Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

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

Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby bluesjr » Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:33 pm

Hi Folks,

I'm a newbie here, just joined after about a year of watching TB YouTube videos. Apologies if this is the wrong place to ask this question. I'm just starting to dive into the various forums.

I've been perplexed by the EU theory of galactic rotational effects as described in the Essential Guide to the EU - Chapter 10. It's not the theory that's perplexing as I find it easier to believe than dark matter. But what I'm trying to understand is why the same theory would not apply to solar systems? In chapter 10 the solar system current sheets are referenced as an example which could scale to galaxies, thereby creating motion similar to a Faraday motor. But the solar system planet movement is pure Kepler motion described by gravity alone, whereas the galaxy rotates as if it were a Faraday disk.

I'd appreciate any explanations, thoughts, or pointers to reference material that would help me understand the difference.
bluesjr
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:23 am

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby JP Michael » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:38 pm

I believe it's generally called the Heliospheric Current Sheet in astrophysics nomenclature. Looks like the same Faraday rotation as a galaxy to me!

The issue in our solar system is the relationship between the planets and the sun, and each planets' moons to their planet. The cause (mechanism) of the precise planetary orbits and distances is still being theorised.
User avatar
JP Michael
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby celeste » Wed Nov 20, 2019 7:58 pm

Two different forces, it appears.
http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-01.PDF
If you look at Don Scott’s model, he explains galactic rotation by an electric field that falls off much slower than inverse square. As you say, we need an inverse square law, and gravity, to explain solar system orbits.

It’s a mistake to think it is the same force, just changed in scale. Here, the way we can explain the apparent contradiction, is to say that gravity is a finite range force. Observations are pointing to this. Here though, you are opening up the can of worms of what gravity actually is.

If you are interested, check out “See the Pattern” on YouTube. There are a few short episodes on various gravity theories, including the dipole idea put forward by Wal Thornhill.
celeste
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby BeAChooser » Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:13 pm

Here's a theory explaining solar rotation observations.

As a cloud of rotating plasma (gas and dust, the mainstream would say) begins to coalesce into a star and planets (and that is the mainstream model), there is a problem that the mainstream’s gravity-only astrophysicists seem to simply ignore.   A slowly rotating cloud may tend to collapse under gravity but there is a point where the outward rotational force will counteract further collapse. Stars can’t form without doing something with this excess rotational energy (angular momentum).  It must be dissipated to enable the cloud to collapse further … but the mainstream model, as far as I can tell, has no believable way to do this. So it just ignores it (correct me if I'm wrong).

Then there is a second problem … that the star, as the most collapsed object, should be spinning the fastest (like a pirouetting dancer pulling in her arms). But if you observe our own solar system, the Sun spins slowly. Almost the entire angular momentum in the solar system (99%) is to be found in the orbiting planets. This appears to be typical of star systems. And again, the mainstream's approach to this difficulty is to … well … ignore it. To this day mainstream astrophysicists still don’t seem to have a good model for how star systems actually form. They just gloss over any problems they can’t explain (correct me if I'm wrong).

But plasma universe theorists do have a model that seems to solve these two obstacles. It’s a model based on ordinary physics (isn't that nice). It's a VERY detailed one that was proposed by Nobel Prize winner, Hannes Alfven, and his colleague Gustaf Arrhenius, back in the 70s ( https://books.google.com/books?id=pvrtCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA143&lpg=PA143&dq=alfven++solar+system+superprominences&source=bl&ots=ty1dPRq0NI&sig=r4VJghktj0RKekUxPQt2JVRtxxg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBWoVChMIrIOa8oC5yAIVDNNjCh2gjQec#v=onepage&q=alfven%20%20solar%20system%20superprominences&f=false ; see pages 138-143, in particular).  Now sadly, their model has been essentially ignored by mainstream *physicists* ever since, but isn’t that par for the course when dealing with the current crop of mainstream *physicists*/priests?  

Alfven and Arrhenius theorized that because the inner part of the charged protostellar plasma cloud would spin faster than the outer part, an electric current would be generated, "flowing out along the solar magnetic field lines, through the cloud and back to the sun at its equator". The interaction of the currents and magnetic fields would cause the inner cloud to slow down, and the outer cloud to speed up, transferring angular momentum outward, and allowing further collapse. They theorized that force free plasma filaments, they called them “superprominences”, could transfer the angular momentum from the sun to the plasma from which the planets formed ... and because the filaments pinch the plasmas together in the process, they would also help speed up planet condensation. Here’s a graphic of this process:

Image

They noted that there would be what they termed “jet streams” forming from the matter in the system along the equatorial axis (in the disk) where atoms in the plasma state would coexist with neutral grains of matter. They said these jet streams would be of decisive importance as an intermediate stage in the accretion of planets and satellites from grains. Inside the jet streams, the grains would accrete to larger bodies and eventually to planets and satellites.
BeAChooser
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby bluesjr » Thu Nov 21, 2019 11:31 am

Thank you all for the excellent answers. Great stuff to dive into.

Looking at the measured galactic angular velocities in Don Scott's paper it does seem to indicate that rotation close to the center of the galaxy is similar to Kepler motion. Then, as Celeste mentioned, it appears that the gravitational equation breaks down with distance. Moving to a constant angular velocity (disk rotation) after that breakpoint.

So the two (or more) forces at play can coexist and we just haven't found the answer yet to why gravity dominates at 'close' distances while electromagnetics (with an observed effect similar to magnetohydrodynamics) dominate at large distances. Pretty cool and, in some ways, points back to the elusive unified field theory tying gravity and EM together.

Perhaps the Alfven - Arrhenius model has the answer. Thanks for that pointer BeAChooser. I'll be digging into it.

So much to learn in this fascinating subject! I've always had an interest in astro-physics, but in a way similar to an armchair quarterback. Just a casual but enthusiastic observer. But the EU theories have pulled me deeper into it. It just feels like a major breakthrough, a historical point of inflection that will set us off on better path where we don't see frequent headlines like "Scientists baffled by new data from ...". Some of that should be expected but it seems to be happening weekly in today's mainstream astronomy world.
bluesjr
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:23 am

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby JP Michael » Thu Nov 21, 2019 8:04 pm

I cannot recommend enough a personal copy of Anthony Peratt's Physics of the Plasma Universe (2015 2nd Edition). I guarantee it will be worth the price of investment for years to come.
User avatar
JP Michael
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby jacmac » Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:49 pm

Welcome bluesjr.
You might also check out Ben Davidson, if you have not already.
He is on you tube.
Check out his plasma cosmology video(there is a long or short version)
Anthony Peratt is featured.
He talks a bit about his work history, as well as plasma physics.
Jack
jacmac
 
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby bluesjr » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am

JP Michael wrote:I cannot recommend enough a personal copy of Anthony Peratt's Physics of the Plasma Universe (2015 2nd Edition). I guarantee it will be worth the price of investment for years to come.


Thanks JP. I will get this book. Had a little sticker shock when looking up the price, but its similar to many text book prices and it always feels good supporting those who have pioneered the path. Can't wait to dive deeper in this subject.
bluesjr
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:23 am

Re: Rotational Effects - Galactic vs. Solar

Unread postby bluesjr » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:38 am

jacmac wrote:Welcome bluesjr.
You might also check out Ben Davidson, if you have not already.
He is on you tube.
Check out his plasma cosmology video(there is a long or short version)
Anthony Peratt is featured.
He talks a bit about his work history, as well as plasma physics.
Jack


Thanks Jack. I am already a fan of Ben's work and watch his daily space weather reports regularly. I don't recall now if it was through Ben that I first learned of Thunderbolts or the other way around. But great stuff on both fronts.
bluesjr
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:23 am


Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests