Electric Sun

[Lloyd]

MEGALIGHTNING TO THE SUN, WHERE?

Charles explained that there is no evidence of a solar circuit externally. There is no megalightning discharging from the heliopause to the Sun's surface.
How are batteries made? By separation of opposite charges. Imploding interstellar filaments compress opposite charge streams into plasma spheres of charge-separated double layers (i.e. stars). As these spheres slowly discharge they give off heat and light energy.

From: The Sun's Density Gradient
https://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/ ... php?t=5613

__CC replied on Apr 22, 2013:
_I'm saying that the proposed current would not radiate (or converge) spherically. Rather, by the magnetic pinch effect, it would be consolidated into a finite number of filaments, like in a plasma lamp. With a breakdown voltage of only 1 V/m in the interplanetary medium, such a current will easily step up to arc mode, and the electrons will quickly achieve relativistic velocities. The magnetic fields will be powerful, and the currents will be well confined. Scott is safe from the accusation that the currents haven't been detected, because only if a satellite got inside one of these filaments would any current at all be detected. But then he has an even bigger problem. If 10^26 watts were streaming in through a handful of pinched filaments, they would be visible, and their footpoints would be the brightest features on the surface of the Sun, like the footpoints on the inner sphere of a plasma lamp. I think Peratt said once that the Sun glows brightly, but the incoming circuits do not, just like the way a lightbulb glows, but the extension cord does not. But this just isn't correct. Maybe I'll send him a plasma lamp for Christmas this year, and ask him to explain why the discharge channels are visible, when by his reckoning only the inner sphere should light up, and consistently across its entire surface.

[jacmac]

CC:

Clearly, powerful forces are at work, to maintain the higher-than-expected density out to the edge, and then for the density to drop off suddenly to almost nothing. Obviously, the gravitational model cannot explain this, and calling the Sun a nuclear furnace doesn't help, because no heat source (nuclear or otherwise) creates containment in free space.

There is really only one possibility here, that this is (somehow) a manifestation of EM forces.

the Sun is obviously a bunch of plasma that is attracted to itself -- far more so than gravity can explain -- and there is a drop-off point, which defies the inverse square law of gravity. So what is the attractive force?

here is only one answer to that question -- the only force that can compete with the electric force in free space is magnetic pressure. So ho

Hence persistent charge separations are possible, even in the presence of near-perfect conductivity, if the charges are moving at relativistic speeds, and are therefore generating opposing magnetic fields.

To build a model out of these principles, we will start with the core of the Sun.

Mr. Chandler has created a complex model using a lot of knowledge beyond my ability, or interest, in taking issue with.
He establishes competing charges at high speeds then brings in magnetic fields to save the day.
He starts in the core and adds double layers coming out.

I look at what we see in the solar system and take a different approach.
I also see the condensation of plasma within the solar system.
I agree with the drift current of Dr. Scott.
I place in the center (or core) a big rock. Oops not to scientific....lets say a solid body with a reasonable high iron content.
Wal Thornhill says similar.
Plasma is said, by Scott, to isolate "electrically one section of itself from another " and also
"Plasmas have an almost magical ability to isolate themselves from foreign intruders." (Page 74, The Electric Sky)

The plasma condenses toward both the solid body of the sun and the high density of the plasma at the sun,
relative to the rest of the solar system.
The plasma establishes a double layer we see as the chromosphere which
contains the solar core (with a significant surface charge, I would guess) and the immediate inner plasma around the core.
The granules are the inner plasmas moving up, approaching the bottom of the double layer and being turned back by the double layer.
this trapped plasma is what generates our light and heat from the sun as it continually tries to escape, but is resisted by the chromosphere.

This is also different from the EU "discharge" model which we are familiar with.
I'm just putting enough here to show how completely different I see things than C Chandler.

[Lloyd]

Bias

[jacmac]

well, of course I am biased. ??
It's my own idea.

Am I misunderstanding you ?
It's mostly the EU model with more emphasis on the chromosphere.

[allynh]

Here is a great video that shows what Scott is talking about. The graphics help show what he is talking about.

Donald E. Scott: Dark Matter Debunked | Thunderbolts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWW_mtihc1Q

Everything is connected with Birkeland currents, at all levels, we just can't see them because they are in dark mode, but we can see where they connect because of the counter rotating material.

BTW, I'm still waiting for Scott's new book, The Interconnected Cosmos, to come out in ebook. Hint, hint.

[Lloyd]

Bias is not conducive to learning.
_I'm not biased and Charles isn't biased. He looked at every possibility to explain how the Sun can have the features that it does. He looked at the conventional model first and that didn't work because there should be way more neutrinos as well as gamma rays; & the nuclear furnace should produce waste products that block further access to the surrounding hydrogen; & seismic waves should not indicate that there are very dense layers inside the Sun; & the photosphere surface should not have a distinct boundary when it's way less dense than our air at sea level.
_I accepted the EU model for numerous years until I had discussion on the Electric Sun model with Charles, Brant Callahan & Michael Mozina. They persuaded me that the Sun is a cathode, not an anode, & that the energy is internal. It seems common sense to notice that there's way more energy coming out of the Sun than is going into it. How can you not see that? Where's the energy going into the Sun? If the Sun were externally powered, the energy going in would be way brighter than the surface of the Sun. You'd be able to see it more clearly than the Sun itself. It would show up on pictures of the Sun from satellites, no matter how far away they were.
_The Sun had to get its energy from somewhere & Charles showed that it got it from an interstellar filament implosion (similar to the EU model in that regard), which stored charge-separated double layers within the Sun as it formed. Filaments obviously contain enough matter throughout their great volume to condense into the relatively small volume of each star (& planet). Filament implosions result from charge separation due to gas cloud collisions and supernova shock waves hitting gas clouds. As imploding filament matter accelerates it increases charge separation &, when it reaches the center from all directions, the charge-separated electrical forces prevent the matter collisions from rebounding outward as an explosion. If the implosion is powerful enough, an exotic ring-star forms, e.g. a pulsar, like the Crab pulsar, whose ring-shape is visible in images, esp. x-ray. Quasars, blazars, white dwarfs etc are all exotics with huge magnetic fields due to opposite charges circulating in the rings in opposite directions at relativistic velocity. If the filament implosion is normal, a normal star like the Sun forms. The exotics die out much sooner than do the normal stars.
_Normal stars release their internal energy (& shrink) more slowly. When they reach the red dwarf stage, they tend to flare up more extremely, losing energy more rapidly, in nova outbursts. That's what happened to Saturn & Jupiter & probably the others. After a lot of such flaring, they lose enough mass to become gas giants, at which stage they are again more stable, I think.

[jacmac]

Bias: Oxford Language definition.

prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

Claiming I am biased and you and Mr. Chandler are not is not conducive to a good dialogue.
Lloyd:

The Sun had to get its energy from somewhere & Charles showed that it got it from an interstellar filament implosion (similar to the EU model in that regard), which stored charge-separated double layers within the Sun as it formed.

CC's filament implosion that condenses enough plasma energy to last for a very very very long time does not work for me.
It is not unlike the standard gravity accretion and atomic controlled explosion theory.
I seem to recall CC saying that the Z pinch of a plasma was not strong enough to "make" solid matter. (Sorry, can't find the reference now)
Yet, his filament implosion to create the loooooong lasting sun is just fine.
I'm more inclined to the connected Universe theory that Dr Scott presents in his new book, The Interconnected Cosmos.

Regarding the Anode vs cathode debate. I have tried several times in different ways to explain my thinking
about the inappropriate use of these terms. Whichever one the sun is , either one, by definition, requires the self described NODE
to connect to the correct voltage source, external to the circuit in discussion.
The solar heliopause, being the other NODE, completely surrounds the inner node at the sun. So,...???
At this point, I assume the terms are being used (by the debaters) as shorthand to describe which way the Ions or electrons are moving
while the actual meaning of the words gives many non believers a reason to say.... PSUEDO SCIENCE !!!!
Thus we get back to the Strawman that came up from Nick.

In conclusion today I would like to say again, no one has presented an explanation for the existence of the chromosphere.
Why is the solar plasma in three distinct parts, how do they relate, what are they for, what do they do ???
I have brought this to the attention of the forum and its readers.
There have been literally no return answers or questions.
My own initial response is: The plasma does this on its own, without and knowledge of mans LAWS OF PHYSICS or ELECTROMAGNETISM.
Hannes Alfven, while receiving the Nobel Prize

Again and again Alfvén reiterated the point: the underlying assumptions of cosmologists today
"are developed with the most sophisticated mathematical methods and it is only
the plasma itself which does not ‘understand’ how beautiful the theories are and absolutely refuses to obey them.”

I am suggesting the way forward in the realm of an Electric Universe
is to follow the plasma, follow its abilities to self organize.

[Lloyd]

You previously admitted you were biased. I explained why we aren't biased, i.e. because we've been open to numerous ideas and continue to be.

I'm interested in discussions when there seems to be potential for a payoff, i.e. something productive coming of it.

The anode/cathode issue doesn't seem important. Feel free to say why you think it is important, if that's what you think.

Saying that plasma has a mind of its own doesn't seem realistic. Charles' model seems to me to have a handle on plasma behavior. Charles' model discusses the chromosphere at several points, though it may not have answered every question you have about it. I don't remember what your question was about that.

