question about the sun and stars in general

[magsk]

I love this theory so much it just seems logical. I do have a question that I could find the exact answer to though, hoping someone can help me out.

It has to do with the sun and stars in general. They say that the coronas are hottest because the electricity to power the sun comes from outer space as opposed to a fusion reactor within the core.

Well my question is why do the sun and stars attract this massive amount of electricity, I mean what is special about these location or objects that allows them to attract so much energy, also why are they formed balls as opposed to clouds of energy like nebulas?

Also if the electricity is coming from outer space why can we not see its flow or measure its flow in our solar system as it gets close to the suns location?

Does the idea that the electricity is being created within the suns core hold up?

[junglelord]

I can offer a possible answer. Not all of my answer may be pure EU theory, some may be my own thoughts as well. With that said, lets first look at geometry.

The geometry of Pi is the geometry of charge. Atomic charge is based on pi. The holographic prinicple applies to the universe and lets apply it to geometry. Therefore the geometry which we see in the large is the geometry we see in the small. Objects larger then stars, like a galaxy are spiral. I believe the spiral preceeds the sphere. The spiral is the mainframe, the archetype form both small and large. The spiral is a longitudinal, scalar, nonlinear, coherent, collective, system. This means it is a quantum system that is entangled. This means things are in instant communication.

This attribute of faster then c propagation is a function of this mainframe. Being non linear in its physics, being collective and coherent, it is a entangled interconnected system at every level. The harmonic relationships of stars and their feed is a universal framework of quantum resonance from the mainframe. This distributed frequency is the other "time" field. The one we recognize as linear time, a clock, is just one frequency field....there are two.

This is one example of more then four dimensions. This quantum resonance is the fifth dimension and allows the universe to be a collective, coherent, soliton, scalar mainframe from big to small via the holographic principle which is an inherent part of the system. The double layer is another archetype of the system as is the geometry of the helix. The results of the Z or Theta pinch effect from these structures is a nuclear funance in and of itself, long before it is a star....hence the nebulas are factorys as they say and in that we agree.

However the spiral galaxy itself is a manufacture of other galaxies as well as being the homopolor faraday disc that it is. It is the result of the crossing of huge galactic currents of double layer helix designs that defy imagination to some minds. However it is clear to mine. The holographic principle applied again would indicate that this is indeed the truth. The open regions of large empty space is the area between the crossovers of this universal Birkeland Currrent. The crossover is the area where galaxies form and also birth new ones from spiral galactic cores. The center of our own galaxy the Milky Way is a bright plasmoid known as Sgr A which is a good geometry to explore with this larger framework as being the point of this even larger crossover.

Concerning the original question, I believe the harmonic relationships of stars and the galactic core is a two fold system of both frequencys. The linear and nonlinear systems. Both of these are frequency domains apply themself both external and internal to the star via propagation of galactic charge current. There is the non linear quantum resonance of the scalar system which would be applied to both the internal core and external corona in its quatum resonace function as a harmonic node within the system, a standing scalar solion structure which is coherent and collective in its behaviour and funtion based on the fifth dimension and the mainframe. As well as the linear electron flow to the corona which is at minimum a result of charge flow both into and out from the sun.

[magsk]

So you are saying that the sun is a sphere because objects of that size are spheres? Or is it because in the natural world (which is this universe we are in) spheres are just the natural form that objects take. Same thing with the spiral shape of the milky way? the spiral shape you say can be found in both the immense and the tiny?

These two shapes are the shapes they are because they are fractals? is this accepted by EU?

The part I didnt realy understand at all is in relation to my question of why stars are the great attractors or points of mass congregation of electricity? What is special about stars or what is special about the location a star occupies that allows it to be this focal point of so much electricity?

[MGmirkin]

I love this theory so much it just seems logical. I do have a question that I could find the exact answer to though, hoping someone can help me out.

It has to do with the sun and stars in general. They say that the coronas are hottest because the electricity to power the sun comes from outer space as opposed to a fusion reactor within the core.

Well my question is why do the sun and stars attract this massive amount of electricity, I mean what is special about these location or objects that allows them to attract so much energy, also why are they formed balls as opposed to clouds of energy like nebulas?

Also if the electricity is coming from outer space why can we not see its flow or measure its flow in our solar system as it gets close to the suns location?

Does the idea that the electricity is being created within the suns core hold up?

To be clear, nobody can see "inside" the sun at present. We can only see what occurs approximately at the photosphere and above (chromosphere / corona / interplanetary space) and speculate about what goes on below the level that is "visible" to various instruments.

As such there's no way to know what's going on within the core. As far as I know, EU does not generally postulate an internal electrical generator at the core. Though it recognizes that there may be currents circulating in or below the lower "visible" atmosphere that give rise to the effects of the solar cycle, the banded appearance of sunspot and solar flares / CMEs throughout the solar cycle, etc.



The sun's "core" (one might say anything below the visible outer layers) is as yet somewhat mysterious. It could be isodense ball of gas (some papers by independent researchers not directly affiliated with the Thunderbolts group have speculated that the various oscillations conform to that notion more so than the usual nuclear furance view), it could be a solid, spherical rocky core (as is the contention of, I believe, of Michael Mozina). We simply don't know at present.

Standard theory (the standard model, I should say), seems to think that the sun's magnetic fields are generated "somehow" in the core by dynamo action, though nobody really seems sure of how and why they persist or why there is a solar cycle at all...

Keeping Maxwell in mind, one assumes that they contend that there is a current within the sun that accounts for its magnetic field. Though how it got there seems shaky to say the least (nobody has a definitive answer). And it's all thought to be a local effect within an isolated body in a large sea of isolated bodies.

EU differs in that it considers the sun to be a load in a larger circuit and/or the focus of an inward drift of electrons throughout the heliosphere with double layers at the heliospheric boundary and the sun's atmosphere. The majority of the electric field of the sun is thus concentrated in those regions with an extremely weak electric field permeating the rest of the heliosphere.

Despite being extremely weak, it is constant over distance the heliosphere is VERY large, constituting a very large voltage potential. Consider a hill at a 20 degree angle that's about 10 meters long versus a hill at the same 20 degrees that's 10,000,000 miles long. Kind of the same thing. By the time electrons traverse the space between the heliopause and the sun's atmosphere, they've gained considerable amounts of energy. Sure, some of it may be lost through collisions with other particles or absorbed by planets, planetessimals, dust, etc. But, consider how big the heliospheric boundary is as a collecting plate, one assumes quite a bit "gets through" to the sun. Granted it's an overall "drift" of electrons through the interplanetary medium. But, then again, electrons only "drift" in household wiring... Relativistic rain of electrons not required to power household appliances.

Sadly, a relativistic rain of electrons would probably be easier to detect than a long slow drift. Unfortunately for pseudo-skeptics, it's simply not expected under the model. If they want relativistic velocities on electrons, they'll have to get bloody close to the sun's atmosphere. Probably inside of it's outer reaches. Possibly at the heliopause as well... The probes that have been crossing it or have crossed it could probably yield some of that data if they're properly equipped for it.

As to why it seems like we must be at "special" locations for stars to be lit electrically... I don't know that I'd necessarily call the location special. Part of the theory seems to be that stars may have started as loads in existing circuits through interstellar or intergalactic space. At that location there may well have been a "pinch" (z-pinch, Bennett pinch, plasma pinch, whatever you want to call it) that caused matter to aggregate (if I were to speculate [I'm still learning] I'd say that Marklund convection might have something to do with it, scavenging materials and aggregating them, sorting by ionization potential).

If stars are created along such existing currents, one might assume they would have momentum / velocity similar to the consituents of said current. IE, if the current was carrying materials in a specific direction, they may still be largely traveling in that direction Moreover, they may still be embedded in the original current, assuming the current is still ongoing. So, I wouldn't say that stars "attract" currents per se. In terms of large current streams being "drawn to them" where they did not originally exist. Rather, they tend to be created within currents (or so sayeth the model, I believe) and probably continue to exist within them.

Now, a more apt question might be "why does the sun shine, but not the Earth or Jupiter?" That answer, unfortunately, I'm not quite privy to.

Though it seems like the sun is the more-or-less central object onto which currents are impinging. It also seems, from various instruments giving us data (using the EU model as a filter for what the data means), that the sun is connected to the Earth via filamentary currents (flux tubes, magnetic flux ropes, magnetic portals, electrical tornadoes in space; whatever you want to call them it all seems to be the same field-aligned currents song and dance). Likely it has similar connections to Mercury (where "magnetic tornadoes" were just discovered connecting its magnetosphere to space and using the same terminology as Earth's "magnetic flux ropes"). Wal's interpretation of Venus' double-eyed vortices and Saturn's polar storms / hotspots implies that similar structures are inflowing at the poles of those planets as well. One wonders whether the "bright clouds" of Uranus may be from similar causes (or possibly flux tubes connecting it to its moons?)...

So, it may be that the sun is the main "electrode" (being that it's central and has a much larger collecting surface for current), and the planets and other bodies may be minor loads, not unlike fingers on the glass of a novelty [globe] plasma lamp.

~Michael Gmirkin

[magsk]

Firstly thank you for the detailed response it was very helpful in me attempting to get a better understanding of this revolutionary theory.

If I am to understand this correct then according to your post and that image in it the main influx of electricity comes into the poles of the sun or in a perpendicular direction from that of the planetary orbits around the sun?

Then it swirls or does its business around the suns surface and is then expelled outward as solar wind giving us our heat and light? Since the electricity came in from a different direction from what is expelled out it minimizes the collisions between the particles allowing us to receive what we do from the sun.

You say we dont readily see or can easily measure the inflow of electricity because it comes in such thin small amounts over such a large area that it is negligible until it reaches very close to the congregation point.

But what is not known is why the sun and stars attract the electricity like they do, it is hypothesized that it is because they are a load in the circuit that is the galaxy->universe->(multiverse?). You say they may be a pinch from ancient times that caused this massive influx of electricity. But could it be that the sun and the stars are comprised of some highly electrically conductive materials? Are there current leading candidates hypothesized by people involved in the EU theory of what these materials could be that are attracting this massive current, or is this not an accepted theory?

[junglelord]

I tried a answer to your question yesterday and the board was frozen when I hit the submit.
Man I hate that, as I lost all that work


thanks to MJ for picking up the ball.

I believe and contend that geometry and harmonic relationship are part of the puzzle as well as composition of the star itself. Being plasma on the surface and possibly iron below the surface, its possible that the center point of the star is a zero point as in electrostatic theory as demonstrated by Professor Leuin at MIT. I know Tesla said the earth was no different then a copper sphere. I wonder if the same could be said of the sun in some respects? I do not see why not and in fact if it does act as such, one could easily see the Tesla system of the Magnifying Transmitter in large scale.

In the art and science of harmonic resonance, one must take into account many variables to achieve systems balance so that the two sources can couple harmonicly into resonance. Since it is a electric system, and since charge is well understood to have significant relationship with harmonic resonance, then one must conclude that the galactic circuit is harmonicly linked into resonance to function as a Faraday homopolar disk.

If Aether exists, it is probably a spiral geometry and most likely a rotating magnetic field with a quantum spin of 2. Charge is defined by Pi and we know that matter has a interger 1/2 spin. The relationship between Aether and matter, based on their respective quantum spin numbers would create PHI in and of itself. This relationship of spin domains reveals itself in the world of life we see all around us and in the universe at large. One cannot seperate structure from function.

Is it not possible under the holographic or fractal prinicple that the spiral galaxy represents the geometry of the aether and that the sphere represents the geometry of charge? I believe infact this is the case.

[MGmirkin]

If I am to understand this correct then according to your post and that image in it the main influx of electricity comes into the poles of the sun or in a perpendicular direction from that of the planetary orbits around the sun?

Then it swirls or does its business around the suns surface and is then expelled outward as solar wind giving us our heat and light? Since the electricity came in from a different direction from what is expelled out it minimizes the collisions between the particles allowing us to receive what we do from the sun.

Well, the diagram is, I think a very rough guesstimate from Don Scott. Keep a couple things in mind:

1) In an electric field, particles of opposite charge will tend to flow in opposite directions. Electrons and negative ions one way, protons and positive ions the other way. Both particle signs can flow in the same circuit. Generally in electrical diagrams, the direction of the current in the diagram is (conventionally) labeled as the direction of the positive charges. So, if you only had positives flowing coherently, then you'd draw the arrows / lines indicating the direction of those charges. Current doesn't care whether you've got positives flowing left or negatives flowing right. So, if you had 100 positives flowing left, you'd draw the lines pointing left with whatever indicator of strength for 100 particles. If you had a hundred negatives flowing right, you'd still draw the exact same line and strength indicator pointing left. IF you had 100 positives flowing left and 100 negatives flowing right, you'd draw the arrows left but with an additive strength indicator for 200 particles worth of current. As I understand it.

So, where the diagram shows arrows in a particular direction they tend to show the direction of positive charges. Negative charges may tend to follow the opposite path.

2) The system as I understand it is largely spherical or spherical-esque. IE, the inward drift current comes throughout the heliosphere, not just along the equatorial plane. The entire heliopause is thought, under the model, to act as a collector of extra-solar electrons, diverting them from nearby space into the heliosphere and then across interplanetary space, accelerated inward by the weak electric field between the inner and outer double layers (where the majority of the voltage drop / electric field is sequestered).

Now, I don't know whether the diagram Is a specific structure embedded within the larger structure, or whether it's an off-the-cuff diagram for the sake of argument and reality is a bit messier... So, all things with a grain of salt.

That said, it's interesting that the poles seem to have large coronal holes not unlike those seen in Birkeland's terella experiments:

(On Possible Electric Phenomena in Solar Systems and Nebulae)
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.ph ... nd_Nebulae

(Figure 260)
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.ph ... ig-260.jpg

Likewise it has a distinctly banded appearance to its solar flares, etc. Not unlike Birkeland's terella.

(Figure 248)
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.ph ... ig-248.jpg

(Figure 253)
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.ph ... ig-253.jpg

I tend to view Fig 253 as a decent enough analogy to the sunspot polarity issue. Sunspots are known to be of opposite "polarity" on opposite hemispheres of the sun. Why should this be so? Consider figure 253 and consider the right hand rule of electricity and magnetism.





Essentially it says that if you make the "hitchhiking sign," with your thumb and other fingers of your right hand, your thumb points in the direction of the conventional current and your other fingers point in the direction of the curl of the magnetic field around the current.

What has this to do with the sunspot polarity problem and figure 253? Well, consider the magnetic field perpendicular to the currents shown in figure 253 in each hemisphere of the terella. Assume the current flows the same direction throughout the length of the glowing arc from one hemisphere to the other.

For the sake of argument, let's assume the current flows from the bottom (southern) hemisphere to the top (northern) hemisphere. What would the right hand rule tell us about the magnetic field?

In the bottom (southern) hemisphere, the current would start perpendicular to the surface pointing outward. So, make a "hitchhiker thumb" (with your right hand) and point it toward yourself. How do your fingers curl? Counter clockwise... So too the magnetic field.

In the top hemisphere, the opposite is true. The current curves upward across the equator and then back toward the terella / "sun." At the surface of the sphere, the current points toward it and away from the viewer. Our "hitchhiker's thumb" points away from us, and our fingers curl in the clockwise direction.

In that example, we've got currents flowing outward in one hemisphere and inward in the other, with oppositely directed mgnetic fields accompanying them. Now, is that the only possible explanation? Ehh, maybe not... But it seems apt enough. If the magnetic fields in both hemispheres are oppositely directed it strongly implies if not REQUIRES oppositely directed electric currents be generating said magnetic fields. According to Maxwell, Ampere, Faraday, et al.

Anecdotal evidence, to be sure... But I tend to find it compelling when taken as a whole with a bunch of other information...

As to the "heat and light," those are generally from the solar atmosphere: photosphere, chromosphere & corona. The photosphere (under he electric star model) is basically a tufted anode arc discharge. IE, under the model, stellar luminosity is dependent upon the strength of currents impinging upon its surface. Minimal currents will leave it in "dark mode," IE minimal activity, some current, generally little or no light / glow emitted (at the very least in our "visible" range). As more current is applied, the star will hop up through other discharge modes including "glow mode" (a diffuse discharge that emits light and is relatively tenuous) and arc mode (a much more energetic mode that tends to be a more copious light producer and producer of higher frequency wavelengths like x-rays, etc.)...

