Hawking's final science study released
- Thread starter Blackleaf
- Start date
Home picture of the day Stellar Oscillator
Stellar Oscillator
Stephen Smith October 24, 2018 picture of the day
Supernova iPTF14hls. Credit: Adapted from Arcavi et al. 2017, Nature. POSS/DSS/LCO/S. Wilkinson.
Oct 25, 2018
Stars are electrical entities.
The explosion of a star, otherwise known as a supernova, is a terminal event in stellar evolution—the star used up its fuel, collapsed under its own gravity, and then ejected most of its gaseous envelope because of “core rebound”. At least, that is how astronomers think stars with certain characteristics should behave.
According to a recent press release, iPTF14hls seemed identical to a familiar class of supernova. Until it dimmed and then brightened again. In fact, it did the same thing several times. Lead researcher Iair Arcavi from the University of California Santa Barbara and Las Cumbres Observatory said:
“This supernova breaks everything we thought we knew about how they work. It’s the biggest puzzle I’ve encountered in almost a decade of studying stellar explosions.”
Many previous Picture of the Day articles point out that stars are not simplistic balls of gravitationally compressed hot gas, they are composed of plasmas. Plasma is ionized, meaning that one or more electrons are stripped from its atoms, so it is electrically charged. Plasma does not behave like a pressurized gas, it behaves according to the tenets of plasma physics.
Electricity flowing through plasma forms regions called double layers: the “charge separation” so often mentioned in these pages. Could charge separation be the foundation for the electrical explosions known as supernovae?
A supernova is an “exploding star.” However, that explosion is due to the breakdown of double layers, and not core collapse and rebound. Since the stars are externally fueled currents of electric charge flowing through circuits in space, supernovae are the result of a stellar “circuit breaker”. When a star’s double layers explode, electromagnetic energy from a vast galactic circuit flows into the explosion. The resulting supernova radiation is emitted across the entire electromagnetic spectrum from radio to gamma rays.
Electric Universe advocate Wal Thornhill wrote:
“Stars are an electrical plasma discharge phenomenon…The energy is transferred over cosmic distances via Birkeland current transmission lines. The energy may be released gradually or stored in a stellar circuit and unleashed catastrophically. It is these cosmic circuits that are the energy source for the supernova explosion – not the star.”
Since stars are the foci for enormous energies from the galaxies in which they exist, their activity cannot be based on mass, or a particular elemental makeup. They are not internally powered objects at all, they are formed electromagnetically in cosmic Birkeland currents. Stars are born of electricity, and electric stars are where the seeds of supernovae mature. Therefore, iPTF14hls is acting like an electrical oscillator, responding to incoming electric charge, and not like a gravitationally compressed ball of hot gas.
Stephen Smith
Hat tip to Christopher Phillips-----------------------------------------------ZAP
Stellar Oscillator
Stephen Smith October 24, 2018 picture of the day
Oct 25, 2018
Stars are electrical entities.
The explosion of a star, otherwise known as a supernova, is a terminal event in stellar evolution—the star used up its fuel, collapsed under its own gravity, and then ejected most of its gaseous envelope because of “core rebound”. At least, that is how astronomers think stars with certain characteristics should behave.
According to a recent press release, iPTF14hls seemed identical to a familiar class of supernova. Until it dimmed and then brightened again. In fact, it did the same thing several times. Lead researcher Iair Arcavi from the University of California Santa Barbara and Las Cumbres Observatory said:
“This supernova breaks everything we thought we knew about how they work. It’s the biggest puzzle I’ve encountered in almost a decade of studying stellar explosions.”
Many previous Picture of the Day articles point out that stars are not simplistic balls of gravitationally compressed hot gas, they are composed of plasmas. Plasma is ionized, meaning that one or more electrons are stripped from its atoms, so it is electrically charged. Plasma does not behave like a pressurized gas, it behaves according to the tenets of plasma physics.
Electricity flowing through plasma forms regions called double layers: the “charge separation” so often mentioned in these pages. Could charge separation be the foundation for the electrical explosions known as supernovae?
A supernova is an “exploding star.” However, that explosion is due to the breakdown of double layers, and not core collapse and rebound. Since the stars are externally fueled currents of electric charge flowing through circuits in space, supernovae are the result of a stellar “circuit breaker”. When a star’s double layers explode, electromagnetic energy from a vast galactic circuit flows into the explosion. The resulting supernova radiation is emitted across the entire electromagnetic spectrum from radio to gamma rays.
Electric Universe advocate Wal Thornhill wrote:
“Stars are an electrical plasma discharge phenomenon…The energy is transferred over cosmic distances via Birkeland current transmission lines. The energy may be released gradually or stored in a stellar circuit and unleashed catastrophically. It is these cosmic circuits that are the energy source for the supernova explosion – not the star.”
Since stars are the foci for enormous energies from the galaxies in which they exist, their activity cannot be based on mass, or a particular elemental makeup. They are not internally powered objects at all, they are formed electromagnetically in cosmic Birkeland currents. Stars are born of electricity, and electric stars are where the seeds of supernovae mature. Therefore, iPTF14hls is acting like an electrical oscillator, responding to incoming electric charge, and not like a gravitationally compressed ball of hot gas.
Stephen Smith
Hat tip to Christopher Phillips-----------------------------------------------ZAP
Lubrication, if any leaked out youy shop would follow gravity all the way till it was a boat. The mail is not the way to get it to you that anyway.
If anti-gravity starts at absolute zero it would seem to run of the same principle that static electricity runs on, with temps providing the variable that sets the amps in what always seems to he in the 'high' range before molecules are being altered permanently. O2 become O3 and in that time it is killing things that are harmful things that are out to kill things that are naturally harmful to living things that use O2.
The temp we call 'zero' is taken in a mass that has many stars and starts share one commonality, they are hot spots. Cold is when the universe is so old that when a start sheds most of it's mass and goes 'cold', that mass never finds enough other mass to clump together so it sheds light (radiated heat at a certain level). When there is no light is when it is colder so the effects that begin at what we call absolute is the start of a new level of 'cold'. The charge that comes from friction is missing and a 'fly-by' still sees heat pass from the hot to the cold side and never in the other direction. What happened at the big bang was either masses merging at high speed or something. The Asteroid Belt and the rings are the end result of planers colliding after they have been forming for a billion years. Conditions cannot be replicated so the 'merging' sees both becoming smaller chunks of mass. They seem be almost collision free now.
If the expansion we see was caused by that the future would have a fate that is already predictable. If the two bodies collapsed even further then there is something called 'absolute mass' that is a bigger version of our galaxy. All should operate the same way and in this case the stars in the arms are flying off into the cold of deep space and probably staying black after that unless picked up in another gravity well. The few pics of galaxies that have plasma jets streaming off them is a gravity well that is vacuuming up debris from between the galaxies including us at some point. The jets are feeding new mass to a 'star making machine'. If they all turn in the 'same direction' more is going on, if it is random a variance in where stars first coming out might determine direction.
Magnetism at the core was transferred to the magma and the crust and that follows the radiation belt so there is another relationship that exists.
IMO if it would fry people it would also fry anything 'electric'. Putting some into orbit through the holes at the pole might not only get then away from 'space junk' and safe from attack because of the radiation.
The gravity topic is weighing on me but I'm fully charged if there is more you need.
Static might be the original attraction but something else created the 'spin'.
Gravity is a fundementasl there is no escape, static is a contained charge, it does not move unless. Capacitance rules, you have charge or you aint important. Yeah spin you got no capacity you got no spin, yer made of rubber maybe. Your diet determines your charge.
Of course there,s a few points in this theory what needs a bit more meat but we are confident of ultimately solving the very few remaining bugaboos. We just need a few hundred thousand dollars to perfect the gizmo. Invest now a breakthrough is eminent.
Last edited:
As strange as it seems we spin about a center of gravity which seems to be beer and or cannabis which is finally legal in Nova Scotia. Science has risen to it.s rightfull place and very soon Nova Scotia will regain it,s lost position in N America.
Every body has two centers of gravity the physical and the intelectual. In the end there must only be one. Which is more likely to press the right buttons?
Ninty degrees is the favoured angle however. You got a circular scar you got electric discharge and nothing else but the very odd miracle. I f the scar is a circle then it,s a result of lightening period and nothing else
I can point out a few from the collective that are showing signs of 'Advanced Anti-gravity Syndrome', aka, 'the AAS whole' condition.
That's because it isn't going to happen. You can't possibly live long enough to correct all your misapprehensions of reality.
You might have used we instead of you in that crotch kick. You are without doubt superior to me in your misapprehensions of reality.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCJ3d_CUb-Y
AP David: The Metaphysics of Michael Faraday | EU2015
A very entertaining lecture for a soggy Sunday.
AP David: The Metaphysics of Michael Faraday | EU2015
A very entertaining lecture for a soggy Sunday.
The electrical model isn't useful, as I showed you years ago, with the assistance of a paper by Dr. Tom Bridgman, there's too much it doesn't explain and too much it predicts (if you can follow the logic of the relevant mathematics, which nobody at your favourite junk science sites can do, including you) that simply isn't observed. The solar wind in the electric model should not be electrically neutral, for instance, but it observably is, the Earth's magnetic field should be overwhelmed (and thus useless for navigation) by the field generated by the currents necessary to power the sun, but it isn't. Until it can explain those two simple observations and provide a plausible mechanism for what's driving the hypothesized currents, the electric model has nothing useful. The people at those sites talk a lot about physics and cosmology, but don't really do any, it's all speculative and qualitative. That's not science.
Ok, you tell me in your learned opinion what space is.
I hope you will not insist that Dr Scott has done no mathmatics.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2018/10/24/donald-scott-how-many-impossible-neutron-stars-space-news/
Scientists are again puzzling over the behaviors of a so-called neutron star which completely confounds conventional models. The object is producing relativistic jets and has a magnetic field that astrophysicists have estimated to be 10 trillion times stronger than that of our Sun. However, standard theory has held that such powerful magnetic fields in a neutron star would actually suppress the emission of such jets. But this is not the first “neutron star” that “shouldn’t exist” according to standard theory. We asked the retired professor of electrical engineering Dr. Donald Scott to outline some of the fundamental objections to the neutron star hypothesis and to explain the promising alternatives suggested by plasma cosmology and the Electric Universe.
No I won't, he does do mathematics, and has made a few sensible contributions to the journal of the IEEE, but he's the only contributor I've seen at the electric cosmos sites who does (I admit I haven't exhaustively searched the sites for others, didn't seem worthwhile wading through all the other crap there), and in his 2006 book The Electric Sky he makes so many elementary errors in physics and astronomy that even a second year undergraduate would doubt that he has any real understanding of what he's talking about.
I,ve read at the TTP web sight for over a decade and the place is full of very learned contributors, that could certainly be because I'm so damn backward as you are fond of reminding me. You,ll eat your words someday Sinister. Plasma physics is real and it commands the cosmos, you will aknowledge that some day like a real man instead of groveling in front of crap like the Higgs boson. The only real thing ever gained by that monster Cern acellarator is cash and nothing else, that thing is the most expensive elementry error in physics ever built, it,s also a testament to the retarded direction particle physics has gone.