The Electric Universe Theory

[Tyger]

Here he begins by tackling the 'doctrine' that matter is unconscious -

RUPERT SHELDRAKE: Science Set Free, Part 2 | EU2013

Text: "Published on Jan 22, 2013: Part 2 of a talk by Rupert Sheldrake at the conference ELECTRIC UNIVERSE 2013: The Tipping Point, in Albuquerque, New Mexico."

@Constance Constance, the above video is a treasure-trove of stuff (along a certain vein) on consciousness and mind - but in particular, at just before 15:00 he starts to talk about the sun - and consciousness - in a way that you might find interesting.

P.S. I bought the Kindle version of 'The Electric Sky'. I'll let you know what I find regarding the sun.

 

[Muadib]

Since I really don't want to get into debunking every last piece of pseudoscience that makes up the EU, I'll just leave these here:

Neutrino Dreaming: The Electric Universe Theory Debunked

Podcast Episode 115: The Electric Universe, Part 1, with Dr. Tom Bridgman | Exposing PseudoAstronomy

Podcast Episode 116: The Electric Universe, Part 2, with Dr. Tom Bridgman | Exposing PseudoAstronomy

Episode 120: James McCanney’s Views on Comets, Part 1 | Exposing PseudoAstronomy

Podcast Episode 121: James McCanney’s Views on Other Stuff in the Universe, Part 2 | Exposing PseudoAstronomy


Getting it from the horse's mouth, IE an actual astronomer with a PHD in his field, is much better than me trying to give a general idea of why EU ideas don't stand up to the test of science. Consider that they have something like 3 or more separate models of the sun, none of which allow them to make any useful predictions at all, and judge for yourself.

Now, from my own pov, to believe in the EU, it would seem that given its complete and utter lack of mainstream acceptance, one would have to believe in some giant, dumbass conspiracy among countless scientists from countless disciplines around the world, ala global warming denier claims.

I submit that it's ridiculous to believe that scientists are engaged in a conspiracy to hide the electrical nature of the universe, just like its ridiculous to believe scientists are manufacturing data about climate change, again, around the world and across disciplines.

There's a group out there called Vault Co. that uses the EU to further their climate change denier garbage, the more pseudoscience we promote, the more people taken in, and it sometimes leads to more serious pseudoscientific beliefs, like climate change denial and creationism, and we certainly don't need any more of that shit.

 

[Tyger]

Since I really don't want to get into debunking every last piece of pseudoscience that makes up the EU, I'll just leave these here:

Appreciate the links. But the 'pseudoscience' characterization is unnecessary. I recall vividly sitting in Geology class during my undergraduate years (many, many moons ago, ) and floating the then 'pseudoscience' of plate tectonics. I know first-hand the immediate 'diss' by the professor and the sense that if I did not agree with the professor - and the then going 'doctrine' of uniformitarianism - my 'bona fides' as a serious scientific thinker would be in question. It's a curious feeling. Thinking outside-the-box has consequences for one's career in science, make no mistake - and hearing the charge of 'pseudoscience' is very much akin to hearing the charge 'heresy' or 'witch' in previous times.

So saying the above, I am not advocating EU as 'right', but I am also not advocating current standard science as 'right' either. IMO it's a dialog that needs to happen rather than knee-jerk push-back and the tally-ho of the derisive charge of 'pseudoscience'. JMO.

Getting it from the horse's mouth, IE an actual astronomer with a PHD in his field, is much better than me trying to give a general idea of why EU ideas don't stand up to the test of science.

While I agree with this - and do it myself - direct links to counter specific claims made in the thread would be helpful.

However, I am moved by your loyalty to the PhD - and the 'actual astronomer' - especially as what is being advocated is of a nature that puts some of the current theories - to which such a person would be loyal - up-ended. It is understandable that there would be - and is - push-back. There is a lot invested in the standard model. Careers - and by that I mean actual jobs - hinge on the standard model being right.

Consider that they have something like 3 or more separate models of the sun, none of which allow them to make any useful predictions at all, and judge for yourself.

Do they? I don't know that. Can you cite anything that indicates/explains these '3 or more separate models'?

The science of the sun is particularly driven by theory. Much of what we 'know' is conjecture. Predictions are hard to make for anyone because of the lack of empirical evidence/knowledge. However, if your assessment of predictions is general - please look at the Mars video and all the comet discussion in the videos - the EU theory is doing a pretty impressive job of predicting what is being found with comets, and what we see on the surface of Mars.