More on that can be read on Don Scott's site:

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

And the model does allow that fusion takes pace on the sun (note, I didn't say "in the sun"). IE, in its atmosphere (photosphere, etc.). Since it produces over a much smaller portion of its volume, the "neutrino problem" (insufficient neutrinos of expected types under the standard model have been found through observations to support an internal fusion model). More observations needed, of course.

Hope that answers a few questions...

[MGmirkin]

But what is not known is why the sun and stars attract the electricity like they do, it is hypothesized that it is because they are a load in the circuit that is the galaxy->universe->(multiverse?). You say they may be a pinch from ancient times that caused this massive influx of electricity. But could it be that the sun and the stars are comprised of some highly electrically conductive materials? Are there current leading candidates hypothesized by people involved in the EU theory of what these materials could be that are attracting this massive current, or is this not an accepted theory?

That I'm not sure on. Without being able to see what's inside the sun, it's difficult to speculate. Though I've read from some of the materials that part of the issue is that the sun holds a positive charge with respect to its environment. Much as Earth, I believe, holds a negative charge. In the lab, it tends to be that charged bodies immersed in plasma will, rather than completely discharging to it, cause double layers to form around itself that largely screen its electric potential (or at least confine the extend of the electric field to small discrete regions near the particular body / electrode). Under the EU model, planetary magnetosphere / plasma sheaths are thought to be composed of such double layers (I think?), likewise the solar heliopause and theoretical solar double layer near the surface of the sun (somewhere in its atmosphere [photosphere / chromosphere, I think?]).

So, it may simply be the sun' charge, with respect to the extra solar (galactic) environment, that is the driving potential for much of its behavior. Likewise, planets' charges or lack thereof may be a driver for their interaction with the sun & vice versa. But again, a lot more observation and research is needed before conclusive statements can be made.

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin

[MGmirkin]

But could it be that the sun and the stars are comprised of some highly electrically conductive materials?

Well, plasma itself is a highly conductive material, being that it's composed largely of dissociated electrons and stripped / deficient atomic nuclei largely free to move about. Ergo it conducts current quite well. But, whether the sun is composed of strictly a cloud of plasma or something else (gas, liquid or solid) at its core remains a topic of debate until some way is found of directly observing / determining what lies within.

Under the standard "fusion" model, at the temperatures the core of the sun should be reaching, the material there would seems to have to be purely in the plasma state. Granted the fusion model claims increasing pressure / density with depth, so it's unclear what exactly that means for its phase (solid, liquid, gas or plasma). Gut feeling says plasma though, considering its temperature. Hard to believe that at such temperatures there would be any "atoms" around to speak of. Rather a large mass of dissociated everything violently smashing into everything else. But again, that's just my impression of the fusion model. The fusion model, of course, has its own problems, such as the surface temperature inversion, neutrino deficit, etc.

~Michael Gmirkin

[MGmirkin]

I believe and contend that geometry and harmonic relationship are part of the puzzle as well as composition of the star itself. Being plasma on the surface and possibly iron below the surface, its possible that the center point of the star is a zero point as in electrostatic theory as demonstrated by Professor Leuin at MIT. I know Tesla said the earth was no different then a copper sphere. I wonder if the same could be said of the sun in some respects? I do not see why not and in fact if it does act as such, one could easily see the Tesla system of the Magnifying Transmitter in large scale.

In the art and science of harmonic resonance, one must take into account many variables to achieve systems balance so that the two sources can couple harmonicly into resonance. Since it is a electric system, and since charge is well understood to have significant relationship with harmonic resonance, then one must conclude that the galactic circuit is harmonicly linked into resonance to function as a Faraday homopolar disk.

I'm afraid I don't know enough about harmonic resonances or how it would apply to an EU conception of stars / galaxies to offer cogent comment...

[junglelord]

Sure you do. Radio is harmonic resonance. Tesla knew that resonance was the key to electricity.
In a EU, resonance would be a given. For instance their is a harmonic coupling event between two like charges that forms the helix of the birkeland current. That is a good example of harmonic resonance in a natural system of the EU.