Plasma Cosmology

Introduction The new full colour E-BOOKS are now available. These are ideal for teachers, general readers, and specialists alike. Go here for further details. Plasma Cosmology This web site aims to provide an introduction to the emerging Plasma "A new scientific truth Universe paradigm, and to explore some of the many profound does not triumph by implications. convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but Mainstream science, for the most part, looks on the universe as rather because its electrically neutral and purely mechanical; a place where the weak opponents eventually force of gravity holds fort. Plasma Cosmology, by contrast, acknowledges the electrodynamic nature of the universe. Gravity and die, and a new generation grows up inertia are NOT the only forces at work. that is familiar with it." The history of science, of course, is fraught with controversy, and it Max Planck is important to bear in mind that the situation today is little different. What is Plasma? Plasma is the fourth state of matter. It differs from solids, liquids and gases in so far as it's atoms are divided into free-floating 'negative' electrons and 'positive' ions (an atom which has lost its electron/s). It is sometimes referred to as an ionized gas. Students are generally taught about only three states of matter, and when Plasma does get a mention, little importance is assigned. Not only should plasma be added to the list, but the order should be reversed to put it in first place. The reasons for this will become clear. The term Plasma was borrowed from blood plasma in order to describe its almost life-like and self-organising properties. Plasma sometimes emits light when under the excitation of electrical and magnetic fields. Polar auroras bear witness to this fact. Where is it? Plasma is almost everywhere. At least ninety-nine percent of the known universe is, in fact, matter in its plasma state! The surface of the sun is plasma; not hot gas, which is quite a different thing. Plasma in space consists entirely of ions and electrons, and is thus very energetic or 'hot'. Only when cooled does it form the matter to which we are familiar here on Earth: solids, liquids, and gases.

Because plasma remains electrically charged in space, it is influenced more by electromagnetic forces than gravity. In fact space, once considered mostly empty, has been found to be alive with plasma. Vast flows of charged particles have been discovered spanning hundreds-of-thousands of light years across interstellar space. The most familiar examples of electrical plasmas here on earth are neon signs and lighting, television screens, and electrical arc welding machines. Fire and Lightning are also forms of Plasma. Some behaviours and properties of Plasma Plasma is an excellent conductor of electricity. Because of its freeflowing electrons its conductive properties far surpass those of copper and gold. Due to its interaction with electromagnetism, plasmas display a complexity in structure far exceeding that of matter in gaseous, liquid, or solid states. It has a tendency to form into cellular and filamentary structures. These structures derive from the fact that a charged particle flow (or current) produces a ring of magnetic fields around itself, 'pinching' plasma into multi-filamentary strands, as can be seen on both cosmic and more localised scales. Pictured right is a novelty plasma-lamp typical of those available on the high street. Mainstream misconceptions While conventional astronomy maps magnetism, electric currents are Men occasionally excluded on the mistaken basis that they are of no significance in stumble over the truth, space. but most of them pick themselves up and carry on as if nothing Working from the inertia of this prior belief, astrophysicists have a ever happened." tendency to talk in euphemisms. 'Electron rains' and 'clouds of ionized gas' are just two examples. From a conservative perspective Winston Churchill these terms might seem easier to grasp than the behaviour of more ethereal plasma, but they are, nonetheless, obfuscations. In reality we are talking about electrodynamic phenomena. It is important to understand that gravity based models were codified before space travel and high powered telescopes. Back then our galaxy, The Milky Way, was considered the entirety of the universe ... and electrically sterile! Instead of trying to shoehorn what we now see into old models, Plasma Cosmology respects the progress of the past, but is not constrained by it. Scientific theories, by definition, are vulnerable to being falsified. Science moves on. The role of Plasma in The Universe

"It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the universe remain hypothetical!" Jim Peebles

Plasma cosmology has gone beyond hypothesis and analysis. There are problems with part three, of course, experimentation on universal scales, but the fact is that plasmas are highly scalable, and supercomputing capabilities have enabled us to model plasma behaviours on galactic scales ... utilising only a few simple formulae. These models are consistent with reality. Big Bang cosmology, by contrast, fails to adequately account for the 'clumpiness' and filamentary structures that we observe. Plasma cosmology does NOT rely on abstract mathematical modelling or an increasing array of exotic hypotheticals like Dark Matter and Dark Energy! Blogs and more My latest blogs (in the guise of The Soupdragon) can be viewed here. www.thunderbolts.info is updated with fascinating plasma related news on a daily basis. You can now view the Thunderbolts video at Google Video. If this link doesn't work, go to Google Video and try a search for Thunderbolts.

A Brief History of Plasma I Kristian Birkeland (1867-1917), Norway Birkeland was amongst the first to speculate that the Northern Lights were charged particles ejected from the Sun, captured by the Earth's magnetic field, and directed towards the polar atmosphere. To prove this theory, Birkeland performed his famous 'Terella' experiment, where he artificially created the aurora in the laboratory. His theories were initially laughed at, and it is only now in the space age that measurements from satellites are proving Birkeland correct. Significantly, his approach to science was broad, comprising observation and laboratory experimentation in addition to mathematical modelling. He was not content with a merely theoretical approach, despite having trained as a mathematician. He is probably Norway's greatest ever scientist, and many of his works are still used as reference materials. The electric currents that

Were Sherlock Holmes a Cosmologist, he might have said 'It's Filamentary my Dear Watson.'

flow from space are named after him -- Birkeland currents. He is recognised for bringing Plasma and Electromagnetism into Cosmology, but while many of his ideas are widely accepted, his cosmological theories are less well known. He died aged 49 just when a working committee was in the process of nominating him for the Nobel Prize in Physics. Sydney Chapman (1888-1970) was regarded as a leader in the field of interplanetary magnetospheric physics for a while after the death of Birkeland. He took an approach very similar to that of Big Bangers, relying heavily on mathematical models, and refused to even discuss many of Birkeland's ideas. According to his models, currents were confined to a sphere that extended little beyond the Earth. He failed to recognise the complex three dimensional relationship between the Earth's magnetosphere and the currents flowing from the Sun. He proposed, in contradistinction to Birkeland's ideas, that currents were restricted to the ionosphere, and that the Earth moved through a vacuum. He was wrong.