Now, from my own pov, to believe in the EU, it would seem that given its complete and utter lack of mainstream acceptance

This is an overstatement, I think. In fact, the success of EU theory to predict and explain phenomena that the standard model admits it cannot account for (as with Mars, as with Comets) has created interest and the beginnings of dialog. EU is interesting to watch as an example of how new paradigms edge out old - or how old and new merge. [BTW plate tectonics remains a theory, not a fact - but it is now an accepted theory, whereas at one time one could not mention it among scientists and remain credible. Now one can not only mention the theory, one can have a career based on it. I think the same progression will happen with EU theory - mainly because the standard model is stalled and needs some fresh perspectives.]

one would have to believe in some giant, dumb-ass conspiracy among countless scientists from countless disciplines around the world, a la global warming denier claims.

No - and it's not an equivalent comparison imo. Plus you're galloping ahead too fast. The EU theory is radical - it's going to take time to be accepted. It's entre will likely be with the cometary stuff (and Mars) imo.

I submit that it's ridiculous to believe that scientists are engaged in a conspiracy to hide the electrical nature of the universe, just like its ridiculous to believe scientists are manufacturing data about climate change, again, around the world and across disciplines.

No one is saying there is a conspiracy. You have me puzzled with this - methinks you have set yourself up with this line of reasoning. I am not aware of any conspiracy thinking around this. The standard model is not 'hiding' the 'electrical nature of the universe' - if you believe that current science is acknowledging the electro-magnetic nature of space - then there has been a shift in the thinking.

There's a group out there called Vault Co. that uses the EU to further their climate change denier garbage, the more pseudoscience we promote, the more people taken in, and it sometimes leads to more serious pseudoscientific beliefs, like climate change denial and creationism, and we certainly don't need any more of that shit.

Guilt by association? People take and run with all kinds of stuff: Hitler took an ancient symbol for Life and used it to stand for a nefarious ideology. There are people who use the Bible, and the Koran, and the Talmud, to justify all manner of fundamentalist beliefs that cause great harm to people - should we ban the Bible, Koran and Talmud? I'm not sure I agree with your reasoning here.

 

[Muadib]

Listen to the podcast links I provided and you will hear about their models of the sun and exactly what's wrong with their theories. You'll also hear the conspiracy claims, they are definitely there.

I don't have a lot of time to spend here, I'm not going to waste alot of it on the EU, especially because there is no single set of cohesive theories that describe the EU. The ideas they promote have been around a long time and were just as faulty then as they are now. The whole thing is a blatant example of how science should not be done, twisting facts to support their pre determined theory.

Also, the podcasts I listed, if you read Stuart's blog or listen to the links I provided, you'll see that Mr. Robbins did his doctoral thesis on the Martian impact craters, I value his opinion on this matter alot more than some guy publishing his theories on the net. Not just because of the PHD, though that certainly helps, but because I've been a fan of his work since 2012 and find him to be eminently reasonable and I've seen that he's not afraid to admit when science doesn't have firm answers rooted in data and evidence. The EU theory isn't one of those cases, there's a reason it doesn't have mainstream acceptance. I encourage you to listen to the podcasts and find out exactly why in clear terms.

Personally, I do believe the human race would be a whole lot better off without those three religious texts that you named, but that's another thread.

 

[Muadib]

If you don't have time for the podcasts, here's a link to an article that argues, quite successfully imo, that the idea of an electric sun does not hold with the observations made about the sun and isn't any more useful (in fact, its much less useful) than standard modern cosmology.This might be more convenient for you to read as it doesn't require making time to listen to hours of podcasts.

This is from the paper and Robbins makes the same point in the podcasts: In order to reject the fundamental theory of fusion in the stellar interior, it would be necessary, to all at once sweep away literally everything known about hydrodynamics & magnetohydrodynamics, thermodynamics, gravitation, nuclear physics, statistical physics, and electromagnetism.



On the "Electric Sun" Hypothesis

 

[Tyger]

Many thanks for all the links, Muadib.

 

[Muadib]

Many thanks for all the links, Muadib.

You're very welcome and I apologize if my original post came off as condescending, that wasn't my intent. I'd like to discuss this subject further when you have time, I don't have a ton of free time either, but I promise to at least attempt to respond in a timely fashion. We don't necessarily have to discuss claims and counter claims, I'm much more curious about why you think modern cosmological ideas fail. Especially given all of the amazing things we've been able achieve and the incredible technological progress we've made, which is in no small part due to the very science that EU theory seems to be trying to discredit.

If you do get a chance to listen to those podcasts, especially 115 and 116 since those deal specifically with different aspects of EU theory, including some of the conspiracy ideas I alluded to earlier, I'd love to hear what you think about them.

 

[Tyger]

Hooo-weeee! I'm down the rabbit hole now! Ha!

Unfortunately this very long video - over 2 hours - uses a computer generated voice-over. I have not listened to the whole of it. The voice-over is a problem. Oh well.

Also, this is not necessarily in sequence, or what Thornhill or LaPoint are saying. I just am positioning this here because it has to do with the sun and works in the same vein. This is a field that will have many avenues of approach and research. Nothing will be 'clean and tidy'. But when we get into the videos of LaPoint, it gets very interesting imo.

Ice Age of the dimming Sun in 30 years

TEXT: "Published on May 19, 2013: A near-incredible story of research and evidence in plasma physics and electro-astrophysics. Evermore evidence and research suggests that our Sun will likely become inactive, turned off, unpowered, a dim star, possibly within a single day some time 30 to 50 years from now when the Primer Fields collapse, with then only a third of its energy output remaining. How must we respond to live and grow food under this Sun?"

 

[Tyger]

David LaPoint intended to do a 7-part series but stopped at 3 parts, explaining that he is devoting his time to his research (and his patents).

The Primer Fields Part 1

TEXT: "Published on Dec 17, 2012: In this video series the currently accepted theories of physics and astrophysics are shaken to the core by a radical new theory of the fundamental forces in all matter. You will be amazed as a magnetic model of the dome at CERN is used to create a 100 mm diameter plasma Sun with a 300 mm diameter equatorial disc of plasma around it! All the plasma videos are actual footage with no enhancement or manipulation other than speed. In other words, this is real thing. Hard to believe, but it is all true."

The Primer Fields Part 2

TEXT: "Published on Jan 31, 2013: The second installment in the Primer Field series."


The following goes into light and the double slit experiment, etc.

The Primer Fields Part 3

TEXT: "Published on Feb 9, 2013: This installment of The Primer Fields explains the dual nature of light and other electromagnetic radiation."

 

[Tyger]

Interview starts at 2:00. A good overview: "Excellent! Clear, concise, reasonable. By god, this sounds suspiciously like science to me!" I agree.

Wallace Thornhill on The Electric Universe Theory - May 10, 2014

TEXT: "Published on May 16, 2014: Wallace Thornhill joins us on this night, and we discuss many facets of the Electric Universe Theory. Why it should be preferred over the current mainstream model, the proof for it, dismissing the Big Bang, Black Holes, Dark Matter, and much more. We talk of galaxies and stars, and what happened to Mars and Earth in the distant path. We talk of Velikovsky and Peratt. It is a fascinating journey.

"Wallace Thornhill graduated in Physics at Melbourne University in 1964 and began postgraduate studies with Prof. Victor Hopper's upper atmosphere research group. Before entering university, he had been inspired by Immanuel Velikovsky through his controversial best-selling book, Worlds in Collision. Wal experienced first-hand the indifference and sometimes hostility toward a radical challenge to mainstream science. He realized there is no career for a heretic in academia.

"Wal worked for 11 years with IBM Australia. The later years were spent in the prestigious IBM Systems Development Institute in Canberra, working on the first computer graphics system in Australia. He was the technical support for the computing facilities in the Research Schools at the Australian National University, which gave him excellent access to libraries and scientists there.

"Wal was initially heavily influenced by the then revolutionary ideas of Immanuel Velikovsky of Princeton. Velikovsky proposed that mankind had been devastated in the past by cosmological events . Wal took these ideas and with his deep knowledge of astronomy and, plasma physics began his own questioning of scientific dogma. Paramount was the place of electro magnetism, as distinct from gravity, in the formation of the universe . This slowly but surely led to his and other colleagues (such as David Talbot, Donald Scott, and Anthony Peratt) questioning such ingrained theories as the big bang, black holes and Einstein's theory of relativity. This group in particular contend that many scientific "proofs "are theory laden or mathematically concocted. An insistence on empirical data from observations and experiments gives their work true integrity. (bio taken from Ancient Destructions investigations, videos, articles on Earths catastrophes more at the sight)."

 

[Tyger]

Magnetic Poles and introducing the Primer Fields video series
March 17, 2014 By Dorfman Adam
LINK: Magnetic Poles and an Introduction to the Primer Fields video series

TEXT: "Magnetism
"In this editorial we offer you a short read to see how David Lapoint’s, Primer Fields video series relates to Nassim Haramein’s “Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass” research paper. But, quickly … how is magnetism currently described by the mainstream?

"South and North poles, Magnetic Bars
"A common source of magnetic field shown in nature is the known South and a North pole of the Earth’s bar magnetic field. Since opposite ends of magnets are attracted, the north pole of a magnet is attracted to the south pole of another magnet. “However, since the North Magnetic Pole, the North Geomagnetic Pole attracts the north pole of a bar magnet – in a physical sense it is actually the south pole”.(1)

"Magnetic Fields
"Anyway, over time, scientist began to understand that all materials are influenced to some extent by each others fields. The magnetic circuit of an object is made up of one or more closed loop paths containing a magnetic flux confined to the path created by the magnetic cores of the material.

"Introducing the Primer Fields
"The Primer Fields is a 3 part video series in which many of the currently accepted theories of physics and astrophysics are shaken to the core by plasma physicist David LaPoint as he proposes a radical new theory of magnetic field that he believes holds all matter together.

"In the first two installments, he suggests that bar shaped magnetic fields are incorrect and instead all matter is confined and formed by the magnetism of two opposing polarity bowl-shaped magnetic fields.

"Essentially, that all matter has intrinsic magnetic fields to it and that electricity is not the driver of the formations seen in space, but in fact is produce by these formations.

[See Video in Link]

"During these experiments he applies over 70,000 volts of electricity create various plasma formations, spins and flows. You will intrigue when a magnetic model of the dome at CERN (The European Organization for Nuclear Research) is used to create a 100 mm diameter plasma Sun with a 300 mm diameter equatorial disc of plasma around it.

"Another fascinating observation is the presence of an “X” pattern during the formation and what appears to be a glowing ring to the center of matter. All the plasma videos are actual footage with no enhancement or manipulation other than speed.

[See Video in Link]

"Dual Torus Topology
"Interestingly, the two opposing polarity bowl-shaped magnetic fields proposed in the Primer Fields is very similar to the double torus topology proposed by Nassim Harameins from the Resonance Projects in his “Spinors, Twistors, Quaternions, and the “Spacetime” and “A Universal Scaling for Organized Matter”research papers which were submitted for peer review and published in 2007 and 2008, respectively. See the Resonance Project’s web site, here.

"Subsequent to these papers, Nassim submitted, published and copywrote the “Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass” research paper in which he appears to have unified the fundamental forces of physics.

"Even more interestingly, is that even though his calculations were subsequently supported by the Paul Sherrer Institute, there has been very little public dialogue amongst the mainstream scientific community about it. Meanwhile, opposing theories, such as quantum gravity and string theory, are still in search of experimental confirmation despite having billions of dollars in resources at their disposal.

"This is not entirely surprising given that Nassim Haramein’s paper requires a major paradigm shift to occur amongst global scientific leaders, who need to accept the proton as a little black hole which could provide a path to connect all matter. And, this black hole, at the atomic level is what creates gravity and various other confinement properties.

"See an “Introduction to new understandings about the Holographic Universe and Black Holes at the atomic level” which discusses Nassim’s “Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass” research paper.

[See Graphic in Link]

"Similarly, since David Lapoint first published the Primer Fields part 1 in 2012, there has been little talk amongst the mainstream media to discuss its content and opposing views. While the content in these videos has not been verified by a third party peer review process, in the same way that Nassim’s work already has, it remains extremely valuable in creating discussion about the magnetic structures of all life.

"And, it should be noted that David Lapoint is still an accomplished plasma physicist and in 2008, was granted a US Patent for a Power Generating Described as: A device with the ability to harness electrical power utilizing magnetic arrays and electrically charged particulate to produce electrical power is provided. The present invention provides a device and system whereby the device may utilize a magnetic array to produce a electronic field that may collected in the form of electric energy. See here.

"While the Primer Field’s was meant to be a 7 part series, David announced on his YouTube channel that he has cancelled all other video series to focus on his work. In recent years, he has submitted several other patents and is expected to submit research reports on his findings.

"Dual Properties of Light
"In Part 3 of these videos, he uses the primer fields to explain the dual nature of light and other electromagnetic radiation properties .

"In other words, he attempts to reveal why light has the properties of both a particle and a wave to reconcile the infamous Double Slit Experiment in a way that most anyone can comprehend. If his findings from his experiments hold true, they will strongly oppose the mainstream view of this phenomena. And, since the Double Slit Experiment is at the core of quantum mechanics, this could have a profound implications in the future of quantum technologies."

In the Primer Fields 3, he discusses edge diffraction, single slit diffraction, dual slit diffraction, and many other aspects of light as well as all electromagnetic radiation. See “An introduction to quantum physics and “The Eye of Horus”” for an explanation on the double slit experiment.

 

[Tyger]

Comments to above blog entry -

Comment: "I think we're getting closer to what Telsa discovered over a century ago, what a tragedy!
Keep sharing stuff like this, its important that this information becomes more widely available and accessed, because I have a feeling these kinds of discoveries will never get coverage by the mainstream media..."

Comment (Response): "Thanks for your note and encouragement, Adam. Indeed, most in the mainstream media do not have enough broad understandings and/or interests to explore the significance of these efforts."

Comment: "The theories David presents are interresting and I expect that this will be proven without the aid of external magnetic fields. Matter has to behave as theorized by itself because it is claimed that this applies to both macro and micro."

Comment (Response): "Thanks for the note Peter - indeed, our understanding about the geometric structure to life is improving."

Comment: "Very interesting ideas. I have watched and read a lot about Telsa and this really does seem to be along the lines of what he did. I wonder, could this be the solution for plasma containment that is preventing us from obtaining sustained fusion? Also when I saw the "ejection" on the second video that David did it made me wonder if this could be used as a means of creating a high velocity ejection system for plasma particles in an extremely powerful plasma/ion drive system? The force created to eject the steel ball is a lot more than " a papers pressure on the hand." I can even see how this could also be used to create a form of force field around a spacecraft to move and protect against matter and radiation."

 

[Tyger]

Here is a review of 'The Primer Fields' 3-part video series -
LINK: Review: The Primer Fields - PESWiki

What is annoying is that 'The Bizarre Discovery at CERN' appears to be a video on a private YouTibe channel, so un-viewable. However, the review quotes the text from YouTube: "Video of magnetic models of the Globe of Science and Innovation at CERN in my vacuum chamber. High voltage plasma reveals the magnetic patterns that the CERN models emit and thereby explain many phenomena found in physics and astrophysics."

Ah-Ha! I have come upon a viewable video of the 'bizarre discovery' at CERN -

Bizarre Discovery at CERN

TEXT: "Published on Jan 17, 2013: Video of magnetic models of the Globe of Science and Innovation at CERN in my vacuum chamber. High voltage plasma reveals the magnetic patterns that the CERN models emit and thereby explain many phenomena found in physics and astrophysics."

 

[Tyger]

Rosetta Mission Update | Comet 67P -- Electrical Sculpting of Surface Dust

TEXT: "Published on Dec 30, 2014: For several months now, the Rosetta Mission has followed the comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko around the sun. And as we’ve expected, direct observation continues to add one mystery to another. How are we to understand the weird configurations of dust on the comet’s surface?"

 

[Tyger]

WHAT IF? Asking the Dangerous Questions with Tom Wilson

TEXT: "Published on Jan 3, 2015: With this video, Dr.Tom Wilson begins a series of discourses looking at critical issues in the theoretical sciences. The series will give special attention to themes highlighted by the science of the Electric Universe."



Comment: "Camouflage is not what we see it is what we think we can see. In nearly every instance in history we have persecuted anyone who has the temerity to suggest an alternative to anything other than the accepted view. The reason we are so primitive in the aspect of science is because we view it with a closed mind. The EU theory maybe bunkum and it may be the biggest breakthrough in science. One thing is for certain, time spent in reconnaissance is never wasted. We should view every option on the table with equal weighting until an overwhelming body of evidence proves or disproves the theory. However this must be carried out without preconceived prejudices and convictions."



Comment: "OK. What difference would treating the universe as plasma instead of gas, liquid and solid make?"



Comment: Quite a bit, since no plasma physicist does so. And when people start to do so, they realize plasma responds strongly to EM fields, due to it's electrical conductivity.

Plasma (physics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The presence of a non-negligible number of charge carriers makes plasma electrically conductive so that it responds strongly to electromagnetic fields."

This results in a collective behavior of plasma, hence flat rotation curves in galaxies.

"It is important to note that although they are unbound, these particles are not ‘free’ in the sense of not experiencing forces. When the charges move, they generate electrical currents with magnetic fields, and as a result, they are affected by each other’s fields. This governs their collective behavior with many degrees of freedom."

Unlike those solids, liquids and gasses that orbit by their own individual masses. Because unlike plasma they are not strongly influenced by the electromagnetic forcing.

It also explains how galaxies and star systems form.

Marklund convection - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)

But to answer your question, treating plasma like plasma instead of solids, liquids and gasses removes 95% of that Fairie Dust required when you treat plasma like solids, liquids and gasses.



Comment: Regardless of if you believe in EU or not, one should always as questions to see if the accepted explanations are correct or not. Personally I ask how an equation or model can be right when you find out that some 90% of it's content is missing, for it to be right? For example: "OK, we found that 90% of the content our calculations were based on is missing but the remaining 10% is correct. All we need to be 100% right is to find the missing 90%".???

How can the remaining 10% be right when the equation it was based on was missing 90% from start? Would we accept such a scenario in any situation? Logic says no. But when our scientist found out that 90% of the universe is missing, for their calculations and model to be right, they gave us 90% elusive dark matter and dark energy. Problem solved???



Comment: It is very easy to figure out why science today more and more finds "logic defying" objects or behavior of objects. When they are confronted by these anomalies that defy their models or predictions they realize it's all wrong. When they created the math for their universe with Big bang, black holes, creation of galaxies, rotation of galaxies, creation of galaxy clusters, creation of solar systems, etc, it was all based on gravity, the weakest force of them all.

Then they found out that it doesn't work, the mass is not enough to create all these and hold them together. 90% was missing to make the math work. Any way you look at it, logic would suggest that when you are off by such a big margin you have to start over from scratch. But no, according to them the math is correct but there must be some dark matter out there to fill the missing 90% and also some dark energy to keep it all together.

There is this famous animation of how universe formed after the big bang and how galaxies were created and galaxy clusters so it all looks as it does today. In the beginning the narrator says "Not everything is known". In reality he means "we don't know 90% of all this". Most people watching that video will think he means they know most of it and only some small parts are missing. In what other area of science, industry or our daily lives would we so boldly make a presentation when we only know 10%??? And actually present it all? The fun part is that this presentation is not about some small, insignificant project that we wouldn't care much but about the ENTIRE universe and everything in it.



Comment: We must remember star sizes are determined by theory - not observation - as all stars regardless of any believed size appear as point sources in any telescope. It is belief about sizes due to thermonuclear and gravitational theory only that has influenced what stars are, or how big they are.

Even binary pairs are determined by gravitational theory, when we already know for a fact that stars do not follow the gravitational laws in their orbits around galaxies, but electromagnetic.

So what is to say those dwarfs really are? And not just low current supply and therefore less overall photosphere tufting?
Stellar evolution in the electric universe

Which might also explain some phenomenon of solar dimming rhythmically we allude to other sources. If only part of a star was undergoing arc discharge, it would appear to dim and brighten as it rotated, and move from side to side as each side brightened and dimmed.

And I'm really not big on the "excuse" of planets being the cause. Unless I am expected to believe I can see a stars movement caused from a planet at the claimed distance, but can not observe it's motion in it's own galaxy compared to us, which must be hundreds or thousands of times greater. Preposterous!

I don't think we understand anything about stellar distances, or even what a galaxy really is, let alone a star, IMO. We don't even understand the one 93 million miles away - to be claiming anything else with any certainty is a perpetuated fraud of self delusion.



Comment: If the sun isn't a giant ball of thermonuclear plasma then what is it? Every single observation you take of the sun points to the notion that it is indeed a massive object comprised mostly of hydrogen and helium that's undergoing thermonuclear fusion at its core. But because us humans haven't come up with a comprehensive explanation as to why the suns corona is an order of magnitude hotter than the surface you think we need to start over from scratch and completely rethink how stars work?



Comment: I think it's great you came here and asked a good question! This is what it's all about. It was a very fair question and the burden of proof rests on the theory, not you. So hopefully you have gotten some good answers. I'll add that they have found that convective activity in the sun is about 1% of what would be needed to support a fusion core, convective layer and sufficient output to coincide with our photospheric observations. This was done recently and called a "MRI of the sun". Scientists are baffled by the result.

It's important to know that there is no harm is seeking understanding of a competing model. So keep searching until you are convinced your current knowledge is indeed sufficient, or until you believe there is enough evidence to support the EU that it is plausible. The journey to either outcome will enrich your life.



Comment: Yes, not only was convection found to be too low to support fusion processes "beneath" the surface, but it also invalidates magnetic reconnection, which relied on those convection processes to explain the existence of electric currents creating the magnetic fields.

Anomalously weak solar convection

Convection and a fusion core was the only explanation they had of those electric currents. Hidden "dynamos", hidden well, everything.

And of course, those differential rotating layers are another express prediction of EU theory.

Marklund convection - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)

Coupled with those Z-pinch processes.

Pinch - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)
Z machine - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)

Which will never attain sustained nuclear fusion as long as they are attempting it without a solid core to begin with. The fusion is happening between those tufts on the surface in the plasma atmosphere where the current pinches down, IMO.

http://www.holoscience.com/news/img/Solar plasma sheath.jpg



Comment: One of couple problems with the understanding of basic laws: Curie temperature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How hot plasma on the Sun or molten iron in Earth's core can sustain a strong magnetic field? Does it mean, that there has to be a magnetic field, BEFORE a planet or star will form?



Comment: I want to know how can we be receiving any signal back from that space craft through the recently discovered plasma shields that surround the earth? The Russians say a radio signal could not pass through these plasma shields? MIT discovered these plasma shields so I don't think there is any question as to whether or not these plasma shields exist. If they do and a radio signal cannot pass through plasma then there are many more questions we don't have the answers too.



Comment: Then no radio signal has ever been received or transmitted to or from anything we ever launched. but since we have and do... i dont think plasma even what they consider cold is cold, they need to redifine the word then for the application of their findings. and all the space craft we have out there transmit and get recieved and those all have to make it through, both directions. voyager is received from way out there and is a billionth of a volt or so. so i doubt the russians still. but they are intellectual as well. more needs to be gathered.



Comment: Please take 5 mins to check up on the MIT discovery. It's very important and if true then everything we are being told and have been told is untrue. Here is a link >>Invisible Plasma Shield, Which Protects Earth From Radiation, Discovered 7,200 Miles Above Planet when using google to search, if you use in url: or in title: before your keywords,you will get better results. ( in title: MIT Plasma shield)

 

[Tyger]

Invisible Plasma Shield, Which Protects Earth From Radiation, Discovered 7,200 Miles Above Planet
By Kukil Bora on November 27 2014

LINK: Invisible Plasma Shield, Which Protects Earth From Radiation, Discovered 7,200 Miles Above Planet

TEXT: "The Earth is protected from fast-moving “killer electrons” by an invisible plasma shield, which is located thousands of miles above the planet’s surface, according to researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of Colorado Boulder.

"High above the Earth’s atmosphere, harmful electrons that make up the outer band of the Van Allen radiation belt travel at nearly the speed of light, pelting everything in their path. Exposure to such high-energy radiation can harm satellite electronics and pose serious health risks to astronauts. However, despite their intense energy, these electrons -- circling around the planet’s equator -- cannot come below 7,200 miles from the Earth’s surface due to the shield, scientists said in a study, published in the journal Nature on Thursday. “It’s almost like theses electrons are running into a glass wall in space,” Daniel Baker of the University of Colorado Boulder and the study’s lead author said, in a statement. “Somewhat like the shields created by force fields on Star Trek that were used to repel alien weapons, we are seeing an invisible shield blocking these electrons. It’s an extremely puzzling phenomenon.”

"The invisible shield, dubbed the “plasmaspheric hiss,” is made up of very low-frequency electromagnetic waves in the Earth’s upper atmosphere. Scientific data and calculations have helped researchers deduce that the hiss deflects incoming electrons, causing them to smash into neutral gas atoms in the Earth’s upper atmosphere, and ultimately disappear. “It’s a very unusual, extraordinary, and pronounced phenomenon,” John Foster, associate director of MIT’s Haystack Observatory, said in a statement. “What this tells us is if you parked a satellite or an orbiting space station with humans just inside this impenetrable barrier, you would expect them to have much longer lifetimes. That’s a good thing to know.”

"The latest study is based on data collected by NASA’s Van Allen Probes that are orbiting within the harsh environments of the Van Allen radiation belt. During the study, the researchers observed an “exceedingly sharp” barrier against harmful electrons, which was steady enough to withstand a solar wind shock in October 2013. To determine what could create and maintain such a barrier, the researchers considered a few possibilities, including effects from the Earth’s magnetic field and radio signals from human transmitters on Earth. “It’s like looking at the phenomenon with new eyes, with a new set of instrumentation, which give us the detail to say, ‘Yes, there is this hard, fast boundary,’” Foster said."

 

[Tyger]

The Electric Sun by Don Scott

TEXT: "Published on May 30, 2013: A lecture by Donald E. Scott PH.D., retired professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst."

 

[Tyger]

Listen to the podcast links I provided and you will hear about their models of the sun and exactly what's wrong with their theories. You'll also hear the conspiracy claims, they are definitely there.

I haven't listened to the podcasts though I did go in and scan the summaries. I did scan the article hitting all the main points.

I don't have a lot of time to spend here

Understood. My problem, too.

I'm not going to waste a lot of it on the EU

Understood.

especially because there is no single set of cohesive theories that describe the EU.

Well, yes and no. Anyway, I do this because it's fun. I love the possibilities.

The ideas they promote have been around a long time and were just as faulty then as they are now.

Didn't know that.

The whole thing is a blatant example of how science should not be done, twisting facts to support their pre determined theory.

Curiously, they say the same about scientists regarding the standard model.

Also, the podcasts I listed, if you read Stuart's blog or listen to the links I provided, you'll see that Mr. Robbins did his doctoral thesis on the Martian impact craters, I value his opinion on this matter alot more than some guy publishing his theories on the net.

Well, yes, one is 'respectable', a member in good standing with 'the system', and playing by the rules. The other, not so much - but still deadly fun!

Not just because of the PHD, though that certainly helps, but because I've been a fan of his work since 2012 and find him to be eminently reasonable and I've seen that he's not afraid to admit when science doesn't have firm answers rooted in data and evidence.

I understand relying on someone's analysis whom one respects. It's all we can do, really.

The EU theory isn't one of those cases, there's a reason it doesn't have mainstream acceptance. I encourage you to listen to the podcasts and find out exactly why in clear terms.

For sure it's a 'dangerous and provocative' theory.

 

[Tyger]

You're very welcome and I apologize if my original post came off as condescending, that wasn't my intent.

No sweat. Thanks for being sensitive, though. Much appreciated.

I'd like to discuss this subject further when you have time, I don't have a ton of free time either, but I promise to at least attempt to respond in a timely fashion.

I'm not one to do that. So annoying, I know. I've long since made the decision to never really discuss anything on the internet beyond giving a friendly nod. I post what interests me and occasionally have a pen-pal but nothing more. I'm aways keen to hear people's views, though - their passion, their knowledge.

We don't necessarily have to discuss claims and counter claims

That's good, because I wouldn't engage such on an internet forum. One of my things.

I'm much more curious about why you think modern cosmological ideas fail.

I don't think that. You misunderstand. I like interesting ideas. I think Velikovsky had a brilliant set of ideas. He spun a cohesive story. What he did - across disciplines (big no-no) - was breath-taking. I think the Electric Universe is fascinating. I'm intrigued that Einstein is being 'taken on' and 'refuted' by some (the temerity!). It's just fun.

Especially given all of the amazing things we've been able to achieve and the incredible technological progress we've made, which is in no small part due to the very science that EU theory seems to be trying to discredit.

The standard model and EU can both have elements that are true. In fact, that would be my hunch, in the end.

Just a note - I'm not sure the 'incredible technological progress' we've made is due to the science the EU theory is 'trying to discredit'. I guess there can be partial truth everywhere.

I'm not that impressed with our space technology science btw. It's hideously primitive. The propulsion system alone makes one weep. We're at a stand-still really. I think the EU has real possibilities to break that gordian knot. I can't say how - just a hunch. To me, that's exciting. Sorry that I can't be any more explicit. I'm just along for the ride.

If you do get a chance to listen to those podcasts, especially 115 and 116 since those deal specifically with different aspects of EU theory, including some of the conspiracy ideas I alluded to earlier, I'd love to hear what you think about them.

Do you mean that the EU people - like Scott or Thornhill? - think conspiracy? In what way? Could you summarize in a nut-shell? I don't see it in anything I have read or listened to thus far.

 

[Tyger]

Inevitably one is led to the amazing Tesla - and then Eric Dollard.

Professor Eric Dollard Origin of Energy Synthesis, Theory of Electricity and Magnetism

TEXT: "Published on Dec 16, 2013: Posted with the permission of Eric P Dollard. One of the finest minds that ever lived in electrical theory, anti-relativity, Eric Dollard is the only man known to be able to accurately reproduce many of Tesla's experiments with Radiant Energy and wireless transmission of power. This is because he understands that conventional electrical theory only includes half of the story. The only living man who can be called "THE HEIR OF NIKOLA TESLA!" "