Which aspects of EU resonate most with you?

[sscoles]

Hi,

My name is Sarah Scoles, and I'm writing an article about Electric Universe Theory for Motherboard magazine. It's partly about the science behind the idea but also about the reasons people are attracted to it and the community surrounding it (like this forum). If you feel like answering any of these questions, either on this forum or by emailing me at sarah[dot]scoles[at]gmail[dot]com, I would really appreciate it!

Thanks!
Sarah
Science Writer
Berkeley, CA
www.sarahscoles.com

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

[BeAChooser]

Hi Sarah,

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

Back in the early 90s when I read a book titled the “The Big Bang Never Happened” by Eric Lerner.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

Lerner’s explanation of EU/PC made more sense than believing in gnomes. His use of plasmoids to explain phenomena such as jets, quasars and pulsars was quite appealing. So I began to do more research via the internet. It seemed more scientific than believing in the house of cards that modern astrophysics had built on singularities (which no one has actually proven exist), inflation (which no one has proven occurred), dark matter (which no one has ever proven exists) and dark energy (an even more gnomic gnome). I was particularly taken with the work by Anthony Peratt, who showed that one could reproduce the formation of galaxies and their rotation curves using just the known interaction of plasma and electromagnetic forces. It was the inability of gravity alone to explain rotation curves that led to the *invention* of the dark matter gnome worshiped by so many in the mainstream astrophysics community. So it occurred to me that when the mainstream repeats the meme that dark matter is the only explanation for the rotation curves, they are lying. And I hate liars.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

Friendships, no. My thoughts have benefited by adversarial discussions of mainstream beliefs versus the EU alternative on forums (like JREF). As well as the ability to do independent research via the internet rather than rely on mainstream publications that just repeat the memes. I just joined this forum which is more likely to result in “friendships”.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

I like that it’s been quite predictive, whereas mainstream Big Bang/Dark Matter/Black Hole explanations have been anything but predictive. Isn’t science supposed to be predictive? Hannes Alfven and Gustaf Arrhenius explained the formation of our solar system to my liking … whereas the mainstream’s explanation continues to leave many phenomena (like how momentum got distributed where it is) suspiciously vague or gnome filled. Alfven’s homopolar model of galaxies intuitively seems to fit most of the observations that I’ve seen via the internet better than the mainstream’s explanations (which invariably involve adding gnome on top of gnome). Years ago when I began discussing this subject with mainstream believers and I’d point out the plasma filaments and magnetic fields at the center of the Milky Way that seemed to fit Alfven’s model, they’d argue that they had nothing to do with anything and were not as ubiquitous as Alfven had predicted. They’d argue that there was no proof of currents being carried by those filaments. Now, Alfven’s predictions has been proven right. There are currents in space. There are plasma filaments visible everywhere, and everywhere we look they are being helically wound, likely by electric currents, just as predicted years ago. The mainstream has been unable to offer a convincing explanation for the helical winding of filaments like these:

http://cdn4.sci-news.com/images/enlarge ... Nebula.jpg

I just don’t buy the “gas” and “shock” explanation for the helical winding seen in the top right corner of that image, for instance. I could go on and on, but you should get the point. And I don’t believe in “frozen-in” magnetic fields … not when the father of MHD said there was no such thing. Physics that we can reproduce in labs on earth is far more appealing to me than a physics that is filled with magical gnomes that can’t be reproduced in labs. And physics that doesn’t ignore observations is far more appealing than physics that ignores any observation that it just can’t explain.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

EU seems more like the result of science. Modern astrophysics seems more of a religion now … or even a cult. There was a recent article (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/26/t ... l-warming/ ) titled “The ‘Cult’ of Climate Change (née Global Warming)”. It listed a bunch of characteristics that make AGWalarmism a religion.  Here they are, and why I think they can also be applied to modern astrophysics:
 
**********
 
“1) Climate alarmists pretend to possess indisputable truths about the past, present, and future. From minute details of the paleoclimate to the world state 200 years in the future, alarmists know everything."
 
Now I ask you, are Big Bang proponents any different?   Aren’t they claiming to possess indisputable truths about the past, present and future?  Down to the minutest detail?  Into the state of the universe billions of years past and future?
 
"2) The alarmist movement stubbornly refuses to debate its dogma, calling it “settled science” and viciously attacking its critics. The attacks are not limited to name calling but include prohibiting scientific research that contradicts this dogma."
 
Alternative believers have a great deal of trouble getting Big Bang proponents to debate.   Big Bang proponents call their beliefs “settled science” and they viciously attack it’s critics.   And the attacks include prohibiting scientific research that contradicts Big Bang.   I don’t know if they’ve made any death threats against the doubters … but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
 
"3) The alarmist movement has a formal doctrine-setting body — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The reports and summaries by this body are considered by the alarmists to be the main source of authority on all things related to climate, energy, the biological cycle, and consequentially, everything else. The cult followers (individuals, organizations, and even governments) regularly quote these unholy texts and use them to justify their decisions."
 
What is NASA if not that doctrine setting body?
 
"4) The alarmist movement has its own priest class: taxpayer-funded impostor “climate scientists” who have no independent (of the climate alarmism) scientific achievements.’ … snip … The alarmists sincerely believe that only members of the priest class are capable of understanding and seriously discussing “climate science.” … snip … It is worth noting that this priest class was appointed by politicians (mostly from developing countries) and is completely disconnected from the eminent scientists who founded climate change research at the peak of their scientific careers and produced the most results prior to 1985. All the eminent scientists who have publicly spoken on the topic since the early 1990s strongly opposed climate alarmism and were attacked or defamed by the alarmists."
 
That’s exactly the situation with regards to the Big Bang “traditional physics” community.   Astrophysicists are taxpayer funded.  They have no independent achievements.   Big Bang proponents believe only astrophysicists are capable of understanding what we see out there in the universe.   Electrical engineers and plasma scientists need not apply.  Even Nobel award winning ones. The astrophysicists the mainstream cites regarding plasma and magnetic fields are completely disconnected from the eminent scientists who founded those disciplines.   All those who speak out opposing the Big Bang gnomes have been attacked or defamed.
 
"5) The climate change cult appears to worship the computer models that its shamans built with their own hands — literally man-made idols. Needless to say, much of the content of IPCC’s texts comes from these computer models."
 
Ditto in Big Bang, Black Hole, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, etc cosmology.  Computer models are the only thing they have.  Observations haven't proven a thing nor corroborated their computer models.  
 
"6) The alarmists deny, ignore, or distort elementary scientific facts, some of which should be known even to kids"
 
Ditto with regards to Big Bang, Black Hole, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, etc cosmology.  How is constantly calling what’s out there "gas" and not "plasma" anything but denying, ignoring and distorting elementary scientific fact, which should be known to even kids?  Don't the school texts tell kids that what we actually see in the universe is 99.999% plasma?   Yes, they do.
 
"7) The alarmists appeal to medieval science errors."
 
Isn’t there something medieval about scientists insisting the universe had a beginning?   After all, the CHURCH, one of the biggest institutions to come out of the medieval period is a big supporter of the Big Bang theory because it too believes in a moment of creation rather than continuous creation and no end either way to the universe.  It’s even formally endorsed Big Bang, just like it now has AGW.
 
"8) The alarmists have created and spread climate mythology, sometimes intentionally modeled on archaic misbeliefs that many alarmists attributed to religion."
 
Aren’t all the gnomes of Big Bang cosmology (inflation, black holes, dark matter, dark energy, frozen magnetic fields, etc, etc, etc) essentially mythologies that have been created out of whole cloth much like demons and angels and rising sea levels?
 
"9) Like an established religion, the climate change cult has its own “start of the time”—usually 1880 (sometimes the 1880s), which is allegedly the beginning of instrumental temperature records."
 
Isn’t the start date for the Big Bang cult when instruments recorded objects whose interpreted motions and distances  seemed to suggest an origin back in the distant past ... some 13.8 billion years ago ... in a single point? Doesn’t the presumption of a single point depend on assumptions about red shift that now are accepted as gospel even though science suggests other possibilities?
 
"10) Climate change cult has its own eschatology—calamities, catastrophes, and the end of the world caused by global warming."
 
Big Bang cosmologists have some people fearing the creation of black holes in their super colliders.  What could be a worse catastrophe?  Others fear the creation of a new universe in those same machines.  And then inherent in the Big Bang Theory is the ultimate death of the universe … either the Big Crunch or the Big Freeze.  What could be more "eschatological"?
 
"11) The climate change cult calls its dogma science but fails to make any scientific (i.e., non-trivial and testable) statements. For example, “Climate change is real” is a trivial statement. The statements about temperatures in 2100 are not practically testable. When alarmists were making testable statements (such as the infamous 1988 James Hansen testimony before Congress and early IPCC reports), they were proven to be incorrect."
 
Now read this:  The Big Bang cult calls its dogma science but fails to make any scientific (i.e., non-trivial and testable) statements. For example, “Big Bang is real” is a trivial statement. The statements about string theory are not practically testable. When alarmists were making testable statements (such as claiming the existence of dark matter), they were proven to be incorrect.   See what I mean?  The Big Bang Cosmology has become just as much a religious cult as AGWalarmism.
 
"12) The climate change cult seeks and actually exerts control over governments.  To add to the above, the climate change cult has survived multiple exposures of its frauds—something that a normal fraud cannot survive. Nevertheless, many cults involve fraud, and even true believers are not against profiting from their position in their cult. The climate change cult has been elevated by the Obama administration into state religion. Both the White House and NASA appear to have converted to this cult."
 
Big Bang cosmologists certainly seek and exert control over governments.   How else have they gotten the governments of the world to shell out the BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars that have gone into costly instrument after costly instrument … all seeking to prove the existence of the countless gnomes that the astrophysicists have created out of whole cloth?
 
Certainly the multiple exposures of Big Bang frauds … like denying the plasma and filamentary nature of the universe … and failing to find proof of their many gnomes … hasn’t seemed to hurt Big Bang Cosmologists so far.   The money is still rolling in because Big Bang has become a “state religion” and it helps that the mainstream press is on board too … along with the White House and NASA.    And perhaps one reason Big Bang proponents refuse to engage plasma/electric universe proponents in honest debate now is their fear that the massive fraud might be exposed to the public and then the public would revolt against all three institutions in this state religion.
 
**********
 
Bottom line … I don’t want to belong to a cult.
 

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

In my 60s, on the west coast, and I’m an engineer and systems (not computers) analyst.

[comingfrom]

I hope you are putting EU theory in a positive light, Sarah.

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

That would have to be when I was conceived. But I know that isn't the answer you are looking for. I didn't start seeing everything as electric until around November 2014. That's when I came across the Thunderbolts Project.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

Mars. The Thunderbolts Project people had a simple, and very obviously correct, explanation for something I seeked an answer to for quite some time. I never could believe the mainstream explanations for craters and the other formations we see on the rocky planets.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

Not yet, but I have found the people on the Thunderbolts forum to be very open and friendly, and willing to patiently explain. I have been greatly stimulated by, and learned a lot from, them.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

By far, it was how that EU theory explained so much that was mystery to me before. And the boost that comes from knowing that, contrary to what we are told, much of physics can be explained and grasped by laymen.

And it is possible to circumvent the sleight of hand by the 'magicians' in the field, and come to have better understandings than even they have.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

The concepts of EU theory are straightforward, and observable, and don't contain unfathomable mysteries buried in complex layers of mathematics.

Also because EU theory doesn't rely on unproven and irrational constructions, such as black holes, while traditional modern physics needs many of them.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

58. Outback Australia. IT consultant.

Spread the word
~Paul

[D_Archer]

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

I was always fascinated by electricity, i wrote a paper on energy in preschool and about renewable energy etc. In my teens i discovered Nikolai Tesla and mostly just researched anything i could find about Tesla, through the magic of the WWW i discoverend the Thunderbolts.info website , the TPODS (read them all) and the forum before the year 2000 i think.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

First: To learn about plasma and how it is the domain of electric forces, this tied in to what i knew about Tesla.

Second:To have a means for catastrophism and thus planetary mishaps and how a system stabilizes, there must be repulsion between heavenly bodies, the result of which is EM effects

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

I am a hermit on the internet with occasianally some friendly interactions with a few members here, but being social is not a need of mine. I do want to go to an Electric Universe conference at least once.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

The approach, using direct observation, referring back to experiments, back to science history, basically learning from the past as a way to go forward. This includes the interdisciplinary nature of it all.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

Tesla said it best:
"Today´s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."

and
"I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view."

and
"Magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king..., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists."


I like to know reality, the real world and to what level the workings of nature can be understood by man.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

I am 33 years old i live in The Netherlands and i am a Natural Philosopher. Starsign: Sagittarius

Daniel is my real first name, Archer is a pseudonym, referencing my starsign and my warrior archetype.

Regards,
Daniel Archer

[jacmac]

Sarah,
I believe you have left out the most important question, and that is:

"WHAT IS THE BASIC IDEA which sets Electric Universe Ideas APART FROM "STANDARD" COSMOLOGY " ? You, Sarah, may be very versed in the general EU dialogue and quite capable of presenting an unbiased look at the Electric Universe, however, it does no harm to get input from active forum members here about what constitutes the Electric Universe.

My answer is:
The basic assumption about space,held by the standard majority, that gravity does all the work and there are no electric currents out there, is incorrect. The electromagnetic force of standard physics is alive and well in space and most of the "matter", in space, is electromagnetically active plasma.

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

About 5 years ago.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

The Thunderbolts site told me the sun was electric and my mind was sort of rebooted.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

I now have something different to talk about socially, the positive receptions are percolating slowly.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

There is no need for "fudge factors" to match the ideas to the observations. New revelations seem to fit right in. Our only DARK STUFF is low energy plasma not strong enough to glow.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

It seems to me to be the truth. As a younger man I never believed in the "BIG BANG." Now I know why.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

In Tucson, and @ 73, I am working on residential repair and remodeling projects.

Thanks for writing an article about the Electric Universe.
Perhaps, Sarah, you might share your answers to these questions as well?

Jack

[BeAChooser]

Perhaps, Sarah, you might share your answers to these questions as well?

Yes, I'd be interested in hearing that as well, Sarah, since your web page says you have a degree in Astrophysics. I’d also be interested in hearing what you were taught about EU, if anything, because I believe part of the problem is that modern universities are turning out students who have been indoctrinated rather than educated. Hate to say it.

[Roshi]

Always was interested in science documentaries, then by chance I saw the "Electric Comet" documentary, then "The Lightning Scarred Planet", and others. And it made sense:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

This planet, with all its appalling immensity, is to electric currents virtually no more than a small metal ball.

I was also interested in the "antedeluvian civilization" and the flood myths, the EU gives an explanation about what could have caused the flood.

Researching the properties of plasma that makes 99% of the Universe seems like a better idea than explaining everything using only 16th century concepts (gravity/inertia) and adding "mysterious unseen matter" to make it work.

[Morphix]

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?
Three years ago.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?
Long time awareness of problems in modern science along the lines of Kuhn.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?
Yes, particularly from attending 2014 EU conference in Albuquerque.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?
The long history of scientific inquiry into electrical aspects of the universe, phtsics, biology, etc.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?
Traditions are made to be broken, and increasingly so as they hold back or even punish rational inquiry.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?
59, Albuquerque, NM, large scale solar project manager.

[hollinsmichael]

Hi Sarah,
I first encountered the EU model while searching youtube for science documentaries. The first video I watched was the Symbols of an Alien Sky. It was the simplicity of theory and merging of the disciplines that drew me into it further. The more I watch and read the more I begin to think that this has merit. I do not say the EU model has all the answers, but it does present new viewpoints that deserve further exploration. It is exciting to be a part of this new discovery. I have not been involved long enough to have formed any social bonds.
I do not mind releasing my demographic information. I am a 40yo male Retired USAF Transportation Master sergeant.
I live in Alabama and am currently working towards a wildlife science degree with plans for future study in wildlife ecology and management.
On a side note I see that you have spent some time in my home state of West Virginia. Go Mountaineers!

[webolife]

Hey Sarah,
Thanks for your interest.
I am in my 60's, Earth Science major/Math minor, semi-retired Science and Math teacher (38 years), Seattle resident.
I am an amateur astronomer and rock hound, have been researching and teaching about catastrophic earth history for 42 years, and the physics/optics of light for about 35 years. I am also a unified field theory enthusiast with a penchant for questioning paradigms and presumptions of standard and alternative models, and driven by Occam's Razor.
Thus I became interested in EU about 10 years ago, due to their unifying electrical and laboratory-based plasma cosmologies. I find standard cosmologists and scientists of many disciplines to be hypocritical in their dismissal of alternate paradigms, while failing to recognize their own foundation is largely abstraction and imagination and, as I tend to see it, "faith based".
I am not an enthusiast of the Saturn theory and have many questions about some of the EU mythological interpretations, but admire their recognition of catastrophism as a working paradigm for earth and solar system history.
I respect that the contributors to EU/Thunderbolt project and forum come from a wide variety of backgrounds and perspectives, but that there is a welcoming atmosphere for discussion and debate, and for genuine peer review, rather than the peer "censorship" atmosphere that is found on some other forums. I find it a privilege to be one of those contributors. I consider some of the contributors with whom I've had long ongoing discussions to be my friends, even several with whom I am philosophically opposed, and have carried on some conversations off-forum with a number of other folks here.
I hope you find yourself welcomed here and that you will feel free to continue checking in with us about your writing project.