"Gravitational systems are the 'ashes' of prior electrical systems." Hannes Alfven

Irving Langmuir (1881-1957), USA Langmuir (1881-1957) was the first to use the term 'Plasma' in 1927, borrowing it from Blood Plasma to describe the almost life-like and self-organising behaviours of a plasma when in the presence of electrical currents and magnetic fields. He discovered Plasma Sheathes, now called Double Layers, having observed the electrons and ions of a plasma separating during experimentation. DLs are one of the most important features of plasma behaviour. He also defined and explained the term 'valence' as part of his description of the atom. Few textbooks, however, recognise the influence that Langmuir had on the development of our understanding of the nature of the atom. He became the first 'non-academic' chemist to receive the Nobel Prize, an accomplishment he realised in 1932. Langmuir probes, which can be used in space, are named after him. Hannes Alfven (1908-1995) - The Father of modern Plasma Physics, Sweden Alfven (1908-1995) is generally regarded as the Father of modern Plasma Physics. He continued the work of Birkeland, feeling very much in spirit with him, and eventually won a Nobel Laureate for his ground-breaking contributions. He was not always highly regarded "I have never thought by the scientific establishment because of his controversial ideas, that you could obtain however, and suffered no little condescension and ridicule in his the extremely clumpy, lifetime. heterogeneous

universe we have today, strongly In fact it now seems bizarre that he wasn't awarded the Nobel Prize affected by plasma until 1970, especially considering his many fundamental accomplishments. For some time he was forced to publish in journals processes, from the that did not enjoy international readership. His ideas finally became smooth, homogeneous one of the Big Bang, known to the general scientific community through his grounddominated by breaking book, Cosmical Electrodynamics, published by Oxford gravitation." Alfven University Press in 1950. Alfven took a practical and intuitive approach to science, insisting that theories of cosmological phenomena must agree with laboratory experiments. (The definition of 'laboratory' being broadened to include experiments in space.) Having started out as an engineer, his methods were in direct opposition to the approach generally favoured by Big Bangers, that of starting-out from idealised mathematical principles. In 1937 Alfven proposed that our galaxy contained a large-scale magnetic field and that charged particles moved in spiral orbits within it, owing to forces exerted by the field. Plasma carried the electrical currents which create the magnetic field. While many of Alfven's theories are now well known, like those of Birkeland, the cosmological implications of his work also remain to be fully recognised. Ironically, some have put this down to the very simplicity of many of these ideas. David Bohm (1917-1992), USA Bohm was the plasma theoretician and cosmologist who discovered the instabilities and resistivity of magnetized plasmas that now bear his name. There are many others who probably should be mentioned, but this web site aims only to serve as an introduction to the emerging paradigm.

"The universe is an unending transformation in flux whose previous states we are not privileged to know." David Bohm d Bohm

Today, a growing body of scientists, engineers, and independent researchers are continuing the work of these pioneers. They have taken up the gauntlet in defiance of some of the more entrenched thinking that still permeates the mainstream. See the links page for further details. Summation Both Hannes Alfven and Irving Langmuir won Nobel Laureates for their work, and Kristian Birkeland probably would have done had he lived long enough. It seems unfortunate, therefore, that their work in cosmology, and the implications of their work in this field, remain largely unrecognised. Alfven's criticism of the Big Bang, it has to be

“I have no trouble publishing in Soviet astrophysical journals, but my work is unacceptable to the

said, certainly rankled with some of the powers that be.

American astrophysical journals.” Hannes Alfvén

A Brief History of Plasma II Faraday and Maxwell While we now know that the terms electro- and -magnetic go together, this was not always the case, and the relationship between electricity and magnetism was not always clear. Michael Faraday, 1791-1867, was called a charlatan and a fraud when he announced that he could generate an electric current by moving a magnet in a coil of wire! James Clerk Maxwell clarified our understanding of the relationship between electricity and magnetism. Electric fields can't be divorced from magnetic fields -- or vice versa -- but conventional astronomy still attempts to do just this!

"The phenomena of electrical discharge are exceedingly important, and when they are better understood they will probably throw great light on the nature of electricity as well as on the nature of gases and of the medium pervading space." James Clerk Maxwell, Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism.

Why does mainstream cosmology attribute little or no importance to electrodynamics? There are a number of reasons for this mistaken attitude, and it represents the the main point of demarcation between Plasma and Big Bang cosmologies. Some time back there was a fork in the road, and mainstream cosmology took the road marked gravity only which lead to a strange place dominated by abstract math. Unfortunately it is now proving almost impossible to turn this behemoth around!

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley

History: When geniuses like Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) and Isaac Newton (1643-1727) formulated their theories very little was known about electricity. (Oil and gas provided the lighting back then.) A treatise had been written on magnetism, and some magnetism is incorporated in astronomical models, but the basis of mainstream theories remain the same -- they rely on gravity and inertia. They work on the mistaken premise that space is electrically sterile.

"Newton was unaware of plasma. Today his disciples spend years in training learning when and how to shut their eyes to it." Mel Acheson

The situation changed briefly in the late 1800s and early 1900s when electromganetism was thought the most likely route to a better understanding of space. Indeed, the scientific press was awash with

such speculation at the time. However, something happened, and it became taboo to discuss EM in space. Albert Einstein, for example, did not so much as mention EM in his Relativity theories, and his mathematical theories effectively removed the concept of the aether. "Never attribute to Magnetic Reconnection and Frozen-in Magnetic Fields malice that which can These erroneous concepts are probably the biggest source of be adequately confusion in mainstream circles. Ironically, the concept of Frozen-in explained by stupidity, Magnetic Fields was first proposed by Hannes Alfven, but he quickly but don't rule out realised his mistake, and explained the error. Unfortunately, he was malice." Heinlein's surprised to find that the error persisted, and later in life he wished Razor he had spent more time correcting the misconception. Magnetic Fields are never frozen into a plasma. This is just a symptom of mainstream science refusing to acknowledge electric currents (energy transfer) in space. They prefer to talk in terms of magnetic ropes et al, as the idea of electricity in space would open up a can of worms for them. They simpy refuse to face this fact to any meaningful extent. Furthermore, magnetic field lines do not reconnect or merge after they break down and release energy. Don Scott, a retired professor of electrical engineering, explains the issues in more detail here Psychology: Belief is known to have a profound affect on perception. Witness the fact that euphemisms are employed to conform to the inertia of prior belief. The mainstream prefers to talk in terms of ion storms and electron rains rather than acknowledging the existence of electrical phenomena in space. See the technical section for explanations of some common misconceptions. So many astronomical phenomena scream 'Electricity', but sophistry is all too often employed to interpret them within the existing paradigm. Filamentary Birkeland currents in plasma, and double layers et al are not even recognised in mainstream cosmology, let alone understood! And they call it the queen of the sciences! 'Charge separation in space is not possible' Well, this is the mainstream view. Because the attractive electrical forces between electrons and ions are 39 orders of magnitude greater than the gravitational attraction between their masses, it is assumed that these particles quickly find each other and neutralise. It is wrong, however, as we now observe charge separation in space. It is therefore important to stress that we should be working backwards from observation, and not extrapolating from some idealised theoretical starting point. Theories of the plasma universe do not begin with neutral matter. They begin with the observation

that charges are already separated. Math While GR is amenable to math -- if we allow for the fact that so many space probes have suffered inexplicable crashes and anomalous accelerations -- the situation with electrodynamics is less simple. How would we go about measuring the voltage of the earth, for example, when voltage is a relative figure? Would we measure the voltage in relation to The Sun or The Moon? And how could we do this? Running a cable between any two planets presents technical difficulties, whereas problems with GR calculations are simply plugged with exotic hypotheticals! Science versus Math Unfortunately, the current cosmological scene is dominated by mathematicians, not scientists, and electromagnetism is notoriously difficult to model mathematically, so they prefer to close their eyes to it. See bad astronomy versus good science, below. Electrodynamics versus Fluid Dynamics Another common trick is to refer to electrodynamic phenomena in terms really only appropriate to fluid dynamics. 'Electron Rains' and 'Ion Storms' are prime examples. These are clearly electrodynamic phenomena, as are 'Magnetic Ropes'. Magnetic ropes are in fact Birkeland currents. See technical for further info. Bad Astronomy versus Good Science Phil Plait, the self-proclaimed Bad Astronomer, is an unrepentant critic of the Electric Universe. He recently launched another attack on the EU model, by proxy, claiming that astronomy does not ignore magnetic fields. This is a straw man, as no such claim has been made "Magnetism is a very important topic in astrophysics (despite some pseudo-scientists lying and saying this force is ignored), but it’s not well-understood. It’s fiendishly complex, so much so that it’s a joke in stronomy." Phil Plait The real issue is that the relationship between magnetic fields and electric currents is being overlooked, and this is a critical omission "In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate In other words, magnetism cannot be viewed in isolation. At least Plait admits their fear of magnetism in the process, which is the big giveaway. Mathematics and the kinetic theory of ordinary Gases

See below Plasma Physics The following quote from Australian physicist, Wal Thornhill, provides some further background on difficulties with working with Plasmas which have contributed to mainstream ignorance on the subject. "Plasma physics started along two parallel lines. One of them was the hundred-year-old investigation into what was called 'electric discharges in gases'. To a high degree, this approach was experimental and phenomenological, and only very slowly did it reach some degree of theoretical sophistication. Most theoretical physicists looked down on this field which was complicated and awkward. The plasma exhibited striations, double layers, and an assortment of oscillations and instabilities. The electron temperature was often found to be one or two orders of magnitude larger than the gas temperature, with the ion temperature intermediate. "In short, it was a field which was not well suited for mathematically elegant theories. The other approach came from the highly developed kinetic theory of ordinary gases. It was thought that, with a limited amount of work, this field could be extended to include ionized gases. The theories were mathematically elegant and claimed to derive all of the properties of a plasma from first principles. In reality this was not true. Because of the complexity of the problem, a number of approximations were necessary which were not always appropriate. The theories had very little contact with experimental physics: all awkward and complicated phenomena observed in the laboratory were simply neglected... Theories about plasmas, at the time called ionized gases, were developed without any contact with laboratory plasma work. In spite of this -- or perhaps because of this -- belief in the theories was so strong that they were applied directly to space. One of the results was the Chapman-Ferraro theory (for a review see Akasofu and Chapman, 1972) which became accepted to such an extent that Birkeland's approach was almost completely forgotten. For thirty or forty years, Birkland's results were often ignored in textbooks and surveys, and all attempts to revive and develop them were neglected. "The crushing victory of the theoretical approach over the experimental approach lasted only until the theory was to make experimentally verifiable predictions. From the theory, it was concluded that in the laboratory, plasmas could easily be confined in magnetic fields and heated to such temperatures as to make thermonuclear release of energy possible. When attempts were made to construct thermonuclear reactors, a confrontation between the theories and reality was unavoidable -- the results were catastrophic. Although the theories were generally accepted, the plasma itself

refused to believe them. This is not to say that Juergens' theory that the sun is an anode is valid. His observation was that the sun appears to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics in that the heat transfer in the wrong way. My friend Leroy, if I recall correctly, once attempted to explain this by an analogy of a man with a cigarette lighter in his extended arm. Neither suggestion is correct as the sun is not a collection of ordinary gas. It a collection of matter in the plasma form and as such the temperature of the electrons is orders of magnitude higher than the rest of the body (A normal condition for a plasma). "The approach which Alfven suggested must ignore the elegant and simplistic ordinary gases theory as the electromagnetic forces within a plasma dominate." Synchrotron Radiation In 1950, Alfven, together with his colleagues Herlofson and Keipenheuer, was the first to identify nonthermal radiation from astronomical sources. It is produced by fast-moving electrons in the presence of magnetic fields, and its importance cannot be underestimated in astrophysics as most of the radiation recorded by radio telescopes derives from this mechanism.

"In the end The Universe will have its say." Sir Fred Hoyle

At the time this was a remarkable suggestion, given that plasma and magnetic fields were thought to have little, if anything, to do in a cosmos filled with 'island universes' (galaxies). It has provided additional evidence for the existence of extensive magnetic fields, and indicates that enormous amounts of energy may be converted, stored, and released by cosmic plasma. Prior to its discovery we were largely restricted to the visual spectrum, which favours the three states of matter (solids, liquids, and gases) that formed the basis of conventional astronomy. The Michelson-Morley experiment Growing numbers of scientists are questioning the hero worship of Einstein, not least because the Michelson-Morley experiment did NOT give a null result. Mainstream science, however, claims that the 'null' result disproves the existence of an æther.

“What we call mass would seem to be nothing but an appearance, and all inertia to be of “... Lorentz, in order to justify his transformation equations, saw the electromagnetic origin.” Henri necessity of postulating a physical effect of interaction between moving matter and æther, to give the mathematics meaning. Physics Poincaré, Science and still had de jure authority over mathematics: it was Einstein, who had Method no qualms about abolishing the æther and still retaining light waves whose properties were expressed by formulae that were meaningless without it, who was the first to discard physics altogether and propose a wholly mathematical theory...” Herbert Dingle, Science at

the Cross-Roads.

Technical overview I The following introduction to some technical terms should provide a reasonable insight into Plasma Physics. An underlying simplicity seems to beckon, even while many questions remain, and a picture drastically different from the traditional view of the universe begins to emerge. The Solar Wind The Earth's magnetic field acts much like a protective cocoon. Over and around this field flows the solar wind, the dilute but persistent stream of plasma (protons, electrons and other ions) emitted by The Sun. This flow of plasma, with its associated electromagnetic fields, distorts The Earth's own field, compressing it on the dayside and stretching it on the night side. The resulting field is called the magnetosphere. Because the sun is seen to emit roughly equal quantities of ions and electrons, the solar wind is considered electrically neutral in mainstream circles. This is wrong. In reality it is a huge bipolar electric current, and the terms solar wind and solar radiation result from the fact that the mainstream refuses to acknowledge electricity in space. Moreover, plasmas react with the extensive magnetic field lines in our solar system, and when conducting fluids flow through a magnetic field a dynamo can be created, with the electrical energy needed to drive the current taken from any relative motion. This is consistent with the laws of physics: If a closed circuit exists, parts of which are moving through a magnetic field while other parts are not, an electric current will arise. This is how dynamos work. Magnetospheres Magnetic forces are of little importance in our everyday lives and require a sensitive instrument like a compass needle to be detected. This is because most of the materials we encounter, from the ground we walk on to the air we breathe, are electrically neutral. At 60 miles or more above the surface of the Earth, however, the situation is very different. The fringes of the atmosphere at these heights are dominated by plasmas which react with the earths

magnetic field, steering and trapping the energised particles. The intense activity in these regions is sometimes described as one of the first surprises of the space age, and the sheer scale of the magnetospheres of other planets has also taken many by surprise, consistent though they are with Plasma models. Magnetotails In contrast to the dayside of the magnetosphere, which is compressed and confined by the solar wind, the night side is stretched into a long tear-shaped 'magnetotail'. This part of the magnetosphere is quite dynamic, where the ions and electrons are often energized (the magnetotail is the main source of the polar aurora). The plasma sheath of Venus is extremely long, almost touching the Earth when the two planets are at their closest approach. NASA astronomers recently discovered 'stringy things' in the tail, as predicted by Birkeland. Birkeland currents Magnetic disturbances are usually observed during displays in auroral zones. These are localised and fade towards the equator, suggesting that currents flow nearby. Currents, of course, require closed circuits. Birkeland proposed that these currents flowed from space at one end of an auroral arc and returned to space at the other, flowing parallel to the ground when in proximity with The Earth. Birkeland first made this proposal after returning from an expedition to an auroral zone in 1903, and it was confirmed by the US Naval satellite, Triad, in 1973. Its magnetometer detected two large sheets of electric current, down on the morning side of the auroral zone, and up on the evening side, as expected. Each sheet typically carries a million amperes or more. Further: Enormous Birkeland currents connecting Jupiter and its moon Io were recorded by the Voyager spacecraft in 1979. In 1984 Farhad Yusef-Azdeh, Don Chance, and Mark Morris discovered Birkeland currents on a galactic scale. Working with the Very Large Array radio telescope, they found an arc of radio emission some 120 light-years long near the centre of the Milky Way! The structure is made up of narrow filaments typically 3 lightyears wide and running the full length of the arc. The strength of the associated magnetic field is 100 times greater than previously thought possible on such a large scale, but the field is nearly identical in geometry and strength to computer simulations of galaxy formation.

Current modes Electric currents in plasma take on three basic modes -- dark, glow or arc -- depending on the voltage and charge density. In laboratory gas-discharge tubes, voltage and charge density vary non-linearly between the electrodes and produce segments that are alternately dark and glowing. The high-charge-density arc mode is used in industry for precision machining. The plasma sheath of venus, mentioned above, is currently in dark mode. Z-pinches The plasma universe consists of swirling streams of electrons and ions flowing in filaments which tend to corkscrew or spiral. They self pinch from the magnetic fields that they generate around themselves. There is a tendency for these filaments to repel at close range, and attract at greater distances. However, when in close proximity they may also spiral around one another. When this happens there is also a tendency for the filaments to compress between them any material (ionized or not) in the plasma. This is called the Z-pinch effect. The bulk of the filaments are invisible from a distance, much like the Birkeland currents that circle the Earth are invisible from its surface, with the exception of auroral discharges. Doubleness The proclivity for multiple filaments to interact in pairs is a signature of electromagnetic forces and sometimes referred to as 'Doubleness'. This behaviour derives from Ampére's Law or the Biot-Savart force law which states that currents in the same direction attract while currents in the opposite direction repel. They do so inversely in relation to the distance between them. This results in a far larger ranging force of interaction than the gravitational force between two masses. Gravitational force is only attractive and varies inversely with the square of the distance. Electromagnetic force strength While all matter is subject to gravity, plasma is more strongly affected by EM forces as is to be expected given its constituent parts -- negatively charged electrons and positively charged ions. In fact, the EM force is 10^39 times as strong! Plasma displays structures and motions that are far more complex than those found in neutral solids, liquids, and gases. It has a tendency to form the cellular and

filamentary structures under discussion. The following is quoted from from Dr A. Peratt's site But perhaps the most important characteristic of electromagnetism is that it obeys the longest-range force law in the universe. When two or more non-plasma bodies interact gravitationally, their force law varies inversely as the square of the distance between them; 1/4 the pull if they are 2 arbitrary measurement units apart, 1/9 the pull for a distance of 3 units apart, 1/16 the pull for 4 units apart, and so on. When plasmas, say streams of charged particles, interact electromagnetically, their force law varies inversely as the distance between them, 1/2 the pull if they are 2 arbitrary measurement units apart, 1/3 the pull for a distance of 3 units apart, 1/4 the pull for 4 units apart, and so on. So at 4 arbitrary distance units apart, the electromagnetic force is 4 times greater than that of gravitation, relatively speaking, and at 100 units, apart, the electromagnetic force is 100 times that of gravitation. Moreover, the electromagnetic force can be repulsive if the streams in interaction are flowing in opposite directions. Thus immense plasma streams measured in megaparsecs, carrying galaxies and stars, can appear to be falling towards nothing when they are actually repelling. Double Layers Plasma sheathes were discovered by Langmuir in his laboratory, and "In the beginning was are now called double layers. the Plasma." Hannes Alfven DLs refer to one of the most important properties of any electrical plasma -- its ability to form electrically isolated sections or cells. Because Plasma is an outstanding conductor and cannot sustain a high electric field, it self-organizes to form a protective sheath (Double Layer) across which most of the electric field is concentrated and where most of the electrical energy is stored (They can act very much like capacitors). When a foreign object is inserted into a plasma, a DL will form around it, shielding it from the main plasma. This effect makes it difficult to insert voltage sensing probes into a plasma in order to measure any electric potential at a specific location. Double layers may break down with an explosive release of electrical energy. Hannes Alfvén first suggested that billions of volts could exist across a typical solar flare DL. Astrophysicists who map magnetic fields and assume there's no

electricity in space (or little of any consequence) seem, somewhat inexplicably, to be unaware of their existence. They resort to positing any number of mechanical devices from 'magnetic reconnection' to 'frozen-in magnetic field lines' and more. 'Frozen-in Magnetic Fields' The myth of 'frozen-in magnetic fields' still raises its head in the mainstream now and again, despite Alfven disposing of it many years ago. For years it was assumed that plasmas were perfect conductors and, as such, a magnetic field in any plasma would have to be 'frozen' inside it. The basic technical reason for this arose from one of Maxwell's equations. It was thought that if all plasmas are ideal conductors they cannot have electric fields (voltage differences, inside them), and that any magnetic fields inside a plasma must therefore be 'frozen', that is unable to move or change in any way. Further: Thanks to Alfven we now know that there can be voltage differences between different points in plasmas. He pointed this out in his acceptance speech when receiving the Nobel Prize for physics in 1970. The electrical conductivity of any material, including plasma, is determined by two factors: the density of the population of available charge carriers (the ions) in the material, and the mobility of these carriers. In any plasma, the mobility of the ions is extremely high. Electrons and ions can move around very freely in space. But the concentration of ions available to carry charge may not be at all high if the plasma is very low pressure or diffuse. In short, although plasmas are excellent conductors, they are not perfect. It therefore follows that weak electric fields can exist inside them, and magnetic fields are NOT frozen inside them. 'Magnetic reconnection' Like the myth of 'Frozen in magnetic fields', Magnetic Reconnection is another colourful invention of conventional astronomy. It also attempts to account for anomalies arising from the misconception that electric currents do not flow in space. In reality it is a well-understood plasma phenomena, relating to exploding double-layers and electric discharge. Astronomers have noticed that when magnetic reconnection occurs, there seem to be regions of electron-depleted space associated with it (Electric Currents). They have also noticed that a two-layer flow of particles is created that speeds the release of energy (Double Layers). Don Scott, a retired professor of electrical engineering, explains the issues in more detail here

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice." Heinlein's Razor

'Magnetars' Magnetars are mathematical-models of stars based on 'frozen-in' magnetic fields and 'magnetic reconnection'. Need we say anymore? The math may be correct, but this does not guarantee that they reflect reality.

"Magnetic Reconnection is pseudo-science." Hannes Alfven

Plasma cosmologists know that magnetic fields do not stand alone -they are induced by electric currents. There must be an intense electric current feeding the magnetar, and this current must be part of a circuit, as all electric circuits must be closed. Power generation Because plasmas are good, but not perfect, conductors, they are similar to wires in their ability to carry electrical current. It is well known that if any conductor cuts through a magnetic field, a current will flow in that conductor. This is how electrical generators and alternators work. If there is any relative motion between a cosmic plasma, say in the arm of a galaxy, and a magnetic field in that same location, currents will flow in the plasma. These currents will, in turn, produce their own magnetic fields. In 1986, Hannes Alfven postulated electrical models on both galactic and solar scales. Physicist Wal Thornhill has pointed out that Alfven's circuits are really scaled up versions of the familiar homopolar motor that serve as the watt-hour meters in many homes. Also, more recently, the interaction of the Moon Io with the giant planet Jupiter has been likened to a dynamo. There is still some discussion as to whether galaxies require electrical power from external sources, but who can now reasonably deny that vast currents flow throughout space? For how much longer can this simple fact be overlooked and denied? Granted, electric currents in space may be more difficult to measure than magnetic fields, but the 'truth is out there'. Scaling Plasmas Plasma phenomena are scalable. Their electrical and physical properties remain the same, independent of the size of the plasma. In a laboratory plasma, of course, things happen much more quickly than on, say, galaxy scales, but the phenomena are identical -- they obey the same laws of physics. In other words we can make accurate models of cosmic scale plasma behaviour in the lab, and generate effects that mimic those observed in space. It has been demonstrated that plasma phenomena can be

"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven

scaled to fourteen orders of magnitude. (Alfven hypothesised that they can be scaled to 28 orders or more!) Electric currents flowing in plasmas produce most of the observed astronomical phenomena that remain inexplicable if we assume gravity and magnetism to be the only forces at work. Plasma simulations A world renowned electrical engineer, Dr Anthony C. Perratt -- a graduate student of Nobel Prize winner Hannes Alfven -- has worked on plasma simulations for many years. See the links page for further details of this leading light in Plasma Physics. He has utilized super-computing capabilities to apply the MaxwellLorentz equations (the basic laws governing the forces and interactions of electric and magnetic fields) to huge ensembles of charged particles. He calls this PIC - Particle In Cell simulation. The results are almost indistinguishable from images of actual galaxies. Peratt Instabilities One of the latest and most important discoveries. These dynamic effects are observed to occur in intense Birkeland currents, arc discharges in plasma torches, z-pinched plasma filaments, and high energy electrical discharges. The instability takes on the shape of a column of axially symmetric toroids or spheroids that remain in a semi-stable state until disruption. These instabilities can also take on a sawtooth structure with a violent snaking motion. Magnetohydrodynamics The study of the dynamics of electrically-conducting fluids, one of many fields pioneered by Alfven, and perhaps one of his better known contributions within mainstream circles.

Technical overview II Dr Charles Bruce FIEE, FIP, FRAS Dr Charles Bruce was an expert in high voltage electrical engineering and a Fellow of The Royal Astronomical Society. In the 1940s he made a remarkable proposal that is still ignored by mainstream astronomy to this day. His proposal supports the

electrodynamic paradigm. Bruce identified cosmic jets, solar flares, magnetic fields and high temperatures in space as electrical discharge phenomena. "And even if one regards the electric fields as merely another postulate, it has the great advantage that it is the one postulate which, in my view, renders all the others unnecessary." C. E. R Bruce, Electric Fields in Space, Penguin Science, 1968 Bruce also identified beautiful bipolar planetary nebulae as electrical phenomena. (M2-9 is pictured in the header, above, to the left of the lightning flash.) The Electric Sky, Don Scott Don Scott is a retired professor of Electrical Engineering, with a long term interest in astronomy and cosmology. His new book, The Electric Sky, contains sensible science that can be understood by both amateurs and experts alike. Published late 2006, it is the first substantial public exposition of the latest developments that further challenge the current 'gravity only' system of thinking. Order here. The Plasma Gun The plasma gun, pictured below, is a simple plasma focus device, consisting of two metal tubes, one inside the other. They have been successful in concentrating plasma discharges during at least three decades of research.

Above. Looking down the barrel of a plasma focus gun.

The energy stored in a large bank of capacitors is concentrated into a Above. 3D view of a tiny filamentary knot, shaped like a donut, and known as a plasmoid. cosmic plasma gun, When plasmoid vortexes collapse, two intense plasma filaments are the M1 Pulsar. fired along the axis. Below. Looking down the barrel, so to speak, Pictured above right is the view down the barrel of a plasma gun. of Nebula NGC 6751.

The same process can be seen at the core of spiral galaxies and in powerful stellar outbursts. Pictured right is Nebula NGC 6751. Plasma phenomena, of course, are scalable over many orders of magnitude. The compact energetic activity at the core of galaxies is thus explained in simple electrical terms. In Plasma Cosmology there is no need for mathematical abstraction. Who needs Black Holes? Devices based on the plasma gun are being developed to generate neutron beams, x-rays, and nuclear fusion devices. The future of space travel probably rests on these. Plasma focus v Black Holes The existence of Black Holes is no longer questioned in conventional astronomy, despite the fact that they are based entirely on theoretical assumptions. However, astronomers using NASAs Hubble Space Telescope have identified the source of a mysterious blue light surrounding a 'supermassive black hole' in our neighboring Galaxy, Andromeda M31. It originates from a disk of hot, young stars that whip around the 'black hole' in much the same way that planets in our solar system revolve around the Sun. Astronomers are perplexed about how this disk of stars could form so close to a giant black hole. They should, of course, be sucked into oblivion, but this isn't happening. Similar stars close to the core of our Milky Way galaxy have also been observed. None of this perplexes astronomers who are familiar with plasma. They can generate similar effects in a plasma lab with the plasma focus device (above): It is the plasmoid that forms and stores energy at the focus of the discharge. When the plasmoid reaches a critical energy level, it discharges its energy in a collimated jet along its axis in the form of electromagnetic radiation and neutrons. Being unstable outside a nucleus, the neutrons soon decay into protons and electrons. The electrons are held back by the electromagnetic field, and the high-speed protons are beamed away. On a galactic scale this is probably the mechanism that produces the collimated jets streaming away from the cores of active galaxies. The masses of ejected protons may make up the quasars that are associated with these galaxies and could be the basis for their intrinsic redshift. Stephen Hawking has put forward a new thoery about black holes, suggesting that they do not destroy everything that strays into their path. The implications are profound for g. theory, and do not surprise those who favour the plasma focus model. The power source in a plasma gun is understood and can be shown to

actually work (using electric currents). An infinitely strong gravitational field has never been shown to exist, plus there needs to be a mechanism that converts the (gravitational) potential energy into plasma effects, which are clearly the end product. Intergalactic plasma circuits A new technique has revealed faint structures amidst the galaxies of the Virgo Cluster. Plasma cosmologists immediately recognise the 'cocoons, plumes, and streamers' as Birkeland currents and plasma sheaths. This is direct confirmation of the intergalactic circuits predicted by the plasma model. The 'pinch effect' organises plasmas into filaments that act as 'power cables'. These can attract and repel, and when close can spiral around each other. At points of sufficiently strong interaction, the matter in these cables will be stretched into arcs and/or bulges that can generate the familiar forms of a spiral galaxy. Cosmic Tornadoes The discovery of Herbig Haro objects, or 'jetted stars', leaves astronomers scratching their heads. The Astronomy Picture of the Day, February 3, 2006, had this to say: “Though such energetic outflows are well known to be associated with the formation of young stars, the exact cause of the spiralling structures apparent in this case is still mysterious.” In reality, these structures highlight THE fundamental misunderstanding of space! The only force known to prevent a stream of gas from rapidly dispersing in the near vacuum of space is magnetism, and only electric currents can generate magnetic fields. The trouble is, early in the twentieth century, the astronomical community decided that gravity rules the heavens, and having settled on this secure and mathematically elegant vision of the cosmos, they are reluctant to entertain ideas about more exotic forces playing any significant role. Most of these objects are many light years in length, and display the classic signatures of Plasma/EM behaviour -- 'beading', spiralling, and 'kink' or 'sawtooth' instabilities. As Alfvén pointed out, time after time, the underlying assumptions of cosmologists today “are developed with the most sophisticated mathematical methods and it is only the plasma itself which does not ‘understand’ how beautiful the theories are and absolutely refuses to obey them.” Plate Tectonics, Earthquakes, and more

This fascinating paper examines the limitations of a thermally driven model of the earth, and outlines an alternative solid-plastic-planet model, possibly expanding, and driven by electromagnetic forces. The paper is technical but approachable.

Some of the implications of Plasma Cosmology Shift happens! It seems that a perspective shift may be required before the paradigm can do likewise. From a conventional perspective, planets and stars are seen as tiny dots of matter punctuating the vast 'emptiness' of space. In this dubious model gravity and inertia dominate, albeit with a little magnetism stirred into the equations now and again. Plasma Cosmology turns this perspective on its head. In reality 'empty' space is actually a vast sea of Plasma, and dominated by electromagnetic forces. The tiny dots of matter are formed by the Zpinch effect (see technical), and surrounded by protective sheathes or Double Layers (again, see technical). "In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over vast distances. The currents have a tendency to pinch into filaments which give rise to cellular structures. These are separated by capacitor-like double layers, producing plasma phenomena which are characterized by conditions of non-isotropy, discontinuity and inhomogeneity. Galaxies are thus expected to lie like pearl beads on a filamentary necklace, as is observed. EM versus Gravity Contrast the plasma model, capable of being reproduced in straightforward simulations, with the Nebular hypothesis -- the idea that vast clouds of dust produced by the BB eventually accreted to form planets and stars. The latter relies almost entirely on gravity, and that most famous of Free Variables -- Time. It ignores the existence of plasma and its electrodynamic properties!

