Welcome to Space News from the Electric Universe
brought to you by The Thunderbolts Project™
at Thunderbolts.info
What is a neutron star?
Scientists tell us that the material left over from a supernova explosion
of a massive star collapses gravitationally forming a very small and incredibly dense star
mostly composed of tightly packed neutrons.
A rotating neutron star will emit regular pulses of radio waves, called pulsars.
It was completely unexpected observation of these radio pulses in the 1960's
that led to the invention of the neutron star hypothesis.
However, in several previous Space News episodes we have discussed
recent discoveries that in effect falsify the foundations of this theory.
Today professor Donald Scott discusses yet another fatal discovery for the theory
of neutron stars and he lays the foundations for an alternative explanation
in the disciplines of plasma physics and electrical engineering.
One of the interesting things about this latest Vela pulsar press release,
was in my opinion, the release actually says something quite different
from what the astronomers intended to say.
I'll try to explain what I mean by that is just a couple of minutes.
Clearly the mainstream view that they of course support
is that pulsars are stars that periodically put out flashes of light
another electromagnetic radiation and the obvious analogy to this is a lighthouse.
Of course, constant beam of light that rotates around so that the observer only see is a flash,
during the instant the beam is pointed directly at him or her.
So, the stars are thought to be emitting a narrow beam of light and rapidly rotating.
That's fine, this explanation works for a while until one realizes a couple of things.
Number one, how rapidly the star has to be rotating
to produce these flashes in millisecond time,
and two, that the Earth, where we all do their observing from,
must be exactly in the beam's plane of rotation.
Whereas the beam can't be looking at somewhere else and we wouldn't see it at all.
So, it's gotta be very precisely in alignment.
Is that logical or is that probable, you have to think about that.
Anyway the Astronomy Picture of the Day, the APOD, the famous APOD,
way back on June 9 2000 contained an image of the Vela Pulsar.
It's just the same image, I think, this is the one they put out the other day.
That APOD called this pulsar a Neutron Star-Ring-Jet
and the picture of the jet was there.
This latest release talks about something about a counter jet and it is new...
It is not new at all, it is back there in the same picture back in 2000.
So, I don't know really what they're talking about
as far as the counter jet is concerned, it is clearly not!
An aligned jet that would be the one that's doing the rotating and flashing at us,
because that's fixed in space, that jet we see that picture of.
Anyway, the official explanation back there in 2000 said that,
"The Vela pulsar is a neutron star. More massive than the Sun,
it has the density of an atomic nucleus." and it's about 12 miles in diameter.
Well, this latest one I think they said it was 18 miles in diameter.
So, whether they think it's growing or whether they have a different idea, I don't know but...
But the point is, it spins 10 times a second!
Now, 10 times a second is 600 rpm.
So, OK. Envision this; it's a star; it's more massive than the Sun;
it's somewhere between 10 and 20 miles in diameter; and it is rotating at 600 rpm.
But, obviously, a star that rotates completely on its axis 10 times a second
would fly apart, it's obvious.
And so, knowing this to be the case astronomers came up with the ad hoc invention
- The Neutron Stars - star made up of only neutrons
densely packed like the center of an atom.
Unfortunately, the problem with that one
is that neutrons don't remain in compact bunches.
There is no such thing as a neutron-neutron pair,
and we know from lab experiments that any alone neutron decays
into a proton, and electron and a neutrino in about 14 minutes.
So, atom-like collections of two or more neutrons will fly apart almost instantaneously.
There cannot be any such thing as a neutron star.
So, some astronomers have begun to realize that neutronium was a sort of absurd
and what put the finishing touches on that, I think for at least some of them,
was the discovery of an X-ray pulsar located in the constellation of Sagittarius
that flashes every 2.5 thousands of a second.
The flash, every 2.5 thousands of a second, that means that
if this thing is a rotating lighthouse beacon, it's rotating at 24,000 rpm.
So, here we got something as a star miles in diameter and is rotating at 24,000 rpm,
that is the speed of a dentist's drill, just about,
and it goes way beyond the red line for even a neutron star.
So, another explanation was invented, very quickly, pulled out of the back pocket,
already added to a long list of inventions that astronomers have made
and this one is that pulsars must be composed of something even denser
than packed neutrons, even denser than neutronium.
They call it - 'Strange Matter'.
Remember that we have 'missing matter' and we have 'dark matter';
so, here is another one to the list, this is 'Strange Matter'.
Anyway, this latest announcement does not express
any doubts at all about the lighthouse model,
but it was concerned that the periodicity was varying.
And I can quote from the release: "It is known from previous studies
that Vela regularly speeds up in rotation frequency,
approximately every three years and also experiences 'micro glitches'..."
A glitch is a change in the rotation speed,
a change in the period of the pulses, the pulse train.
And "The new research showed" that "Vela's pulse width changes over time,..."
and "...it changes sharply..." at certain periods of time.
Ok, that's fine, but if you look then at the abstract of the release
it says, and I'm quoting now: "The mechanisms of emission
and changes in rotation frequency" that is the 'glitching'
"of the Vela pulsar are not well understood."
Can I repeat those three words? They're 'NOT WELL UNDERSTOOD.'
The very next sentence says:
"Further insight into these mechanisms can be achieved by long-term studies
of integrated pulse width, timing residuals, and bright pulse rates."
Translate that into English, that says, we don't have any idea what's going on now,
but if you give us more time and more money we'll invent some other good explanations
down the line somewhere, at least that's my suggestion.
Anyway, astronomers are worried because
the new data by glitches means that their massive star
must instantaneously vary its rotational speed by thousands of rpm.
