Lloyd wrote: Questions for Brant Brant, do you agree with Charles that space is a conductor, or with Juergens et al that it's an insulator? And, since you say that galactic or nebular filaments do have magnetic pinches, do you think the pinches would form stars? I seem to remember you saying before that you agree with EU that stars form by magnetic pinches of Birkeland currents. Is my memory right or wrong? If you agree with that manner of star formation, have you analyzed how exactly the conflicting magnetic and electric fields would allow matter to condense?
I believe that space is a conductor.. I think you can measure the permeability of space...| If space was not a conductor would you get plasma filaments? Logically I would say no..
Reconnections or pinches form in the filaments that extend from the sun to the earth. The question is what time scale would you need to form a star in a pinch if indeed thats what happens... Because we have not looked for new matter or cores at the reconnection sites in lab experiments or at the magnetosphere... I have not seen any mention of this in the CLUSTER lit either...
Wiki.. "A flux transfer event (FTE) occurs when a magnetic portal opens in the Earth's magnetosphere through which high-energy particles flow from the Sun. This connection, while previously thought to be permanent, has been found to be brief and very dynamic. The European Space Agency's four Cluster spacecraft and NASA's five THEMIS probes have flown through and surrounded these FTEs, measuring their dimensions and identifying the particles that are transferred between the magnetic fields."
Is a supernova a pinch?? I have come to believe that it may be supernovae that form stars, or the iron cores that are the beginning of a star... Or the other possibility is that stars form at the center of galaxies (in the NOT blackhole(aether pinch)) and move outward. See "Mysterious Iron Factories in the Early Universe"..
I dont know why yet but I have a hard time agreeing with the collapse model... I will have to go back and do some more reading.
Some Plasmoid Sun Model Tenets Does everyone agree that these are some of the main tenets of Bob's Plasmoid Sun Model? 1. The Sun is powered by a galactic Birkeland current. 2. Current enters the Sun during the quiet phase and exits during the active phase of the solar cycle. 3. The Sun was formed as a ball-lightning-like plasmoid breaking out of a bend in the Birkeland current. 4. During the quiet phase the Sun stores charge and during the active phase it leaks charge outward.
I think of the sun as a realtime converter.. Not a storage unit...
Maunder Minimum Quiet Sun If I stated that correctly, I don't think that would be able to explain the Maunder Minimum, the century or more of time during which the Sun showed no sunspots and yet continued to radiate almost the same amount of energy as before and after, but slightly less, so that the climate was somewhat colder during that time.
Generally if a device is a dissipation element in a circuit I would expect to see some kind of real change.. Thats why I think the sun is just a converter and the planets are the dissipation elements in the system...
PersianPaladin
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
Some further clarifications, or perhaps I'm repeating myself again?
"Marklund (1979) found a stationary state when the inward convections of ions and electrons toward the axis of a filament was matched by recombination and outward diffusion of the neutralized plasma. The equilibrium density of the ionized component normally has a maximum at the axis. However, because of the radiated loss of energy, the filament cools and a temperature gradient is associated with the plasma. Because of this hollow cylinders, or modifications of hollow cylinders of matter, will form about the flux tubes" - Anthony L. Perratt, http://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloads/AdvancesII.pdf
Perratt also discusses magnetic field profiles of galaxies on p.69 which is relevant regarding field-aligned electric currents.
This is from Marklund's paper:-
"This E ✕ B /B² convection is a very efficient process for collecting material to form the filament. This is true, even if the process is slowed by collisions, because as long as the particles are charged they are forced to drift inwards. If the plasma is partially ionised—as in part of the solar atmosphere and many other cosmical plasmas—a temperature gradient will cause the radial transport to be different for elements with different ionisation potentials. The most abundant elements of a cosmical plasma can be divided into groups of roughly equal ionisation potentials as follows: element, (approximate ionisation potential): He, (24eV); H, O, N, (13eV); C, S, (11eV); Fe, Si, Mg, (8eV)." - Goran Marklund, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v2 ... 370b0.html
Fälthammar on p.11 of a 1993 paper that he published, references Goran Marklund's convection that is one particular method of plasma chemical separation. He also mentions the Critical Ionization Velocity process regarding velocity-based interactions of neutral gases and plasmas.
