Welcome to Space News from the Electric Universe,
brought to you by The Thunderbolts Project™
at Thunderbolts.info
It’s a story that has been told by scientists and educators
with great confidence for many decades.
Billions of years ago, the planets and our parent star
formed in a gravitationally collapsing cloud of gas and dust
inside an object called a nebular cloud.
The leftover material was the source of our solar system’s asteroids, comets and meteoroids.
Collisions between asteroids are also thought to be the source of meteoroids
that occasionally strike the Earth.
These bodies therefore have long been viewed as types of Rosetta stones,
which can tell scientists about primordial conditions in our solar system’s infancy.
The Electric Universe hypothesis,
which includes very different stories of our solar system’s formation,
and of recent planetary catastrophe,
offers a very different explanation for the origins of asteroids, comets and meteoroids.
This hypothesis has always claimed
that these bodies were electrically blasted from the surfaces of planets and moons,
in a relatively recent epoch of planetary instability in the inner solar system.
Although institutional science has never entertained this hypothesis,
in recent years, the planetary origins of these bodies
is a thesis that has found its way into the scientific literature.
In 2016, we reported on the chemical analysis of a meteorite called Gujba.
What the investigators found was the meteorites geological origins
were much too complex for any conventional theory to explain.
The team’s conclusion was that the meteorite formed from the molten debris
of a planetary collision in the asteroid belt.
A Phys.org report on the research states,
“Based on chemical traces preserved in Gujba,
the target planet might have been even larger than the asteroid 4 Vesta,
one of the largest bodies in the asteroid belt with a diameter of about 326 miles."
A lead investigator said of the discovery,
“People used to say that meteorites like Gujba
were the building blocks of the solar system.
Now, we know it’s the construction debris of the planets.”
Today, a new paper published in the Journal Nature Astronomy
offers a further breakthrough for proponents of planetary catastrophe.
The study suggests that the large majority of asteroids in the inner asteroid belt
are pieces of 5 annihilated worlds, called planetesimals.
The clue the team followed was the unusual inclined or tilted orbits
of near-earth asteroids.
Of course, the only mechanism the team can propose
that might have created these weird inclinations
is violent collisions.
A lead author of the paper states,
"We couldn’t think of any forces that are acting to produce that distribution."
However, "if a big asteroid is smashed up and it has a high inclination,
then those fragments have that same inclination.
"The team suggests that as many as 85% of bodies in the inner asteroid belt
are fragments of these hypothetical planetesimals.
A Washington Post report on this paper acknowledges a completely unresolved problem
with the standard beliefs about planetary formation.
It states:
“According to the traditional story of the origin of the solar system,
the planets formed slowly from accretion,
as particles in the circumstellar disk clumped together to great pebbles,
then slightly larger spheres, on and on until they reached their current size.
But when scientists try to re-create this story with computer models, it breaks down.
Rather than growing,
these incipient planets tend to splinter after reaching pebble size.
How could this process result in bodies the size of those in the asteroid belt,
let alone whole planets?
The Washington Post reporter is correct to refer to these beliefs as parts of a “story”
rather than a hypothesis or theory.
A successful hypothesis or theory will make predictions
that discovery actually confirms.
Instead, the standard fiction of our solar system’s formation,
which relies entirely on processes such as gravitational collapse, collisions, and accretion
has failed both experimentally and observationally,
resulting in endless ad hoc theories tacked on to try to preserve the discredited story.
Today, the latest insights into the compositions of comets,
asteroids and meteorites on Earth
offers no support to our solar system’s alleged 4.5-billion year history.
We reported on one such landmark discovery earlier this year,
with new insights into the most mysterious meteorite ever found on Earth,
called the Hypatia stone.
For four years, scientists have studied the meteorite fragments
found in a Libyan desert glass field in southwest Egypt.
As reported by Phys.org in 2018, research from a team in Johannesburg has
“…provided unsettling answers that spiral away
from conventional views of the material our solar system was formed from.”
The matrix of minerals composing the Hypatia stone has been described as a “fruitcake”,
resembling no known meteorite or comet,
and consisting of strange and never before seen combinations of minerals.
And the dust material found in the fragments confounds
the very foundations of the solar nebular hypothesis.
As described by Phys.org,
“Generally, science says that our solar system’s planets
ultimately formed from a huge, ancient cloud of interstellar dust.
(the solar nebula) in space.
The first part of that process would be much like dust bunnies
coagulating in an unswept room.
Science also holds that the solar nebula was homogenous,
that is, the same kind of dust everywhere.
But Hypatia’s chemistry tugs at this view.”
Coagulating dust bunnies is ultimately the best analogy scientists can offer
for planet formation in a gravity-only cosmology.
But allow the organizational electromagnetic force,
a thousand billion billion billion billion times more powerful than gravity,
and the picture becomes both more plausible and coherent.
The Electric Universe has always stated that the formation of a solar system
does not begin with gravitational collapse in a nebular cloud.
And, in recent years, the Electric Universe prediction
that stars form along vast networks of filaments, like pearls on a string,
has been confirmed.
Like lightning, the filaments are of remarkably constant width,
an impossible result of gravitational processes.
And as the Electric Universe also predicts,
the most prominent filaments can be seen drawing matter from networks of smaller filaments.
Smaller coronal filaments are also characteristic of electrical discharges in plasma.
Although telescopes can currently only pick up
the largest bodies forming along these filaments,
the Electric Universe proposes that some planets,
including the long-mysterious so-called Hot Jupiters,
also form along these same lightning channels,
with other rocky planets likely being ejected from the cores of gas giants.
Allow this possibility, and a new and profound understanding may be possible
both for our solar system,
and for the thousands of seemingly baffling exoplanetary systems.
For a quarter of a century,
exoplanets and their parent stars have shattered all predictions
based on the two and a half centuries old nebular hypothesis.
As acknowledged in the 2014 Nature article 'Planets in Chaos',
“The discovery of thousands of stars systems wildly different from our own
has demolished ideas about how planets form.
Astronomers are searching for a whole new theory.”
The mysteries range from tight conglomerations of exoplanets
packed impossibly close to their parent stars,
to exoplanets with retrograde orbits –
that is orbits in the opposite directions of the spin of their parent stars;
to tightly packed planets with radically different chemical compositions,
in complete defiance of the belief that our own solar system
was formed from material which was graded in properties moving outward from the Sun;
and enormous Hot Jupiters which orbit their parent stars at much too close a distance
for the planets to have formed through gravitational accretion.
These discoveries also affirm another aspect of the Electric Universe theory,
as proposed by physicist Wal Thornhill,
that is that the gravitational force is modified by the electrical nature of any body,
so if a body is charged more or less than those around it,
there will be a charge exchange.
And in the process, gravity will modify the orbits of those bodies.
The result is that capture is much more likely in the Electric Universe
than in standard cosmology.
The abundance of binary stars, as well as seemingly odd planetary systems,
is expected in the Electric Universe.
This includes the puzzling retrograde orbits of some exoplanets.
As Thornhill has explained previously,
if a body is being captured from some nearby angle,
it can rotate in the opposite direction,
or rotate about the poles of its adoptive star.
The study of exoplanetary systems has had another influence
on the way astronomers view our own solar system:
increasingly, scientists entertain the notion of dramatic planetary migration
since the solar system’s formation.
As described in a 2018 Phys.org report,
“…in our solar system, the inner planets have surprisingly large spacing and diverse sizes.
Abundant evidence in the solar system suggests that Jupiter and Saturn
disrupted our system’s early structure,
resulting in the four widely-spaced terrestrial planets we have today.”
Many scientists today now suggest that these gas giants acted as
“wrecking balls” in the early solar system,
destroying a generation of planets and robbing the planet Mars of its lighter elements.
The Electric Universe / catastrophist theory
agrees that these planets acted as “wrecking balls”,
though not through tidal forces and mechanical collisions,
and NOT billions of years in the past.
The ravaged surfaces of planets and moons
do not speak to random impacts over eons of time.
Rather, they show all of the predictable scarring features
produced in experiments with electrical discharges.
It is not a coincidence that, as noted earlier,
the accretion process fails completely to achieve objects even the size of asteroids.
In the Electric Universe, asteroids, as well as comets and meteoroids,
did not accrete billions of years ago,
but were ripped from the surfaces of planets and moons by interplanetary lightning.
Of course, the desiccated, rocky appearance of every comet nucleus imaged to date
— from comet Borrelly in 2001,
to comet Wild 2 in 2004,
to comet Tempel 1 in 2005,
to the recent Rosetta mission to comet 67P
— was also an explicit prediction of the Electric Universe.
In contrast, on the screen is an artistic rendition
depicting comet scientists’ vision of a comet nucleus prior to the 1986 mission to Halley.
And yet, here is the actual surface of a comet,
whose planetary features are stunningly obvious.
Recently, scientists attempting to account for both 67P’s mysterious double-lobed shape
and the amazing stratigraphy seen on the nucleus,
which is virtually indistinguishable from stratified sedimentary and igneous rock
on our own planet,
performed computer simulations to attempt to prove that the comet was formed
by the collision and accretion of two comets.
As reported by Phys.org earlier this year,
“Comets which consist of two parts, like Chury (67P),
can form after a catastrophic collision of larger bodies.
Such collisions may have taken place in a later phase of our solar system,
which suggests that Chury can be much younger than previously assumed.
This is shown through computer simulations by an international research group
with the participation of the University of Bern.”
But before creating virtual reality simulations of cometary collisions,
scientists must first acknowledge the extraordinary improbability of such collisions.
In fact, an official webpage for the Rosetta mission states of the Kuiper Belt
and the hypothetical Oort Cloud,
“Each of these regions contain billions of comets,
but they have so much room in the vast rooms of space
that they get no closer to each other than we on Earth do to the sun.”
It could be said that some progress has been made in comet science,
in the sense that scientists at least now recognize that comet 67P
is not billions of years old.
As noted in the phys.org report, 67P:
“…did not necessarily have to originate from the early formation phase of the solar system,
as has been claimed repeatedly.”
This should register as a stunning admission,
since the very name of the ESA’s mission, Rosetta,
rose from the unfounded belief that comets are “Rosetta stones,”
tracing back to our solar system’s mythical 4.5-billion year origins.
But, what real progress can be made when all of astronomy and astrophysics
functions under the untenable belief that gravity,
and gravity alone, rules the cosmos.
As noted by Thunderbolts contributor Mel Acheson
“…the point of science is not merely to explain
but to find out which explanation is actually the case.
For that, you need more than one explanation from which to choose….
Verification alone is inadequate:
You need to search for alternatives and to test them to gain reliability.”
The vision of a solar system and its celestial bodies
that formed from gravitational collapse, collisions and accretion
has resulted in a story that has gone off the rails, into total disarray.
Every attempt to redeem the story
leads only to further contradictions and intractable problems.
A new story, a narrative without contradiction or confusion
is waiting to be written in our Electric Universe.