Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The Electric Glow Of The Sun

Expand Messages
  • Light Eye
    Dear Friends, http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm Love and Light. David Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO Apr 27, 2005 The Electric Glow of the Sun
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 28, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Friends,

      http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm

      Love and Light.

      David


      Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO












      Apr 27, 2005
      The Electric Glow of the Sun

      A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun model worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation of the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar behavior.

      For centuries, the nature of the Sun’s radiance remained a mystery to astronomers. The Sun is the only object in the solar system that produces its own visible light. All others reflect the light of the Sun. What unique trait of the Sun enables it to shine upon the other objects in the solar system?

      Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is answered. The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to generate temperatures of about 16 million K—producing a continuous “controlled” nuclear reaction.

      Most astronomers and astrophysicists investigating the Sun are so convinced of the fusion model that only the rarest among them will countenance challenges to the underlying idea. Standard textbooks and institutional research, complemented by a chorus of scientific and popular media, “ratify” the fusion model of the Sun year after year by ignoring evidence to the contrary.

      A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric. It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that the fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun, while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.

      More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce proposed in 1944 that the Sun’s "photosphere has the appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel." This discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed granulation of the solar surface." Bruce’s model, however, was based on a conventional understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the “electric” Sun without reference to external electric fields.

      Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce’s work, added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in 1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a larger galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make the theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.

      Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge" fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons. In this view, the charge differential at the Earth’s distance from the Sun is smaller than our present ability to measure—perhaps one or two electrons per cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and at the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength to generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.

      Today, the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott urge a critical comparison of the fusion model and the electrical model. Given what we now know about the Sun, which model meets the tests of unity, coherence, simplicity, and predictability? Why did so many discoveries surprise investigators and even contradict the expectations of the fusion model? Is there any fundamental feature of the Sun that contradicts the glow discharge hypothesis?

      Our closer looks at the Sun have revealed the pervasive influence of magnetic fields, which are the effect of electric currents. Sunspots, prominences, coronal mass ejections, and a host of other features require ever more complicated guesswork on behalf of the fusion model. But this is the way an anode in a coronal glow discharge behaves!

      In the electrical model, the Sun is the “anode” or positively charged body in the electrical exchange, while the "cathode" or negatively charged contributor is not a discrete object, but the invisible “virtual cathode” at the limit of the Sun’s coronal discharge. (Coronal discharges can sometimes be seen as a glow surrounding high-voltage transmission wires, where the wire discharges into the surrounding air). This virtual cathode lies far beyond the planets. In the lexicon of astronomy, this is the “heliopause.” In electrical terms, it is the cellular sheath or “double layer” separating the plasma cell that surrounds the Sun ("heliosphere”) from the enveloping galactic plasma.

      In an electric universe, such cellular forms are expected between regions of dissimilar plasma properties. According to the glow discharge model of the Sun, almost the entire voltage difference between the Sun and its galactic environment occurs across the thin boundary sheath of the heliopause. Inside the heliopause there is a weak but constant radial electrical field centered on the Sun. A weak electric field, immeasurable locally with today's instruments but cumulative across the vast volume of space within the heliosphere, is sufficient to power the solar discharge.

      The visible component of a coronal glow discharge occurs above the anode, often in layers. The Sun’s red chromosphere is part of this discharge. (Unconsciously, it seems, the correct electrical engineering term was applied to the Sun’s corona.) Correspondingly, the highest particle energies are not at the photosphere but above it. The electrical theorists see the Sun as a perfect example of this characteristic of glow discharges—a radical contrast to the expected dissipation of energy from the core outward in the fusion model of the Sun.

      At about 500 kilometers (310 miles) above the photosphere or visible surface, we find the coldest measurable temperature, about 4400 degrees K. Moving upward, the temperature then rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees K at the top of the chromosphere, some 2200 kilometers (1200 miles) above the Sun's surface. Here it abruptly jumps hundreds of thousands of degrees, then continues slowly rising, eventually reaching 2 million degrees in the corona. Even at a distance of one or two solar diameters, ionized oxygen atoms reach 200 million degrees!

      In other words the “reverse temperature gradient,” while meeting the tests of the glow discharge model, contradicts every original expectation of the fusion model.

      But this is only the first of many enigmas and contradictions facing the fusion hypothesis. As astronomer Fred Hoyle pointed out years ago, with the strong gravity and the mere 5,800-degree temperature at the surface, the Sun’s atmosphere should be only a few thousand kilometers thick, according to the “gas laws” astrophysicists typically apply to such bodies. Instead, the atmosphere balloons out to 100,000 kilometers, where it heats up to a million degrees or more. From there, particles accelerate out among the planets in defiance of gravity. Thus the planets, Earth included, could be said to orbit inside the Sun's diffuse atmosphere.

      The discovery that blasts of particles escape the Sun at an estimated 400- to 700-kilometers per second came as an uncomfortable surprise for advocates of the nuclear powered model. Certainly, the “pressure” of sunlight cannot explain the acceleration of the solar “wind”. In an electrically neutral, gravity-driven universe, particles were not hot enough to escape such massive bodies, which (in the theory) are attractors only. And yet, the particles of the solar wind continue to accelerate past Venus, Earth, and Mars. Since these particles are not miniature “rocket ships,” this acceleration is the last thing one should expect!

      According to the electric theorists, a weak electric field, focused on the Sun, better explains the acceleration of the charged particles of the solar wind. Electric fields accelerate charged particles. And just as magnetic fields are undeniable witnesses to the presence of electric currents, particle acceleration is a good measure of the strength of an electric field.

      A common mistake made by critics of the electric model is to assume that the radial electric field of the Sun should be not only measurable but also strong enough to accelerate electrons toward the Sun at “relativistic” speeds (up to 300,000 kilometers per second). By this argument, we should find electrons not only zipping past our instruments but also creating dramatic displays in Earth’s night sky.

      But as noted above, in the plasma glow-discharge model the interplanetary electric field will be extremely weak. No instrument placed in space could measure the radial voltage differential across a few tens of meters, any more than it could measure the solar wind acceleration over a few tens of meters. But we can observe the solar wind acceleration over tens of millions of kilometers, confirming that the electric field of the Sun, though imperceptible in terms of volts per meter, is sufficient to sustain a powerful drift current across interplanetary space. Given the massive volume of this space, the implied current is quite sufficient to power the Sun.

      Look for more details on the drift current, solar magnetic fields, nuclear reactions, and many other features of the Sun in upcoming Pictures of the Day.

      See also these Pictures of the Day—

      TPOD July 29, 2004: Arc Lamp in the Sky
      TPOD July 27, 2004: Stellar Nurseries
      TPOD Sep 22, 2004: Electric Stars
      TPOD Oct 06, 2004: The Iron Sun
      TPOD Oct 15, 2004: Solar Tornadoes
      TPOD Nov 03, 2004: Kepler Supernova Remnant

      More about electric stars can be found here:

      http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
      http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=by2r22xg



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jahnets
      More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 30, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        "More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research
        Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical
        researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
        proposed in 1944 that the Sun’s "photosphere has the appearance, the
        temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics
        because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel." This
        discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed granulation
        of the solar surface." Bruce’s model, however, was based on a conventional
        understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
        “electric” Sun without reference to external electric fields."

        This has been on my mind for days and it wasn't until this morning that it
        dawned on me why... I think he is correct, and I'll share why... Some time
        ago I went up on the astral to talk to a friend. He said he was expecting
        very important company, at which I said, "Ok I will leave and see you
        later". At this point, his company showed up and laying his hand on top of
        my hand lightly held me there and said, "Don't leave on my account".
        I turned my head around to see who was speaking and before me was a male
        humanoid looking person with long golden hair and what looked like golden
        leather outfit on. What really caught my eye was he seemed to be on fire. I
        blinked and looked away and looked back and it was as though the flames were
        coming off him for about 6-9 inches around him. He stood there not moving
        watching the expressions run across my face and I finally said, you know I
        find this facinating that you look like you're on fire but you obviously
        aren't melting, what is causing that? He didn't answer me and I started to
        turn my hand around so we would have been palm to palm and he looked
        frightened for a moment and said or thought No. I stopped and said so you
        can touch me, but I can't touch you??? At which point I either passed out or
        was knocked out... ha ha Can't have me getting too much information... Now
        what connected the above article in case you can't fathom it yet is, that
        part about me turning my hand around. We have an electrical current running
        through us in our body, now even though I was in my astral body, I'm
        thinking that if I had gone palm to palm with him either he or I would have
        short circuited... Thus why he exclaimed "No" to me... I did get the
        impression I would get hurt with the NO but it was more feeling and
        understanding rather than words or thoughts. This happened when that big
        comet flew by us a while back and I assumed he was the spirit for that
        comet, which was why my friend said he was expecting important company...
        Now in the above paragraph from the article note..."photosphere has the
        appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
        characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in
        parallel."
        specifically... or a large number of arcs in parallel... So could it be
        that the Sun is a bunch of spirits that have come together and are arcing,
        palm to palm...


        -----Original Message-----
        From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Light Eye
        Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 12:46 AM
        To: Global_Rumblings@...; SpeakIt@...;
        SkyOpen@yahoogroups.com; ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com;
        changingplanetgroup@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


        Dear Friends,

        http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm

        Love and Light.

        David


        Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO












        Apr 27, 2005
        The Electric Glow of the Sun

        A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under
        the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun model
        worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation of
        the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar
        behavior.

        For centuries, the nature of the Sun’s radiance remained a mystery to
        astronomers. The Sun is the only object in the solar system that produces
        its own visible light. All others reflect the light of the Sun. What unique
        trait of the Sun enables it to shine upon the other objects in the solar
        system?

        Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is answered.
        The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that
        astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to
        generate temperatures of about 16 million K—producing a continuous
        “controlled” nuclear reaction.

        Most astronomers and astrophysicists investigating the Sun are so convinced
        of the fusion model that only the rarest among them will countenance
        challenges to the underlying idea. Standard textbooks and institutional
        research, complemented by a chorus of scientific and popular media, “ratify”
        the fusion model of the Sun year after year by ignoring evidence to the
        contrary.

        A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the
        popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric.
        It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that the
        fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun,
        while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that
        posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.

        More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research
        Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical
        researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
        proposed in 1944 that the Sun’s "photosphere has the appearance, the
        temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics
        because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel." This
        discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed granulation
        of the solar surface." Bruce’s model, however, was based on a conventional
        understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
        “electric” Sun without reference to external electric fields.

        Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce’s work,
        added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in
        1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body
        in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the
        center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a larger
        galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make the
        theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.

        Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge"
        fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is
        essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge
        model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily
        dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is
        nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons. In this
        view, the charge differential at the Earth’s distance from the Sun is
        smaller than our present ability to measure—perhaps one or two electrons per
        cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and at
        the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength to
        generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.

        Today, the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott urge a
        critical comparison of the fusion model and the electrical model. Given what
        we now know about the Sun, which model meets the tests of unity, coherence,
        simplicity, and predictability? Why did so many discoveries surprise
        investigators and even contradict the expectations of the fusion model? Is
        there any fundamental feature of the Sun that contradicts the glow discharge
        hypothesis?

        Our closer looks at the Sun have revealed the pervasive influence of
        magnetic fields, which are the effect of electric currents. Sunspots,
        prominences, coronal mass ejections, and a host of other features require
        ever more complicated guesswork on behalf of the fusion model. But this is
        the way an anode in a coronal glow discharge behaves!

        In the electrical model, the Sun is the “anode” or positively charged body
        in the electrical exchange, while the "cathode" or negatively charged
        contributor is not a discrete object, but the invisible “virtual cathode” at
        the limit of the Sun’s coronal discharge. (Coronal discharges can sometimes
        be seen as a glow surrounding high-voltage transmission wires, where the
        wire discharges into the surrounding air). This virtual cathode lies far
        beyond the planets. In the lexicon of astronomy, this is the “heliopause.”
        In electrical terms, it is the cellular sheath or “double layer” separating
        the plasma cell that surrounds the Sun ("heliosphere”) from the enveloping
        galactic plasma.

        In an electric universe, such cellular forms are expected between regions of
        dissimilar plasma properties. According to the glow discharge model of the
        Sun, almost the entire voltage difference between the Sun and its galactic
        environment occurs across the thin boundary sheath of the heliopause. Inside
        the heliopause there is a weak but constant radial electrical field centered
        on the Sun. A weak electric field, immeasurable locally with today's
        instruments but cumulative across the vast volume of space within the
        heliosphere, is sufficient to power the solar discharge.

        The visible component of a coronal glow discharge occurs above the anode,
        often in layers. The Sun’s red chromosphere is part of this discharge.
        (Unconsciously, it seems, the correct electrical engineering term was
        applied to the Sun’s corona.) Correspondingly, the highest particle energies
        are not at the photosphere but above it. The electrical theorists see the
        Sun as a perfect example of this characteristic of glow discharges—a radical
        contrast to the expected dissipation of energy from the core outward in the
        fusion model of the Sun.

        At about 500 kilometers (310 miles) above the photosphere or visible
        surface, we find the coldest measurable temperature, about 4400 degrees K.
        Moving upward, the temperature then rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees K
        at the top of the chromosphere, some 2200 kilometers (1200 miles) above the
        Sun's surface. Here it abruptly jumps hundreds of thousands of degrees, then
        continues slowly rising, eventually reaching 2 million degrees in the
        corona. Even at a distance of one or two solar diameters, ionized oxygen
        atoms reach 200 million degrees!

        In other words the “reverse temperature gradient,” while meeting the tests
        of the glow discharge model, contradicts every original expectation of the
        fusion model.

        But this is only the first of many enigmas and contradictions facing the
        fusion hypothesis. As astronomer Fred Hoyle pointed out years ago, with the
        strong gravity and the mere 5,800-degree temperature at the surface, the Sun
        ’s atmosphere should be only a few thousand kilometers thick, according to
        the “gas laws” astrophysicists typically apply to such bodies. Instead, the
        atmosphere balloons out to 100,000 kilometers, where it heats up to a
        million degrees or more. From there, particles accelerate out among the
        planets in defiance of gravity. Thus the planets, Earth included, could be
        said to orbit inside the Sun's diffuse atmosphere.

        The discovery that blasts of particles escape the Sun at an estimated 400-
        to 700-kilometers per second came as an uncomfortable surprise for advocates
        of the nuclear powered model. Certainly, the “pressure” of sunlight cannot
        explain the acceleration of the solar “wind”. In an electrically neutral,
        gravity-driven universe, particles were not hot enough to escape such
        massive bodies, which (in the theory) are attractors only. And yet, the
        particles of the solar wind continue to accelerate past Venus, Earth, and
        Mars. Since these particles are not miniature “rocket ships,” this
        acceleration is the last thing one should expect!

        According to the electric theorists, a weak electric field, focused on the
        Sun, better explains the acceleration of the charged particles of the solar
        wind. Electric fields accelerate charged particles. And just as magnetic
        fields are undeniable witnesses to the presence of electric currents,
        particle acceleration is a good measure of the strength of an electric
        field.

        A common mistake made by critics of the electric model is to assume that the
        radial electric field of the Sun should be not only measurable but also
        strong enough to accelerate electrons toward the Sun at “relativistic”
        speeds (up to 300,000 kilometers per second). By this argument, we should
        find electrons not only zipping past our instruments but also creating
        dramatic displays in Earth’s night sky.

        But as noted above, in the plasma glow-discharge model the interplanetary
        electric field will be extremely weak. No instrument placed in space could
        measure the radial voltage differential across a few tens of meters, any
        more than it could measure the solar wind acceleration over a few tens of
        meters. But we can observe the solar wind acceleration over tens of millions
        of kilometers, confirming that the electric field of the Sun, though
        imperceptible in terms of volts per meter, is sufficient to sustain a
        powerful drift current across interplanetary space. Given the massive volume
        of this space, the implied current is quite sufficient to power the Sun.

        Look for more details on the drift current, solar magnetic fields, nuclear
        reactions, and many other features of the Sun in upcoming Pictures of the
        Day.

        See also these Pictures of the Day—

        TPOD July 29, 2004: Arc Lamp in the Sky
        TPOD July 27, 2004: Stellar Nurseries
        TPOD Sep 22, 2004: Electric Stars
        TPOD Oct 06, 2004: The Iron Sun
        TPOD Oct 15, 2004: Solar Tornadoes
        TPOD Nov 03, 2004: Kepler Supernova Remnant

        More about electric stars can be found here:

        http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
        http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=by2r22xg



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • William Hamilton
        Also see the Electric Sun at http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm The Electric Cosmos is a whole site dedicated to Plasma Cosmology. Bill ... From: Jahnets
        Message 3 of 5 , May 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Also see the Electric Sun at

          http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

          The Electric Cosmos is a whole site dedicated to Plasma Cosmology.

          Bill
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Jahnets" <Jahnets@...>
          To: <ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 10:25 AM
          Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


          > "More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
          > Research
          > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
          > electrical
          > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
          > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
          > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
          > characteristics
          > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
          > This
          > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
          > granulation
          > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
          > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
          > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields."
          >
          > This has been on my mind for days and it wasn't until this morning that it
          > dawned on me why... I think he is correct, and I'll share why... Some time
          > ago I went up on the astral to talk to a friend. He said he was expecting
          > very important company, at which I said, "Ok I will leave and see you
          > later". At this point, his company showed up and laying his hand on top of
          > my hand lightly held me there and said, "Don't leave on my account".
          > I turned my head around to see who was speaking and before me was a male
          > humanoid looking person with long golden hair and what looked like golden
          > leather outfit on. What really caught my eye was he seemed to be on fire.
          > I
          > blinked and looked away and looked back and it was as though the flames
          > were
          > coming off him for about 6-9 inches around him. He stood there not moving
          > watching the expressions run across my face and I finally said, you know I
          > find this facinating that you look like you're on fire but you obviously
          > aren't melting, what is causing that? He didn't answer me and I started to
          > turn my hand around so we would have been palm to palm and he looked
          > frightened for a moment and said or thought No. I stopped and said so you
          > can touch me, but I can't touch you??? At which point I either passed out
          > or
          > was knocked out... ha ha Can't have me getting too much information... Now
          > what connected the above article in case you can't fathom it yet is, that
          > part about me turning my hand around. We have an electrical current
          > running
          > through us in our body, now even though I was in my astral body, I'm
          > thinking that if I had gone palm to palm with him either he or I would
          > have
          > short circuited... Thus why he exclaimed "No" to me... I did get the
          > impression I would get hurt with the NO but it was more feeling and
          > understanding rather than words or thoughts. This happened when that big
          > comet flew by us a while back and I assumed he was the spirit for that
          > comet, which was why my friend said he was expecting important company...
          > Now in the above paragraph from the article note..."photosphere has the
          > appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has
          > arc
          > characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs
          > in
          > parallel."
          > specifically... or a large number of arcs in parallel... So could it be
          > that the Sun is a bunch of spirits that have come together and are arcing,
          > palm to palm...
          >
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Light Eye
          > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 12:46 AM
          > To: Global_Rumblings@...; SpeakIt@...;
          > SkyOpen@yahoogroups.com; ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com;
          > changingplanetgroup@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun
          >
          >
          > Dear Friends,
          >
          > http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm
          >
          > Love and Light.
          >
          > David
          >
          >
          > Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Apr 27, 2005
          > The Electric Glow of the Sun
          >
          > A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under
          > the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun
          > model
          > worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation
          > of
          > the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar
          > behavior.
          >
          > For centuries, the nature of the Sun's radiance remained a mystery to
          > astronomers. The Sun is the only object in the solar system that produces
          > its own visible light. All others reflect the light of the Sun. What
          > unique
          > trait of the Sun enables it to shine upon the other objects in the solar
          > system?
          >
          > Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is
          > answered.
          > The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that
          > astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to
          > generate temperatures of about 16 million K-producing a continuous
          > "controlled" nuclear reaction.
          >
          > Most astronomers and astrophysicists investigating the Sun are so
          > convinced
          > of the fusion model that only the rarest among them will countenance
          > challenges to the underlying idea. Standard textbooks and institutional
          > research, complemented by a chorus of scientific and popular media,
          > "ratify"
          > the fusion model of the Sun year after year by ignoring evidence to the
          > contrary.
          >
          > A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the
          > popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric.
          > It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that
          > the
          > fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun,
          > while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that
          > posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.
          >
          > More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
          > Research
          > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
          > electrical
          > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
          > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
          > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
          > characteristics
          > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
          > This
          > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
          > granulation
          > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
          > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
          > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields.
          >
          > Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce's
          > work,
          > added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in
          > 1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body
          > in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the
          > center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a
          > larger
          > galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make
          > the
          > theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.
          >
          > Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge"
          > fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is
          > essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge
          > model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily
          > dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is
          > nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons. In
          > this
          > view, the charge differential at the Earth's distance from the Sun is
          > smaller than our present ability to measure-perhaps one or two electrons
          > per
          > cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and
          > at
          > the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength
          > to
          > generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.
          >
          > Today, the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott urge a
          > critical comparison of the fusion model and the electrical model. Given
          > what
          > we now know about the Sun, which model meets the tests of unity,
          > coherence,
          > simplicity, and predictability? Why did so many discoveries surprise
          > investigators and even contradict the expectations of the fusion model? Is
          > there any fundamental feature of the Sun that contradicts the glow
          > discharge
          > hypothesis?
          >
          > Our closer looks at the Sun have revealed the pervasive influence of
          > magnetic fields, which are the effect of electric currents. Sunspots,
          > prominences, coronal mass ejections, and a host of other features require
          > ever more complicated guesswork on behalf of the fusion model. But this is
          > the way an anode in a coronal glow discharge behaves!
          >
          > In the electrical model, the Sun is the "anode" or positively charged body
          > in the electrical exchange, while the "cathode" or negatively charged
          > contributor is not a discrete object, but the invisible "virtual cathode"
          > at
          > the limit of the Sun's coronal discharge. (Coronal discharges can
          > sometimes
          > be seen as a glow surrounding high-voltage transmission wires, where the
          > wire discharges into the surrounding air). This virtual cathode lies far
          > beyond the planets. In the lexicon of astronomy, this is the "heliopause."
          > In electrical terms, it is the cellular sheath or "double layer"
          > separating
          > the plasma cell that surrounds the Sun ("heliosphere") from the enveloping
          > galactic plasma.
          >
          > In an electric universe, such cellular forms are expected between regions
          > of
          > dissimilar plasma properties. According to the glow discharge model of the
          > Sun, almost the entire voltage difference between the Sun and its galactic
          > environment occurs across the thin boundary sheath of the heliopause.
          > Inside
          > the heliopause there is a weak but constant radial electrical field
          > centered
          > on the Sun. A weak electric field, immeasurable locally with today's
          > instruments but cumulative across the vast volume of space within the
          > heliosphere, is sufficient to power the solar discharge.
          >
          > The visible component of a coronal glow discharge occurs above the anode,
          > often in layers. The Sun's red chromosphere is part of this discharge.
          > (Unconsciously, it seems, the correct electrical engineering term was
          > applied to the Sun's corona.) Correspondingly, the highest particle
          > energies
          > are not at the photosphere but above it. The electrical theorists see the
          > Sun as a perfect example of this characteristic of glow discharges-a
          > radical
          > contrast to the expected dissipation of energy from the core outward in
          > the
          > fusion model of the Sun.
          >
          > At about 500 kilometers (310 miles) above the photosphere or visible
          > surface, we find the coldest measurable temperature, about 4400 degrees K.
          > Moving upward, the temperature then rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees
          > K
          > at the top of the chromosphere, some 2200 kilometers (1200 miles) above
          > the
          > Sun's surface. Here it abruptly jumps hundreds of thousands of degrees,
          > then
          > continues slowly rising, eventually reaching 2 million degrees in the
          > corona. Even at a distance of one or two solar diameters, ionized oxygen
          > atoms reach 200 million degrees!
          >
          > In other words the "reverse temperature gradient," while meeting the tests
          > of the glow discharge model, contradicts every original expectation of the
          > fusion model.
          >
          > But this is only the first of many enigmas and contradictions facing the
          > fusion hypothesis. As astronomer Fred Hoyle pointed out years ago, with
          > the
          > strong gravity and the mere 5,800-degree temperature at the surface, the
          > Sun
          > 's atmosphere should be only a few thousand kilometers thick, according to
          > the "gas laws" astrophysicists typically apply to such bodies. Instead,
          > the
          > atmosphere balloons out to 100,000 kilometers, where it heats up to a
          > million degrees or more. From there, particles accelerate out among the
          > planets in defiance of gravity. Thus the planets, Earth included, could be
          > said to orbit inside the Sun's diffuse atmosphere.
          >
          > The discovery that blasts of particles escape the Sun at an estimated 400-
          > to 700-kilometers per second came as an uncomfortable surprise for
          > advocates
          > of the nuclear powered model. Certainly, the "pressure" of sunlight cannot
          > explain the acceleration of the solar "wind". In an electrically neutral,
          > gravity-driven universe, particles were not hot enough to escape such
          > massive bodies, which (in the theory) are attractors only. And yet, the
          > particles of the solar wind continue to accelerate past Venus, Earth, and
          > Mars. Since these particles are not miniature "rocket ships," this
          > acceleration is the last thing one should expect!
          >
          > According to the electric theorists, a weak electric field, focused on the
          > Sun, better explains the acceleration of the charged particles of the
          > solar
          > wind. Electric fields accelerate charged particles. And just as magnetic
          > fields are undeniable witnesses to the presence of electric currents,
          > particle acceleration is a good measure of the strength of an electric
          > field.
          >
          > A common mistake made by critics of the electric model is to assume that
          > the
          > radial electric field of the Sun should be not only measurable but also
          > strong enough to accelerate electrons toward the Sun at "relativistic"
          > speeds (up to 300,000 kilometers per second). By this argument, we should
          > find electrons not only zipping past our instruments but also creating
          > dramatic displays in Earth's night sky.
          >
          > But as noted above, in the plasma glow-discharge model the interplanetary
          > electric field will be extremely weak. No instrument placed in space could
          > measure the radial voltage differential across a few tens of meters, any
          > more than it could measure the solar wind acceleration over a few tens of
          > meters. But we can observe the solar wind acceleration over tens of
          > millions
          > of kilometers, confirming that the electric field of the Sun, though
          > imperceptible in terms of volts per meter, is sufficient to sustain a
          > powerful drift current across interplanetary space. Given the massive
          > volume
          > of this space, the implied current is quite sufficient to power the Sun.
          >
          > Look for more details on the drift current, solar magnetic fields, nuclear
          > reactions, and many other features of the Sun in upcoming Pictures of the
          > Day.
          >
          > See also these Pictures of the Day-
          >
          > TPOD July 29, 2004: Arc Lamp in the Sky
          > TPOD July 27, 2004: Stellar Nurseries
          > TPOD Sep 22, 2004: Electric Stars
          > TPOD Oct 06, 2004: The Iron Sun
          > TPOD Oct 15, 2004: Solar Tornadoes
          > TPOD Nov 03, 2004: Kepler Supernova Remnant
          >
          > More about electric stars can be found here:
          >
          > http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
          > http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=by2r22xg
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --
          > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005
          >



          --
          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005
        • Jahnets
          So what if a being was in the middle and the rest locked around him arcing, wouldn t that make a prison of sorts? If some of the beings on the outside burnt
          Message 4 of 5 , May 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            So what if a being was in the middle and the rest locked around him arcing,
            wouldn't that make a prison of sorts? If some of the beings on the outside
            burnt out and while being replaced it showed up as a hole to us because the
            arc is gone until it is corrected. I have wondered about this for a while,
            if the Sun's magic square is 666, could it be a prison?



            -----Original Message-----
            From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
            [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of William Hamilton
            Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 5:08 AM
            To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


            Also see the Electric Sun at

            http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

            The Electric Cosmos is a whole site dedicated to Plasma Cosmology.

            Bill
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Jahnets" <Jahnets@...>
            To: <ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 10:25 AM
            Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


            > "More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
            > Research
            > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
            > electrical
            > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
            > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
            > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
            > characteristics
            > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
            > This
            > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
            > granulation
            > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
            > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
            > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields."
            >
            > This has been on my mind for days and it wasn't until this morning that it
            > dawned on me why... I think he is correct, and I'll share why... Some time
            > ago I went up on the astral to talk to a friend. He said he was expecting
            > very important company, at which I said, "Ok I will leave and see you
            > later". At this point, his company showed up and laying his hand on top of
            > my hand lightly held me there and said, "Don't leave on my account".
            > I turned my head around to see who was speaking and before me was a male
            > humanoid looking person with long golden hair and what looked like golden
            > leather outfit on. What really caught my eye was he seemed to be on fire.
            > I
            > blinked and looked away and looked back and it was as though the flames
            > were
            > coming off him for about 6-9 inches around him. He stood there not moving
            > watching the expressions run across my face and I finally said, you know I
            > find this facinating that you look like you're on fire but you obviously
            > aren't melting, what is causing that? He didn't answer me and I started to
            > turn my hand around so we would have been palm to palm and he looked
            > frightened for a moment and said or thought No. I stopped and said so you
            > can touch me, but I can't touch you??? At which point I either passed out
            > or
            > was knocked out... ha ha Can't have me getting too much information... Now
            > what connected the above article in case you can't fathom it yet is, that
            > part about me turning my hand around. We have an electrical current
            > running
            > through us in our body, now even though I was in my astral body, I'm
            > thinking that if I had gone palm to palm with him either he or I would
            > have
            > short circuited... Thus why he exclaimed "No" to me... I did get the
            > impression I would get hurt with the NO but it was more feeling and
            > understanding rather than words or thoughts. This happened when that big
            > comet flew by us a while back and I assumed he was the spirit for that
            > comet, which was why my friend said he was expecting important company...
            > Now in the above paragraph from the article note..."photosphere has the
            > appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has
            > arc
            > characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs
            > in
            > parallel."
            > specifically... or a large number of arcs in parallel... So could it be
            > that the Sun is a bunch of spirits that have come together and are arcing,
            > palm to palm...
            >
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Light Eye
            > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 12:46 AM
            > To: Global_Rumblings@...; SpeakIt@...;
            > SkyOpen@yahoogroups.com; ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com;
            > changingplanetgroup@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun
            >
            >
            > Dear Friends,
            >
            > http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm
            >
            > Love and Light.
            >
            > David
            >
            >
            > Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Apr 27, 2005
            > The Electric Glow of the Sun
            >
            > A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under
            > the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun
            > model
            > worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation
            > of
            > the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar
            > behavior.
            >
            > For centuries, the nature of the Sun's radiance remained a mystery to
            > astronomers. The Sun is the only object in the solar system that produces
            > its own visible light. All others reflect the light of the Sun. What
            > unique
            > trait of the Sun enables it to shine upon the other objects in the solar
            > system?
            >
            > Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is
            > answered.
            > The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that
            > astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to
            > generate temperatures of about 16 million K-producing a continuous
            > "controlled" nuclear reaction.
            >
            > Most astronomers and astrophysicists investigating the Sun are so
            > convinced
            > of the fusion model that only the rarest among them will countenance
            > challenges to the underlying idea. Standard textbooks and institutional
            > research, complemented by a chorus of scientific and popular media,
            > "ratify"
            > the fusion model of the Sun year after year by ignoring evidence to the
            > contrary.
            >
            > A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the
            > popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric.
            > It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that
            > the
            > fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun,
            > while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that
            > posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.
            >
            > More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
            > Research
            > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
            > electrical
            > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
            > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
            > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
            > characteristics
            > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
            > This
            > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
            > granulation
            > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
            > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
            > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields.
            >
            > Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce's
            > work,
            > added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in
            > 1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body
            > in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the
            > center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a
            > larger
            > galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make
            > the
            > theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.
            >
            > Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge"
            > fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is
            > essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge
            > model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily
            > dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is
            > nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons. In
            > this
            > view, the charge differential at the Earth's distance from the Sun is
            > smaller than our present ability to measure-perhaps one or two electrons
            > per
            > cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and
            > at
            > the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength
            > to
            > generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.
            >
            > Today, the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott urge a
            > critical comparison of the fusion model and the electrical model. Given
            > what
            > we now know about the Sun, which model meets the tests of unity,
            > coherence,
            > simplicity, and predictability? Why did so many discoveries surprise
            > investigators and even contradict the expectations of the fusion model? Is
            > there any fundamental feature of the Sun that contradicts the glow
            > discharge
            > hypothesis?
            >
            > Our closer looks at the Sun have revealed the pervasive influence of
            > magnetic fields, which are the effect of electric currents. Sunspots,
            > prominences, coronal mass ejections, and a host of other features require
            > ever more complicated guesswork on behalf of the fusion model. But this is
            > the way an anode in a coronal glow discharge behaves!
            >
            > In the electrical model, the Sun is the "anode" or positively charged body
            > in the electrical exchange, while the "cathode" or negatively charged
            > contributor is not a discrete object, but the invisible "virtual cathode"
            > at
            > the limit of the Sun's coronal discharge. (Coronal discharges can
            > sometimes
            > be seen as a glow surrounding high-voltage transmission wires, where the
            > wire discharges into the surrounding air). This virtual cathode lies far
            > beyond the planets. In the lexicon of astronomy, this is the "heliopause."
            > In electrical terms, it is the cellular sheath or "double layer"
            > separating
            > the plasma cell that surrounds the Sun ("heliosphere") from the enveloping
            > galactic plasma.
            >
            > In an electric universe, such cellular forms are expected between regions
            > of
            > dissimilar plasma properties. According to the glow discharge model of the
            > Sun, almost the entire voltage difference between the Sun and its galactic
            > environment occurs across the thin boundary sheath of the heliopause.
            > Inside
            > the heliopause there is a weak but constant radial electrical field
            > centered
            > on the Sun. A weak electric field, immeasurable locally with today's
            > instruments but cumulative across the vast volume of space within the
            > heliosphere, is sufficient to power the solar discharge.
            >
            > The visible component of a coronal glow discharge occurs above the anode,
            > often in layers. The Sun's red chromosphere is part of this discharge.
            > (Unconsciously, it seems, the correct electrical engineering term was
            > applied to the Sun's corona.) Correspondingly, the highest particle
            > energies
            > are not at the photosphere but above it. The electrical theorists see the
            > Sun as a perfect example of this characteristic of glow discharges-a
            > radical
            > contrast to the expected dissipation of energy from the core outward in
            > the
            > fusion model of the Sun.
            >
            > At about 500 kilometers (310 miles) above the photosphere or visible
            > surface, we find the coldest measurable temperature, about 4400 degrees K.
            > Moving upward, the temperature then rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees
            > K
            > at the top of the chromosphere, some 2200 kilometers (1200 miles) above
            > the
            > Sun's surface. Here it abruptly jumps hundreds of thousands of degrees,
            > then
            > continues slowly rising, eventually reaching 2 million degrees in the
            > corona. Even at a distance of one or two solar diameters, ionized oxygen
            > atoms reach 200 million degrees!
            >
            > In other words the "reverse temperature gradient," while meeting the tests
            > of the glow discharge model, contradicts every original expectation of the
            > fusion model.
            >
            > But this is only the first of many enigmas and contradictions facing the
            > fusion hypothesis. As astronomer Fred Hoyle pointed out years ago, with
            > the
            > strong gravity and the mere 5,800-degree temperature at the surface, the
            > Sun
            > 's atmosphere should be only a few thousand kilometers thick, according to
            > the "gas laws" astrophysicists typically apply to such bodies. Instead,
            > the
            > atmosphere balloons out to 100,000 kilometers, where it heats up to a
            > million degrees or more. From there, particles accelerate out among the
            > planets in defiance of gravity. Thus the planets, Earth included, could be
            > said to orbit inside the Sun's diffuse atmosphere.
            >
            > The discovery that blasts of particles escape the Sun at an estimated 400-
            > to 700-kilometers per second came as an uncomfortable surprise for
            > advocates
            > of the nuclear powered model. Certainly, the "pressure" of sunlight cannot
            > explain the acceleration of the solar "wind". In an electrically neutral,
            > gravity-driven universe, particles were not hot enough to escape such
            > massive bodies, which (in the theory) are attractors only. And yet, the
            > particles of the solar wind continue to accelerate past Venus, Earth, and
            > Mars. Since these particles are not miniature "rocket ships," this
            > acceleration is the last thing one should expect!
            >
            > According to the electric theorists, a weak electric field, focused on the
            > Sun, better explains the acceleration of the charged particles of the
            > solar
            > wind. Electric fields accelerate charged particles. And just as magnetic
            > fields are undeniable witnesses to the presence of electric currents,
            > particle acceleration is a good measure of the strength of an electric
            > field.
            >
            > A common mistake made by critics of the electric model is to assume that
            > the
            > radial electric field of the Sun should be not only measurable but also
            > strong enough to accelerate electrons toward the Sun at "relativistic"
            > speeds (up to 300,000 kilometers per second). By this argument, we should
            > find electrons not only zipping past our instruments but also creating
            > dramatic displays in Earth's night sky.
            >
            > But as noted above, in the plasma glow-discharge model the interplanetary
            > electric field will be extremely weak. No instrument placed in space could
            > measure the radial voltage differential across a few tens of meters, any
            > more than it could measure the solar wind acceleration over a few tens of
            > meters. But we can observe the solar wind acceleration over tens of
            > millions
            > of kilometers, confirming that the electric field of the Sun, though
            > imperceptible in terms of volts per meter, is sufficient to sustain a
            > powerful drift current across interplanetary space. Given the massive
            > volume
            > of this space, the implied current is quite sufficient to power the Sun.
            >
            > Look for more details on the drift current, solar magnetic fields, nuclear
            > reactions, and many other features of the Sun in upcoming Pictures of the
            > Day.
            >
            > See also these Pictures of the Day-
            >
            > TPOD July 29, 2004: Arc Lamp in the Sky
            > TPOD July 27, 2004: Stellar Nurseries
            > TPOD Sep 22, 2004: Electric Stars
            > TPOD Oct 06, 2004: The Iron Sun
            > TPOD Oct 15, 2004: Solar Tornadoes
            > TPOD Nov 03, 2004: Kepler Supernova Remnant
            >
            > More about electric stars can be found here:
            >
            > http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
            > http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=by2r22xg
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --
            > No virus found in this incoming message.
            > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
            > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005
            >



            --
            No virus found in this outgoing message.
            Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
            Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005





            Yahoo! Groups Links
          • Jahnets
            So why is it that the majority of scientists believe in the nucleur theory??? and why while I m at it did Mako state that we know the sun is hydrogen??? How
            Message 5 of 5 , May 1, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              So why is it that the majority of scientists believe in the nucleur
              theory??? and why while I'm at it did Mako state that we know the sun is
              hydrogen??? How can we be possitive of that? That whole interview bothered
              me as it seemed it was all theory, and it sounded like they weren't sure
              which direction to go with M theory or F theory...



              -----Original Message-----
              From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of William Hamilton
              Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 5:08 AM
              To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


              Also see the Electric Sun at

              http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

              The Electric Cosmos is a whole site dedicated to Plasma Cosmology.

              Bill
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Jahnets" <Jahnets@...>
              To: <ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 10:25 AM
              Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun


              > "More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
              > Research
              > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
              > electrical
              > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
              > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
              > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
              > characteristics
              > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
              > This
              > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
              > granulation
              > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
              > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
              > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields."
              >
              > This has been on my mind for days and it wasn't until this morning that it
              > dawned on me why... I think he is correct, and I'll share why... Some time
              > ago I went up on the astral to talk to a friend. He said he was expecting
              > very important company, at which I said, "Ok I will leave and see you
              > later". At this point, his company showed up and laying his hand on top of
              > my hand lightly held me there and said, "Don't leave on my account".
              > I turned my head around to see who was speaking and before me was a male
              > humanoid looking person with long golden hair and what looked like golden
              > leather outfit on. What really caught my eye was he seemed to be on fire.
              > I
              > blinked and looked away and looked back and it was as though the flames
              > were
              > coming off him for about 6-9 inches around him. He stood there not moving
              > watching the expressions run across my face and I finally said, you know I
              > find this facinating that you look like you're on fire but you obviously
              > aren't melting, what is causing that? He didn't answer me and I started to
              > turn my hand around so we would have been palm to palm and he looked
              > frightened for a moment and said or thought No. I stopped and said so you
              > can touch me, but I can't touch you??? At which point I either passed out
              > or
              > was knocked out... ha ha Can't have me getting too much information... Now
              > what connected the above article in case you can't fathom it yet is, that
              > part about me turning my hand around. We have an electrical current
              > running
              > through us in our body, now even though I was in my astral body, I'm
              > thinking that if I had gone palm to palm with him either he or I would
              > have
              > short circuited... Thus why he exclaimed "No" to me... I did get the
              > impression I would get hurt with the NO but it was more feeling and
              > understanding rather than words or thoughts. This happened when that big
              > comet flew by us a while back and I assumed he was the spirit for that
              > comet, which was why my friend said he was expecting important company...
              > Now in the above paragraph from the article note..."photosphere has the
              > appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has
              > arc
              > characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs
              > in
              > parallel."
              > specifically... or a large number of arcs in parallel... So could it be
              > that the Sun is a bunch of spirits that have come together and are arcing,
              > palm to palm...
              >
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
              > [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Light Eye
              > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 12:46 AM
              > To: Global_Rumblings@...; SpeakIt@...;
              > SkyOpen@yahoogroups.com; ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com;
              > changingplanetgroup@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: [ufodiscussion] The Electric Glow Of The Sun
              >
              >
              > Dear Friends,
              >
              > http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm
              >
              > Love and Light.
              >
              > David
              >
              >
              > Credit: NASA/CXC/SAO
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Apr 27, 2005
              > The Electric Glow of the Sun
              >
              > A little known fact: Popular ideas about the Sun have not fared well under
              > the tests of a scientific theory. The formulators of the standard Sun
              > model
              > worked with gravity, gas laws, and nuclear fusion. But closer observation
              > of
              > the Sun has shown that electrical and magnetic properties dominate solar
              > behavior.
              >
              > For centuries, the nature of the Sun's radiance remained a mystery to
              > astronomers. The Sun is the only object in the solar system that produces
              > its own visible light. All others reflect the light of the Sun. What
              > unique
              > trait of the Sun enables it to shine upon the other objects in the solar
              > system?
              >
              > Today, astronomers assure us that the most fundamental question is
              > answered.
              > The Sun is a thermonuclear furnace. The ball of gas is so large that
              > astronomers envision pressures and densities within its core sufficient to
              > generate temperatures of about 16 million K-producing a continuous
              > "controlled" nuclear reaction.
              >
              > Most astronomers and astrophysicists investigating the Sun are so
              > convinced
              > of the fusion model that only the rarest among them will countenance
              > challenges to the underlying idea. Standard textbooks and institutional
              > research, complemented by a chorus of scientific and popular media,
              > "ratify"
              > the fusion model of the Sun year after year by ignoring evidence to the
              > contrary.
              >
              > A growing group of independent researchers, however, insists that the
              > popular idea is incorrect. These researchers say that the Sun is electric.
              > It is a glow discharge fed by galactic currents. And they emphasize that
              > the
              > fusion model anticipated none of the milestone discoveries about the Sun,
              > while the electric model predicts and explains the very observations that
              > posed the greatest quandaries for solar investigation.
              >
              > More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical
              > Research
              > Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An
              > electrical
              > researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce
              > proposed in 1944 that the Sun's "photosphere has the appearance, the
              > temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc
              > characteristics
              > because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel."
              > This
              > discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed
              > granulation
              > of the solar surface." Bruce's model, however, was based on a conventional
              > understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the
              > "electric" Sun without reference to external electric fields.
              >
              > Years later, a brilliant engineer, Ralph Juergens, inspired by Bruce's
              > work,
              > added a revolutionary possibility. In a series of articles beginning in
              > 1972, Juergens suggested that the Sun is not an electrically isolated body
              > in space, but the most positively charged object in the solar system, the
              > center of a radial electric field. This field, he said, lies within a
              > larger
              > galactic field. With this hypothesis, Juergens became the first to make
              > the
              > theoretical leap to an external power source of the Sun.
              >
              > Juergens proposed that the Sun is the focus of a "coronal glow discharge"
              > fed by galactic currents. To avoid misunderstanding of this concept, it is
              > essential that we distinguish the complex, electrodynamic glow discharge
              > model of the Sun from a simple electrostatic model that can be easily
              > dismissed. Throughout most of the volume of a glow discharge the plasma is
              > nearly neutral, with almost equal numbers of protons and electrons. In
              > this
              > view, the charge differential at the Earth's distance from the Sun is
              > smaller than our present ability to measure-perhaps one or two electrons
              > per
              > cubic meter. But the charge density is far higher closer to the Sun, and
              > at
              > the solar corona and surface the electric field is of sufficient strength
              > to
              > generate all of the energetic phenomena we observe.
              >
              > Today, the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott urge a
              > critical comparison of the fusion model and the electrical model. Given
              > what
              > we now know about the Sun, which model meets the tests of unity,
              > coherence,
              > simplicity, and predictability? Why did so many discoveries surprise
              > investigators and even contradict the expectations of the fusion model? Is
              > there any fundamental feature of the Sun that contradicts the glow
              > discharge
              > hypothesis?
              >
              > Our closer looks at the Sun have revealed the pervasive influence of
              > magnetic fields, which are the effect of electric currents. Sunspots,
              > prominences, coronal mass ejections, and a host of other features require
              > ever more complicated guesswork on behalf of the fusion model. But this is
              > the way an anode in a coronal glow discharge behaves!
              >
              > In the electrical model, the Sun is the "anode" or positively charged body
              > in the electrical exchange, while the "cathode" or negatively charged
              > contributor is not a discrete object, but the invisible "virtual cathode"
              > at
              > the limit of the Sun's coronal discharge. (Coronal discharges can
              > sometimes
              > be seen as a glow surrounding high-voltage transmission wires, where the
              > wire discharges into the surrounding air). This virtual cathode lies far
              > beyond the planets. In the lexicon of astronomy, this is the "heliopause."
              > In electrical terms, it is the cellular sheath or "double layer"
              > separating
              > the plasma cell that surrounds the Sun ("heliosphere") from the enveloping
              > galactic plasma.
              >
              > In an electric universe, such cellular forms are expected between regions
              > of
              > dissimilar plasma properties. According to the glow discharge model of the
              > Sun, almost the entire voltage difference between the Sun and its galactic
              > environment occurs across the thin boundary sheath of the heliopause.
              > Inside
              > the heliopause there is a weak but constant radial electrical field
              > centered
              > on the Sun. A weak electric field, immeasurable locally with today's
              > instruments but cumulative across the vast volume of space within the
              > heliosphere, is sufficient to power the solar discharge.
              >
              > The visible component of a coronal glow discharge occurs above the anode,
              > often in layers. The Sun's red chromosphere is part of this discharge.
              > (Unconsciously, it seems, the correct electrical engineering term was
              > applied to the Sun's corona.) Correspondingly, the highest particle
              > energies
              > are not at the photosphere but above it. The electrical theorists see the
              > Sun as a perfect example of this characteristic of glow discharges-a
              > radical
              > contrast to the expected dissipation of energy from the core outward in
              > the
              > fusion model of the Sun.
              >
              > At about 500 kilometers (310 miles) above the photosphere or visible
              > surface, we find the coldest measurable temperature, about 4400 degrees K.
              > Moving upward, the temperature then rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees
              > K
              > at the top of the chromosphere, some 2200 kilometers (1200 miles) above
              > the
              > Sun's surface. Here it abruptly jumps hundreds of thousands of degrees,
              > then
              > continues slowly rising, eventually reaching 2 million degrees in the
              > corona. Even at a distance of one or two solar diameters, ionized oxygen
              > atoms reach 200 million degrees!
              >
              > In other words the "reverse temperature gradient," while meeting the tests
              > of the glow discharge model, contradicts every original expectation of the
              > fusion model.
              >
              > But this is only the first of many enigmas and contradictions facing the
              > fusion hypothesis. As astronomer Fred Hoyle pointed out years ago, with
              > the
              > strong gravity and the mere 5,800-degree temperature at the surface, the
              > Sun
              > 's atmosphere should be only a few thousand kilometers thick, according to
              > the "gas laws" astrophysicists typically apply to such bodies. Instead,
              > the
              > atmosphere balloons out to 100,000 kilometers, where it heats up to a
              > million degrees or more. From there, particles accelerate out among the
              > planets in defiance of gravity. Thus the planets, Earth included, could be
              > said to orbit inside the Sun's diffuse atmosphere.
              >
              > The discovery that blasts of particles escape the Sun at an estimated 400-
              > to 700-kilometers per second came as an uncomfortable surprise for
              > advocates
              > of the nuclear powered model. Certainly, the "pressure" of sunlight cannot
              > explain the acceleration of the solar "wind". In an electrically neutral,
              > gravity-driven universe, particles were not hot enough to escape such
              > massive bodies, which (in the theory) are attractors only. And yet, the
              > particles of the solar wind continue to accelerate past Venus, Earth, and
              > Mars. Since these particles are not miniature "rocket ships," this
              > acceleration is the last thing one should expect!
              >
              > According to the electric theorists, a weak electric field, focused on the
              > Sun, better explains the acceleration of the charged particles of the
              > solar
              > wind. Electric fields accelerate charged particles. And just as magnetic
              > fields are undeniable witnesses to the presence of electric currents,
              > particle acceleration is a good measure of the strength of an electric
              > field.
              >
              > A common mistake made by critics of the electric model is to assume that
              > the
              > radial electric field of the Sun should be not only measurable but also
              > strong enough to accelerate electrons toward the Sun at "relativistic"
              > speeds (up to 300,000 kilometers per second). By this argument, we should
              > find electrons not only zipping past our instruments but also creating
              > dramatic displays in Earth's night sky.
              >
              > But as noted above, in the plasma glow-discharge model the interplanetary
              > electric field will be extremely weak. No instrument placed in space could
              > measure the radial voltage differential across a few tens of meters, any
              > more than it could measure the solar wind acceleration over a few tens of
              > meters. But we can observe the solar wind acceleration over tens of
              > millions
              > of kilometers, confirming that the electric field of the Sun, though
              > imperceptible in terms of volts per meter, is sufficient to sustain a
              > powerful drift current across interplanetary space. Given the massive
              > volume
              > of this space, the implied current is quite sufficient to power the Sun.
              >
              > Look for more details on the drift current, solar magnetic fields, nuclear
              > reactions, and many other features of the Sun in upcoming Pictures of the
              > Day.
              >
              > See also these Pictures of the Day-
              >
              > TPOD July 29, 2004: Arc Lamp in the Sky
              > TPOD July 27, 2004: Stellar Nurseries
              > TPOD Sep 22, 2004: Electric Stars
              > TPOD Oct 06, 2004: The Iron Sun
              > TPOD Oct 15, 2004: Solar Tornadoes
              > TPOD Nov 03, 2004: Kepler Supernova Remnant
              >
              > More about electric stars can be found here:
              >
              > http://www.electric-cosmos.org/hrdiagr.htm
              > http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=by2r22xg
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --
              > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005
              >



              --
              No virus found in this outgoing message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.0 - Release Date: 4/29/2005





              Yahoo! Groups Links
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.