Albeit, if you remember my earlier posts - you'll find that Perratt clarified that even the "neutral" hydrogen gas on the periphery of galaxies can be regarded as a bulk "plasma" - despite it's low ionization percentage. Wallace Thornhill suggests that Charles and others actually properly familiarize themselves with the literature (and that includes myself) before we feel we can offer criticisms of it.
It's simply a measurement of accelerated electrons respective to the magnetic field. The morphologies of the plasmoids are not "made-up". However, magnetic reconnection is suggested as a means to explain the formation - along with many other things in mainstream astronomy. Alfven et al have stated that the "pinch" mechanism can account for these plasmoid formations instead, and thus this deserves serious consideration.
Frankly, the hypothesis that stars are plasmoids also needs to be seriously considered rather than just dismissed. The pinch-process can produce such morphologies in both the lab and in space, and thus we need to seriously reconsider our understanding of stars in general. Are they formed from dense condensation of matter - or are they simply unstable and much less dense electronproton vorticies that have fusion reactions on their surfaces. And yes, I agree with Wal Thornhill about reconsidering the methodology in which stellar masses and densities are calculated in light of their electric nature.
orrery
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
This is a popular graphical representation of the heliospheric current sheet.
Some individuals seem to be going off of Tokamak models of "spinning blobs" and "scrap-off layer" (SOL)
justcurious
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
The fact that the best EU critiques come from within the EU community itself speaks volumes, you guys are an inspiration to myself and I'm sure many young budding future scientists. The only critiques from outside the EU are usually a waste of time (emotional rants, logical fallacies, etc). Bob Johnson is doing a superb job, well done and thank you!
CharlesChandler
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
upriver wrote: And this is what is observed in the local filaments that CLUSTER studies.
I put a link to this at: QDL / Articles / Science / Theoretical / Hot Topics
Sounds like there is a wealth of information in this, concerning the behaviors of plasma in general, and solar fluxes in particular. I just have no idea what this means!
Lloyd wrote: Sounds like that's what our work group ought to focus on: analyzing Bob Johnson's Plasmoid Sun model and seeing what are the main requirements for it and what evidence goes for and against those requirements.
You mean... wait... you mean... posts that are ON-topic??? Is that even a word?
As with other topics, I'll try to collect the arguments for & against, and put them into a reference document.
Bob didn't provide detailed diagrams of his proposal, but here's the gist of it...
Bob Johnson wrote: A stable plasmoid is like a Birkeland Current wrapped round into a closed loop. This force-free toroidal form occurs at all scales. It's been suggested that the electron itself is a toroid. Wal Thornhill has argued that there is a plasmoid at the heart of the Milky Way. So it seems possible that a plasmoid may be contained inside the Sun and other stars as well.
I totally agree that CFDLs provide the defining characteristics of the Sun (surface & interior). But a plasmoid strong enough to maintain distinct CFDLs in the Sun, whose leakage could light up the whole solar system, would require an extremely powerful, well organized magnetic field. The Sun's actual magnetic field is poorly organized, and averages 1 Gauss, which is merely twice the strength of the Earth's magnetic field. Of course, it's reasonable to assume that the solar toroidal plasmoid would be far from the surface. But for its effects to be felt so significantly at the surface, its magnetic field would be detectable as well. So I think that the B-field is out of range. This brick wall is what sent me looking for another way of sustaining CFDLs, which is how I arrived at compressive ionization as the organizing principle. This accomplishes the same feat, but without any magnetic fields.
upriver wrote: If space was not a conductor would you get plasma filaments? Logically I would say no.
Agreed. And if free space was not a conductor, neon lights wouldn't work. Lightning wouldn't happen. The aurora wouldn't happen. Any time an electron has to pass through free space in order to get from one atom to the next, because it is outside of the electron cloud of a crystal lattice, it is passing through... free space. If free space was a perfect insulator, discharges in plasma wouldn't happen.
And don't tell me that free space is a perfect insulator, but that sometimes an electron can tunnel through it. If that's the case, it isn't exactly a perfect insulator anymore. Especially if this happens at a regular rate. That would be like saying that a seive can form a perfect seal, except for the holes in it, which sometimes allow stuff through. Which times? All times! That's not a perfect seal. It's a seive!
The only thing preventing an electron from zipping freely through empty space in response to an electric field is the binding energy of the last atom it called home. Once outside of an electron cloud, the only resistance comes from collisions with atoms.
Anyway, I created a reference document for this topic.
In time, I'll try to pull together more of the statements. Future discussions should begin by reading the reference document. Otherwise, we'll just keep going back and forth on this. If there are open questions, we'll leave them open. But we should never have to re-hash anything.
PersianPaladin wrote: Some further clarifications, or perhaps I'm repeating myself again?
I'm still hoping that you'll find an answer to the question about the fate of high-speed filaments. If a star forms, how long will it last with that kind of velocity relative to its environment?
PersianPaladin wrote: Regarding that paper about plasmoids detected in solar flares [...] It's simply a measurement of accelerated electrons respective to the magnetic field.
Actually, it's just an MHD assumption that it's the magnetic field that is accelerating the electrons. It's also possible that the earlier CME ejected a large mass of positive ions, creating a charge imbalance, and drawing a waft of electrons out of the Sun. They would then tend to follow the magnetic field lines, which would bring them to the top of the arcade. Once the electrons can no longer make outward progress as field-aligned currents, they slow down, and then break out of the magnetic field, thereafter proceeding directly on out into space. This explains the high charge density in the helmet streamers, as noted in the image. Magnetic connection does not. Time varying magnetic fields can induce currents, but they're not going to create extraordinary charge densities, and certainly not at the mid-point of the field lines. Rather, the magnetic fields should accelerate the charges all of the way down the lines, and if anything, we'd expect higher charge densities at the footpoints of the field lines.
Also, it "might be" just an assumption that it is a magnetic field that is keeping these clusters of electrons organized, thus justifying the term "plasmoid". I don't have access to that journal, so you'll have to tell me: did they explicitly discount the possibility of a clump of positive ions at the centers of these clusters, which would make them electrostatic plasma cells, instead of electrodynamic plasmoids? If so, can you supply the quote?
PersianPaladin wrote: Frankly, the hypothesis that stars are plasmoids also needs to be seriously considered rather than just dismissed.
I have considered it. I ran into some tough, unanswered questions about condensing matter from ions (despite the Coulomb force resisting it), and about the stability of condensed matter formed at relativistic speeds (necessary for such a powerful z-pinch). "Serious consideration" means actually thinking about it, not just casually taking somebody else's word for it.
BTW, can you ask Wal about the size of the "blueberries" that they created in the Vemasat Labs?
PersianPaladin wrote: The pinch-process can produce such morphologies in both the lab and in space, and thus we need to seriously reconsider our understanding of stars in general. Are they formed from dense condensation of matter - or are they simply unstable and much less dense electronproton vorticies that have fusion reactions on their surfaces. And yes, I agree with Wal Thornhill about reconsidering the methodology in which stellar masses and densities are calculated in light of their electric nature.
As noted above, the first question concerning the stellar plasmoid model is, "Where are the magnetic fields?" In some cases, they're definitely there (e.g., white dwarfs, magnetars), with fields exceeding millions of Gauss. I consider those to be toroidal plasmoids (a.k.a., natural tokamaks). But that doesn't speak to the nature of the Sun. In the end, I found it necessary to maintain two stellar models, one for the "exotic" stars (black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, etc.) and the other for "normal" stars (such as our Sun), due to the distinct differences in properties.
Lloyd
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
BJ's Transcript Statements I laid out Bob's transcript statements here: http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=4741-4760-5079-9484-9454-9840-69~. I divided them into statements that seem significant for Charles' theory, statements of Bob's theory and statements significant for Thornhill's theory. I also removed a lot of statements that don't seem very relevant for us, such as some of those that go against Juergens. - I also copied Brant's previous post about galactic filaments and put it after the post on BJ's transcript statements. - I hope to edit the statements some more in order to state more precisely what are the basic tenets of Bob's theory.
Size of Blueberries Charles, you asked about the sizes of Ransom's blueberries in the lab. I don't know, but I just emailed him to ask, in case PP doesn't get time to ask Wal soon. The TPOD said his blueberries had similar features to the Martian ones, so it seems likely that they're of similar size, i.e. BB-sized. Last Sep I looked up the sizes of blueberries etc in order to compare them to chondrules in meteors, which do seem to be very similar. Below is a copy of what I posted at that time.
Re: Opportunity Unearths New Conundrum On Mars' Surface Postby Lloyd » Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:09 pm Martian Blueberries http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap040405.html [4/5/2004] The average diameter of a blueberry is only about 4 millimeters.
New Martian Spherules http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mer/news/mer20120914.html [9/14/2012] Opportunity is investigating an outcrop called Kirkwood in the Cape York segment of the western rim of Endeavour Crater. The spheres measure as much as one-eighth of an inch (3 millimeters) in diameter. The analysis is still preliminary, but it indicates that these spheres do not have the high iron content of Martian blueberries.
Lunar Spherules http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_spherules ranging in size from less than 100 micrometers to more than 250 micrometers [0.25 mm], similar spherules were found in Moon soil samples collected by Apollo 12 at the Procellarum Basin, and Apollo 14 near Mare Imbrium (Sea of Rains), the dark crater that dominates the Moon's face, and their properties were consistent with expectations for creation by meteor impacts.
TPOD http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040827mars.htm [8/27/2004] At this TPOD blueberries are compared to moqui balls, geodes, thunder eggs, concretions and even hailstones. But Ransom's blueberries made in the lab seemed most similar [to Martian blueberries].
Summary: 4 mm av Martian Blueberries (hematite?) 3 mm max New Martian Spherules (glass?) 0.25 mm max Lunar Spherules (glass?) 10 mm max Meteoric Chondrules (carbonates etc) ? ............ Ransom's blueberries (hematite)
justcurious
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
My intuition tells me that we may learn from more familiar physical phenomena, to possibly explain how a toroidal plasma can be self-sustaining. There usually mechanical analogues to electrical phenomena, current flowing through a wire vs liquid flowing through a pipe, wave propagations, etc....
On a sidenote, at 3 minutes into the above video a black hole is formed, or dark matter, not sure which, since I don;t see anything there LOL.
As a layperson, I find it plausible that the sun could be a plasmoid not necessarily dependent on a specific/geometrically confined external electric circuit, but rather feeding off the ambient plasma (which is denser and more abundant in the galactic filamants).
Lloyd
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
CJ Ransom's Reply At this same link as above, http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=4741-4760-5079-9484-9454-9840-69~, I just posted images that CJ Ransom just sent me. I think it shows they're mostly 3 to 4 mm in diameter. The biggest one looks about 4.5 mm.
The following website seems to say that blueberries are composed of hematite, which is probably why CJ used hematite in his experiment. I'm not sure, but it sounds like they're hollow, since it talks about layers within blueberries. At least some of CJ's blueberries were said to be hollow. I found a NASA image of blueberries that include some that are hollow here: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2012-290. I'll try to post the image with CJ's images. http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/14/13868790-sphe~
- These particular berries, measuring as much as one-eighth of an inch (3 millimeters) in diameter, cover an outcrop called Kirkwood in the Cape York segment of Endeavour Crater's western rim. - "Kirkwood is chock full of a dense accumulation of these small spherical objects," Squyres said. "Of course, we immediately thought of the blueberries, but this is something different. We never have seen such a dense accumulation of spherules in a rock outcrop on Mars." - Iron-rich Martian blueberries first came to light soon after Opportunity headed out from its landing site on Mars' Meridiani Planum in early 2004. The fact that they have layers of a mineral called hematite suggests that the spherules were formed by the action of mineral-laden water percolating through rocks. That's how similar spherules formed on Earth, where they're known as thunderballs, shaman stones or Moqui marbles. - ... Many of the spheres on the Kirkwood outcrop have been broken open and eroded by the wind, NASA said. The eroded berries show signs of a concentric structure. To investigate further, Opportunity aimed its Alpha Particle X-Ray Spectrometer at the berries and analyzed their elemental composition. The preliminary analysis indicates that the recently found spheres do not have the high iron content seen in the original Martian blueberries. Advertise | AdChoices - "They seem to be crunchy on the outside, and softer in the middle," Squyres said. "They are different in concentration. They are different in structure. They are different in composition. They are different in distribution.
CharlesChandler
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
Lloyd wrote: I just posted images that CJ Ransom just sent me. I think it shows they're mostly 3 to 4 mm in diameter. The biggest one looks about 4.5 mm.
Thanks for tracking this down! That's about what I thought. At the very beginning of the paper, it mentions "1 mm hematite spherules", below a picture of some white sand spherules that look to be roughly 1 mm in diameter (next to a copper BB, which would be about 4.3 mm in diameter). So it looks like the low end is roughly 1 mm.
The reason why I ask is that 1 mm is wider than the discharge channel in EDM. In a previous life I was a CNC programmer, and I went on to develop software for CNC milling/machining. One of my customers was using a plasma cutter to extract rough-cut parts from aluminum sheet stock. Such cutters take out a 1/8" kerf. (That's 3.175 mm.) The plasma stream rotates clockwise facing in the direction of the stream, due to the Lorentz force. For this reason, you always put the left shoulder of the stream on the cut-line, so that the rotation of the stream combines with the forward motion of the cutter, to produce a cleaner cut. Theoretically, you might say that there is a vacuum in the axis of the stream, left by the centrifugal force of the rotation, but that isn't exactly going to be chilly enough to leave blueberries, being that close to an arc discharge. But there definitely isn't any vacuum in the core of an EDM charge stream. Electrons are much lighter, and so do not have the centrifugal force of a plasma stream. As a consequence, the discharge channel is a lot thinner, nominally being about 0.01" (0.25 mm). (See this if you don't want to take my word for it.) How is a 0.25 mm charge stream going to pinch a 1 mm blueberry? It isn't. It might bore a hole through the center of one, but it isn't going to make one with Marklund convection. So these things are just slag. The ones left in the centers of the craters are the most interesting. I think that the arc started dancing around inside the crater, throwing splatter everywhere. Splatter left inside the crater could be rolled up into a ball as a clump of it was alternately pushed one way and then the other by the force of new splatter. At least that's my guess. But it definitely wasn't any sort of pinch effect.
upriver
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
CharlesChandler wrote: As noted above, the first question concerning the stellar plasmoid model is, "Where are the magnetic fields?" In some cases, they're definitely there (e.g., white dwarfs, magnetars), with fields exceeding millions of Gauss. I consider those to be toroidal plasmoids (a.k.a., natural tokamaks). But that doesn't speak to the nature of the Sun. In the end, I found it necessary to maintain two stellar models, one for the "exotic" stars (black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, etc.) and the other for "normal" stars (such as our Sun), due to the distinct differences in properties.
The idea of maintaining 2 stellar models I think is a really bad idea...
CharlesChandler
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
upriver wrote: The idea of maintaining 2 stellar models I think is a really bad idea...
Then God had a bad idea when He decided to make stars with two different recipes, if you want look at it that way. (I don't. )
For me, intellectual elegance is not the only factor. It's certainly "a" factor, but it isn't "the" factor. Somewhere in there, the constructs have to match the observations. So accuracy is a factor also. Sometimes there are trade-offs between simplicity and accuracy. We could go with a more accurate model, but that would be a lot more complicated, and we don't need the accuracy bad enough to deal with that complexity, so we'll just stick to the simple answer. We can all understand that. But as concerns exotic versus normal stars, there just aren't enough properties in common for one construct to work well for either one of them. If you try to generalize across observations that are too diverse, you end up with vague, abstract statements that just aren't worth much. If there is actually a difference in kind between two different groups of observations, you need two constructs.
As concerns stars, it's the difference between electrostatics and electrodynamics. The Sun is provably made up of CFDLs, and without magnetic fields powerful enough to maintain charge separations. How do you maintain CFDLs in the excellent conductivity of 6000 K plasma, without magnetic pressure? I'm going with compressive ionization. The power output can then be attributed to sustained arc discharges due to transient charge imbalances between the DLs, which make them CCDLs to a minor degree. White dwarfs on the other hand very definitely have the B-fields sufficient for charge separations, so those are toroidal plasmoids (i.e., natural tokamaks). The proof that magnetic pressure is the organizing principle is the gamma rays, which are evidence of nuclear fusion. Gamma rays are easily absorbed by even the thinnest of atmospheres. So how do you get the pressure necessary for fusion, without any overlying matter at all to provide the pressure? To my knowledge, there are only two types of pressure capable of causing nuclear fusion: hydrostatic, and magnetic. It isn't hydrostatic, so it has to be magnetic. Hence white dwarfs are toroidal plasmoids.
I don't see a reasonable way of describing star types that are so different with the same construct. It isn't my fault that all of the properties of EM don't reduce just to z-pinches in one form or another! Electromagnetism, in its full glory, can actually produce quite a wide variety of phenomena. If you pick the right property, you get an accurate description. If you pick the wrong one, people shake their heads and walk away. So it isn't good enough to know that the standard model is busted, proving that EM is at work, and then to just pick the first property of EM that comes to mind, thinking that it's already proven. You have to check to see if the expectations of that property are actually met. If they aren't, pick another property and try that. There are plenty there, so sooner or later, you're going to find one that matches the observations perfectly. Then you've made a provable scientific advance.
justcurious
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
This thread was off to a good start until ... The signal to noise ratio is very low. Trying to find a coherent thought is like looking for a needle in a haystack. I guess that is the nature of internet forums.
CharlesChandler
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
Which comments did you find to be incoherent, and what was incoherent about them?
Lloyd
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
Questions for Charles re: BJ's Video Transcript Statements I wrote up these questions last night so far. I hope you may have time to answer, Charles.
. Why would the electron temperature beyond 2AU be higher during solar max than during solar min? Does Bob's Plasmoid model require that electrons stream into the Sun during solar min and out during solar max? If so, did he show any evidence that electrons stream into the Sun during solar min? The electron temperature decrease beyond 2AU during solar min isn't evidence of electrons streaming in, is it?
. Do you agree with Bob that: 1. the corona drives the HCS (heliospheric current sheet) during half of the solar cycle and they reverse during the other half? 2. high latitude electrons drive the fast solar wind impinging on the equatorial HCS? 3. that misalignment between a galactic Birkeland current and the heliosphere could produce the solar cycle?
. I get the impression that Bob's model would require about the same huge magnetic field and visible electric current near the Sun that the anode Sun model would require. Do you agree? Wouldn't Bridgman's calculation still apply, which shows that an undetected current would be way to weak to produce the Sun's radiation?
. Would the torus around the solar equator (I think during solar max) be an electron cloud and would that slow down the solar wind ejected at low latitudes?
. Do you think there's anything to Bob's theory about the solar cycle? He points out quite a few differences between the two halves of each cycle. I think it was Celeste who suggested within recent months that the cycle is due to the Sun going above the galactic plane for half of the cycle and below for the other half, if I remember right. It seems that both explanations may have trouble with the Maunder Minimum, when there were no sunspots.
. As Brant indicated, I think your accretion theory is the hardest part of your model to understand or believe. Can it be clarified and explained in somewhat more detail? I think the "Like likes like" and implosion parts might be the the most confusing parts of the theory. Yours still seems most plausible of any others that I know of, but pinning down those two issues would still help, I think.
Two kinds of Stars . Maybe Brant isn't aware that both your star models start out the same way, with electrical attraction between objects and plasma in a nebula, but that the normal stars then develop mainly from implosion of the non-spinning or slowly spinning nebula, which develops very little magnetic field, whereas the exotic stars develop from implosion of fast spinning nebulae, producing huge magnetic fields that prevent compressive ionization, but result in natural tokamaks instead. Maybe it could be loosely compared to the difference between the formation of a raindrop and a hailstone. Or maybe anyone can think of a better comparison.
justcurious
Re: The Anode Sun Vs The Plasmoid Model
Lloyd wrote: I think the "Like likes like" and implosion parts might be the the most confusing parts of the theory. Yours still seems most plausible of any others that I know of, but pinning down those two issues would still help, I think.
How can someone who doesn't know anything about electricity or how it works, possibly provide explanations and theories of an electric sun?
And if free space was not a conductor, neon lights wouldn't work. Lightning wouldn't happen. The aurora wouldn't happen. Any time an electron has to pass through free space in order to get from one atom to the next, because it is outside of the electron cloud of a crystal lattice, it is passing through... free space. If free space was a perfect insulator, discharges in plasma wouldn't happen.
)
Electromagnetism, in its full glory, can actually produce quite a wide variety of phenomena. If you pick the right property, you get an accurate description. If you pick the wrong one, people shake their heads and walk away.
