Charge and Galactic Electric Current
[I]t is thought that mass and charge are static when they are not. They may be STABLE, but they are not static. Mass and charge are both motion, and all motion includes time, by definition.
- "That implies that the mass of the proton is not really measured in kilograms, it is measured in kilograms per second. You can't mean that." Yes, I do mean that. The current notation is fine in most circumstances, since we drop the time in almost all equations. It only comes up in problems like this, when we see clearly that charge is an emission, and an emission happens over time.
* Actually, my understanding of Miles' idea on charge is that it's a flow of mass and a lot of mass flows through each proton per second. But the proton has its own mass as well. So I gather that it's like a faucet. The faucet has a mass and the water that flows through it has mass. The amount that flows through in a minute is usually more than the mass of the faucet itself.
- [T]his new paper [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.1397v3.pdf] [is] by researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory, who have obtained “for the first time, a direct determination of a galactic-scale electric current (~ 3 × 10^18 A) , and its direction ... positive away from the AGN. Our analysis strongly supports a model where the jet energy flow is mainly electromagnetic.”
Megalightning from the Heliospheric Current Sheet
* What the following says to me is that all it takes to get megalightning strikes between planets or cosmic bodies is dust from comets etc. The dust gives the existing charge the means to make a huge current, or electric discharge.
[Wikipedia says:] The shape of the current sheet results from the influence of the Sun's rotating magnetic field on the plasma in the interplanetary medium (Solar Wind). A small electrical current flows within the sheet, about 10^−10 A/m². The thickness of the current sheet is about 10,000km.
... When I present my unified field equations, I am always told by the mainstream that there isn't enough E/M in the universe to make a difference. They point to the small electrical current, and say that is negligible.
... Current doesn't run through charge, it runs through ions. In other words, I have defined charge as being mediated by real photons, and E/M is mediated by ions. You have two levels of energy transport here, and they ignore that. They treat charge just like E/M, but charge underlies E/M, it isn't equivalent to it. If you have photons but no ions, you will have charge but no current.
... The low number 10^−10 A/m² isn't an indication of low charge, it is only an indication of the low density of ions present. The number is low because they are measuring the current in the space between planets, which is of very low ionic density. The fact is, given the density of ions in Solar System space, that current is extremely high. To have that much current with that density of ions indicates a very high charge. It indicates a very dense and powerful photonic field in space.
... [T]he density of space in the Solar System is around 1fg/m^3. That's 10^-18kg/m^3. To achieve or measure a current of 10^−10A/m² across that is extraordinary, to say the least....
... It is extraordinary because a matter density that low shouldn't create or carry any current, and the mainstream never explains how current can travel through empty space. To show you how high it is, let us scale that current up. What if space had the density of water? The current would be 10^11A/m²! That's the power of over 3 million lightning bolts. That is the true measure of how powerful the underlying charge field is. In other words, the charge field that exists in the Solar System has that potential (and more), and it is just waiting for ions to express that potential as current or magnetism.
... That number 10^−10A/m² is an indirect measurement of my charge field....
... The charge field energizes the ions, and the ions tell us the current. The current with the density of ions tells us the strength of the underlying charge field.