The Total Charge of the Sun Under the EU Model

[Keith]

What is the total electrical charge of the Sun under the Electric Universe model?

The generally accepted value for the mass of the sun is 1.9891 × 10^30 kg

If we take the main elements that the sun is composed of, namely hydrogen and helium, with some metals, and work out the total number of protons and electrons within the total mass for its component parts, one can arrive at the following charge values:

Total Positive charge from all the protons = 1.6406 × 10^38 Coulombs
Total Negative charge from all the Electrons = 1.6406 × 10^38 Coulombs

Combined charge = 3.2812 × 10^38 Coulombs

These values are obtained from a basic orthodox analysis. According to what standard astrophysics says, the total positive charge is practically identical to the total negative charge, with only slight fluctuations. In fact, I saw some people saying that the difference might only go as high as approximately 77 Coulombs in total.

What I would like to know is, what does the Electric universe model have to say about the total charge of the Sun in terms of Coulombs? Does it agree with these figures? Does it have a figure, and if so how is it derived?

Or perhaps, does it think that these figures are ultimately irrelevant or just plain wrong, because the Sun has to have a full on positive or negative charge?

[nick c]

Hi Keith,

Wal Thornhill has responded to critics by pointing out when examining the Electric Sun model, low pressure gas discharge physics is the correct approach not simple electrostatics.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005 ... hballs.htm

Here is a short overview of the subject, in this link to Thornhill's "Synopsis #6 - the Electric Star" from his Holoscience website:
https://www.holoscience.com/wp/synopsis ... ric-stars/

You may be interested in perusing some of the many articles on that site.


All though there were several pioneer plasma researchers who preceded him, Ralph Juergens took the idea of an electrically powered Sun to its logical conclusion. This link has 4 seminal articles by Juergens:

https://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/

[Brigit]

Keith says,

• "If we take the main elements that the sun is composed of, namely hydrogen and helium, with some metals, and work out the total number of protons and electrons within the total mass for its component parts, one can arrive at the following charge values:
  
  Total Positive charge from all the protons = 1.6406 × 10^38 Coulombs
  Total Negative charge from all the Electrons = 1.6406 × 10^38 Coulombs"

Hello Keith. You have in your Coulomb calculations for the Sun a neutral body. In some sense this is correct, because in the Electric Sun model, beneath its glowing photosphere of H and He plasma, is a solid body, made up of solid materials. That is, it is made up of atoms with protons and electrons in roughly equal numbers.

It is also true that

• 'Throughout almost the entire volume of the heliosphere the solar plasma is quasi-neutral. That is, sampling will reveal equal numbers of positive ions and electrons in the solar “wind.” '

Nevertheless, in the Electric Sun model, while the plasma within the Sun's cellular plasma region is quasi-neutral, the protons are largely being accelerated away from the Sun. This acceleration of the positively charged ions, known as the solar wind, has the hydrogen ions both leaving the sun and continuing to accelerate into the outer solar system.

Likewise, within the Sun's cellular plasma region, there is an electron drift sunward.

This is why the sun is considered to be an arcing and glowing plasma discharge, in the Electric Sun model. Conventional theory has difficulty explaining why the solar wind accelerates away from the sun.

We can look at the reason why the positive and negative ions and electrons are moving in a current that is centered on the Sun. And as nickc pointed out, this is an electrodynamic model, not an electrostatic model. --After all, in a neon light, you will notice that the entire circuit, the electrodes, and the wires, etc. is made up of neutral matter. But the circuit allows the electrons to flow opposite the positive ions (in general); it ionizes the gas in the low pressure gas tube, and when it becomes a plasma, it gives light.

1/2

[nick c]

I always wondered about the concept of quasi neutrality of any specific plasma process, for example the solar wind. or the Sun in its entirety.
I don't doubt that quasi neutrality makes sense, but how do we verify that? or rather has it been verified? or is it an assumption?
Has someone actually taken a census of the positive and negative particles and atoms in the plasma in question?
I have no position on this, but rather I am just curious.

[Maol]

Helios and Ulysses spacecraft

The Solar Wind is the source of H2 + O = H2O which maintains the H2O content of our planet.

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/ulysses/

https://www2.mps.mpg.de/en/projekte/helios/

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... 702/2/1604

https://wind.nasa.gov/docs/SMS_Gloeckler_SSR1995.pdf

https://pds.nasa.gov/data/uly-j-hiscale ... icinst.htm

[Keith]

I have read the suggested articles that you have all noted, and I get a sense of where they are headed. However, I am after something very specific.

When I opened this thread I gave a value for the total charge of the Sun in terms of coulombs. This was just my opening. I was expecting it to be challenged, and in fact I was counting on it.

Under the Electric Universe model, has anyone got an alternative total charge value for the Sun in terms of coulombs?

If the sun is charged from outside - as some of the articles suggest - then is there a charge to the sun which ‘saturates it’ so to speak? Has this been calculated and expressed in coulombs?

I have heard some people also mention the heliopause, suggesting that this is charged? If so, has the charge being calculated in terms of coulombs?

The reason I ask is because I'm wanting to put a value for coulombs into an equation to test some theories. That is why I need a value. If I don't have a value, then I have nothing.

[Brigit]

2/2

Within the volume of the Sun's heliosphere there is an electric field, and this electric field's direction is what accelerates the positive ions away from the Sun. Dr Don Scott -- "How do we accelerate a charged particle? Put it in an electric field!" As the positively charged particles travel from the Sun's photosphere beyond the inner solar system, the velocity of these ions continually increases (until it plateaus in the outer Solar System). This is the solar wind. The electrons experience this electric field in the opposite direction and there is an electron drift towards the Sun.

The Sun is in the center of a local circuit in this model, so rather than an electrostatically charged "pith ball" we need to look at the voltage potential.

In the Electric Sun model, almost the entire voltage difference is at the heliosphere, or the Sun's cellular plasma sheath.

• The Voltage Difference at the Heliosphere
  https://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-conte ... charge.jpg
  "Diagram showing the important electrical features of a glow discharge aligned with the heliosphere and with the Sun as the anode." "The heliosphere boundary is a double layer with charge concentrations shown."

• "It is easy to see that we have within the solar plasma sheath a weak but constant electric field that accelerates solar protons away from the Sun in the form of the solar wind and causes electrons to drift toward the Sun (and causes negatively charged spacecraft, like Pioneer 10, to accelerate anomalously backwards toward the Sun). The overall result of the charge drifts in opposite directions is the current that lights the Sun." from "Voyager at the Edge of -- What?" by Wal Thornhill

• The Sun's Plasma Sheath/Heliosphere is a Double Layer. This Is a Plasma Double Layer.
  https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/wp-con ... d-copy.jpg
  Plasma sheaths form between plasmas of different compositions, densities, temperatures and ionization

Again, "stars reside within plasma sheaths perhaps as great as a light-day in extent. They are the borders between the electrical influence of stars" and the interstellar plasma.

• Voyager Diagram
  https://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-conte ... iagram.jpg

Thank you for letting me finish the thought! It's a circuit. The anode and cathode do not get neutralized by particles of opposite charge in a circuit. P.

[Brigit]

nickc says, "I don't doubt that quasi neutrality makes sense, but how do we verify that? or rather has it been verified? or is it an assumption?
Has someone actually taken a census of the positive and negative particles and atoms in the plasma in question?
I have no position on this, but rather I am just curious."

I can give you the references I have for the quasi-neutrality of cosmic plasmas. But I think you are exactly right, nothing can really take the place of actually observing the plasma in a given region. When Voyager 1 and 2 left the Sun's heliosphere, the interstellar plasma had more electrons per cubic meter than the Sun's plasma, and so we have good agreement with the Plasma Cosmology model, where these double layers form because of the difference between plasmas.

Anyway, here are three refs:

ref 1: Anthony L. Peratt, " Evolution of the Plasma Universe: I. Double Radio Galaxies, Quasars, and Extragalactic Jets"

In this early paper (1986) he says,

• "In magnetized nonhomogeneous astrophysical plasma,
  a number of mechanisms are present that can generate
  field-aligned electric fields. These include anomolous re-
  sistivity caused by wave-particle interactions, collision-
  less thermoelectric effect due to energy-dependent wave
  particle interactions, magnetic mirror effects involving
  trapped particles and magnetic-field gradients, and elec-
  tric double layers due to localized charge separation.
  While all of the above mechanisms have been studied in
  the laboratory and simulated by computer, it is the last
  mechanism that has been found to be remarkably prolific
  in producing appreciable potential drops in neutral plasma."

ref 2: a video lecture on youtube by JD Callen on Plasma Sheaths. He says that

• "plasma is quasi-neutral except at the boundaries where:
  particle flux = nV ~ nU t
  The electrons flow out too fast and this leads to a positive potential."

The Langmuir sheath is formed at that boundary between two types of plasma.

ref 3: Wal Thornhill, Jul 1, 2008, "Twinkle, Twinkle Electric Star"

• 'The father of plasma cosmology, Hannes Alfvén, expressed the opinion that double layers should be classed as “a new type of celestial object.” They are responsible for the radio noise from ‘radio’ galaxies. In interstellar space they produce the cosmic microwave radiation, mistakenly interpreted as the afterglow from the mythical big bang. Alfvén tentatively suggested that X-ray and gamma ray bursts may be due to exploding double layers.
  
  An important feature of plasma sheaths, or double layers, is that the electric field on either side of the thin double layer is very weak and the plasma there is ‘quasi neutral.’ '

[jacmac]

Sorry Keith I don't know enough physics to answer your coulomb question.
However, I ask (Brigit, nick c, or anyone) if you see the double layer at the heliopause, do you not recognize the double layer at the sun;
we call it the chromosphere ? This is said by Dr. Scott in his writings, but not taken up by Wal Thornhill ???
As I have pointed out in other posts, The cell structure of the solar system is left at the heliopause, but the language used inside
the solar system is that of a CIRCUIT. The circuit model needs an anode, cathode, and a discharge.
I remember well the year(s) long discussions about the sun being an anode or cathode on this forum.

We humans have advanced in electricity via CIRCUITS, and the language of circuits.
Thus we get into trouble when quasi-neutrality happens.
With quasi-neutrality evident in our solar area the mainstream asks where are our circuits ?
Where are the big currents and voltage differences to POWER the sun ??
In my opinion this has helped the mainstream suppress the EU solar and universe models.
Circuits are basically linear. The sun is 3 dimensional and VERY COMPLICATED.

Look at magnetic images of our sun and it's close environment.
The photospheric magnetic surface is very mixed up with positive and negative fields,
and the sun(total) magnetic field is also very mixed as the overall polarity changes
from MOSTLY positive to MOSTLY negative every 11 years ON AVERAGE.
If the magnetism is all mixed up then so are all the circuits and all the electric current flows.
Therefore the single word DISCHARGE is insufficient to explain all that is happening.

We need to use a cell model for the sun and get away from linear circuit terms.
We can then explore issues like quasi-neutrality; where is it ,what does it mean etc.
We can then make progress overall IMHO.

Jack

[Brigit]

Let's make sure the original post is addressed. Keith says, "The reason I ask is because I'm wanting to put a value for coulombs into an equation to test some theories. That is why I need a value. If I don't have a value, then I have nothing."

The Electric Sun model has been tested in two experiments. One is in Birkeland's Terrella, and the other is with the SAFIRE experiment.

Birkeland was able to switch the polarity of the sphere in the center of his vacuum chamber. Some of his results give what looks like solar activity, and some of it replicates electrical activity around the planets, like the aurorae.

The SAFIRE experiment set up a small spherical anode inside of a huge vacuum chamber. Here are some of the Sun's characteristics that SAFIRE was testing for:

acceleration of charged particles away from the Sun
heating of the upper atmosphere or Corona (5,000 degrees at the photosphere rises to millions of degrees as you go farther from the sun)
super rotation of the equatorial atmosphere

[jacmac]

Brigit said: Let's make sure the original post is addressed.
Quite right Brigit, my bad.
I have made a new thread: Is the Chromosphere a double layer ?

[Brigit]

Hey no worries jacmac. I didn't mean to sound so shirty -- I am sorry about that!

But I like the idea for another topic (:

[galaxy12]

This thread has a hypothesis about the sun's charge:

https://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/php ... y12#p10261

The sun's poles flip every 11 years:



If the rotating inertia of the sun is positively charged, the magnetic field lines should exit the sun's north geographic pole and enter at the south geographic pole. We can use the right hand rule and point our thumb in the direction of the sun's rotation and curl our fingers around the equator. Our fingers will curl in the direction of the magnetic field lines if the sun were positively charged. This represents the current configuration of the magnetic field until year 2028, suggesting the sun is currently positively charged.



In 2028, the sun's magnetic poles should flip with the magnetic field lines exiting the sun's south geographic pole. This configuration of magnetic field lines leaving the south geographic pole would suggest that the sun's rotating inertia would be negatively charged.
The sun accelerates either toward or away from the solar system's barycenter every 11 years due to planetary alignments. This acceleration causes the photosphere, chromosphere and corona to heat up, emitting electrons and leaving these regions with a greater net positive charge. In the hypothetical model, the photosphere acts as an insulator in a capacitor with negative charges building up beneath the photosphere and positive charges building up outside the photosphere. Electrons are accelerated across the insulating photosphere, chromosphere and corona, causing radiation emission.



In summary, the sun's rotating mass may be positively charged when the sun is accelerating or decelerating toward or away from the solar system's barycenter (increased DL/DT). A positively charged sun would suggest a solar maximum while a negatively charged sun would suggest a solar minimum.

[Robertus Maximus]

What is the total electrical charge of the Sun under the Electric Universe model?

Keith, when we consider the Electric Sun model, the answer to your question is not as simple as may first appear.

If we consider the structure of the Sun then conventional astrophysics considers the Sun to be a hydrogen/helium plasma, we are told this is so by observations of the solar atmosphere.

Applying this line of reasoning to the Earth, then an external observer may deduce a hydrogen/helium plasma composition for the Earth, after all, hydrogen and helium are the main components of Earth’s exosphere.

The actual composition of the body of the Sun is unknown but if we venture that the Sun formed in Birkeland Current pinch that had been subject to Marklund convection then we can assume a very different solar interior, from the one we are told exists, one composed of heavy elements.

The solar core may be ‘diffuse’, Ralph Juergens did not rule out the possibility that the Sun may be isodense; keep in mind that the Juno spacecraft did not find a compact Jovian core rather a ‘diffuse’ one. If Jupiter is a ‘failed star’ how can nuclear fusion arise in a diffuse core?

As a starting point, any calculations based on the ‘standard’ solar plasma model would, therefore, be wrong.

A better understanding may be gleaned from the writings of Earl Milton.

In my JMST Electric Sun proposal the ‘M’ is in recognition of the work done by Earl Milton in this field. Obviously (?) the remaining letters are ‘J’ Juergens, ‘S’ Scott and ‘T’ Thornhill.

https://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... =3&t=16299

Quoting from Milton:

(Kronos, Vol. 5 No. 1, Fall 1979):

“The corona behaves like an expanding gas, too hot to be bound by gravity to the Sun. Protons leave the Sun continually at velocities in excess of one hundred kilometres per second. The corona loses 67,000 tonnes of gas per second. This gas constitutes the solar wind, which flows outward through the Solar System to be dissipated in interstellar space.

“The observation that the solar wind accelerates after leaving the Sun has befuddled astrophysicists because evaporated protons ought to be retarded by the Sun's gravity as they move outward. At the Earth's distance from the Sun (150 Gm), the solar-wind density is 5 protons per cubic centimetre. This represents an electrical current of 4 x 10-7 amperes per square metre. If the solar wind flows only in the disc of the planetary system, Juergens has calculated the current of the Sun to be of the order of 1015 amperes! This current represents a loss of protons from the Sun, or a gain of negative charge by the Sun; the electric current, or the rate at which the Sun gains charge, is diminished if not all the flowing protons escape the Sun.

“Because an electrical current seems to be flowing away from the Sun, Juergens has proposed that the Sun is powered from the outside. He connects the Sun to the galaxy via an electric discharge with a driving potential of the order of 10 Gigavolts. In the discharge, solar-wind protons move from the Sun to the galaxy, and small numbers of very energetic cosmic electrons flow from the galaxy to the Sun. These electrons release their energy at the photosphere and power the Sun.

“As I visualise the electric Sun, the cosmic space within which the Solar System is embedded possesses a net negative charge per unit relative to the Sun's charge per unit. As the Sun "burns", it acquires increasing negative charge. The Sun's radiative lifetime will extend until the solar charge density equals that of its galactic surroundings.”

(SIS Review, Vol. 5 No. 1, 1980/81):

“Juergens concluded that electrical forces not only played a role in the cosmos but that they were responsible solely for a large number of the cosmic events. Juergens, unlike (Charles) Bruce, did not see the electrification of stellar atmospheres as the result of the mechanical separation of electrons and ions. (Remember that Bruce had proposed such a mechanism when he compared cosmic discharges with terrestrial atmospheres.) Juergens did not follow Bruce's model, where neutral astronomical bodies were surrounded by electrified atmospheres. Instead, he saw the astronomical body as an inherently charged object which was immersed in a universe which could be described as an electrified fluid. His use of a universal electrified fluid rather than empty space between the astronomical bodies is similar to Einstein's notion of space-time curvature used to explain the action of gravity. Einstein pictured the Universe as a sort of sheet of elastic which was distorted by the masses imbedded in it. Where there was a mass there was much strain. Where there was no mass, there was little strain. A cavity surrounded each mass on the otherwise nearly flat fabric of space-time. Similarly, Juergens conceived of space as an electrified fabric where the quantity of charge in the space varies from place to place over large distances. The astronomical objects themselves are swimming in that electrified fabric or fluid, and they also had a charge, which may or may not be compatible with the environment in which they reside.

“Juergens utilised the rules of electricity (which most physicists agree upon) as the operative factor in cosmic processes. So, electric currents flow between a body and the space around it if the two are incompatible electrically. Over a long time, any object comes to be at peace with its environment, then the electric current stops. But until peace is achieved the body is surrounded by an electrical sheath, a region through which an electric current flows, and in which energy is released. The sheath need not produce any optical effect; but under certain conditions, such as around the Sun and about comets, the sheath is luminous.

“(Fundamental to this theory is the notion that the Sun itself is an electrical device which is out of tune with the cosmic environment in which it rests.)

“One can view space electrically, and I will use only negative electricity in my description because I believe the Universe has a net negative charge. Space is a place where each cube of the space "contains" a certain number of negative charges. The bodies in the space and the atoms between the bodies also can have an excess negative charge over what theoretically we consider to be electrically neutral. The charge density need not be the same at all places, so you can have a situation where at one part of the Galaxy there are fewer negatives than elsewhere. Now, if such a situation occurs one would expect that negative charges would flow into the deficient region(s). Eventually equilibrium would be reached, thereafter there would be the same number of negatives everywhere.

“Juergens, though he never wrote of why it would happen, viewed the phenomenon of a star as the result of a suddenly produced electric cavity in the fabric of space. The electric flow into the cavity, which is the Sun (and which includes on its rim the entire planetary system), supplies the energy which the star (here the Sun) radiates. The solar wind, a flow of electron-deficient atoms (ions) away from the Sun, carries the electric current. That a negatively charged body like the Sun can increase its charge by emitting a proton wind is reasonable only if the space surrounding the Sun is more negatively charged than is the Sun itself! Viewed as a body within an electrically neutral Universe, a like-behaving Sun would seem to be positively charged. (No electron wind flows from the Sun: solar wind electrons move randomly.) That the Universe cannot be neutral seems likely.

“Juergens' electrical star begins as an electrical cavity, infinitesimally small and infinitely deep. The cavity sends out a signal to the cosmos asking for charge to fill the deficiency. Since there are not many atoms and fewer available electrons between the stars, the electrical flow is restricted. The Universe, though containing an excess of negative charge, is stingy when it comes to redistribution of its charges. … so also the electrified space must be maintained in a mildly conductive state if any electric redistribution is to be possible. This makes the presence of interstellar matter necessary to the functioning of the Universe. However, … too conductive a space invites annihilation. So … the cosmos limits the transaction between its parts. Thus, some electrons flow into the solar cavity. They flow to the Sun's surface, making it hot and liberating the observed solar output. The process which liberates energy seems not to satisfy the solar demand for electrons, so the Sun generates its own electrical flow toward distant space, the solar wind. By launching electron-deficient atoms into space the Sun gains electrons in a most efficient way. As the solar wind protons pass into the relatively more electron-rich space away from the Sun, the protons (which constitute most of the solar wind) can recombine with now-available electrons, completing indirectly the transfer of one electron from space on to the body of the Sun. So Juergens' notion of an electrical Sun describes a phenomenon that starts out as a very deep cavity which fills up as galactic electrons flow into and solar ions flow out of a widening and ever more shallow electrical cavity. … and you end up with an electrical cavity that would be very, very broad and not very electrically attractive after a time.

“In Juergens' picture the Sun's properties come from without; they arise from where the Sun is located, from the space with which it is interacting. The Sun is visible where the galactic current impinges upon it.”

If we keep the above in mind then in what sense is knowing the solar charge important? Perhaps a value could be used to silence critics? (Highly unlikely) But this value would only be a snapshot of an ever-increasing negative charge.

In my writings I have tried to emphasise that the Sun is highly negatively charged, it acts as an anode due to the greater negative charge of its environment.

To my mind and somewhat adapting Juergens’ proposal, we can see that the very same Birkeland Currents that form stars then power the ‘flaw’ in the ‘electrified fluid’ as Milton calls it. In my earlier material I noted that this is a Sisyphean task and the Sun is not going to ‘run-out’ of fuel any time soon naturally, of course, the governing factor is the Sun’s environment.

I guess what I’m trying to say - in a nutshell - is that we need to know the charge of both the Sun and its environment!

[jacmac]

The topic: What is "The Total Charge of the Sun Under the EU Model" ?
There is no single answer.
There are at least three (or 4) distinct parts to the "Sun".
As nick c has pointed out the chromosphere is a double layer according to Dr. Scott.
Therefore, with charge separation in a double layer, there are different charge values (voltages) in different places.
What is the total charge of the photosphere ?
What is the total charge of the inner layer within the chromosphere double layer ?
What is the charge of the outer layer within the chromosphere double layer ?
What is the charge of the lower corona ?
Repeat at the heliosphere double layer ....
The sun is a complicated construction of plasmas, not one thing.