... , with the Oort Cloud apparently having ten times the angular momentum of the planets, the situation is much worse. According to Asimov, the solar-system angular momentum is split as follows: Oort Cloud 90% All of the planets 9.8 % The sun 0.2 % The total mass of the Oort Cloud is estimated to be roughly that of Saturn. The recent flyby of Halley's Comet created this dilemma. It was discovered that Halley was a chunk containing 140 cubic miles of ice - much larger than anticipated for this "typical" comet. If the estimated 2 trillion comets are, on the average, Halley's size, the Oort Cloud is a thousand times more massive than previously thought. This, combined with estimates of Oort Cloud distance and angular velocity leads to the almost ridiculous distribution of solar-system angular momentum tabulated above. This will keep the theorists busy for a while. (Asimov, Isaac; Frontiers: New Discoveries about Man and His Planet, Outer Space and the Universe , New York, 1989, p. 270. Cr. C. Ginenthal) Comment. Perhaps the Oort Cloud isn't there after all. Or, if it is, it isn't rotating as rapidly as thought. In any case, the accepted theory of solarsystem formation is in trouble. Reference. Details concerning our catalog The Sun and Solar System Debris may be found here . From Science Frontiers #70, JUL-AUG 1990 . 1990-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... the top of a thundercloud and flashed across their instrument's field of view in 1/10 of a second. Nevertheless, it was caught on six video frames. Morss commented as follows: "It's something that you're going to have to scratch your head and think, 'What kind of phenomenon could form this kind of light?' .. .. . "It's got to be some kind of trapped charge that popped out of the top of a thunderstorm." (Anderson, Julie; "Ball of Light Leaves Scientists in the Dark," Omaha Morning Herald , December 18, 1996. Cr. L. Farish.) Comment. Perhaps 1,800 miles per second should really be 1,800 miles per hour. This velocity would be comparable with that of another very speedy "ball of light." May 25, 1997. Near Loco, Oklahoma. In what might be called a "video replay" of the above phenomenon, L. Lamphere caught a similar fast-moving "object" near a tornado-spawning storm. He and his team had a digital video camera trained on the storm and were taking time-lapse still photos. Lamphere reported: "The ceiling was maybe 900 feet. We were about four or five miles from the storm, which was tracking southeast. The object was well-defined and well-lit, but was obscured briefly by scud clouds. It dipped and bobbled in its trajectory before it flew into a storm known to contain hail the size of baseballs and ...

... of theories. This, after all, is what science is all about. It turns out that Alfven has made many correct scientific predictions. (He even shared a Nobel Prize in 1970.) But, as S.G . Brush has related in a detailed article in Eos, being correct is not the same as being accepted. "According to some scientists and philosophers of science, a theory is or should be judged by its ability to make successful predictions. This paper examines a case from the history of recent science - the research of Hannes Alfven and his colleagues on space plasma phenomena - in order to see whether scientists actually follow this policy. Tests of five pre-dictions are considered: magnetohydrodynamic waves, field-alligned (' Birkeland') currents, critical ionization velocity and the existance of planetary rings, electrostatic double layers, and partial corotation. It is found that the success or failure of these predictions had essentially no effect on the acceptance of Alfven's theories, even though concepts such as 'Alfven waves' have become firmly entrenched in space physics. Perhaps the importance of predictions in science has been exaggerated; if a theory is not acceptable to the scientific community, it may not gain any credit from successful predictions." Brush concludes that the continuing resistance to Alfven's work is due to the widely held opinion that his theory is not plausible; that is, it does not conform to the dominant paradigm. (Brush, Stephen G.; "Prediction and Theory Evaluation," Eos, 71:19, 1990. Cr ...

... ? Back on the Gobi, geologists remarked that the rich fossil deposits were found in structureless sandstone; i.e ., there was none of the cross-bedding seen in sandstones elsewhere in the region. Furthermore, fossils were extremely rare in the cross-bedded sandstones, which were built up over long periods of time. It looked as if the structureless, fossiliferous sandstones were sandslides differing from those in Nebraska in their much greater magnitude. But why were the Gobi sandslides so much larger and, apparently, faster? The next clue came from the recent devastating mudflows in California and Central America caused by heavy rains. These debris flows were made deadly when the infiltrating rainwater was blocked by bedrock. The accumulating water turned the soil into a muddy slurries that raced down hills at high velocities, overtaking animals (including many people) trying to escape. There is no bedrock in the Gobi, but a little digging encountered impervious layers of caliche. The Gobi caliche consists of layers of sandgrains cemented together by calcium carbonate. Typically located 2-3 feet below the dune surfaces, the caliche layers were evidence that the Gobi had experienced benign periods in the past with low winds, stable dunes and more moisture. But when heavy rains doused the Gobi dunes, the water was blocked by these caliche layers. Result: fluidized sand and catastrophic sand slides. These Cretaceous events were deadly for wildlife but blessings for future paleontologists. (Dingus, Lowell, and Loope, David; "Death in the Dunes," Natural History, 109:50, July-August 2000. ...

... case alone brings into question the interpretation of cosmological red-shift for all galaxies." (Moles, M., et al, including Arp; "Testing for Interaction between the Galaxies NGC 450 and UGC 807," Astrophysical Journal, 432:135, 1994.) But discordant redshifts are not limited to distant galaxies. "In the Milky Way, the so-called "K -effect" shows that hot, young stars seem to be exploding away from us in every direction (i .e ., they have an excess redshift right here in our own galaxy). If this had been heeded when first discovered, the expansion of the universe might never have been promulgated." (Arp, H.; "Companion Galaxies: A Test of the Assumption that Velocities Can Be Inferred from Redshifts," Astrophysical Journal, 430:74, 1994.) Both of the above quotations are from abstracts written by T. Van Flandern in his Meta Research Bulletin, 3:51 and 3:40, 1994, respectively. More on discordant redshifts can be found in our catalog: Stars, Galaxies, Cosmos. It is described here . From Science Frontiers #98, MAR-APR 1995 . 1995-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... additional doubt on this aspect of Relativity. Such experiments by Ives and other key scientists suggested that an ether actually did exist and that it could serve as an absolute reference frame. Another implication was that time was an independent entity unaffected by motion and that the infamous Twin Paradox was a fiction. Ives himself believed his work proved that so-called relativistic effects could be easily explained by phenomena appealing more to the common sense, such as the change of a light source's frequency with motion (over and above the Doppler Effect), rather than revamping space-time concepts. In short, Ives thought he had proved Special Relativity untenable experimentally and an un-necessary distortion of science's worldview. (Barnes, Thomas G., and Ramirez, Francisco S.; "Velocity Effects on Atomic Clocks and the Time Question," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 18:198, 1982.) Comment. Why do the textbooks neglect to mention the Ives experiments and why should a review of Ives' work appear in a creationist publication? The answers are easy: Special Relativity now has the status of scientific dogma, which one questions at his own peril. The creationists, on the other hand, vehemently reject relativitism in favor of absolute standards in space-time as well as other features of human existence. It would be amusing if the real world conformed to neither model, both of which are defended so passionately. From Science Frontiers #22, JUL-AUG 1982 . 1982-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... the basis of a stereomodel of Viking images, we have measured the geometry of a steep, constricted reach of the north channel that drops 900 m in only 100 km. A late-stage flood is hypothesized to have scoured the channel. If we assume that channel striations indicate water levels, then the flood had a minimum cross-sectional area of 3.12 x 107 m2 (the putative flood had a width of 83 km, an average depth of 373 m, and a maximum depth of 1280 m). These channel measurements suggest that flood vel ocities ranged from 32 to 75 m. s-1 and that discharge was greater than 1 km3. s-1 , values larger than those calculated for any other flood event on Mars or Earth." That maximum flood velocity is equal to 170 miles/hour! The erosion features included a -mile-deep pothole. Some temporary lake was likely the source of the flood, although no one sees any surface water on Mars today. (Robinson, Mark S., and Tanaka, Kenneth L.; "Magnitude of a Catastrophic Flood Event at Kasei Valles, Mars," Geology , 18:902, 1990.) Reference. Our catalog: The Moon and the Planets contains a section on the Martian "channels" (AEM1). For ordering information, visit: here . From Science Frontiers #76, JUL-AUG 1991 . 1991-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... to most astronomers. How did these walls form so early? Why hasn't the force of gravity modified the basic structure of the cosmos over the billions of years that followed the Big Bang? The astronomical quandry is this: If the very early universe looks pretty much the same as today's universe, the implication is that mass, the source of gravitational sculpting, is scarce. But this is at odds with the cosmic expansion rate which implies a much higher density of matter. (Appenzeller, Tim; "Ancient Galaxy Walls Go up; Will Theories Tumble Down?" Science, 276:36, 1997.) Comment. The existence of galaxy walls, like so many astronomical constructs, depends upon the assumption that the red shifts of galaxies are proportional to their recessional velocities and, additionally, their distances and ages. So much rides on this one assumption. The same situation prevails in biology, where everything is founded on the assumption that random mutations and natural selection can together generate any degree of complexity, sophistication, and innovation seen in nature. The history of science tells us that many paradigms have fallen because they depended upon faulty assumptions. From Science Frontiers #116, MAR-APR 1998 . 1998-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... conviction, and, when in doubt, agree with the wisest person present, who by definition must come from one of the the very few [recognized] institutions). Look upon new ideas with great disapproval and never discover a phenomenon for which no explanation exists, and certainly not one for which an explanation within the framework of known physics does not appear to be possible." Arp played this game for 29 years at the Mount Wilson and Palomar Observatories. He compiled the marvelous Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies, and was once rated among the top 20 astronomers. But he kept finding Anomalies -- apparently-associated celestial objects with different redshifts. More and more he began to believe and (perhaps recklessly) assert that some redshifts are not cosmological; that is, a measure of recessional velocity and distance. Soon, his rating dropped from the "upper 20" to "under 200". The final (and disgraceful) blow came about four years ago, when he received an unsigned letter stating that his work was without value and that he could have no more telescope time! Arp now lives in West Germany. (Burbidge, Geoffrey; "Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies," Sky and Telescope, 75:38, 1988.) Comment. More political details may be found in Arp's book. Is Arp a martyrin-the-making? You bet he is! Burbidge, an admitted Arp sympathizer, suggests that the "Arp Effect" is only the tip of the iceberg. In closing his review, he invokes the ghost of Alfred ...

... Project Sourcebook Subjects Nature, hypothesis, and the big bang As noted above, J. Maddox, Editor of the preeminent journal Nature, seems intent on muffling the Big Bang. Now we see a newly added section in Nature bearing the heading Hypothesis . Hypothesis "is intended as an occasional vehicle for scientific papers that fail to win the full-throated approval of the referees to whom they have been sent, but which are nevertheless judged to be of sufficient importance to command the attention of readers..." Certainly, this is a commendable development. But not surprisingly, the first paper is an at-tack on the Big Bang. Most of the authors of this first article are familiar to readers of Science Frontiers: H. Arp (Not all redshifts are measures of receding velocity.); G. Burbidge (Quasars are not as far away as they seem.); and F. Hoyle (The multidisciplinary iconoclast who helped de velop the Steady State theory of the universe.) None of these scientists has recanted, even in face of not-so-subtle pressures to conform. The first paper in Hypothesis. Arp et al summarize in two sentences: "We discuss evidence to show that the generally accepted view of the Big Bang model for the origin of the Universe is unsatisfactory. We suggest an alternative model that satisfies the constraints better." Most of the paper sets out observational evidence for the authors' main themes, as stated parenthetically above following their names. Space is also devoted to the contention that the vaunted "proofs" of the ...

... From Impacts On The Earth R.A . Muller and D.E . Morris review the evidence tying geomagnetic reversals to the impacts of large bodies with the earth: the tektites and microtektites; the climate changes; the biological extinctions, etc. Then they propose a physical mechanism for geomagnetic reversals: "The impact of a large extraterrestrial object on the Earth can produce a geomagnetic reversal through the following mechanism: dust from the impact crater and soot from fires trigger a climate change and the beginning of a little ice age. The redistribution of water near the equator to ice at high latitudes alters the rotation rate of the crust and mantle of the Earth. If the sea-level change is sufficiently large ( 10 meters) and rapid (in a few hundred years), then the velocity shear in the liquid core disrupts the convective cells that drive the dynamo. The new convective cells that subsequently form distort and tangle the previous field, reducing the dipole component near to zero while increasing the energy in multipole components. Eventually a dipole is rebuilt by dynamo action, and the event is seen either as a geomagnetic reversal or as an excursion." (Muller, Richard A., and Morris, Donald E.; "Geomagnetic Reversals from Impacts on the Earth," Geophysical Research Letters, 13:1177, 1986.) Comment. That the earth's field is generated by internal dynamo action is still a theory, although a widely accepted one. From Science Frontiers #49, JAN-FEB 1987 . 1987-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... created a similar air blast with severe consequences. July 10, 1996. Yosemite National Park, California. We reported this remarkable event in SF#111 for its far-flung seismic waves, which jostled seismographs at Berkeley and Reno over 200 kilometers distant. Actually, there were two rock falls 14 seconds apart. The "rocks" fell from a 665-meter cliff at Happy Isles in the eastern part of Yosemite Valley. No pebbles these; with volumes of 23,000 and 38,000 cubic meters. Although the impact area of the rock falls was not particularly large, the falls generated an air blast and an abrasive sandy cloud that devastated a larger area downslope of the impact sites toward the Happy Isles Nature Center. Immediately downslope of the impacts, the air blast had velocities exceeding 110 m/s [about 245 mph] and toppled or snapped about 1000 trees. Even at distances of 0.5 km from impact, wind velociies snapped or toppled large trees, causing one fatality and several serious injuries beyond the Happy Isles Nature Center. A dense sandy cloud trailed the air blast and abraded fallen trunks and trees left standing. (Wieczorek, Gerald F. et al; "Unusual July 10, 1996, Rock Fall at Happy Isles, Yosemite National Park," Geological Society of America, Bulletin, 112:75, 2000.) From Science Frontiers #139, Jan-Feb 2002 . 2001 William R. Corliss Other Sites of Interest SIS . Catastrophism, archaeoastronomy, ancient history, mythology and astronomy. Lobster . The journal of intelligence and ...