Is the Electric Universe theory a better integrated cosmological view?

[Plasmatic]

How about you demonstrate how to be a properly objectivist epistemologist, and prove to us the above paragraph, especially the parts I highlighted in red. (I’m not sure what planetary encounters are, but they sure sound interesting…do they also involve cosmic thunderbolts that will (as in you have epistemologically correct proof available that they will) separate two planets when they close on each other?)

Anthony Perrat of Los Alamos national labratory has detailed the carving of high energy plasma disharge phenomenon on petroglyphs on every continent.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/14145750/Anthony…ed-in-Antiquity

The evidence for electrical scarring on planets is overwhelming.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/12070…triccraters.htm

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Craters

This is just some clues for one to dig further if they like.

[Jake_Ellison]

Thornihill addresses this topic in the book The Electric Universe. But here is a TPOD article breifly discussing the subject:

Wait, so the website that tells me that this cannot happen (“Such pictures are entirely fanciful because a comet would be disrupted electrically by a cosmic thunderbolt before it hit the Earth.”), is not a credible source? I believe there is a link in this thread to it, so you should really make sure people know which are the official websites, that carry information that is indeed claimed by EU, and which contain fabrications that contradict EU. (like the universal, in no way mitigated, claim that a comet cannot impact Earth, because a thunderbolt would stop this)

[Plasmatic]

Wait, so the website that tells me that this cannot happen (“Such pictures are entirely fanciful because a comet would be disrupted electrically by a cosmic thunderbolt before it hit the Earth.”), is not a credible source? I believe there is a link in this thread to it, so you should really make sure people know which are the official websites, that carry information that is indeed claimed by EU, and which contain fabrications that contradict EU. (like the universal, in no way mitigated, claim that a comet cannot impact Earth, because a thunderbolt would stop this)

“Disruption” does not equal “comet cannot impact Earth”. This seems to leave the rest of your comments unfounded.

On the orbit question you asked.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/thornhill2.htm

[Plasmatic]

On the above:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arc…dayasteroid.htm

In fact, our planet may not be so vulnerable to a globally-devastating event as astronomers have led us to believe. From the Electric Universe perspective, as explained by Wallace Thornhill, Earth, the asteroids, and comets are charged bodies moving in the electric field of the Sun. Thornhill believes that the charge difference between these bodies provides the earth with a natural defense against asteroids and comets, particularly very large ones. When an asteroid or comet enters the electric field of the Earth, which is contained within its “magnetosphere,” or more accurately-plasma sheath, there will be a powerful discharge between the two bodies. (See earlier TPODs on the Tunguska event and the Chicago Fire.)

The internal electrical stress caused by the discharge of the interloping asteroid or comet will generally cause it to detonate like an exploding capacitor—just as comets have frequently exploded “inexplicably” as they moved toward the Sun on their elongated orbits. (See The Explosive Demise of Comet Linear, and When Comets Break Apart. Also Schwassmann-Wachmann 3 Disintegrates)

Of course, we have already witnessed the electrical destruction of a colliding comet. Comet Shoemaker-Levy fragments were destroyed in a series of brilliant, unexpected flashes high above Jupiter’s atmosphere.

This is not to say that the Electric theorists believe comets and asteroids pose no threat to human beings. But the havoc these bodies might wreak would likely be limited to localized disasters —perhaps a series of Tunguska-like events producing regional devastation with falls of sand and dust, perhaps electrical craters, fires and earthquakes, but no single impact crater at all. The devastation of a global extinction requires an encounter with something much larger than a puny comet or asteroid. In all likelihood, it requires electrical exchanges with a body the size of a planet.

[Jake_Ellison]

Anthony Perrat of Los Alamos national labratory has detailed the carving of high energy plasma disharge phenomenon on petroglyphs on every continent.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/14145750/Anthony…ed-in-Antiquity

The evidence for electrical scarring on planets is overwhelming.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/12070…triccraters.htm

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Craters

This is just some clues for one to dig further if they like.

