The EM Universe

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:33 pm

I posted:
I have just had something nagging at me for a while now that is suggesting this twisting or torque is important, somehow.


For anyone with time on their hands, Zhiliang Cao exlains his Torque theory.

The space itself is not a complete void. In fact, space has energy in it. The energies and forces have a simple movement. This very movement dominates every aspect of physical existence. Nothing can exist without it. The movement is called the Torque. The Torque Theory explains everything from the electronic field, magnetic field, mass energy equation, Plank equation, the structure of the basic particles, gravity, and etc. The torque is in everything, and everything follows along the torque.


http://vixra.org/pdf/1007.0030v1.pdf
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:20 pm

A tiny satellite circling Earth is providing an unexpectedly complicated picture of the solar system's heliosphere, the invisible bubble that extends far beyond the planetary orbits to where the solar wind strikes the vast sea of particles and radiation that fill interstellar space, researchers said Thursday.


http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la- ... 2721.story

A sea gives the impression of something with 'body', but 1 atom/cc doesn't sound very dense to me.
How do you 'strike' something which hardly exists?

The interstellar medium is mainly made of lone hydrogen atoms. They do not even exist as pairs as they do on earth. I mentioned before that space is filled with hydrogen atoms. The actual density of hydrogen as it exist in interstellar space is on the average of about 1 atom per cubic centimeter. In the extremes, as low as 0.1 atom per cubic centimeter has been found in the space between the spiral arms and as high as 1000 atoms per cubic centimeter are known to exist near the galactic core.


The sphere in my view is the result of EM wave interactions, so I believe we will find, one day, outside of this sphere, at about 3r distance, another torus. The sphere is a double layer dependent on an RF electric field for its formation.
Of course, I could be wrong...;-)
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby Osmosis » Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:28 pm

Hi GaryN,
Rf field-generated double layer? hmmm---
Osmosis
Osmosis
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:09 pm

Is it just me, or does anyone else begin to see twisty, sometimes spiraling strings of stars when they look at some star field images for a while? I was just looking at some images of Hartley 2, and in the lower lower left image in particular, I think I see some obvious strings of stars.
Maybe my pattern matching circuits need a good cleaning out? :lol:
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod2010/1 ... ldbru1m8a4
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sun Nov 21, 2010 8:05 pm

Planetary nebulae with asymmetrical wings of nebulosity are common. But nothing like the newfound rings around NGC 1514 had been seen before. Astronomers say the rings are made of dust ejected by the dying pair of stars at the center of NGC 1514. This burst of dust collided with the walls of a cavity that was already cleared out by stellar winds, forming the rings.


Image

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 125354.htm

The EM universe has a slightly different explanation. I just met, through a twist of fate,
an Electrical Engineer and an antenna whiz who are seeing what I see. Stay tuned to this wavelength...
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby JaJa » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:39 am

hi Gary

would you say that what you posit on the EM Universe supports what Rodin has done with his numbers and visa versa?

JJ
Omnia in numeris sita sunt
User avatar
JaJa
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 5:23 am

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:20 pm

I haven't given thought to integrating Rodins work into my big picture jj, but I'd say
there must be a connection. Have to look into that, some time. My latest efforts have
been focused on...
Planet formation.

The turbulent instabilities encountered in some of the fusion power devices may be
a problem for those scientists, but may be a serendipitous discovery for EU, or EMU
proponents. The formation of geometric, dusty plasma crystals in the curving magnetic
field of the Stelarator, including the Coulomb ball point to, IMO, a likely process
for planet formation.
I don't believe that planets are, or can be formed in the polar jets, and that the only
items 'ejected' from these jets are events and not things. They are the result of
slow and fast wave interaction in what is in effect the collimated beam of a backwards wave oscillator.
The only reasonable method of planet formation, given the observation of the multi-layer
structure of the planets observed at sufficient resolution, is through the creation of
geometric structures in an energised plasma in a curved magnetic field. The Coulomb ball fits the bill. This has been proposed by others, but in my proposal the energetic torus is the producer of the 'dust' for the layers, and the confinement/acceleration vessel, and that the torus is of dipole antenna field origin.

Coulomb balls, planet formation.

The coagulation of charged aggregates consisting of micron-sized dust grains is an important process in fields as diverse as planet formation and plasma processing of silicon wafers for computer chips.

http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/DPP07/Event/70433

Dust Coulomb balls: three-dimensional plasma crystals.
(I wonder if Oliver Arp and Halton are related?)
O. Arp, D. Block, A. Piel, and A. Melzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 165004 (2004)

http://www.ieap.uni-kiel.de/plasma/ag-piel/pub/pdf.gif

The explanation of the existence of tori around many spherical objects is not correct,
and the Io plasma torus should not exist under the standard explanation. Some "other
effects" are conjectured. It is an EM structure, and the heavens are rife with them.

Drift resonance and stability of the Io plasma torus.
The observed local time asymmetry of the Io plasma torus is generally attributed to the presence of a persistent dawn-to-dusk electric field in the Jovian magnetosphere. The local time asymmetry is modulated at the System 3 rotation period of Jupiter's magnetic field, suggesting that the dawn-to-dusk electric field may be similarly modulated. We argue that such a System 3 modulation would have a profound disruptive effect on the observed torus structure if the torus were to corotate at exactly the System 3 rate: the torus would be a resonantly forced harmonic oscillator, and would disintegrate in a few rotation periods, contrary to observations. This destabilizing effect is independent of, and in addition to, the more familiar effect of the centrifugal interchange instability, which is also capable of disrupting the torus in a few rotation periods in the absence of other effects.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000JGR...105.5555Z
(I see Jupiter as having been much more active in the past, and therefor capable of having its own
highly energetic tori to create spherical moons)

If energies of 10^21 eV have been observed in galactic toruses, then matter is being created in those structures, and formed into crystals. Dusty plasma rings around stars are producing matter through photon pair production, not pulling it in from outside. We cant see the center of Galaxies
not because of accretion, but from copious creation.

Photon Pair production:
The threshold temperature for production of electrons is about 10^10 kelvins, 10^13 K for protons and neutrons, etc.
How many kelvins is 10^21 eV?

I am lead to believe then, that the planets were produced in times of a much increased electrical activity, and rather than having been spit out the poles and somehow migrating to the equatorial
regions, have always been equatorial, but can be nearer or further from the Sun as electrical
tension in the system changes.
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:29 pm

Image

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 221537.htm

More misunderstanding by the mainstream scientists. The 'collision' is due to
2 objects having achieved, in isolation, a charge differential. At the end of the
visible arms of the galaxies, charged particles do not stop, they continue in
their search for a less crowded environment. As they travel they will assume the
spiraling, long, thin vortex configuration. Both galaxies are reaching out to
each other. As the tips meet, the current flow between them increases, the
magnetic field strengthens, the pinching (and tension) increases, and the stars
are created. Where are the huge clouds of condensing hydrogen that stars are
supposedly formed from, when you are 'off nucleus'?
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Dec 03, 2010 2:09 pm

Replace the 'black hole' with your favorite alternative energy source, replace accretion with creation.

An induction accelerator of cosmic rays on the axis of an accretion disk

The structure and magnitude of the electric field created by a rotating accretion disk with a poloidal magnetic field is found for the case of a vacuum approximation along the axis. The accretion disk is modeled as a torus filled with plasma and a frozen-in magnetic field. The dimensions and location of the maximum electric field as well as the energy of the accelerated particles are found. The gravitational field is assumed to be weak.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/g748766546w8q403/
PDF:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/g74 ... lltext.pdf
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:00 am

The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass to energy.
Dan Bar-Zohar (Open University of Israel)

Abstract
The sun energy source thought to be a nuclear fusion reactor inside the sun core. The sun is not heated by fusion reaction but by magnetic fields coming from the galactic center. The nuclear fusion is a by product of the magnetic fields heating. The changing magnetic fields from the galactic center induce electric currents inside the sun that heat the sun. The heat and the high kinetic energy of particles in the sun core, trigger high energy collisions that create the main constituents of matter, electron, proton and neutron. The collisions also fuse or nucleosynthesis heavier elements like deuterium, tritium, helium and lithium. This leads to the fact that the stars and galaxies constantly produce mass and energy. The article will explain the clockworks behinds the galaxies energy production. The galaxy energy and mass production cancel out the Big Bang theory and leads to a steady state cosmological model with large amount of new mass created that expand and accelerate the universe.


http://philica.com/display_article.php?article_id=65

Not quite as I imagine things, but the Sun being the Creator is a good start.
I'll e-mail him and put him straight. :-)
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:39 pm

Which came first, the BH or the galaxy?
Hole's on First?: New Evidence Shows Black Hole Growth Preceding Galactic Formation
An accidental find in a star-forming dwarf galaxy shows that black holes may mature early in galaxy evolution

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... black-hole

It makes much more sense to me to turn the BH function around. It is not pulling
material in, it is putting energy out, and leading to the creation of matter
through EM means, beginning with scalar EM.

Starburst. Where is all the hydrogen that is accreting into stars?
Image
M82 is a so-called starburst galaxy, where stars are forming at rates that are tens or even hundreds of times higher than in a normal galaxy. The burst of star birth may be caused by a close encounter or collision with another galaxy, which sends shock waves rushing through the galaxy. In the case of M82, astronomers think that a brush with its neighbor galaxy M81 millions of years ago set off this torrent of star formation.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 160915.htm

Our picture of the Universe is incomplete without the tension component being included,
a magnetic tension, and a modulated magnetic tension at that. And, I think what is
really being missed is that these objects are not due to a single EM event,
but to the interaction of 2 EM events. Our Sun, quasars, RRAPs, AGN, BHs, whatever,can
appear to have differing emissions, shapes and behaviours due to differing relationships of
these two, at heart, scalar EM events.
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:20 pm

Rats, that should have been RRATs, not RRAPs, above. Anyway, right on cue, my double energy sources are
being resolved. Just as solar systems can have multiple Suns, there can be
multiple 'Black holes'. It is the wave mixing between these objects that determines
the nature of the greater structure.
Merging black holes, or dual EM energy sources/radiators?
Astronomers Discover Close Pairs of Massive Black Holes
Double active nuclei -- each powered by a supermassive black hole -- are easily discerned in the Keck images, which have the resolution similar to that of the Hubble Space Telescope, but are obtained from the ground, using the Laser Guide Star Adaptive Optics technology, which removes the atmospheric blur.

http://www.astro.caltech.edu/~george/bbh/
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:11 pm

Concentric shells of massive evolved star, 8 SM minimum. Simplified, not to scale.
Image
If these shells are EM constructs, then they will be charge accumulators, and the nuclei
of the elements are being forced into existence. The 'pressure' eventually builds to a
point where the nuclei escape their shells, sometimes explosively, and only become
atoms on acquiring electrons. The rate of acquisition of electrons will determine the
isotope produced. I might not be surprised if it was found that the radius of the shells was based on
the phi ratio, but not upset if they were not.
I think it was Pythagoras, not Democritus, who asked "Should not an atom from closer to the center of the sun travel faster than one from further out?", or words to that effect. Smart guy?
Iron nuclei in cosmic rays.
From just above 10 million trillion electronvolts to three times that energy, the number of iron nuclei appears to rise steeply, with heavy nuclei ultimately dominating the cosmic ray population, Cronin reported. He and colleagues have posted these findings online at arXiv.org.

"It's a surprise," says Todor Stanev of the University of Delaware in Newark.

The data are particularly puzzling because it's unclear what the source of the iron could be, notes Pierre Sokolsky of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City. The disks of material that surround and feed supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies is a likely source for the generation of high-energy cosmic rays. But those disks consist primarily of protons and some helium, not iron.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... n32369493/
Just trying to put the pieces together.
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby allynh » Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:10 pm

I look at the diagram and see planets forming like pearls inside the Sun, then when they "grow" large enough they are expelled from the Sun to spread the electrical load on the system.

The Saturn Event as example: I don't see Jupiter, Saturn, Venus, Mars, Earth being a separate system "captured" by the Sun, I see them as a string of planets expelled from the Sun once they grew too large inside.

The label, "not to scale", makes the shells thicker on the outside layers growing progressively thinner toward the center.

Think of the system of shells as constantly dynamic, transmuting and accumulating material, then spitting out strings of planets to start all over again.

A beautiful red drop of water in slow motion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ-AX1G0SmY

Run the video forward and back. Look at the water drop, and visualize a string of material flowing out, forming a string of planets, forming large to small.
01.jpg

02.jpg

03.jpg

04.jpg
allynh
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Jan 27, 2011 11:23 pm

That's very pretty allynh, but I don't think the ejection would/could work with
my model of the Sun. Of course, my model of the Sun hasn't been proven, yet. ;-)
While you are here though, let me bend your ear with what is, for me, a new insight.
If it is a mad idea, it comes from some, I presume, rather clever dudes.
This is another 'machine, to add to my growing list. It really is an EM Universe.
They still propose an 'old fashioned' BH/AGN/QSO as the pulse energy source to
drive the 'Oh My God!' particle, but they will come around. I wasn't aware of the
Magnetowave version of the PWA, but 'it's a keeper' for sure.

Magnetowave Induced Plasma Wakefield Acceleration for Ultra High
Energy Cosmic Rays

Abstract: Magnetowave-induced plasma wakefield acceleration (MPFA) in a relativistic astrophysical outflow was proposed in 2002 as a viable mechanism for the acceleration of cosmic particles to ultra high energies. Recently our simulation results have clearly demonstrated the existence of the mechanism for the first time. Instead of relying on the lower frequency and speed Alfven limit of the magnetowave, we concentrate on its higher frequency and speed whistler mode as the regime for the driving pulse. The magnetized plasma wakefield so induced follows precisely the theoretical prediction. We show that when the condition is right, the plasma wakefield so induced maintains very high coherence and can thus sustain high-gradient acceleration for macroscopic distance. This mechanism provides a third option for exciting large amplitude plasma wakefield acceleration, in addition to that driven by a laser pulse or an electron beam. We discuss its connection to the production of ultra high energy cosmic rays (UHECR). Considering the inter-disciplinary nature of the subject, the talk will be pedagogical for audience with different backgrounds and will emphasize the plasma-astro connection.

http://inpa.lbl.gov/INPA/Abstracts/033007.html
A pdf:
http://iopscience.iop.org/0741-3335/51/ ... 024012.pdf
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: 2646
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests