Originally posted by Thill
reply to post by they see ALL
But thats exacly that it is .. Scientist will not agree to any theory that will cause them to loose their jobs/funding and be ridiculed as somebody that was completly wrong all the time ...
Astronomers have confirmed the existence of a lopsided "doughnut" of electrified plasma surrounding Saturn.
The giant ring current, as the doughnut is called, was confirmed following analysis of recent Cassini spacecraft data. But the new information adds a twist to the electric phenomenon, which extends more than 746,000 miles (1.2 million kilometers) into space: It rotates.
Originally posted by StellarX
Originally posted by buddhasystem
I frankly find a few posts in this thread slightly paranoid.
It's only paranoia if they are not after you! Maybe it's time to stop and turn around?
This must be why the work of Birkeland has been ignored when not attacked and or dismissed?
Is it your contention that NASA has not over the years indulged in absolutely massive volumes of controversy over their manipulation of data?
Does this new find have anything to do with the way the energy is generated inside the Sun? Hardly.
You bet it does but that will take a few more decades
at the current rate of establishment non achievement.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Does this new find have anything to do with the way the energy is generated inside the Sun? Hardly.
You bet it does but that will take a few more decades
You don't know that, so I dismiss that as empty talk.
- The outer corona of the sun is millions of degrees hotter than its surface. According to the standard model the heat should radiate uniformely away from the core, and obey the inverse square law for radiation. It does not.
- The suns output sometimes stops COMPLETELY, sometimes for days. That is very hard to explain by a continuosly fusioning sun. (science.nasa.gov...)
- Heavy elements (metals). According to the standard model the sun is made of its fuel (hydrogen) and its byproduct (helium). The current fusion model does not account for where the large amount of heavy elements emanating from the sun comes from.
- Solar neutrino deficiency. Measurements of neutrino's have never accurately fitted models.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by DarkSide
I might be saying something stupid but if the sun's output stopped completely for days don't you think that would be noticed? Like no light for a few days would hardly go unnoticed
Dec. 13, 1999: From May 10-12, 1999, the solar wind that blows constantly from the Sun virtually disappeared -- the most drastic and longest-lasting decrease ever observed.
science.nasa.gov...
Data from the Hinode satellite shows that magnetic waves play a critical role in driving the solar wind into space. The solar wind is a stream of electrically charged gas that is propelled away from the sun in all directions at speeds of almost 1 million miles per hour. Better understanding of the solar wind may lead to more accurate prediction of damaging radiation waves before they reach satellites.
How the solar wind is formed and powered has been the subject of debate for decades. Powerful magnetic Alfvén waves in the electrically charged gas near the sun have always been a leading candidate as a force in the formation of solar wind since Alfvén waves in principle can transfer energy from the sun's surface up through its atmosphere, or corona, into the solar wind.
Originally posted by Donoso
I find it hilarious that you act like scientists find themselves to be experts when it's the media and paranoia prone folks that label them such as to try and prove an ad hoc point.
Science is all about change.
* Arrhenius (ion chemistry)
* Alfven, Hans (galaxy-scale plasma dynamics)
* Baird, John L. (television camera)
* Bakker, Robert (fast, warm-blooded dinosaurs)
* Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (black holes in 1930)
* Chladni, Ernst (meteorites in 1800)
* Doppler (optical Doppler effect)
* Folk, Robert L. (existence and importance of nanobacteria)
* Galvani (bioelectricity)
* Harvey, William (circulation of blood, 1628)
* Krebs (ATP energy, Krebs cycle)
* Galileo (supported the Copernican viewpoint)
* Gauss, Karl F. (nonEuclidean geometery)
* Binning/Roher/Gimzewski (scanning-tunneling microscope)
* Goddard, Robert (rocket-powered space ships)
* Goethe (Land color theory)
* Gold, Thomas (deep non-biological petroleum deposits)
* Gold, Thomas (deep mine bacteria)
* Lister, J (sterilizing)
* Margulis, Lynn (endosymbiotic organelles)
* Mayer, Julius R. (The Law of Conservation of Energy)
* Marshall, B (ulcers caused by bacteria, helicobacter pylori)
* McClintlock, Barbara (mobile genetic elements, "jumping genes", transposons)
* Newlands, J. (pre-Mendeleev periodic table)
* Nottebohm, F. (neurogenesis: brains can grow neurons)
* Ohm, George S. (Ohm's Law)
* Ovshinsky, Stanford R. (amorphous semiconductor devices)
* Pasteur, Louis (germ theory of disease)
* Prusiner, Stanley (existence of prions, 1982)
* Rous, Peyton (viruses cause cancer)
* Semmelweis, I. (surgeons wash hands, puerperal fever )
* Tesla, Nikola (Earth electrical resonance, "Schumann" resonance)
* Tesla, Nikola (brushless AC motor)
* J H van't Hoff (molecules are 3D)
* Warren, Warren S (flaw in MRI theory)
* Wegener, Alfred (continental drift)
* Wright, Wilbur & Orville (flying machines)
* Zwicky, Fritz (existence of dark matter, 1933)
* Zweig, George (quark theory)
* Ball lightning (lacking a theory, it was long dismissed as retinal afterimages)
* Catastrophism (ridicule of rapid Earth changes, asteroid mass extinctions)
* Child abuse (before 1950, doctors were mystified by "spontaneous" childhood bruising)
* Cooperation or altruism between animals (versus Evolution's required competition)
* Instantaneous meteor noises (evidence rejected because sound should be delayed by distance)
* Mind-body connection (psychoneuroimmunology, doctors ridiculed any emotional basis for disease)
* Perceptrons (later vindicated as Neural Networks)
* Permanent magnet levitation ("Levitron" shouldn't have worked)
www.amasci.com...
It's a never ending study of how exactly the universe works.
You don't think Stephen Hawking's "ego" was hurt after he proclaimed he had been all wrong about black holes?
What about how Einstein was dead certain that Quantum Mechanics was doomed to fail?
hink Newtonian laws of gravity are obsolete because of general relativity? Newtonian laws of gravity are pretty damn accurate in certain scales. However, they simply didn't work after a certain point.
How about the very recent and widespread acceptance of the multiverse? The general idea existed back with Sci-Fi parallel universes. Past ideas and knowledge get expanded on and refined over the ages.
It's ludicrous to believe that with enough empirical data to form a test that can be verified by anyone in the Scientific community they'll say:
"Nope! Even though there's ample proof to support your hypothesis, we're going to sit this one out!"
You've got to be kidding! People would be jumping on the bandwagon left and right, the amount of funding one could obtain at that point would be well enough for an extraordinary amount of investigation.
It's almost as if you believe that every single scientist goes through a process where their brains are melded into a single drone like state and they follow the commands of some evil overlord. That's not the case, I assure you.
You'll never find a more interesting discussion then at a BBQ party where the crowd is made up of physicists, biologists, and the occasional mathematician. Not too many though, they're a'tad nuts.
bibliotecapleyades.net
A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun model worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation of the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar behavior.
Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is answered. The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to generate temperatures of about 16 million K—producing a continuous “controlled” nuclear reaction.
A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric. It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that the fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun, while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.
More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce proposed in 1944 that the Sun’s,
"photosphere has the appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
This discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed granulation of the solar surface." Bruce’s model, however, was based on a conventional understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the “electric” Sun without reference to external electric fields.
Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce’s work, added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in 1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a larger galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make the theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.
Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge" fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons.
In this view, the charge differential at the Earth’s distance from the Sun is smaller than our present ability to measure—perhaps one or two electrons per cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and at the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength to generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.
If the bipolar Z-pinch pattern is introduced to explain supernovae and planetary nebulae, a new electrical theory of stars is required.
