Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

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

Locked
sjw40364
Guest

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by sjw40364 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:47 pm

Solar wrote:especially in comparison to what occurred with V838 Monocerotis from 2002. It wasn’t that the star went “nova” at that time but that the increase in brightness due to it’s transformation revealed previously unseen concentric ‘shells’ of material. This was referred to as being the result of a “light echo”, a rather bizarre conceptual term imho. The rationale being that; had there been an actual “nova” the material surrounding the star would have had to “expanded” faster than the limiting shackle known as the “speed of light”.

V838 Mon: Mystery Star which suddenly transformed
"Observations indicate that the erupting star transformed itself over a period of months from a small under-luminous star a little hotter than the Sun, to a highly luminous, cool super giant star undergoing rapid and complex brightness changes. The transformation defies the conventional understanding of stellar life cycles.” - Thunderbolts TPOD
Hubble watches light echo from mysterious erupting star

The light echo of supernova 1987A

I wonder if the concentric shells can be monitored to see if they are moving in a direction inward/outward from a star, or if they are stationary with respect to the star, and/or if they correlate with the position of the star’s helio-sheath and/or supposed larger “termination shock”. That would be interesting.

Now, there is only one problem I'm (constructively) having with this approach: Obviously images can be referenced which seem to visually indicate (perspective), and normally are interpreted in the sense, that at quite some distance these "clouds" have the character of undergoing a sort of 'dissipation'. They're interpreted as if having been 'expelled' from the star at some point long ago and are more rarified the further one gets away from a star etc.

I think it would helpful if we could find literature indicating directional 'flows' to these 'shells'.
This small time-lapse shows very little movement of each current pair, but the variation in brightness reveal activity within each current pair. I believe a larger long-term study would more than likely show on overall rotation around the central axis of the current pairs and around the star itself. Without being able to overlap the images with exact scale factors I can do no more than eyeball it. But if these current pairs go into glow mode at the same time as the central current pair, the entire star out to the region of its heliosphere would seem to glow, making the star suddenly seem to swell in size. Any dust shells might well be blown outward from the increase of solar wind due to increase of current, forming these observed shock fronts, but that does not necessarily equate to exploding. Our normal as normal can be in space Sun accelerates particles up to 700km/s and it is relatively stable.

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-conten ... lapse1.jpg

sjw40364
Guest

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by sjw40364 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:06 pm

Yet at the same time I have no problem with stars exploding from double layer explosions. I believe some stars loose their connections and like a switch improperly closed, boom, energy is released explosively. I just do not think all supernova events should be classified as happening from one scenario only.

User avatar
phyllotaxis
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 3:16 pm
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by phyllotaxis » Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:11 pm

Solar wrote: I wonder if the concentric shells can be monitored to see if they are moving in a direction inward/outward from a star, or if they are stationary with respect to the star, and/or if they correlate with the position of the star’s helio-sheath and/or supposed larger “termination shock”. That would be interesting.

Now, there is only one problem I'm (constructively) having with this approach: Obviously images can be referenced which seem to visually indicate (perspective), and normally are interpreted in the sense, that at quite some distance these "clouds" have the character of undergoing a sort of 'dissipation'. They're interpreted as if having been 'expelled' from the star at some point long ago and are more rarified the further one gets away from a star etc.

I think it would helpful if we could find literature indicating directional 'flows' to these 'shells'.
If it's not out there already, why not propose the experiment/observation be done?

User avatar
PersianPaladin
Posts: 668
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 8:38 am
Location: Turkey

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by PersianPaladin » Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:13 pm

orrery wrote:I would remind everyone that Don Scott advocates that a pulsar is actually a plasma connected binary system emulating a relaxation oscillator. Evidence of 4 magnetic pole object would indicate 2 stars in a tight binary configuration as proposed by Scott's relaxation oscillator theory.

Score +1 for the Electric Sky
Yup. And neutron stars do not exist - as they violate the "island of stability". This leaves only "gravity" as a force that somehow pulls the nuclei together. And of course - we know how laughable that idea is in a highly conductive plasma environment.

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by Solar » Mon Aug 06, 2012 7:29 pm

sjw40364 wrote:But if these current pairs go into glow mode at the same time as the central current pair, the entire star out to the region of its heliosphere would seem to glow, making the star suddenly seem to swell in size. Any dust shells might well be blown outward from the increase of solar wind due to increase of current, forming these observed shock fronts, but that does not necessarily equate to exploding. Our normal as normal can be in space Sun accelerates particles up to 700km/s and it is relatively stable.

