Is the Universe Electric?
Gravity drives the cosmos. Black holes are out there devouring all that stray within reach. The redshift of starlight is an indicator of distance and quasars are unbelievably bright objects seen at the beginnings of the universe. Dark matter and dark energy have a mysterious effect on the way that the universe holds together. The Sun is consuming itself from within in a gigantic ongoing nuclear holocaust. Impact craters and the results of geological processes dominate planetary bodies and moons.
Now, I’m no astronomer. Nor am I any form of mathematician. In terms of work, I was in the engineering field – fabrication, welding and stuff like that. I was a software developer for a while and now I’ve been a teacher since 2003. In terms of interests, I’ve always been a reader/viewer of primarily SF and fantasy, and I’ve had a layman’s lifelong interest in thing to do with space (maybe those two things are related…). I enjoyed reading Scientific American and publications of that ilk. I enjoy following the ongoing adventures on Mars. I was a daily visitor to APOD (Astronomy Picture of the Day). My hobbies are photography and (as you well know) collecting first edition SF. I have four wonderful kids and happily resident in Korea. I’m just a regular guy with an open mind and some life experience. I was secure with facts I presented in the opening paragraph…
…until I discovered that they aren’t facts at all. In fact they are theories based on outdated observations and blindingly complex mathematical abstractions that have no relevance to, nor can be empirically tested in the real world.
Gravity is irrelevant in the cosmos. Electromagnetism is many orders of magnitude more powerful. You can pick up a nail with a small magnet against the gravitational force of this entire planet. Electromagnetism is also much more effectual over longer distances.
Black holes don’t exist. They are an invention to explain effects that are otherwise unexplainable via the gravitational dogma. Effects which can be otherwise explained without recourse to mathematical abstraction and the invention of things that can’t be seen. Likewise dark matter and dark energy. Likewise neutron stars. They are fabrications. Fudge-factors to make gravitationally based equations make sense when the observational data falsifies them.
Redshift is intrinsic to the object and not an indicator of distance. Quasars are supposed to be incredibly bright and distant objects due to the redshift of their light. The observational data (yet again) says otherwise. Supposed quasars are observed to be physically connected to or in front of much nearer galaxies. Impossible if you cling to conventional and now outdated ideology.
What is a Quasar doing in front of a galaxy?? Click the image.
The sun is a giant electric arc lamp, plugged into a galactic power grid. If the sun is powered from within and radiating it’s energy outward via convection and heat transfer, why is the visible surface of the sun a relatively cool 4400 degrees or so Kelvin, yet jump to about 2 million degrees a little more than 2000km from the surface? Again, established theories have no satisfactory explanation for many aspects of the sun’s behaviour, yet another holds strong and does satisfy the requirements of the observational data.
click the image for some illumination regarding the Sun
Craters are the results of interplanetary lightning strikes and electrical machining. Many peculiar features of craters cannot be reproduced by mechanical impact models, or are vanishingly unlikely with recourse to probability. Hexagonal shapes, central peaks, crater chains, the unusual propensity to have small craters on the rims of other craters, terraced walls, smooth floors, ejecta obviously not emanating from the center of the ‘impact’. All anomalous features are explained (yet again) by a different model of formation.
click the image for a sensible deconstruction of the crater Tycho
Look, I could go on and on. The point is, as we develop new ways of seeing the universe – new and more powerful ways – ways that were unavailable to astronomers when these gravitational and mechanical theories were proposed and then hardened in to dogma, we are discovering that the facts – the observational realities – are incompatible with and indeed falsify much what we thought we knew. Too much credence is given to mathematical fantasy and not to empirical, reproducible and hard science. Hard science that can accommodate many of these new observations. Hard science that makes accurate predictions about what we will observe. Hard science that isn’t constantly surprised by new discoveries and doesn’t have to invent unobservable, unmeasurable fantasy to hold itself together. Science that doesn’t more and more resemble a Rube Goldberg machine as time goes on.
What about magnetic fields in space?? Astronomers talk about them, they are accepted, but the gigantic elephant in the room is the fact that you absolutely cannot have a magnetic field without an electric current. Yet apparently space is electrically inert. Sorry guys, you can’t have interstellar magnetic fields without interstellar electric currents!! See?? This is the common sense I’m talking about.
He’s a rather controversial figure for several reasons, but science fiction author James P. Hogan has written a very informative introduction to the Electric Universe. I recommend reading it.
I have decided to include a weekly summary of the Thunderbolts Pictures of the Day on this site. The word deserves to be spread.
The hexagonal crater on Mimas.
Most of the links I’ve presented here do go back to the Thunderbolts website which I discovered about 6 or 7 years ago. As I mentioned, I’m just an ordinary guy who knows common sense when he sees it, and I saw more common sense on that site that I’d seen in a long, long time. The Queen of Sciences really doesn’t have any clothes at the moment.