Electric Universe

[OmegaWolf]

The Electric Universe (Plasma Cosmology) theory can explain the observed structure and behavior of the universe without recourse to theoretical dark matter/dark energy, which are by their very nature unobservable. In essence the existing theories do not account for the electromagnetic force in space, assuming a "gravitation only" environment. When the gravitation only model was observed there were serious anomalies. Instead of reexamining their underlying assumptions cosmologists "created" speculative dark matter/energy to explain the anomalous observations.

Here is a link with more detailed info:

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/introduction.htm

[CFTraveler]

I read of this theory some time ago and the website I saw had some beautiful illustrations of the electromagnetic pattern waves of the solar system, and it was beautiful. They were used to illustrate how emf described the orbits of the planets and other celestial bodies within our system. I just liked them because of their beauty. I wonder where the pictures went?

[OmegaWolf]

I read of this theory some time ago and the website I saw had some beautiful illustrations of the electromagnetic pattern waves of the solar system, and it was beautiful. They were used to illustrate how emf described the orbits of the planets and other celestial bodies within our system. I just liked them because of their beauty. I wonder where the pictures went?

It was when I was looking for images of "sprites" and "jets" that I came across the theory. One of the websites does a "picture of the day":

http://www.thunderbolts.info/

[Lordofthebunnies]

Yeah, I stumbled across this theory awhile back as well. Its pretty interesting. Here's some other sites and articles:

http://www.plasmacosmology.net/

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/ ... igbang.htm (http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/controversies/bigbang.htm)

http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/

I'm not sure whether its true or not, though truth be told, the idea of an eternal, evolving universe seems more reasonable to me than some of the creation ex nihilo ideas applied to the big bang.

[journyman161]

The theory is interesting but so far doesn't seem to cover the problem it had a few years back when proposed - what mecahnism transmits or contain the electro-magnetism. There would need to be something other than the normal EMF we can measure or else we would 'see' the effects of this field in our observations.

Also, the author of the site 'electric-cosmos' seems to have a rather simplistic idea of just what astronomy is about.
Because the stars are light years away, we cannot hope to be able to "go there" and perform experiments on them. Until relatively recently even the planets were out of our reach. Thus, cosmologists never get to complete the scientific method. We cannot "close the loop" in cosmologyThere is no need to 'go there' to check a lot of things about other stars; there they are, sitting up there in plain view - many things can be determined simply by looking at them in the right way. The loop can be closed on a lot of the hypotheses because we can evaluate with the evidence in front of us. The site seems to think you have to manipulate the stuff of stars to be able to check things - without realising the 'stuff of stars' is reaching us on an ongoing basis in the form of little quanta of light.

I've mentioned elsewhere about a guy called Edward Leedskalnin & his theories about gravity & magnetism & also about the actual results of the Michelson-Morley 'ether' tests - the EM Universe theory would fit rather nicely with both concepts I think.

[OmegaWolf]

The theory is interesting but so far doesn't seem to cover the problem it had a few years back when proposed - what mecahnism transmits or contain the electro-magnetism. There would need to be something other than the normal EMF we can measure or else we would 'see' the effects of this field in our observations.

From what I have read the mechanism for the transmission of the force is the same as it is terrestrially, the medium is interstellar plasma. According to the proponents of this theory the effects of this can be seen in (among other things) the filamentary structure of astronomical nebulae, galaxies etc.

[journyman161]

Oh I agree it is an interesting view on things & should be thought through in more detail than it has so far received. And I wasn't suggesting that the mechanism for EM on Ezarth is different - it is also unknown. This idea of little packets of mass or waves of energy is simply a possible way to look at things & has basic problems to solve - so I doubt we have the answer yet at all for how EM functions.

And the Ether that Michelson-Morley found would be a perfect candidate for the interstellar plasma you mention. It would also fit nicely with Leedskalnin's 'magnets' that are the basis for everything.

And of them all, Leedskalnin has the runs on the board - the man moved huge chunks of rock around by himself to show application of his ideas.

[journyman161]

Over time, the two big, false assumptions (above) have been adorned with elegant, abstract, mathematical "models" consisting of equations concerning: mass, energy, velocity of light, etc. The solutions of these equations have led to pronouncements that 99% of the universe must consist of "dark matter": stuff that humans cannot observe, and that a "Big Bang" occurred wherein all the matter in the Universe (presumably including the matter that we cannot see) was created out of nothing, in an instant, precisely 12 billion years ago
As an example, consider Newton's law of gravity. It seems to work correctly in describing the motions of falling bodies here on Earth. It precisely describes the requirements of placing satellites in orbit. It works in what we call the macroscopic range of human endeavor. But, when we get inside the nucleus of the atom, we find Newtonian mechanics to be hopelessly overpowered by what are called the strong and weak forces. Gravity doesn't seem to work in that very small "region of validity"He's trying too hard - dark matter & dark energy are labels for phenomena that might offer explanations for why the theory doesn't match observation. Nobody even knows if there is matter that we would ahve problems observing - but whatever it is, it is acting like extra matter would act.

Nobody says all the matter was created in an instant 12 billion years ago - the matter is thought to have come about later on, as the initial conditions changed, & again, it is only the general public who are sure there was a Big Bang. Cosmologists have a range of possibilities.

Newtons laws do NOT accurately describe even motion on Earth & certainly aren't accurate enough for satellites - on the other hand, Relativity does fit this bill - wihtout Relativity, your GPS wouldn't be worth spit.

When someone over-reaches like this guy is doing, I get suspicious - I begin to wonder, if his science is so poor in the more orthodox world of physics, how good is it going to be once he steps outside the bounds?

That doesn't mean he is wrong, just that with this stuff in his presentation he is going to have to work harder to convince me. A more reasoned approach showing a better understanding of the subject he is panning would provide less resistance to his subject matter.

[OmegaWolf]

When someone over-reaches like this guy is doing, I get suspicious - I begin to wonder, if his science is so poor in the more orthodox world of physics, how good is it going to be once he steps outside the bounds?

That doesn't mean he is wrong, just that with this stuff in his presentation he is going to have to work harder to convince me. A more reasoned approach showing a better understanding of the subject he is panning would provide less resistance to his subject matter.

His site is just one out of many.

From what I can determine (as a layman), plasma cosmologists have been able to successfully model the observed structure of interstellar phenomena in the lab. They have not had to resort to the creation of entirely new classes of unobserved matter and energy to support their theories regarding the apparent structure of the universe.

Really, which explanation is simpler: that matter at all scales is affected and shaped by EM fields or that there is a HUGE amount of matter around that we cannot see that is shaping the universe gravitationally? This is a rhetorical question but it goes to the principle of Occam's razor.

Omega

[CFTraveler]

Journeyman:
In the risk of sounding stupid, since I haven't looked at Leedskalkin's boards or site-does he have anything to do with the guy that built the Coral Castle in Florida? I think his name is similar.

[journyman161]

CFT: Yep, that's him - Leedskalnin (to me) has a fair amount of credibility in his theories because he has put them into practice ina way that kinda blows competitors out of the water. He knew something the rest of the world doesn't & he proved it by moving rather large chunks of stone around.

Omegawolf: Being able to model a structure isn't a final proof. Keep in mind most of the Standard theory has been confirmed in the lab. But just to spark thought, one possibility for extra mass & energy is the recent theory of a holographic universe. Maybe the mass & energy from the cosmos of which our holograph is a copy can still affect this plenum? It would certainly explain why we can't see it.

Imagine if Princess Leia in Starwars (Leia the Hologram) was able to conduct experiments within her holograph world? Would the presence of 'real' particles (mass) or electric or magnetic fields (energy) from our universe register on her holo-instruments? We know the the light particles of which the holo-Leia was composed would be affected, but would she detect only the effect & not the cause?

[OmegaWolf]

Being able to model a structure isn't a final proof.

That's true. But being able to model it without recourse to unobservable matter/dimensions/interactions does seem more scientific. Being able to model a structure also allows you to make predictions based on that model which can be confirmed or denied by future observations.


Keep in mind most of the Standard theory has been confirmed in the lab.

To my knowledge no labs have observed dark matter or energy. Their existence can only be inferred. If they didn't assume an electromagnetically neutral space environment and took into account the existing research into plasma cosmology it seems there would be no need for dark matter/dark energy. I don't think that plasma cosmology stands outside the standard model. It is just that specialist astrophysicists who are not familiar with its peculiarities have not incorporated it into their worldview.

[OmegaWolf]

But just to spark thought, one possibility for extra mass & energy is the recent theory of a holographic universe. Maybe the mass & energy from the cosmos of which our holograph is a copy can still affect this plenum? It would certainly explain why we can't see it.

Imagine if Princess Leia in Starwars (Leia the Hologram) was able to conduct experiments within her holograph world? Would the presence of 'real' particles (mass) or electric or magnetic fields (energy) from our universe register on her holo-instruments? We know the the light particles of which the holo-Leia was composed would be affected, but would she detect only the effect & not the cause?

That's a really cool theory and I love this sort of thing. How about the implications of "electric universe":


The consequences and possibilities in an Electric Universe are far-reaching. First we must acknowledge our profound ignorance! We know nothing of the origin of the universe. There was no Big Bang. The visible universe is static and much smaller than we thought. We have no idea of the age or extent of the universe. We don't know the ultimate source of the electrical energy or matter that forms the universe. Galaxies are shaped by electrical forces and form plasma focuses at their centers, which periodically eject quasars and jets of electrons. Quasars evolve into companion galaxies. Galaxies form families with identifiable "parents" and "children". Stars are electrical ?transformers? not thermonuclear devices. There are no neutron stars or Black Holes. We don't know the age of stars because the thermonuclear evolution theory does not apply to them. Supernovae are totally inadequate as a source of heavy elements. We do not know the age of the Earth because radioactive clocks can be upset by powerful electric discharges.

The powerful electric discharges that form a stellar photosphere create the heavy elements that appear in their spectra. Stars "give birth" electrically to companion stars and gas giant planets. Life is most likely to form inside the radiant plasma envelope of a brown dwarf star! Our Sun has gained new planets, including the Earth. That accounts for the ?fruit-salad? of their characteristics. It is not the most hospitable place for life since small changes in the distant Sun could freeze or sterilize the Earth. Planetary surfaces and atmospheres are deposited during their birth from a larger body and during electrical encounters with other planets. Planetary surfaces bear the electrical scars of such cosmic events. The speed of light is not a barrier. Real-time communication over galactic distances may be possible. Therefore time is universal and time travel is impossible. Anti-gravity is possible. Space has no extra dimensions in which to warp or where parallel universes may exist. There is no "zero-point" vacuum energy. The invisible energy source in space is electrical. Clean nuclear power is available from resonant catalytic nuclear systems. Higher energy is available from resonant catalytic chemical systems than in the usual chemical reactions. Biological enzymes are capable of utilizing resonant nuclear catalysis to transmute elements. Biological systems show evidence of communicating via resonant chemical systems, which may lend a physical explanation to the work of Rupert Sheldrake. DNA does not hold the key to life but is more like a blueprint for a set of components and tools in a factory. We may never be able to read the human genome and tell whether it represents a creature with two legs or six because the information that controls the assembly line is external to the DNA. There is more to life than chemistry.

We are not hopelessly isolated in time and space on a tiny rock, orbiting an insignificant star in an insignificant galaxy. We are hopefully connected with the power and intelligence of the universe.

The future in an Electric Universe looks very exciting indeed!


The above quote from http://www.holoscience.com/synopsis.php?page=12

[journyman161]

I've been doing some reading & so far I can't find much more than somebody telling me everything we know is wrong & therefore the electric universe is right. Nothing about why it is wrong or anything to actually explain what the electric universe actually is.

From what I've read of Halton Arp, he would be horrified at his name being used for this unless there is, somewhere, something more concrete than his observations that Quasars seem to cluster behind unusual galaxies.

Do you have any links to something a trifle more technical than the rather opinionated essay above?

EDIT: I have read almost all the holoscience.com synopsis & it contains no fact, just assertion & criticism of the Standard Model physics. It's been written by a conspiracy theory buff is my best guess. Various comments about how 'nobody' has thought of this or is trained for it are hallmarks of the crank. It makes them 'special' & 'superior' - real scientists speculate & theorise, they don't make statements of conjecture as if they are fact.


Most people are unaware that we have no understanding of how lightning is created in clouds. The simplest answer is that lightning is not generated there at all. Clouds merely form a convenient path to Earth for electricity originating in space. Without clouds it is possible to have a "bolt from the blue". That is happening on Venus (although the sky certainly isn't blue). Weather systems are driven primarily by external electrical influences.

Consequently the Sun has weather patterns. And the most distant planet, Neptune, has the most violent winds in the solar system though it receives very little energy from the Sun. Electric discharges from space cause Mars' huge dust devils and planet-wide dust storms. They are responsible for Jupiter's Great Red Spot and the "spokes" in Saturn's rings. It is why Venus has lightning in its smog-like clouds and its mountain-tops glow with St. Elmo's fire. It is why the Earth has lightning stretching into space in the form of "red sprites" and "blue jets", and why tethered satellites "blow a fuse".

However, nobody is trained to consider electrical energy input to weather systems.

The image on the right is NASA artist's view of lightning on Venus during the descent of one of the Pioneer probes. Venus has smog-like clouds that are not expected to generate lightning and yet the planet suffers intense lightning. This argues against the popular notion of what causes lightningIt is strange how he goes from 'nobody knows how lightning is formed...' to somehow we know Venus' clouds aren't expected to generate lightning.

Science doesn't deny there is potential difference between Earth & clouds - but the phenomena has been well studied & there are explanations. The writer doesn't seem to know that the lightning bolt actually strikes upwards as adjustment is made. Electric skies are nothing new - radiation & charged particles from space will strip electrons from nuclei - it is why we have the 'ionosphere'

If the holoscience writer is the best proponent of this theory it isn't looking good. If he's going to quote Halton Arp, he should at least make sure what Arp says agrees with what he is asserting with the electric universe theory.

I'll look further for something with a little more data & thought but I must admit, it's getting hard to maintain interest.

[Lordofthebunnies]

The Electric Universe theory and Plasma Cosmology are slightly different from one another, the EU is a more outlandish.

[OmegaWolf]

From what I've read of Halton Arp, he would be horrified at his name being used for this unless there is, somewhere, something more concrete than his observations that Quasars seem to cluster behind unusual galaxies.

From what I understand of Arp's work the central thesis is that high red-shift objects such as quasars in many cases appear to be connected to low red-shift objects. Since the theory that red-shifting is relative to an object's absolute motion in relation to the earth is a foundation of modern astrophysics, Arp's theory is a direct contradiction. In short, according to Arp, red-shift is relative to the age and energy level of an object and not its speed/distance from earth. The implication is that galaxies "give birth" to quasars which as they age become galaxies in their own right.

I think they cite his work more as a refutation of Big Bang than as a direct confirmation of the electrical theory. Although, I would assume that they theorize that the birth of quasars is also an electrical phenomenon.

[OmegaWolf]

Do you have any links to something a trifle more technical than the rather opinionated essay above?


Anthony Peratt's website is :

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/universe.html

Also the wikipedia entry on plasma cosmology is pretty good:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology

[OmegaWolf]

The Electric Universe theory and Plasma Cosmology are slightly different from one another, the EU is a more outlandish.

That's true and I have probably been guilty in this thread of confusing the two.

I believe the electric universe uses some of the implications of plasma cosmology to explain ancient myths etc. The Holoscience website is definitely on the EU side although the two are still closely related.

[OmegaWolf]

Here is a synopsis of the Electric Universe theory that highlights the differences with Plasma Cosmology:


Introduction

In the wake of recent discoveries, a new way of seeing the physical universe is emerging. The new vantage point emphasizes the role of electricity in space and shows the negligible contribution of gravity in cosmic events.

Images returned by high-powered telescopes and recent space probes have challenged astronomers’ long-standing assumptions about galaxies and their constituent stars, about the evolution of our solar system, and about the nature and history of Earth.

The new discoveries also suggest that our early ancestors may have witnessed awe inspiring electrical events in the heavens—the source of myths and symbols around the world.

Cosmology

Today, we are seeing things in space that were never imagined. We detect magnetic fields everywhere, even in the “empty” depths of intergalactic space. Magnetic fields cannot exist without causative electric currents.

The naked electric force is 39 orders of magnitude (a thousand billion billion billion billion times) stronger than gravity. The visible universe is constituted almost entirely of electrically active plasma.

In the twentieth century the pioneers of plasma science inspired a new school of investigation called plasma cosmology. Plasma cosmologists suggest that electricity is the primary force organizing spiral galaxies and the astonishing galactic clusters now seen in deep space.

Plasma cosmology has achieved surprising success in predicting major discoveries of the space age. This new perspective does not require purely theoretical inventions like the Big Bang, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars, or Black Holes.

Stars

The “Electric Universe” extends the findings of plasma cosmology to the formation and evolution of stars and their planetary satellites.

Proponents of the Electric Universe suggest that there are no isolated islands in the universe. All objects in space, from subatomic particles to galactic clusters, are connected by manifestations of the electric force acting in realtime.

Stars are formed at the intersections of galactic current filaments in dusty space plasma.

It is electricity that continues to energize the stars in a form of glow discharge, our Sun included. This external power source explains why the temperature of the Sun increases above the photosphere, to ♥♥♥♥♥♥l temperatures of 2 million degrees.

Powerful plasma feedback effects maintain a steady output of visible solar radiation while variations in power input show up in the familiar sunspot cycle. It is in the nature of a glow discharge that all stars possess a weak electric field beyond the ♥♥♥♥♥♥.

As charged particles of the solar wind move away from the Sun, they continue to be accelerated due to the Sun's electric field.

The size of a star and its color are determined electrically and may change suddenly. Novae and supernovae are the explosive response of stars to a power surge in their galactic circuit.

Comets

Comets are electrically charged bodies moving on elliptical orbits through the Sun's interplanetary electric field. A comet’s swift radial movement as it approaches the Sun, develops arcing on the nucleus. The arcs produce jets of dust and ions that form the coma and visible tails.

Many comets are solid rocks with dry surfaces. The sharply defined features of comet nuclei make clear that they are not “dirty snowballs” sublimating in the Sun. Due to the electric force, a comet can entrain a mass of hydrogen from the Sun greater than the mass of the comet's nucleus. The unexpected X-rays of a cometary discharge can reach 2 million degrees.

Cometary nuclei reveal deeply cratered and blackened surfaces due to electric arcing. Since comet nuclei are eroded electrically, they could not survive across eons of solar system history. Many comets were born in catastrophic events only a few thousand years ago.

Planetary Science

In the recent history of the solar system, its electrical environment changed. Under changing electrical conditions planetary orbits changed as well.

Close approaches of planets led to powerful electric arcing between planets and moons. All rocky bodies in the solar system show the massive scars of these kinds of electrical events.

Electric discharge scarring is occurring even now on Jupiter’s closest moon, Io, and on Saturn’s moon, Enceladus.

Electrical activity continues on Mars, driving "dust devils" the size of Mount Everest – created by the electrical differential between the surface of Mars and surrounding space.

All of the dominant surface features of Mars show the patterns of electric discharge, suggesting that in the past a vast quantity of material was excavated electrically from Mars.

It was an interplanetary arc that created the Martian Valles Marineris, the largest known scar on a solid planet. Much of the rocky material exploding from Mars became comets, asteroids, and meteorites. Some of the material arc machined from the Martian surface is still reaching the Earth today.


This is taken from:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/synopsis2.htm

[OmegaWolf]

An article of relevance to the Plasma Cosmology/Electric Universe theory of stellar formation. Note the acknowledgement that there is more at work in star formation than gravity alone.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/p ... 50301.html (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/proto_stars_050301.html)

[OmegaWolf]

Documentary on Electric Universe theory, "Thunderbolts of the Gods" is available at Google Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 1316220374 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4773590301316220374)

OW