Electric universe theory

Is it really that absurd.

As the video points out in the first minute: gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces. The entire mass of the earth pulls down on a ball bearing, and a child can overcome all of that force with a small magnet. Magnetism is a thousand billion billion billion billion times more powerful than gravity.

And that's only electromagnetism. Nuclear forces are quadrillions of quadrillions of quadrillions of quadrillions times more powerful than gravity, so how could a blackhole even exist? The gravity would be overcome instantly by nuclear forces and it would explode.

 

When a theory makes everything simplier instead of more complex, and grows in viability the more information is collected, that's usually a good sign that the theory is correct.

In the case of electric universe, everything fits into place without all these extranatural entities such as blackholes and dark matter. It explains why the sun has a magnetic field, and why the corona of the sun is hotter than the surface.

Recently the NASA Themis mission confirmed that the northen lights are caused by electrical connections between the sun and the earth which transfer millions of amps to the upper atmosphere of the earth. Lightning is probably caused by the same phenomenon.

Everything begins to fit into place with no special mathamatics, no hypothetical particles or energy or extra dimensions. A simple and consistent theory of the universe, with many reproducable scaled experiments such as this one of the sun:





This is what I call good science.

 

Textbook knowledge is the modern bible. And I am the modern heretic.

Think about what you are saying. When we fuse atoms in a laboratory what force do we use? And how long does it last? How much force is unleashed with respect to the forces causing the fusion?

If you could fuse a thimble of water you would have a hydrogen bomb. It would detonate your entire laboratory and probably the surrounding country-side.

Now blow the experiment up to epic proportions. Put it in a ball big enough that the gravity causes the fusion. It still remains that the forces being unleashed are far far far far far far far greater than the forces initiating the fusion. The longer the fusion goes on the more concentrated energy there is trying to get out of the center. If a large object were causing fusion in its core then the combined energy of a hydrogen bomb going off every nanosecond would inevitably blow the whole thing apart.

If matter is energy (which it isn't) then your conversion process is basically one of matter to energy, and on the matter side you have mass (gravity) causing the fusion and on the energy side you have strong nuclear force causing the explosion. It doesn't matter how large the object is, this reaction is utterly unsustainable. Once the matter crosses the barrier into energy it is dissipating with a force 10^38 times stronger than the force it experienced to make this transition.

These currents are visible everywhere in space.


Just like an arc lamp.

There are papers:
http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&safe=off&q=plasma+cosmology

This is a rubbish argument. "No one else is paying attention to it therefore it must be false." No one ever pays attention to the right theory in the time that the theory is proposed. Science is awash with examples.

The point can be proven in a much simpler manner. Back in the early 20th century, universities had 'schools of thought' in almost every discipline. Since the takeover of control of universities and education systems by government the concept of 'schools of thought' has become discarded, and now there is 'the mainstream' and 'the kooks', consequently nothing is ever questioned anymore and likewise nothing is really discovered anymore, except by accident.

Education is 'without questions' -- the socialist model. It has become philosophically based in conformity, not in the search for truth.

 

Well the electric sun theory basically holds that the sun is an electrical phenomenon. The photo of the experiment I posted above is basically a scaled down a model of it.

Think of a tesla coil in a vacuum chamber charged to a billion billion billion volts. It would have a corona, it would be very bright, it would appear larger than it actually is, due to the plasma that surrounds it. It would have 'solar flares', it would have a magnetic field, it would arc out to anything that came even remotely close to it. These are all phenomena the sun exhibits.

The electric sun theory is that basically the sun is picking up energy from outside the solar system. Birkland currents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current) are 'twisted pair' transmission arcs through plasma; When an arc discharge occurs in plasma the magnetic field caused by the passage of the charge constricts the flow of the charge. This is sometimes called z-pinch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-pinch) In otherwords, the conductive medium -- the plasma -- changes its position based on the magnetic field of the electricity moving through it. This change in position also changes the channel through which the current is flowing, thus creating a reinforcing cycle which creates the twisted pair phenomonon.

As posted before, in space it looks something like this:


However not all birkland currents will be visible -- at least not in the visible light spectrum. Gas needs to be highly excited before it gives off light (like in an arc lamp.)

You can review the various arguments in support of this hypothesis here:
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

It fits into a larger theory: the electric universe theory.

 

The first thing I would say to this is all matter has a charge.

The second thing I would say is that the manner by which astrophysicists determine the composition of stars is dubious at best.

The third thing I would say is that a gas is a gas is a gas, if you run a billion billion billion volts through a gas it's gonna glow.

Well gravity is a pretty weak force. And we know that there are electrical connections (birkland currents) running from the sun into the earth (that's across the span of mercury and venus remember) which cause the northern lights and possibly lightning as well. These were predicted in the early 20th century by the pioneers of the elctric universe theory, and discovered / verified in 2007 by the NASA Themis mission. Details here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/auroras/themis_power.html

Well it beats 10 dimensional blackholes any day of the week in my book. Give me a theory that I can test in a lab, and I'll give you a thumbs up. Give me a metaphysical heap of shit labeled mainstream cosmology and I will direct you to the nearest church.


Edit: had more to add...

Also this theory, aside from being so simple and elegant and largely scalable, and therefore empirically testable, also opens up so many great avenues. If the 'redness' of 'distant' stars is not caused by the doppler effect, but rather is just a result of the way in which charge is distributed or flows throughout the galaxy and other galaxies, then stuff might not actually be that far away. I'm still researching this, and I'm not sure how they square this finding with the change in angle (from our perspective) of the stars with respect to the earth's movement; But it sure would be something to find out that the earth is not only not isolated but also that faster than light travel is entirely possible.

 

I understand what the doppler effect is. The point was that if galaxies are not redshifted, then they are not necessarily moving away, which means the universe isn't expanding. If the universe isn't expanding then it may not actually be that big.

As for parallax , that is what I was describing above when I said

And as far as I know parallax is the only means by which they determine the distance of cosmic objects from earth.

 

Case in point:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5goktPDzxcemTK7KTx4aNwjUpMAvw