I’m not looking to learn more, I don’t read fiction unless there’s good character development. But since aristotlejones expressed his consternation that the critics of this didn’t substantiate their opinions, I’m willing to address any arguments he can present, on this website. But if he doesn’t, then he shouldn’t expect me to do the work for him. It’s not my theory, it’s not my job to argument it. My job is to shoot down any arguments you guys present me with: and the standard for your arguments has been set pretty claerly, you can read it in aristotlejones’s post. So no aproximations, or painting with a wide brush, please, give me specific, conclusive evidence. Either that, or stop complaining that we’re not “objective epistemologists”. There’s nothing to be objective about, this thread contains arbitrary claims (that I had to go looking for) and links. (that I’m not gonna click)

Speaking of which, I’ll follow your lead and substantiate my opinion that this is a crackpot theory with links. So here you go:

Relativity By Albert Einstein

The principle of relativity: a collection of original memoirs on the special … By Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Albert Einstein, Hermann Minkowski

Einstein’s theory of relativity By Max Born

Is this epistemologically correct enough?

So, if anyone wants actual arguments, on this site, to defend the opinion that it’s nonsense, then you’ll have to start presenting arguments in favor of your theory, on this website. If you want to argue with links, then why don’t you start by reading and debunking my three links, to show some good faith, and then I’ll consider reading some of yours?

[Plasmatic]

I’m not looking to learn more, I don’t read fiction unless there’s good character development. But since aristotlejones expressed his consternation that the critics of this didn’t substantiate their opinions, I’m willing to address any arguments he can present, on this website. But if he doesn’t, then he shouldn’t expect me to do the work for him. It’s not my theory, it’s not my job to argument it. My job is to shoot down any arguments you guys present me with: and the standard for your arguments has been set pretty claerly, you can read it in aristotlejones’s post. So no aproximations, or painting with a wide brush, please, give me specific, conclusive evidence. Either that, or stop complaining that we’re not “objective epistemologists”. There’s nothing to be objective about, this thread contains arbitrary claims (that I had to go looking for) and links. (that I’m not gonna click)

Speaking of which, I’ll follow your lead and substantiate my opinion that this is a crackpot theory with links. So here you go:

Relativity By Albert Einstein

The principle of relativity: a collection of original memoirs on the special … By Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Albert Einstein, Hermann Minkowski

Einstein’s theory of relativity By Max Born

Is this epistemologically correct enough?

So, if anyone wants actual arguments, on this site, to defend the opinion that it’s nonsense, then you’ll have to start presenting arguments in favor of your theory, on this website. If you want to argue with links, then why don’t you start by reading and debunking my three links, to show some good faith, and then I’ll consider reading some of yours?

Jake Im not interested in arguing as ive said before. While I did post info that pertains to particular challenges, the links are for one who considers checking these premises worth it. You dont and thats fine with me.

[Jake_Ellison]

“Disruption” does not equal “comet cannot impact Earth”. This seems to leave the rest of your comments unfounded.

On the orbit question you asked.

You’re right, disruption is vague. Luckily, they clarify what they mean by disruption, in no uncertain terms: they mean no impact, no marks whatsoever, only a crater from the thunderbolt:

Besides, in an Electric Universe comets are not the apocalyptic threat to the Earth imaginatively portrayed by artists. Such pictures are entirely fanciful because a comet would be disrupted electrically by a cosmic thunderbolt before it hit the Earth. The only visible evidence remaining would be an electric arc crater like Meteor Crater in Arizona.

This is not to say that the Electric theorists believe comets and asteroids pose no threat to human beings. But the havoc these bodies might wreak would likely be limited to localized disasters—perhaps a series of Tunguska-like events producing regional devastation with falls of sand and dust, perhaps electrical craters, fires and earthquakes, but no single impact crater at all.

The plot thickens. Now there is nothing falling to Earth at all. We’re talking not even asteroids, not only comets get disintegrated. Only sand and dust can fall to Earth, everything else, puff…big lightning.

Alright, hang on a second… googleing…if only half the human population on Earth had a a cellphone camera with them all the time…

Neuschwanstein, 2002:

And part of the meteorite:

Groningen (Netherlands) (there’s video, too, available for download)

Austin, Texas: (photos, video)

http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/2009_02_…video_west.html

[Grames]

I’m open to the idea that astronomers do not integrate electrical phenomena into their explanations, or that comets are denser and more like asteroids than ice cubes, but the hand waving here is just too much. Its too easy to hand wave refutations.

Of course, we have already witnessed the electrical destruction of a colliding comet. Comet Shoemaker-Levy fragments were destroyed in a series of brilliant, unexpected flashes high above Jupiter’s atmosphere.

Just what voltage and total energy delivered are required to vaporize a comet? Are these numbers consistent or contradictory with anything else we know? No numbers are given.

The linked article only claimed a brightening at 2.3 million km away from Jupiter, not a destruction. That is a distance beyond the orbit of Callisto, the outermost of the galilean moons. This could be corona discharge due to a high electric field difference between the comet fragments and the planet, just as they claim cometary discharges are. There is no way in hell lightning discharges from Jupiter’s atmosphere are reaching out that far. Electrical force is subject to an inverse square law, and 2.3 million km squared is pretty damn big number.

There is no discussion of which way the current is moving, but I’ll assume the Sun is positive and the cometary halo is negative, and comet fragments are still negatively charged with respect to Jupiter. Charge distributions on charged solid bodies are on the surface, not distributed within the volume. There is no way electrons leaping from the surface of a comet fragment can destroy it. If the charge and current were reversed, the surface would light up but charge recombination would occur only on the surface and not penetrate to the core of a dense body. The sudden thermal gradient of a hot outside and cool inside can cause some damage (fracturing) but it isn’t going to explode from the inside.

There is a limit to how much a comet can be electrically charged. Because like charges repel, there is an equilibrium point where the mass of an electron attracted to the mass of the comet is equal to the total repulsive force from the the net electric charge. Has anyone done the math on that? (and from googling a bit, the photoelectric effect of starlight will be knocking electrons off thus lowering the practical maximum charge.)

[dream_weaver]

From Science Daily

Magnetar formation mystery solved? Supernova explosions and dizzying spins in a binary system

 

This discovery allowed the astronomers to reconstruct the stellar life story that permitted the magnetar to form, in place of the expected black hole [3]. In the first stage of this process, the more massive star of the pair begins to run out of fuel, transferring its outer layers to its less massive companion – which is destined to become the magnetar – causing it to rotate more and more quickly. This rapid rotation appears to be the essential ingredient in the formation of the magnetar’s ultra-strong magnetic field.

 

Edited to add, also from this article:

It seems that being a component of a double star may therefore be an essential ingredient in the recipe for forming a magnetar. The rapid rotation created by mass transfer between the two stars appears necessary to generate the ultra-strong magnetic field and then a second mass transfer phase allows the magnetar-to-be to slim down sufficiently so that it does not collapse into a black hole at the moment of its death

 

From Thunderbolts

Precessional Magnetar

 

It is a well-established fact that magnetic fields are induced by electric currents. Therefore, there must be an electric current generating the intense fields in magnetars. It is also indisputable that the input current must exist in a circuit, since persistent electric charge can only move that way.

 

A screwdriver can be magnetized by winding a copper wire along its length and running an electrical charge through it.

 

Is there a known method that would magnetize a screwdriver by rapidly rotating it? Or is this phenomenon (edited to add clarification: the description from Science Daily) one to study to discover a means of doing so?

[dream_weaver]

Excerpts from Science Daily

High-speed solar winds increase lightning strikes on Earth

Scientists have discovered new evidence to suggest that lightning on Earth is triggered not only by cosmic rays from space, but also by energetic particles from the sun. Researchers found a link between increased thunderstorm activity on Earth and streams of high-energy particles accelerated by the solar wind, offering compelling evidence that particles from space help trigger lightning bolts.

 

Meteorology found a substantial and significant increase in lightning rates across Europe for up to 40 days after the arrival of high-speed solar winds, which can travel at more than a million miles per hour, into Earth’s atmosphere.

