The image above is a diagram of a circuit. What does it take to make a galaxy? The popular view in astronomy today imagines that black holes and dark matter organize galactic structure and induce the observed motions. Neither can be seen, but both can be described mathematically without straying from the paradigm of an electrically neutral, gravitationally-driven cosmos. The problem for astronomers is that the gravitational model looks good in their mathematical equations, but it is disproven by scientific observation.
As Dr. Scott has written:
"In the ES [Electric Star] model, perhaps the most important factor in determining any given star's characteristics is the strength of the current density in Amperes per square meter (A/m2) measured at that star's surface. If a star's incoming current density increases, the arc discharges on its surface (photospheric tufts) will get hotter, change color (away from red, toward blue), and get brighter. The absolute brightness of a star, therefore, depends on two things: the strength of the current density impinging into its surface, and the star's size (the star's diameter). Therefore, we add another scale to the horizontal axis of the HR diagram: Current Density at the Star's Surface."
This is what is happening to our sun. The current coming from a source OUTSIDE the known universe is increasing. Our sun is heating up, and at the present rate, in another 5-6 years its radiance will be twice what it was 18 years ago. THIS is the true cause of global warming. It is normal for the sun to have an 11-year "period". At the end of its last 11 year cycle, it continued to gain in energy output, rather than decreasing.
As demonstrated in numerous laboratory experiments, electric currents in plasma can produce all of the common structures observed in the heavens, from simple filaments to the polar jets of stars and galaxies to the “wheels within wheels” found at the cores of nebulas and other high-energy formations.
The Crab Nebula
On July 4, 1054 AD, Chinese chroniclers recorded an apparent supernova they called a "guest star" in the constellation Taurus, near the star Zeta Tauri. It was bright enough to be visible in daylight, but faded and disappeared again about a year later.
In 1731 astronomer John Bevis discovered a bright nebula in the same location. When Charles Messier saw it in 1758, he first thought this "fuzzy object" might be a comet, but he found that it never moved.
Using a larger telescope in 1844, Lord Ross thought the nebula resembled a crab's claw, and the description stuck. More than ten light years across, the Crab Nebula is now thought to be the remains of a star that exploded in 1054.
Today's astronomical instruments see much more than Messier's fuzzy patch. They see filaments and complex structures, in colors and wavelengths that highlight newly discovered phenomena. For example, the star at the center of the nebula blinks 30 times a second. We now call such stars "pulsars".
The high-resolution picture of the Crab Nebula above (upper), taken by the Very Large Telescope (VLT), shows the filamentation produced by magnetic fields and electric currents, as material races away from the nebula's core at half the speed of light--a "higher speed than expected from a free explosion", according to NASA reports. Acceleration of particles is a trademark of electrical activity, and no other force in space is known to achieve this feat.
In the lower photograph taken by the Chandra X-Ray Telescope, we see the internal dynamics of the Crab Nebula, revealing structure typical of the intensely energetic activity observed in decades of laboratory experiments with electrical discharge in plasma. That these dynamics are revealed by x-rays is significant because x-ray activity always accompanies high-energy electrical interactions. The internal polar configuration is of particular interest. A torus or wheel-like structure revolves around an axial column--presenting what some have called a "doughnut on a stick". Polar columns or jets are expected in intense plasma discharge.
In their discussion of the Crab Nebula, NASA spokesmen refer to "a scintillating halo, and an intense knot of emission dancing, sprite-like, above the pulsar's pole". Though gravitational theories never envisioned the polar "jets", "haloes", and "knots" of the Crab Nebula, we can now recognize these as prime examples of electrical forces in the universe.
From the "mainstream point of view" it hides a black hole. However, no theorist exploring the mathematical wonders of black holes ever posited the structures observed around it. But the electric viewpoint sees something much different, something that was anticipated by the experimental work of Hannes Alfven and his colleagues who founded today’s plasma cosmology.
The core of our galaxy is a region full of mysteries, including flares that can brighten the central area by a factor of four in a few days or by a factor of two in forty minutes. From an electric universe point of view, this is the most active expression of the electric power of the Milky Way.
Dust veils most of the core of the Milky Way from optical observations, but today's radio, infrared, ultraviolet and x-ray telescopes uncover intriguing images and data about the activity at the center of our home galaxy. It's a region full of mysteries, including the remnants of an unexplained hyper-explosion a few thousand years ago and flares that can brighten the central area by a factor of four in a few days or by a factor of two in forty minutes.
From an electric universe point of view, this is the most active expression of the electric power of the Milky Way. This is where currents are focused from the spiral arms down into a tiny donut-shaped plasmoid. From the center of this plasmoid, electric currents spray out from the axis of the galaxy, then return along the spiral arms, inducing magnetic fields and lighting up the stars. The energy stored in the plasmoid is released in prodigious outbursts of high speed particles and radiation, heralded by explosive flares.
A closer radio telescope view of Sagittarius A can be seen here. The anomalous “temperature variations” at the galactic core are noted here. And the relationship of the galactic core to electric currents feeding star formation is discussed here.
The Chandra X-Ray Telescope has found anomalous temperatures at the core of the Milky Way, but the anomalies disappear in the light of plasma lab experiments.
The Chandra news release announcing this new image of the center of the Milky Way said that the X-ray spectrum of the gases "is consistent with a hot gas cloud that contains two components--10- million-degree Celsius gas and 100-million-degree gas."
This result was unexpected and difficult to explain. The press release describes the problem in greater detail: "Shock waves from supernova explosions are the most likely explanation for heating the 10-million-degree gas, but how the 100-million-degree gas is heated is not known. Ordinary supernova shock waves won't work, and heating by very high-energy particles produces the wrong spectrum of X-rays. Also, the observed Galactic magnetic field appears to rule out confinement and heating by magnetic turbulence."
Plasma cosmologists expected temperature discrepancies, because they've seen the same thing in plasma experiments. In the opening paragraph of his 1981 monograph, _Cosmic Plasma_, Hannés Alfvén discusses some of the oddities of plasma behavior that showed up in the lab but not in the simplified theories of physicists and astronomers: "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."
What Chandra has discovered is that the temperatures of plasma at the core of the Milky Way behave exactly the way they behave in plasma experiments on Earth. Some measurements show temperatures as expected, but others indicate temperatures ten to a hundred times higher. If astronomers had taken plasma lab results as seriously as they take hot gas cloud models, they wouldn't have been surprised.
Where is the power source?
The power "could be" generated locally. The rotational inertia of a body could drive the circuit in much the same way as a water-driven turbine in a dam drives a generator. Early plasma physicists often simply assumed such a mechanism. But because smaller-scale circuits in space are invariably coupled to larger-scale circuits (such as the coupling between the auroral circuit and the "solar wind" circuit), the Electric Universe posits a remote power supply.
An electrical current in plasma will generate its own magnetic field and "self constrict" the current channel. This is called the Bennett pinch effect. It produces filaments or threads of current that remain coherent over large distances. Multiple filaments tend to spiral around each other, forming helical "power cables" that can transmit electric power over large distances.
These cables have been identified running from equator to poles in the circuits that power the aurora. Plasma cosmologists also identify them in the filaments that extend from active "radio" galaxies to the "radio lobes" (double layers) far above each pole of such galaxies. Almost every body in the universe displays some kind of filamentation. Venus has a tail composed of invisible "stringy things" (NASA's description). Comets have tails composed of visible "stringy things"--the ion tails. The neon-light-like glows of planetary nebulas resolve, in close-up views, into intricate webs of strings. The jets of Herbig-Haro stars and active galaxies are often resolved into braided filaments. And the spiral arms of some galaxies look "hairy" with threads of material extending from them.
If all these filaments are Birkeland currents, they are only the visible portions of entire circuits. The rest of the circuit may generate magnetic fields that can be mapped, and the map will give an indication of the extent of the circuit.
The smaller image above is such a map of the galaxy M82. The arrows indicate the direction and strength of the magnetic field. The larger image is an artist's conception of a likely circuit schema that flows around and organizes the galaxy. High-density currents flow out along the spin axis to large distances. These distant regions are likely locations for energetic double layers (which show up as radio and x-ray lobes in certain active galaxies). The currents then spread out and flow circumferentially around to the equatorial plane. They return to the galactic core along the spiral arms, pulling in matter and pinching it into stars as they go.
This blows the gravitational model "out of the water" so-to-speak, since it explains the mechanism of "star formation". The conventional theory violates Boyle's gas law, but of course that didn't stop astronomers from promoting their "Big Bang" fairy tale.
Every element in these galactic circuits radiates energy. So the circuits must be powered through their coupling with a larger circuit. The extent of that larger circuit is indicated by the observation that galaxies occur in strings. This is why Arp's observations of connections between high-redshift objects (supposedly far away) and low-redshift galaxies (relatively nearby) are important to plasma cosmologists: If the far-away objects are really companions of nearby galaxies, everything we see outside the Milky Way is part of the "stringy" structure of the galaxies. The strings of galaxy-quasar groups are actually super-galactic Birkeland cables along which the groups are "pinched" out. Arp's observations raise the possibility that everything we see occurs along one braided filament that swirls from the Virgo supercluster to the Fornax supercluster, with our galaxy situated midway.
This "string of galactic superclusters" would then be a load in a circuit whose extent--and whose power supply--is far beyond all we presently see and know.
Hebrews 1:3 "...and upholding all things by the word of his power,...
Here is a sobering implication: our own Sun's future is by no means as certain as mainstream astronomy assures. The Birkeland current powering it could increase or decrease suddenly, and do so at any time. Surely we have stuff for the making of some great science-fiction doomsday scenarios here! Read the related article here.
When seeking to test a hypothesis, it is helpful to start with clear and undeniable facts. But when the impact theory is applied to the prominent lunar “rayed crater”, Tycho, the theory fails even the most obvious tests.
Certainly the most conspicuous crater on the Moon is Tycho in the southern hemisphere. (For context, we have placed a full Hubble Telescope image of the Moon here). The crater is some 85 kilometers in diameter, displaying enigmatic “rays” that extend at least a quarter of the way around the moon.
The central peak, said to have been formed by a “rebound” of subterranean material, rises about 2 kilometers above the crater floor. Planetary scientists suggest that the flat floor of the crater (seen here) was formed by the pooling of melted material.
But the idea that an impact would create such an extensive pool of molten rock finds no support in impact experiments or in high-energy explosions. Not even an atomic explosion creates a flat melted floor of this sort. The force of the explosion shocks and ejects material. It does not hold the material in place to “melt” it into a lake of lava.
When the brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, considered the lunar craters Tycho and Aristarchus, he noted the distinct features of electrical discharge. He wrote in 1974, “…If Aristarchus and Tycho were produced by electric discharges, their clean floors would be just about what one would expect. The abilities of discharges to produce melting on cathode [negatively charged] surfaces and generally to ‘clean up’ those surfaces have been remarked upon since the earliest experiments with electric discharges”.
Juergens envisioned an interplanetary arc between the Moon and an approaching body (for his analysis, he summoned the planet Mars). While an instantaneous explosion does not have time to create a lava lake, an electric arc involving a long-distance flow of current between two approaching bodies, “would persist beyond the instant of any initial touchdown explosion”, leaving material melted in place.
Juergens saw Tycho as a “cathode crater”, and he drew special attention to Tycho’s “spectacular system of rays”. These, he suggested, are the very kind of streamers an electrical theorist would look for—a signature of the electron pathways that triggered the Tycho discharge.
Of course, the astronomers’ consensus today is that the streamers are the trails of material ejected from the crater into narrow paths over extraordinary distances. But the “rays”, Juergens noted, have no discernible depth, while material exploding from a Tycho-sized crater “would at least occasionally fall more heavily in one place than in another and build up substantial formations. But no one has ever been able to point out such a ray ‘deposit’”.
