Our understanding of Electricity as a cosmic force is in it's infancy. 

 

This is just a little poke into the ever deep Rabbit Hole. 

Enjoy. 

@cindyment You don’t have any problem with any of those concepts, because you bend over to Authority.

You have never seen a black hole, never seen an object made of just Neutrons (a theoretical object that violates all known laws of physics), never seen String Theory (or it’s 10 other dimensions), never sensed Black matter (Or have an iota of evidence that it exists)......

Yet, you accept all of it, without question or hesitation.

And here comes a different theory, that you dismiss without looking at any of the evidence, and declare it quackery, why? because you already know better..

 

Talking to you is a waste of my time. 🙏

 

 

@cindyment Find the information yourself. 

I am not your peon. 

And most of the authors and contributors to the Electric Model are REAL SCIENTISTS. Employed at some of the most prestigious Universities around the world.

But just like Covid....A scientist is only a scientist when he defends the status quo, everyone else is a Quack.

The Progenitor of the Electric model is Nikola Tesla, he is often called the Father of Electricity and I don’t think I need to go very deep into his resume.

@cindyment So you post their assertions without presenting any of the evidence that they cite for the claim. Very interesting....

 

Let me ask you one question..... Is this claim more or less preposterous that a description of a Black Hole, or a Neutron Star, or Dark Matter, or String Theory?

Black Hole: A black hole is a region of spacetime where gravity is so strong that nothing — no particles or even electromagnetic radiation such as light — can escape from it. The theory of general relativity predicts that a sufficiently compact mass can deform spacetime to form a black hole. The boundary of no escape is called the event horizon.

 

Neutron Star: Neutron Stars. When the core of a massive star undergoes gravitational collapse at the end of its life, protons and electrons are literally scrunched together, leaving behind one of nature’s most wondrous creations: a neutron star. Neutron stars cram roughly 1.3 to 2.5 solar masses into a city-sized sphere perhaps 20 kilometers

 

Dark Matter: Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe. Its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including gravitational effects that cannot be explained by accepted theories of gravity unless more matter is present than can be seen. For this reason, most experts think that dark matter is abundant in the universe and that it has had a strong influence on its structure and evolution. Dark matter is called dark because it does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field, which means it does not absorb, reflect or emit electromagnetic radiation, and is therefore difficult to detect

Mathematics is a language, a language of patterns. You can conjure up any pattern, real or imagined, and prove it mathematically.

Mathematics must always be tied back down to reality, it cannot be a substitute for observation. @mahgister

Mathematics does not trump Reality. Reality does not bend to equations, equations that require magical objects like black holes, neutron stars, dark matter to explain what is being observed out in space.

Our equations don’t add up, ohhhhhh it’s not that our mathematical, unverified understanding of the fundamental forces of the universe is incomplete, no no no there must be this 99.9% of the universe that is completely invisible. Can’t be detected, can’t be interacted with, can’t be verified......but it MUST exist or our equations don’t balance out. And Gravitational equations are sacrosanct... can’t be challenged.

Anyone that dares to point out this fundamental contradiction.....is a nutcase.

 

A star is spinning out in space at the speed of a dentist drill, at least we think it is spinning, but no object that size can stay intact as explained by the theory of star formation. Hmmmmmm okay, instead of actually addressing the problem and modifying mathematical models to align with observation........we come up with an object sooooo dense, that it still stays intact spinning at those speeds. An object made of Neutrons, neutrons so densely packed together, that have never been observed in experiments, or anywhere else in nature, a phenomenon that violates all known laws of Nuclear physics. Attach it to a few new equations and off we go....

 

String theory and it’s 10 extra dimensions.....I don’t even need to go there.

This is what happens when you have Mathematicians sitting in their basements, dictating that reality conform to their theoretical models.

All inconvenient observations are filtered out, wild fairy tale objects are debated endlessly......Just another version of "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Hey, but what do I know...all this has been debunked on a video on YouTube.....no need to pay attention. Move along, nothing to see here.

@cindyment when you start off a reply by accusing others of being nutcases, there can’t be much of a conversation from there on out.

Like I said, I am not interested in talking to you, so please ignore my replies, I am conversing with other less intelligent souls, who have a dumb open mind, a mind that is still receptive to new ideas.

I find Electric Universe’s claims far more believable than Magical black holes, dark matter, etc etc etc....

I have watched over a 1000 hours of accompanying videos and evidence, claims made by credible scientists, working at mainstream institutions. Their theories have successfully predicted all sorts of phenomena in space (decades/centuries in advance), observations that have left main stream scientists completely befuddled.

All the information is available online, cited, catalogued, straight from the horse’s mouth. It is there for people that are interested enough to go and investigate for themselves.

Every revolutionary idea in human history has been labelled "Nutcase" by all the mediocre minds, mediocre minds that themselves have always maintained that their generation had reached the end of Human discovery, nothing new is possible.

"It was very easy to be a scientist in the past" they constantly scream...

All the while denigrating and harassing people that are doing all the trailblazing.

Everything has already been discovered bro, It was easier to be Tesla than it is to be you...

Thunderbolts project....all videos are available on their YouTube channel.

All accompanying evidence is catalogued and cited....if you are this motivated to debunk their life’s work, at least have the decency to listen to what they have to say first.

 

BUUUUT, you will never do that, because you already know everything, and you especially know that they are completely wrong.

The constant repeating of the claim that you think is soooooo preposterous, that it does not even merit a simple cursory investigation, speaks more about you, than it does about them.

 

So peace out, I couldn’t care less about your education, or whatever other credentials you would like to throw in my face.

 

 

ADD: And this constant haranguing for me to do your thinking for you, would you like me to distill a 1000 hours of information into 3 paragraphs? Succinctly and legibly enough to sate your intellectual curiosity?

I posted a video that I find extremely interesting, it has over 2 million views, if you want to watch it...great. If not...get out of the way and let others enjoy it.

 

Mr. Armchair expert.

 

 

 

@onhwy61 watch the video I posted. 

watch the video :)

You need the first video so you have some context as to what the other ones are talking about. There is over a 1000 hours of information...to give you evidence out of context, would be like me speaking to you in Latin.

If you are not interested in spending time to explore these ideas, I can't help you. There is no context in modern science that will help, or information that will make the transition any easier. 

There are no shortcuts, you have to listen to the videos in a series, and go along on that journey. 

I find the videos extremely entertaining, even outside of their scientific purview. 

The hard science videos are catalogued in a different series, if you are interested past these ones. 

Venus and mars. 

@millercarbon there are over a 1000 hours of other videos that go into extensive detail on the subject. This video was released 8 years ago. the 1st in a series.

 

@millercarbon These are just some of the top comments on the first video. I feel exactly the same way, that this is one of those must watch pieces of work, whether you agree or disagree at the end of watching it, you will never encounter this information anywhere else. It is if nothing else, just an incredibly wild ride.

Again, before i get attacked for shilling for this stuff, I am definitely not doing that. Coming across this work for me was one of those incredible Aha moments in my life, I have no other  agenda, or reason to post this here. 

 

(1st)"I stopped drinking because of this video on February 19, 2014. This video made me stop being a worthless drunk and I pulled myself together and have been on a quest from that very day. I am a father and a husband of 18 years ,happily and content, ALL because of this movie. Thank you David for your work, and for my marriage? I will continue to live a life of balance in honor of your gift of knowledge to us all."

(2nd) "I don’t say this lightly... This is easily one of the greatest videos I have ever seen--period. Several people close to me know that I have been driven by a need to find the truth, because everything I have been taught never seemed to fit together as it should if it were the truth. For the first time in my life, I feel like I’m finally learning something that makes sense from a logical and physical perspective."

(3rd) "This video has changed my life. I first watched it two years ago and I have never looked back. There is simply no trouble explaining any question I can form with the Electric Universe model. It is the most profound work I have ever encountered in my life. I truly feel like a part of something greater than myself because of this information. Thank You."

Show less

 

 

I posted a video, you wanna watch it... great. If not....don’t. Don’t come at me like I owe you something.

You want me to summarize the entire electric Universe model for you in a post? Summarize and hour and 30 minutes worth of evidence for you?

How about you prove Quantum Mechanics to me. On demand, in a 140 characters and less.....Prove it!!!

 

The 2nd part of the series that deals with Electrical Scarring on the surface of Mars gets me every single time. Just finished watching it again, it’s time to send the Thunderbolt guys my Cult Dues, and the foreskin of my 1st born.

The team over there gets very uppity if they don’t get their tributes on time.

 

Anyone that has any experience with a welding torch will recognize that scarring instantly, no 13th dimension black hole, Neutron Star or esoteric mathematics needed. 

 

Blah blah blah. I am not talking about flat Earth...YOU ARE.

I am talking about planetary scarring that has been reproduced in controlled laboratory experiments.

So keep building those strawman arguments :)

Throw in some Qanon references while you are at it.

 

As a mater of fact, why don't you go bother someone else, go do something productive. Commenting on videos that you are not going to watch, and critiquing evidence that you are not going to see, is borderline demented. 

 

 

In Part 1 of this presentation, physicist Wal Thornhill began his analysis of the recent award of the Nobel Prize in Physics to scientists for their contributions to the so-called detection of gravitational waves. While science media has shown exactly zero skepticism of the gravitational waves pronouncements, Thornhill discussed some of the foundational mathematical problems that preclude the claimed detection of "two black holes colliding a billion years ago, and producing ripples in the fabric of space-time." Today, in Part 2, Thornhill explores another fundamental cosmological question, and that is the existence of the required medium for the communication of waves in a vacuum – a medium called the aether.

 

 

The Electrical Universe cosmology is independent from Emmanuel Velikovsky’s work, I know debunkers like to focus on this part of the catalogue amongst a 1000 other videos. These 3 videos deal with the history of Human myth, and show evidence that the surface of mars has been sculpted by Interplanetary Electrical arcing in it’s recent history. Events that were recorded and observed by ancient cultures on every continent on our planet.

This Mars topology was predicted by Emmanuel Velikovsky, as much as people like to label him as a nutjob, a lot of his claims have since been proven right.

The mathematics of Standard Cosmology itself is extremely illogical and contradictory.. I posted Stephen Crother's critiques of the standard mathematical model and he cuts right to the heart of the issue. 

Most people will not have the time to watch it, but it is a brief summation of the existential challenges the standard model faces. Mathematics is a tool to explain what we see out in space, but it cannot replace common sense, logic, and observation itself. 

@mahgister yes, we are children playing with ideas that are too grand for comprehension, claiming authority and certainty where there is none.   

 

@cindyment You have a habit to attacking people’s character instead of their arguments. Bad habit you have there. 

 

Galileo (was imprisoned for proving that the Earth is not the center of the Universe)… You would have probably nailed his front door shut with all the other tormentors. 

 

 

The LIGO-Virgo Scientific Collaboration has announced that on 14 September 2015, LIGO detected an Einstein gravitational wave directly for the first time, with the first concomitant observation of a binary black hole merger. The announcement was made with much media attention. Not so long ago similar media excitement surrounded the announcement by the BICEP-2 Team of detection of primordial gravitational waves imprinted in B-mode polarizations of a Cosmic Microwave Background, which proved to be naught. According to the LIGO-Virgo Collaboration, the gravitational wave LIGO allegedly detected was generated by two merging black holes, one of ~29 solar masses, the other of ~36 solar masses, at a distance of some 1.3 billion light years. The insurmountable problem for the credibility of LIGO’s claims is the invalidity of the theoretical assumptions upon which they are based. There are two ways by which the LIGO report can be analyzed: (a) examination of the LIGO interferometer operation and data acquisition, and (b) consideration of the theories of black holes and gravitational waves upon which all else relies. Only theoretical considerations are considered in this presentation because there is no need to analyze the LIGO apparatus and its alleged signal data to understand that the claim for detection of Einstein gravitational waves and black holes is built upon theoretical fallacies and conformation bias. The instrumental aberration reported by the LIGO-Virgo Collaboration is not related to Einstein gravitational waves or to the collision and merger of black holes.

