RE-EXAMINING VELIKOVSKY: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Imported from text file |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
<span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">The ?Electric Universe? Theory (EUT) owes part of its inspiration to the work of Immanuel Velikovsky (<u>Worlds in Collision</u> [1950]), at least for introducing the concept of catastrophism of an electrical nature potentially inducing what EUT proponents see as plasma-arced ?scarring? on some planets and other objects within our solar system, such as Mars.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> <span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">Though discredited by mainstream physicists and astronomers since the publication of his ideas in 1950, <span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">Velikovsky nonetheless ushered in an era where catastrophic events, rather than just immeasurable eons of uniformitarianism, became acknowledged as a potential contributor to the current state of our solar system (and maybe beyond).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> <span style="FONT-FAMILY: ">Based on my admittedly quite crude calculations in this paper, it still appears too far-fetched to believe the planet Venus arose out of Jupiter and careened through the inner solar system anytime within human history (if ever at all).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>However, this does not invalidate the EUT contention that planetary scarring due to electrical plasma-arcing may be responsible for the bizarre surface features seen on Mars and perhaps other celestial objects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>But just what particular planetoids or comets might have been responsible for this remains unknown. | <span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">The ?Electric Universe? Theory (EUT) owes part of its inspiration to the work of Immanuel Velikovsky (<u>Worlds in Collision</u> [1950]), at least for introducing the concept of catastrophism of an electrical nature potentially inducing what EUT proponents see as plasma-arced ?scarring? on some planets and other objects within our solar system, such as Mars.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> <span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">Though discredited by mainstream physicists and astronomers since the publication of his ideas in 1950, <span style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: ">Velikovsky nonetheless ushered in an era where catastrophic events, rather than just immeasurable eons of uniformitarianism, became acknowledged as a potential contributor to the current state of our solar system (and maybe beyond).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> <span style="FONT-FAMILY: ">Based on my admittedly quite crude calculations in this paper, it still appears too far-fetched to believe the planet Venus arose out of Jupiter and careened through the inner solar system anytime within human history (if ever at all).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>However, this does not invalidate the EUT contention that planetary scarring due to electrical plasma-arcing may be responsible for the bizarre surface features seen on Mars and perhaps other celestial objects.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>But just what particular planetoids or comets might have been responsible for this remains unknown. | ||
</span></span></span></span></span></span> | </span></span></span></span></span></span> | ||
[[Category:Cosmology]] | [[Category:Scientific Paper|re-examining velikovsky]] | ||
[[Category:Electric Universe]] | |||
[[Category:Cosmology|re-examining velikovsky]] | |||
[[Category:Electric Universe|re-examining velikovsky]] | |||
Latest revision as of 21:52, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | RE-EXAMINING VELIKOVSKY |
| Read in full | Link to paper |
| Author(s) | Raymond H Gallucci |
| Keywords | Velikovsky, Catastrophism, Venus, Solar System, Electric Universe |
| Published | 2013 |
| Journal | None |
| No. of pages | 3 |
Read the full paper here
Abstract
The ?Electric Universe? Theory (EUT) owes part of its inspiration to the work of Immanuel Velikovsky (Worlds in Collision [1950]), at least for introducing the concept of catastrophism of an electrical nature potentially inducing what EUT proponents see as plasma-arced ?scarring? on some planets and other objects within our solar system, such as Mars. Though discredited by mainstream physicists and astronomers since the publication of his ideas in 1950, Velikovsky nonetheless ushered in an era where catastrophic events, rather than just immeasurable eons of uniformitarianism, became acknowledged as a potential contributor to the current state of our solar system (and maybe beyond). Based on my admittedly quite crude calculations in this paper, it still appears too far-fetched to believe the planet Venus arose out of Jupiter and careened through the inner solar system anytime within human history (if ever at all). However, this does not invalidate the EUT contention that planetary scarring due to electrical plasma-arcing may be responsible for the bizarre surface features seen on Mars and perhaps other celestial objects. But just what particular planetoids or comets might have been responsible for this remains unknown.