The EM Universe

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby orrery » Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:27 pm

I am still confused about the lack of trigonometric parallax measurements for the milky way planetary "dust ring" around our solar system. Even in a helical vortex trailing orbit a parallax measurement should be possible that can be used to determine the distance to the milky way "ring"

One would assume that at Oort cloud distances parallax should be measurable and lasers would be applicable at these distances and capable of returning results in a generation.
"though free to think and to act - we are held together like the stars - in firmament with ties inseparable - these ties cannot be seen but we can feel them - each of us is only part of a whole" -tesla

http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmaCosmology
User avatar
orrery
 
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: USA

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby JaJa » Thu Jun 09, 2011 12:04 am

GaryN wrote:I'm still thinking about that, Lloyd. The Universe seems to be indifferent

Perhaps human consciousness would appear indifferent to say... a single conscious cell? Perhaps its the scale, or order of magnitude that gives the impression of indifference between micro and macro states of consciousness?

Gary, I was wondering if you had your ideas written down on a PDF that I could sit down and read?

:D
Omnia in numeris sita sunt
User avatar
JaJa
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 5:23 am

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:37 am

Hi Orrery,
Can you expand on your post a little? I searched your milky way planetary dust ring, and
it came up top of the search, but I'm not quite sure which ring you are refering to.
I did find this page from the images results:
How the Sun was made.
http://craftsmanjohn.multiply.com/journ ... n_was_made.
I like this image showing planetary formation, but the description is not right.
The planets are formed in the tori of a much more active Sun, and are Coulomb
balls. The tori would have been much closer to the Sun at the time of planet
formation, and 'relaxed' when the energy level decreased.
Image
One would assume that at Oort cloud distances parallax should be measurable and lasers would be applicable at these distances and capable of returning results in a generation.

The Ooort cloud objects are too small to be detected, I think, and Sedna is
about the only object which has an estimated distance, at 960 AU. The Oort cloud
is thought to be 2 LY Dia. but 1 LY is about 60,000 astronomical units, so
Sedna is way closer. I think there are still a lot of problems with distance
measurements, even with parallax methods.

Hi JaJa,
I keep promising myself I will spend some time going through about 3 years
of text files, bookmarks and links and put something more coherent together.
Maybe you will give me the push I need to actually do it!
Perhaps human consciousness would appear indifferent to say... a single conscious cell? Perhaps its the scale, or order of magnitude that gives the impression of indifference between micro and macro states of consciousness?

Yeah, I'd go with that. Olaf Stapledon, whos works I really like, also had the idea
of an indifferent universe, but as you say, it may be an effect of the scale. If I was
a galaxy, I might not feel that way! :D

Vast Solar Eruption Shocks NASA and Raises Doubts on Sun Theory
NASA reports an entire hemisphere of the sun has erupted. The U.S. space agency now admits the cataclysm puts existing solar theories in doubt.
We are forever being told that the sun is a vast gas ball of hydrogen and helium at the center of our solar system. But new evidence may help prove this isn’t the case after all, according to solar experts who say the sun has an iron core.
A stunned NASA admits, “Astronomers knew they had witnessed something big. It was so big, it may have shattered old ideas about solar activity.”

http://www.suite101.com/content/vast-so ... ry-a327330
Getting closer, but IMO, Mr Manuels model is still not correct. The neutron star
core is laughable. Concentric charge accumulating spheres all the way, iron the
inner sphere. There is also (in my mind) a reason here why iron is magnetic, within
the Suns field of influence at least.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby orrery » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:21 pm

GaryN wrote:Hi orrery,
I'd say it looks like a lot of dust and rocks, planetoids and planets in the
central plane of the Oort sphere, lots of stuff produced by our Sun during
the time when it was much more energetic. I'm not saying that is what Katirai
thought it was, that's just my interpretation.
It could be the disk of the Milky Way, but I don't have the equipment to be
able to determine one way or another, just have to (for now) believe what the
experts say. What are you thinking you see?


^^^^
"though free to think and to act - we are held together like the stars - in firmament with ties inseparable - these ties cannot be seen but we can feel them - each of us is only part of a whole" -tesla

http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmaCosmology
User avatar
orrery
 
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: USA

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:16 am

Hi orrery,
I had wondered about how we would tell the difference between objects in the
central plane of an Oort sphere, and what is supposed to be the disk of the Milky Way.
I'm not convinced they can make reliable measurements of anything much out there.
But...

Below is a picture of the real Milky Way taken by the satellite COBE. The disk and center region of our Galaxy are readily recognizable. This image makes the Milky Way appear much more galaxy-like and less like the smudge of stars we see stretching across our night sky. It is possible to imagine what our Milky Way might look like looking down on it from outside.

Image
http://heasarc.nasa.gov/docs/cosmic/milkyway_info.html

Wow! COBE sure has travelled a long way, it is far outside the Milky Way, going
by this image. Amazing.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby nick c » Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:32 pm

GaryN wrote:The Ooort cloud objects are too small to be detected, I think, and Sedna is
about the only object which has an estimated distance, at 960 AU.
Just some thoughts relating this to the Electric Universe.

The hypothesized existence of an Oort cloud (swarm of comets) is based on the theory that the Sun was formed from a gravitationally condensing molecular gas cloud, yet the EU tells us that stars are not formed in that way. But, rather by z or Bennett pinch effect of Birkeland currents moving through the galactic plasma. So there is no need for an Oort Cloud, which has never been detected. It is a conclusion drawn from an incorrect theory. Furthermore, the EU offers an alternative explanation for the origin of comets. That is not to say that there are not "objects" out there, because of course there are objects everywhere...in the inner solar system, the outer solar system, interstellar space, etc. etc.

The dwarf planet Sedna has an orbit that is highly elliptical, ranging from 75 AU to over 975 AU. It is presently about 90 AU away. The interesting thing is that the orbit takes Sedna out of the solar system and into interstellar space, the heliopause is thought to be at around 120 AU. It is highly speculative to say that Sedna is even a permanent member of our solar system. Projected positions of Sedna are based upon Newtonian calculations. At 975 AU we do not know what influences could be in effect. Nor do we know about the effect of it crossing the heliopause; the Voyager spacecraft have displayed some anomalous motions.

Nick
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Jun 10, 2011 1:54 pm

Hi Nick,
I am fully convinced that the current pinch is the primary mechanism responsible
for the creation of all the events and objects we can detect around us. I do not
believe an Oort cloud, if it exists, has been formed by gravity, but would be the
result of the EM/ES fields produced around the pinch.
I heard Dave Talbot on Rense radio the other night, and he was saying that we
need to use our eyes and some common sense in order to determine what is going on,
rather than reams of mathematical conjecture, and I agree fully with that. It is in
the details of the mechanism where I diverge from the 'standard' EU model. When we
can see a globular star cluster with a flux tube passing through it, then I see
the formation of a spherical structure which, viewed from the outside, could be an
Oort cloud or sphere, and we don't know that we do or don't live inside such a
construct.
Image
And there is no proof to me that all the objects in a cluster are stars. If they
are, then they should have complex, active magnetic fields, if they are fusion
powered, turbulent, convective plasma balls. I just happened to have been working
on another NIAMI piece, see what you think of this one.;-)

The Magnetic Fields of Stars.
If stars are the fusion cored, turbulent objects we are told they are, then
I would assume that they must display, like our Sun, magnetic fields that we
could detect by some ingenious method or other. There are some measurements
of stars from up to 1800 LY away, using Zeeman-Doppler imaging:
Image
Surface magnetic field of SU Aur, a young star of T Tauri type.

