http://nextbigfuture.disqus.com/enSat, 18 Jul 2009 13:45:45 -0000http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/07/beyond-molecular-nanotechnology-is.html#comment-12883316<p>Despite the creativity displayed by Professor Bolonkin, I believe he has fallen for the pseudo-science routinely spewed by mainstream astronomers. His paper is founded upon "science" that has NEVER been corroborated in nature.</p><p>Astronomer's belief in things they call white dwarfs, neutron stars and black holes are based on several incorrect assumptions and mathematical typos (<a href="http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest1.htm)" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest1.htm)">http://www.thunderbolts.inf...</a> that have caused them to create absurd "explanations" for the actual observations they make. No one has ever observed a neutron star. What they have actually observed are high repetition pulses, for which the only explanation they came up with was a spinning star. Unfortunately for that explanation, a star made of normal matter would immediately tear itself apart. Instead of throwing out that hypothesis, they "fixed" it by dreaming up a material that any hands-on nuclear scientist would immediately reject: Neutronium. Lone neutrons decay to proton-electron pairs within 14 minutes, collections of two or more neutrons will fly apart almost instantaneously and atoms with neutron-to-proton ratios &gt; 1.5 radioactively decay to configurations that are closer to a ratio of 1. See the links for more details about why neutron stars are impossible: <a href="http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/neutron_stars.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/neutron_stars.htm">http://www.thunderbolts.inf...</a>, <a href="http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090121theory.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090121theory.htm">http://www.thunderbolts.inf...</a> and <a href="http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090424imagine.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090424imagine.htm">http://www.thunderbolts.inf...</a>. Similar "mistakes" were made about black holes, dark matter, dark energy and other patches used to try to salvage the Big Bang theory. Whenever observations do not match the "elegant" mathematics of their theory, they simply invent another invisible, undetectable thing to put off the need to acknowledge that maybe it is time to go back to the drawing board come up with a better theory to fit their observations.</p>jonathleeSat, 18 Jul 2009 13:45:45 -0000http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/07/beyond-molecular-nanotechnology-is.html#comment-12794258<p>I'll believe it when I see it.</p>kurt9Thu, 16 Jul 2009 20:47:59 -0000