What is the difference between the Electric Universe and Plasma Universe
Welcome to a new series which will look at some of the main concepts of the plasma universe
and see if this can leads us to new insights. I would first like to start by examining what
the differences are between the plasma universe and Electric Universe at a high level and
then start by examining the main concepts of the plasma universe. Now I will caveat
this by saying that this is my interpretation of the difference and the aim is not to cover
the full breadth of each but to understand where they overlap and don’t. Let dive in...
It is fair to say that the grandfather of the plasma universe was Hannes Alfven. Although
there is some debate whether he coined the term first or Antony Peratt. Hannes argued
from as early as 1937 that if Plasma pervaded the universe, it could then carry electric
currents capable of generating a galactic magnetic field. It was therefore of vital
importance to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents.
He felt space was filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum
over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents.
The latter is likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular
structure. So in simple terms, the beginnings of the plasma universe started way before
it received a name later on in 1986. Hannes also wrote many papers on alternative concepts
of the formation of the solar system which would utilise the concept of the electric
and magnetic force being critical in the condensation of matter.
The most fundamental tenet of the idea of the plasma universe is being able to scale
up from observable experiments rather than extrapolating forwards from some imaginary
starting point like the Big Bang. The plasma universe, therefore, rejects the idea of the
big bang. This also means the universe is not expanding so that leaves the question
of how do you explain the cosmic background radiation and the redshift of galaxies? As
far as I know, Lerner is the only one to have talked about this and he relies on the concept
of tired light to cause light that travels a greater distance to become more redshifted.
So let’s start by building a picture of what elements are included in the plasma universe.
One thing that is important to consider is that there are a number of different ways
of looking at many of these aspects and there will be alternative theories for the same
mechanism even within the umbrella of the plasma universe.
Let’s start by working upwards. The starting point for much of these ideas came from the
work of Kristian Birkeland who investigated the aurora and felt they were caused by electrical
currents. Hannes explained the aurora by using his research from the laboratory and identified
the concept of a double layer as a mechanism to accelerate the electron which caused the
aurora. Solar flares could also be explained in this way. Hannes felt that if the Sun was
a rotating ball of plasma and had a strong magnetic field then this moving magnetic field
would create a dynamo effect and cause a current to be created. From this, he came up with
the concept of the solar electric circuit.
One very important distinction that is worth pointing out is that Hannes was never interested
or questioned what the sun was. His idea for the solar circuit was not something that powered
the star it was simply a by-product of the magnetic field. He never questioned if the
Sun’s power and radiation were caused by nuclear processes or not. Hannes felt that
large gas clouds would be slightly ionised and under the right conditions, these would
start to form filaments. These filaments could carry currents in a force-free configuration
like a Birkeland current or could cause pinching. This he felt could overcome the problems faced
by a gravity only model where the collapse of material reached a point where the collisions
tear it apart. Years later they did indeed discover many stars were actually formed on
these filaments and that the pinching effect may indeed be critical for the formation of
stars. One other point is that in the plasma universe gravity still plays a vitally important
role in the formation of certain objects but the electromagnetic force was now equally
as important and certainly more important for shaping the large scale structure of the
filaments.
He then expanded this concept of the solar circuit to look at galaxies. Knowing that
galaxies have a magnetic field and that the stars and material rotated around the centre
of the galaxy so once more a dynamo effect had to be present. This would cause a current
to flow out of the poles and loop back around into the equatorial plane. He used this concept
to explain double radio sources as these lobes would be located at the point where the double
layers would be situated. Hannes did not spend much time considering how galaxies might form
so kept with the mainstream idea that a cloud collapsed to form this.
Peratt would take a radically different approach to the formation and evolution of galaxies
which we will look at in a separate video. In a nutshell, Peratt discovered through detailed
simulations that two galactic filaments could interact and would cause the formation of
a galaxy and also explain the double lobes in a totally different way.
So mainstream sees gravity as the dominant force at large scales. The universe started
from the Big Bang. Stars are formed by gravitation collapse, as are galaxies. The galactic rotation
problem and the formation of what appeared like vast filaments of galaxies could only
be reconciled by the introduction of dark matter. Stars eventually collapse and form
black holes and at the heart of every galaxy, there is a supermassive black hole.
The plasma universe holds that the universe is filled with plasma and that this plasma
forms a vast network of filaments. Galaxies form along these filaments due to the interaction
of the filaments, the evolution of galaxies is very different to the mainstream. Galaxies
are also filled with filaments of plasma along which stars form. Neither Peratt nor Alven
make any attempt to explain what a star is. It is therefore not clear if that means they
do or do not rule out black holes?
Eric Lerner also worked in a laboratory examining plasma and came up with a theory of what a
quasar was. Instead of this being a supermassive black hole it was instead a plasmoid similar
to the one he produced in the laboratory. Lerner is very much in the camp that a star
is a thermonuclear object but what is not so clear is if his rejection of a supermassive
black hole means he also rejects the idea of a star becoming a black hole?
Antony Peratt developed a different explanation for the formation of galaxies that involved
the interaction of two or more Birkeland currents. This would also explain quasars and would
lead to a radically different evolution of galaxies compared to the accepted model.
Most of the concepts in the plasma universe tend really to focus on the large galactic
scale and very little has been done to look at the dynamic within a galaxy. This is of
particular importance when we look at Peratt’s concept as I feel this could equally be expanded
to look at stars as well. It is a little strange that this was not looked at considering the
idea is that the concepts are capable of scaling from the laboratory to the solar system, to
galaxies and beyond.
The important aspects of the plasma universe, therefore, are that plasma will form filaments,
pinches, double layers and that many of the phenomena we see can be explained with these
concepts. In the next video, I want to cover some of these basic concepts of the plasma
universe in a little more detail.
So how is the electric universe different? I guess one of the most important differences
is the seed idea. This really comes from Velikoski idea of a more recent disaster caused by the
rearrangement of the solar system due to electrical interactions. At the heart of the electric
universe is the idea that the whole universe is powered by these electrical currents at
every level. In fact, you might say that there is only one fundamental force all the others
are just appearances due to this primary force. So here is a noticeable difference to the
plasma universe right off the bat. Where the plasma universe was really about the order
and structure of the universe the electric universe attempt to tackle the order and structure
of mother nature itself, at every level. It is ambitious, to say the least, and there
are many branches within this community looking at different aspects of these concepts. Some
well documents, many not well documented and some just spoken about. The ambition and scale
of this means there are many fragmented pieces that can make it very hard to understand how
they piece together. Some are often conflicting or contradictory.
But let’s jump back a little to start with as there is one split that makes part of the
electric universe harder to swallow for some. The theory and the story. The concepts and
theories are built on the backbone of the plasma universe but take this into fresh new
areas. One particularly important distinction is the nature of the Sun. The electric universe
holds that the sun is an arc discharge and follows and build on Jeurgens electric sun
model. This ties in nicely with the concept of filaments and flowing charge and is capable
of explaining the changes in a stars appearance in a totally different way that seems far
more logical. Wal Thornhill also postulates the existence of electro-gravity. Here the
force we see as gravity is simply a side effect or polarisation of charges in material that
give the appearance of gravity. The predominant force acting on material is therefore the
electromagnetic one. Stars are also capable of splitting into two through a fissioning
process. This occurs when the star is electrically stressed and attempts to increase its surface
area to accommodate this. This may explain why so many star systems are binary ones.
There is also the idea that brown dwarf stars can be captured by other stars and this means
the brown dwarf turns into a large gas giant. Gas giants can also eject material if they
are at a different potential to the host star when captured. This ejected material can form
what appears later as planets. The electric universe holds that stars are formed in pinches
of filaments but may become ejected from these filaments. The formation of planets is not
so well documented but are generally explained using the idea that they are ejected from
either the gas giant or star during an electrical stressing event. The idea is that the stars
are powered by the slow current that runs through the filaments and this current might
change which can cause changes to the appearance and behaviour of the star.
So how are galaxies formed? Some may form in the pinch in intergalactic filaments and
some may be formed by the material ejected by active galaxies. Here the EU follows closely
with some of Halton Arps idea on the lifecycle of a galaxy. Quasars are young objects ejected
from active galaxies which over time turn into companion galaxies. These ideas are indeed
radically different from the plasma universe but one aspect that is interesting is that
of redshift. The Electric universe strongly believes like Halton that redshift cannot
be used to measure distance because part of this redshift was an intrinsic component that
seemed to be more related to the age of the object than its distance. The CMBR is caused
by the filaments in our own galaxy.
Don Scott also revisited the idea of a Bessel function Birkeland current which would allow
the current to form into cylinders and if large enough would even allow the current
to flow in both directions.
The electrical currents that flow are also responsible for earthquakes, volcanoes, formation
of metals in the crust. electrical scaring of terrain on Earth and Mars as well as other
planets is a result of violent interaction in the recent past. And this leads to one
of the aspects that is maybe harder to accept. The idea that Earth was originally part of
Saturn and was captured by the Sun. This capture process and subsequent rearrangement would
then lead to some of the catastrophic events described in Velikovsky's books and described
by Talbot’s work. This is still something that I am on the fence about but am keeping
an open mind on. To me, the more interesting aspects are the ideas around looking at the
flow of current and the dominance of the electric force at every level.
Notable side theories to the EU are Jim Weninger’s idea of the motion of our star spiralling
around Sirius, which in turn is spiralling around Arcturus and is a totally different
way of explaining precession and the cycle of disasters.
Edo Kaal’s Structured Atom Model concept and the idea of removing the strong nuclear
force, and replacing the neutron with an electron-proton pair.
So in summary the plasma universe holds the universe is 99% plasma, filaments give it
structure and carry material around. Pinching causes the formation of galaxies and stars.
Stars are still thermonuclear in nature and the flow of plasma in the filament has no
direct impact on a star’s behaviour. Redshift is explained only by tired light. Does not
take any of Halton Arps work into account although Peratt’s later work does indeed
show an alternative way of explaining some of Halton Arps ideas on ejection of material
from galaxies. Plus points are that it is very well documented. Alfven, Peratt and Lerner
have extensive documents and books covering many aspects of the ideas but the only active
person in this arena is now Lerner.
The Electric Universe build on some of the fundamental concepts of the plasma universe.
So 99% plasma, filamented structure. Stars and galaxies form in pinches. Stars are not
thermonuclear in nature but electrical. The electrical force is the fundamental force
that drives all the phenomena we see. The flow of current in a galaxy has a direct impact
on the behaviour of the star. The same applies to galaxies which are also powered by large
intergalactic Birkeland currents. A large part of the redshift we observe is due to
the age of the object caused by its electrical nature. As objects age, the redshift becomes
less and less. Objects older than us appear blue shifted. The EU concept also takes the
idea to weather systems, currents that flow in and around planetary bodies and this could
explain many geologic processes which the plasma universe do not cover.
Documentation is certainly not their strong point. It does exist in parts but sometimes
these are old and rely on older concepts. There is nothing that binds it all together
and this can make it extremely difficult for anyone trying to understand more of the details
of how it might work. The community is still active and there are many people still working
in different areas of this.
Now there are probably many aspects that I have forgotten so I would be interested to
know if you can add to this picture of the differences between the two.