T Tauri stars are pre–main sequence stars – the youngest visible F, G, K, M spectral type stars (<2 Solar mass). Their surface temperatures are similar to those of main sequence stars of the same mass, but they are significantly more luminous because their radii are larger. Their central temperatures are too low for hydrogen fusion. Instead, they are powered by gravitational energy released as the stars contract towards the main sequence, which they reach after about 100 million years. They typically rotate with a period between one and twelve days, compared to a month for the Sun, and are very active and variable.

Image
Drawing of a T-Tauri star with a circumstellar accretion disc.

Another method uses a spectropolarimeter.
http://james.as.arizona.edu/~psmith/SPOL/
There do not however appear to be many studies done of the nearer stars, and I
am surprised that the nearest Sun-like star, Alpha Centauri A, does not seem to
have been studied.
NARVAL was announced with some fanfare, but seems to have gone dormant.
http://www.ast.obs-mip.fr/projets/narva ... 1_eng.html
The lack of results from these investigations makes me wonder about what has
been found. Does what was expected not match what has been found?
I have E-mailed the director of NARVAL to ask about Centauri A, or any of the
other nearest stars to see if information is available. Why? I'm still trying
to disprove Katirais proposal, so I want to be convinced that the closest
stars are stars, and evidence so far has not convinced me.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby fosborn_ » Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:48 am

The Ooort cloud objects are too small to be detected, I think, and Sedna is
about the only object which has an estimated distance, at 960 AU. The Oort cloud
is thought to be 2 LY Dia. but 1 LY is about 60,000 astronomical units, so
Sedna is way closer. I think there are still a lot of problems with distance
measurements, even with parallax methods.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2216&start=165#p53044


So sense the Oort objects are to small to be detected, the standard trigonometric parallax methods are ok with you?
You now disagree with Katirai on this point too?

I understand parallax, didn't mean
the principle was bogus, just its application to stellar distance, without,
like you say, a huge baseline. So they use relative parallaxes. All well and
good, but what Katirai is proposing is that the objects they photograph to
compare over time, might not be distant stars to begin with!
Looking at the Oort cloud model, he is proposing that the objects they use
give off only the reflected light of the sun,
which they can do because they
are much closer than the astronomers believe. Outrageous? How do you prove
him wrong?
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4254&hilit=distance+calculations#p47957
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov
fosborn_
 
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Jun 11, 2011 11:38 am

My E-Mail contact at NARVAL has been very quick to respond. They are still
in operation after 4 years, and have examined quite a few stars now, about
50 it seems. I asked specifically about Alpha Centauri A, but was not answered
on that. I tried again, and he said that they were looking at the brightest,
rather than the nearest, as they were easier to detect. Makes sense I suppose,
but also indicates that their detection methods have their limitations.
He said they were looking for Solar Twins, but A.Cen A, from what I see, is about
as Sun-like as it gets.
A quick look at some of the stars they have examined shows them to be young,
as they all have debris disks surrounding them, presumably forming planets.
The dominant magnetic fields seem to be related to their estimated rotation
rates, poloidal in slow rotators, toroidal in the faster ones. The dynamo
effect in action.
http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2008MNRAS.388...80P
However, from all the parameters they examined, these objects, to me, could
just as well be gas giants like Jupiter or Saturn. I'll need to look into that
in more detail, but first impressions put a lot of doubt in my mind about just
what they are looking at.
I'll try him one more time and ask if they have tried looking at A.Cen A, but
as with the NRAO, they don't seem to want to address the A.Cen A issue directly,
and until the nearest stars can be shown to my satisfaction to be stars, Katirai
is not 'down for the count'.

