That's because they get paid to tow the line. It's called "the Standard Model" because no one in the establishment has either the courage or the intelligence to challenge it.
Theoretically you could shoot a high powered rifle while standing on the moon and hit yourself in the back of the head with the bullet about 30mins later.
I'll check out the other thread but a couple of things so far I find difficult to believe. Firstly, that our solar system was pretty much formed as it is 10,000 years ago. And secondly that there's been no mention of anything to explain an alternative to the Big Bang theory.
you would boil and implode at the same time, so freezing eye balls would be the least of your worries
It's a route I could easily have followed, with my academic background. Cosmology is a subject that I have been interested all of my life, and one on which I have read, and continue to read many books and papers. Like Wal Thornhill, and so many others, I struggled with the explanations provided by the Standard Model and grew evermore frustrated by the inability of modern maths-based physicists to answer key questions, that there was no way I could have stomached doing a degree in physics. The Standard Model is in disarray, and physics is headed for a crash.
That is interesting as the moon has 1/6th the gravity of earth and a circumference of 11000 km, so how would the bullet not hit the ground, way before it got back to you?
Yknow if you drop a large ball with a small ball on top, the small ball shoots upwards really far? Theoretically if you could do that with 6 stacked bouncy balls you'd send the top one of the atmosphere.
Which key questions? You keep mentioning these issues that can't be explained but haven't given any examples.
found this https://www.iflscience.com/space/what-would-happen-your-body-space-without-spacesuit/ You are still ****ed and die very quick
I could have studied medicine, but I didn’t, so I can’t tell a surgeon I know better. Just a thought like.
I assume it wouldn't be fired parallel to the ground, and essentially into a very low orbit. Would be one hell of a rifle though
Back would've been more accurate, but it could do at least one circumnavigation before gravity pulled it to the surface as there's no drag on the bullet to slow it down.
I'm talking about research on the Cosmos and in highly theoretical fields, such as quantum physics. The Universities give grants and jobs for students/lecturers to follow specific, highly defined areas. You cannot get a grant to stray off the beaten track, and you don't last long at an established University if you start to teach students to question the Standard Model.
