The Safire Project and The Earth’s Theoretical Atmospheric Constrainment Against The Vacuum of Outer Space: The Tall Tales of Theoretical Science Just Never Cease

The Safire Project:

https://safireproject.com/index.html

NOTE: It should be noted that The Safire Project is deeply involved with Climate Change. This speaks volumes about its true nature, backers, and aims.

I am very well aware of The Safire Project, but in considering its role in explaining why The Earth’s atmosphere sticks to a spinning ball, many seem to forget one crucial fact. Both NASA and mainstream science have been claiming a very different reason for this alleged effect, which has nothing to with the claims being made by adherents to The Safire Project’s research in plasma energy. It is not to say that The Safire Project does not make some intriguing claims, but rather, it is to highlight that NASA, and mainstream science, in general, has been asserting for many decades that either Newtonian Gravity, or Einstein’s Pseudo-Riemannian Manifold effect are responsible for why The Earth’s atmosphere holds close to The Earth without a solid and impermeable barrier, not The Safire Project’s theoretical claims. NASA and mainstream science never teach anything about The Safire Project as a justification for atmospheric containment, and thus, it is a separate topic within the general scope and purview of justifications for atmospheric adherence to a spinning ball, which is said to be flying through the vacuum of imaginary Outer Space. Alas, the tall tales and parade of antecedent causes and justification for The Earth’s atmosphere being contained around a spinning ball without a solid and impermeable barrier just never seem to cease.

Essentially, various claims have been circulating within The Ivory Halls of theoretical physics, none of which have been empirically tested at the scale they are being applied to, namely The Earth and The Earth’s atmosphere, that posit that plasma layers constrain and isolate The Earth’s atmosphere from the surrounding vacuum of imaginary Outer Space, which is to say that low energy layers of The Earth’s theoretical “dark mode plasma layer” have the ability to constrain The Earth’s atmosphere to a spinning ball against a vacuum at 1×10-6 to <3×10-17 Torr 100 µPa to <3fPa, without smashing The Earth’s atmosphere down into a singularly flat and homogeneous blanket of isotropic density, along with all the creatures inhabiting it. It’s a fascinating claim, to be sure, although entirely unsubstantiated or tested to the celestial scale we are speaking of when we speak of The Earth’s astrosphere being electromagnetically constrained around The Earth against the imaginary Outer Space vacuum, as I have mentioned, and has not yet found wide acceptance within the mainstream science community.

It is also interesting to note that The Electromagnetic Force is not considered to be a particularly strong force in Physics, of the four fundamental forces: The Strong Nuclear Force, The Electromagnetic Force, The Weak Nuclear Force, and The Gravitational Force. The Electromagnetic Force is considered the second strongest force and is responsible for interactions between charged particles, like the attraction between electrons and protons in an atom. It is what keeps electrons in orbit around the nucleus, according to the Department of Energy. Unlike The Strong Force, it has an infinite range, although its strength decreases with increasing distance. Subsequently, if The Electromagnetic Force were acting with so much strength as to constrain The Earth’s atmosphere against The Earth, and without a plasma container acting as a solid and impermeable barrier, as we see in laboratories, which would be, by analogy, The Firmament, it would, indeed be a life-ending force, compressing The Earth’s atmosphere down into a singularly flat and homogeneous blanket of isotropic density. But, naturally, this is not how we observe The Electromatic plasma field to be at all. In fact, it behaves as though it were in an enclosed and contained system with a solid and impermeable barrier containing it, as we would expect, by comparison, if there was a Firmament between The Earth’s atmosphere and whatever may be hypothesized to exist beyond such a solid impermeable barrier.

Electromagnetic Plasma Phenomenon Only Occurs Within an Enclosed System…NEVER Contiguous With an External Vacuum. The Earth is an Enclosed System, Enshrouded by The Firmament. That’s Why We See Plasma Phenomena in The Atmosphere. It’s Enclosed.

Electromagnetic Plasma Phenomenon Under The Enclosed Firmament. Again, Electromagnetic Plasma Phenomenon Only Occurs Within an Enclosed System…NEVER Contiguous With an External Vacuum. The Earth is an Enclosed System, Enshrouded by The Firmament. That’s Why We See Plasma Phenomena in The Atmosphere. It’s Enclosed.

Electromagnetic Plasma Lightning Strikes in The Earth’s Enclosed Atmosphere. It All Makes Sense, Suddenly:

The “Safire Chamber” experiments require an enclosed system, and cannot work if a vacuum is contiguous to the laboratory application. The Phase I model of the experiment was an enclosed bell-jar vacuum chamber with a small metal spherical anode and a copper cathode, 1800W DC power, coupled with high-speed cameras, oscilloscopes, and optical/mass spectrometers. Using this setup, they were able to demonstrate a stable, self-organizing plasma within the enclosed chamber, again much like what we would expect if The Earth were an enclosed electromagnet plasma system, enclosed within The Firmament, which is a solid and impermeable barrier. The phenomena also included moving tufts that increased in number relative to the current, concentric rings of double-layers that showed independent rotation, and bursts of high-energy within the 2M to 10MW range.

The Starfire Chamber is Called a Chamber Because it is Enclosed, With a Solid and Impermeable Barrier, Like The Earth with The Firmament. ( Images From The Starfire Project Website):

This is the 12 centimeter anode prior to the firing-up of The Safire Chamber:

This is the 12 centimeter anode after the firing-up of The Safire Chamber:

Physics of The Plasma Ball:

The Safire Project, which stands for the “Stellar Atmospheric Reconnection Experiment,” is an experimental initiative aimed at studying plasma and nuclear fusion processes that occur in stars, particularly the sun. The project, led by a team including scientists and engineers, seeks to replicate certain stellar phenomena in a laboratory setting.

The SAFIRE Project 2017 - 2018 Update:

While the project's goal is to explore how electric and magnetic fields interact with plasma to potentially mimic aspects of solar activity, it's important to note that the term “electric sun” is often associated with The Electric Universe theory, which posits that electric and electromagnetic forces play a significant role in cosmic phenomena. This theory is considered controversial and is not widely accepted in mainstream science, as I mentioned. The Safire Project has reported some intriguing results regarding plasma behaviors and interactions, but it has not definitively demonstrated the creation of an “electric sun” in the laboratory in the sense of replicating The Sun’s full range of processes or outputs. The work continues to be exploratory, and further research is needed to validate and understand the implications of their findings.

Questions, Comments, and Answers Regarding The Safire Project: Vacuum Versus Pressure

J.P. Bush Food Forager Said This:

“And just what constrains the spherical concentric shells of the SAFIRE apparatus's atmosphere from exploding outwards into the vacuum of the chamber? There's no 'wall' between the plasma and the vacuum (there is only containment between the vacuum and earth atmosphere). Its only hydrogen gas electrified into a plasma state, separated into visible double layers, self-sorted, and held in place by the laws of electromagnetism.

Now I know that SAFIRE has several theoretical flaws which makes it unsuitable as a true analogue to earth or the sun: SAFIRE's orb was an anode, whereas earth and the sun are electrically cathodes (Juergens was wrong on this point), so a copper orb cathode encased with a steel anode would have been more accurate representation of our solar system's dynamics. Sadly, we will never see any experiment reversing SAFIRE's polarity despite our repeated requests.

Second, the entire apparatus is encased, an unfortunate necessity of terrestrial vacuum research, whereas the solar system is open and free to all electromagnetic particle movement (e.g., solar wind, cosmic rays). The only actual space vacuum research I am aware of is that done by the Russians on ISS, and they certainly were not testing the SAFIRE device in open space, which is the next necessary step:

Thirdly, SAFIRE's orb has no magnetic field, unlike earth or the sun. This may result in changes to the shape of the SAFIRE orb's hydrogen plasma atmosphere.

Fourth, no SAFIRE experiments have utilized earth minerals (e.g., granite) as the cathode orb, nor standard earth air (N2 O2 Ar He H2 CO2) to see what might happen with spherical atmospheric formation in a vacuum. I doubt any such experiments will occur despite our requests for them.

But those significant points aside, it is still a practical demonstration that a sphere can form a layered plasma atmosphere in a vacuum without any outward 'explosion' of the atmosphere against the vacuum. The electromagnetic properties of the hydrogen plasma are enough to retain its spherical shape, layering and overall electrical isolation from the surrounding vacuum. And because plasma physics is ubiquitous across the entire universe at every scale, micro to macro, they can apply equally to planetary atmospheres as much as to SAFIRE's star simulation.

It may just be that your precious raqia is the same layered atmospheric plasma phenomenon that once upon a time in ancient memory was previously visible in the sky and resembled a solid curved disc or upturned bowl. That same plasma layer(s) still exists now, only in dark mode rather than glow, because of catastrophic alterations of earth's electrical environs in the millennia between then and now.”

My reply:

Thank you for your questions and comments.

The Safire vacuum chamber is initially a contained vacuum. However, the electrodynamic effect can only isolate itself around the anode if hydrogen, or theoretically, if some other noble gas is introduced into the vacuum chamber, in which case, the hydrogen gas is electrified into a plasma state around the anode within the sealed chamber. But as soon as you introduce the hydrogen into the vacuum chamber, the chamber is no longer in a vacuum state. Even a small amount of hydrogen gas introduced into a vacuum chamber will increase the pressure within the chamber, moving it away from a perfect vacuum and creating a partial vacuum, at best. Thus, the pressure from the hydrogen changes the vacuum state into one of pressure, in which case, there is no reason for the dual electrified plasma layers to expand outwards to reach the inner walls of the Safire Chamber anymore because the entire chamber suddenly becomes a homogeneous electromagnetic pressure field, with an electrified plasma state at its core, analogues to a light bulb with a burning filament at its core.

Think of the evolution of the incandescent lightbulb. Early incandescent lightbulb bulbs used a quasi-vacuum to prevent the filament from burning up in the presence of too much oxygen. The glass bulb was evacuated to create a quasi-vacuum, meaning almost all the air was removed. This was crucial because oxygen would react with the hot filament, causing it to burn up quickly. And while some early light bulbs did use a quasi-vacuum, modern incandescent bulbs typically contain an inert gas like argon or nitrogen, which causes them be even less a true vacuum. And so, as soon as hydrogen is introduced into the Safire Chamber vacuum, it is no longer a true vacuum anymore. There is now pressure in the vacuum chamber system, helping to mold the electromagnetically charged hydrogen around the anode. It does this by creating a pressurized field within the chamber which, essentially, enable the chamber walls to “push back” against the excited plasma core, thereby isolating it around the anode, since that is the epicenter of the electromagnetic disturbance with the chamber.

Additionally, while a vacuum is characterized by low pressure, the plasma within it is not at zero pressure. The plasma, itself, has a pressure due to the movement and collisions of its charged particles. Thus, in addition to the hydrogen, the plasma effect creates even more pressure in a vacuum. In fact, plasma is often generated in vacuum environments for various industrial applications because the plasma, itself, exerts pressure. This pressure can be harnessed for processes like surface treatment and material modification. In short, adding hydrogen and plasma to a vacuum chamber will change the pressure inside it, meaning it’s no longer a perfect vacuum.

Subsequently, making the claim that The Safire Chamber, with its anode, is somehow similar to The Earth’s electromagnetic plasma layers being able to constrain The Earth’s atmosphere from the inconceivably powerful vacuum void of Outer Space at 1×10-6 to <3×10-17 Torr 100 µPa to <3fPa is an incoherent and false analogy. In the first case, The Safire Chamber is a closed, encased system, where pressure can easily be generated through the introduction of hydrogen and plasma, resulting in hydrogen to be easily localized around an anode, while the vacuum void of Outer Space is an open system, meaning regardless of how many electromagnetic plasma layers exist in The Earth’s atmosphere, the Outer Space vacuum void would obey The Laws of Thermodynamics, resulting in The Earth’s atmosphere being whisked out into the vacuum void to fill any available volume. In the Heliocentric Model, there is simply no solid and impermeable barrier to stop this natural Thermodynamic effect, and no amount of electromagnetic plasma layers could ever impede this well-tested, scalable, repeatable, observable natural Thermodynamic effect, either. Further, no empirical evidence exists to demonstrate the veracity of such an electrodynamic effect, as well, certainly not The Safire Project.

To conclude, containment is the necessary antecedent to pressure, as The Safire Chamber proves, and The Earth, indeed, has an atmospheric pressure, which points to the fact that The Earth’s atmosphere is, indeed, contained. The very idea that electromagnetic plasma effects could constrain The Earth’s atmosphere against the hypothetical vacuum void of Outer Space at 1×10-6 to <3×10-17 Torr 100 µPa to <3fPa flies in the face of everything we know about Thermodynamics and the way in which high pressure states must flow to lower pressure conditions to achieve Thermodynamic equilibrium. These are testable, repeatable, scalable, observable facts of science. However, imagining a hypothetical Outer Space vacuum that co-exists contiguous with the atmospheric pressure of The Earth’s atmosphere without a solid and impermeable barrier between these pressure conditions is something that has never been achieved or seen in all of Mankind’s history in any legitimate empirical test, repeatable demonstration, of natural observation. Quite simply, high pressure moves to low pressure to fill any available volume in a vacuum. It’s a well-tested Thermodynamic principle. If you had containment with The Earth, electrodynamic plasma effects would work, and they do work because The Earth does possess containment via a solid and impermeable crystalline Firmament with electrodynamic plasma properties, .

One Final Note:

Any non-empirical claims and theoretical speculations that you may have made concerning solar winds, planets, solar systems, etc...in a vacuum void of hypothetical Outer Space, fall, as far as I am concerned, within the domain of theoretical and speculative unfalsifiable claims, and which have little bearing on the topic of testable empirical science. As such, they have no place in this discourse.

Nikola Tesla Harnessed the Naturally Occurring Electromagnetic Plasma Energy Inherent to The Enclosed Earth Realm, With The Firmament Enclosing It:

Nikola Tesla was conceivably the greatest inventor in human history, who obtained around 300 patents worldwide for his inventions. Some of Tesla's patents are not accounted for, and various sources have discovered some that have lain hidden in patent archives.

There are a minimum of 278 patents issued to Tesla in 26 countries that have been accounted for. Many of Tesla's patents were in the United States, Britain, and Canada, but many other patents were approved in countries around the globe. Many inventions developed by Tesla were not put into patent protection.

Images Courtesy of Stephen De Leon of Hollister California:

The Reclassification of Newtonian Gravity as a Pseudo-Riemannian Manifold in Geodesics in November 25, 1915:

To backtrack now, we must remember that, contrary to the Newtonian Gravitational formalization, there is no force of Gravity pulling the molecular density of gasses down to Earth, in that Gravity was reclassified as an effect and not a force via Einstein’s November 25, 1915, General Theory of Relativity field equation papers. The “mass attracts mass” claim of Newtonian Gravity was overruled by a Pseudo-Riemannian Manifold in geodesics. Subsequently, according to The Heliocentric Model, mass does NOT attract mass, and has not been claimed to be attracting mass since 1915. Gravity is no longer in line with the Heliocentric rhetoric of Sir Isaac Newton, where mass is said to attract mass. Rather, in The Heliocentric Model, it's the bending of a Pseudo-Riemannian Space-Time dimension that causes the illusion of gravitational attraction. It's geodesics in Space-Time. That's what Gravity is said to be in The Heliocentric Model. In geometry, a geodesic is a curve representing in some sense the shortest path (arc) between two points in a surface, or more generally in a Riemannian Manifold. The term also has meaning in any differentiable manifold with a connection. It is a generalization of the notion of a “straight line”.

Hence, in BOTH the aforementioned Gravitational Models, Gravity has zero power to hold The Earth’s atmospheric pressure gradients:

In the Newtonian Model, The Earth’s atmospheric pressure gradients, and in particular, at The Exosphere, contain an ascending strata of atomic density that is so sparse that there is an insufficient mass to satisfy Newton’s Universal Law of Gravitation’s requirement for significant mass as a function of gravitational attraction. Additionally, for Einstein, what is known as Gravity is not a force but evidence that we exist in a pseudo-Riemannian Manifold, or nonisomorphic, as it traces a geodesic, a space whose shape comes from the presence of masses with time being a relative quantity. Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity is a kinematic theory in that it provides a geometric explanation of gravitational motion, wherein there is no “mass attracts mass” variable. This, being Newton’s gravitational claim, was supplanted with curved Space-Time.

Nevertheless, for gas pressure gradients to remain intact contiguous to a vacuum, the necessary antecedent of a container is required, according to The Second Law of Thermodynamics. From these aforementioned conditions, we know that gravitational attraction has no power to hold singular atoms, nor The Earth’s atmospheric pressure gradients, from being immediately “pushed upwards,” in a homogenous confluence, out into the vacuum of Outer Space at the highest altitudes above The Earth, and by no means, can gravitational attraction serve or behave as a barrier between The Earth and the alleged vacuum of Outer Space. This being the case, and since The Earth, indeed, possess a pressurized atmosphere, the claim that The Earth is surrounded by an Outer Space vacuum is null and void, and the container is the Firmament from Genesis.

The necessary causal antecedent for gas, air, and/or atmospheric pressure to exist equates to containment. If the alleged Outer Space around Earth is truly as described, with no sold barrier between The Earth’s Atmosphere and the near perfect vacuum of theoretical Outer Space, we'd all be dead as entropy would increase as The Earth’s Atmosphere expands out into the volume of available Outer Space in order to achieve Thermodynamic equilibrium.

Plasma Cosmology and The Electric Sun: The Sun is NOT a Nuclear Furnace Nor a Star

NOTE:

Some of the following research is based upon the assumption that The Sun exists in a near perfect vacuum, which I do not endorse. Nevertheless, the plasma deduction inherent within this research has its applications towards debunking the notion that The Sun is nuclear furnace and a Star.

The Stars and Wandering Stars (“Planets”)

· The Stars and Planets are not solid. They are the result of electromagnetically driven Sonoluminescence.

· Plasma makes up the sun and stars, and it is the most common state of matter in the Universe, as a whole.

· NASA has lied to you with CGI Computer cartoons of Planets and Stars for so long you do not trust your own eyes.

· Get your telescope out and look at them. They are not solid.

· The Phases of Venus have nothing to do with the Sun's position.

· Venus generates its own light like The Stars and all The Planets.

· They all shimmer and appear to have phases through the very understandable science of Sonoluminescence.

The Electric Sun On Flat Earth! (Mirror):

The Plasma Cosmos:

Plasma Ball Sun Surface ...or a Dandelion:

The Electric Sun

Stellar Electric Light Bodies

“In the incandescent Sun, is the only idea that The Earth knows.The idea of the apple of Earth is in the Sun, likewise the wood of the tree and the violet in the meadow. Likewise, the cool Earth is there with its rivers and mountains. All idea is one idea in the light of the Sun. The light of the Sun is never divided into its many seeming separate ideas until it is electrically extended from the Sun and those extensions electrically echoed back to it. The Sun is a crucible which melts all ideas into one, then sets them out into space to cool and separate into many units of that one…all moving extensions of the one still light, as manifested in the white Suns and the black light of their surrounding spaces, are but extensions of one Source”. (Page 52, The Secret of Light)

The evidence proves that the Sun is not the theoretical egghead “nuke furnace” as claimed by academics.

The Sun’s Corona is Millions of degrees according to academic scientists. Do you see just how confused these folks are? There reason for believing this absurdity is they think x-rays from the Sun are generated thermally, which they are not. So-called electrons are accelerated through the Sun’s so-called EM “field” to create so-called “x-rays”. (this is the alternative academic explanation using academic language).

“Scientists today state that the Sun is a gigantic atomic nuclear furnace radiating a tremendous amount of heat to the satellite planets each second. The temperature at its surface is said to be thousands of degrees (5800 K), and the internal temperature (and Corona) are supposedly in the millions of degrees. However, it is unexplainable how superheated gases can act magnetically. For it is an elementary fact of physics that a substance loses its so-called magnetism when heated. Since astronomers have definitely recorded magnetic effects upon the Sun, we have a direct conflict between the Sun’s true nature and the suggested temperature. This conflict only indicates that the Sun is not the superheated mass of gases that scientists think it is, but rather a cool body as Herschel (Viktor Schauberger and Rudolph Steiner) said it was.

Astronomers base their calculations on two assumptions:

First, they assume the Sun is a perfect radiating body; second, and most important, they assume that the Sun is radiating heat! This is because they believe that heat on Earth, as well as heat on other planetary bodies, comes directly from the Sun. People feel the heat when they stand in sunlight, so they say the Sun must be a burning mass radiating that heat. That is like saying a radio transmitter radiates sound waves because when we turn on our radios, we hear sound. But we know that such a transmitter radiates radio waves, and that these waves are turned into sound inside the radio!” (Luis E. Prada) Conversion from one form to another is the key and that is what happens here on Earth as the Sun’s expanding electric light is converted to heat.

Adios Solar Nuclear Furnace

So how can there be the massive Solar magnetic fields observed, in these extreme temperatures, since substances lose their magnetism when heated? The tragically failed, nuclear sun theory, also claims that the core of the Sun is 15,600,00o degrees K, the surface is supposedly 5,800 degrees K and the Corona is over 1 million degrees K and sometimes as hot as 30 million degrees K, if you can stomach that. By what manner does the Sun perform this magic that defies all reason, probability and possibility? Or, could this just be another egghead trick based on the flawed mathematics of bush’s beloved, “nuclear theory of the atom”? The cause lies in the inability of their model to explain anything, therefore ad hoc assumptions must be inserted into their “knowledge” so that these flaws can be kept in the dark and they can pretend to understand their field of so-called study.

“One aspect concerning our Sun and our conception of it does need to be examined, namely the question of temperature. In our understanding of temperature, we generally consider it to be a measure of heat. For most of our customary purposes this is indeed the case. However, when speaking of the temperature of the Sun, for instance, which is supposed to be about 6000 degrees Celsius at the surface and 20,000,000 degrees C at the center, we may no longer be concerned with thermal temperature, but rather with energetic activity, for according to Isaac Asimov:

Temperature here has to be distinguished from heat. The temperature is a measure of kinetic energy of the atoms and particles in the gas, but since the particles are few, the actual heat content per unit of volume is low.

Moreover, if interstellar space is a near absolute vacuum with thermal temperature of -270.15 Celsius, then how does the Sun’s supposed heat ever reach us, since, being able to pass through an extreme vacuum, a denser medium is therefore necessary for the propagation of heat rays or infrared rays?” (pages 77-80, Living Energies, by Callum Coats)

Our Sun’s Electric Vortices

“It happens that the proton-proton chain, very important in the sun, begins with a most improbable event: the collision of two protons resulting in the formation of . . . the heavy isotope of hydrogen called deuterium. Usually the formation of a compound nucleus of two protons simply breaks up into two protons again, rather than ejecting a positron and turning into a deuteron, and very many compound nuclei must form to produce appreciable amounts of deuterium. But even at the high (theorized) temperatures of stellar interiors it is extremely hard for two positively charged nuclei to come together to undergo any kind of reaction. One might not expect nuclear reactions to occur at all in stars.” (Exploration of the Universe, George Ogden Abell, D. Morrison, S.C. Wolff, 5th edition, 1987, p. 520.) (Advanced Atomic Energy Converters)

Our Sun’s Cold Electric Plasma

“In such cases as this, where the general trend of thought in any field is on the wrong track, the reason almost invariably is the uncritical acceptance of some erroneous conclusion or conclusions. As will be brought out in detail in the pages that follow, astronomy has unfortunately been the victim of two particularly far-reaching errors, The latter portion of this volume will examine a wide variety of phenomena in which the true relations have not heretofore been recognized because the general submission to Einstein’s dictum that speeds in excess of that of light are impossible has diverted inquiry into unproductive channels (more dark futile attempts, which benefit the moneymen). The theories applicable to the more familiar astronomical objects that will be discussed in the earlier chapters have been led astray by another erroneous conclusion also imported from the physicists. This costly mistake is the conclusion that the energy production process in the stars is the conversion of hydrogen to helium (the nuclear furnace theory) and successively heavier elements.

Stellar Jets are Evidence of a Star’s Twin Opposing Electrical Vortices

Thus far, the thinking about this subject has been dominated by the physicists “insistence that the most energetic process known to them (nuclear fusion) must necessarily be the process whereby the stars generate their (imagined) energy, regardless of any evidence to the contrary that may exist in other scientific areas.

The Nested Electro-Magnetic Vortices in Spherical Systems: Atoms, Suns and Galaxies

Note the spinning Sacred Geometries which give form to these twins opposing EM Vortex systems.

The most recent change, from the gravitational contraction hypothesis to the hydrogen conversion hypothesis was preceded by a long and acrimonious dispute with the geologists, whose evidence showed that geological history required a great deal more time than was allowed by the gravitational contraction process. Ultimately the physicists had to concede defeat.

Then gravitational contraction was recognized as more potent, and became the physicist’s orthodoxy, defended furiously against attacks by the geologists and others. Now the hydrogen conversion (nuclear furnace theory) process is the canonical view, resting on exactly the same grounds that crumbled in the two previous instances. In each case the contention was that there is no other tenable alternative. But in both of these earlier cases it turned out that there was such an alternative. (Chapter 1, The Universe of Motion)

“A serious objection is that reactions of this kind are reversible and there is no adequate reason why the reaction between helium and the hydrogen isotope H¹ should proceed preferentially in the direction H -> He. The situation with respect to the H² and H³ isotopes is entirely different. These isotopes are unstable under terrestrial or similar conditions and are therefore subject to reactions which convert them into stable isotopes. Such reactions take place spontaneously but can be speeded up by application of additional kinetic energy and if H² or H³> are present in the stars in substantial quantities a process of conversion to Helium 4 could be an important energy source. Available evidence indicates, however, that most of the hydrogen in the stars is in the Helium 1 state, as would be expected from the probable level of magnetic ionization, and Helium 1 is just as stable as Helium.

At a very high temperature the chances of an atomic break-up and rearrangement are improved but this does not necessarily increase the proportion of helium in the final product; on the contrary, we have seen that a greater kinetic energy results in more fragmentation and it therefore favors the smaller unit rather than the larger. Furthermore, an increase in the amount of space displacement (thermal motion) is not conducive to building up time displacement (mass). The two principal processes which have been postulated as stellar energy sources begin with the reactions H¹ + H¹ -> H² and C12 + H¹ -> N13 respectively. These reactions involve combination of stable isotopes to form unstable isotopes and combination of smaller units to form larger units. In both of these respects the direction of the proposed reactions is in direct opposition to the normal probabilities under the prevailing conditions.

Solar Electric Vortices

Visible proof that the Incandescence of our Sun is manufactured in the Upper Atmosphere of the Sun, not in a nuke furnace at its core according to academic guesswork. Note the Dark interior atmosphere below the roiling upper atmosphere interacting with “315 Billion volts” of imploding Electrical Pressure, according to Nikola Tesla. This incandescence does not produce the millions of degree temperatures theorized by academics, because of their dysfunctional understanding of x-ray generation being thermal, instead of it’s true cause, which is electrical.

A second objection to the hypothetical fusion reaction is that it is a “dead end” process, and as such is open to criticism from both the theoretical and the observational standpoints. The Fundamental Postulates definitely require all basic physical processes to be cyclic and any one-way process such as the conversion of stellar hydrogen to helium violates this general principle. Also, if this hypothesis were valid there should be some evidence of the existence of helium-rich structures, representing the later stages of the hypothetical stellar evolution. No such evidence is available”. (The Structure of the Physical Universe, Chapter XXXII)

“We need go no farther than the first deduction that is made from the assumed existence of the hydrogen conversion process to encounter a glaring example of the way in which this pure assumption is allowed to override the astronomical evidence. In application to the question of stellar ages, this hypothetical process leads to the conclusion that the hot, massive stars of the O and B classes are very young, as their output of energy is so enormous that, on the basis of this hypothesis, their supply of fuel cannot last for more than a relatively short time. It then follows that these stars must have been formed relatively recently, and somewhere near their present locations.

No theory that calls for the formation of stars within the galaxies is plausible so long as the theorists are unable to explain how stars can be formed in this kind of an environment. One that, in addition, requires the most massive and most energetic of all stars to be very young, astronomically speaking, converts the implausibility into an absurdity.

On this basis, the globular clusters are the youngest aggregates of matter, and the stars of these clusters are the youngest of all stars. Thus, the astronomers have their age sequence upside down.

The existence of this multitude of commonly recognized contradictions and inconsistencies is a clear indication that there is something radically wrong with the foundations of present-day astronomical theory”. (Chapter 1, The Universe of Motion)

It is claimed by astronomers that the largest and brightest stars are the youngest, because they believe stars require a nuclear fuel, therefore when they are young they are biggest, because they are full of fuel, like a full tank of gas in your car. Then by burning their fuel they get smaller, like less gas in your car’s tank. They start out as large Blue tanks and end up as smaller Red tanks of fuel. This is the exact opposite of the reality by which they operate. The largest typical stars are the adult stars and the smallest are the newborns. They evolve overtime into adult stars as they grow, just like everything else in nature, until they reach their age or temperature limit and explode as supernovas, throwing off rings as they expand, which will birth new astronomical systems in their wake.

The academic obsession with a “fuel” for stars to “burn” is clearly an artifact of the energy baron’s manipulation of academic theory, with the funding, peer selection and tenure processes under their influence or direct control. It profits them greatly for humans to blindly believe that in order to get energy to do our work, we must burn something, which they just happen to own and sell at great cost financially and to our environment as well. Being that their current profits are astronomically higher than any time in recorded history, we see immediately how much they have to lose if mankind frees itself from their lies. Extending the burning concept from their dysfunctional machines to stars insures them that mankind will continue to believe that there is no other way to get our energy in great quantities than by blowing up or burning their fuels. In the darkness of this false theory mankind will believe that even the stars must burn fuel and therefore, this is the very foundation of energy production in nature. However, this is easily proven to be a lie.

“The basic energy production process in this universe we find, is the conversion of rotational motion (mass) to linear motion (energy) at the age and temperature limits of matter. This one process accounts for the entire range of energy generation, from supplying the modest ‘fuel’ requirements of the quiet stars, to providing the enormous energy required for the ejection of a quasar. And it requires no special conditions or unusual circumstances to bring it into operation. All matter eventually arrives at one or the other of these limits”. (Chapter 18, The Universe of Motion)

The big scary nuclear furnace Sun, raging at tens of millions of degrees is just another grandiose absurdity of academic proportions.

“The idea that stellar power is not generated by any of the commonly accepted reaction chains (nuclear furnace theory) has another consequence, namely that our beliefs about stellar ages will be wrong. …Stellar ages are inferred from our beliefs that stars derive their power from converting hydrogen into helium. If our beliefs about this process are erroneous, then stellar ages will have to be revised. Generally, this will mean that what are currently believed to be old stars are actually young, and that the young stars are actually old. Because of the implications of this, our views on the “evolution” of the universe must also change drastically”. (Advanced Atomic Energy Converters)

“It is well to remember for example that the idea of an infinite and basically non-evolving universe had begun to take root long before the observations of uniformity had become available. This was at a time when it was thought that the universe must go on working for ever like some huge powerful perpetual motion machine. Towards the end of the 19th Century, however, this idea had run into difficulties with the empirical second law (theory) of thermodynamics. Thus, it has become increasingly clear that it was a natural and inevitable property of all machines we could study in the terrestrial laboratory that their energy eventually became randomized or degraded into heat. Bit by bit, the energy capable of doing productive work wasted away. The ultimate fate of the world seemed therefore to suffer a ‘heat death’.

Physicists were forced to accept what is the ‘law (theory) of increase of entropy’ (i.e.. the irreversible dissipation of energy) on the largest scale and they became accustomed to the idea of an evolving universe. The ground was thus well prepared for the discovery (theory) of cosmic expansion. It follows then that if the large-scale uniformity referred to above, in space and time, were truly a fundamental fact, we might have to abandon the ‘doppler interpretation’ of cosmological red-shifts and the entropy problem could still be with us. The suspicion would be reinforced that, contrary to local thermodynamic ‘laws’, there exists places in the universe where entropy is reduced (neg-entropy) rather than increased, where dissipated heat energy is somehow collected and converted back into organized motion”. (The Cosmic Serpent, pgs. 18-19)

As we read through this honest confession of two Scottish astronomers above, it is clear that they see at least partially, the problems with the way astronomy proceeded from its inception. The first mistake was to see a galaxy as a man-made machine operating within the confines of the terrestrial environment. Galaxies do not operate like manmade machines, they function according to their twin imploding electrical vortices which gravitate potential energy and radiate kinetic energy. These vortices convert the “potential energy” of “space” into the “kinetic energy” of Suns, which is a cyclical process. The space surrounding the Stars are the Star’s inverse conditions which are constantly flowing back to their centers and radiated outward again perpetually, because this is the nature of the twin opposing electro-magnetic vortices, which give all matter form.

The imaginary unidirectional dissipation of energy into nothingness (heat death) is absurd and is typical of the unidirectional thinking of academicians. Galaxies do not operate in an atmosphere which produces friction, they are in space which does not produce friction. The celestial mechanics there are vastly different than the physical mechanics on the surface of our planet, with its gravity and friction, which produce resistance to our man-made machines. Because academics were “forced to accept” the absurdity of the provably wrong second (so-called) law of thermodynamics as stated above, they extended these false ideas into more bizarre ideas like an imagined “heat death” and universal annihilation (entropy).

Electric Vortices and Sun Spots

This fallacious belief was further extended to an idea of an “evolving universe” and consequently it had to have a beginning with a “huge wank”, otherwise known as the academic big bang theory. Can you see how simple the child like assumptions of academicians are? They start by comparing manmade machines which are totally “unnatural”, to the natural Galaxies of creation. Our man-made machines are in fact working against nature in our terrestrial atmosphere, due to their unnatural backward designs and the limiting conditions they operate within. Galaxies in great contrast are Nature itself and therefore function naturally. Then academicians extend these false ideas further and further away from reality into their dream worlds of analogies where the comparisons made are not even remotely similar to the objects they pretend to study.

Does a galaxy look like a manmade machine to you? If so, I may never be able to reach you with my dissenting assertions. When they state, “The suspicion would be reinforced that, contrary to local thermodynamic laws, there exists places in the universe where entropy is reduced rather than increased, where dissipated heat energy is somehow collected and converted back into organized motion”, they are admitting it, without knowing the answer. There is a cyclical process totally unaccounted for in newton’ fallacious 2nd law (theory) of thermodynamics, which is fully accounted for by the twin opposing north and south polar electro-magnetic vortices which recycle radiated kinetic energy from its “potential form” in nebulous space, back into kinetic energy in the condensed form of incandescent stars, perpetually via implosion.

Galaxies are visibly vortices. Has it never occurred to these academic dummies that vortices suck into themselves (implode) which is a cyclical process as they radiate their wondrous electric light outward? Unfortunately, the very obvious escapes their academic intellects, because they are mentally imprisoned by so-called academic laws which are in fact, dysfunctional theories and not laws at all. The fact that they compare the unnatural manmade machines on Earth to a natural Galaxy in space, reveals instantly, how out of touch academics are with reality. Furthermore, when they say, “there exists places in the universe where entropy is reduced (neg-entropy) rather than increased, where dissipated heat energy is somehow collected and converted back into organized motion. They are treating this anticipated cyclical process as if it is the exception, whereas, this is the fundamental means by which all motions of the universe operate, from the so-called subatomic, to the super galactic. It is not the exception, it is the very foundation of creation in all of its forms.

In the cyclical spiraling nature of eternity there is no need for a single direct line of evolution towards some perfected form from another less perfected form, because the spiral towards evolution is unwound by the spiral of de-evolution. Everything in this Universe is birthed, then it “evolves” to maturity after which it grows old (de-evolves) and dies and is reborn again as something else. Since the Universe was not birthed according to the provably untenable “big bang scenario”, it is not evolving. It would actually be de-evolving according to this failed theory based on a “big bang”, from a state of organized matter and energy (the observable galaxies and stars) into absolute nothingness (entropy). This ugly academic theory of “universal annihilation”, is due to a falsely imagined, “heat death” because of the theories of those scientists who are slaved into the false and discredited, unidirectional thermodynamic “laws” of academic construction.

“Principles outlined in a previous article, Advanced Stellar Propulsion Systems, give us reason to believe that the age of a stellar system will correlate directly with the total mass of that system. A binary star system would be older than a single star. A globular cluster (currently viewed as “very old”) would be regarded as much younger than a spiral arm galaxy. The oldest star systems would be the giant spheroid galaxies like the one in M87.

Mainstream scientists are now beginning to realize that stars may be older than galaxies. (Science News April 15, 1995, Vol. 147, No. 15, p. 230 “Keck finding: Did stars predate galaxies?”) They are also perplexed by evidence that the universe appears to be younger than the oldest stars in the universe. Again, these problems originate largely because of misunderstandings about the true mechanism of stellar power (nuclear furnace fallacy), as well as their belief in the “Big Bang” origin of the universe” (Science News 10/8, 10/22, 10/29 (1994) V146, Nos. 15,17,18, pp. 232-234, 265, 278; 9/9/95 V148. No. 11, p. 166) (Advanced Atomic Energy Converters)

“The ionization level in the chromosphere, corresponds to the thermal ionization which would exist at a temperature of 20,000° to 30,000° K and in order to explain the still stronger ionization in the corona on a thermal basis it would be necessary to assume a temperature in the neighborhood of one million degrees. The observed level of ionization is therefore inconsistent with a thermal origin unless a highly abnormal temperature situation exists in this region and no convincing reason why conditions should be abnormal has ever been discovered. We are thus led to the conclusion that the ionization is not thermal and that it is a product of the cosmic radiation which, according to theory, should be causing just the kind of an effect which we observe. In the light of this explanation the location of the maximum ionization in the outer regions of the corona is to be expected, since the matter in this zone is exposed to the maximum cosmic radiation. As this radiation travels inward, it is gradually attenuated by contacts with the diffuse material in the intervening space and the degree of ionization of the material atoms is reduced accordingly”. (The Structure of the Physical Universe, Chapter XXXVII)

The Electrical Birthing of Stars

“Plasma cosmology easily steps over this line in the sand which the big bang stumbles. Electrical double layers associated with active galaxies and quasars generate copious amounts of x-rays, and they do it ‘the easy way’, by accelerating electrons through an electric field, just like your dentist does. There are no black holes lurking in his x-ray machine”. (The Electric Universe) (Nor, are there any black holes lurking in the real Universe for that matter, eggheads!)

“The conclusions with respect to the origin of the x-rays that are observed in the vicinity of the giant galaxies are also applicable, on a smaller scale, to the production of x-rays in the surroundings of individual stars. These x-rays are believed to originate in the stellar coronas, and it has therefore been concluded that” temperatures of a million to 10-30 million degrees. “228 exist in these coronas. Here, again, the existence of such temperatures is excluded by basic thermal principles. Consequently, the x-rays cannot be produced thermally in these locations. But, as in the galactic situation, the x-ray production is easily explained on the basis of leakage of intermediate speed matter from the interiors of the stars, followed by a return to the low speed range in the coronas (which are Scalar attributes).

In the light of what is known about the fundamentals of heat and temperature, a high temperature in a medium as sparse as that of intergalactic space is impossible. As explained in Volume II, the temperature of a gas is the result of containment. The pressure is a measure of the containment, while the temperature is a measure of the energy imparted to the gas that is subject to pressure. Thus, the temperature, T is a function of the pressure, P. For a given volume, V, of “ideal gas,” the two quantities are directly proportional, as indicated by the general gas law, PV = RT, where R is the gas constant. If the pressure is very low, as in the near vacuum of intergalactic or interstellar space, the temperature is likewise very low. It is measured in degrees, not in millions of degrees. It is often asserted that portions of the gas in the vicinity of hot stars (coronas) or active galaxies are “heated by radiation” (the theoretical synchrotron process). But radiation does not repeal the gas laws”. (Chapter 19, The Universe of Motion)

So, we can know say “sayonara” to the luminous crown of the common astronomical egghead, the “1 million to 30 million degree” solar Corona.

“Funny thing about that term “heat” – when relating it to plasmas and things in space, it’s not necessarily describing ‘high temperature’ (though often termed x million degrees) so much as describing ‘high energy’. Heat as we generally know it is caused by the movement of particles, that is, the more they move, the ‘hotter’ the substance they make up becomes. But plasmas in space are (mostly) so diffuse that to think of them as physically ‘hot’ may be a misdirection of thought, rather they are physically ‘energetic’, that is their particles are vibrating so hard or moving so fast that they show lots of ‘temperature’ without the whole medium ‘feeling’ hot, so to speak”.

The age old idea that the heat from the Sun “travels” through the immense cold of space to heat our planet is false, because once again, it is based on appearances. As can be seen above, heat traveling through the near freezing, near vacuum of space is impossible. The condition of the Sun’s positive electrical polarity is repeated on the side of the Earth which faces the Sun. The negative radiating vortices of electrical force spiraling from the Sun (anode) reach “the inertial plane of equal pressures between the Earth and the Sun where there is a reversal of the reproduction of an expanding counterpart into the reproduction of a contracting counterpart”. (The Universal One, Pg. 30)

These negative unwinding vortex waves become positively imploding vortices as they spiral through the electrical pressure gradients and atmospheric lenses of Earth. The wave-fields are compressed and concentrated toward the Earth’s center as they curve inward on their implosive journey through the convex, “lens like” atmospheric and electrical pressure gradients, thereby producing light on the side of the Earth facing the Sun (cathode).

This process produces heat here on our planet as the Actinic Force of the positively imploding currents of electric light react with the negative (grounding) physical matter of our world. A magnifying lens used to start a fire, works upon this principle of bending and compressing wave-fields in this same manner. The night side of Earth is simultaneously discharging these positive Solar vortex currents through the “lens like” atmospheric and electrical pressure gradients via the negative electro-magnetic radiation of heat and light otherwise known as cold and darkness, respectively.

Stellar Temperature Tables According to Flawed Academic Astronomy

Academic Astronomical Tripe:

“Think about this for a moment. How can scientists know how hot a star is, if they have never visited it? Imagine a fire. When you look at the hottest part of the flame (the part closest to the wood) the fire looks blue. As the fire gets further and further from the wood it gets cooler, and the color changes first to yellow, and then to red. Scientists know that a blue star must be a very hot star, while a yellow star is a medium hot star, and a red star is a cool star”. (Stars)

The above statement should be stated, “scientists assume” that the stars colors are indicative of their variations in the “extreme, million degree plus temperature ranges” attributed to them, because they do not “know”, they are guessing with their theory. Once again, these flawed “scientific” ideas, are based entirely on “appearances” (sensory based information) and not on “Knowing” (Mind – Self Knowledge). They are not even “reasoning” correctly with their flawed analogy, which demonstrates the exact opposite of their theory. The “nuclear fire” gets hotter, not cooler, high up in the Corona, it’s claimed to be a million to 30 million degrees hotter than the surface, according to this cruddy scholastic nonsense.

These academicians are describing Stars as if they were made of burning wood, as it is seen in the atmosphere of our Earth as an analogy. I am pretty sure we’ll all agree the Stars are not made of wood any more than the Moon is made of cheese.

The color classifications attributed to Stars and their imagined “millions of degrees” temperatures are actually varying degrees of electrified conditions of the Stars according to their mixture of gases and metals, their sizes, the variations in the electrical pressure conditions of the wave-fields they center and the strength of the electro-magnetic Birkeland currents (sympathetic streams) flowing through these wave-fields, as they interact with the other Stellar wave-fields which are spiraling in massive vortices around the Galactic Center.

The temperatures in the millions of degrees associated with this theory have no basis at all in reality, they are a guess based on “black body radiation theory”, which has been tagged onto “star temperature theory”, much in the same way that the “theoretical electron of mathematical imagining” was tagged onto the Mendeleev periodical table, purely out of convenience, as an easy way to “explain something” , which has no actual basis in reality. The electrons created by mankind are not remotely related to the electrons of the periodical table, they are two entirely different creatures. One is real and is used daily by humans, the other is a theoretical myth, which lets physicists pretend like they have a theory.

These imagined temperatures are the result of astronomers clinging to physicists with their “nuclear theory of the atom” and the “nuclear furnace theory” of stellar energy production as a way to explain variations in the magnitudes and appearances of the stellar light they view with their limited sensory based gear (telescopes), when they peer out at the fiery globes and galactic vortices populating our Universe.