Hi Frank, I was just looking into the Oort cloud, why it was proposed and how
it supposedly formed. They talk about non-gravitational effects, but make no
mention whatsoever of electrical forces, whereas I imagine they dominate. They'll
catch on eventually. I hope.
(PDF) http://www.chara.gsu.edu/~thenry/PLANET ... matson.pdf
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Jun 14, 2011 1:19 pm

Well, I can't get a straight answer about A.Cen A, but I did find that Sirius
A has been determined to have no detectable surface magnetic field, even
though it is such a bright object. There is no mention of Sirius B, but if it
is a white dwarf, then chances are it should have a strong field.
I'm really doubting what they tell us about all these stars, and the more I
research, the more Katirais ideas make sense, and with the addition of the EM
mechanisms, even more so.
If we look at the Solar system planets and their moons, then we should
also expect to see such diverse configurations around these distant 'stars'.
And where do we see disks and energetic tori? Around the gas giants. So
when many of the stars examined by NARVAL are shown to have accretion disks,
are they really?
It has also been noted that some tori around the planets do not lie on
the equatorial plane, but can be at odd angles to the plane, and not
concentric to the planet.
Image

And with Jupiter, there can be moons in the plasma tori. Which came first though?
Image
So Sirius B might be a moon orbiting in an 'off kilter' ring current ? I can get rid of
the nonsense white dwarf density by placing a spherical multilayer ceramic capacitor in that
current ring. ;-)
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:19 am

Giant space scope RadioAstron reaches orbit
Image
The result is expected to have an incredibly high resolution - as if taken by a telescope with a dish as wide as the maximum distance between the antennas - from the Earth to the Moon.
One of the telescope's primary goals is to zoom in to the neighbouring galaxy M-87, some 59 million light years from Earth.
Scientists believe that there is a black hole there, and RadioAstron's mission is to confirm this hypothesis.
Researchers are also after some detailed data about pulsars, interstellar plasma and neutron stars in the Milky Way.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14200971

I wonder if this device will be able to finally take a decent image of our nearest
neighbors, as well as the millions of LY distant objects? The USA did cancel at least
one project which was very much like this one, and, me being perhaps overly suspicious,
wondered if it was because it would have revealed too much?
This is exciting to me, as the whole of our present assumptions about the structure
of the cosmos may well be challenged or even overthrown. I'll be bugging them to point
at Sirius A for sure! And the BH in M87? What will they conclude??
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:31 am

More backwards assumptions:
Chandra X-ray Telescope images gas flowing toward black hole
Image
“It’s exciting to find such clear evidence for gas in the grip of a massive black hole,” said Dr. Ka-Wah Wong, a post-doctoral researcher at The University of Alabama, who led the study that appears in the July 20 issue of The Astrophysical Journal Letters. ”Chandra’s resolving power provides a unique opportunity to understand more about how black holes capture material by studying this nearby object.”

As gas flows toward a black hole, it becomes squeezed, making it hotter and brighter, a signature now confirmed by the X-ray observations.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-cha ... s-gas.html
The Chandra data also show that the gas close to the black hole in the center of the galaxy is denser than gas further out, as predicted. Using the observed properties of the gas and theoretical assumptions, the team then estimated that each year gas weighing about 2 percent the mass of the sun is being pulled across the Bondi radius toward the black hole.

I theoretically assume they are full of it. If there is creation occurring close in,
then I would expect it to be denser towards the center too.
“A leading mystery in astrophysics is how the area around massive black holes can stay so dim, when there’s so much fuel available to light up,” said co-author Dr. Jimmy Irwin, assistant professor in UA’s department of physics and astronomy. “This black hole is a poster child for this problem.”

So they admit there are problems with their model, but I'm sure they'll find
a fudge factor to make it all confirm their assumptions, after all, they have
had lots of practice over the years.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:04 pm

Clusters of 'failed stars' detected

One of the discovered brown dwarfs is one of the least-massive ever observed, astronomers said.

