a. The sources of power is the galactic circuit itself? But then you admit that EU does not know what is powering the system.
A circuit is a closed loop though, you have a power source inside of the circuit such as a battery and the load such as a light bulb and the conductive medium such as a copper wire. You ask the question, "what is powering this system"? That's what I asked. What is the source of power in the circuit? In a circuit you have three parts, the power source, the load and the medium for conduction of electricity.
b. The consumers of power is not understood by me. Electrons and charged material is flowing away from the Sun. Thus it appears to be releasing energy not consuming it from another source. This is the solar wind. How does a star consume power if the electrical current (DC) is flowing away from it in all directions? We know the current is flowing away from the Sun, not towards it, because of Earth's weather and its resemblance to a low pressure DC discharge tube. http://vixra.org/pdf/1212.0009v1.pdf
Lightning caused by DC discharge from the Sun. The clouds store the charge and coupled with the ground acts as a giant capacitor, with two very wide, very large plates to store and release the charge. When enough charge is stored and the potential difference is too great, the charge equalizes forming lightning.
c. The intergalactic medium in vacuum does conduct electricity, but it does it so well, that there is no direction for current dissipation from a star, except for being omni-directional DC current (solar wind) away from the star, dissimilar to a copper wire. DC in a copper wire goes in one direction, in a star it goes in all directions away from the star. Therefore the only way to make the current travel in any specific direction is to allign it by a magnetic field, this is what the Earth does with the aurora. Thus stars are not connected electrically in a large grid, because there is nothing in between the stars to magnetically confine the electrical current.
If the DC current from the Sun would become magnetically confined, instead of being omni-directional, the sun would literally look like a giant plasma ball with one single arc reaching towards the Earth frying everything in site. That is frightening.
So what I'm saying is that we are left with few options. My take is that the Sun is not powered externally because:
a. the solar wind is flowing away from it.
If we are to assume direct current is actively powering the Sun then the solar wind (DC) should:
b. be going towards it.
In stellar metamorphosis if the DC from other stars is powerful enough, it will magnetically pinch a cloud of pre-existing gas forming another star. This brings up a very important point, do stars need to be next to each other to be born or can they be born many billions of miles separate from each other?
Once the interstellar gas undergoes the phase transition to plasma, it will reject incoming currents as the star is electrically saturated. It will flow in the opposite direction away from the star, as the star starts travelling the galaxy adopting older stars creating "systems". The Pleiades cluster is on specific case of a set of stars all forming at about the same time and then travelling with each other as they move about the galaxy.
The star is electrically active, there is no doubt about that, my beef is with it being "powered" by another object, simply because there are no incoming currents, all the currents from the Sun are outgoing. Also my beef is with there being a giant "grid" because like copper wire, we should be able to see all the currents being pinched in tubes from star to star, yet it is shown that stars are emitting omni-directionally.
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
JeffreyW wrote: The star is electrically active, there is no doubt about that, my beef is with it being "powered" by another object, simply because there are no incoming currents, all the currents from the Sun are outgoing.
Cosmic rays are one perpetually charged and incoming current flow.
JeffreyW wrote: Also my beef is with there being a giant "grid" because like copper wire, we should be able to see all the currents being pinched in tubes from star to star, yet it is shown that stars are emitting omni-directionally.
Not all plasma is in "hot" glow mode. Much of it is dark (not dark matter but in dark mode, ie, a mag field or electrical field whose current densities are very low).
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
JeffreyW wrote:
b. The consumers of power is not understood by me.Electrons and charged material is flowing away from the Sun. Thus it appears to be releasing energy not consuming it from another source.
Then you agree with Velikovsky.
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
viscount aero wrote:
Cosmic rays are one perpetually charged and incoming current flow.
Not all plasma is in "hot" glow mode. Much of it is dark (not dark matter but in dark mode, ie, a mag field or electrical field whose current densities are very low).
Good. Now if cosmic rays are powering the Sun, then there should be just as much energy from the cosmic rays entering the Sun as the Sun emits radiative energy. As well where do the cosmic rays originate from in EU?
1. In EU do cosmic rays power the Sun?
2. Where do cosmic rays originate in the EU model?
In stellar metamorphosis cosmic rays are not covered as they are present, but are a very small phenomenon compared to the actual radiation a star emits. I will have to look into them.
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
JeffreyW wrote: So EU has it like this:
a. The sources of power is the galactic circuit itself? But then you admit that EU does not know what is powering the system.
No theory knows. Not everything is scientifically knowable.
JeffreyW wrote: A circuit is a closed loop though, you have a power source inside of the circuit such as a battery and the load such as a light bulb and the conductive medium such as a copper wire. You ask the question, "what is powering this system"? That's what I asked. What is the source of power in the circuit?In a circuit you have three parts, the power source, the load and the medium for conduction of electricity.
To begin searching more deeply, realize that nature is the best particle accelerator known. It accelerates particles to light speed, including waves. Take again the example of cosmic rays. These are highly energetic. These rays can drive particles up into a million billion electron volts. How? That is unknown.
Moreover, this creates a magnetohydrodynamic environment in the interstellar medium. It is not thermodynamic inasmuch as it is electrical, ie, magneto. This medium, however diffuse, is exceedingly omnipresent and enveloping and highly energetic. This gestalt of waves dwarfs the Sun by trillions of orders of magnitude.
An analogue to this that is clearly demonstrative and visible are comets. They could be considered overgrown "cosmic ray particles" as they ionize and energize near a star. Imagine now trillions upon trillions of comets that are atomic-sized all streaming towards a star.
The clash of particles will create an electromagnetic interplay that results in what we see at the Sun. The fusion in the corona is the result of this clashing. Whereas the comet ionizes and becomes visible millions of miles distant up to the Sun, cosmic particles do that AT the Sun itself--thus "Creating" the Sun.
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
You'll have to endure Wal Thornhill's monotone speech, but he explains the electric sun and cosmic currents in this lecture:
WAL THORNHILL: From Cosmic Currents to the Electric Sun | EU 2013http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgdJcghkri4
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
JeffreyW wrote:
If the DC current from the Sun would become magnetically confined, instead of being omni-directional, the sun would literally look like a giant plasma ball with one single arc reaching towards the Earth frying everything in site. That is frightening.
hhah HHAHHAhHAHAa
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
JeffreyW wrote: Good. Now if cosmic rays are powering the Sun, then there should be just as much energy from the cosmic rays entering the Sun as the Sun emits radiative energy. As well where do the cosmic rays originate from in EU?
1. In EU do cosmic rays power the Sun?
To my knowledge--unknown.
JeffreyW wrote: 2. Where do cosmic rays originate in the EU model?
Don't know.
JeffreyW wrote: In stellar metamorphosis cosmic rays are not covered as they are present, but are a very small phenomenon compared to the actual radiation a star emits. I will have to look into them.
That is but one source. I wouldn't bet that it is "the" source. I honestly don't know.
viscount aero
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
I just a found a recently begun thread about one of the very things we're discussing here:
I think I am beginning to see the picture EU is painting of celestial phenomenon after 2+ years of searching:
1. They believe stars are electrical phenomenon. 2. Thus they are "powered electrically".
Is this correct?
What if it is really this:
1. Stars exhibit electrical behavior. 2. Thus they are electrical in nature.
Is it me, or is it a leap of faith to go from "stars can be shown to exhibit electrical behavior" to "stars are powered electrically"?
It seems to me there is an unasked, unmentioned assumption there that is getting in the way of understanding stars. I will list this assumption:
1. Stars are powered by something continuous.
It seems apparent to me that people have assumed without evidence that since objects like stars are bright and big that they have to be "powered" by something either internally or externally.
In stellar metamorphosis stars are not powered continuously by anything. In stellar metamorphosis to state that a star is "powered" is to assume that which there is no evidence for. In GTSM stars are events which are dissipating the energy of another system, that other system was the process of galactic birth itself in which a fully capable pulsar dies and ejects matter in bi-polar configurations like in Hercules A.
In thermodynamics matter cannot be created or destroyed, it just changes forms. The matter of the Sun is just changing form. The plasma is becoming gas, this process releases heat as it is an exothermic reaction. There is nothing at all powering the Sun, either externally like in EU or internally like in fusion scientism. It is a dissipative event. The electrical properties we see are inherent in the Sun, and does not mean it is powered electrically. This is same leap of faith of fusion scientism, there is lots of hydrogen there, so it has to be a big hydrogen bomb. lol
JeffreyW
Re: The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis
What generates the heat of the Sun is just basic plasma chemistry in stellar metamorphosis.
I'd say wake up and smell the circuits, but You can SEE the circuits. They emit x-rays. Only electricity produces x-rays. Or are the x-rays produced by thermodynamics in an unconnected system? I would have thought You'd have seen this after two years of EU study.
I'd say wake up and smell the circuits, but You can SEE the circuits. They emit x-rays. Only electricity produces x-rays. Or are the x-rays produced by thermodynamics in an unconnected system? I would have thought You'd have seen this after two years of EU study.
michael
Vacuum doesn't prevent the flow of electrical currents, thus voltage drops are impossible, thus no circuits. Voltage drops can only happen inside of areas where there is electrically resistive material. This means there is no electrical grid.
Again, I work with electrical equipment. No voltage = no currents = no electrical grid.
I wrote a paper on the similarities between Earth's atmosphere and the V-I (voltages/current) characteristics of a DC low pressure discharge tube:
Notice the left hand side of the graph on the second page, the voltage and Amps drop off into background ionization. Thus no electrical grid in outer space connecting stars.
The tunnel vision does more than magnify the elegance of the single idea. It also excludes considering other ideas. Alternative ideas are stymied by unquestioning faith in the "only possible" theory. For this reason, as history shows, most fundamental breakthroughs come from outsiders — those who "sit down before facts like a child."
These big men in science, Kristian Birkeland, Charles E. R. Bruce , Ralph E. Juergens, and Hannes Alfvén may have not had all of the evidence that is available now, but little men stand as midgets beside them when they attempt to emulate them with unsupported and false evidence, and give no mind to science, nor do they "sit down before facts like a child."
I'd say wake up and smell the circuits, but You can SEE the circuits. They emit x-rays. Only electricity produces x-rays. Or are the x-rays produced by thermodynamics in an unconnected system? I would have thought You'd have seen this after two years of EU study.
michael
Vacuum doesn't prevent the flow of electrical currents, thus voltage drops are impossible, thus no circuits. Voltage drops can only happen inside of areas where there is electrically resistive material. This means there is no electrical grid.
Again, I work with electrical equipment. No voltage = no currents = no electrical grid.
I wrote a paper on the similarities between Earth's atmosphere and the V-I (voltages/current) characteristics of a DC low pressure discharge tube:
Notice the left hand side of the graph on the second page, the voltage and Amps drop off into background ionization. Thus no electrical grid in outer space connecting stars.
