How the sun really works

Here's some links that may help answer those questions.
www.electric-cosmos.org...
www.thunderbolts.info...
www.holoscience.com...
Neutron Stars refute their own existence
Black holes tear logic apart
www.geocities.com...

The last link has links to many of the original papers from Schwarzschild, Hilbert, Droste etc.. A little honest historical research should show how silly the black hole theory really is. All the black hole effects are recreated on Earth with dense plasma focus or plasma gun.

reply to post by ZeuZZ

---

There was TONS of "scientific literature" to verify that the world was flat ... just because there are books and articles written that say the same thing, does not mean they are right.

[edit on 8-11-2007 by thatblissguy]

I believe that your questions are answered at the end of this synopsis of the electric model of the sun i wrote on another forum online recently (quoted below). It was a forum for mainstream astronomers, so after a few posts they started getting angry and locked the thread without adequately answering any of the questions is asked them.

I will be happy to continue the debate here. the other thread i started looked promising but no-one rubutted any of the electric universe stuff there.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And the earlier Tim-Thompson site that someone linked to, that claims to debunk this theory, is the only one on the internet i can find against plasma cosmology (apart from his other ad-hominem rantings on 'bautforums' and 'badastronomy' forums). Read Don Scotts rebuttal to it, he ABSOLUTELY tears his arguments apart. www.electric-cosmos.org... I can highly reccomend his book 'the electric sky', read the reviews on amazon, they're all positive (apart from one easily offended astrophysicist, with no scientific reasoning used), and it has been read by a lot of top scientists. look at the endorsements, members.cox.net...


www.physicsforums.com...


(cont)



[edit on 8-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

(cont)


Thats how the metals are produced, via Z-pinch fusion, which is very strong. At my old Uni, in our physcis department, we had a small prototype of the Z-pinch fusion generator which was from sandia, and we spent a week looking into how it functioned, it was very interesting, although far too modern technology for the current syllabus i was doing.

The sad thing for mainstream astronomers is that the sustained hydrogen nuclear fusion process hypothesised in the sun has NEVER been sustained on earth. It may not even be possible.



[edit on 8-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

-




Supernova would be caused by stars that enter areas of the galaxy where there are many more ions to fuel it than it can take. The ions are produced from the solar wind of the billions and billions of surrounding stars. As the amount of ions flowing into the stars increase, so does the stars size, until it reaches a point where the energy input exceeds the output, and explodes. This theory also explains why our sun changes in size, still unexplained by the conventional nuclear core model. Where else do you think the vast amount of particles emitted from stars go?



Black holes are an interesting subject. Has anyone ever seen a black hole? No. Has anyone ever proved black holes? No. All we really know is exactly what we observe in space that have lead us to think that black holes are there in the first place, mainly gamma ray outbursts and strong attractive forces. It is far more likely that charge interactions between ionized space plasma is what causes galaxies, not 'super massive black holes', that, I hasten to add, have never been seen.

Quote from; www.plasma-universe.com...

[edit on 8-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

Plasma galaxy formation simulation on a supercomputer. Without the need of any 'super massive black holes' or undetectable dark matter, or dark energy, just birkeland currents with a voltage and amperage, and some plasma physics. As the universe is 99.999% plasma, this makes perfect sense to apply this to galaxy formation.




www.plasma-universe.com...

the results of Peratts simulation looks very convincing. So if the galaxies are held together by electric currents, is is highly likely that they pass throungh stars, which are acting as a focus for the particles. A lot of peratts papers and work has been peer reviewed and approved, here are a few,

adsabs.harvard.edu...
adsabs.harvard.edu...
adsabs.harvard.edu...
adsabs.harvard.edu...


When you look at the corona you do notice that it is made up of filamentary like structures, just like electric birkeland currents. And also the Corono is millions of degrees hotter than the surface of the sun, if the energy the sun was using was being attrated remotely, this is exactly where you would expect it to be expressed, just above the surface. The standard model has no explanation for the coronal heating problem.




A birkeland current;


[/im]


It looks like pretty good evidence for remote electric currents being in contact with the sun from other parts of the galaxy, and possibly fuelling it. Which has big implications for global warming and galactic size changes effecting the suns output and possibly earth in some way.



[edit on 8-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

Umm, Don't you mean TONS of "religious dogma"?. It's actually a bit of a misnomer to think that all past cultures believed the Earth was flat, many ancient cultures new the Earth was round up to and beyond 6000 years ago.
The flat Earth concept is solely a 16th century (or around about) product of religion.

This is more than just articles and books, It's based on the verifiable sciences of plasma physics and electrical engineering, as has already been mentioned.
As ZueZZ has stated, mainstream cosmology tends to ignore the findings of other sciences that are well documented and backed by experimentation.

Welcome to ATS ZueZZ, and thanks for the links, It's good to see more people considering what EU theory has to offer. I think we'll be hearing much more about it in years to come, the sooner mainstream science and the public catch up the better. It has implications for understanding our place in the universe and how it is powered, our lost history and potential for creative and non destructive technology is far reaching.

thanx for the welcome

I am often amazed that every time i have tried to debate this on mainstream physics forums with some pretty damn intelligent academics on there, they consistantly fail to come up with any satisfatory reason as to why plasma cosmology and the EU theory are not correct. So i have concluded that it must be right! as soon as i quote them the peer reviewed papers on that site, they delete the thread instantly! i'm using their own system aginst them, as they cant argue with peer reviewed stuff, and theres plenty on EU about on the net

The main reason i am interested in this is to see if this is what is causing global warming and also (somewhat more pessimistically) see if due to changes in the galaxy something is going to happen to the sun and the date 2012. I dont think that being that precise about the date is at all likely, but there do seem to be many people, and completely separate cultures all over the world that have come up with this approximate date. I was reading Jim Marss' post on this, and he says; "I do understand that at the end of 2012, the Earth will come into a straight alignment with the center of our Milky Way galaxy. Even odder is that scientists have claimed to have received regular radio-type signals emanating from the center of the galaxy. No one knows what this portends, but many people believe that this situation is foretelling that our 3D material plane may experience increased vibrations in the universal energy grid." www.abovetopsecret.com...

I have also read an article that says that plasma formations that occur in the upper atmosphere could have been recorded in vaious ancient rock art; which would idicate an electrical phenomenen in the upper atmosphere, and local solar system. Maybe they were seeing formations in the sky caused by changes in the galaxy which effects the suns output? www.theglobalintelligencer.com...

I was gonna post a link to this page on Jims thread, so see what he makes of it, but i think i need an invite or something Anyway, thats the more specualtive side of it, its the science that i really like as it has a lot of academic support, even if mainstream astronomers choose to completely ignore them.


[edit on 8-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

No one can come up with a single reason to debunk this theory then? so I can only presume that is a correct model of the sun, and that the majority of current astronomy is wrong.

please can someone show me reasons as to why this electrical model is not correct, i would very much like to hear them.

[edit on 15-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

Astronomers defend the standard model by claiming that all processes they describe have been performed in the laboratory and are well known. But nothing could be further from the truth. Mankind has been doggedly struggling for over half a century to create a sustained nuclear fusion reaction in the laboratory, we have not come close to doing it, it may not even be a possible. The only experiment that releases tremendous amounts of energy is the atomic bomb, and that reaction is almost instantaneous. Recently discovered inherent instabilities in the plasma generated by the process may make it impossible to control the reaction and make it occur continually. Just to assume that such a sustained process is happening at the suns core is a stretch.

However the the Z-pinch fusion effect of current filaments in arc mode plasmas has been tested and is very strong, and the effect of these forces on the suns surface would be strong enough to fuse atoms. Whatever nuclear fusion is taking place is likely taking place in the double layer above the top of the photosphere and through out the rest of the sun, not deep within its core. applying this to the sun makes perfect sense as the sun is constituted of 100% plasma.

Sandia National Laboratories Z-machine has produced huge amounts of energy, certainly sufficient for the sun to fuel itself from, using only plasma physics and magnetic fields.

www.plasma-universe.com...





It is far more likely that this is the process that fuels the sun, meaning the sun is attracting its energy from an extenal circuit of ions. The sun is probably not powered from its core as we have all been led to beleive. I highly suspect that this is what is causing global warming, as there are a lot of odd things happening in the solar system at the moment.



www.space.com...

www.space.com...

I updated some of the details on the Electric Sun Model on www.plasma-universe.com... which gives some really good evidence for a remotely powered sun.

They have a few good pictures of birkeland current structures in the corona, and filaments that look just like electrical currents, travelling into and out of the sun in the solar wind.




The flare appears twisted just like the birkeland currents you sometimes see in common plasma balls, like these;





The novelty plasma ball demonstrates many of the properties of plasma that can be seen in the Sun, in nebulae, and in galaxies. Since the sun is 99.999% plasma, applying these recent experiments to the sun is a logical step.



Blaise Frazier's beautiful photo of the spherical electrode in the centre of a plasma ball shows a blue filamentary streamer as it wavers during the 8-second exposure. Thousands of volts of electricity ionize the gas in the globe, ripping electrons from molecules and atoms. As electrons recombine with the ions, the gas gives off light. The colors depend on the kind of gas filling the globe.




This plasma ball illustrates some of the fundamental characteristics of plasma. Sometimes called a plasma cable, or plasma rope, the filament is the result of electrons and ions flowing through the plasma (i.e., an electric current). The current generates a magnetic field that surrounds the filament like hoops around a beer barrel. The magnetic field pinches the current and keeps it collimated (or wire-like).


Also, as has been shown well earlier by other people on this thread, the work of Kristian Birkeland successfully showed the equatorial plasma torus seen on the sun using an electrical high voltage mechanism. Birkeland was nominated for the Nobel Prize no less than seven times; even though the implictaions of his work on how the sun really functions is continually ignored by mainstream astronomy today.
His experiment;



Looks like a pretty good fit to me. A lot of birkelands work can be seen on havard uni's website;

-adsabs.harvard.edu...
-adsabs.harvard.edu...
-adsabs.harvard.edu...
-adsabs.harvard.edu...



Instead of astonomers being excited about the prospect of testing structures in space in the laboratory, they have been overwhelmingly negative of these findings. Probably because it brings into question a lot of their original assumptions about gravity, and the fuel source of the sun, which they can not back up with any good reasons.

Currently there is no explanation as to why gravity can cause these structures, or why the corona is even there in the first place. They are all obviously an electrical phenomenon. The sun is likely not powered from its core, but externally from the galaxy.




[edit on 16-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

This clip does very well to illustrate the difference between mainstream cosmology and plasma cosmology. Read the description of the video in youtube for some of the science papers behind plasma cosmology.

YouTube Link

The world's leading professional association for the advancement of technology, the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc) has shown recent interest in electrically powered stars. This is quite amazing, as it is a peer reviewed paper, coming from one of the most respected science bodies in the world. August 2007;
ieeexplore.ieee.org.../iel5/27/4287017/04287093.pdf&arnumber=4287093

(i dont think that link works, for whatever reason, to see the paper search for the paper in google under the title; "The Z-Pinch Morphology of Supernova 1987A and Electric Stars")



They state;



There is a revolution coming in astronomy, they are quickly beggining to realize that plasma cosmology is a better interpretation than their current gravity based theories.

The conspiracy comes in becasue NASA must know this is how space works, but, for whatever reason, they dont want the public to know. I suspect its just fear of looking stupid. If nasa had to admit that the whole basis of modern astronomy is completely wrong, they would never hear the end of it.