 

Lead author of the study, Dr Chris Scott, said: "Our main result is that we have found evidence that high-speed solar wind streams can increase lightning rates. This may be an actual increase in lightning or an increase in the magnitude of lightning, lifting it above the detection threshold of measurement instruments.

 

The solar wind consists of a constant stream of energetic particles – mainly electrons and protons – that are propelled from the Sun’s atmosphere at around a million miles per hour. The streams of particles can vary in density, temperature and speed and sweep past Earth every 27 days or so, in line with the time it takes the Sun to make one complete rotation relative to Earth.

 

Excerpt from Thunderbolts

Solar Electricity

The discovery that a “solar wind” escapes the Sun at between 400 and 700 kilometers per second was a surprise for the nuclear theory. In a gravity-driven Universe, the Sun’s heat and radiation pressure are insufficient to explain how the particles of the solar wind accelerate past Venus, Earth and the rest of the planets. Since they are not rocket powered particles, no one expected such acceleration.

 

According to the electric Sun theory, an electric field focused on the Sun accelerates charged particles: the faster they accelerate, the stronger the field. But as noted, the interplanetary electric field is extremely weak. No instrument would be able to measure the voltage differential across 100 meters, but the solar wind acceleration over tens of millions of kilometers does confirm the Sun’s e-field, enough to sustain a drift current across the Solar System. Within the spatial volume, the implied current is sufficient to power the Sun.
 

 

The solar wind consists of a constant stream of energetic particles – mainly electrons and protons…

 

Aren’t electrons and protons what essentially comprise an electric field?

[tadmjones]

I saw an interesting show about capturing photo evidence of a phenomenon called sprite lightning, it seemed scientists were interested to know why it reached so high “up” or I suppose why it seemed to interact with regions so high in the troposphere.

[dream_weaver]

I’ve not run across a Science Daily article on the sprite lightning to excerpt against the Thunderbolt projects considerations on the matter, such as Bolts Out of Thin Air.

 

Then again, Science Daily posts Magnetic fingerprint of our galaxy revealed that amounted to little more than “Hey look. A magnetic field. Isn’t that interesting.”

 

Edited to add: I found it interesting to note the “straight line” running through the middle of the illustration (needed to click on ‘enlarge picture’ to see on my browser) and the “All about Evidence” presentation by Donald Scott on his discoveries about Birkeland currents in the 35 minute presentation A New Model of Magnetic Structure in Space.

 

The explanation given jives with my understanding of modeling curvatures on a cylindrical surface. It amounts to a pitch not deviating from a straight line along its axis, to one with a varying pitch that depends on the magnitude of the radius. An example of a constant pitch can be experienced by examining the threading on any common screw, nut or bolt.

[dream_weaver]

From the Thunderbolts:  A New Look at Near Neighbors Part One

The Electric Universe model takes a very different approach. There was no Big Bang, no distinct creation event, and the Universe is as it always was: 99.999% plasma. Over time, the cosmic plasma organized into cells, as plasma will do, separated by differences in matter and charge densities, bounded by double layers. Along the boundaries between these cells, filaments and sheets organized into Birkeland currents. The Universe self-organized due to the electromagnetic properties of plasma.

 

On Wikipedia is found:

The presence of a non-negligible number of charge carriers makes the plasma electrically conductive so that it responds strongly to electromagnetic fields. Plasma, therefore, has properties quite unlike those of solids, liquids, or gases and is considered a distinct state of matter. Like gas, plasma does not have a definite shape or a definite volume unless enclosed in a container; unlike gas, under the influence of a magnetic field, it may form structures such as filaments, beams and double layers. Some common plasmas are found in stars and neon signs. In the universe, plasma is the most common state of matter for ordinary matter, most of which is in the rarefied intergalactic plasma (particularly intracluster medium) and in stars. Much of the understanding of plasmas has come from the pursuit of controlled nuclear fusion and fusion power, for which plasma physics provides the scientific basis.

 

How applicable is plasma physics to existence as a whole?
 