"Its mass is comparable to those of giant planets, yet it doesn't circle a star. How it formed is a mystery," said Aleks Scholz of the Dublin Institute of Advanced Studies in Ireland, formerly a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Toronto.


http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2011/10 ... 318370771/

As I don't believe they know the proper size/distance/mass of any of these objects,
it is only conjecture that they are 'failed stars'. Spherical Coulomb crystals can form
at around 40-50K Kelvin, which is coincidentally the temperature of hot, young stars.
All the other colors of stars will just be cooling versions of the same.
The only real Suns are the result of Z-pinches in plasma filaments, which produce the
charge and vibration necessary to lead to the formation of the dust that forms multilayer
rocky spheres. It's quite simple really. :geek:
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Oct 19, 2011 6:52 pm

Spiral arms hint at the presence of planets
Image
Two spiral arms emerge from the gas-rich disk around SAO 206462, a young star in the constellation Lupus. This image, acquired by the Subaru Telescope and its HiCIAO instrument, is the first to show spiral arms in a circumstellar disk. The disk itself is some 14 billion miles across, or about twice the size of Pluto's orbit in our own solar system. Credit: NAOJ/Subaru

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-spi ... anets.html

A torus around the central energetic event will accumulate charge on its
exterior. Charge does not like being confined, and will, when the charge
is high enough and dense enough, begint to drift off to somewhere attractive.
Then a game of follow the leader begins, the charge attaining a flame-like
shape. It will attain the curved and corkscrewing shape, become accelerated
by accepted principles, and will form Coulomb crystals in the interior of
what has become a flux tube. Yes, planets will be formed when and if the
necessary conditions are met. I'd bet a dime to a dollar that if planets
are eventually detected, they will be at 40-50 thousand degrees. The size and
distance of this object are, as usual, best guesses.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby lizzie » Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:05 am

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3947&start=660#p58081

GaryN said: I agree that all the planets are formed hollow; it fits in with the idea that they are formed as spherical Coulomb crystals.

Is the Sun a Spherical Coulomb Crystal?

Premise: To resolve the structure of the sun as magic square, discern which body: sun / earth / Neptune is "center" and planet orbital relation.

Seemingly, this Author constructs the framework of the Mayan Tzolkin without realizing it. His methods validate planet placements and orbits as well as atomic electron orbitals and crystal harmonics. It should be noted that electrons, in reality, do not orbit the nucleus but reside at the north / south poles of the nucleus (as spherical surfaces); a toroidal-one-layer thick-electron-cloud full of individual electron-potential-domains upon this spherical surface, appearing and disappearing from the 3rd dimension at a rate of approx. 1300-3000 times a second.

The Author uses a grid of 7 x 7 squares upon which 7 planets orbit. The Mayan Tzolkin is a grid of 13 x 20 squares so the 7 x 7 should be expanded to 13 x 20. It should be found that the diagonals of the 13 x 20 grid will match the diagonal lines of the Tzolkin.


"Asteroseismology has recently discovered that the body of stars appears with stationary nodal structures".

Full nodes, empty nodes

"The analogy of phenomena would lead one to believe that networks formed by the distribution of atoms in crystals could be considered as consisting of atoms occupying nodes, with an individual structure of stationary waves whose separation is interatomic space".

"Nonetheless, inside atoms the interpretation of the function of the wave takes into account that it is the square of the magnitude of its loop that is the measure of probability in finding electrons. It is surprising that it is precisely over the nodes of these waves where particles should never be found!"

"In interatomic planes of a crystal, both parallel and successive - also known as Bragg's planes - radiation is reflected in the same way that a flat mirror reflects light".

"Crystallography shows us which planes need to be established between the locations of the different atoms in a crystal".

"The waves reflected by the crystals never do so from any of the arcs of the supposedly stationary waves which pre-exist amongst the crystal atom-nodes, but from above the planes formed by the nodal lines".

(Note: The Author's so called "particles" should never be found directly over the nodes because the nodes are the perfectly cancelled standing waves wherein no wave can exist. This implies that the so called "particles" that do appear where the nodes are not, are not particles at all, but interactions of frequencies called domains of potential).
lizzie
Guest
 

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests