Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

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

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Mon Jan 15, 2018 8:57 pm

Here are three different models of the formation of planets and stars in the Plasma Universe and the Electric Universe.

"Plasma-cosmology theories tie the flares to the formation processes of stars and of planets. Stars form where an electric current is squeezed by its own magnetic field until it becomes unstable. Then it pinches into a series of spheres that pull in matter and become centers of glow and arc discharges. This is why star formation occurs in groups, often in lines, and in the highest-energy regions of a galaxy.


Similar electrical processes form planets. Because plasma is complex, there are several possible mechanisms for electrical planet formation. Any one (or even all) may be at work.

The solaria binaria concept of Alfred de Grazia and Earl Milton has planets form along a plasma bridge between a star and a companion star. This theory predicts the recent discovery of a plasma bridge stretching between the red giant star Mira and its white dwarf companion.

Wallace Thornhill’s theory has planets ejected electrically in the equatorial plane of the star and moons ejected in a similar manner from the equatorial plane of gas giants. (Our own moon, which doesn’t orbit in the equatorial plane, was captured.)

Anthony Peratt has planets form in polar-aligned groups of 7 to 9 along the second current filament that parallels the filament in which the star forms. In the lab, matter is concentrated into spheres at the center of toruses that are stacked along the axis of the filament. The spheres remain in polar alignment as long as the discharge is active, and then they scatter “like buckshot” when it quenches.

All three of these theories assume that the electrical activity observed in young stars plays an active role in forming planets as well as in forming stars."

ref: POTD Jun 03, 2005


In Emanuel Swedenborg's hypothesis as well, catastrophic flaring of stars is seen as evidence of a continuing, active process in the universe, and is a precursor to the formation of planets.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:34 pm

This passage will make it very clear that Emanuel Swedenborg is presenting his theory of planet formation as the final end of a process of stellar "creation" of matter.

"Now reason dictates, that causes must exist before effects; the simple before the compound; principles before principiates; that is to say, actives, passives, and elementaries, before a series of things successively and simultaneously arising: the first must exist before the intermediate; the intermediate before the ultimate. Reason, therefore, dictates that the planets must derive their origin from causes, in time and in place; that causes are to be found in first principles; in fine, that the earths in our system must have had an origin by succession. Now if, according to reason, the planets have their origins in causes and in time and in place, it remains to be ascertained what those causes are; what the time, and what the place.

With respect to causes we may observe, that they are no other than those which are latent in the first principles; that is to say, in the active, the passive, and the elementary which is compounded of both. With respect to time, the planets could have no origin before the existence of causes to produce them; that is, before the existence of actives, passives, and elementaries; with respect to place, their origin could be nowhere else but in the place in which their causes concurred to produce them; which could be only about the active solar space, where everything is present which could compound and give birth to such effects. And, inasmuch as causes always accompany the effects, it follows, that effects can be produced only in the place where the causes are. As yet all that pertains to the system is near the sun; and therefore, that the planets had their origin near the sun, will be the subject of demonstration in the present chapter."


Now applying this principle, I think Swedenborg would say that if you see that the planet Jupiter has 69 moons, and Saturn has 61, and Uranus has 27, then it is very reasonable to expect that the causes for the formation of those moons are within the gas giants themselves.

He did not quite venture that the gas giants could also fission*, but he did say that the stars do. And I think that his postulation that the matter which makes up the planets was created in the place where the planets are found, through a succession of particle synthesis on the sun, does conclude the whole question. Swedenborg was not in any way responsible for the nebular hypothesis because he believed the matter for the planets was made from simpler particles in the sun.

*to my knowledge
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby webolife » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:48 pm

Nice to see you Brigit,
Our paths have not crossed for a while.
The difficulty with the solar planetary causation premise comes imo in the examination of the solar system's angular momentum budget. If the planets originated in/from the sun, as Swedenborg proposes, then he must explain why the current configurations and rotations of the outer planets would violate the law of conservation of momentum. As I understand it, this angular momentum conservation dilemma plagues the nebular hypothesis, and is one of the physical premises behind the Saturn theory, not my favorite viewpoint. Other capture scenarios have been put forth, but these come with their own questions, eg. how to explain the stability and remarkably low eccentricity [except Mars] of the major planetary orbits. Creation [bara] in situ is an alternative, but that raises questions which may be scientifically unanswerable. Electrostatics/electri-gravitics provide a charge-based orbit stabilization mechanism that is laboratory "friendly", but controversially scalable[?]...
Any thoughts?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:58 am

Hello webolife, wonderful to see you!
Also, hi Solar. Thank you very much for dropping by.

Webolife says,
If the planets originated in/from the sun, as Swedenborg proposes, then he must explain why the current configurations and rotations of the outer planets would violate the law of conservation of momentum.


It does appear that laws have been broken. (:

I will give a quick response, and then I will post the passages from the Principia Vol II so that readers can appreciate Swedenborg's solar system formation in his own words, and nothing is left to construals.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:26 pm

We recall that Swedenborg describes the formation of a "solar crust," which is made up of newly "compressed" matter, and which the sun expels away from itself. Swedenborg supports this process with the multitude of observations of both [stellar] dimming and bright stellar outbursts, recorded by historians and astronomers.

The newly compressed matter is made up of particles called "fourth finites." This is very youthful matter, which will undergo changes as it ages and moves away from the sun. (Swedenborg's system of particles is foreign to modern readers, but it does provide a coherent basis for formation of spheres, rotation, vortical movements, and orbital motion.)

The fourth finites, being newly compressed and more elastic/liquid, and having equal pressure in all directions, forms into globes. "It is in consequence of equal circumpressure, that liquid bodies glomerate into globes, as water does in air; quicksilver in water, air and ether..."

Some of the material falls back into the sun, and some forms into bodies which continue to orbit the sun, first closely, and then further away. As the distance from the sun is elongated and the orbit widens, the fourth finites go through changes from finites, to actives and passives, to compounds. Or, it is described as passive and active particles which combine to make elements.

Now I am going to speed up. The planet becomes embedded in its own vortex. The particles combine to form elements. As it moves away from the sun, there are increases in magnitude of weight (with continued input from the sun) and it seeks equilibrium with the solar vortex.

And that is why "it comes to its destined periphery or orbit in the solar vortex."

So no laws were broken, if you accept his progression of particles, and the action of the solar and planetary vortices seeking equilibrium. Swedenborg deals forthrightly with the formation of matter, and his explanation of why we see so many lovely rolling spheres has its basis in liquid dynamics (w/o gravitation).
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:42 pm

From the text of the Appendix, a really simplified version of the earlier description in the book:

Inasmuch then as nature acts by the most simple laws, it may be well to offer a brief summary of the principles of my philosophy. Let us begin from the first simple. 1. In the simple the internal state is a tendency into a spiral motion, and consequently its conatus is of a like kind. 2. In the first finite thence arising there is a spiral motion of the parts, as also in the other finites, so that there is a similarity in all the finites.




Image

3. From this single cause there arises in every finite a progressive motion of the parts, an axillary motion of the whole, and if nothing prevent, a local motion also. 4. If there be a local motion, there hence arises the active, one similar to the other. 5. From finites and actives arises the elementary, one similar to the other, and differing only in degree and dimension. Hence it is evident that I presume the existence of only three kinds of entities, namely, finites, actives, and the compounds of these or elementaries. With regard to finites, I have stated that one is generated from the other; that all the finites thus arising are perfectly similar one to the other, differing only in degree and dimension; that the fifth finite is thus similar to the fourth, the fourth to the third, the third to the second, the second to the first, and the first to its simple; so that he who has learnt the nature of one will have learnt the nature of all.



Image
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:48 pm

In the same manner the actives are all perfectly similar the one to the other; the fifth, fourth, third, second, and first, being all of the same nature, and like the finites, differing only in dimension and degree. The elementaries moreover are similar one to the other, being compounded of the passive and active, or of the finite and active; finites occupying its surface, and actives its interiors; hence the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth elements are all similar one to the other, and he who has learnt the nature of one will have learnt the nature of all.


Image

Image

I have stated also that in every finite there are three distinct motions; a progressive motion of the parts, an axillary motion, and if nothing prevent, a local motion; that so far as I am aware, these are the only motions in nature; or at least, if the motions of entities be granted, it cannot be denied by any rational being, that of all others these are the most highly adapted to the operations of nature.


~Swedenborg Appendix, with figures taken from an earlier chapter
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:26 pm

I have already quoted from Emanuel Swedenborg's Principia which was originally published in Europe between 1729 and 1734, in order to archive, in his own words, his theory of planet formation -- which seems to have been wrongly conflated with Kant's Nebular Hypothesis by scientists ever since.

I shared from the chapter called "OF THE UNIVERSAL SOLAR AND PLANETARY CHAOS, AND ITS SEPARATION INTO PLANETS AND SATELLITES," and was about to post much of "CHAPTER XI. ON THE VORTEX SURROUNDING THE EARTH, AND THE EARTH's PROGRESSION FROM THE SUN TO THE CIRCLE OF ITS ORBIT," to answer further questions about how the planet would arrive in its "final periphery." But something really struck me this week which I am now ready to bring up.

Once again, Swedenborg's own diagrams:

Image
Last edited by Brigit Bara on Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:36 pm

Image


Image


It occurred to me that Emanuel Swedenborg would have viewed Supernova 1987a as an encouraging confirmation of his hypothesis that the brightening of stars, or supernovae, would be followed by the formation of a family of intermediate spheres, made of primal, simpler particles.

Image
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:52 pm

And that led me to wonder if those plasma spheres will evolve, materially, into objects with more stable atomic structures.

(It should not be impossible, in the Electric Universe. As has been discussed, the pairs of quasars which are found on axes through the centers of active galaxies, begin with high redshifts; and as they age, according to holoscience, they pick up more electrons and form more traditional matter.)

So does that leave the possibility that these spheres may age in some surprising way, if not as Swedenborg envisioned?
Last edited by Brigit Bara on Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:37 am

Swedenborg's Principia, ON THE VORTEX SURROUNDING THE EARTH, AND THE EARTH's PROGRESSION FROM THE SUN TO THE CIRCLE OF ITS ORBIT:

Hence it follows, that the earth, when thus in the centre of its vorter, is in its natural situation. That it cannot travel out of its vorter, nor move unaccompanied by the vorter; but that so long as its avillary motion remains, so long remains also the vortical motion of its parts, always determined and proportioned to the size and velocity of its body. 5. That the vorter formed round the earth aims at an equilibrium in the solar vortex, that is to say, occupies the place where it can be in a state of equilibrium. That were the vortical motion greater or swifter, it would seek a different locality from what it would were the motion less or slower.


7. That the earth, which is compelled to form innumerable spiral circles in its passage round the sun, travels with a velocity gradually diminishing in proportion to its distance from the sun; that its motion also is diminished according to the circles it describes, or its annual gyrations in a simple ratio; but in relation to the diameter or right line drawn perpendicularly to the sun, in a duplicate ratio. In the spiral orbit described by the earth, the diminution of its motion can be no other than in a simple ratio, because it arises only from the resistance of the fluent particles; and since of these particles there is a successive series extending spirally from the centre to the circumferences, the motion is every moment retarded by this series at every successive step; and inasmuch as the cause of retardation and resistance is simple, the ratio of velocity is consequently simple. So that in a simple ratio, according to the spiral circles, the greatest velocity is in the centre, a less degree in the circumferences, and the least in the ultimate circumference.


2. That the earth underwent innumerable changes before arriving at its present circle or orbit, that is to say, changes as numerous as the circles it completed, or the different distances of these circles from the sun; as numerous also as were the degrees of velocity in the course of its annual and diurnal revolution ; in fine, that every day and hour it underwent some new change, during its journey from the sun to its present orbit. The number of changes therefore it experienced may be concluded from this, that when issuing from its chaotic state it was at first naked, and was so near the sun as to appear comparatively diminutive, yet able to look closely into the vast solar ocean;


that afterwards every hour, day, and year it receded to a farther distance, and in relation to the immense solar disk became smaller and smaller, because subtending a continually less angle; that it thus became in a less degree surrounded with the solar rays; the farther it receded the less became its relative size, and the greater was the difference of manner in which the solar beam

was received on its surface.


Every moment was it changing its locality and distance from the sun; so that the sun could operate upon it when it was near in a different manner than when it was farther off, and with a variety every successive moment. Thus every instant it was experiencing some change in its relation to the sun, which was as it were ever changing, producing, and vivifying everything in its vortex. In like manner it was ever undergoing some change as to its circumfluent elementaries, which near the solar centre are in a greater degree of compression and a more rapid motion, and farther from it are in a less; so that what in the first instance these elementaries united, they at other distances either dissolved or united in a different manner, and vice versa.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby webolife » Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:03 am

My research for years was in the opposite direction from Swedenborg, toward the microscopic designs of life.
His diagrams are strongly reminiscent of cross-sectional views in cytology: centrosomes, microfilaments, cilia, flagella, and the like. These structures play essential roles in reproduction, locomotion, intracellular transport, and the conversion of light to chemical impulses in photoreceptors of our retina, to list a few. It would indeed be an amazing hierarchical unification to discover such vortices in the generation of galaxies and stellar systems, inasmuch as their forms are suggested in laboratory plasma experiments...
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:01 pm

My research for years was in the opposite direction from Swedenborg, toward the microscopic designs of life. His diagrams are strongly reminiscent of cross-sectional views in cytology: centrosomes, microfilaments, cilia, flagella, and the like. These structures play essential roles in reproduction, locomotion, intracellular transport, and the conversion of light to chemical impulses in photoreceptors of our retina, to list a few. ~webolife


That is very exciting that you are studying cytology, webolife. It does seem that the farther our instruments go and the more we can see and understand of cellular processes, the more it all either matches or far, far surpasses our own technology. How is it that a single cell is manipulating atoms to maintain a charge within its walls, or utilizing finely tuned antennae, or performing mysterious feats of biomineralization -- which may result in minerals which have different isotopes than were used originally? At a time when life is being explored at submicroscopic levels, it appears to me that a certain theory, which shall remain unnamed, ill-prepares people to see or to understand or to appreciate the complexity and exquisite structure of daily cellular life. I am glad you are giving these subjects your attention. It makes me wonder what the most extraordinary aspect of cytology you have found is, if you had to choose. (:

Swedenborg's atomic structures, because of their internal motion, allow for atomic re-arrangements, progressions, and even the motion of the larger bodies they make up. I thought you would probably not like this aspect of his model, but I had to include Emanuel Swedenborg's finite and elementary particles at this point because you asked why the planets would not be flung away from the sun, but would come into the orbital paths which are observed. The answer was because they essentially gain weight as they age, and because the vortex of the sun and the vortex of the planet must come into equilibrium. (Any one can read the original to check.)

In modern terms, I think he was talking about the ubiquitous quality of spin -- his vortical motion -- at both the atomic and astronomical scales. There is a wonderful quote in The Virtue of Heresy which says that sooner or later, scientists are going to realize that wherever there is spin, there is electricity.*

*(A paraphrase, apologies to HIlton Ratcliff.)
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby webolife » Tue Feb 06, 2018 5:15 pm

As my avatar suggests, for me the the most amazing fundament in microbiology is the root of life as we know it: DNA transcription and translation of proteins and the direction of cell processes. I say "fundament" because it is what distinguishes life at the very core, yet the complexity of the reproductive process at its essential base is practically unspeakable. I've summarized this numerous times elsewhere, but here it is in brief for another gander:
DNA holds the elegant code for the formation of proteins that distinguish one cell or tissue from another, or one life form from another, or even one intercellular process from another. Every cell [even of a bacterium] is a factory comprised of many sub-cellular machines, each structured with specific proteins which as life goes need to be repaired, replaced or replicated. At first, one of these machines unzips the DNA at the precise location of the code for the needed protein. The protein is transcribed by the action of enzymes [proteins] in the form of RNA which then travel [sometimes by means of microtubules, or the famous endoplasmic reticulum] to ribosomes, protein machines that pair up the sequenced RNA strands with amino acids, then joining them by means of more enzymes [eg. protease] and folding them into the specific protein[s] needed by the cell. All of the [macro]structures of the cell [that nice high school biology list of the cell organelles], all of the machines, the activating enzymes, the transport mechanisms [incl. such structures as the membrane pump and amazing flagellar motor, and other parts and processes left out of this brief synopsis] are required in order for this reproductive process to take place, yet each and all are themselves the products of this process. This is beyond a chicken-or-egg riddle. It is irreducible complexity at the very core of biological existence, beyond any frail conception of human ingenuity. Some of the machines in this process have cross sections that appear very much like Swedenborgs spirals, eg. centromeres, microtubules, cilia, etc.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Swedenborg: Nebular Hypothesis, or Solar Expulsion?

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:10 pm

I am glad the ES diagrams inspired you to write about cellular structures, webolife. It is all rather wonderful the way you describe it.

You probably already knew this story about JD Kraus[], but did you ever hear it while watching someone build a kitchen sieve antenna (:

"Helical Antenna 5.8GHz for FPV……the kitchen sieve version!"

https://youtu.be/GJD5tMP2kG4
dur 23:40
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests