Gigantic Lightning Above the Electric Earth

Hi peeps...

First I just wanted to say I never knew you got lightning way above the clouds..! This is a video by Wal Thornhill whose Electric Universe model makes more sense to me than the Standard model. Now I could not tell you which is the truer model of our Universe (I do not think I know enough to say..!). But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

Well I just wanted to share this video as I found it quite intriguing. Especially as it was about something new to me.. Hope you enjoy it.. This was posted in March of this year and it has only come to my attention today. Apologies if this has already been posted..



Peace
Fluff

reply to post by fluff007

But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

Yes, it does, to scientists. To layman, sure, totally plausible.

It is amazing isn't it. I remember seeing the quite some years back on a program on the BBC.

When bolts come down, "sprites" go up.

As Einstien said, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. IMO this is just a product of the natural world in balance.

boncho
reply to post by fluff007

But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

 

Yes, it does, to scientists. To layman, sure, totally plausible.

There was a time, washing your hands before surgery was far fetched too. LOL.

What i find more interesting is that the space elevator idea can never work because of this.

Klassified

boncho
reply to post by fluff007

But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

 

Yes, it does, to scientists. To layman, sure, totally plausible.

There was a time, washing your hands before surgery was far fetched too. LOL.

I'm sure a wealth of knowledge will be added to the scientific record in the years following our lives. I just don't believe the "Electric Universe Model" will become a recognized theory, as it has major problems, cited by many, reviewed by many.

I would say the EU theory, would be similar to stating that hand washing is unneeded today, because they found antibodies, which must kill every germ we touch.

(As in, you might be on to something, but you took a wrong turn five exits ago)

Astrophysicists say that stars, including the sun, are powered by nuclear fusion. However electric universe theorists say this is not so. The reasons given are that:

we haven’t yet found the neutrinos that must be emitted from such a reaction;
that the granular structure we see on the sun would not be possible, because convection is impossible due to the conditions there;
the energy emitted from the sun does not display the inverse square law;
periodic fluctuations in the sun’s output resemble electric discharge patterns; and
the solar wind is and effect of charged particles being accelerated in an electric field.
Well that all sounds very plausible and ‘scientificy’. But let’s take a closer look at the arguments one by one.

Click here to read the individual debunks to each position

fluff007
Hi peeps...

First I just wanted to say I never knew you got lightning way above the clouds..! This is a video by Wal Thornhill whose Electric Universe model makes more sense to me than the Standard model. Now I could not tell you which is the truer model of our Universe (I do not think I know enough to say..!). But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

Well I just wanted to share this video as I found it quite intriguing. Especially as it was about something new to me.. Hope you enjoy it.. This was posted in March of this year and it has only come to my attention today. Apologies if this has already been posted..

Peace
Fluff

Interesting that 80km to 100km is mentioned as the distance the lightening seems to emanate from.
www.wildheretic.com...

This site needs very serious consideration!

How would you feel if you found out that the sun was in fact a huge sulphur lamp?

boncho
reply to post by fluff007

But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

 

Yes, it does, to scientists. To layman, sure, totally plausible.

Most scientists have sold out to the money interests.
The truth will out and your blind faith (if that is what it is) and arrogance
will be soon sorely tested.

reply to post by boncho


Your whole being is Electricity!!

When a polygraph expert tests people for lying, he hooks up electrical sensors!!

You are Energy/Electricity!

Your soul is like a plasma that runs along your nervous system stemming from your brain.

The nervous system doesn't look much different than those sprites

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nervous_system
en.wikipedia.org...

The nervous compared to those sprites is very similar.

A neat comparison on Internet of Galactic Super clusters to the brain neural network:

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121119140545.htm
www.sciencedaily.com...

Very cool renderings and art on this page visually illustrating it.

www.bordalierinstitute.com/target0.html
www.bordalierinstitute.com...

Something is going on in a higher dimension!!

Universum, ancient woodcut and early depiction of a holographic universe
from Wikipedia Commons


upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Universum.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org...

reply to post by boncho


The defibrillator which is a life saving machine gives the heart an electric shock.. The electric shock kick starts the heart and allows it to re-establish its normal rhythm....

Defibrillation is a common treatment for life-threatening cardiac dysrhythmias, ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia. Defibrillation consists of delivering a therapeutic dose of electrical energy to the heart with a device called a defibrillator. This depolarizes a critical mass of the heart muscle, terminates the dysrhythmia and allows normal sinus rhythm to be reestablished by the body's natural pacemaker, in the sinoatrial node of the heart.

en.wikipedia.org...

The defibrillator saves a colossal amount of lives. And it uses electricity. That says something for me. As a previous poster stated we are electrical beings. And if we are electrical beings it makes sense that we do indeed live in an Electric Universe.

This theory seems very very very censored by many corporations, organisations and establishments. It is completely dismissed. Scientists get told what to publish. If they have found something that goes against what we know their work is ridiculed and sometimes they even 'disappear'.. If theories like the Electric Universe are so far fetched why do they spend a huge amount of effort censoring, ridiculing and 'interfering'.

If someone comes up with a theory. Why not study it. Why bother to spend so much making sure theories like this do not see the light of day. And if they do the people who put forward these theories are branded crazy and mad.

Even Albert Einstein's theories were ridiculed when he first put them out there. Especially his theory of relativity. And look what he has become... He is revered by many many many people..

Remember when people thought the Earth was flat and ruled it outrageously preposterous that it could be a sphere..

All theories deserve to be studied...

reply to post by fluff007


Its the earth thinking thoughts.

reply to post by fluff007


Cherry picking talking points doesn't make them true you realize.

UpEndedWorld

boncho
reply to post by fluff007

But it does not seem so far fetched to think the Electric Universe model is a real possibility...

 

Yes, it does, to scientists. To layman, sure, totally plausible.

Most scientists have sold out to the money interests.
The truth will out and your blind faith (if that is what it is) and arrogance
will be soon sorely tested.

That is a better description of everyone in this thread supporting EU.

For one, I never said there are not electrical or magnetic phenomena which can't possible have another explanation or better understanding, aka a new Theory for us to have on them. That theory also does not mean, all others would be rendered useless.

EU, I said, as a theory, does not hold up under scrutiny. If you would like to prove that, present information for that, by all means.

Part of the thing I dont like about EU, is everyone pushing it, is trying so hard to prove relativity and a ton of other theories wrong, by saying EU is right. And you wonder why it has trouble in peer review?

By the way, to all in this thread, electrical impulses in the human body, a cardiac defibrillator, does not prove the electric universe theory correct, sorry.

legacy.jyi.org...

The solar system and galaxy look like individual cells, heck, the universe looks like a giant brain, that does not mean without a shadow of a doubt we live in a giant dog's brain, it means it looks like a brain and needs further study.

The difference between science and reaching.

Wal Thornhill says it perfectly in the video:

"Now one of the problems is that science is suppose to be evidence-based, but here you see a case where evidence is not admitted because it doesn't fit prior beliefs." 1:25-1:35 of video

That pretty much says it all

JakiusFogg
It is amazing isn't it. I remember seeing the quite some years back on a program on the BBC.

When bolts come down, "sprites" go up.

As Einstien said, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. IMO this is just a product of the natural world in balance.

(in Phage's voice)

Actually, no, Einstein never said that.

'Equal and opposite' was Newton, 300+ years before Einstein.

Not sure why you think that??? (I want to put an emoticon in here, but they are so messed up I'm not sure which one to use -- I want the one that says 'I get your meaning, but you aren't quite right' - I don't want to demean you at all)

reply to post by boncho

I'm sure a wealth of knowledge will be added to the scientific record in the years following our lives. I just don't believe the "Electric Universe Model" will become a recognized theory, as it has major problems, cited by many, reviewed by many.

You may very well be right there Boncho. I'm not qualified to argue either side. You would be far more knowledgeable than I in this area. My point was more along the lines, that academia often vehemently oppose theories that challenge the present consensus, citing a myriad of "valid" reasons. But in due time, when enough evidence surfaces, a new paradigm is born, and our sciences take an instant leap forward. That may, or may not, be the case here.

Still, you've got to respect a group of folks who spend their life learning, and trying to answer the BIG questions.

fluff007
reply to post by boncho

 

The defibrillator which is a life saving machine gives the heart an electric shock.. The electric shock kick starts the heart and allows it to re-establish its normal rhythm....

This is interesting, Older Defibrillators used a quick jolt of Electricity, and it was over.

Modern Defibrillators Give you a quick jolt and then it sends that jolt into a negative wave, I guess mimicking A heart beat in and out.

www.resuscitationcentral.com/defibrillation/biphasic-waveform/
www.resuscitationcentral.com...

Monophasic Waveforms: A type of defibrillation waveform where a shock is delivered to the heart from one vector as shown below. It is shown graphically as current vs. time.
In this waveform, there is no ability to adjust for patient impedance, and it is generally recommended that all monophasic defibrillators deliver 360J of energy in adult patients to insure maximum current is delivered in the face of an inability to detect patient impedance.

Biphasic Waveforms: A type of defibrillation waveform where a shock is delivered to the heart via two vectors. Biphasic waveforms were initially developed for use in implantable defibrillators and have since become the standard in external defibrillators.
While all biphasic waveforms have been shown to allow termination of VF at lower current than monophasic defibrillators, there are two types of waveforms used in external defibrillators. These are shown below.

