an electromagnetically shielded room fly? Well, I may know the answer – because your “EM force” is different than the “conventional” EM we know. And exactly because it is different, we do not call it EM (to avoid confusion), but gravitation.

  19. HeadAroundU says

    Why do you idiots keep replying to OilIsMastery???

  20. Adam says

    Well, keep in mind that precipitation has to form around some sort of nucleus of material (usually dust). Recent research has shown that bacteria sometimes serves as the nucleation site around which snowflakes form.

    http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/03/living-snowflakes-bacteria-important-to-snow-formation.ars

    So really, it’s not a big surprise that bacteria was found in the upper reaches of the atmosphere. What IS surprising, though, is that they’re unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. However, we have to be careful before we jump to conclusions. We’re not exactly certain that these aren’t previously-unknown bacteria that simply blew into the atmosphere from the ground (which is actually how the snowflake bacteria get up there) or whether these are just modified terrestrial bacteria. I think it’s a long shot to say that these are probably extra-terrestrial in origin. It’s a possibility, but it’s remote.

  21. Bret says

    Obviously, this is the bacteria that escaped to the upper atmosphere in 1969:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_strain

    ; )

    ~]3

  22. ND says

    Notice how Oils is avoiding the postings on the GOCE mission. Apparently it does not compute with his view of gravitation.

  23. ThereIsNoSuchThingAsMagicExceptFor Gravity,

    “Of course the physics that govern how dust motes ( or any light objects ) stay suspended in the outside air also apply to bacteria in the stratosphere due to the tiny amount of mass that bacteria has, and therefore all of that physics is false as well.”

    Unfortunately for you, bacteria has more so-called “mass” than a nitrogen molecule. By specific gravity, bacteria is heavier than 2 atoms of nitrogen.

  24. Trux,

    Q: “Oills, are you telling gravitation does not exist and we are attracted to the Earth just because of our ignorance?”

    A: That is precisely what I’m telling you.

    “…to establish it [gravity] as original or primitive in certain parts of matter is to resort either to miracle or an imaginary occult quality.” — Gottfreid W. Leibniz, polymath, July 1710

    Q: “Can you fly?”

    A: With the proper equipment.

    Q: “If you believe gravitation does not exist, but that we are rather attracted due to EM effects, can you answer this one question: why don’t objects inside an electromagnetically shielded room fly?”

    A: Have you perfomed the Cavendish Experiment in a Faraday Cage? If you have, can you please link us to your published results?

    As my friend Louis said, “All physical experiments we do, at the surface of the earth, are done within the earth’s electric field that has a quite background value of about 100 Volts per vertical meter.

    Also these experiments are done in the earth’s geomagnetic field, so this makes 2 EM fields we need to be aware of.

    If either of the two fields are constant during an experiment, then the experimental data have one sense of utility.

    If either of the fields change during the experiment, then the experiment might produce, what we call erroneous, data.

    If you are not aware of these EM fields, then your, to you, scientific explanations, are incomplete.”

  25. ND,

    Are you saying that gravitation is caused by global cooling?

  26. ND says

    Oils,

    What do you expect to happen to a Cavendish Experiment in a Faraday Cage?

  27. ND says

    Oils,

    GOCE will be mapping earth’s gravitational field from orbit.

  28. ND,

    I predict that if you perform the Cavendish Experiment in a true Faraday Cage and believe your results you will start agreeing with everything I’m saying.

  29. ND,

    “GOCE will be mapping earth’s gravitational field from orbit.”

    In actually it will be measuring the Earth’s water level from orbit and pretending that that’s somehow measuring invisible magic mythological gravitons.

  30. ND says

    Oils: “I predict that if you perform the Cavendish Experiment in a true Faraday Cage and believe your results you will start agreeing with everything I’m saying.”

    Which is what exactly? Why are you all of a sudden being vague. You’re usually very vocal about how gravity is a myth. If you know what would happen to a Cavendish experiment in a Faraday cage enlighten us. I don’t have the means to do a Cav exp in a Faraday cage. So tell us what to expect with such a setup.

  31. ND says

    Oils,

    No, Goce will be measuring the irregular tugs of gravity it will feel when it orbits over the irregular surface of the earth.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOCE#Payload

  32. formulaterp says

    Congrats to the Indian scientists for their discoveries! Also nice job keeping that balloon from getting shot down by the Giant Lightning Bolts from Space.

  33. ND,

    “Its main payload is the Electrostatic Gravity Gradiometer (EGG)”

    Hmm, electrostatic gravity? Electricity. Just as I suspected. This is what I’ve been saying all along.

  34. ND says

    Oils,

    Sorry try again. The EGG measures acceleration.

    According to ESA who is runs GOCE:

    “The principle of operation of one of these
    accelerometers is that a proof mass is
    floated in a small cage and is kept in the
    centre of the cage by electrostatic forces,”

    Please see page 17 of:
    http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bulletin133/bul133c_fehringer.pdf

  35. ND says

    Oils,

    Any specifics on what I should expect to see with a Cavendish experiment in a Faraday cage? Should I see less of what we in the Brotherhood of Gravitation call gravity? Should I see none? Has this been done before? What were the results?

  36. ND,

    “The EGG measures acceleration”

    Acceleration relative to what?

    “mass is floated in a small cage and is kept in the centre of the cage by electrostatic forces”

    Is this saying that electrostatic forces counteract gravity?

  37. ND,

    Since you’re an authority on gravitation and electromagnetism I expected you to have already perform the Cavendish Expermient in a Faraday Cage. Since you haven’t sone so, I’m not sure what you are claiming.

  38. ND says

    Oils,

    I am not an authority on gravity. It’s just that the things you’re claiming don’t square with tons and tons of observation. What you describe as gravity does not match the science is saying about gravity.

    By your last response I gather that you have no idea what should happen in the faraday cage.

  39. ND,

    “I am not an authority on gravity.”

    Amen brother. No one is.

    “It’s just that the things you’re claiming don’t square with tons and tons of observation.”

    What observation?

    “What you describe as gravity does not match the science is saying about gravity.”

    How so?

    “By your last response I gather that you have no idea what should happen in the faraday cage.”

    Gravitation should be falsified. I refer you to my comments posted above.

  40. ND says

    Oils,

    Regarding GOCE, all the info you need is in that pdf file as well as the various postings on this site and elsewhere. And they’re easy to understand. The acceleration is actually explained in the section of the wiki page on GOCE where you read Electrostatic Gravity Gradiometer.

    As for your (mis)understanding of gravity, here’s an example … more than once you’ve asked why the moon does not come crashing down on our heads. The moon’s orbit and basically its behavior is consistent with gravity as known by science. More than once other posters have pointed you towards wiki pages that explain orbits, gravity, angular momentum in easy to understand terms. They very rarely contain quotes from authority tho so I guess that didn’t help.

  41. Rob says

    “I don’t have the means to do a Cav exp in a Faraday cage.”

    I do. I’d just have to get into the undergrad labs at work and use their setup with some nickle sheet around it. Shouldn’t take more than half a day. But I don’t think that will shut Oils up.

    PS- Oils, good job with the fake posts agreeing with yourself on the first page.

  42. ND says

    Rob,

    Cool! Have you used tried it before (without the shielding obviously)? What sort of value did you get?

  43. trux says

    Oills, can you please tell us why you need equipment to defy the gravity if no gravity exists? And why objects do not fly, or at least change weight inside an EM shielded room, if the weight is not caused by gravity but by EM force?

  44. Alex says

    Interesting article. I wasn’t aware that bacteria could live their whole lives in the atmosphere, both reproducing and dieing without ever coming into contact with the ground. I wonder how big a bacteria could become before it couldn’t live in the atmosphere due to the effects of gravity? I imagine that they say up there due to wind and Brownian motion that keeps all molecules airborne.

