Thunderbolts Forum v3.0

Watching this discussion and wondering how this idea jives with EU.

https://youtu.be/hM8Ms_Qk_XE?si=FINQYXn42S0--VNT

at 33:30 they start discussing the solar stuff and they get into the Corona's temperature. I've always thought EU says the Corona is hundreds (thousands?) of times more hot, but they are saying its a misread from the sensors misinterpreting a chemical reaction.

They start talking about Corona at 43:30 - "the astronomers are telling us that the Corona is at millions of degrees. It cannot be"

They're also saying the sun is obviously convection because the surface appears to be material roiling up and out - visible confirmation.

Any thoughts on this? Wondering what Don Scott would say about this stuff.

I've always thought EU says the Corona is hundreds (thousands?) of times more hot, but they are saying its a misread from the sensors misinterpreting a chemical reaction.

No, that does not make sense although it is a novel attempt to go for a non electrical explanation.

The Corona is so hot because of:

The chaos of Brownian motion produces the high temperature we see in the solar corona.
Of all the ideas offered up as being an explanation of the extreme temperature (more than 2 million Kelvin) measured in the lower corona of our Sun, the simplest is that electrically accelerated high velocity positive ions are colliding with relatively static ions and neutral atoms in that location.

The electrical properties of the Photosphere/Chromosphere/Lower corona region of the Sun’s visible boundary is dominated by a double layer (DL) of electrical charge.

see the chart in the TPOD linked below:
https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010 ... corona.htm

nick c wrote: ↑Tue May 13, 2025 12:04 am

I've always thought EU says the Corona is hundreds (thousands?) of times more hot, but they are saying its a misread from the sensors misinterpreting a chemical reaction.

No, that does not make sense although it is a novel attempt to go for a non electrical explanation.

The Corona is so hot because of:

The chaos of Brownian motion produces the high temperature we see in the solar corona.
Of all the ideas offered up as being an explanation of the extreme temperature (more than 2 million Kelvin) measured in the lower corona of our Sun, the simplest is that electrically accelerated high velocity positive ions are colliding with relatively static ions and neutral atoms in that location.

The electrical properties of the Photosphere/Chromosphere/Lower corona region of the Sun’s visible boundary is dominated by a double layer (DL) of electrical charge.

see the chart in the TPOD linked below:
https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010 ... corona.htm

Are you just responding to my summarized comment, or did you watch the part of the video where they break it down? I'm not confident my summary properly explains what they were saying. It sounded like they were saying that the tiny particles of iron in the Corona heat up from the electrons escaping, and the method of measurement of temperature only recognizes the temperature spectograph of 'just' those particles and not the actual averaged out temperature of the aggregate of space within the Corona, which is what they suggest they'll have to contend with if a satellite prob attempts to penetrate it to reach the much cooler sun surface.

Are you just responding to my summarized comment, or did you watch the part of the video where they break it down?

I was mostly responding to your comments. However, the video is almost 3 hours long and I did not have time for it all. I did go over some of it, and found it interesting.

With regard to the temperature of the corona it was somewhat unclear; it must be remembered that the measurements are made with spectrometers and are real. However, when your talking about plasmas and electric discharges temperature becomes somewhat meaningless or at least deceiving. For example a lightning bolt on Earth can be over 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

With regard to the rest of the video:
There are some big differences between what they discussed and the Electric Sun model (as in Scott or Thornhill's work).
A few examples: they did entertain that planets are formed by fissioning of a star or gas giant, but they rejected the idea that Saturn could have been captured. Also, it seems that they thought that the Earth and Venus were ejected from the Sun and settled in their present orbits. That of course, is completely at odds with the EU. I could not determine what they think is the power source of the Sun, it seemed from what I viewed that they were accepting of a nuclear fusion dynamo at the core, however I may have missed any contrary speculations. And they seemed to derive a stellar evolution reflected in the H-R diagram which is completely contrary to the Electric Universe.

I did like that they asserted that so called planetary discs around stars, are not solar systems in the early formation stage, but were rather expulsion discs. That was one of Wal Thornhill's main points.

Some points were very familiar to EU and others very different.