There is a lot of science to back this model of the sun up; www.plasma-universe.com...-11


[edit on 18-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

I think the real key point of this however is that in a few hundred years, someone will come up with a NEW amazing theory that blows Plasma away as well, and so on, the truth is we honestly don't know.

We talk the talk and don't walk the walk.


We claim to know what holds the universe together etc... but have hardly left our own planet.

Nice work ZeuZZ! Ive read the arguments in bad astronomy forums and the conclusion I came with is that main stream has no reason to stick with its ideas, none. Its not doing them any favors and it's holding back science & technology in such a way that it is stupid. We cant send 'men' on the moon because it is impossible to get any work done without getting zapped or covered in micro fine magnetically charged dust. We call wireless transfer of electricity WiTricity, as if its a new form of magic! This site give a nice explanation on what electricity is, or isnt.

My fave sun is HD 12545

to the OP.
So you're saying just because no one has 'seen' a black hole then it must not exist? When someone asks you a legit question about something the theory you subscribe to can't explain you proceed to flat out deny it's existence? How do you expect anyone to take your 'truth' seriously with statements like that?

Just because you don't understand how gravity works and it's relationship with electromagnetism doesn't mean any theories based on it are false. And also just because something can't be done/duplicated here on earth doesn't mean it can not exist in space. IE your neutron star 'explanation'.

It can be hard to wrap your mind around the EXTREMES tat occur in space this however does not mean they are nonexistant.

There is a reason why the current theory is the one held standard, that's because a lot of brilliant minds have worked on this for many many decades. Now you're saying we should throw all that away because you feel offended that someone is keeping your theories from becoming the new mainstream for which we should base all other science upon?

I wish our TPTB would already come out and tell us they have the mathematical formula to gravity so that we can put all this nonsense to rest.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck........you know the rest.

You can only be confident of what you directly observe, not what you speculate is causing these effects. Currently black holes are no more than speculation. The current explanation for black holes is more like magic than science. This all stems from matematicians using einsteins equations to conjure up things on paper that have no relation to what we actually observe in space.


The only data you have is periodic high energy gamma ray outbursts, which were discovered after astronomers had come to the definitve conclusion that nothing emminates from black holes. Instead of re-evaluating the original model, they just come up with the Ad-Hoc explanation that this is actually how black holes work, changing the entire concept of how black holes work overnight.

Ion clocks that are put in a basic 'relaxion oscillator' arrangement build up charge and cause periodic discharge between bodies. The bursts from black holes are nearly identical to that for trapped-ion clocks.




I could give you further more specific reasons if you require, but reading your post, most of the points seem to be Ad Hominem, and not raising genuine scientific issues. I have a Phd in physics, so my knowledge of electromagnetism and gravity is probably sufficient to answer your questions.

Could you be a bit more specific in your questions? i am not entirely sure what you doubt about this theory.





Why do mainstream astronomers not consider this, if it is such a good theory? That is a legitimate question to ask. The answer is quite simple.




www.electric-cosmos.org...








[edit on 18-11-2007 by ZeuZZ]

-------------------------------------
Replaced quote with 'ex' tags for eternal material and added link

Please read Posting work written by others

www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 21/11/07 by masqua]

does the EU also the planets and moons

That is a very interesting star, and it is good evidence of electrical activity on stars.



Quote from www.electric-cosmos.org...





That black section is a huge sunspot, i didn't realise that! Thanks for sharing

Thats pretty damn hard to expalin with 'tangled magnetic fields' or 'magnetic depression' as most astronomers do.

Yet again the Plasma Universe offers a better explanation.


quote from www.holoscience.com...;






---------------------------------------
Replaced quotes with 'ex' tags for external material.

please read Posting work written by others

www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 21/11/07 by masqua]

Please provide evidence to back this up.




I've got news for you. Nuclear fusion reactions in a star's core are a result of gravitational collapse. The radiation pressure generated by those fusion reactions prevents any further collapse until the nuclear fuel is exhausted.