  45. ND,

    “more than once you’ve asked why the moon does not come crashing down on our heads.”

    Correct. A question you have never adequately answered.

    “The moon’s orbit and basically its behavior is consistent with gravity as known by science.”

    A 17th century creationist assumption based upon the occult, divine intervention, and miracles.

    “…lest the systems of the fixed stars should, by their gravity, fall on each other, he [God] hath placed those systems at immense distances from one another.” — Isaac Newton, mathematician, 1687

    “More than once other posters have pointed you towards wiki pages that explain orbits, gravity, angular momentum in easy to understand terms.”

    The Internet Encylopedia of Bias and Inobjectivity is not refereed or peer-reviewed. It is censored. It is antiscience and pseudoscience.

  46. Trux,

    “Oills, can you please tell us why you need equipment to defy the gravity if no gravity exists?”

    Contrary to General Relativity and Einstein who said, “It is the theory that determines what can be observed” (1926), science and the scientific method require observation. Observation requires equipment.

    “Observations in science are the primary and ultimate authority.” — Halton C. Arp, astronomer, 1998

    “Unlike the current belief in the field that observations can be discarded according to whether they fit a theory, I submit that the observations in fact are the known laws of physics.” — Halton C. Arp, astronomer, 1987

    “…certain theoretical investigations … appear to me to throw doubt on the utility of very minute gravitational observations.” — George H. Darwin, physicist, 1882

  47. ND says

    Trux,

    Oils, has a tendency to start spouting quotes when he’s stuck with and a can’t answer questions anymore.

  48. ND,

    What part of “…science and the scientific method require observation. Observation requires equipment” don’t you understand?

  49. ND says

    Oils,

    I understand it just fine, thanks for asking.

    But you seem to be ignoring this question:
    “And why objects do not fly, or at least change weight inside an EM shielded room, if the weight is not caused by gravity but by EM force?”

    Faraday cages do exist and regardless of the Cav exp, there has not been any reports of zero gravity, nor any reduction of it. Even a tiny amount at the edge of detectability of equipment.

    As for the following:
    “”more than once you’ve asked why the moon does not come crashing down on our heads.”

    Correct. A question you have never adequately answered.”

    This has been already answered by others for you with links to resources that will explain it for you. You’ve consistently avoided groking them.

    Oils:” [me]”The moon’s orbit and basically its behavior is consistent with gravity as known by science.”

    A 17th century creationist assumption based upon the occult, divine intervention, and miracles.”

    You’re completely avoid observational evidence that what you consider be 17th century creationist, occult myth actually explains what we see around the solar system very well. Instead you’re using nonsensical rhetoric. Science does not say that according to the gravitational model the moon will come crashing down on us and can’t be in the orbit we see it.

    Anyway. There’s nothing more to say.

  50. ND,

    You have previously admitted that you have not performed the Cavendish Experiment in a Faraday Cage and now you are claiming you know the results of this experiment without ever having performed it. What gives?

    “observational evidence”

    What observational evidence? When, where, and under what conditions did you observe a graviton? Can you please link me to your published results?

  51. trux says

    Oills, can you please answer the question why objects do not fly / float inside an EM shielded room. And I do not mean just plain Faraday cage, that shields EM waves, but real magnetic shield (passive or active) that eliminates or at least significantly reduces even static magnetic fields. What exactly does cause the objects to be attracted to the Earth with the exactly same force as we call gravity if it is neither gravity nor electromagnetism?

  52. Popisfizzy says

    *** NEWSFLASH: THIS JUST IN ***

    Balloons float, birds fly! Gravity demonstrated to be wrong! OilIsMastery is vilified! General public holds him as a hero! Physicist everywhere facepalm and sigh! Science stagnates!

  53. Calib says

    Come on guys, cant you tell when you are being taken for a ride? After months and months of trying to reason with Oilsmastery, and realising that he is not open to reason of any sort, why oh why do we even answer any of his posts?

    You are just giving him what he wants…an outlet to troll…and people here are taking the bait time and time again.

    When will Universe Today implement some form of moderation in these forums? How about just linking to the BAUT forum entry for each article thats posted here…the BAUT forums have effective moderation to weed out the trolls, and is really a great forum to discuss astronomy/science in a civilized manner.

  54. ND says

    Calib,

    Please don’t pop our balloons here. We are operating under extreme idealism here. Idealism and optimism that Oils can be rehabilitated and returned to civilization. All we have to do is explain things to him. We just have to make him understand gravity.

  55. TD says

    Interesting news. I wonder when the flight was conducted?

    UV resistance definitely increases the chances for life on Mars.

    How about electric fields – electric charge for an uplift mechanism?

    The abstract is here:

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V02-4SR0M28-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ab6ec362a849ea390ebea1859c754563

  56. Trux,

    “Oills, can you please answer the question why objects do not fly / float inside an EM shielded room.”

    According to the theory of gravitation God’s divine intervention and miraclework prevents that from happening.

    “And I do not mean just plain Faraday cage, that shields EM waves, but real magnetic shield (passive or active) that eliminates or at least significantly reduces even static magnetic fields.”

    “All physical experiments we do, at the surface of the earth, are done within the earth’s electric field that has a quiet background value of about 100 Volts per vertical meter. Also these experiments are done in the earth’s geomagnetic field, so this makes 2 EM fields we need to be aware of. If either of the two fields are constant during an experiment, then the experimental data have one sense of utility. If either of the fields change during the experiment, then the experiment might produce, what we call erroneous, data. If you are not aware of these EM fields, then your, to you, scientific explanations, are incomplete.” — Louis Hissink, geologist, February 2009

    “What exactly does cause the objects to be attracted to the Earth with the exactly same force as we call gravity if it is neither gravity nor electromagnetism?”

    Good question. I say it’s electromagnetism.

    “…Inertia is exclusively of electromagnetic origin….” — Henri Poincaré, physicist, 1908

    “… Matter is composed of electricity, and of nothing else ….” — Oliver J. Lodge, physicist, 1904

    “…lest the systems of the fixed stars should, by their gravity, fall on each other, he [God] hath placed those systems at immense distances from one another.” — Isaac Newton, mathematician, 1687

  57. trux says

    Oills, have you never heard about magnetic shielding? Inside such shielding the EM field (including the Earth EM field) is significally reduced. How comes objects still weight the same?

  58. Trux,

    “Oills, have you never heard about magnetic shielding?”

    Yup. I’ve never seen a magnetic shield capable of blocking the magnetosphere of the Earth. Have you?

    “Inside such shielding the EM field (including the Earth EM field) is significally reduced.”

    You mean a Faraday Cage?

    “How comes objects still weight the same?”

    What makes you think that they do?

  59. Popisfizzy says

    If they block, say, 1/10 of the Earth’s electromagnetic field, then they would have to weight 1/10 of their mass outside (crazy thing is that scales still work inside, being the magic of “mechanical” and all). There are so many flaws with your idea that it’s hilarious. For example, neutron stars are impossible without gravity, as the strong force can’t hold together something that massive. In fact, a large amount of matter just can’t coalesce without gravity as most matter is magnetically neutral.

    Your understanding of physics is so hilariously bad, it’s hard to put into words. Have you ever even been in a high school physics classroom, let alone an area of higher education? Quotes don’t make you intelligent, you know.

  60. Popisfizzy says

    Oh, and on top of all this: You’re aware that Isaac Newton isn’t well-known purely because of his formulation of gravity, but also because of optics (heavily tied into electromagnetics, because photons are the mediating force particle of electromagnetism), the laws of motion (which have really been shown to be true, regardless of what forces are acting upon a moving objects, just so long as it’s any force), calculus, and the law of cooling, amongst other things.

    And, on top of all this, his law of universal gravitation describes only what occurs, not what occurs it (that can be attributed to Einstein and general relativity). He described the attraction between bodies, which can be measured by looking at the motions of the planets and moons, all of which match to what he says. He did give odd things and hypothesized that gravity was repulsive at a distance, but this is because he was alive in the late 1600s/early 1700s. It was a common belief, among pretty much everyone in the scientific world, that the universe was static. The fact that it’s not was only really demonstrated centuries later by Edwin Hubble. So, all your animosity towards him is unfounded, since his law of universal gravitation is demonstratably true, entirely regardless of *what* causes the force we interpret as gravity, even if by some wild run of the imagination it is somehow electromagnetism and not, you know, something with *evidence* behind it.

    So, on top of being a fallacious, ignorant hypocrit (as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, on other comments), you’re also entirely ignorant of the people you attack. Why do you think anyone could take you seriously, again?

  61. trux says

    No, Oills, I do not mean a Faraday cage – it indeed does not block any static magnetic fields. I mean magnetic shielding. Already passive magnetic shields (thick plates of strongl magnetic concductors) can block Earth magnetic field to a pretty good degree, and then you have active magnetic shields that can go far beyond that. I am surprised that a person with such a critical spirit like you never heard about it. I thought that someone who promotes alternative theories, at least takes the effort to study basic physics, to avoid such terrible mishaps.

  62. Popisfizzy,

    “For example, neutron stars are impossible without gravity, as the strong force can’t hold together something that massive.”

    Exactly. Neutron stars are a myth.

    “According to electric star theory, neutron stars belong in the same category with invisible pink unicorns.” — Stephen Smith, physicist, November 2008

  63. Popisfizzy,

    I am aware that Newton is known for his fanatic creationism, his practicing of the occult, his studies of alchemy and pseudoscience, and his practice of witchcraft and the magical arts.

  64. Trux,

    You didn’t answer the question. Can you please link me your paper supporting your claims?

  65. trux says

    Oills, just open your elementary school physics book, or enter the term “magnetic shielding” into Google, if you never heard about it.

  66. Trux,

    I can only conclude from your response that you don’t have such a paper and that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

  67. trux says

    Oills, no magnetic shielding is so common that you can find it anywhere, and there are thousands of documents on the net where you can read about it. Are you denying the existence of magnetic shielding? Or just telling that it works only with the conventional magnetism, and not with the one you substitute for gravity? In the second case you are perfectly right – magnetic shielding indeed works only with EM fields, not with gravity. That’s one of the proofs they are two separate forces. There may be a common root for both of them (and indeed many big scientist searched and search for an universal theory describing both), but it is not correct calling gravity elektromagnetism or vice versa, since they have different properties.

    And if you deny that magnetic shielding exist, then I have also no problem with it – just explain us why we do not float or weight more/less when placed into an articial EM field?

  68. And still no link or paper.

  69. popisfizzy says

    Good, good. The best way to promote your own argument is to ignore things that don’t work for it. I see that’s the route you’ve already taken.

  70. Popisfizzy,

    What did I ignore?

    Have you ever observed a neutron star?

    Have you ever experimented on a neutron star in the laboratory?

    What repeatable experiments did you perform on the neutron star?

  71. trux says

    And Oills, if you are unable to answer any of the previous questions, but still want to claim that our weight is not gravity based but caused by the EM field of the Earth, can you explain why New Zealanders are attracted to the Earth in the same way as Europeans? Aren’t the EM field vectors opposite, or do all New Zealanders have all oposite charge than Europeans? How comes southerners are not immediately accelerated to the space (and then back home) when they travel to the Northern hemisphere? And how comes people and objects still experience weight even on equator? If it is the Earth EM field that attracts them, shouldn’t they be accelerated either south or north, depending on their electrical charge? And what happens when a southerner meets a northerner? Will their opposite electrical charges stick them together, or burn to coal?

  72. popisfizzy says

    Well, you quite blatantly ignored pretty much everything I said about Newton, especially why he’s still remembered and that the fact that his law of universal gravitation is correct regardless of what causes gravitation. The equation is demonstratably correct, even if, somehow, your silly theory that electromagnetism causes it is somehow right. Newton didn’t describe the cause, just the appearance.

    And then there’s also time dialation, which is another nail in the coffin for your little theory. Despite the fact that you’ll almost certainly say it’s a myth, there are two very well-known instances outside the laboratory that it has been tested, and nothing but general relativity can explain it properly.

  73. Trux,

    Still no link or paper?

    FYI: I never said “weight is not gravity based.” I don’t know why you believe that.

    My problem is with gravitation not gravity.

    And yes, gravity is an electromagnetic phenomenon. The Earth is a charged body and matter is made of electrons and electricity.

    “can you explain why New Zealanders are attracted to the Earth in the same way as Europeans?”

    As far as your claim that gravity is the same all over the world, gravity anomalies are said to exist are all over the world: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090226110812.htm

    “Aren’t the EM field vectors opposite, or do all New Zealanders have all oposite charge than Europeans?”

    No. We observe lightning (negative electric charge) striking the Earth in both hemispheres.

  74. Popisfizzy,

    “and that the fact that his law of universal gravitation is correct ”

    This statement is laughable. Neptune was over 1 billion miles away from where the equation predicted it would be.

    “The equation is demonstratably correct, even if, somehow, your silly theory that electromagnetism causes it is somehow right. Newton didn’t describe the cause, just the appearance.”

    Newton himself suggested electricity was the cause.

    I find it ironic that you think Newton was silly because he believed in electricity.

    “And now we might add something concerning a certain most subtle spirit which pervades and lies hid in all gross bodies; by the force and action of which spirit the particles of bodies attract one another at near distances, and cohere, if contiguous; and electric bodies operate to greater distances, as well repelling as attracting the neighboring corpuscles; and light is emitted, reflected, refracted, inflected, and heats bodies; and all sensation is excited, and the members of animal bodies move at the command of the will, namely, by the vibrations of this spirit, mutually propagated along the solid filaments of the nerves, from the outward organs of sense to the brain, and from the brain into the muscles. But these are things that cannot be explained in few words, nor are we furnished with that sufficiency of experiments which is required to an accurate determination and demonstration of the laws by which this electric and elastic spirit operates.” — Isaac Newton, mathematician, 1686

    “And then there’s also time dialation, which is another nail in the coffin for your little theory.”

    Time dilation just means that time is a priori and relative and not a posteriori and absolute as claimed by Newton and Einstein.

    The claim that time is a material object is a myth indeed.

    “If we…consequently take objects as they are in themselves, then time is nothing.” — Immanuel Kant, physical scientist/philosopher, 1781

  75. popisfizzy says

    … yea, gonna call bull on your claim unless you can back it up, seeing as how Neptune’s mass and position was derived from perturbations in Uranus’ orbit and by using the law of universal gravitation. It was a very good verification that it was correct.

    And, once again, I don’t care that he thought it was electricity because he died quite a while before Einstein put forth general relativity. As I pointed out above (And which you promptly ignored, you cranks being professionals in that sort of thing.), I don’t hold things against people when they were ignorant because they lacked the knowledge in that time period.

    Lastly, some more ignoring of my statements. Electricity can’t describe time dilation, gravitational or otherwise. Time dilation due to traveling near-c is for the same reasons as time dilation on the Earth’s surface, or in any other gravitational well, and stating that gravity due to the curvature of spacetime doesn’t exist requires you to hypothesize as to it’s cause, which will all be futile.

    And Kant was just a philosopher, not a scientist. What he says has no bearing on science. Descartes believed strongly that the speed of light was infinite, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s been shown otherwise.

    Perhaps you need to rely less on quotes and more on providing evidence, hmm? This quoting and arguing from ignorance is really no better than what Gene Ray does for TimeCube, you silly little man.

    [Note: I actually posted this comment several days ago, but it didn’t post it because it “required moderation”. I assume that’s because I used the more profane version of “bull” in it.]

Comments are closed.