[dream_weaver]

* * * Frank Harley’s tangential point moved to: What are the implications of existence regarding plasma? * * *

[dream_weaver]

Excerpts from Science Daily

High-speed solar winds increase lightning strikes on Earth

Scientists have discovered new evidence to suggest that lightning on Earth is triggered not only by cosmic rays from space, but also by energetic particles from the sun. Researchers found a link between increased thunderstorm activity on Earth and streams of high-energy particles accelerated by the solar wind, offering compelling evidence that particles from space help trigger lightning bolts.

 

Meteorology found a substantial and significant increase in lightning rates across Europe for up to 40 days after the arrival of high-speed solar winds, which can travel at more than a million miles per hour, into Earth’s atmosphere.

 

Lead author of the study, Dr Chris Scott, said: "Our main result is that we have found evidence that high-speed solar wind streams can increase lightning rates. This may be an actual increase in lightning or an increase in the magnitude of lightning, lifting it above the detection threshold of measurement instruments.

 

The solar wind consists of a constant stream of energetic particles – mainly electrons and protons – that are propelled from the Sun’s atmosphere at around a million miles per hour. The streams of particles can vary in density, temperature and speed and sweep past Earth every 27 days or so, in line with the time it takes the Sun to make one complete rotation relative to Earth.

 

Excerpt from Thunderbolts

Solar Electricity

The discovery that a “solar wind” escapes the Sun at between 400 and 700 kilometers per second was a surprise for the nuclear theory. In a gravity-driven Universe, the Sun’s heat and radiation pressure are insufficient to explain how the particles of the solar wind accelerate past Venus, Earth and the rest of the planets. Since they are not rocket powered particles, no one expected such acceleration.

 

According to the electric Sun theory, an electric field focused on the Sun accelerates charged particles: the faster they accelerate, the stronger the field. But as noted, the interplanetary electric field is extremely weak. No instrument would be able to measure the voltage differential across 100 meters, but the solar wind acceleration over tens of millions of kilometers does confirm the Sun’s e-field, enough to sustain a drift current across the Solar System. Within the spatial volume, the implied current is sufficient to power the Sun.

 

 

The solar wind consists of a constant stream of energetic particles – mainly electrons and protons…

 

Aren’t electrons and protons what essentially comprise an electric field?

A Shocker: Solar Wind Provokes Lightning on Earth | Space News

An 8 minute 33 second clip elucidating on the Science Daily article linked to above.

 

Also, a direct link, if it works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67wOTlKmeoA

[dream_weaver]

This was posted recently on Science Daily.

 

How solar wind can break through Earth’s magnetic field

 

From the summary posted there:

Space is not empty. A wind of charged particles blows outwards from the Sun, carrying a magnetic field with it. Sometimes this solar wind can break through the Earth’s magnetic field. Researchers now have an answer to one of the questions about how this actually occurs. When two areas with plasma (electrically charged gas) and magnetic fields with different orientations collide, the magnetic fields can be “clipped off” and “reconnected” so that the topology of the magnetic field is changed, they explain.

While electricity and magnetism share a relationship, the article deals more with the magnetic reconnection. The electrically charged gas is a description of the plasma without really going into the electrical side of the story.

[dream_weaver]

This was posted recently on Science Daily

 

Glimpse into the invisible world of electric asteroids

 

Source:

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

Summary:

Space may appear empty – a soundless vacuum, but it’s not an absolute void. It flows with electric activity that is not visible to our eyes. NASA is developing plans to send humans to an asteroid, and wants to know more about the electrical environment explorers will encounter there.

[dream_weaver]

This was posted recently on Science Daily

 

Glimpse into the invisible world of electric asteroids

 

Source:

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

Summary:

Space may appear empty – a soundless vacuum, but it’s not an absolute void. It flows with electric activity that is not visible to our eyes. NASA is developing plans to send humans to an asteroid, and wants to know more about the electrical environment explorers will encounter there.

Thunderbolts project responds to NASA article:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player\_embedded&v=NrYaM9Q-mCM

[DavidV]

The “electric universe” theory is unscientific nonsense.  I’m closing this topic to discourage real science from being posted here to give it an air of legitimacy.