Jul 17, 2019
Stars are born where regions of space accumulate dense electric charge.
Stars are concentrations of electricity that result from Birkeland currents and electric charge separation in space. Therefore, conventional models of stellar evolution reveal almost nothing about how stars are born and behave. Red giant stars, as previously written, are big because electrical stress in the circuits that feed them energy is low. Giant blue-white stars experience extreme electrical stress, so if there is a breakdown in their double-layer envelopes, they might explode.
Along with mistakes about stellar evolution, redshift theory continues to inhibit astrophysics. Years ago, the late astronomer Halton Arp proposed that redshift is a property of matter, just like mass, or temperature, and that said redshift is variable. Arp reported finding many objects that do not conform to galactic acceleration models, such as celestial objects with different redshifts connected by filaments of luminous matter.
Consensus redshift theory results in a Universe that is expanding. Since light is conventionally thought to shift toward the red when galaxies are receding, those galaxies are thought to be far away. The farther away they are the faster they appear to move, imparting greater redshifts. The only explanation from the mainstream is that the Universe is expanding.
According to a recent press release, “Astronomers have made a new measurement of how fast the universe is expanding, using an entirely different kind of star than previous endeavors.”
Relying on the misshapen theory of dark energy, astrophysicists believe that space, itself, is “stretching”. Although they point out that “…this new evidence suggests… that there is something fundamentally flawed in our current model of the universe.”
Indeed, to reify “space” into a physical form that can be modified—stretched, warped, or twisted—implies a serious misunderstanding. Space is not physical. Space is where physical objects exist. Space is defined as: “The unlimited or incalculably great three-dimensional realm or expanse in which all material objects are located and all events occur”. Space is a domain, not substance, since it is where substance exists. Therefore it has no existence, except as a method for defining the existence and position of things. To infer that space (and time) are a “fabric” is ludicrous.
If electricity is brought to bear, it becomes obvious that luminosity has nothing to do with distance. Supernovae, whose brightness characteristics are used to “measure” distance, are, in reality, shorts in the circuits that provide them with energy. As written above, stars are externally powered by Birkeland currents, so their lives and their deaths have nothing to do with nuclear cores or fusion, in general. Therefore, no physical processes like gravity, or undetectable forces like dark energy, can be used to define an expansion in the philosophical concept known as “space”.
As Electric Universe advocate, Wal Thornhill wrote:
“All of the ‘dark’ things in astronomy are artefacts of a crackpot cosmology. The ‘dark energy’ model of the universe demands that eventually all of the stars will disappear and there will be eternal darkness. In the words of Brian Schmidt, ‘The future for the universe appears very bleak.” He confirms my portrayal of big bang cosmology as ‘hope less.'”