EU Theory and Plasma Cosmology

[colesakick]

That is absolutely right Calli, it is the classic shape of a bow-shock. It is also quite adequately explained as Birkeland current. The fact is that we have two completely rational explanations for the same empirical observations of space. <br /><br />When I consider two intelligent minds peering at the same material and making diametrically different conclusions over it I am reminded of an incident I had in college with a common drawing often included in psychology texts under the heading of “Perception” The drawing can be viewed as either a beautiful young woman or a withered old hag. One or the other image is seen at first glance, after that it is very difficult to believe the other image is there. I saw the beautiful young woman right away when my Professor asked us to tell what was in the drawing. I was flabbergasted that others were calling that lovely lady an old hag. Finally; someone came over and traced their finger over the hag’s face and hump-like posture and then I could see her. Shifting back and forth between the images was then fairly easy.<br /><br />My point is that both the bow-shock analysis and the electrical current analysis are feasible. However, if you only see a bow-shock, in your mind it can’t be something different. You need a shift in perception in order to see what Michael and I see. We used to see only a bow-shock as well, now we see more. Electricity and magnetism are invisible forces; in space we can only see and measure their effects. This makes it very challenging to provide an image of astronomy that is undeniable electrical in nature, as we already have perfectly reasonable explanations for our observations.<br /><br />There is a growing contingent of professional scientists that have made a perception shift and are exploring alternatives to the standard model picture of astronomy. I’ve linked to this before but it bears repeating. The Alternative Cosmology Group does not have a fixed idea about astronomy, they publish many alternatives, <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Intellectual honesty means being willing to challenge yourself instead of others </div>

 

[colesakick]

From one of the articles linked to above:<br /><br />"Magnetic fields previously have been detected in jets emitted by quasars and protostars, but the evidence was not conclusive that the magnetic fields were actually confining the jets. These new VLBA observations now make that direct connection for the very first time," Vlemmings added. <br /><br />By using the VLBA to study the alignment, or polarization, of radio waves emitted by water molecules in the jets, the scientists were able to determine the strength and orientation of the magnetic field surrounding the jets. <br /><br />"Our observations support recent theoretical models in which magnetically-confined jets produce the sometimes-complex shapes we see in planetary nebulae," said Philip Diamond, also of Jodrell Bank Observatory. <br /><br />While the stars that produce planetary nebulae are spherical, most of the nebulae themselves are not. Instead, they show complex shapes, many elongated. The earlier discovery of jets in W43A showed one mechanism that could produce the elongated shapes. The latest observations will help scientists understand the mechanisms producing the jets. <br /><br />The water molecules the scientists observed are in regions nearly 100 billion miles from the old star, where they are amplifying, or strengthening, radio waves at a frequency of 22 GHz. Such regions are called masers, because they amplify microwave radiation the same way a laser amplifies light radiation.” <br />http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=19746 <br /><br />I wanted to paste that in here to say the following. Astronomers are not required to study electrical engineering, which is a total shame. These guys in the article above puzzle over the obvious (to an electrical engineer). The relationship between electricity and magnetism is poorly understood by most astronomers, as this article attests. They have confirmed that a magnetic field is a <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Intellectual honesty means being willing to challenge yourself instead of others </div>

 

[vonster]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />If you support such cranky beliefs, or try to denigrate those who call them what they are, then you place yourself in their midst.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />you know, the funniest thing i have to share:<br /><br />whenver i see you post? im picturing this guy in a brown tweed jacket, in an english countryclub with a cigar, surrounded by his cronies from the university .. long handlebar mustache .. <br /><br />and you are saying your posts in a heavy english accent, just about every sentence has a "poppycock!!" or a "balderdash!!" in front of it, <br /><br />and all is said in a distinctively self-righteous yet enthusistic manner, and your little pack is chuckling behind you over brandy<br /><br />lol why is that??<br /><br />.<br /><br />

 

[yevaud]

<i>Astronomers are not required to study electrical engineering, which is a total shame. These guys in the article above puzzle over the obvious (to an electrical engineer). The relationship between electricity and magnetism is poorly understood by most astronomers, as this article attests.</i><br /><br />Well, guess what? I majored in Astronomy in College, and worked in Electronics for well over 20 years.<br /><br />Are there Electrical and Magnetic effects in abundance throughout the Universe? Yes there are. However, what all EU proponents don't ever seem to get or believe is that that they are <i>effects</i>, not <i>a principle, driving force.</i><br /><br /><i>They have confirmed that a magnetic field is acting on matter in space yet cannot see that only an electrical current can explain the above observation.</i><br /><br />If you believe that hundreds, nay thousands of PhD's in Astrophysics cannot "see" that there are (well known, by the way) E/M effects in an Astrophysical sense, then you are very wrong. They do indeed see these, yet their reasons for being so, their causes are fairly well understood. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[colesakick]

I meant nothing personal there old friend. Your case is an exception, not a rule, I was simply lamenting that it is not the rule. A degree in astronomy does not require an electrical foundation and it should, especially now that electrical “effects” in spacde are appreciated. It may well be that electromagnetic observations are being deemed effects simply because of perceptional bias, and perhaps (as I suspect) the astronomers do not understand the concept of electricity and magnetism fully (what can only be causal given X and Y, versus what could be effect given B and C). <br /><br />I don’t mean to imply that all of astronomy is built on a wrong foundation. Most folks who find the EU model intriguing simply think that we need to redefine our terms a bit to get a clearer picture of what we are observing (electrical current deforming a plasma sheath versus bow shock, for example). Our current use of meteorological terms seems to have muddied up what we are really looking at. This is not a contest to supplant one model with another, this is a quest for answers to current puzzling, counterintuitive observations which fit quite nicely in an electrical model, but only at the cost of muddying up other areas we thought we had well in hand.<br /><br />I understand you being incredulous, or at least I think I do. I hope you understand that those in the EU camp are not competing with or attempting to undermine anything, we are simply curious and passionately striving for the most accurate answers. At first I was incredulous too. I was naive enough to think there was some kind of willful blockade of research into electromagnetism in space (and even a conspiracy by the Mods here to brush discussion of it under the rug by shifting threads into a domain void common sense where it would more easily be ignored). I realize now that the passion is shared by all of us. In some this topic is a very personal matter, for others it is a purely intellectual matter. I can absolutely appreciat <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Intellectual honesty means being willing to challenge yourself instead of others </div>