Re: Sunward Electrons
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2021 1:41 am
For discussion of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology. The ideas and opinions expressed on this forum do not necessarily reflect those of T-Bolts Group Inc or The Thunderbolts Project™
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=404
Would you care to comment on the Idea, as proposed by Dr Scott,-For the sake of brevity I have called the double layer the heliosheath,
There's that too!"Would you care to comment on the Idea, as proposed by Dr Scott,
that the chromosphere is (or contains) a double layer ?"
Yes, the above may be true in general, but what about our sun ?But the worry about double layers is that they are plasma instabilities, they tend to not hold still, ... and also, they explode.
That still leaves the question of what maintains the current in the first place.
Not necessarily.
Continuous ionization maintains the current sheet as in:
Part of the problem is that no matter which name one chooses to use one is only pointing toward one of several functions that occur in the interactions of an ionizing sheath within the immediate external environment. Were it a simple case of the solar system and its heliosphere drifting to the vacuum of space there would be no heliosphere. The space within which the sun moves is filled with other species of particles; a lot of which belongs to several other larger 'structures'. It is not beneficial to treat the observations as though a case of the heliosphere being a "bubble" moving in a void because simultaneously those clouds have their own collective motions in different directions as portrayed above. Consider also:
These questions: Is it a double layer, is it a current sheet, is it a membrane, is it a boundary, a porous sheath...? The answer is YES to all of them owing to the fact that several different functions are inherent properties of this dynamic multifarious (multi-modal) 'structure' known as the "Heliophere". Taking into consideration the dynamics of the immediate external environment, these interacting clouds that are everywhere present, even the details in this next image are incomplete:The first encounter between the sun and the surrounding interstellar cloud appears to have occurred 2000 to 8000 years ago. The sun and cloud space motions are nearly perpendicular, an indication that the sun is skimming the cloud surface. The electron density derived for the surrounding cloud from the carbon component of the anomalous cosmic ray population in the solar system and from the interstellar ratio of Mg(+) to Mg degrees toward Sirius support an equilibrium model for cloud ionization (an electron density of 0.22 to 0.44 per cubic centimeter). The upwind magnetic field direction is nearly parallel to the cloud surface. The relative sun-cloud motion indicates that the solar system has a bow shock. - Morphology and ionization of the interstellar cloud surrounding the solar system - P C Frisch 02 Sep 1994 (paywalled)
Yes, "all of them", often seems appropriate to these complicated solar questions.The answer is YES to all of them owing to the fact that several different functions are inherent properties of this dynamic multifarious (multi-modal) 'structure' known as the "Heliophere"
I might paraphrase as: How does the galaxy light up the sun ? What is the electric circuit ?"What is this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Describe this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Identify the taps of this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Describe how these taps are utilized in this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"How much voltage, wattage, current, power, etc, are these taps on this interstellar or galactic transformer good for?"
Welcome to the forum by the way, and congrats on your first post here.
I also think it's *helpful* and useful to have "skeptics" that ask the difficult questions. It tends to keep things scientifically honest. I agree with you by the way that an honest "I don't know" is *lot* better than just "making stuff up" and inventing metaphysical concepts out of whole cloth.One word:
Higgsy
Why Higgsy?
FYI, I wouldn't "assume" that either Thornhill or Scott is suggesting that *all* of the sun's radiant energy necessarily comes from *external* electrons. In fact they both talk about fusion occurring near the surface which changes with the sunspot cycles, meaning at least *some* of the sun's energy (according to their model) is generated by "local" fusion processes in and around the sun. The current would supposedly drive that fusion process, but local fusion would generates energy *in/on the sun*, so at least some of the sun's radiant energy is coming from the sun itself.Higgsy wrote: "Thank you. But this is not an answer to my question: "Do you or Wal have any idea or model for how that might work within the Sun and where we can find the currents in the solar system necessary to power the Sun electrically to the tune of 10^26W?" In other words, I am looking for evidence of these sunward electrons, a measure of their flux, a mechanism for converting them into radiation at the Sun, a means for preventing negative charge accumulation in the Sun, and calculations that show that all of this adds up to 10^26W."
Well, technically EU/PC theory is loosely (generally) differentiated from "standard" cosmology by the application of *circuit* theory to events in space, and the assumption that massive plasma threads carry current over vast distances in space, regardless of what solar model one prefers. There are *at least* three significantly unique solar models to choose from in EU/PC theory, including Birkeland's cathode solar model, Juergen's anode solar model and Alfven's "homopolar generator" model which is basically the "standard" solar model with "circuits" connecting it to the rest of the universe.That above has been sticking with me for some time now, and more so the past few days.
Why?
I have a nice big massive text book behind me literally titled: "Electrical Circuit Theory"
It's not defined in whole by its discussion of a capacitor....ideal and real. Its not defined in whole by its discussion of a anode...ideal and real. Its not defined in whole by its discussion of a cathode...ideal and real. Actually, it's everything...right down to an "unknown's" applicability to a circuit based upon it's observable and measureable behavior.
In my brain, when I see and hear "The Electric Universe", what my brain processes is:
"Interstellar Electrical Circuit Theory"
When you say "transformer", do you mean "generator"? I'd say that galaxies are essentially "transforming" whatever current flow patterns are entiering into the galactic circuits into an interwoven sent of circuits within the galaxy itself.However, getting back directly to Higgsy quote, my brain is also saying the following when processing HIggsy's questions :
"What is this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
https://www.plasma-universe.com/unipolar-inductor/"Describe this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a 'tap' in this instance. The universe would be 'wired' together by large scale Birkeland currents which transport energy into and out of various galaxies."Identify the taps of this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Describe how these taps are utilized in this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
Hmmm. Well, Birkeland estimated the voltage difference between the "surface" of the sun's electrode surface and "space" was about 600 million volts, whereas Alfven estimated the working currents in the solar atmosphere to operate at around a billion volts. Wattage and current estimates would depend on how much energy one assumes is generated locally, in local fusion processes in and around the sun compared to the amount of energy flowing into the sun."How much voltage, wattage, current, power, etc, are these taps on this interstellar or galactic transformer good for?"
There actually is: the law of electric charge conservation. One can't simply create positive charges (without negative counterparts) ex nihilo.Michael Mozina wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 4:41 am Technically there's nothing to preclude an anode solar model from being entirely internally powered by fusion
Correct me if I am misunderstanding this Michael Mozina, but these remarks appear to be the result of a complete lack of familiarity with the Plasma Universe, implying instead that he expects a solid state power station to supply electric current to each and every galaxy."'I have a nice big massive text book behind me literally titled: "Electrical Circuit Theory"
However, getting back directly to Higgsy quote, my brain is also saying the following when processing HIggsy's questions :
"What is this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Describe this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
"Identify the taps of this interstellar or galactic transformer?"
When you can't tell whether it's science or science fiction . . . get away . . . seriously . . . run if you can!'"
In deference to this post originator I ask of Brigit:That is, cosmic plasma in filamentary and cellular structures at a stellar, galactic, and intergalactic scale are taken to be true, and the rest of the discussion is based on it. I have requested a couple of times on this forum on Sunward Electrons that if any one would like to dispute the premise, please start a different topic.
And to Michael Mozina, who champions an electric circuit sun, as does Brigit, but in reverse polarity.No circuit, no double layers.