[Michael Mozina]

Hi,

My name is Sarah Scoles, and I'm writing an article about Electric Universe Theory for Motherboard magazine. It's partly about the science behind the idea but also about the reasons people are attracted to it and the community surrounding it (like this forum). If you feel like answering any of these questions, either on this forum or by emailing me at sarah[dot]scoles[at]gmail[dot]com, I would really appreciate it!

Thanks!
Sarah
Science Writer
Berkeley, CA
http://www.sarahscoles.com

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

I started reading about it sometime in the early part of 2005, starting with Birkeland's work, and the papers of Hannes Alfven. Peratt's work is actually better, but it's difficult to get hold of, and I didn't have access to it for a couple of years.

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

My interest in high energy solar physics events, and specifically coronal loop activity that ultimately led me to explore the idea of electric solar models and theories. That inevitably led me to the online EU/PC community.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

Yes, I've formed a few online friendships over the years within the EU/PC community, and I've even gotten papers published as a result of those connections, but I've probably made more mainstreamers angry than I originally intended.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

I'm most attracted to EU/PC theory as it applies to high energy solar atmospheric physics, but the appeal in terms of cosmology theory is simply the chocolate icing on the cake in terms of physics. EU/PC theory has the potential to explain everything that we observe in spacetime using pure empirical physical processes and ordinary circuit theory rather than relying upon what amounts to placeholder terms for pure human ignorance, and ideas and claims that Hannes Alfven called "pseudoscience".

It's hard (for me at least) to remain emotionally attached or scientifically attracted to a belief system that is 95 percent placeholder terms for ignorance. Almost anything that is more empirically based that a mere 5 percent is preferable to current cosmology theory IMO.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

Empirical physics has always and will always trump supernatural dogma over time, and what you're calling "modern physics" is 95 percent supernatural dogma and placeholder terms for ignorance. There has to be a real empirical explanation for the observations we see in space, and obviously what passes for "modern physics" cannot do so.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

I'm 56, living in Northern California, and I've been a self employed computer programmer by trade for the past 23 years.

[BeAChooser]

Perhaps these weren't the answers sscoles was looking for?

[comingfrom]

We should keep an eye out for the article.

http://motherboard.vice.com/en_au

[D_Archer]

The response is quite meager so far.

Regards,
Daniel

[Phorce]

Hi,

My name is Sarah Scoles, and I'm writing an article about Electric Universe Theory for Motherboard magazine. It's partly about the science behind the idea but also about the reasons people are attracted to it and the community surrounding it (like this forum). If you feel like answering any of these questions, either on this forum or by emailing me at sarah[dot]scoles[at]gmail[dot]com, I would really appreciate it!

Thanks!
Sarah
Science Writer
Berkeley, CA
http://www.sarahscoles.com

1. When did you first encounter Electric Universe Theory?

2010

2. What did you initially find interesting about it that made you want to check it out?

Alternative theories. "Multiple conflicting hypothesis". Gravity based and electric based cosmology can both be right.

3. Have you formed friendships because of EU or benefited from forum discussions (or anything else kind of social)?

Interesting forum discussions and reading. Actually helped me socialise face to face more because EU opened my eyes to reality.

4. As you learned more about the Electric Universe, what aspects of it appealed to you most?

Other relevant cosmology science with merit and evidence (even if not necessarily proven) that I had not heard referenced in the media.

5. Why do you prefer EU to traditional modern physics?

I prefer neither. I regard all relevant scientific outlooks as simply further exploration of the world around us.

6. If you don't mind giving this out, what are your age, location, and occupation/vocation?

45. Great Britain. DJ/Musician/Artist. Software/web design.