So, if you think about it, you got this horrifically massive monster out there
going in 24 hours period, several hundreds if not thousands rpm
and all of a sudden 'bop' you put the brakes on it and it has to stop
or slow down and then speed back up again.
Then how this happens it's just mind-boggling
in my estimation what it does, it defeats the model,
it clearly falsifies the lighthouse model.
But there's a more realistic explanation
and that more realistic explanation is, in my estimation -- electrical!
What we're looking at in pulsars are strobe lights,
and strobe lights have been around since the 1930's.
There's a company, EG&G, was founded by Harold Edgerton
followed by name Germeshausen and another guy by the name Grier.
So, Edgerton, Germeshausen and Grier came into business in 1947 as EG&G,
and what did they do, they manufactured strobe lights.
And the heart of the strobe light is just a small bulb containing a plasma
driven by a very simple electrical circuit.
And one such electrical circuit is called a relaxation oscillator.
And you can see in the picture that it can consist of nothing more than
a resistor, the capacitor, the voltage source and a gas tube, a little glass.
In the case of here on Earth the glass tube,
where in space it doesn't need a glass tube, it can just be a cloud of plasma.
And it can put out pulses of light at various periodicities and pulse widths.
So, you can see from the diagram there that what happens
when you connect the first connect the 6V battery and everything we'll say is dead,
the capacitors uncharged, the light bulb is turned off.
When you connect the 6V battery to the resistor,
it begins to pump current through the resistor into the capacitor in charge of the capacitor,
no current goes into the light bulb, because the light bulb,
the plasma is turned off, it hasn't reached its firing voltage yet.
It's firing voltage were there 5 volts.
So, what happens is the current goes through the resistor down into the capacitor.
You can think of a capacitor is set of like a bucket that holds charge,
just like you fill a bucket of water up with water
and as you fill it, the height of the water in the bucket gets higher
well as you pour more and more charge into capacitor
the voltage across the capacitor is just like the water level in the bucket, it gets higher.
And so you can see how that voltage builds up
in that exponential rise that is heading up towards 6V.
If nothing happened to detour it,
it would approach 6 volts in an infinite length of time exponentially
but it's interrupted.
But when it gets to 5V the bulb says 'ho-ho' that's my firing voltage
--zingo-- it emits a flash of light.
It becomes a short circuit and discharges the capacitor.
All the charge that has been in that 'bucket' of that capacitor
is dumped into the into the light bulb in an instant flash,
and that is what gives the familiar strobe light, that brilliant instantaneous flash.
The length of time it takes to charge up
is a product of the resistance times the capacitor.
So, you take the resistor value in Ohms, and the capacitor values in Farads,
and multiplies the two of then together, and that gives you the time constant,
the so-called RC time constant, of that exponential voltage rise
and that will give you an indication of how long it's gonna be between flashes.
So, you want to make it more rapid?
Well, reduce the R or reduce the C or possibly both of then.
And so, you can play games with the values and do all sorts of things
with the periodicity and you can certainly vary it.
So, if we have a pair of stars, a binary pair of stars out in space,
and if they are closely spaced, there may very well be a plasma bridge between them
and the resistance in the relaxation oscillators is the resistance of that plasma bridge.
And so, the capacitance value depends on the surface areas of the two stars,
and if one of the stars is being driven by an external current to higher and higher voltage
clearly this kind of oscillation is possible.
Also voltage pulses can bounce back and forth along a plasma bridge.
If we have a plasma bridge that connects the two stars
and we get a voltage pulse that goes from one to the other,
it can bounce back again and there's all sorts of possibilities for
reflections of pulses on high-voltage power transmission lines.
And in 1995, an analysis was performed by Peratt and Healy on a transmission line system
having the properties that they believed to be those of a pulsar atmosphere.
Well, they could explain in those experiments
17 different observed properties of Pulsar emissions.
In those experiments, they could imitate glitches; they could imitate varying pulses;
they could change the width of the pulse itself; all sorts of things were possible.
And it can happen very, very quickly
because all you have to do is change the resistance value of a plasma,
and that's very, very simple and probably does indeed happen in space.
So, we know that neutron stars made up of neutronium are impossible.
'Strange matter' is impossible.
And if we're not willing to discard everything we know about the physics of materials,
we know that new science of things like 'strange matter' is not really acceptable science.
The real explanation is an electrical one, and it has been available since 1930's
and it's really quite simple.
Just as a sort of an addendum people might notice the similarity
in the shapes of the exploding plasma shape obtained from a plasma focus device,
which is an another device which has been around in plasma laboratories for decades.
Umbrella shape, the sort of a double umbrella
that's coming out the right side of the plasma focus
and if you compare that with the Vela pulsar picture they are almost identical.
Let me just finish by saying, sort of personal note.
A couple of years ago, a defender of the lighthouse model
told me that the extreme regularity of a pulsar
was proof that they could not be electrical.
Electrical circuits would be too unstable to produce those
absolutely, regularly periodic pulse trains.
So now, with this announcement it seems to me, at least,
that astronomers are perplexed about the -- irregularity -- of this pulse trains.
And so, the worm has turned a bit, I think,
and what they thought was a defense of their model
now is another thing added to the list of probable falsifications of their lighthouse model
and all I can say is imagine the torques that would be necessary
to slow the rotation of the star that speed it back up again.
Now, the lighthouse model is falsified,
and I'm just wondering how long it's gonna take them to admit it.
For continuous updates on Space News from the Electric Universe
stay tuned to
Thunderbolts.info