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-conten ... lapse1.jpg
Ah… I think I see where you’re going; especially since Supernova 1987A is still periodically doing its thing. The material expelled from the actual “exploding double layer” phase gets re-energized by subsequent ‘pulsations’ as revealed through the ongoing dynamics seen in the later brightening of the circumstellar rings in the photo you linked. It just occurred to me that it’s the subsequent ‘pulsations’ along the discharge path that can induce such a feature. This is why I like PULSED PLASMA. This is also observable with lightning. Watch the continued ‘pulsations’ occurring along the discharge path beginning at approx 0.35sec:

Slow Motion Lightning

The following video, from which the above video was taken, explains the pulsations as being due to the rest of the charge being “draining” to ground:

Raging Planet (Discovery Planet)

The thing I like about your approach is that it doesn’t consider the “supernova” as a one off event, even with the inclusion of “explosive double layers”, but continued excitation involving charge ‘draining’ pulsations along the discharge path.

Such that, this could account for later energetic activities, such as that of V838 Monocerotis, which having already undergone said “exploding double layer” expulsion, THEN saw subsequent energetic brightening of the expelled material owing to further increases in current density to the star due to lightning-like pulsations (who am I kidding; it IS cosmic lightning).

You would be correct in my humble opinion that such subsequent pulsed activities would not necessarily involve a stellar “explosion” and this is more probable in relation to what electrically occurred with the subsequent brightening of V838 Monocerotis. After all:
“The energy may be released gradually or stored in a stellar circuit and unleashed catastrophically. – Supernova 1987A Decoded
If stars are powered by electrical current filaments strung through the galactic plasma in which the stars are immersed, power surges in those circuits can suddenly brighten and dim them. – TPOD: V838 Mon
That last quote there I think is directly to your non-explosive point. So it seems to me that you’re including the broader EU implications of a star embedded along an active cosmic current path; which is a good thing obviously. Quite nice for eyeballin' it bro.
"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

sjw40364
Guest

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by sjw40364 » Tue Aug 07, 2012 3:48 pm

Thanks!

It just seems to me that as far as I can tell from the time-lapse photo's of 1987A, it is not expanding or shrinking inwards so much as the ring is just experiencing surges. I believe these rings (http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/07 ... c-helix-2/) are the same as these rings (http://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric- ... e=74fgmwne) it's just a matter of current flow and plasma age and density. One can not expect similar shaped rings every time as plasma is highly filamentary. It is anistropic and not isotropic. It is neither a static universe nor an expanding one, it is one without limits in constant motion, all interacting on an EM level. I believe Birkeland Currents stretch from galaxy to galaxy with no end. From star to star within a galaxy. From star to planet and planet to moon. From proton to neutron to electron.

sjw40364
Guest

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by sjw40364 » Tue Aug 07, 2012 5:50 pm

And as the video you posted show, these current filaments are always seeking to find its opposite charge. Whether from cloud to ground or galaxy to galaxy, or electron to proton, as that is indeed what makes up plasma. So instead of searching for Neutron Stars, Dark Matter and its companion Dark Energy, or Black Holes, or the Higgs of more mass than a proton, standard cosmology needs to find what holds that electron from touching the proton. Because you can be sure that besides the occasional random collision, those electrons in that lightning bolt never touched. Yet zap, energy flowed. And what is the effect orders of magnitude slower that you observe? Photons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLWIBrwe ... re=related

I believe the aether is a dielectric: "A dielectric is an electrical insulator that can be polarized by an applied electric field." and matter is composed of conductive material: "In physics and electrical engineering, a conductor is a material which contains movable electric charges."
"When a dielectric is placed in an electric field, electric charges do not flow through the material as they do in a conductor, but only slightly shift from their average equilibrium positions causing dielectric polarization. Because of dielectric polarization, positive charges are displaced toward the field and negative charges shift in the opposite direction. This creates an internal electric field which reduces the overall field within the dielectric itself. If a dielectric is composed of weakly bonded molecules, those molecules not only become polarized, but also reorient so that their symmetry axis aligns to the field."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_conductor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric
And if you place an electric field inside a dielectric?
"The study of dielectric properties is concerned with the storage and dissipation of electric and magnetic energy in materials."
Hence gravities seeming faster than light property, the aether does not need to move, it just polarizes itself to the axis of the electric field. Hence our inability to detect it. It is polarized to the electric field just as is everything else including light.

User avatar
phyllotaxis
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 3:16 pm
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by phyllotaxis » Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:51 pm

sjw40364 wrote:Thanks!

It just seems to me that as far as I can tell from the time-lapse photo's of 1987A, it is not expanding or shrinking inwards so much as the ring is just experiencing surges. I believe these rings (http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/07 ... c-helix-2/) are the same as these rings (http://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric- ... e=74fgmwne) it's just a matter of current flow and plasma age and density. One can not expect similar shaped rings every time as plasma is highly filamentary. It is anistropic and not isotropic. It is neither a static universe nor an expanding one, it is one without limits in constant motion, all interacting on an EM level. I believe Birkeland Currents stretch from galaxy to galaxy with no end. From star to star within a galaxy. From star to planet and planet to moon. From proton to neutron to electron.
sjw40364 wrote: Hence gravities seeming faster than light property, the aether does not need to move, it just polarizes itself to the axis of the electric field. Hence our inability to detect it. It is polarized to the electric field just as is everything else including light.



Perfectly described ideas- the last one I have specifically wondered about as well.... now how could we prove it? :arrow:

kiwi
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Neutron star may sport four magnetic poles

Post by kiwi » Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:34 pm

nick c wrote:
orrery wrote:I would remind everyone that Don Scott advocates that a pulsar is actually a plasma connected binary system emulating a relaxation oscillator. Evidence of 4 magnetic pole object would indicate 2 stars in a tight binary configuration as proposed by Scott's relaxation oscillator theory.

Score +1 for the Electric Sky
Yes, there is a binary star at the center of the Crab Nebula.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1942ApJ....96..199M
The central star of the Crab nebula is probably the south preceding of the two stars near the center of the nebula.
Which begs the question for mainstream: how did the companion survive a supernova explosion?
Variable Stars

When I was researching topics for this article, Wal Thornhill said to me,
"Have a look at variable stars, particularly bursters, where I think you will find the brightness curve is like that of lightning with a sudden rise time and exponential decay. Some stars are regular and others irregular. The irregular ones seem to average the power over the bursts. When they are more frequent, the energy is less per burst. If there is a long latency, the next burst is more powerful. It's the kind of thing you would expect from an electrical circuit when the trigger level is variable and the power input constant.
I think many variable stars are actually binaries with some kind of electrical interaction. Long period Miras (A type of variable star) may actually have an object orbiting within the shell of a red giant (as I have proposed for the proto-Saturnian system)"
Following Wal's suggestion, I looked at the recent Hubble image of Mira itself, the flagship star of that class of variable stars. Mira's image reveals a huge plasma emission on one side of the star. The official explanation includes the words, " Mira A is a red giant star undergoing dramatic pulsations, causing it to become more than 100 times brighter over the course of a year. …. Mira can extend to over 700 times the size of our Sun, and is only 400 light-years away. The …. photograph taken by the Hubble Space Telescope shows the true face of Mira. But what are we seeing? The unusual extended feature off the lower left of the star remains somewhat mysterious. Possible explanations include gravitational perturbation and/or heating from Mira's white dwarf star companion." [Italics added.]http://electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
Mira has a white dwarf companion, just as Wal suggested was likely. So, a much better possible explanation of its pulsating output is that an electrical discharge is taking place between Mira and its companion, much like a relaxation oscillator. It's not really "mysterious" at all.

There are many examples of unequally sized, closely spaced, binary pairs that are variable and emit frequent nova-like explosions. The list includes:

SS Cygni - A yellow dwarf and a hot blue-white dwarf. Orbital period 6.5 hours! Separation distance 100.000 miles or less. Burnham asks, "Is SS Cygni ..... dying out after having been [a full scale nova] in the past?"
U Geminorum - A B-type blue dwarf and a G-type dwarf. Orbital period 4.5 hours! Separation distance a few hundred thousand miles. In this case Burnham states, "Spectroscopic studies reveal the existence of a "rotating ring of gas" (plasma) around the blue star, and it appears that the explosive increase of light is due not only to the brightening of the star, but to a large increase of radiation from the cloud."
Z Andromedae and R Aquarii - Both of these consist of a hot blue dwarf mated to a red giant.
T Coronae and RS Ophiuchi - Both have recurrent nova-like eruptions and are close binary systems.
Gamma Ray Bursters

In 1998 NASA gave their description of what constitutes a "gamma ray burster".
"October 13, 1998: Cosmic gamma-ray bursts have been called the greatest mystery of modern astronomy. They are powerful blasts of gamma- and X-radiation that come from all parts of the sky, but never from the same direction twice. Space satellites indicate that Earth is illuminated by 2 to 3 bursts every day. What are they? No one is certain. Until recently we didn't even know if they came from the neighborhood of our own solar system or perhaps from as far away as the edge of the universe. The first vital clues began to emerge in 1997 when astronomers detected an optical counterpart to a gamma-ray burst. In February 1997 the BeppoSAX X-ray astronomy satellite pinpointed the position of a burst in Orion to within a few arcminutes. That allowed astronomers to photograph the burst, and what they saw surprised them. They detected a rapidly fading star, probably the aftermath of a gigantic explosion, next to a faint amorphous blob believed to be a very distant galaxy." [Italics added.]
Doesn't this sound like fissioning again? An explosion, followed by a rapidly fading star, accompanied by some sort of companion! Might it be that the reason they "never [come] from the same direction twice" is that the creation of the binary pair has relieved the electrical stress (at least for a long enough time that we humans haven't yet seen a recurrence)? The February 2001 issue of Sky & Telescope magazine contains these words,
"Does every gamma-ray burst begin with the supernova explosion of a massive star? New observations from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and the Italian-Dutch BeppoSAX satellite suggest this is so. Some astronomers think it's still too early to draw firm conclusions, though they hail the new observations as revolutionary. In any case, a link between gamma-ray bursts and supernovae seems to be convincingly confirmed."
Pulsars

Although pulsars do not occupy a specific place in the HR diagram, it is worth noting that they, too, have characteristics that are most comfortably explained via the ES model. Pulsars are stars that have extremely short periods of variability in their production of EM radiation (both light and radio frequency emissions) . When they were first discovered it was thought that they rotated rapidly - like lighthouses. But when the observed rate of "rotation" got up to about once per second for certain pulsars, despite their having masses exceeding that of the sun, this official explanation became untenable. Instead, the concept of the "neutron star" was invented. It was proposed that only such a dense material could make up a star that could stand those rotation speeds.
But, one of the basic rules of nuclear chemistry is the 'zone of stability'. This is the observation that if we add neutrons to the nucleus of any atom, we need to add an almost proportional number of protons (and their accompanying electrons) to maintain a stable nucleus. In fact, it seems that when we consider all the natural elements (and the heavy man made elements as well), there is a requirement that in order to hold a group of neutrons together in a nucleus, a certain number of proton-electron pairs are required. The stable nuclei of the lighter elements contain approximately equal numbers of neutrons and protons, a neutron/proton ratio of 1. The heavier nuclei contain a few more neutrons than protons, but the limit seems to be 1.5 neutrons per proton. Nuclei that differ significantly from this ratio SPONTANEOUSLY UNDERGO RADIOACTIVE TRANSFORMATIONS that tend to bring their compositions into or closer to this ratio.

Flying in the face of this observed fact, mainstream astrophysicists continue to postulate the existence of stars made up of solid material consisting only of neutrons, "neutronium". This is yet one more example of Fairie Dust entities fantasized by astrophysicists to explain otherwise inexplicable observations. The 'neutron star' is simply yet another fantasy conjured up, this time, in order to avoid confronting the idea that pulsar discharges are electrical phenomena. A nucleus or charge free atom made up of only neutrons has never been synthesized in any laboratory nor can it ever be. In fact, a web search on the word 'neutronium' will produce only references to a computer game – not to any real, scientific discussion or description. Lone neutrons decay into proton - electron pairs in less than 14 minutes; atomlike collections of two or more neutrons will fly apart almost instantaneously.

Perhaps some astronomers have begun to realize neutronium is embarrassingly impossible. In any event, a less easily falsifiable entity has now been proposed. Wal Thornhill has written about this latest mainstream explanation of pulsar emissions:

"The discovery now of an x-ray pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658 (J1808 for short), located in the constellation of Sagittarius, that flashes every 2.5 thousandths of a second (that is 24,000 RPM!) goes way beyond the red-line even for a neutron star. So another ad hoc requirement is added to the already long list - this pulsar must be composed of something even more dense than packed neutrons - strange matter! ...When not associated with protons in a nucleus, neutrons decay into protons and electrons in a few minutes. Atomic nuclei with too many neutrons are unstable. If it were possible to form a neutron star, why should it be stable?"
"Strange matter"! Yet another ad hoc fictional invention! They have been getting away with this kind of nonsense for decades. How ludicrous does it have to get before some responsible astronomer cries out that this Emperor Has No Clothes On?
Some pulsars oscillate with periods in the millisecond range. Their radio pulse characteristics are: the 'duty cycle' is typically 5% (i.e., the pulsar flashes like a strobe light - the duration of each output pulse is much shorter than the length of time between pulses); some individual pulses are quite variable in intensity; the polarization of the pulse implies the origin has a strong magnetic field; magnetic fields require electrical currents. These characteristics are consistent with an electrical arc (lightning) interaction between two closely spaced binary stars. Relaxation oscillators with characteristics like this have been known and used by electrical engineers for many years. Therefore, I was pleased when I saw the following announcement:

Hubble Space Telescope Observations Reveal Coolest and Oldest White Dwarf Stars in the Galaxy: "Using the Hubble Space Telescope, astronomers at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) have detected five optical companion stars orbiting millisecond pulsars. Only two other such systems are known. Three of the companions are among the coolest and oldest white dwarf stars known." [Italics added]

It is becoming obvious that pulsars are electrical discharges between members of binary pairs.

The Crab Pulsar

The "Crab Nebula" (M1) is a cloud of gas (plasma) that is the remnant of a nova explosion seen by Chinese astronomers. Lying at the center of the nebula is a pulsar- a star called CM Tauri. The frequency of repetition of the pulsar's output is 30 pulses per second. The length of each flash, however, is approximately 1/1000 sec., one millisecond! The obvious question to ask next is: Is this star a binary pair? No companion is visible from even the largest earthbound telescopes. But, the Hubble orbiting telescope has recently found a companion, "a small knot of bright emission located only 1500 AU (1500 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun) from the pulsar. This knot has gone undetected up until now because even at the best ground-based resolution it is lost in the glare of the adjacent pulsar. The knot and the pulsar line up with the direction of a jet of X-ray emission. A second discovery is that in the direction opposite the knot, the Crab pulsar is capped by a ring-like 'halo' of emission tipped at about 20 degrees to our line of sight. In this geometry the polar jet flows right through the center of the halo."

M1 - The Crab Nebula
The shape of this pulsar centered object is exactly that of an electrical homopolar motor - generator.

Supernova Remnant G11.2-0.3

On August 6, 2000, and October 15, 2000, the orbiting X-ray telescope Chandra discovered a pulsar at the geometric center of the supernova remnant known as G11.2-0.3. This observation provides strong evidence that the pulsar was formed in the supernova of 386 AD, which was also witnessed by Chinese astronomers. The official description of the image included the words:
"The Chandra observations of G11.2-0.3 have also, for the first time, revealed the bizarre appearance of the pulsar wind nebula at the center of the supernova remnant. Its rough cigar-like shape is in contrast to the graceful arcs observed around the Crab and Vela pulsars. However, together with those pulsars, G11.2-0.3 demonstrates that such complicated structures are ubiquitous around young pulsars."
Upon examination, the image of the central star reveals that it is at the center of a 'cigar shaped' plasma discharge, not a 'bizarre wind nebula' (whatever that is). Although no binary companion has (yet) been found, the presence of the observed plasma discharge makes one suspect it is only a matter of time.
Each new discovery of a binary pair of stars, one of which is either a variable star or pulsar, at the center of a nova remnant, is one more piece of evidence that Juergens' electric star model and Thornhill's theory of the fissioning of those electric stars are both valid.

Electric Star Evolution

In the Electric Star hypothesis, there is no reason to attribute youth to one spectral type over another. We conclude that a star's location on the HR diagram only depends on its size and the electric current density it is presently experiencing. If, for whatever reason, the strength of that current density should change, then the star will change its position on the HR diagram - perhaps, like FG Sagittae, abruptly. Otherwise, no movement from one place to another on that plot is to be expected. And its age remains indeterminate regardless of its mass or spectral type. This is disquieting in the sense that we are now confronted by the knowledge that our own Sun's future is not as certain as is predicted by mainstream astronomy. We cannot know whether the Birkeland current presently powering our Sun will increase or decrease, nor how long it will be before it does so.
Summary

A fresh look at the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, unencumbered by the assumption that all stars must be internally powered by the thermonuclear fusion reaction, reveals an elegant correspondence between this plot and the Electric Star model proposed by Ralph Juergens and extended by Earl Milton. In fact the correspondence is better than it is with the standard thermonuclear model. The details in the shape of the HR diagram are exactly what the tufted electric star model predicts they should be. The observed actions of nova-like variable stars, pulsars, the anomalies in the line spectra of B-type stars, and the high frequency of occurrence of binary pairs of stars are all in concordance with Thornhill's Electrical Universe theory, his stellar fissioning concept, and the Electric Star model as well. Completely mysterious and unexplained from the thermonuclear model point of view is the 'impossible' evolutionary behavior of FG Sagittae and V838 Monocerotis. Yet these phenomena are perfectly understandable using the ES model. We eagerly await NASA's next 'mysterious discovery' to further strengthen the case for the Electric Star hypothesis.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests