Recovered: Iron Sun Theories

[bboyer]

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:11 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "SeaSmith"

StefanR,

For in-depth discussion and citations on your question #1
see Galaxy Rotation & Plasma ... thread on this forum-

<old forum link no longer valid>

~

[bboyer]

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:39 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "StefanR"

Thanks for the link SeaSmith, but I am sorry if my post was rather vague.
It was more in response to Ik that made me state the questions.
_________________
"And surely struggle against him we must in every possible way who would annihilate knowledge and reason and mind, and yet ventures to speak confidently about anything."
Plato, Phaedo

[bboyer]

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:17 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "lk"

- Stefan asked about questions:

1. How do stars/planets form?
2. What is composition of the sun?
3. How does the sun function?
4. How is the sun powered?
5. How is space percieved?
6. Do neutron stars exist?
7. Are Blackholes/Bigbang real?

- Yes, that's probably close enough, but I'll modify your list anyway a little.
1. How do stars form?
2. Are stars isodense or stratified?
3. How does the sun radiate energy?
4. How does the solar wind operate?
5. What is space?
6. What are neutron stars?
7. What are black holes?
- So are yous ready to answer? I didn't want to include questions that might be too far from the topic of this thread. If we make progress with these questions, we can add more in-depth questions to try to advance farther still. Eh?
- SeaSmith, thanks for the link. We do need to get a lot of links like that for each point and then we need to extract the most important relevant data from each link. Si?

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:23 am Post subject: Easy Reply with quote
OP "earls"

1. God
2. God
3. God
4. God
5. God
6. God
7. God

Any more questions?

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:49 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "junglelord"

So dog is the answer for everything?
I'm dyslexic

_________________
Peace, Live Long and Prosper.

Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality. But there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real, but not as brightly lit... a Darkside."

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "lk"

Which answers do you agree with? Answer from 0-7. If you agree with none, please state your alternative answer for the question.

0. Background?
A. WT: astronomer or physicist? WT's site for evidence
B. OM: astronomer? OM's site for evidence
C. Up: electrical engineer - TB forum for evidence
D. MM: ? + website for evidence

1. How do stars form? What's best evidence?
A. WT: Stars and some planets form in electrical z-pinches in star-forming regions of galaxies.
.. WT: Smaller stars, planets etc form when high-amperage galactic electric currents over-stress larger stars, causing them to fission.
B. OM: Conventional view of nebular accretion disk formation of star systems.
.. OM: Solar system formed from neutron star and accretion disk from former star that went supernova.
C. Up: Stars form in z-pinches from pulsars.
.. Up: Same as WT?
D. MM: Same as OM?

2. Are stars isodense or stratified? What's best evidence?
A. WT2: Sun is mostly isodense plasma with small dense core.
B. OM2: Sun is stratified with neutron star core and shells of iron, calcium?, neon, helium and hydrogen.
C. Up2: Sun is mostly isodense with solid iron surface under the photosphere.
D. MM2: Sun is neutron star core with mostly iron volcanic surface under photosphere.

3. How does the sun radiate energy? What's best evidence?
A. WT3: Sun acts like a vacuum tube in anode glow mode.
B. OM3: Somewhat similar view of electrical effects in the solar atmosphere.
C. Up3: Sun is like vac tube in anode glow mode with thermionic emission?
D. MM3: ?

4. How does the solar wind operate? What's best evidence?
A. WT4: Electric current at the sun is electrons entering from galactic current and protons exiting as solar wind.
B. OM4: Neutrons constantly sublimate? off the core and become protons in the solar wind. [Where does he say the electrons go?]
C. Up4: Tesla longitudinal waves from galactic core produce solar energy and solar wind?
D. MM4: ?

5. What is space? What's best evidence?
A. WT5: Space is a neutrino sea.
B. OM5: Conventional view of relativity & quantum mechanics & empty spacetime?
C. Up5: Space: Correas' aether energy theory at aetherometry.com
D. MM5: ?

6. What are neutron stars? What's best evidence?
A. WT6: There are no neutron stars; pulsars are discharging capacitors or the like.
B. OM6: Neutron stars exist within some stars and as pulsars.
C. Up6: There are no neutron stars; pulsars are z-pinches.
D. MM6: Same as OM?

7. What are black holes? What's best evidence?
A. WT7: There are no black holes, no big bangs.
B. OM7: Agrees.
C. Up7: Agrees
D. MM7: Agrees?

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:51 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "upriver"

Thats why I propose a resonance system where the sun receives longitudinal waves(not affected by ordinary matter) from the galactic center, and transforms them into outward flowing electrons(electricity) kinda like a radio antenna works.

If you can explain to me what the longitudinal waves are made of so that nobody can accuse of of practicing metaphysics and we can test the concept in a lab, and watch it work, I'll probably end up championing your cause. I see a lot of merit in treating the sun as a constant stream of electrons and/or a constant stream of protons. I have however leaned on the mainstream pretty hard for practicing dogma that is based on metaphysics. I'd therefore hate to be accused of believing in my own brand of untestable metaphysics. Are you describing some sort of Bose Einstein condensate of of subatomic particles (like electrons)?

Maybe we should start a longitudinal(Tesla) waves thread.

No, its not a BE condensate. But a BE will become coherent and take on some of the properties of L waves.
_________________
Ron Paul Forum.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

SOS Save Our Science.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:21 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "upriver"

Which answers do you agree with? Answer from 0-7. If you agree with none, please state your alternative answer for the question.

0. Background?
A. WT: astronomer or physicist? WT's site for evidence
B. OM: astronomer? OM's site for evidence
C. Up: electrical engineer - TB forum for evidence
D. MM: ? + website for evidence

Upriver: Paper AA, electrical engineer(a title held-3Com R&D) with a background in imaging, machinery/machine shop, and acoustics. Currently a lab tech at http://www.impulsedevices.com
Here are a bunch of movies that I imaged. http://www.impulsedevices.com/media.html

1. How do stars form? What's best evidence?
A. WT: Stars and some planets form in electrical z-pinches in star-forming regions of galaxies.
.. WT: Smaller stars, planets etc form when high-amperage galactic electric currents over-stress larger stars, causing them to fission.
B. OM: Conventional view of nebular accretion disk formation of star systems.
.. OM: Solar system formed from neutron star and accretion disk from former star that went supernova.
C. Up: Stars form in z-pinches from pulsars.
.. Up: Same as WT?
D. MM: Same as OM?

Upriver: Here is a comparisons of the sizes of stars.
http://www.co-intelligence.org/newslett ... isons.html

Is there a corresponding scaling of sizes of z-pinch(GRB, supernova, pulsar)? There is still some work to do on the formation of stars.

2. Are stars isodense or stratified? What's best evidence?
A. WT2: Sun is mostly isodense plasma with small dense core.
B. OM2: Sun is stratified with neutron star core and shells of iron, calcium?, neon, helium and hydrogen.
C. Up2: Sun is mostly isodense with solid iron surface under the photosphere.
D. MM2: Sun is neutron star core with mostly iron volcanic surface under photosphere.

Upriver: Our sun as a local example is a isodense hollow(50%), iron ball with some stratification on the surface.

3. How does the sun radiate energy? What's best evidence?
A. WT3: Sun acts like a vacuum tube in anode glow mode.
B. OM3: Somewhat similar view of electrical effects in the solar atmosphere.
C. Up3: Sun is like vac tube in anode glow mode with thermionic emission?
D. MM3: ?

Sun is like vac tube in cathode(not anode) glow mode with thermionic emission. Look at Birkelands work. It was the cathode side the exhibited the EDM effects. The current flow was away from the cathode towards the anode.

I found this wonderful book on Google.
Handbook of Vacuum ARC Science and Technology: Fundamentals
http://books.google.com/books?id=6fK9qY ... Xw#PPR7,M1

4. How does the solar wind operate? What's best evidence?
A. WT4: Electric current at the sun is electrons entering from galactic current and protons exiting as solar wind.
B. OM4: Neutrons constantly sublimate? off the core and become protons in the solar wind. [Where does he say the electrons go?]
C. Up4: Tesla longitudinal waves from galactic core produce solar energy and solar wind?
D. MM4: ?

Upriver: Tesla longitudinal waves from galactic core produce solar energy and solar wind by resonating the iron shell. In this interaction with the shell they are expressed as kinetic energy which directly shows up in the lightest standard particle(electron). This electricity then produces the solar wind by the process of thermionic emission, like a filament in a vacuum tube. The electrons leaving the surface ionize the surface, dragging heavy ions with them.

5. What is space? What's best evidence?
A. WT5: Space is a neutrino sea.
B. OM5: Conventional view of relativity & quantum mechanics & empty spacetime?
C. Up5: Space: Correas' aether energy theory at aetherometry.com
D. MM5: ?

Upriver: Space is energy in its lowest entropy form and work is this energy's phase and amplitude change in any form.

6. What are neutron stars? What's best evidence?
A. WT6: There are no neutron stars; pulsars are discharging capacitors or the like.
B. OM6: Neutron stars exist within some stars and as pulsars.
C. Up6: There are no neutron stars; pulsars are z-pinches.
D. MM6: Same as OM?

Upriver: A neutron star matches the classic configuration of a plasma focus. And the neutron/pulsars pulse shape matches a compression event wave form with some sawtooth capacitive discharge features in a small percentage of pulsars.

7. What are black holes? What's best evidence?
A. WT7: There are no black holes, no big bangs.
B. OM7: Agrees.
C. Up7: Agrees
D. MM7: Agrees?

Upriver: If you are talking about the theoretical idea of a blackhole being this point in space where some amount of solar mass has collapsed upon itself to the point where it has no real presence in our space except a gravity field, No dont think they exist.

But the objects described as blackholes I think are "energy exits", exactly opposite the idea of a mainstream blackhole.
_________________
Ron Paul Forum.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

SOS Save Our Science.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:24 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "kovil"

1. How do stars/planets form?
2. What is composition of the sun?
3. How does the sun function?
4. How is the sun powered?
5. How is space percieved?
6. Do neutron stars exist?
7. Are Blackholes/Bigbang real?


1. Stars form first, then planets. Stars form by a combination of gravity and electric forces. The electric forces organize the matter, gravity causes the remaining contraction. Gravity then causes an additional electrical action by creating a positive anode within matter (if the lump is big enough, like stars and the galactic central region), which then attracts electrons or the negatively charged matter. This secondary electrical activity then organizes the matter again into galactic shapes and solar system organizations.

2. A mass ordered by atomic weights, densest in the center, lightest at the surface. A combination of gravity and the electric forces, in a complex dance of Shiva.

3. & 4. The Sun has an input of galactic energy (electrons) which is arriving at the heliopause, it also has gravitational energy which causes secondary electrical activity causing a magnetic field and an electric field. Stars radiate virtually all of the galactic energy they receive, up to a point, if they are losing 'weight' they store the arriving energy until they can radiate again.

5. Space is the place where The Undivided (gravity) expresses itself. It is the 'field' where The Infinite (Energy) manifests its existance. Without 'Space' , Energy would have no 'place' to exist, and without Energy, Space would have no reason to exist. It is a mutually dependent equation which is fundamental in the formation of Reality and the Universe.

6. No. A neutron star by itself would explode, or never form. Neutrons will not remain that compact without an enormous amount of mass surrounding them to supply the necessary gravitational field to force the electrons to 'play whole court basketball' ; meaning that in about 15 minutes 1/2 the neutrons will spontaneously devolve into an electron and a proton. There must be a 'pressure' or reason for the electrons to avoid the Heisenberg principle of 'knowing everything about location and momentum simultaneously'. If the quantum description and rules of engagement are correct (and they seem to be) , neutron stars are not possible on their own, without considerable additional 'help' in the form of a strong gravitational field, or a similar containment field. The neutrons would have no compelling reason to remain in such close proximity.

7. Black Holes and the Big Bang are maybe theoretically possible, however; reasonable practical common sense says that they are both at the extreme end of the bell curve of probabilities. Not impossible, but very very highly unlikely.

As Dobson says, " Get rid of the make believe, and focus on the real."

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:11 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "junglelord"

Maybe we should start a longitudinal(Tesla) waves thread.

No, its not a BE condensate. But a BE will become coherent and take on some of the properties of L waves.

Already ongoing, my pet project.
<old forum link no longer valid>

The missing information on Scalar Field Technology is hidden in Faradays Induction work, but is not found in Maxwells.
http://www.k-meyl.de/go/60_Primaerliter ... axwell.pdf

you will see the Pinch question vs the Telsa Impulse Magnifying Transmitter here. Who other then Tesla has built a system that copies nature when it comes to the pinch machine> no one! If we are to go forward we need to run experiments like Tesla and Birkeland. At present we do not so until we do nature will remain hidden.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... .php?t=951

Thats why I propose a resonance system where the sun receives longitudinal waves(not affected by ordinary matter) from the galactic center, and transforms them into outward flowing electrons(electricity) kinda like a radio antenna works.

A true stroke of genius Upriver! It should be noted that the radient energy of the longitudinal dielectric current is neutrinos and pressure! The sun receives and transmitts longitudinal energy! Based on the Four Field Theory of Electricity the Sun is a Oscillating Impusle Longitudinal Current Theta Pinch Device.


Scalar Experiments you can own and test for yourself. Mind you it has been modified, but it still works great and is Longitudinal Energy Transmission.
http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=50_ ... sublevel=0

1. No high school ever has rebuilt a "Magnifying Transmitter“. The technology simply was too costly and too expensive. In that way the results have not been reproduced, as it is imperative for an acknowledgement. I have solved this problem by the use of modern electronics, by replacing the spark gap generator with a function generator and the operation with high-tension with 2-4 Volts low-tension.

I sell the experiment as a demonstration-set so that it is reproduced as often as possible. It fits in a case and has been sold more than 200 times. Some universities already could confirm the effects. The measured degrees of effectiveness lie between 140 and 1000 percent.

http://www.k-meyl.de/go/60_Primaerliter ... ansfer.pdf

This video is called "Power Enginieering Scalar Field Theory - Faraday vs. Maxwell and Demonstration of Longitudinal waves Transmission (Konstantin Meyl) (2003)". After he expounds on the same details that are included his written works he gives the demonstration with the apparatus discussed in same written works.

First he shows, at 7+ MHZ he is transmitting Longitudinal, or Scalar,or Standing Wave (the three names are synonimous with the same phenomena), and then by reducing the frequency to 4+ MHZ he is transmitting Hertzian Waves. The difference being that the resonant frequency of the coils and capacitive impedance is tuned to the 7+ MHZ frequency, and not to the 4+ MHZ frequency.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 6714&hl=de

A Scalar Video with Longitudinal Light and its very different attributes compared to Hertzian 60Hz Light. Longitudinal Light shows the Impuse effects of the Tesla Scalar System. It has outward Neutrino pressure on biological sytems and a blue tinge with attractive forces to metal! They say it resembles star light due to the outward neutrino pressure and attractive features to metal. Sounds like a good model of the EU Star Plasma Z Pinch having Scalar properties. They continue to show the different effects from vaccum tubes, plasma tubes, argon tube, as far as propagation methods of Longitudinal Waves. The same bulbs have totally different effects when they are powered by Longitudinal Waves. The difference which is quite startling compared to hertzian light from the same bulb.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0757457294

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0445596549
_________________
Peace, Live Long and Prosper.

Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality. But there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real, but not as brightly lit... a Darkside."

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "lk"

LOTS OF IRON
Thanks Kovil and Upriver for your answers to the earlier 7 questions. Hopefully Mozina and others will answer too soon.
Here's something Upriver said on this thread a few months back: http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... .php?t=490
This ought to interest Arp proponents. An iron rich "young" quasar. Meaning a high redshift iron rich quasar.
Iron stars are ejected from a variety of objects?
Galaxies eject iron quasars.
Pulsars ejects G size stars.
Supernova eject giant stars.
The HR diagram reflects that trend as there is a smaller population of giant and supergiant stars.
Here is another link. Mysterious iron factory in the Early Universe http://www.mpe-garching.mpg.de/Highligh ... 20708.html

[bboyer]

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:09 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Mo"

Thats why I propose a resonance system where the sun receives longitudinal waves(not affected by ordinary matter) from the galactic center, and transforms them into outward flowing electrons(electricity) kinda like a radio antenna works.

A true stroke of genius Upriver! It should be noted that the radient energy of the longitudinal dielectric current is neutrinos and pressure! The sun receives and transmitts longitudinal energy! Based on the Four Field Theory of Electricity the Sun is a Oscillating Impusle Longitudinal Current Theta Pinch Device.

Feels good to me.
Mo

[bboyer]

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:23 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "SeaSmith"

Thats why I propose a resonance system where the sun receives longitudinal waves(not affected by ordinary matter) from the galactic center, and transforms them into outward flowing electrons(electricity) kinda like a radio antenna works.

Better terminology Upriver, thank you.
"Antenna" instead of re-radiator>

Solar Resonator parts list:

Oscillating AL (Aetheric Longitudinal) power source

Resonant receiver ( vortical coil, transducer, spherical bell) core

Double-layer (conductor-dielectric-conductor) spheroid shell, configured as Electrostatic Transformer/Capacitor and Transmitter/Antenna

Tuned as re-Radiator of Thermal, EM and AL emanations.

Power W- to Potential V- to Power W

s

[bboyer]

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:17 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "StefanR"

Although I have to admit I don't have a fixed model in mind and don't have the knowledge to be a real judge on the validity of a particular model
partly because of the often differing terminology that is used due to linguistic/cultural/scientific differences of the proposers of such model. Of course time plays also a big role in the difficulty of interpreting the intensions of the modeler, the means and measures of the investigator of a phenomena have differed over centuries sometimes for better sometimes for worse. Most of all, I always seem to find my own knowledge lacking in lots of ways and am still very much occupied by unlearning what I learned and learning what I unlearned.
But let me try to add a view, although Upriver all ready toke a lot off wind out of my solarsails, by trying to answer the questions as stated by Ik.


1. How do stars form? What's best evidence?

I think there is maybe no definite one way a star can form. There are a lot of different circumstances active inside and outside a galaxy. Different matter distributions , qualitative and quantitative, and the field properties surrounding that matter, will provide lots of opportunity for star-like behaviour.
First better observations of stair-formation have to be made. But if the question is in relation to the dispute if a molecular-cloud collapses merely by gravitational forces (alowing maybe some static electricity in the very early stages) or that electromagnetic forces and Z-pinches are at work, I'm of the opinion that if in a more comprehensive view gravity can be resolved as a electromagnetic interaction there is no more dispute. It now only concerns determination of range and level of each interaction.
And maybe also actual material growth of stars/planets can be a real process affecting lifecycles of those objects.


2. Are stars isodense or stratified? What's best evidence?

If a star is product of it's environment than it will contain the different ellements of that environment and it seems plausible that when a electric star is proposed than those elements can be affected according to their valence. So stratification seems likely if those elements are part of the constitution of the plasma. Also certain elements can be produced under certain conditions. A core might be present be it a hollow or a dense matter like neutrons. But the core might also be cold instead of warm if the contention is allowed that neutrinos are absorbed by the core and slowed down and materialized, a cold and superconductive core might have merits. A reverse action might be attributed to the galactic-core, so that matter is taken apart into it's most basic form and energy, which again is re-radiated as neutrinos or expelled as primal matter for the formation and powering of new objects and thus letting the cycle of creation and destruction continually take place.


3. How does the sun radiate energy? What's best evidence?

From a dual field approach, I would say that that the Birkeland description seems quite attractive for the maxwellian part but I would add the absorption and radiation off longitudonal waves, which are caried by neutrinos. Cosmic neutrinos from the Galaxy-core and other sources can feed energy into the sun and might even materialize as particles by being slowed down in the core due to resonant interaction.A partial radiation of solar-neutrinos will make the resonant interaction possible with the planets.
This resonance is what makes the sun connect to the galactic-core.


4. How does the solar wind operate? What's best evidence?

The solar wind is a part of the Birkeland decription of the maxwellian part of the model.

5. What is space? What's best evidence?

I'll get back to that one. I once found a nice description, but have lend out the book it was in.
But maybe a space-thread is not such a bad idea?


6. What are neutron stars? What's best evidence?

I'm not sure, but the label is maybe used for a phenomena of a different nature, like Thunderbolts proposes.


7. What are black holes? What's best evidence?

I really don't know, but I doubt the actual existence.

----------------------------------

Maybe we should start a longitudinal(Tesla) waves thread.

No, its not a BE condensate. But a BE will become coherent and take on some of the properties of L waves.

Already ongoing, my pet project.
<old forum link no longer valid>

Although Junglelord already made a fine compilation of material, it might be good idea for an new thread concerning that topic. Having the thread of Junglelord as reference thread with a lot of information about the history of the subject, it would be good to have a constructive discussion about merits and consequences in the Electric Universe-forum. But what would be a good beginning to start such a thread, Upriver?
_________________
"And surely struggle against him we must in every possible way who would annihilate knowledge and reason and mind, and yet ventures to speak confidently about anything."
Plato, Phaedo

[bboyer]

Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: Sun Reply with quote
OP "SeaSmith"

@
Summary

Tesla Electrostatic Transformer

Here was a new transformer effect. He believed it was an electrostatic transforma­tion. Impulse currents each possessed an electrostatic nature. The bunching of charge in the impulser brings this electrostatic field to a peak in a small instant of time.

He began placing these "secondary" coils within his "primary" impulser circuit. The strap, which connected his magnetic arc to the capacitors, formed the "primary". He made necessary distinctions among his Transformer com­ponents. Few engineers actually appreciate these distinctions. The "primary" and "secondary" of Tesla Transformers are not magnetic inductors. They are resistive capacitors. Coil-shaped capacitors! Tesla Transformer action is elec­trostatic induction.

Tesla said that the coil-capacitors were "in resonance". Electrostatic resonance.

While his original vision of the vortex was applied by him to the designing of motors and generators, Tesla now realized that this was not its primary message.

http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/tesla.htm
~