Gravitational forces are only attractive, whereas electromagnetic forces are both attractive and repulsive, and 10^39 stronger! They both vary inversely with the square of the distance. EM forces are known to produce the spheroid, toroid, and spiral structures that we witness throughout the universe. Gravity is NOT the only force at work. Misconception #1 "Sure, the electric force is much stronger than gravity at the sub-atomic level, but at the macrocosmic level gravity is incomparably more powerful than electricity.” Martin Rees compares the electrostatic forces between two submicroscopic charged particles with the force of gravitational attraction between two Jupiter-sized masses and makes the statement above. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! By this method we could say: “Compare the power of the water coming over Niagara Falls with the power emitted by the average incandescent flashlight bulb – see – falling water is much more powerful than electricity.” Such incompatible comparisons defy clarification. Don Scott, retired professor of Electrical Engineering, adds the following: "This assertion is like saying gravity affects elephants more than microbes. It is simply invalid. “For two protons, the electrostatic force of repulsion between them is 1.2x10^36 times the force of their gravitational attraction. The electrostatic repulsion between two electrons is 4.2x10^42 times their gravitational attraction. For one proton and one electron, the electrostatic force of attraction between them is 2.2x10^39 times the force of their gravitational attraction.” The Electric Sky (TES) Matters of no little importance Standard scientific texts focus on just three states of matter -- solids, liquids, and gases. This is no small omission. Not only should Plasma be added to this list, but it should take first place, not least because of the fact that it constitutes 99% of the known Universe! Space travel has confirmed this fact. It is misleading to describe plasma as an ionized gas when it is in fact a state in its own right.

“[T]he professional tends to interpret the pictures by using the theory he was taught while the amateur tries to use the picture to arrive at a Given the dominance of Plasma in the universe, it seems more sensible theory” Halton Arp, to consider solids as cooled Plasma (Or matter with energy removed), Seeing Red as opposed to highly energised or heated matter. Moreover, because of the ability of Plasma to interact with electromagnetic forces, it is capable of forming far more complex

structures than those seen in solids, liquids, or gases. Plasma is for everyone as Anthony Perratt, a leading contemporary Astrophysicist, is wont to say. Houston, we have a problem! Within the limited confines of our own backyard, the Solar System, existing gravitational models seem to be holding-up. We have succeeded in sending probes to neighbouring planets and, despite the crashes and anomalous accelerations that have afflicted many space programs, the Huygens mission recently scored a spectacular success -landing on Titan, a moon of Saturn, despite unexpected atmospheric conditions.

"It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the universe remain hypothetical." Jim Peebles, Princeton Cosmologist

It should be noted, however, that g models begin to break down when we look further a field. Gravity, of course, is generally described as a property of mass. The trouble is that we have not discovered enough mass in our own galaxy, The Milky Way, to account for its fortunate tendency not to disintegrate.

"...past 90% it [Dark Matter] begins to make observations The existence of mysterious Dark Matter is hypothesised to account for irrelevant." Halton this shortfall in mass, but it is yet to be discovered despite extensive Arp searches. Its existence is only inferred on the basis that g models 'must be' correct. The alternatives raise too many uncomfortable questions! Furthermore, Dark Matter is no small kludge factor -- it is alleged to account for between 20% to 99% of the universe, depending on which accounts you read! This has lead to further problems in relation to expansion models, and another hypothetical, Dark Energy, has been invented to overcome these. In summation, Dark Matter and Dark Energy add up to the blank cheques that postpone the falsification of bankrupt theories. Moreover, it can be shown that electromagnetic forces are several orders of magnitude greater than the gravitational forces, especially in certain types of plasma, and also that electromagnetic forces can have a longer range. On the largest scales, evidence that plasmas exhibit external forces on physical objects such as galaxies is the same as that which has lead standard model researchers to postulate dark matter and dark energy. Need anymore be said? The space tether experiment In 1996, in a joint venture between the US and Italy, a large spherical satellite was deployed from the US space shuttle at the end of a conducting cable (tether) over 12 miles long. The idea was to let the shuttle drag the tether across the Earth's magnetic field, producing one part of a dynamo circuit. The return current, from the shuttle to the

"In the beginning was the Plasma." Hannes Alfven

payload, would flow via the Earth's ionosphere. The deployment was almost complete when things went wrong. The tether suddenly broke free, and it took some smart detective work to discover the cause. The nature of the break suggested it was not caused by excessive tension, but that a strong electric current had melted the tether. As Above ... So Below It is often said that there is no reason to believe that the universe knows about us, or that our solar system knows about the universe. In this purely mechanistic view, contradictory evidence is generally explained away as merely coincidental.

"When Kepler found his long-cherished belief did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the See this article from www.astronomy.com Anomalies in CMB measurements seem to suggest that our solar system uncomfortable fact. reacts to conditions outside it, which was not expected, but this situation He preferred the hard truth to his is dismissed as ... coincidental. dearest illusions; that Plasma Cosmology promotes a more holistic view of the universe. This is the heart of science." Carl Sagan is a profound differentiation, and permits many theories previously excluded in a purely mechanistic gravity-dominated universe. Bodies immersed in plasma are not isolated -- they are connected by circuits. The Dynamic Universe The Plasma Universe is an extremely dynamic, quasi Steady-State Universe. It may seem strange to consider Galaxies lasting billions of years as mere transient phenomena, but this is how it is. Planets, Stars and Galaxies are born and die. The universe is cyclical! In the plasma model, super clusters, clusters and galaxies are formed from magnetically confined plasma vortex filaments. The plasma cosmology approach can easily accommodate large scale structures, and in fact predicts them. Since the plasma approach hypothesises no theoretical starting point, the amount of time necessary for large-scale structures presents no problem for the theory. The Queen of The Sciences Because Cosmology is considered the Queen of the Sciences, it provides the building blocks for so many other scientific disciplines, and this seems to add to the inertia against change. A new approach to cosmology will require a reassessment in most if not all scientific disciplines!

"The universe is an unending transformation in flux whose previous states we are not privileged to know." David Bohm

Frequently Asked Questions, and a few objections... This might seem like a "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick stupid question, but themselves up and carry on as if nothing ever happened." Winston how come we don't all Churchill get electrocuted if space is so full of electricity? This is actually a common question, and the answer is straightforward. Imagine a bird sitting on a high powered cable. That cable might carry many thousands of volts, but the bird is safe providing that it doesn't touch another cable, or any other object with an electrical differential. The air around the bird acts as an insulator. Standing on the earth we are much like the bird sitting on the cable, and the magnetosphere acts as a protective cocoon, shielding us from most of the energised particles flying through space. The occasional crackle and hum of electric cables reminds us of their purpose. Likewise, thunderstorms remind us that our planet seeks electrical equilibrium with its solar environment. Why is space considered electrically

neutral in mainstream science? See History II Why don't we see more aurora like phenomena if space is so electrically active? The auroras occur at the poles where charge is concentrated by the Earth's magnetosphere. In space plasmas are more tenuous, and the electric currents that flow through them are invisible to the naked eye, much like most power cables here on Earth, which are very often hidden from sight. Also, power plants may be many miles from the cities they supply. There is strong evidence, however, that the heavens were far more electrically active in recent millennia. See Ancient Testimony. If only half of what you say is true, how could mainstream science be so blind? A few words from Alfven seem appropriate here. In 1986 he said: "We should remember that there was once a discipline called Natural Philosophy. Unfortunately, this discipline seems not to exist today. It has been renamed science, but

"Gravitational systems are the 'ashes' of prior electrical systems." Hannes Alfven

science of today is in danger of losing much of the natural philosophy aspect." Alfven believed that territorial dominance, greed, and fear of the unknown were factors in this transition. "Scientists tend to resist interdisciplinary inquiries into their own territory. In many instances, such parochialism is founded on the fear that intrusion from other disciplines would compete unfairly for limited financial resources and thus diminish their own opportunity for research." There is so much we don't understand about plasma and electricity! How can we hope to build cosmological models with it? Sure, we may have a lot to learn about something like electricity, although it is taken very much for granted, but we can measure and observe the properties and behaviours of both plasma and electricity, which enables us to make predictions. This approach stems from a branch of philosophy known as empiricism, which is the basis of

science. Isn't this just fringe science?

“We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture.” Hannes Alfvén

Emphatically NO! A number of respected scientists and electrical engineers support most of the ideas expressed here. This web site is simply a synthesis of the basic principles. It should also be borne in mind that two of the founding fathers, Alfven and Langmuir, won Nobel Laureates, and Birkeland probably would have done had he lived long enough. See History. While many questions remain, Plasma Cosmology is gaining ground, whereas Big Bang cosmology relies on an increasing array of ad-hoc assumptions and hypotheticals. The BBT is increasingly under attack, even if does still dominate academic circles at the present time. Can Plasma Cosmology "The universe is an unending transformation in flux whose previous live with the Big Bang? states we are not privileged to know." David Bohm Surprisingly, yes. The Big Bang does not necessarily preclude the importance of Plasma and its electrodynamic properties. Even within conventional Big Bang cosmology, the entire early universe consisted of plasma before recombination (the

process in which electrons become confined to protons to make neutral atoms) occurred. However, it should be noted that most scientists and engineers in the Plasma field prefer an actualistic approach to science -- the method of working backwards from observation, rather than starting out at idealised theoretical principals. The Big Bang fails to account for the 'clumpiness' of the universe and the filamentary structures that we see. These are consistent with Plasma models. Who needs Plasma Cosmology? Gravitational models work just fine!

"It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the universe remain hypothetical." Jim Peebles, Princeton Cosmologist

Problems with g models require the invention of a number of hypotheticals. Dark Matter and Dark Energy remain highly speculative despite extensive searches over more than twenty years! Where is the Math? Do not worry. If "Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the mathematics turns you physical world, but because we know so little." Bertrand Russell on, there is plenty of it in some of the more technical pages that we link to. See the philosophy

page for some discussion about the relative importance of math in differing cosmologies. You seem to insinuate that there is a conspiracy against Plasma Cosmology! Not really. As has been stated, academic circles are currently dominated by Big Bang proponents, and they tend to promote their own theories, but science will move on. Isn't Plasma Cosmology just a re-hash of old Velikovskian ideas? No. PC does not rest on "In the end The Universe will have its say." Sir Fred Hoyle any ideas about catastrophism, but it does not preclude them, and many plasma physicists acknowledge that our solar system may have been more electrically active in recent millennia. Electric Universe supporters are generally more sympathetic to ideas relating to Catastrophism. When can we expect to see PC gaining wider acceptance? Progress is being made, slowly but surely, but plasma physicists grow increasingly impatient. See the Way Forward

Could gravity have an EM origin? Electric Universe "But hitherto I have not been able to discover the cause of those supporters view gravity properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses." as an electrostatic Isaac Newton dipolar force. It should be noted that we don't actually know what gravity is -- it remains a descriptive term for a force that we know very little about; a force which is described mathematically. It may also be described as a property of mass, of course. Research is being carried out into the potential existence of gravity waves and graviton particles, but it has so far achieved little if any success. Also, see the speculations page. Why is there relatively little research into Plasma Cosmology? A lack of funding doesn't help. Again, see the Way Forward I thought that the The Electric Star Model had been debunked? Electric Star models suffer fewer vulnerabilities than highy speculative mainstream models which rest on a number of unverified assumptions, notably in relation to neutrino flavours, iron content,

and 'magnetic reconnection', amongst many others. If the sun is electrically powered, as proposed by EU supporters, why do we not see electrons flying towards it? This is a good question “The peer review system is satisfactory during quiescent times, but in so far as it pretty not during a revolution in a discipline such as astrophysics, when the well sums up the establishment seeks to preserve the status quo.” Hannes Alfvén mainstream gripe with the the electric star model. It is important to bear in mind, however, that we should base our models on what we see, and not on what we might expect to see. Plasmas exhibit many behaviours not expected or recognised, let alone understood, in mainstream astronomy/astrophysics. Check out double layers and birkeland currents in the technical section. These provide some clues as to what may be going on. Electrical engineers, it seems, are better qualified to recognise and understand so many astronomical phenomena. Significantly, Wal Thornhill and Don Scott point out that it would be difficult to detect low energy electrons as they stream towards The Sun. Does your model supprt

astrological ideas? Please forgive me, as I'm no expert on astrology. I will concede, nonetheless, that plasma cosmology permits a more holistic view of the universe, although I have no idea how this could support conventional astrology. Are UFOs electromagnetically driven? I have no idea! For a scientific perspective try www.ufoskeptic.org You are not the first to try and come up with a unified theory of everything, and get it totally wrong! This is not a unified theory of everything. Plasma Cosmology simply represents a fresh approach to many cosmological problems, and this web site is a synthesis of many of the ideas. You seem to suggest that the mainstream ignores plasma physics? Far from it. The point is "...no knowledge is complete or perfect." Carl Sagan that the mainstream thus far assigns little importance to the role of plasma and electromagnetism on cosmic scales. It is one thing to contemplate that space isn't the

vacuum once predicted, but quite another to acknowledge that Plasma and its EM interactions may play a role in cosmical structures, from planets and stars to galaxies and super-clusters. The passive role of plasma assumed by the mainstream is wrong!