Stephen Crothers is a preeminent mathematician, counted among the most competent critics of modern cosmology, including both the General Theory of Relativity and popular theory of the Big Bang. He has also gained much attention for his systematic unraveling of standard Black Hole theory, showing that the mathematical model of a Black Hole follows neither from observation nor from any logical reasoning from Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. He gave two talks at the conference.

I am not debating his character, he might be a pedophile or a wife beater, or whatever else.... you can have your kicks sifting through his garbage if that is what makes you happy. @cindyment 

 

@mahgister I have dedicated my life to the study of all disciplines, in every direction. Spiritual, physical, societal, Astronomical, things of all sorts.

The Electrical Cosmology is just one part of this journey, and the questions they have raised as far as I am concerned, are valid, legitimate, and rooted in hard science.

Do they have all the answers? Absolutely not, but at least they are asking the right questions. Standard Astronomy however is hopelessly lost in numbers and theories, constructs of their own imaginations, mired in contradiction and illogic.

The Dogma is too entrenched, it’s like these people have been smelling their own farts for too long, and they have gotten used to the stench. (Basically I am describing the entire history of "Settled Science", save the few brave souls that buck the pressure to conform).

ADD: And it’s good to see others like yourself, that have an open mind and are at least receptive to new information.

I enjoy your insight and unique point of view very much. 

 

 

@mahgister The funny thing is...I know Standard Cosmology inside and out, I studied every aspect of it, for years and years and years, all sorts of disciplines. My critiques of it do not come from a lack of understanding or unfamiliarity with it’s claims, but just the opposite.

Anyways, enough arguing for a day. Time to listen to some Music 🙏

Hope you enjoy yours. 

 

@femoore12 Dragnet mass surveillance is collecting data for AI systems that have been operational for decades, yes.... but now it is being prepared for integration directly into the grid. 

Latency.....5G is needed for effective real time computation. 

Infrastructure was just not there to have decentralized AI before. 

It will be unveiled at some point in this pandemic.....for your safety of course. 

 

 

Lets not go there, or this thread will get shut down also.

we are all on that roller coaster ride now, no getting off for anyone at this point. Buckle in till the end of 2024. 

DARPA has quite a many ways to tie you down to the grid.

 

I won’t say anything after this :)

Lockdown after lockdown, each harsher than the last, people will beg for this AI system. Contact tracing and Vaccine passports are just the tip of the iceberg,.

I think it’s time to build a house out in the woods, with a dedicated room for a modded Magnepan 20.7 speaker setup :)

More than a century after his death, Tesla’s wireless power discovery is a rarely credited to him. Thomas Edison is more commonly associated with the invention of electricity; however, his experiments were failures. In fact, Tesla’s alternating AC currents proved to be the more reliable method of conducting electricity.

Contrary to the theory metal to metal contact was required to conduct electricity, Tesla was successful in transmitting currents through plastic over short distances using magnetic induction. The Tesla Laboratory at Wardenclyffe was his final experiment site, featuring a 185-foot tower with metal bars extending below ground. Today, the image that comes to mind features electrical bolts extending from the top of the tower, where the coils exchange electrical currents.

Tesla’s Wireless Power Experiments

In the late 19th century, Tesla’s work on the tower explored electrical transmission using radio frequency resonance to create electrical energy through two coils to generate high voltage, high frequency currents. His experiments used near-field inductive and capacitive couplings. Near-field inductive is a short-range wireless physical layer that transmits a low power, non-propagating magnetic field between devices. Capacitive couplings transmit power between two networks by displacing currents produced by the electrical fields.

Tesla performed demonstrations in front of crowds showing how incandescent bulbs could be lit wireless when in proximity of the coil. As his research progressed, he tested long distance transmission using LC circuits.

Tesla furthered his studies to develop a long-distance transmission method at a high-altitude location in Colorado Springs. His theory was that low-pressure air present at 30,000 feet would allow electrical transmission to travel much longer distances. He speculated he could use the entire planet to conduct electricity by sending alternating current pulses into the ground. Our history books to date do not reflect he had any success in proving this theory.

He did, however, accurately predict the success of the internet and cellular phones both operating by long distance, wireless transmissions. He believed wireless transmission could solve a myriad of global issues by providing a means of instant communication, “a great step will be made toward the unification and harmonious existence of the various races inhabiting the globe.”

Today’s Applications for Tesla’s Wireless Technology

Tesla’s coil still shows up in some of our television and radio designs but does not have many practical applications. However, his resonant inductive coupling method is applied to our short-range wireless systems.

On the cusp of providing free energy to all, Tesla’s research was squelched by high power individuals who did not want energy to become a free commodity. Tesla was denied funding by bankers and his theory about worldwide transmission has been denounced; however, his research was of such significance that it was confiscated by the FBI upon his death.

Tesla’s wireless power research still holds potential for future innovations as our technology evolves to accommodate new AI technology.

A lot of mainstream news outlets are bots, and the bots are very good.

@mahgister watch this one when you get a chance. would be interesting to see what you think.

Add: There is no political solution to a spiritual problem. Hang in there, and just enjoy the ride, we get to have front row seats to the ending of an age. Human Consciousness will rise regardless of whatever else happens next.....you are not alone.

 

Come on Cindy.....You didn’t watch the video....so please keep the Harry Potter commentary to a minimum.

Go do something productive, water your plants, take a bath.

 

People that do not understand why AI is an incarnation of the perfect totalitarian state, also have very little knowledge of China’s Social Credit system.

These two system’s are actually one and the same, and are being implemented in the west. It’s not gloom and doom, it is commentary from people that are actually paying attention to what is already happening.

@cindyment 

Unfortunately, most people are pretty narrow in their thinking, the proverbial when your only tool is a hammer everything is a nail. 

 

Now use the same logic to understand my critiques of the Gravitational model. 🙏 

I know Cindy, plasma doesn’t scale, but Gasses in a vacuum turn into Black Holes 🙏

I completely understand where you are coming from.

 

 

 

 

 

@mahgister

I consider him to be my greatest spiritual teacher/philosopher.

Plasma scaling

The parameters of plasmas, including their spatial and temporal extent, vary by many orders of magnitude. Nevertheless, there are significant similarities in the behaviors of apparently disparate plasmas. It is not only of theoretical interest to understand the scaling of plasma behavior, it also allows the results of laboratory experiments to be applied to larger natural or artificial plasmas of interest. The situation is similar to testing aircraft or studying natural turbulent flow in wind tunnels.

Similarity transformations (also called similarity laws) help us work out how plasma properties changes in order to retain the same characteristics. A necessary first step is to express the laws governing the system in a nondimensional form. The choice of nondimensional parameters is never unique, and it is usually only possible to achieve by choosing to ignore certain aspects of the system.

One dimensionless parameter characterizing a plasma is the ratio of ion to electron mass. Since this number is large, at least 1836, it is commonly taken to be infinite in theoretical analyses, that is, either the electrons are assumed to be massless or the ions are assumed to be infinitely massive. In numerical studies the opposite problem often appears. The computation time would be intractably large if a realistic mass ratio were used, so an artificially small but still rather large value, for example 100, is substituted. To analyze some phenomena, such as lower hybrid oscillations, it is essential to use the proper value.

A commonly used similarity transformation

 

 

Hannes Alfvén suggested that, by scaling laboratory results by a factor of 10⁹, he could extrapolate magnetospheric conditions. Another scaling jump of 10⁹ was required to extrapolate to galactic conditions, and a third jump of 10⁹ was required to extrapolate to the Hubble distance ^[2]

One commonly used similarity transformation was derived for gas discharges by James Dillon Cobine (1941)^[3], Alfred Hans von Engel and Max Steenbeck (1934)^[4], and further applied by Hannes Alfvén and Carl-Gunne Fälthammar to plasmas.^[5] They can be summarised as follows:

 

 

Similarity Transformations Applied to Gaseous Discharges and some Plasmas

Property	Scale Factor
length, time, inductance, capacitance	x1	x
particle energy, velocity, potential, current, resistance	x0=1	Unchanged
electric and magnetic fields, conductivity, neutral gas density, ionization fraction	x-1	1/x
current density, electron and ion densities	x-2	1/x2

 

 

This scaling applies best to plasmas with a relatively low degree of ionization. In such plasmas, the ionization energy of the neutral atoms is an important parameter and establishes an absolute energy scale, which explains many of the scalings in the table:

• Since the masses of electrons and ions cannot be varied, the velocities of the particles are also fixed, as is the speed of sound.
• If velocities are constant, then time scales must be directly proportional to distance scales.
• In order that charged particles falling through an electric potential gain the same energy, the potentials must be invariant, implying that the electric field scales inversely with the distance.
• Assuming that the magnitude of the E-cross-B drift is important and should be invariant, the magnetic field must scale like the electric field, namely inversely with the size. This is also the scaling required by Faraday’s law of induction and Ampère’s law.
• Assuming that the speed of the Alfvén wave is important and must remain invariant, the ion density (and with it the electron density) must scale with B², that is, inversely with the square of the size. Considering that the temperature is fixed, this also ensures that the ratio of thermal to magnetic energy, known as beta, remains constant. Furthermore, in regions where quasineutrality is violated, this scaling is required by Gauss’s law.
• Ampère’s law also requires that current density scales inversely with the square of the size, and therefore that current itself is invariant.
• The electrical conductivity is current density divided by electric field and thus scales inversely with the length.
• In a partially ionized plasma, the electrical conductivity is proportional to the electron density and inversely proportional to the neutral gas density, implying that the neutral density must scale inversely with the length, and ionization fraction scales inversely with the length.

Limitations

While these similarity transformations capture some basic properties of plasmas, not all plasma phenomena scale in this way. Consider, for example, the degree of ionization, which is dimensionless and thus would ideally remain unchanged when the system is scaled. The number of charged particles per unit volume is proportional to the current density, which scales as x ^-2, whereas the number of neutral particles per unit volume scales as x ^-1 in this transformation, so the degree of ionization does not remain unchanged but scales as x ^-1.

Astrophysical application

As an example, take an auroral sheet with a thickness of 1 km. A laboratory simulation might have a thickness of 10 cm, a factor of 10⁴ smaller. To satisfy the condition of this similarity transformation, the gaseous density would have to be increased by a factor of 10⁴ from 10⁴ m^-3 to 10⁸ m^-3 (10¹⁰ cm^-3 to 10¹⁴ cm^-3), and the magnetic field would have to be increased by the same factor from 50 microteslas to 500 milliteslas (0.5 gauss to 5 kilogauss). These values are large but within the range of technology. If the experiment captures the essential features of the aurora, the processes will be 10⁴ times faster so that a pulse that takes 100 s in nature would take only 10 ms in the laboratory.

 

 

Similarity transformations applied to some astrophysical plasmas
Actual plasma properties compared to a laboratory plasma if the scale length is reduced to 10 cm.

Region	Characteristic dimension (cm)			Density (particles/cm3)		Magnetic field (gauss)		Characteristic time
	Actual	Scaled	Scale Factor	Actual	Scaled	Actual	Scaled	Actual	Scaled
Ionosphere	106 – 107	10	10-5 – 10-6	1010	1015 – 1016	0.5	5×104 – 5×105	Period of Giant pulsation
								100 s	0.1 – 1 ms
Exosphere	109	10	10-8	105 – 10	1013 – 109	0.5 – 5×10-4	5×107 – 5×104	One Day
								105 s	1 ms
Interplanetary space	1013	10	10-12	1 – 10	1012 – 1013	10-4	108	One Solar Rotation
								2×106 s	2 μs
Interstellar space	3×1022	10	3×10-22	1	3×1021	10-6 – 10-5	3×1015 – 3×1016	Period of galactic rotation
								1×1016 s	3 μs
Intergalactic space	>3×1027	10	<3×10-27	10-4?	>3×1022	10-7?	>3×1019	Age of the Universe
								4×1017s	1×10-9s
Solar chromosphere	108	10	10-7	1011 – 1014	1018 – 1021	103 – 1	1010 – 107	Life of Solar Flare
								103 s	100 μs
								Life of Solar Prominence
								105 s	10 ms
Solar corona	1010 – 1011	10	10-9 – 10-10	108 – 106	1017 – 1016	102 – 10-1	1011 – 109	Life of Coronal Arc
								103 s	10-1 to 1 µs
								Solar Cycle
								22 years	70 to 700 ms

Particle density of the Earth’s atmosphere at sea level is 10¹⁹ per cm³
Small bar magnet = 100 milliteslas. Big electromagnet = 2 teslas
10⁹ cm = 10,000 km

 

 

The table shows the properties of some actual space plasma (see the columns labelled Actual). It also shows how other plasma properties would need to be changed, if (a) the characteristic length of a plasma were reduced to just 10 cm, and (b) the characteristics of the plasma were to remain unchanged.

The first thing to notice is that many cosmic phenomena cannot be reproduced in the laboratory because the necessary magnetic field strength is beyond the technological limits. Of the phenomena listed, only the ionosphere and the exosphere can be scaled to laboratory size. Another problem is the ionization fraction. When the size is varied over many orders of magnitude, the assumption of a partially ionized plasma may be violated in the simulation. A final observation is that the plasma densities needed in the laboratory are sizeable, up to 10¹⁶ cm^-3 for the ionosphere, compared to the atmospheric density of about 10¹⁹ particles per cm³. In other words, the laboratory analogy of a low density space plasma is not a “vacuum chamber”, but laboratory plasma with a pressure, when the higher temperature is taken into consideration, which can approach atmospheric pressure.

 

 

Notes

1. ↑ After Peratt, A. L., “Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasmas” (1996) Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 242, Issue 1/2, p. 93-163. FULL TEXT PEER REVIEWED
2. ↑ Hannes Alfvén, “On hierarchical cosmology” FULL TEXT (1983) Astrophysics and Space Science (ISSN 0004-640X), vol. 89, no. 2, Jan. 1983, p. 313-324. PEER REVIEWED
3. ↑ Cobine, J. D ., 1941: Gaseous Conductors, McGraw-Hill . New York. ACADEMIC BOOK
4. ↑ von Engel, A., and Steenbeck, M., 1934: ElektrischeGasentladungen, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. See also von Engel, 1955: Ionized Gases, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
5. ↑ H. Alfvén and C.-G. Falthammar, Cosmic electrodynamics (2nd Edition, Clarendon press, Oxford, 1963) See 4.2.2. Similarity Transformations. ACADEMIC BOOK

References

• Peratt, A. L., “Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasmas” (1996) Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 242, Issue 1/2, p. 93-163. FULL TEXT PEER REVIEWED
• Peratt, Anthony L., “Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasmas“, Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 256, Issue 1/2, p. 51-75 (1997) Paper FULL TEXT PDF PEER REVIEWED

@cindyment ...all plasma experiments in a laboratory setting have shown Linear Scaling that is directly proportional to energy input.

I must have missed it, but can you direct me to any experiments on Earth that have turned Gasses in a vacuum into mini Black Holes (I’ll even settle for microscopic, or subatomic) Must be a very easy thing to do, considering the almost unlimited amounts of money afforded to Standard Gravitational model scientists.

 

Quick question....Do you ever hold your own side to your own standard of evidence?

This British Centric worldview is collapsing in all directions...

Banking, economics, biology, health, astronomy, physics, philosophy, history, and pretty much every fundamental question to do with life on this planet.

 

@mahgister These are very interesting times, it is a time of amazement, not fear.

There is a revolution happening within Human Consciousness, in their desperation to impede it's progress, the ruling ideologies have only accelerated the process.

Grab a chair, bring out some popcorn, and just enjoy the show :)

 

And also @cindyment , maybe you can explain this??

Just a little picture of a storm on the surface of Saturn.. Pay particular attention to the hexagonal shape.

 

Here is another angle.

 

 

Cindy...before you say Fluid Dynamics, know this..

1) This structure extends 100’s of miles up into the Atmosphere on the Gas Giant.

2) The Concentric Hexagonal structures around the main central structure have been measured as having different Rotational speeds, and temperatures.

3) The Hexagonal North pole, and the corresponding South pole, have significantly Higher temperatures than the surrounding areas.

 

Please have at it. 

 

I can show you simple lab experiments done on Earth that account for all of this, no esoteric mathematics required. 

 

ADD: I couldn’t read the hexagonal impact paper, might be a paywall issue... anyhow this shape is very commonly associated with all sorts of electrical discharges.

@djones51  No, you are going from point A to Point B, on rockets and computer chips built on the works of Tesla. (He is the father of electricity after all)

If you got there in a craft that used a black hole as a propellent...You would have a point. (or dark matter, or fairy pixie dust)

 

https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-11-things-you-didnt-know-about-nikola-tesla

If you couldn’t imagine life without your TV remote, thank Nikola Tesla for making it possible. Tesla invented, predicted or contributed to development of hundreds of technologies that play big parts in our daily lives -- like the remote control, neon and fluorescent lights, wireless transmission, computers, smartphones, laser beams, x-rays, robotics and, of course, alternating current, the basis of our present-day electrical system.

“

While the simulation produced a nine-sided shape instead of the hexagon the scientists were expecting, this still suggests that Yadav and Bloxham are onto something.

“The hexagon is likely very deep,” they said. “Our model simultaneously and self-consistently produces alternating zonal jets, the polar cyclone, and hexagon-like polygonal structures similar to those observed on Saturn.”

Even if some bizarre life form could just barely survive on Saturn, it is unlikely anything would want to."

 

1) The formation goes very high up into the atmosphere.

2) This "Explanation" doesn’t even mention the concentric hexagonal zones

3) No mention of temperature variations

4) Shapes created in simulation are not Hexagonal.

5) It is a computer simulation....I can simulate a dragon fighting an orc...doesn’t mean anything.

 

Pay attention.....to...what you accept as evidence, when it is in defense of theories you already accept as being true.

Anything is good enough......."computer simulations"..... vaguely recreating 1 one of the parameters....is enough. Grabage in garbage out.

Do you see my point yet?

Because an apple falls from a tree, gasses in a vacuum collapse into a black hole. I know, how could I forget..... I am sure if Newton was here today, and he saw you guys talking about Black Holes etc etc, he would smash his own head into a wall.

 

As for what you are saying.....I am not discounting Gravity..."Uh"....I am saying Black Holes don’t exist. Two very different things...

And I am not saying computers don’t work to plot courses in space, "Uh", I am saying they do not work to recreate infinitely complex systems at Planetary or Galactic levels.

I am teaching you a free class in Logic 101, so please check your huffing and puffing at the door. I should be charging you money for this.

@djones51

 

Oh Cindy....the problem is much much deeper than that. I DO NOT accept computer simulations as a proof of anything. (not that the simulation in this case is  satisfactory even if I did).

I can create a simulation......wait for it... that can can simulate ANYTHING. If I don’t get my desired result, I can keep tweaking my parameters till I do.

This is not what I call SCIENCE. You do... and I understand that.....I don’t.

 

Laboratory experiments are not good enough for you, but computer simulations are....this is where we part ways my friend.

A natural system is infinitely complex, and to have an accurate working computer model to simulate all the conditions on a place like Saturn, foreseen, seen, and unseen is completely impossible. It cannot be done. (I don’t think even you are claiming that we know everything about the inner workings of the Gas Giant, or are you?).

This is not evidence.....I hope you are now starting to understand my comment about smelling your own farts for too long.