Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 34

Introduction

The new full colour E-BOOKS are now available. These are ideal for
teachers, general readers, and specialists alike. Go here for further
details.

Plasma Cosmology

This web site aims to provide an introduction to the emerging Plasma "A new scientific truth
Universe paradigm, and to explore some of the many profound does not triumph by
implications. convincing its
opponents and making
Mainstream science, for the most part, looks on the universe as them see the light, but
electrically neutral and purely mechanical; a place where the weak rather because its
force of gravity holds fort. Plasma Cosmology, by contrast, opponents eventually
acknowledges the electrodynamic nature of the universe. Gravity and die, and a new
inertia are NOT the only forces at work. generation grows up
that is familiar with it."
The history of science, of course, is fraught with controversy, and it Max Planck
is important to bear in mind that the situation today is little different.

What is Plasma?

Plasma is the fourth state of matter. It differs from solids, liquids and
gases in so far as it's atoms are divided into free-floating 'negative'
electrons and 'positive' ions (an atom which has lost its electron/s). It
is sometimes referred to as an ionized gas.

Students are generally taught about only three states of matter, and
when Plasma does get a mention, little importance is assigned. Not
only should plasma be added to the list, but the order should be
reversed to put it in first place. The reasons for this will become
clear.

The term Plasma was borrowed from blood plasma in order to


describe its almost life-like and self-organising properties.

Plasma sometimes emits light when under the excitation of electrical


and magnetic fields. Polar auroras bear witness to this fact.

Where is it?

Plasma is almost everywhere. At least ninety-nine percent of the


known universe is, in fact, matter in its plasma state! The surface of
the sun is plasma; not hot gas, which is quite a different thing.

Plasma in space consists entirely of ions and electrons, and is thus


very energetic or 'hot'. Only when cooled does it form the matter to
which we are familiar here on Earth: solids, liquids, and gases.
Because plasma remains electrically charged in space, it is
influenced more by electromagnetic forces than gravity. In fact
space, once considered mostly empty, has been found to be alive
with plasma. Vast flows of charged particles have been discovered
spanning hundreds-of-thousands of light years across interstellar
space.

The most familiar examples of electrical plasmas here on earth are


neon signs and lighting, television screens, and electrical arc welding
machines. Fire and Lightning are also forms of Plasma.

Some behaviours and properties of Plasma

Plasma is an excellent conductor of electricity. Because of its free-


flowing electrons its conductive properties far surpass those of
copper and gold.

Due to its interaction with electromagnetism, plasmas display a


complexity in structure far exceeding that of matter in gaseous,
liquid, or solid states. It has a tendency to form into cellular and
filamentary structures.

These structures derive from the fact that a charged particle flow (or
current) produces a ring of magnetic fields around itself, 'pinching'
plasma into multi-filamentary strands, as can be seen on both cosmic
and more localised scales. Pictured right is a novelty plasma-lamp
typical of those available on the high street.

Mainstream misconceptions

While conventional astronomy maps magnetism, electric currents are Men occasionally
excluded on the mistaken basis that they are of no significance in stumble over the truth,
space. but most of them pick
themselves up and
Working from the inertia of this prior belief, astrophysicists have a carry on as if nothing
tendency to talk in euphemisms. 'Electron rains' and 'clouds of ever happened."
ionized gas' are just two examples. From a conservative perspective Winston Churchill
these terms might seem easier to grasp than the behaviour of more
ethereal plasma, but they are, nonetheless, obfuscations. In reality we
are talking about electrodynamic phenomena.

It is important to understand that gravity based models were codified "It is an


before space travel and high powered telescopes. Back then our embarrassment that the
galaxy, The Milky Way, was considered the entirety of the dominant forms of
universe ... and electrically sterile! Instead of trying to shoehorn what matter in the universe
we now see into old models, Plasma Cosmology respects the remain hypothetical!"
progress of the past, but is not constrained by it. Scientific theories, Jim Peebles
by definition, are vulnerable to being falsified. Science moves on.

The role of Plasma in The Universe


Plasma cosmology has gone beyond hypothesis and analysis. There
are problems with part three, of course, experimentation on universal
scales, but the fact is that plasmas are highly scalable, and super-
computing capabilities have enabled us to model plasma behaviours
on galactic scales ... utilising only a few simple formulae.

These models are consistent with reality. Big Bang cosmology, by Were Sherlock Holmes
contrast, fails to adequately account for the 'clumpiness' and a Cosmologist, he
filamentary structures that we observe. might have said 'It's
Filamentary my Dear
Plasma cosmology does NOT rely on abstract mathematical Watson.'
modelling or an increasing array of exotic hypotheticals like Dark
Matter and Dark Energy!
Blogs and more

My latest blogs (in the guise of The Soupdragon) can be viewed


here.

www.thunderbolts.info is updated with fascinating plasma related


news on a daily basis.

You can now view the Thunderbolts video at Google Video. If this
link doesn't work, go to Google Video and try a search for
Thunderbolts.

A Brief History of Plasma I

Kristian Birkeland (1867-1917), Norway

Birkeland was amongst the first to speculate that the Northern Lights
were charged particles ejected from the Sun, captured by the Earth's
magnetic field, and directed towards the polar atmosphere. To prove
this theory, Birkeland performed his famous 'Terella' experiment,
where he artificially created the aurora in the laboratory. His theories
were initially laughed at, and it is only now in the space age that
measurements from satellites are proving Birkeland correct.

Significantly, his approach to science was broad, comprising


observation and laboratory experimentation in addition to
mathematical modelling. He was not content with a merely
theoretical approach, despite having trained as a mathematician.

He is probably Norway's greatest ever scientist, and many of his


works are still used as reference materials. The electric currents that
flow from space are named after him -- Birkeland currents. He is
recognised for bringing Plasma and Electromagnetism into
Cosmology, but while many of his ideas are widely accepted, his
cosmological theories are less well known. He died aged 49 just
when a working committee was in the process of nominating him for
the Nobel Prize in Physics.

Sydney Chapman (1888-1970) was regarded as a leader in the field "Gravitational systems
of interplanetary magnetospheric physics for a while after the death are the 'ashes' of prior
of Birkeland. He took an approach very similar to that of Big electrical systems."
Bangers, relying heavily on mathematical models, and refused to Hannes Alfven
even discuss many of Birkeland's ideas. According to his models,
currents were confined to a sphere that extended little beyond the
Earth. He failed to recognise the complex three dimensional
relationship between the Earth's magnetosphere and the currents
flowing from the Sun. He proposed, in contradistinction to
Birkeland's ideas, that currents were restricted to the ionosphere, and
that the Earth moved through a vacuum. He was wrong.

Irving Langmuir (1881-1957), USA

Langmuir (1881-1957) was the first to use the term 'Plasma' in 1927,
borrowing it from Blood Plasma to describe the almost life-like and
self-organising behaviours of a plasma when in the presence of
electrical currents and magnetic fields.

He discovered Plasma Sheathes, now called Double Layers, having


observed the electrons and ions of a plasma separating during
experimentation. DLs are one of the most important features of
plasma behaviour.

He also defined and explained the term 'valence' as part of his


description of the atom. Few textbooks, however, recognise the
influence that Langmuir had on the development of our
understanding of the nature of the atom.

He became the first 'non-academic' chemist to receive the Nobel


Prize, an accomplishment he realised in 1932. Langmuir probes,
which can be used in space, are named after him.

Hannes Alfven (1908-1995) - The Father of modern Plasma Physics,


Sweden

Alfven (1908-1995) is generally regarded as the Father of modern


Plasma Physics. He continued the work of Birkeland, feeling very
much in spirit with him, and eventually won a Nobel Laureate for his
ground-breaking contributions. He was not always highly regarded
by the scientific establishment because of his controversial ideas, "I have never thought
however, and suffered no little condescension and ridicule in his that you could obtain
lifetime. the extremely clumpy,
heterogeneous
universe we have
In fact it now seems bizarre that he wasn't awarded the Nobel Prize today, strongly
until 1970, especially considering his many fundamental affected by plasma
accomplishments. For some time he was forced to publish in journals processes, from the
that did not enjoy international readership. His ideas finally became smooth, homogeneous
known to the general scientific community through his ground- one of the Big Bang,
breaking book, Cosmical Electrodynamics, published by Oxford dominated by
University Press in 1950. gravitation." Alfven

Alfven took a practical and intuitive approach to science, insisting


that theories of cosmological phenomena must agree with laboratory
experiments. (The definition of 'laboratory' being broadened to
include experiments in space.) Having started out as an engineer, his
methods were in direct opposition to the approach generally favoured
by Big Bangers, that of starting-out from idealised mathematical
principles.

In 1937 Alfven proposed that our galaxy contained a large-scale


magnetic field and that charged particles moved in spiral orbits
within it, owing to forces exerted by the field. Plasma carried the
electrical currents which create the magnetic field.

While many of Alfven's theories are now well known, like those of
Birkeland, the cosmological implications of his work also remain to
be fully recognised. Ironically, some have put this down to the very
simplicity of many of these ideas.

David Bohm (1917-1992), USA

Bohm was the plasma theoretician and cosmologist who discovered "The universe is an
the instabilities and resistivity of magnetized plasmas that now bear unending
his name. transformation in flux
whose previous states
we are not privileged
There are many others who probably should be mentioned, but this
to know." David Bohm
web site aims only to serve as an introduction to the emerging
paradigm.
d Bohm

Today, a growing body of scientists, engineers, and independent


researchers are continuing the work of these pioneers. They have
taken up the gauntlet in defiance of some of the more entrenched
thinking that still permeates the mainstream. See the links page for
further details.

Summation

Both Hannes Alfven and Irving Langmuir won Nobel Laureates for “I have no trouble
their work, and Kristian Birkeland probably would have done had he publishing in Soviet
lived long enough. It seems unfortunate, therefore, that their work in astrophysical journals,
cosmology, and the implications of their work in this field, remain but my work is
largely unrecognised. Alfven's criticism of the Big Bang, it has to be unacceptable to the
said, certainly rankled with some of the powers that be. American
astrophysical
journals.” Hannes
Alfvén

A Brief History of Plasma II

Faraday and Maxwell "The phenomena of


electrical discharge are
exceedingly important,
While we now know that the terms electro- and -magnetic go and when they are
together, this was not always the case, and the relationship between better understood they
electricity and magnetism was not always clear. Michael Faraday, will probably throw
1791-1867, was called a charlatan and a fraud when he announced great light on the
that he could generate an electric current by moving a magnet in a nature of electricity as
coil of wire! well as on the nature of
gases and of the
James Clerk Maxwell clarified our understanding of the relationship medium pervading
between electricity and magnetism. Electric fields can't be divorced space." James Clerk
from magnetic fields -- or vice versa -- but conventional astronomy Maxwell, Treatise on
still attempts to do just this! Electricity and
Magnetism.

Why does mainstream cosmology attribute little or no importance to


electrodynamics?

There are a number of reasons for this mistaken attitude, and it "Facts do not cease to
represents the the main point of demarcation between Plasma and exist because they are
Big Bang cosmologies. Some time back there was a fork in the road, ignored." Aldous
and mainstream cosmology took the road marked gravity only which Huxley
lead to a strange place dominated by abstract math. Unfortunately it
is now proving almost impossible to turn this behemoth around!

History: "Newton was unaware


When geniuses like Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) and Isaac Newton of plasma. Today his
(1643-1727) formulated their theories very little was known about disciples spend years
electricity. (Oil and gas provided the lighting back then.) A treatise in training learning
had been written on magnetism, and some magnetism is incorporated when and how to shut
in astronomical models, but the basis of mainstream theories remain their eyes to it." Mel
the same -- they rely on gravity and inertia. They work on the Acheson
mistaken premise that space is electrically sterile.

The situation changed briefly in the late 1800s and early 1900s when
electromganetism was thought the most likely route to a better
understanding of space. Indeed, the scientific press was awash with
such speculation at the time. However, something happened, and it
became taboo to discuss EM in space. Albert Einstein, for example,
did not so much as mention EM in his Relativity theories, and his
mathematical theories effectively removed the concept of the aether.
"Never attribute to
Magnetic Reconnection and Frozen-in Magnetic Fields malice that which can
These erroneous concepts are probably the biggest source of be adequately
confusion in mainstream circles. Ironically, the concept of Frozen-in explained by stupidity,
Magnetic Fields was first proposed by Hannes Alfven, but he quickly but don't rule out
realised his mistake, and explained the error. Unfortunately, he was malice." Heinlein's
surprised to find that the error persisted, and later in life he wished Razor
he had spent more time correcting the misconception.

Magnetic Fields are never frozen into a plasma. This is just a


symptom of mainstream science refusing to acknowledge electric
currents (energy transfer) in space. They prefer to talk in terms of
magnetic ropes et al, as the idea of electricity in space would open up
a can of worms for them. They simpy refuse to face this fact to any
meaningful extent. Furthermore, magnetic field lines do not
reconnect or merge after they break down and release energy.

Don Scott, a retired professor of electrical engineering, explains the


issues in more detail here

Psychology:
Belief is known to have a profound affect on perception. Witness the
fact that euphemisms are employed to conform to the inertia of prior
belief. The mainstream prefers to talk in terms of ion storms and
electron rains rather than acknowledging the existence of electrical
phenomena in space. See the technical section for explanations of
some common misconceptions. So many astronomical phenomena
scream 'Electricity', but sophistry is all too often employed to
interpret them within the existing paradigm.

Filamentary Birkeland currents in plasma, and double layers et al are


not even recognised in mainstream cosmology, let alone understood!
And they call it the queen of the sciences!

'Charge separation in space is not possible'


Well, this is the mainstream view. Because the attractive electrical
forces between electrons and ions are 39 orders of magnitude greater
than the gravitational attraction between their masses, it is assumed
that these particles quickly find each other and neutralise.

It is wrong, however, as we now observe charge separation in space.


It is therefore important to stress that we should be working
backwards from observation, and not extrapolating from some
idealised theoretical starting point. Theories of the plasma universe
do not begin with neutral matter. They begin with the observation
that charges are already separated.

Math
While GR is amenable to math -- if we allow for the fact that so
many space probes have suffered inexplicable crashes and
anomalous accelerations -- the situation with electrodynamics is less
simple. How would we go about measuring the voltage of the earth,
for example, when voltage is a relative figure? Would we measure
the voltage in relation to The Sun or The Moon? And how could we
do this? Running a cable between any two planets presents technical
difficulties, whereas problems with GR calculations are simply
plugged with exotic hypotheticals!

Science versus Math


Unfortunately, the current cosmological scene is dominated by
mathematicians, not scientists, and electromagnetism is notoriously
difficult to model mathematically, so they prefer to close their eyes
to it. See bad astronomy versus good science, below.

Electrodynamics versus Fluid Dynamics


Another common trick is to refer to electrodynamic phenomena in
terms really only appropriate to fluid dynamics. 'Electron Rains' and
'Ion Storms' are prime examples. These are clearly electrodynamic
phenomena, as are 'Magnetic Ropes'. Magnetic ropes are in fact
Birkeland currents. See technical for further info.

Bad Astronomy versus Good Science


Phil Plait, the self-proclaimed Bad Astronomer, is an unrepentant
critic of the Electric Universe. He recently launched another attack
on the EU model, by proxy, claiming that astronomy does not ignore
magnetic
fields. This is a straw man, as no such claim has been made

"Magnetism is a very important topic in astrophysics (despite some


pseudo-scientists lying and saying this
force is ignored), but it’s not well-understood. It’s fiendishly
complex, so much so that it’s a joke in stronomy." Phil Plait

The real issue is that the relationship between magnetic fields and
electric currents is being overlooked, and this is a critical omission

"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it


is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field
and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate

In other words, magnetism cannot be viewed in isolation. At least


Plait admits their fear of magnetism in the process, which is the big
giveaway.

Mathematics and the kinetic theory of ordinary Gases


See below

Plasma Physics

The following quote from Australian physicist, Wal Thornhill,


provides some further background on difficulties with working with
Plasmas which have contributed to mainstream ignorance on the
subject.

"Plasma physics started along two parallel lines. One of them was
the hundred-year-old investigation into what was called 'electric
discharges in gases'. To a high degree, this approach was
experimental and phenomenological, and only very slowly did it
reach some degree of theoretical sophistication. Most theoretical
physicists looked down on this field which was complicated and
awkward. The plasma exhibited striations, double layers, and an
assortment of oscillations and instabilities. The electron temperature
was often found to be one or two orders of magnitude larger than the
gas temperature, with the ion temperature intermediate.

"In short, it was a field which was not well suited for mathematically
elegant theories. The other approach came from the highly developed
kinetic theory of ordinary gases. It was thought that, with a limited
amount of work, this field could be extended to include ionized
gases. The theories were mathematically elegant and claimed to
derive all of the properties of a plasma from first principles. In reality
this was not true. Because of the complexity of the problem, a
number of approximations were necessary which were not always
appropriate. The theories had very little contact with experimental
physics: all awkward and complicated phenomena observed in the
laboratory were simply neglected... Theories about plasmas, at the
time called ionized gases, were developed without any contact with
laboratory plasma work. In spite of this -- or perhaps because of this
-- belief in the theories was so strong that they were applied directly
to space. One of the results was the Chapman-Ferraro theory (for a
review see Akasofu and Chapman, 1972) which became accepted to
such an extent that Birkeland's approach was almost completely
forgotten. For thirty or forty years, Birkland's results were often
ignored in textbooks and surveys, and all attempts to revive and
develop them were neglected.

"The crushing victory of the theoretical approach over the


experimental approach lasted only until the theory was to make
experimentally verifiable predictions. From the theory, it was
concluded that in the laboratory, plasmas could easily be confined in
magnetic fields and heated to such temperatures as to make
thermonuclear release of energy possible. When attempts were made
to construct thermonuclear reactors, a confrontation between the
theories and reality was unavoidable -- the results were catastrophic.
Although the theories were generally accepted, the plasma itself
refused to believe them. This is not to say that Juergens' theory that
the sun is an anode is valid. His observation was that the sun appears
to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics in that the heat transfer in
the wrong way. My friend Leroy, if I recall correctly, once attempted
to explain this by an analogy of a man with a cigarette lighter in his
extended arm. Neither suggestion is correct as the sun is not a
collection of ordinary gas. It a collection of matter in the plasma
form and as such the temperature of the electrons is orders of
magnitude higher than the rest of the body (A normal condition for a
plasma).

"The approach which Alfven suggested must ignore the elegant and
simplistic ordinary gases theory as the electromagnetic forces within
a plasma dominate."

Synchrotron Radiation

In 1950, Alfven, together with his colleagues Herlofson and "In the end The
Keipenheuer, was the first to identify nonthermal radiation from Universe will have its
astronomical sources. It is produced by fast-moving electrons in the say." Sir Fred Hoyle
presence of magnetic fields, and its importance cannot be
underestimated in astrophysics as most of the radiation recorded by
radio telescopes derives from this mechanism.

At the time this was a remarkable suggestion, given that plasma and
magnetic fields were thought to have little, if anything, to do in a
cosmos filled with 'island universes' (galaxies). It has provided
additional evidence for the existence of extensive magnetic fields,
and indicates that enormous amounts of energy may be converted,
stored, and released by cosmic plasma.

Prior to its discovery we were largely restricted to the visual


spectrum, which favours the three states of matter (solids, liquids,
and gases) that formed the basis of conventional astronomy.

The Michelson-Morley experiment

Growing numbers of scientists are questioning the hero worship of “What we call mass
Einstein, not least because the Michelson-Morley experiment did would seem to be
NOT give a null result. Mainstream science, however, claims that the nothing but an
'null' result disproves the existence of an æther. appearance, and all
inertia to be of
“... Lorentz, in order to justify his transformation equations, saw the electromagnetic
necessity of postulating a physical effect of interaction between origin.” Henri
moving matter and æther, to give the mathematics meaning. Physics Poincaré, Science and
still had de jure authority over mathematics: it was Einstein, who had Method
no qualms about abolishing the æther and still retaining light waves
whose properties were expressed by formulae that were meaningless
without it, who was the first to discard physics altogether and
propose a wholly mathematical theory...” Herbert Dingle, Science at
the Cross-Roads.

Technical overview I

The following introduction to some technical terms should provide a


reasonable insight into Plasma Physics. An underlying simplicity
seems to beckon, even while many questions remain, and a picture
drastically different from the traditional view of the universe begins
to emerge.

The Solar Wind

The Earth's magnetic field acts much like a protective cocoon. Over
and around this field flows the solar wind, the dilute but persistent
stream of plasma (protons, electrons and other ions) emitted by The
Sun. This flow of plasma, with its associated electromagnetic fields,
distorts The Earth's own field, compressing it on the dayside and
stretching it on the night side. The resulting field is called the
magnetosphere.

Because the sun is seen to emit roughly equal quantities of ions and
electrons, the solar wind is considered electrically neutral in
mainstream circles. This is wrong. In reality it is a huge bipolar
electric current, and the terms solar wind and solar radiation result
from the fact that the mainstream refuses to acknowledge electricity
in space.

Moreover, plasmas react with the extensive magnetic field lines in


our solar system, and when conducting fluids flow through a
magnetic field a dynamo can be created, with the electrical energy
needed to drive the current taken from any relative motion. This is
consistent with the laws of physics: If a closed circuit exists, parts of
which are moving through a magnetic field while other parts are not,
an electric current will arise. This is how dynamos work.

Magnetospheres

Magnetic forces are of little importance in our everyday lives and


require a sensitive instrument like a compass needle to be detected.
This is because most of the materials we encounter, from the ground
we walk on to the air we breathe, are electrically neutral.

At 60 miles or more above the surface of the Earth, however, the


situation is very different. The fringes of the atmosphere at these
heights are dominated by plasmas which react with the earths
magnetic field, steering and trapping the energised particles.

The intense activity in these regions is sometimes described as one of


the first surprises of the space age, and the sheer scale of the
magnetospheres of other planets has also taken many by surprise,
consistent though they are with Plasma models.

Magnetotails

In contrast to the dayside of the magnetosphere, which is compressed


and confined by the solar wind, the night side is stretched into a long
tear-shaped 'magnetotail'. This part of the magnetosphere is quite
dynamic, where the ions and electrons are often energized (the
magnetotail is the main source of the polar aurora).

The plasma sheath of Venus is extremely long, almost touching the


Earth when the two planets are at their closest approach. NASA
astronomers recently discovered 'stringy things' in the tail, as
predicted by Birkeland.

Birkeland currents

Magnetic disturbances are usually observed during displays in


auroral zones. These are localised and fade towards the equator,
suggesting that currents flow nearby. Currents, of course, require
closed circuits. Birkeland proposed that these currents flowed from
space at one end of an auroral arc and returned to space at the other,
flowing parallel to the ground when in proximity with The Earth.

Birkeland first made this proposal after returning from an expedition


to an auroral zone in 1903, and it was confirmed by the US Naval
satellite, Triad, in 1973. Its magnetometer detected two large sheets
of electric current, down on the morning side of the auroral zone, and
up on the evening side, as expected. Each sheet typically carries a
million amperes or more.

Further: Enormous Birkeland currents connecting Jupiter and its


moon Io were recorded by the Voyager spacecraft in 1979.

In 1984 Farhad Yusef-Azdeh, Don Chance, and Mark Morris


discovered Birkeland currents on a galactic scale. Working with the
Very Large Array radio telescope, they found an arc of radio
emission some 120 light-years long near the centre of the Milky
Way! The structure is made up of narrow filaments typically 3 light-
years wide and running the full length of the arc. The strength of the
associated magnetic field is 100 times greater than previously
thought possible on such a large scale, but the field is nearly identical
in geometry and strength to computer simulations of galaxy
formation.
Current modes

Electric currents in plasma take on three basic modes -- dark, glow or


arc -- depending on the voltage and charge density. In laboratory
gas-discharge tubes, voltage and charge density vary non-linearly
between the electrodes and produce segments that are alternately
dark and glowing. The high-charge-density arc mode is used in
industry for precision machining.

The plasma sheath of venus, mentioned above, is currently in dark


mode.

Z-pinches

The plasma universe consists of swirling streams of electrons and


ions flowing in filaments which tend to corkscrew or spiral. They
self pinch from the magnetic fields that they generate around
themselves.

There is a tendency for these filaments to repel at close range, and


attract at greater distances. However, when in close proximity they
may also spiral around one another. When this happens there is also
a tendency for the filaments to compress between them any material
(ionized or not) in the plasma. This is called the Z-pinch effect.

The bulk of the filaments are invisible from a distance, much like the
Birkeland currents that circle the Earth are invisible from its surface,
with the exception of auroral discharges.

Doubleness

The proclivity for multiple filaments to interact in pairs is a signature


of electromagnetic forces and sometimes referred to as 'Doubleness'.

This behaviour derives from Ampére's Law or the Biot-Savart force


law which states that currents in the same direction attract while
currents in the opposite direction repel. They do so inversely in
relation to the distance between them. This results in a far larger
ranging force of interaction than the gravitational force between two
masses. Gravitational force is only attractive and varies inversely
with the square of the distance.

Electromagnetic force strength

While all matter is subject to gravity, plasma is more strongly


affected by EM forces as is to be expected given its constituent parts
-- negatively charged electrons and positively charged ions. In fact,
the EM force is 10^39 times as strong! Plasma displays structures
and motions that are far more complex than those found in neutral
solids, liquids, and gases. It has a tendency to form the cellular and
filamentary structures under discussion.

The following is quoted from from Dr A. Peratt's site

But perhaps the most important characteristic of electromagnetism is


that it obeys the longest-range force law in the universe.

When two or more non-plasma bodies interact gravitationally, their


force law varies inversely as the square of the distance between
them; 1/4 the pull if they are 2 arbitrary measurement units apart, 1/9
the pull for a distance of 3 units apart, 1/16 the pull for 4 units apart,
and so on.

When plasmas, say streams of charged particles, interact


electromagnetically, their force law varies inversely as the distance
between them, 1/2 the pull if they are 2 arbitrary measurement units
apart, 1/3 the pull for a distance of 3 units apart, 1/4 the pull for 4
units apart, and so on. So at 4 arbitrary distance units apart, the
electromagnetic force is 4 times greater than that of gravitation,
relatively speaking, and at 100 units, apart, the electromagnetic force
is 100 times that of gravitation.

Moreover, the electromagnetic force can be repulsive if the streams


in interaction are flowing in opposite directions. Thus immense
plasma streams measured in megaparsecs, carrying galaxies and
stars, can appear to be falling towards nothing when they are actually
repelling.

Double Layers

Plasma sheathes were discovered by Langmuir in his laboratory, and "In the beginning was
are now called double layers. the Plasma." Hannes
Alfven
DLs refer to one of the most important properties of any electrical
plasma -- its ability to form electrically isolated sections or cells.
Because Plasma is an outstanding conductor and cannot sustain a
high electric field, it self-organizes to form a protective sheath
(Double Layer) across which most of the electric field is
concentrated and where most of the electrical energy is stored (They
can act very much like capacitors).

When a foreign object is inserted into a plasma, a DL will form


around it, shielding it from the main plasma. This effect makes it
difficult to insert voltage sensing probes into a plasma in order to
measure any electric potential at a specific location.

Double layers may break down with an explosive release of


electrical energy. Hannes Alfvén first suggested that billions of volts
could exist across a typical solar flare DL.

Astrophysicists who map magnetic fields and assume there's no


electricity in space (or little of any consequence) seem, somewhat
inexplicably, to be unaware of their existence. They resort to positing
any number of mechanical devices from 'magnetic reconnection' to
'frozen-in magnetic field lines' and more.

'Frozen-in Magnetic Fields'

The myth of 'frozen-in magnetic fields' still raises its head in the "Never attribute to
mainstream now and again, despite Alfven disposing of it many malice that which can
years ago. For years it was assumed that plasmas were perfect be adequately
conductors and, as such, a magnetic field in any plasma would have explained by stupidity,
to be 'frozen' inside it. but don't rule out
malice." Heinlein's
The basic technical reason for this arose from one of Maxwell's Razor
equations. It was thought that if all plasmas are ideal conductors they
cannot have electric fields (voltage differences, inside them), and
that any magnetic fields inside a plasma must therefore be 'frozen',
that is unable to move or change in any way.

Further: Thanks to Alfven we now know that there can be voltage


differences between different points in plasmas. He pointed this out
in his acceptance speech when receiving the Nobel Prize for physics
in 1970. The electrical conductivity of any material, including
plasma, is determined by two factors: the density of the population of
available charge carriers (the ions) in the material, and the mobility
of these carriers. In any plasma, the mobility of the ions is extremely
high. Electrons and ions can move around very freely in space. But
the concentration of ions available to carry charge may not be at all
high if the plasma is very low pressure or diffuse. In short, although
plasmas are excellent conductors, they are not perfect. It therefore
follows that weak electric fields can exist inside them, and magnetic
fields are NOT frozen inside them.

'Magnetic reconnection'

Like the myth of 'Frozen in magnetic fields', Magnetic Reconnection


is another colourful invention of conventional astronomy. It also
attempts to account for anomalies arising from the misconception
that electric currents do not flow in space.

In reality it is a well-understood plasma phenomena, relating to


exploding double-layers and electric discharge. Astronomers have
noticed that when magnetic reconnection occurs, there seem to be
regions of electron-depleted space associated with it (Electric
Currents). They have also noticed that a two-layer flow of particles is
created that speeds the release of energy (Double Layers).

Don Scott, a retired professor of electrical engineering, explains the


issues in more detail here
'Magnetars'

Magnetars are mathematical-models of stars based on 'frozen-in' "Magnetic


magnetic fields and 'magnetic reconnection'. Need we say anymore? Reconnection is
The math may be correct, but this does not guarantee that they reflect pseudo-science."
reality. Hannes Alfven

Plasma cosmologists know that magnetic fields do not stand alone --


they are induced by electric currents. There must be an intense
electric current feeding the magnetar, and this current must be part of
a circuit, as all electric circuits must be closed.

Power generation

Because plasmas are good, but not perfect, conductors, they are "In order to understand
similar to wires in their ability to carry electrical current. It is well the phenomena in a
known that if any conductor cuts through a magnetic field, a current certain plasma region,
will flow in that conductor. This is how electrical generators and it is necessary to map
alternators work. not only the magnetic
but also the electric
If there is any relative motion between a cosmic plasma, say in the field and the electric
arm of a galaxy, and a magnetic field in that same location, currents currents." Hannes
will flow in the plasma. These currents will, in turn, produce their Alfven
own magnetic fields.

In 1986, Hannes Alfven postulated electrical models on both galactic


and solar scales. Physicist Wal Thornhill has pointed out that
Alfven's circuits are really scaled up versions of the familiar
homopolar motor that serve as the watt-hour meters in many homes.
Also, more recently, the interaction of the Moon Io with the giant
planet Jupiter has been likened to a dynamo.

There is still some discussion as to whether galaxies require


electrical power from external sources, but who can now reasonably
deny that vast currents flow throughout space? For how much longer
can this simple fact be overlooked and denied?

Granted, electric currents in space may be more difficult to measure


than magnetic fields, but the 'truth is out there'.

Scaling Plasmas

Plasma phenomena are scalable. Their electrical and physical


properties remain the same, independent of the size of the plasma. In
a laboratory plasma, of course, things happen much more quickly
than on, say, galaxy scales, but the phenomena are identical -- they
obey the same laws of physics.

In other words we can make accurate models of cosmic scale plasma


behaviour in the lab, and generate effects that mimic those observed
in space. It has been demonstrated that plasma phenomena can be
scaled to fourteen orders of magnitude. (Alfven hypothesised that
they can be scaled to 28 orders or more!)

Electric currents flowing in plasmas produce most of the observed


astronomical phenomena that remain inexplicable if we assume
gravity and magnetism to be the only forces at work.

Plasma simulations

A world renowned electrical engineer, Dr Anthony C. Perratt -- a


graduate student of Nobel Prize winner Hannes Alfven -- has worked
on plasma simulations for many years. See the links page for further
details of this leading light in Plasma Physics.

He has utilized super-computing capabilities to apply the Maxwell-


Lorentz equations (the basic laws governing the forces and
interactions of electric and magnetic fields) to huge ensembles of
charged particles. He calls this PIC - Particle In Cell simulation. The
results are almost indistinguishable from images of actual galaxies.

Peratt Instabilities

One of the latest and most important discoveries. These dynamic


effects are observed to occur in intense Birkeland currents, arc
discharges in plasma torches, z-pinched plasma filaments, and high
energy electrical discharges. The instability takes on the shape of a
column of axially symmetric toroids or spheroids that remain in a
semi-stable state until disruption. These instabilities can also take on
a sawtooth structure with a violent snaking motion.

Magnetohydrodynamics

The study of the dynamics of electrically-conducting fluids, one of


many fields pioneered by Alfven, and perhaps one of his better
known contributions within mainstream circles.

Technical overview II

Dr Charles Bruce FIEE, FIP, FRAS

Dr Charles Bruce was an expert in high voltage electrical


engineering and a Fellow of The Royal Astronomical Society. In the
1940s he made a remarkable proposal that is still ignored by
mainstream astronomy to this day. His proposal supports the
electrodynamic paradigm.

Bruce identified cosmic jets, solar flares, magnetic fields and high
temperatures in space as electrical discharge phenomena.

"And even if one regards the electric fields as merely another


postulate, it has the great advantage that it is the one postulate which,
in my view, renders all the others unnecessary." C. E. R Bruce,
Electric Fields in Space, Penguin Science, 1968

Bruce also identified beautiful bipolar planetary nebulae as electrical


phenomena. (M2-9 is pictured in the header, above, to the left of the
lightning flash.)

The Electric Sky, Don Scott

Don Scott is a retired professor of Electrical Engineering, with a long


term interest in astronomy and cosmology.

His new book, The Electric Sky, contains sensible science that can
be understood by both amateurs and experts alike. Published late
2006, it is the first substantial public exposition of the latest
developments that further challenge the current 'gravity only' system
of thinking. Order here.

The Plasma Gun

The plasma gun, pictured below, is a simple plasma focus device,


consisting of two metal tubes, one inside the other. They have been
successful in concentrating plasma discharges during at least three
decades of research.

Above. Looking down


the barrel of a plasma
focus gun.

The energy stored in a large bank of capacitors is concentrated into a Above. 3D view of a
tiny filamentary knot, shaped like a donut, and known as a plasmoid. cosmic plasma gun,
When plasmoid vortexes collapse, two intense plasma filaments are the M1 Pulsar.
fired along the axis.
Below. Looking down
Pictured above right is the view down the barrel of a plasma gun. the barrel, so to speak,
of Nebula NGC 6751.
The same process can be seen at the core of spiral galaxies and in
powerful stellar outbursts. Pictured right is Nebula NGC 6751.
Plasma phenomena, of course, are scalable over many orders of
magnitude. The compact energetic activity at the core of galaxies is
thus explained in simple electrical terms. In Plasma Cosmology there
is no need for mathematical abstraction. Who needs Black Holes?

Devices based on the plasma gun are being developed to generate


neutron beams, x-rays, and nuclear fusion devices. The future of
space travel probably rests on these.

Plasma focus v Black Holes

The existence of Black Holes is no longer questioned in conventional


astronomy, despite the fact that they are based entirely on theoretical
assumptions.

However, astronomers using NASAs Hubble Space Telescope have


identified the source of a mysterious blue light surrounding a 'super-
massive black hole' in our neighboring Galaxy, Andromeda M31. It
originates from a disk of hot, young stars that whip around the 'black
hole' in much the same way that planets in our solar system revolve
around the Sun. Astronomers are perplexed about how this disk of
stars could form so close to a giant black hole. They should, of
course, be sucked into oblivion, but this isn't happening.

Similar stars close to the core of our Milky Way galaxy have also
been observed.

None of this perplexes astronomers who are familiar with plasma.


They can generate similar effects in a plasma lab with the plasma
focus device (above): It is the plasmoid that forms and stores energy
at the focus of the discharge. When the plasmoid reaches a critical
energy level, it discharges its energy in a collimated jet along its axis
in the form of electromagnetic radiation and neutrons. Being
unstable outside a nucleus, the neutrons soon decay into protons and
electrons. The electrons are held back by the electromagnetic field,
and the high-speed protons are beamed away.

On a galactic scale this is probably the mechanism that produces the


collimated jets streaming away from the cores of active galaxies. The
masses of ejected protons may make up the quasars that are
associated with these galaxies and could be the basis for their
intrinsic redshift.

Stephen Hawking has put forward a new thoery about black holes,
suggesting that they do not destroy everything that strays into their
path. The implications are profound for g. theory, and do not surprise
those who favour the plasma focus model.

The power source in a plasma gun is understood and can be shown to


actually work (using electric currents). An infinitely strong
gravitational field has never been shown to exist, plus there needs to
be a mechanism that converts the (gravitational) potential energy into
plasma effects, which are clearly the end product.

Intergalactic plasma circuits

A new technique has revealed faint structures amidst the galaxies of


the Virgo Cluster. Plasma cosmologists immediately recognise the
'cocoons, plumes, and streamers' as Birkeland currents and plasma
sheaths. This is direct confirmation of the intergalactic circuits
predicted by the plasma model.

The 'pinch effect' organises plasmas into filaments that act as 'power
cables'. These can attract and repel, and when close can spiral around
each other. At points of sufficiently strong interaction, the matter in
these cables will be stretched into arcs and/or bulges that can
generate the familiar forms of a spiral galaxy.

Cosmic Tornadoes

The discovery of Herbig Haro objects, or 'jetted stars', leaves


astronomers scratching their heads. The Astronomy Picture of the
Day, February 3, 2006, had this to say: “Though such energetic
outflows are well known to be associated with the formation of
young stars, the exact cause of the spiralling structures apparent in
this case is still mysterious.”

In reality, these structures highlight THE fundamental


misunderstanding of space! The only force known to prevent a
stream of gas from rapidly dispersing in the near vacuum of space is
magnetism, and only electric currents can generate magnetic fields.

The trouble is, early in the twentieth century, the astronomical


community decided that gravity rules the heavens, and having settled
on this secure and mathematically elegant vision of the cosmos, they
are reluctant to entertain ideas about more exotic forces playing any
significant role.

Most of these objects are many light years in length, and display the
classic signatures of Plasma/EM behaviour -- 'beading', spiralling,
and 'kink' or 'sawtooth' instabilities.

As Alfvén pointed out, time after time, the underlying assumptions


of cosmologists today “are developed with the most sophisticated
mathematical methods and it is only the plasma itself which does not
‘understand’ how beautiful the theories are and absolutely refuses to
obey them.”

Plate Tectonics, Earthquakes, and more


This fascinating paper examines the limitations of a thermally driven
model of the earth, and outlines an alternative solid-plastic-planet
model, possibly expanding, and driven by electromagnetic forces.
The paper is technical but approachable.

Some of the implications of Plasma Cosmology

Shift happens!

It seems that a perspective shift may be required before the paradigm


can do likewise.

From a conventional perspective, planets and stars are seen as tiny dots
of matter punctuating the vast 'emptiness' of space. In this dubious
model gravity and inertia dominate, albeit with a little magnetism
stirred into the equations now and again.

Plasma Cosmology turns this perspective on its head.

In reality 'empty' space is actually a vast sea of Plasma, and dominated


by electromagnetic forces. The tiny dots of matter are formed by the Z-
pinch effect (see technical), and surrounded by protective sheathes or
Double Layers (again, see technical).

"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is


necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and
the electric currents." Hannes Alfven

Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and


momentum over vast distances. The currents have a tendency to pinch
into filaments which give rise to cellular structures. These are separated
by capacitor-like double layers, producing plasma phenomena which
are characterized by conditions of non-isotropy, discontinuity and
inhomogeneity.

Galaxies are thus expected to lie like pearl beads on a filamentary


necklace, as is observed.

EM versus Gravity

Contrast the plasma model, capable of being reproduced in


straightforward simulations, with the Nebular hypothesis -- the idea that
vast clouds of dust produced by the BB eventually accreted to form
planets and stars. The latter relies almost entirely on gravity, and that
most famous of Free Variables -- Time. It ignores the existence of
plasma and its electrodynamic properties!
Gravitational forces are only attractive, whereas electromagnetic forces
are both attractive and repulsive, and 10^39 stronger! They both vary
inversely with the square of the distance.

EM forces are known to produce the spheroid, toroid, and spiral


structures that we witness throughout the universe. Gravity is NOT the
only force at work.

Misconception #1

"Sure, the electric force is much stronger than gravity at the sub-atomic
level, but at the macrocosmic level gravity is incomparably more
powerful than electricity.”

Martin Rees compares the electrostatic forces between two


submicroscopic charged particles with the force of gravitational
attraction between two Jupiter-sized masses and makes the statement
above. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! By this method we
could say: “Compare the power of the water coming over Niagara Falls
with the power emitted by the average incandescent flashlight bulb –
see – falling water is much more powerful than electricity.” Such
incompatible comparisons defy clarification.

Don Scott, retired professor of Electrical Engineering, adds the


following:
"This assertion is like saying gravity affects elephants more than
microbes. It is simply invalid. “For two protons, the electrostatic force
of repulsion between them is 1.2x10^36 times the force of their
gravitational attraction. The electrostatic repulsion between two
electrons is 4.2x10^42 times their gravitational attraction. For one
proton and one electron, the electrostatic force of attraction between
them is 2.2x10^39 times the force of their gravitational attraction.” The
Electric Sky (TES)

Matters of no little importance

Standard scientific texts focus on just three states of matter -- solids,


“[T]he professional
liquids, and gases. This is no small omission. Not only should Plasma tends to interpret the
be added to this list, but it should take first place, not least because of
pictures by using the
the fact that it constitutes 99% of the known Universe! Space travel has
theory he was taught
confirmed this fact. It is misleading to describe plasma as an ionized gas
while the amateur
when it is in fact a state in its own right. tries to use the
picture to arrive at a
Given the dominance of Plasma in the universe, it seems more sensible theory” Halton Arp,
to consider solids as cooled Plasma (Or matter with energy removed), Seeing Red
as opposed to highly energised or heated matter.

Moreover, because of the ability of Plasma to interact with


electromagnetic forces, it is capable of forming far more complex
structures than those seen in solids, liquids, or gases.

Plasma is for everyone as Anthony Perratt, a leading contemporary


Astrophysicist, is wont to say.

Houston, we have a problem!

Within the limited confines of our own backyard, the Solar System, "It is an
existing gravitational models seem to be holding-up. We have embarrassment that
succeeded in sending probes to neighbouring planets and, despite the the dominant forms
crashes and anomalous accelerations that have afflicted many space of matter in the
programs, the Huygens mission recently scored a spectacular success -- universe remain
landing on Titan, a moon of Saturn, despite unexpected atmospheric hypothetical." Jim
conditions. Peebles, Princeton
Cosmologist
It should be noted, however, that g models begin to break down when
we look further a field. Gravity, of course, is generally described as a
property of mass. The trouble is that we have not discovered enough
mass in our own galaxy, The Milky Way, to account for its fortunate "...past 90% it [Dark
tendency not to disintegrate. Matter] begins to
make observations
The existence of mysterious Dark Matter is hypothesised to account for irrelevant." Halton
this shortfall in mass, but it is yet to be discovered despite extensive Arp
searches. Its existence is only inferred on the basis that g models 'must
be' correct. The alternatives raise too many uncomfortable questions!

Furthermore, Dark Matter is no small kludge factor -- it is alleged to


account for between 20% to 99% of the universe, depending on which
accounts you read! This has lead to further problems in relation to
expansion models, and another hypothetical, Dark Energy, has been
invented to overcome these. In summation, Dark Matter and Dark
Energy add up to the blank cheques that postpone the falsification
of bankrupt theories.

Moreover, it can be shown that electromagnetic forces are several


orders of magnitude greater than the gravitational forces, especially in
certain types of plasma, and also that electromagnetic forces can have a
longer range. On the largest scales, evidence that plasmas exhibit
external forces on physical objects such as galaxies is the same as that
which has lead standard model researchers to postulate dark matter and
dark energy. Need anymore be said?

The space tether experiment

In 1996, in a joint venture between the US and Italy, a large spherical "In the beginning
satellite was deployed from the US space shuttle at the end of a was the Plasma."
conducting cable (tether) over 12 miles long. The idea was to let the Hannes Alfven
shuttle drag the tether across the Earth's magnetic field, producing one
part of a dynamo circuit. The return current, from the shuttle to the
payload, would flow via the Earth's ionosphere.

The deployment was almost complete when things went wrong. The
tether suddenly broke free, and it took some smart detective work to
discover the cause. The nature of the break suggested it was not caused
by excessive tension, but that a strong electric current had melted the
tether.

As Above ... So Below

It is often said that there is no reason to believe that the universe knows "When Kepler found
about us, or that our solar system knows about the universe. In this his long-cherished
purely mechanistic view, contradictory evidence is generally explained belief did not agree
away as merely coincidental. with the most
precise observation,
See this article from www.astronomy.com he accepted the
Anomalies in CMB measurements seem to suggest that our solar system uncomfortable fact.
reacts to conditions outside it, which was not expected, but this situation He preferred the
is dismissed as ... coincidental. hard truth to his
dearest illusions; that
Plasma Cosmology promotes a more holistic view of the universe. This is the heart of
is a profound differentiation, and permits many theories previously science." Carl Sagan
excluded in a purely mechanistic gravity-dominated universe. Bodies
immersed in plasma are not isolated -- they are connected by circuits.

The Dynamic Universe

The Plasma Universe is an extremely dynamic, quasi Steady-State "The universe is an


Universe. It may seem strange to consider Galaxies lasting billions of unending
years as mere transient phenomena, but this is how it is. Planets, Stars transformation in
and Galaxies are born and die. The universe is cyclical! flux whose previous
states we are not
In the plasma model, super clusters, clusters and galaxies are formed privileged to know."
from magnetically confined plasma vortex filaments. The plasma David Bohm
cosmology approach can easily accommodate large scale structures, and
in fact predicts them. Since the plasma approach hypothesises no
theoretical starting point, the amount of time necessary for large-scale
structures presents no problem for the theory.

The Queen of The Sciences

Because Cosmology is considered the Queen of the Sciences, it


provides the building blocks for so many other scientific disciplines,
and this seems to add to the inertia against change. A new approach to
cosmology will require a reassessment in most if not all scientific
disciplines!
Frequently Asked
Questions, and a few
objections...

This might seem like a "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
stupid question, but themselves up and carry on as if nothing ever happened." Winston
how come we don't all Churchill
get electrocuted if space
is so full of electricity?

This is actually a
common question, and
the answer is
straightforward.
Imagine a bird sitting
on a high powered
cable. That cable might
carry many thousands
of volts, but the bird is
safe providing that it
doesn't touch another
cable, or any other
object with an electrical
differential. The air
around the bird acts as
an insulator.

Standing on the earth


we are much like the
bird sitting on the cable,
and the magnetosphere
acts as a protective
cocoon, shielding us
from most of the
energised particles
flying through space.

The occasional crackle


and hum of electric
cables reminds us of
their purpose. Likewise,
thunderstorms remind
us that our planet seeks
electrical equilibrium
with its solar
environment.

Why is space
considered electrically
neutral in mainstream
science?

See History II

Why don't we see more


aurora like phenomena
if space is so
electrically active?

The auroras occur at the


poles where charge is
concentrated by the
Earth's magnetosphere.
In space plasmas are
more tenuous, and the
electric currents that
flow through them are
invisible to the naked
eye, much like most
power cables here on
Earth, which are very
often hidden from sight.
Also, power plants may
be many miles from the
cities they supply.
There is strong
evidence, however, that
the heavens were far
more electrically active
in recent millennia. See
Ancient Testimony.

