SAFIRE

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

SAFIRE

Unread postby Mjolnir » Fri Feb 24, 2017 4:24 am

Hi,

So every now and then I search for news about the Safire project.
Today, I found this:
https://www.youtubejoy.com/watch?v=7n87XDOvvYI

Not a lot of new info here, but I thought I'd share it anyway.
It is Monty talking to a christian channel in January, I think, and I guess our friends over at the sceptics forum will enjoy it.
Also, at about 16-17 minutes in, some talk about "men in black" following the project.

Mjolnir
Mjolnir
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:09 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:40 pm

Just in case the EU haters are too lazy to look up the video, here's last year's EU conference presentation of the SAFIRE experiments. SAFIRE is a very impressive, well organized, and highly professional science project. This is the way all experiments should be conducted. The Gimbal and the Langmuir probes are simply awesome. I love the engineering that has gone into SAFIRE.

https://www.youtubejoy.com/watch?v=-K_GBBspZjs

I sure hope that future versions of SAFIRE will have the ability to reverse the polarity. :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:07 pm

Good find Mjolnir, thanks for posting it.
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: 2546
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:24 pm

One of the things that intrigues me about the SAFIRE experiments thus far are the multiple double layer spheres that form. That does seem to behave like the solar atmosphere, and the temperature layering also seems to match.

I'd love to see what happens if they added some helium and neon into the chamber to see if the elements arranged themselves into concentric double spherical layers which are arranged by atomic weight, or ionization potential.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby kell1990 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:26 pm

Mjolnir wrote:Hi,

So every now and then I search for news about the Safire project.
Today, I found this:
https://www.youtubejoy.com/watch?v=7n87XDOvvYI

Not a lot of new info here, but I thought I'd share it anyway.
It is Monty talking to a christian channel in January, I think, and I guess our friends over at the sceptics forum will enjoy it.
Also, at about 16-17 minutes in, some talk about "men in black" following the project.

Mjolnir


I too would like to thank you for posting this. Not to be conspiratorial or anything, but the way he phrases the people who are interested in this research is, um, fascinating, to say the least.

Maybe Thunderbolts isn't the only only group who is researching this subject.

If the presently accepted theory is so far off the mark, then surely people far smarter than I have also figured this out. And have begun to act accordingly.
kell1990
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:54 am

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Mjolnir » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:36 am

I'm sure most of you are aware, but SO posted a new talk by Michael Clarage on SAFIRE here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE6_AEOmqoU&t=0s
Mjolnir
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:09 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:39 am

Mjolnir wrote:I'm sure most of you are aware, but SO posted a new talk by Michael Clarage on SAFIRE here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE6_AEOmqoU&t=0s


Thanks for the link. Cool video.

You really shouldn't be confusing the EU/PC haters by pointing out to them that there are real experiments underway to 'test' the various elements of EU/PC theory. :) They'd blow a circuit if they had one to work with. :) The double layer behaviors are probably going to yield some important information in terms of how plasma in various locations is able to emit various types of EM radiation.

It's almost impossible to understand how the mainstream can be so out of touch with empirical reality. It's nice to see real experiments underway that will eventually lead to a *real* understanding of how the universe works.

It's refreshing to see an astronomy experiment that actually works in the lab as expected rather than producing nothing but "null results".

It really is only a matter of time before empirical physics takes it's rightful place in cosmology. Experiments like SAFIRE and the full range of experiments conducted by Birkeland are critical to that effort.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby The Great Dog » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:18 pm

The Great Dog was fortunate enough to see a SAFIRE video from a few years ago, when it was still near-tabletop size. The nested spheres were prominent in that video, as well. Since they were (are?) using a steel anode inside a helium atmosphere, it is apparent that the impurities in the steel were sputtering out, creating plasmas of their own.

They also got readings that seemed to supprt double layers shorting out. SAFIRE reported spikes of over a million watts in just about 10 nanosecond bursts. Since their input is orders of magnitude less than a million watts, a good guess would be double layers drawing all the available energy from the entire circuit in an uncontrolled runaway for a split-second.

The Great Dog wonders if welder's goggles are part of their lab apparel? And lead aprons, for that matter...it's possible that those energy levels could create high frequency UV and X-rays.

TGD
User avatar
The Great Dog
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:58 pm

SAFIRE vs SPP

Unread postby Cargo » Tue May 09, 2017 10:46 pm

That's right! It's a dog fight. I imagine that SAFIRE could easily predict and even validate the electric findings of the Solar Probe Plus in it's Lab.

http://solarprobe.jhuapl.edu/The-Missio ... Objectives

I think NASA is ful of brilliantly blind people if they continue on this path. I hope maybe, maybe, someday they break the silly dogma.

SAFIRE, you have 446 days to simulate the corona insertion at 9 radii and measure the "wind". :)

And poor NASA, "Explore mechanisms that accelerate and transport energetic particles". Gee? What could that be?
Cargo
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby electricgravity1 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 1:58 pm

I watched Monty's 2015 presentation of SAFIRE and was most excited by the detection of atomic mass 3 from an air of molecular hydrogen.
Image
Was it fusion? Monty suggested it could be.

But... then I noticed the amount. Its a large amount of the total mass detected. If this was from a fusion reaction, wouldn't SAFIRE have detected an anomalous amount of heat?

surely Monty wouldn't have been misleading with the atomic mass 3 result. He could have checked for tri-hydrogen by switching the terrella off, and keeping the mass spectometer on, any tri-hydrogen would disintegrate and not register as atomic mass 3.

It does strike me now that he didn't rule out tri-hydrogen in his 2015 presentation. That doesn't make sense.
electricgravity1
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2016 8:50 am

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Mjolnir » Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:44 am

Hi aigain,

Some, at least to me, new info on the SAFIRE project:

http://www.safirefilm.com/index.html

Mjolnir
Mjolnir
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:09 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby jacmac » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:25 am

As a supporter of The EU view of our universe I would like to point out one fundamental
difference between our sun and the Safire project.
The sun is completely surrounded by the solar system, the heliopause, the interstellar medium, and beyond.
There is no connection to a voltage source other than as listed above.
The Safire experiment(as was Birkeland's Terrella) is a simulation using two points of connection to voltage;
thus the anode/cathode sun debate.
My simple analogy is the game of tennis.
A man made "circuit" is like a tennis match, two players hit the ball back and forth.(Safire, with anode and cathode)
The sun is like one player hitting the ball off a wall; the ball bouncing back to her. The wall is the inner core of the sun, the single player is the extended solar environment.
The ball, of course, represents the current.
There are many similarities, but they are different.
Jack
jacmac
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Solar » Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:47 am

Question please:

This slide, shown at the IEEE ICOPS 2006 conference, refers to a “Z-pinch,” which is the compression of an electric discharge in plasma by its own induced magnetic field. The canister in the center of the slide has a number of fine tungsten wires stretched between the top metal cap and the lower cap. An intense current pulse is sent through the wires causing them to vaporize and form plasma. The current generates a powerful cylindrical magnetic field that squeezes the plasma inwards toward the vertical axis of the canister. The fact that the plasma is “pinched” along the z-axis gives rise to the term “Z-pinch.”

The slide is important because it reveals the peculiar fact that although plasma physicists can see the obvious application of their high-energy laboratory Z-pinches to cosmic phenomena, most seem to assume the electrical Z-pinch is transitory, like their experiments. So they go on to apply incorrect magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) concepts – such as “flows,” “jets” and “shocks” to the cosmic phenomena. Magnetohydrodynamics ignores electricity and relies on magnetic fields being “trapped” in plasma. The “father” of plasma physics, the late Hannes Alfvén, showed decades ago that the concept of “frozen in” magnetic fields in space plasma is an invalid concept. He called for primary consideration of the electric circuits, which must be present to sustain the magnetic fields.

It is the contention of the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model that all stars are the focus of a continuous Z-pinch effect. Where the discharge becomes sufficiently violent, the familiar Z-pinch morphology becomes apparent in glowing bipolar planetary nebulae (such as the one in the lower left image). And, for example, at bottom center the beaded rings of supernova 1987a are a manifestation of an ongoing Z-pinch and have nothing to do with shocks. - Holoscience


Sandia's Z-Pinch Machine and SAFRE both consume the metallic focus of the discharge process. Sandia uses different thin metal wires whereas SAFIRE uses small metal spheres. How do you people reconcile the differences between these two?

In both scenarios a plasma is induced. Is SAFIRE's Birkeland inspired ionization technique to be considered a scaled down plasma inducing Z-Pinch? Are they in any way comparable? Is SAFIRE to be considered a "Moment" in the continuous Z-Pinch process after a star is formed? How are these relationships going to be juxtaposed with one other?
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:10 am

Solar wrote:Sandia's Z-Pinch Machine and SAFRE both consume the metallic focus of the discharge process. Sandia uses different thin metal wires whereas SAFIRE uses small metal spheres. How do you people reconcile the differences between these two?


Ultimately a z-pinch is a z-pinch, regardless of where the material originates, and regardless of what kind of plasma is in the z-pinch.

In both scenarios a plasma is induced. Is SAFIRE's Birkeland inspired ionization technique to be considered a scaled down plasma inducing Z-Pinch? Are they in any way comparable? Is SAFIRE to be considered a "Moment" in the continuous Z-Pinch process after a star is formed? How are these relationships going to be juxtaposed with one other?


I would say that they are comparable and they both scale to whatever voltages you want. Birkeland assumed (estimated from his experiments) that the sun operated at about 600 million volts, whereas Alfven put that number closer to a billion volts. The z-pinch effect occurs inside of coronal loops, large and small, both under the surface of the photosphere and well out into the corona. As long as massive amounts of current flowing through the plasma, these are comparable events. The only difference is that the sun's z-pinch processes are ongoing and continuous, whereas the z-pinch process at Sandia tends to be time limited.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Mjolnir » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:28 am

Solar wrote:Question please:

...

Sandia's Z-Pinch Machine and SAFRE both consume the metallic focus of the discharge process. Sandia uses different thin metal wires whereas SAFIRE uses small metal spheres. How do you people reconcile the differences between these two?

In both scenarios a plasma is induced. Is SAFIRE's Birkeland inspired ionization technique to be considered a scaled down plasma inducing Z-Pinch? Are they in any way comparable? Is SAFIRE to be considered a "Moment" in the continuous Z-Pinch process after a star is formed? How are these relationships going to be juxtaposed with one other?


I don't know if I even understand the question, but it doesn't seem to me like SAFIRE is designed to "consume the focus of the discharge process", although the metal balls can of course be damaged by high temperatures. Also, I haven't heard Z-pinches mentioned a lot in connection with SAFIRE. From the material at the link (http://www.safirefilm.com/index.html) I gave, Monty writes that SAFIREs version of the electric sun model might be boiled down to a fundamental process:

“Charged plasma affecting matter of a different electrical potential”

So SAFIRE may or may not be married to an idea from Wal's website from 2006.

Just my thoughts.

Mjolnir
Mjolnir
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:09 pm

Next

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron