Electric Universe

[OmegaWolf]

The Electric Universe (Plasma Cosmology) theory can explain the observed structure and behavior of the universe without recourse to theoretical dark matter/dark energy, which are by their very nature unobservable. In essence the existing theories do not account for the electromagnetic force in space, assuming a "gravitation only" environment. When the gravitation only model was observed there were serious anomalies. Instead of reexamining their underlying assumptions cosmologists "created" speculative dark matter/energy to explain the anomalous observations.

Here is a link with more detailed info:

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/introduction.htm

[CFTraveler]

I read of this theory some time ago and the website I saw had some beautiful illustrations of the electromagnetic pattern waves of the solar system, and it was beautiful. They were used to illustrate how emf described the orbits of the planets and other celestial bodies within our system. I just liked them because of their beauty. I wonder where the pictures went?

[OmegaWolf]

I read of this theory some time ago and the website I saw had some beautiful illustrations of the electromagnetic pattern waves of the solar system, and it was beautiful. They were used to illustrate how emf described the orbits of the planets and other celestial bodies within our system. I just liked them because of their beauty. I wonder where the pictures went?

It was when I was looking for images of "sprites" and "jets" that I came across the theory. One of the websites does a "picture of the day":

http://www.thunderbolts.info/

[Lordofthebunnies]

Yeah, I stumbled across this theory awhile back as well. Its pretty interesting. Here's some other sites and articles:

http://www.plasmacosmology.net/

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/ ... igbang.htm

http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/

I'm not sure whether its true or not, though truth be told, the idea of an eternal, evolving universe seems more reasonable to me than some of the creation ex nihilo ideas applied to the big bang.

[journyman161]

The theory is interesting but so far doesn't seem to cover the problem it had a few years back when proposed - what mecahnism transmits or contain the electro-magnetism. There would need to be something other than the normal EMF we can measure or else we would 'see' the effects of this field in our observations.

Also, the author of the site 'electric-cosmos' seems to have a rather simplistic idea of just what astronomy is about.

Because the stars are light years away, we cannot hope to be able to "go there" and perform experiments on them. Until relatively recently even the planets were out of our reach. Thus, cosmologists never get to complete the scientific method. We cannot "close the loop" in cosmology

There is no need to 'go there' to check a lot of things about other stars; there they are, sitting up there in plain view - many things can be determined simply by looking at them in the right way. The loop can be closed on a lot of the hypotheses because we can evaluate with the evidence in front of us. The site seems to think you have to manipulate the stuff of stars to be able to check things - without realising the 'stuff of stars' is reaching us on an ongoing basis in the form of little quanta of light.

I've mentioned elsewhere about a guy called Edward Leedskalnin & his theories about gravity & magnetism & also about the actual results of the Michelson-Morley 'ether' tests - the EM Universe theory would fit rather nicely with both concepts I think.

[OmegaWolf]

The theory is interesting but so far doesn't seem to cover the problem it had a few years back when proposed - what mecahnism transmits or contain the electro-magnetism. There would need to be something other than the normal EMF we can measure or else we would 'see' the effects of this field in our observations.

From what I have read the mechanism for the transmission of the force is the same as it is terrestrially, the medium is interstellar plasma. According to the proponents of this theory the effects of this can be seen in (among other things) the filamentary structure of astronomical nebulae, galaxies etc.

[journyman161]

Oh I agree it is an interesting view on things & should be thought through in more detail than it has so far received. And I wasn't suggesting that the mechanism for EM on Ezarth is different - it is also unknown. This idea of little packets of mass or waves of energy is simply a possible way to look at things & has basic problems to solve - so I doubt we have the answer yet at all for how EM functions.

And the Ether that Michelson-Morley found would be a perfect candidate for the interstellar plasma you mention. It would also fit nicely with Leedskalnin's 'magnets' that are the basis for everything.

And of them all, Leedskalnin has the runs on the board - the man moved huge chunks of rock around by himself to show application of his ideas.

[journyman161]

Over time, the two big, false assumptions (above) have been adorned with elegant, abstract, mathematical "models" consisting of equations concerning: mass, energy, velocity of light, etc. The solutions of these equations have led to pronouncements that 99% of the universe must consist of "dark matter": stuff that humans cannot observe, and that a "Big Bang" occurred wherein all the matter in the Universe (presumably including the matter that we cannot see) was created out of nothing, in an instant, precisely 12 billion years ago

As an example, consider Newton's law of gravity. It seems to work correctly in describing the motions of falling bodies here on Earth. It precisely describes the requirements of placing satellites in orbit. It works in what we call the macroscopic range of human endeavor. But, when we get inside the nucleus of the atom, we find Newtonian mechanics to be hopelessly overpowered by what are called the strong and weak forces. Gravity doesn't seem to work in that very small "region of validity"

He's trying too hard - dark matter & dark energy are labels for phenomena that might offer explanations for why the theory doesn't match observation. Nobody even knows if there is matter that we would ahve problems observing - but whatever it is, it is acting like extra matter would act.

Nobody says all the matter was created in an instant 12 billion years ago - the matter is thought to have come about later on, as the initial conditions changed, & again, it is only the general public who are sure there was a Big Bang. Cosmologists have a range of possibilities.

Newtons laws do NOT accurately describe even motion on Earth & certainly aren't accurate enough for satellites - on the other hand, Relativity does fit this bill - wihtout Relativity, your GPS wouldn't be worth spit.

When someone over-reaches like this guy is doing, I get suspicious - I begin to wonder, if his science is so poor in the more orthodox world of physics, how good is it going to be once he steps outside the bounds?

That doesn't mean he is wrong, just that with this stuff in his presentation he is going to have to work harder to convince me. A more reasoned approach showing a better understanding of the subject he is panning would provide less resistance to his subject matter.

[OmegaWolf]

When someone over-reaches like this guy is doing, I get suspicious - I begin to wonder, if his science is so poor in the more orthodox world of physics, how good is it going to be once he steps outside the bounds?

That doesn't mean he is wrong, just that with this stuff in his presentation he is going to have to work harder to convince me. A more reasoned approach showing a better understanding of the subject he is panning would provide less resistance to his subject matter.

His site is just one out of many.

From what I can determine (as a layman), plasma cosmologists have been able to successfully model the observed structure of interstellar phenomena in the lab. They have not had to resort to the creation of entirely new classes of unobserved matter and energy to support their theories regarding the apparent structure of the universe.

Really, which explanation is simpler: that matter at all scales is affected and shaped by EM fields or that there is a HUGE amount of matter around that we cannot see that is shaping the universe gravitationally? This is a rhetorical question but it goes to the principle of Occam's razor.

Omega

[CFTraveler]

Journeyman:
In the risk of sounding stupid, since I haven't looked at Leedskalkin's boards or site-does he have anything to do with the guy that built the Coral Castle in Florida? I think his name is similar.