If only half of what you


say is true, how could
mainstream science be
so blind?

A few words from "Gravitational systems are the 'ashes' of prior electrical systems."
Alfven seem Hannes Alfven
appropriate here. In
1986 he said:

"We should remember


that there was once a
discipline called
Natural Philosophy.
Unfortunately, this
discipline seems not to
exist today. It has been
renamed science, but
science of today is in
danger of losing much
of the natural
philosophy aspect."

Alfven believed that


territorial dominance,
greed, and fear of the
unknown were factors
in this transition.

"Scientists tend to resist


interdisciplinary
inquiries into their own
territory. In many
instances, such
parochialism is founded
on the fear that
intrusion from other
disciplines would
compete unfairly for
limited financial
resources and thus
diminish their own
opportunity for
research."

There is so much we
don't understand about
plasma and electricity!
How can we hope to
build cosmological
models with it?

Sure, we may have a lot


to learn about
something like
electricity, although it
is taken very much for
granted, but we can
measure and observe
the properties and
behaviours of both
plasma and electricity,
which enables us to
make predictions. This
approach stems from a
branch of philosophy
known as empiricism,
which is the basis of
science.

Isn't this just fringe “We have to learn again that science without contact with
science? experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray
into imaginary conjecture.” Hannes Alfvén
Emphatically NO! A
number of respected
scientists and electrical
engineers support most
of the ideas expressed
here. This web site is
simply a synthesis of
the basic principles. It
should also be borne in
mind that two of the
founding fathers,
Alfven and Langmuir,
won Nobel Laureates,
and Birkeland probably
would have done had
he lived long enough.
See History.

While many questions


remain, Plasma
Cosmology is gaining
ground, whereas Big
Bang cosmology relies
on an increasing array
of ad-hoc assumptions
and hypotheticals. The
BBT is increasingly
under attack, even if
does still dominate
academic circles at the
present time.

Can Plasma Cosmology "The universe is an unending transformation in flux whose previous
live with the Big Bang? states we are not privileged to know." David Bohm

Surprisingly, yes. The


Big Bang does not
necessarily preclude the
importance of Plasma
and its electrodynamic
properties. Even within
conventional Big Bang
cosmology, the entire
early universe consisted
of plasma before
recombination (the
process in which
electrons become
confined to protons to
make neutral atoms)
occurred. However, it
should be noted that
most scientists and
engineers in the Plasma
field prefer an
actualistic approach to
science -- the method of
working backwards
from observation, rather
than starting out at
idealised theoretical
principals.

The Big Bang fails to


account for the
'clumpiness' of the
universe and the
filamentary structures
that we see. These are
consistent with Plasma
models.

Who needs Plasma "It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the
Cosmology? universe remain hypothetical." Jim Peebles, Princeton Cosmologist
Gravitational models
work just fine!

Problems with g models


require the invention of
a number of
hypotheticals. Dark
Matter and Dark
Energy remain highly
speculative despite
extensive searches over
more than twenty years!

Where is the Math?

Do not worry. If "Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the
mathematics turns you physical world, but because we know so little." Bertrand Russell
on, there is plenty of it
in some of the more
technical pages that we
link to.

See the philosophy


page for some
discussion about the
relative importance of
math in differing
cosmologies.

You seem to insinuate


that there is a
conspiracy against
Plasma Cosmology!

Not really. As has been


stated, academic circles
are currently dominated
by Big Bang
proponents, and they
tend to promote their
own theories, but
science will move on.

Isn't Plasma Cosmology


just a re-hash of old
Velikovskian ideas?

No. PC does not rest on "In the end The Universe will have its say." Sir Fred Hoyle
any ideas about
catastrophism, but it
does not preclude them,
and many plasma
physicists acknowledge
that our solar system
may have been more
electrically active in
recent millennia.
Electric Universe
supporters are generally
more sympathetic to
ideas relating to
Catastrophism.

When can we expect to


see PC gaining wider
acceptance?

Progress is being made,


slowly but surely, but
plasma physicists grow
increasingly impatient.
See the Way Forward
Could gravity have an
EM origin?

Electric Universe "But hitherto I have not been able to discover the cause of those
supporters view gravity properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses."
as an electrostatic Isaac Newton
dipolar force. It should
be noted that we don't
actually know what
gravity is -- it remains a
descriptive term for a
force that we know
very little about; a force
which is described
mathematically. It may
also be described as a
property of mass, of
course.

Research is being
carried out into the
potential existence of
gravity waves and
graviton particles, but it
has so far achieved
little if any success.
Also, see the
speculations page.

Why is there relatively


little research into
Plasma Cosmology?

A lack of funding
doesn't help. Again, see
the Way Forward

I thought that the The


Electric Star Model had
been debunked?

Electric Star models


suffer fewer
vulnerabilities than
highy speculative
mainstream models
which rest on a number
of unverified
assumptions, notably in
relation to neutrino
flavours, iron content,
and 'magnetic
reconnection', amongst
many others.

If the sun is electrically


powered, as proposed
by EU supporters, why
do we not see electrons
flying towards it?

This is a good question “The peer review system is satisfactory during quiescent times, but
in so far as it pretty not during a revolution in a discipline such as astrophysics, when the
well sums up the establishment seeks to preserve the status quo.” Hannes Alfvén
mainstream gripe with
the the electric star
model.

It is important to bear in
mind, however, that we
should base our models
on what we see, and not
on what we might
expect to see. Plasmas
exhibit many
behaviours not
expected or recognised,
let alone understood, in
mainstream
astronomy/astrophysics.
Check out double layers
and birkeland currents
in the technical section.
These provide some
clues as to what may be
going on.

Electrical engineers, it
seems, are better
qualified to recognise
and understand so many
astronomical
phenomena.
Significantly, Wal
Thornhill and Don
Scott point out that it
would be difficult to
detect low energy
electrons as they stream
towards The Sun.

Does your model supprt


astrological ideas?

Please forgive me, as


I'm no expert on
astrology. I will
concede, nonetheless,
that plasma cosmology
permits a more holistic
view of the universe,
although I have no idea
how this could support
conventional astrology.

Are UFOs
electromagnetically
driven?

I have no idea! For a


scientific perspective
try www.ufoskeptic.org

You are not the first to


try and come up with a
unified theory of
everything, and get it
totally wrong!

This is not a unified


theory of everything.
Plasma Cosmology
simply represents a
fresh approach to many
cosmological problems,
and this web site is a
synthesis of many of
the ideas.

You seem to suggest


that the mainstream
ignores plasma
physics?

Far from it. The point is "...no knowledge is complete or perfect." Carl Sagan
that the mainstream
thus far assigns little
importance to the role
of plasma and
electromagnetism on
cosmic scales. It is one
thing to contemplate
that space isn't the
vacuum once predicted,
but quite another to
acknowledge that
Plasma and its EM
interactions may play a
role in cosmical
structures, from planets
and stars to galaxies
and super-clusters. The
passive role of plasma
assumed by the
mainstream is wrong!

Вам также может понравиться