The presence of the narrow rays over such long distances, according to Juergens, is “all-but-impossible to reconcile with ejection origins. Enormous velocities of ejection must be postulated to explain the lengths of the rays, yet the energetic processes responsible for such velocities must be imagined to be focused very precisely to account for the ribbon-thin appearance of the rays”. In fact, this challenge has found no answer in more recent scientific exploration. No experimental explosion at any scale has ever produced anything comparable to the well-defined 1500-kilometer “rays” of Tycho.
Even more telling is the fact that the rays are punctuated with numerous small craters. An early explanation was that "some solid material was shot out with the jets and produced 'on-the-way' craters". But such narrow trajectories for secondary impactors are an absurdity under the mechanics of an explosion. And the total volume of ejected material needed to form the secondary craters along Tycho's rays, would amount to some 10,000 cubic kilometers – an amount of material entirely inconsistent with careful measurements indicating that practically all material excavated from Tycho's crater has been deposited in its rim. However, the ray elements, terminating on small craters, are the very markers that today’s electrical theorists have cited repeatedly as definitive evidence of an electrical discharge path. As Wallace Thornhill has so often observed, such discharge streamers frequently terminate at a crater. In fact, this is exactly what Gene Shoemaker found when investigating the puzzles of Tycho—"...many small secondary craters, too small to be resolved by telescopes on earth, occur at the near end of each ray element."
When compared to an imagined sphere of the Moon’s average radius, the surrounding highland region occupied by Tycho is more than 1200 meters above the “surface” of that sphere. The crater site appears to be at the summit, or very close to the summit, of terrain that trends downward in every direction away from the site for hundreds of kilometers. For the impact theory, this location can only be an accident. But for the electrical theorists, the elevation on which Tycho sits is not accidental. Lightning is attracted to the highest point on a surface. (That is, of course, the principle behind lightning arrestors placed on the pinnacles of tall buildings).
Though astronomers see Tycho’s rays as material ejected from the focal point of an impact, a mere glance at the picture above is sufficient to make clear that not all of the streamers radiate from a central point. Is this surprising? A mechanical impact has a single focal point and cannot explain these offset rays. Juergens noted that they "diverge from a common point, or common focus, located on or buried beneath the western rim of the crater." The electrical interpretation of Tycho sees the streamers as paths of electrons rushing across the lunar highlands to the highest point, where it launches into space to form the lightning "leader" stroke. The high point is destroyed in the process. The powerful lightning "return stroke" that forms the Tycho crater comes minutes afterwards and focuses on the nearest high point, a few kilometers to the east. In support of this explanation, the crater Tycho is surrounded by a dark halo of ejecta that blankets the extensive ray system, laid down earlier.
Tycho's crater rim rises about one kilometer above the surrounding terrain and the crater walls exhibit terraces (shown here) that are not characteristic of high energy explosions. However, such terracing is observed in innumerable instances of electrical discharge machining. (See the large terraced crater in the picture on the right here). This terracing may be due to the fact that electrical current flows in plasma in the form of twisted filament pairs – rather like a double helix. So the terracing is caused by the cutting action of the rotating current filaments on the crater wall. Indeed, some lunar craters exhibit bilateral corkscrew terracing – another observation inexplicable by the impact model, but remarkably consistent with the principle of an arc constituted of twin rotating “Birkeland Currents”.
While it is possible to get a “rebound peak” close to the center of an explosion, such a peak is not typical. In the electrical cratering experiments by plasma physicist CJ Ransom, (as seen here) central peaks were often the norm. As long ago as 1965, attention was drawn to the similar incidence of craters with central peaks in lunar craters and laboratory spark-machined craters. They seem to be an effect of the rotating current filaments, which may leave the center of a crater relatively untouched.
The electrical theorists find great irony in the many examples of earlier researchers who pointed to the electrical properties of phenomena that official science eventually learned to ignore. In 1903, W. H. Pickering, in his book The Moon, suggested that electrical effects could account for the narrow paths of Tycho’s “rays”, and he drew a direct comparison to the streamers seen in auroral displays. But as occurred so frequently in the twentieth century, evidence of electrical activity in space was ignored because it found no place in gravitational cosmology or in the curricula of astronomers and geologists.