Regarding filament implosions, z-pinches are due to electric & magnetic fields. Filament implosions involve both electrical and magnetic forces. Electrical forces attract opposite charges and repel like charges, but magnetic forces keep opposite charges separated while pulling like charges together (when in motion) until they reach the implosion center, where gravity takes over charge separation. I.e., the electrons are dislodged from closely packed atoms due to gravity and are squeezed out to a level that has room for them, making electric double layers. I don't know how big the interstellar filament sections are that implode, but it must be at least some light years, so it would take at least some years for the implosion, but I think Charles said it would take thousands of years at near light speed, i.e. about 85% of light speed. It's a huge volume of space in a gas cloud that gets condensed down to the size of a star or planet. So for stars to give off their stored energy for several thousand years seems entirely reasonable to me.

[jacmac]

Lloyd:

You previously admitted you were biased. I explained why we aren't biased, i.e. because we've been open to numerous ideas and continue to be.

You have me there Lloyd.
I used it in haste; in reaction to your use of the word.
I certainly favor my own idea.
However, I do take the term BIASED to mean UNFAIRLY prejudiced.
Don't you see that you insult me with that term.
It is an attack against my person, not on my ideas.
How can you know the extent of my openness to other ideas ?
I would rather you say Your idea is bad because....etc.
So, If we can please drop the BIASED word I will proceed:

If the EU community cannot agree on the anode cathode question it does not bode well for acceptance by others.
So, when I proposed the idea the sun was neither a cathode nor an anode, and why, I assumed it to be a possible productive step.
But no one seems to be open to it
Lloyd:

Saying that plasma has a mind of its own doesn't seem realistic.

it is a fact that the plasma has SELF ORGANIZED into the photosphere, chromosphere, corona.
That is what I think is realistic.
"Has a mind of it's own" are your words, not mine.
Lloyd:

the chromosphere ,,,,,I don't remember what your question was about that.

Why is it there, what does it do ??
Lloyd:

Regarding filament implosions, z-pinches are due to electric & magnetic fields. Filament implosions involve both electrical and magnetic forces.

That statement seems to be self contradictory and lends itself to my not accepting the whole idea that a collapsing plasma has made the plasma sun, and the internal nature of the plasma power.

That's all I have today.
Jack

[nick c]

Science is supposed to be unbiased, and perhaps it is in the long run, maybe not. But scientists are always biased. They are not supposed to be, in theory, but if they are human beings then they are biased. They can't help themselves...all humans are biased to some extent, it is unavoidable and without exception.

[Lloyd]

>_I won't belabor the issue of bias, since I reckon we all know bias is at least potentially unproductive. That leaves the issues of interstellar filaments and the chromosphere.
_I think Charles Chandler (CC) and EU agree that stars & planets form from interstellar filaments.
_In his Filaments paper at http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=15482 CC says:
"_The section on Accretion identified a force far stronger than gravity that is responsible for the collapse of dusty plasmas into stars, planets, & moons. Now we can examine the dynamics of this process.
_Recent research has shown that giant molecular clouds first resolve into linear filaments, and then the filaments collapse into stars.1,2,3 (See Figure 1.)
>_His references are these.
"1. Carlqvist, P. (1988): Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation. Astrophysics and Space Science, 144 (1-2): 73-84 ⇧
2. Verschuur, G. L. (1995): Interstellar Neutral Hydrogen Filaments at High Galactic Latitudes and the Bennett Pinch. Astrophysics and Space Science, 227 (1-2): 187-198 ⇧
3. Peretto, N. et al. (2012): The Pipe Nebula as seen with Herschel: Formation of filamentary structures by large-scale compression? arXiv, astro-ph.GA: 1203.3403 ⇧
>_EU says filaments are Birkeland currents.
_A definition of Birkeland currents online is: A set of currents that flow along geomagnetic field lines connecting the Earth's magnetosphere to the Earth's high-latitude ionosphere.
_CC continues as follows.
"_The Universe is actually full of filaments of various sizes and shapes.4,5
_Both gravity and hydrostatic pressure object to this form, leaving only EM as the driving force. Some EM theorists have generalized the concept of Birkeland currents to explain the prevalence of filaments, but without establishing the electromotive forces at play, and without demonstrating that the currents would require material filaments.
_An electric current actually prefers a vacuum,6 and would evacuate the material in a filament by ohmic heating. So electric currents neither prefer filaments, nor cause them.
>_CC has studied lightning, thunderstorms & tornadoes extensively. His paper on thunderstorms explains that lightning progresses in short steps, evacuating air for some meters to form a channel, then sending electrons through the vacuum, then evacuating more air in front to extend the channel and repeating in steps until reaching "ground". He continues as follows.
"_Rather, the filaments are created by gas cloud collisions. The friction will be relaxed if they resolve into jets that tunnel through the opposing clouds. As they do, they'll stretch the Debye sheaths into comas, as in Figure 2 [ http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=16257 ], establishing a linear body force. So hydrodynamic jets produce electrostatic filaments.
_Once formed, they'll snap together. In other words, it's like grabbing a balloon that wasn't ready to "collapse" and stretching it into an ellipsoid with a high aspect ratio, creating a force that wasn't there in the resting condition. If we let go, the balloon will implode toward the center in a bidirectional linear motion, rather than a radial one.
>So that's his explanation of filament formation and the beginning of collapse into stars. The EU model just has a z-pinch, doesn't it? It doesn't seem to take into account the electric fields, just the magnetic. The magnetic accounts for confining ions to a channel, but not for forming them into spheres, as far as I know.

You said: "it is a fact that the plasma has SELF ORGANIZED into the photosphere, chromosphere, corona.
>What do you mean by self-organized? Aren't they formed by electrical, magnetic and gravitational fields? If so, aren't they organized by those forces?
You said: why is the chromosphere there and what does it do?
>I think the photosphere is a negative layer of hydrogen 3% ionized. The chromosphere is neutral hydrogen along with protons. Electrons from the photosphere are attracted outward toward the positive heliosphere. Electron collisions with hydrogen atoms break some of them down into free protons & electrons. The electric field forces the electrons outward and the protons inward toward the negative photosphere. The electrons pick up speed as they accelerate outward, causing higher energy collisions. The higher temperature makes the top of the chromosphere reddish. In the corona the hydrogen atmosphere is less dense than the chromosphere, but the electrons continue accelerating outward causing higher energy collisions with extremely high temperatures.

[jacmac]

You said: "it is a fact that the plasma has SELF ORGANIZED into the photosphere, chromosphere, corona.
>What do you mean by self-organized? Aren't they formed by electrical, magnetic and gravitational fields? If so, aren't they organized by those forces?

The three parts P, C ,C. are all plasma, with quite different characteristics.
If the fields formed these distinct three plasmas ,that begs the question "Where did the fields come from ?
So, I think the plasma does it.
I use the term "self organize" in the same sense that plasma in space can and does form Double layers (DL).
Dr. Scott places a DL in the chromosphere. (page 48, The Interconnected Cosmos)
I take his idea one small step further and say: The chromosphere IS a DL.
You come close to that yourself:

>I think the photosphere is a negative layer of hydrogen 3% ionized. The chromosphere is neutral hydrogen along with protons.

"neutral hydrogen with protons" sounds like a positive charge layer to me.
So, Scott's DL or yours, why do these electric layers maintain their charges, not get all mixed up and disappear ?
Because plasma can form DL's. When people discuss plasma and the formation of DL's the term self organized is sometimes used.
CC uses DL's quite a lot, but not in the chromosphere.

When the universe is said to be 99.9% plasma
and it is plasma because it contains charged particles,
and the plasma can separate charges and make DL's,
and the separated charges then have at hand the electromagnetic force
(39 orders of magnitude stronger than gravity) available to do WORK,
then, I suggest ,we need to focus more on this phenomenon.

[Lloyd]

Yes, the layer above the photosphere is positive. It includes the chromosphere and the corona and I think the rest of the heliosphere or interplanetary medium (IPM). They form from the neutral hydrogen that has long been around the Sun due to gravitational attraction to it, as well as from electrons emitted from the negative photosphere, which collide with some of the hydrogen to form protons and more electrons. Some of the protons remain in the chromosphere and corona making them a positive layer of atmosphere and some are electrically pulled into the photosphere, while the electrons repel each other and accelerate outward.

It's the gravitational attraction of the Sun that holds the neutral hydrogen in the chromosphere and corona, while the negative photosphere expels electrons that positively ionize the chromosphere and corona. So the gravitational and electrical forces are what organize the chromosphere and all of the features of the Sun.

[jacmac]

Thanks Lloyd,
Looks like you are sticking with C Chandler and I'm sticking with Dr. Scott.
That's what a forum is; we all get to speak our minds.

[nick c]

I had to search my archives to find this NASA article which describes incoming galactic electrons discovered at or near the heliopause by Voyager:
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasas-voy ... ystem-edge

At the same time, Voyager has detected a 100-fold increase in the intensity of high-energy electrons from elsewhere in the galaxy diffusing into our solar system from outside, which is another indication of the approaching boundary.

So, all these electrons entering at the mind boggling large surface area of the heliopause enter the Solar System and drift to the anode surface of the Sun, where they are concentrated into an incredibly small surface area (compared to the surface of the heliopause} creating arc and glow mode electric discharges as well as nuclear fusion.