They are talking 360 Joules or 700-1700 volts. That is a lot of juice at once. Its kinda like getting hit with a mini lightning bolt to get rebooted!!

Web page describing Defibrillator models and voltages.
Voltage Used to Resuscitate a Human Heart
hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/CindyAnnRomanowich.shtml
hypertextbook.com...



reply to post by AthlonSavage

AthlonSavage
reply to post by fluff007

 

Its the earth thinking thoughts.

Good question!

I wonder what it thinks of humans if it does?....

Klassified
reply to post by boncho

 

I'm sure a wealth of knowledge will be added to the scientific record in the years following our lives. I just don't believe the "Electric Universe Model" will become a recognized theory, as it has major problems, cited by many, reviewed by many.

You may very well be right there Boncho. I'm not qualified to argue either side. You would be far more knowledgeable than I in this area. My point was more along the lines, that academia often vehemently oppose theories that challenge the present consensus, citing a myriad of "valid" reasons. But in due time, when enough evidence surfaces, a new paradigm is born, and our sciences take an instant leap forward. That may, or may not, be the case here.

Still, you've got to respect a group of folks who spend their life learning, and trying to answer the BIG questions.

edit on 10/10/2013 by Klassified because: clarity

I respect and admire those people for sure. I do. It is those people who shape and change the scientific landscape. But the ones who want to take shortcuts and have their theories become mainstream or status quo, without earning it properly are not asking for science, they are asking for dogma.

In fact, the hardened scientific beliefs that rule the day now mostly started as out of the box thinking. They all started out as hypotheses, against the grain, not "mainstream", revolutionary, changing, etc.

Those people who stuck to their guns to bring us new scientific understanding are well revered and rightfully so. I applaud anyone who has dedicated their life to that mission.

However, there is a point in everyone's life when they want recognition. And unfortunately, everyone has this nagging urge to be right. In some cases it has sullied very admirable but normal, boring academic careers, because a select few decide they don't want to go through the accustomed channels of proof. They want their cake before it's baked.

As I previously mentioned, I believe without a shadow of a doubt there will be hundreds of new theories which completely reshape the scientific landscape. Some may have a many of few things noted or touched upon in EU, but will of course still vary greatly. They will be things that stand up to scrutiny and can be proved again and again through repeatable experimentation and empirical evidence.

And, as I mentioned in another post, the universe looks like a brain. The old Animal House bit, the Men in Black, the Perversions of Science on HBO, all these shows or movies touched on something, are we just a quark or gluon in some massively greater, macro being. Do we make up a molecule of some giant space bug? Or do we make up the make up of ourselves, is our universe molecules of our molecules which fold in on themselves?

These kinds of questions are what makes human curiosity so strong.

Just because we see the question however, doesn't mean we have the ability to find the answer. At least, not at this time anyway. These things take time.

The major problem with EU, (If I remember correctly) is that it contradicts too many observed, empirically observed phenomena, so for it to be right, it would turn physics on its head. It would basically be like stating the sky isn't blue anymore. So by its own admission, there is something wrong with it.

Could a new theory come about that uses much of the information in EU, but, changes it enough that all our currently proved, testable knowledge remains the same? Sure, maybe.

That wouldn't be such a bad thing. Anything that improves our grasp of the universe is a good thing!

It has to fit in to our current understanding to some degree though. What some people are asking, is equal to saying, "well, when relativity came out, we figured out that Newton was full of bollocks, you see, a feather and an anvil, they travel at varying speeds in no atmosphere."

But they don't. There is no way to disprove some of Newtown's laws. You could say, when X happens to the anvil and X happens to the feather, in a perfect vacuum, X will happen. That would be a new theory that adds to it. Lets say some exotic particle force, makes the anvil and feather turn to bunnies and appear in dimension X.

My example, absurd yes, but the fundamental is there. Just trying to explain it in a way for everyone to understand. The new theory of bunnies in dimension X would still allow Newton's calculations to stand, because there would be some contributing factor to explain what indeed is going on.

The problem with EU, from my recollection, is it tries to wipe the board of things we already know. We may not have a perfect understanding of everything, but you can make 1+1 = 3 simply because you found a new way to do division.

reply to post by boncho


I so very much agree, folks need to stop the shortcuts, i guess the old
workers motto applies to science as well, you can have it good, fast
or cheap, pick any two.

reply to post by six67seven

Wal Thornhill says it perfectly in the video:

"Now one of the problems is that science is suppose to be evidence-based, but here you see a case where evidence is not admitted because it doesn't fit prior beliefs." 1:25-1:35 of video

That pretty much says it all

No, he's just gibbering. Seriously.

If one does not know any physics (as those citing lightning sprites and defribillators as evidence for an electrically powered universe clearly do not), one simply has no business having an opinion on this subject. 'Makes sense to me'? Sure,it makes sense to me, but what do I know?