[Music]
In 2012, I began an online video series with The Thunderbolts Project called
Space News from the Electric Universe. The purpose of this series was to
explore the role of electromagnetism and plasma at all scales in the cosmos.
It was my opinion that the most interesting and effective way to present
this material would be to do so in the context of discussion of space discoveries.
Beginning in the late 1990s through my father David Talbott's relationship with
physicist Wal Thornhill, I was in the privileged position of having direct
access to the chief proponent of the Electric Universe.
Now, when one looks at space discovery through the lens of EU theory, it cannot
help but transform one's perspective on the nature of the universe.
One thing I learned quickly is that, generally speaking, celestial objects
simply can't form the way that gravitational theory proposes.
The hypothesized collisions, explosions, and slow gravitational accretion processes
simply do not match what we observe, nor do these processes work experimentally.
As any astronomer knows, over decades of planetary formation simulations,
gravitational accretion only achieves an object the size of a pebble before it breaks down.
Ironically, mysterious magnetism has more recently been added to accretion
experiments in an ad hoc effort to make them actually work.
Of course, star formation is an equally mysterious process for mainstream astronomy.
In his recent Thunderbolts presentation on the James Webb telescope,
Wal Thornhill has offered a definitive treatise on the creation of stars in an Electric Universe.
Thornhill has contrasted the predictive success of the standard hypothesis of
stars where they formed by gravitational collapse and accretion, versus the
Electric Universe and plasma cosmology view of stars where they formed by the
electromagnetic Z-pinch. Over the last decade, I've done my best to articulate this
viewpoint when reporting on the relevant scientific discoveries. For a moment now,
I'd like to again don the hat that I wore at the helm of Space News
and present a recent scientific finding In light of the Electric Universe theory.
Earlier this year, scientists using data from a number of space telescopes,
studied over 300 so-called protostars in a star-forming region called the Orion
complex. What these scientists found is that so-called gravitational cavities do
not play their expected role in quenching the growth of a star.
Conventional theory had proposed a type of so-called stellar feedback
where the combined force of astrophysical jets and stellar winds
pull gas from a star and trap it in its molecular cloud, thus eventually halting a star's growth.
However, as is so often the case, what the scientists actually found sent them back
to the drawing board. Astronomer Nolan Habel of the
University of Toledo says in a science alert report quote “In one stellar formation model,
if you start out with a small cavity, as the proto-star rapidly becomes more evolved,
its outflow creates an ever-larger cavity until the surrounding gas is
eventually blown away, leaving an isolated star... Our observations indicate
there is no progressive growth that we can find, so the cavities are not growing until
they push out all of the mass in the cloud. So, there must be some other process
going on that gets rid of the gas that doesn't end up in the star.”
However, the problem for astronomers is truly fundamental. How can one hope to
resolve the mystery of how star formation is quenched if one doesn't
understand the formation process itself? Theorists’ reliance on convoluted,
inefficient and unproven processes, should be the first signal to us
that something is wrong with their gravity-only approach.
Now, our suggestion that astronomers don't understand such an important
cosmological process as star formation, might seem outlandish to some.
But again, we have to consider the evidence. In fact, through the entire space age,
scientific discovery has completely confounded conventional theories
about stars,from a star's birth until the end of its life in a supernova.
I've often cited the quote of economist Milton Friedman which states,
”The only relevant test of the validity of a hypothesis is comparison of
prediction with experience.” Gravitational theory did not predict the
landmark discoveries in stellar science. In contrast, technological leaps have
provided increasingly stunning confirmation of the predictions of
plasma cosmology and the Electric Universe. Again, in standard theory
gravitational collapse and accretion lead to the creation of both stars and
planets over many eons of time. However, both the Electric Universe and
plasma cosmology propose that the electromagnetic phenomenon called the Z-pinch,
also known as the Bennett pinch, is the powerful organizational force
governing the rapid formation of stars. We have to remember that the
gravitational accretion model never expected polar jets.
They had to be accommodated with a cover story involving the usual suspect, which
is magically generated magnetic fields, when scientists discovered them coming
from some bright stars. Now, the scientific paper cited in the
aforementioned Science Alert report states, “The mechanism for creating these
cavities, whether by jet precession, wide- angled winds or jet entrainment is still
debated.” But what's really observed is hourglass shaped cavities centered on
the protostar. This is precisely the same pattern that we see in planetary nebulae,
where the star's vast electric circuit is clearly lit up. So, to say that the cavity is lit up by
quote “scattered light from the star” is merely a convenient assumption
and its constant size is easy to understand, since the circuit is
unrelated to the developmental stage of a protostar. And the authors of the paper admit.
quote, “... several evolved protostars with relatively small cavity sizes are identified.”
In fact, the aforementioned Nolan Habel states in the scientific paper,
”An HST Survey of Protostellar Outflow Cavities: Does Feedback Clear Envelopes?” states,
”Understanding the factors that govern the evolution of the envelopes - and
thereby influence mass accretion and the properties of nascent discs -
is a problem in star and planet formation studies. Now many decades ago, it was the father
of plasma cosmology, Hannes Alfven, who made the outrageous prediction that
stars would form by cosmic Z-pinches along vast networks of filaments, with an
electromagnetic scavenging effect in molecular clouds in each current filament.
Alfven wrote of Willard Harrison Bennett's discovery of the Z-pinch in
the first half of the 20th century, quote, ”Important fields of research, i.e., the
treatment of the state in interstellar regions, including the formation of stars,
are still based on a neglect of Bennett's discovery more than half a century ago...
present-day students in astrophysics hear nothing about it.”
A great opportunity to test these opposing theories is found in these
remarkable images of a stellar nursery in the aptly named “Snake Nebula”.
Here we see a number of stars forming along the filament and the stars
themselves break up along a cylinder. This is not expected at all by
gravitational theory, which predicts that a center of mass exists toward which all
of the surrounding material in the cloud tends to move, and to congregate to eventually form a star.
What's more, just as a fatal deficit of matter has been observed in the discs
about stars, required to form a typical number of planets, scientists studying
the Snake Nebula found that the material needed to be drawn in to form massive
stars, is far less than gravitational models predict. In 2014,
the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics issued a press release
which stated, “Previous theories proposed that high-mass stars form within very massive
isolated ‘cores’ weighing at least 100 times the mass of the Sun.
These new results show that that is not the case. The data also demonstrate that massive
stars aren't born alone but in groups... The team also was surprised to find that
these two nebular patches had fragmented into individual star seeds so early in the star
formation process. They detected bipolar outflows and other signs of
active, ongoing star formation.” The dramatic absence of the required
material to form stars is not surprising if such objects are
formed by the electromagnetic Z-pinch As Alfven noted, the electromagnetic force
is exponentially greater than gravity and is scalable up to the cosmic magnitude.
Dramatic confirmation of the star- forming electric currents came more
than a decade ago when the Herschel space observatory imaged an
”incredible network of filamentary structures seen in the constellation of the Southern Cross.
A 2009 ESA report stated, “That a dark cool area such as this would be bustling
with activity, was unexpected. But the images reveal a surprising
amount of turmoil: the interstellar material is condensing into continuous
and interconnected filaments glowing from the light emitted by new-born stars
at various stages of development.” The conventional explanation for these
filaments was the dissipation of some quote, “large-scale turbulence involving
exploding stars.” However, such explosions would be expected to impose some radial
curvature on the filaments which we simply do not see.
And the claim that the filaments are quote ”glowing from the light emitted by
newborn stars” simply cannot be tenable, because the filaments glow steadily
along their length, demonstrating that the light is intrinsic to the filaments,
which is exactly what one expects if the light output is provided by electric current.
Moreover, in 2011 even finer images from Herschel provided the conclusive
evidence that cosmic scale electric currents flow along the filaments.
An ESA report at the time states, ”The filaments are huge, stretching for
tens of light years through space and Herschel has shown that newly-born stars
are often found in the densest parts of them... Such filaments and interstellar
clouds have been glimpsed before by other infrared satellites... but they have
never been seen clearly enough to have their widths measured.
Now, Herschel has shown that, regardless of the length or density of a filament,
the width is always roughly the same.” The lead author of a paper on the
discovery stated, “This is a very big surprise...” And the ESA report concludes,
this consistency of the widths demands an explanation.” Any attempt to explain the filament's
constant width by explosions is also untenable. Explosions will cause the filaments to
vary markedly in brightness and width depending on the density of the
interstellar dust and the perspective from which they are viewed.
Several years ago, Thornhill wrote of this groundbreaking discovery, quote “The
constant width over vast distances is due to the current flowing along the
Birkeland filaments, each filament constituting a part of a larger electric
circuit. And in a circuit the current must be the same in the whole filament
although the current density can vary in the filament due to the electromagnetic pinch effect.”
The evidence I’ve just cited is as easy to understand as it is compelling. It's
consistent with the universe governed by efficient mechanisms that are easily
replicated in laboratories on Earth. From my perspective as a curious
layperson, the overwhelming predictive success of any scientific hypothesis
demands urgent consideration from institutionalized science. And yet,
a fair and thorough scientific hearing on the Electric Universe or plasma
cosmology, has yet to occur. Alfven’s statement that students of
astrophysics are unfamiliar with even basic concepts of electric currents in
space is as true today as it was decades ago. It is important to remember that scientists
are human beings, and although the scientific method is devoid of bias,
humans are not. Science is not a static collection of
pronouncements from authorities or quasi- authorities. Nor is it a set of unassailable dogmas
established by a show of hands. Science is an ongoing and never-ending endeavor,
and by its intrinsic nature, makes accurate the prediction that inevitably, the truth will out.
[Music]