Luminosity and Temperature evaluations ignore the Electric Star Hypothesis

This academic guess is based on the appearances of light and they do not even “know” what light is, whether particle or wave, so once again, how are we to trust them? I think we can safely disregard the academic color scheme of the extreme temperatures attributed to Stars, because it is based upon the appearance of light, which is a simulation, not its cause. The comparison of burning objects here in our atmosphere to the electrical motions of incandescent stars in cold dark space, is of course imbecilic, there is absolutely no relationship between the two. So, here again academicians reveal just how far they are removed from the very reality which they are supposed to be studying for the benefit of mankind.

The same can be said for the “gravity” of a Star or Galaxy bending light from other Stars or Galaxies, according to Einstein’s four dimensional, curved space and time fantasy. “Magnetism is known to interact with light, as demonstrated by the Zeeman and Faraday effects. The starlight refraction has no relation to, nor interaction with, the gravitational field of the Sun, or warped space systems” according to Einstein’s imagination. Refraction of light waves due to a Star or Galaxy’s Electro-Magnetic, “lens like”, plasma and atmospheric wave-fields is the cause, not the imaginary text book version, hawking Einstein’s claim that: gravity lines of force, “curve space” around heavenly bodies and drag the imaginary “photon wave trains” with them.

Time as used by mankind is not another dimension according to Einstein’s crazy notion of four-dimensional space and time. Time as used by mankind, records the motions of material objects within the three dimensions of space we are accustomed to measuring the Universe with. It is not a separate dimension.

G.R.: Einstein’s “goofy religion” of 4-dimensional space time imprisonment:

“Concentrated spheres, such as Earth and Sun, are surrounded by layers of light of equal pressures. Clouds float around the Earth in them. The reason they float in curves parallel to the Earth is because of these spherical equipotential planes of pressures which curve as the Earth curves. Curved pressures of light act as lenses to multiply and divide light radially. (Spiraling) Light rays which pass through curved planes concentrate to a point when projected through light lenses of space in the convex direction and decentrate when they pass through the concave direction.” (The Secret of Light, Pg. 244)

“To say that in the presence of large bodies space ‘becomes’ curved, is equivalent to stating that something can act on nothing. I for one refuse to subscribe to such a view”. (Nikola Tesla, New York Herald Tribune, 9/11/32)

Al’s Supercalafragilistic Theory

Since space has no mass according to the “scholars”, how can gravity “pull” on it and bend it in accordance with Al’s Supercalafragilistic theory? Mass determines gravity according to academic theory. This bizarre idea came from a guy who could not tie his own shoe laces. Now do you get it? Empty space does not curve, in our measurements of it. The three-dimensional Euclidean Space we are accustomed to using in our physical observation and descriptions of the Universe as a reference system, is the direct measure of distance between physical objects, which is measured in straight lines, not curved ones and is described within the x, y and z coordinates of the academically sanctified Cartesian System. It is therefore impossible for space to curve according to the fundamental academic definition of its measure. Since Space is vacuous according to academic sources, there would be nothing to create curves with, in their silly academic theory.” -- http://www.feandft.com/the-electric-sun/

Book Description

“Today many scientists recognize plasma as the key element to understanding new observations in near-Earth, interplanetary, interstellar, and intergalactic space; in stars, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies, and throughout the observable universe. Physics of the Plasma Universe, 2nd Edition is an update of observations made across the entire cosmic electromagnetic spectrum over the two decades since the publication of the first edition. It addresses paradigm changing discoveries made by telescopes, planetary probes, satellites, and radio and space telescopes. The contents are the result of the author's 37 years research at Livermore and Los Alamos National Laboratories, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

This book covers topics such as the large-scale structure and the filamentary universe; the formation of magnetic fields and galaxies, active galactic nuclei and quasars, the origin and abundance of light elements, star formation and the evolution of solar systems, and cosmic rays. Chapters 8 and 9 are based on the research of Professor Gerrit Verschuur, and reinvestigation of the manifestation of interstellar neutral hydrogen filaments from radio astronomical observations are given. Using data from the Green Bank 100-m telescope (GBT) of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), detailed information is presented for a non-cosmological origin for the cosmic microwave background quadruple moment.” -- Amazon Book review

Plasma in Physics

“Plasma (from Ancient Greek meaning 'moldable substance') is one of the four fundamental states of matter, and was first described by chemist Irving Langmuir in the 1920s. It consists of a gas of ions, atoms which have some of their orbital electrons removed, and free electrons. Plasma can be artificially generated by heating or subjecting a neutral gas to a strong electromagnetic field to the point where an ionized gaseous substance becomes increasingly electrically conductive. The resulting charged ions and electrons become influenced by long-range electromagnetic fields, making the plasma dynamics more sensitive to these fields than a neutral gas.” --Wikipedia

Plasma Cosmology

“Plasma cosmology is a non-standard cosmology whose central postulate is that the dynamics of ionized gases and plasmas play important, if not dominant, roles in the physics of the universe beyond the Solar System. In contrast, the current observations and models of cosmologists and astrophysicists explain the formation, development, and evolution of astronomical bodies and large-scale structures in the universe as influenced by gravity (including its formulation in Einstein's theory of general relativity) and baryonic physics.

Some theoretical concepts about plasma cosmology originated with Hannes Alfvén, who tentatively proposed the use of plasma scaling to extrapolate the results of laboratory experiments and plasma physics observations and scale them over many orders of magnitude up to the largest observable objects in the universe (see box.

Cosmologists and astrophysicists who have evaluated plasma cosmology reject it because it does not match the observations of astrophysical phenomena as well as current cosmological theory. Very few papers supporting plasma cosmology have appeared in the literature since the mid-1990s.

The term plasma universe is sometimes used as a synonym for Plasma Cosmology, as an alternative description of the plasma in the universe.”

--Wikipedia

The Electric Sun Model: Wal Thornhill: SAFIRE and the Future of Science Part 1

What powers the Sun? The answer seems obvious. It must be nuclear energy to allow the Sun to shine for billions of years. But that assumes, as Sir Arthur Eddington did in the early 20th century, that stars are isolated objects in space, and because it had been found that the fusion of two hydrogen nuclei produced the most energy and hydrogen dominates the sun's outer atmosphere, Eddington assumed that stars are a gravitating ball of hydrogen gas.

Wal Thornhill: SAFIRE and the Future of Science, Part One | Space News:

The astronomer George Gamow wrote of Eddington, "he was able to find out everything about the interior of the Sun and other stars without leaving his comfortable study at Cambridge University.

Eddington famously used to say, "It should not be too difficult to understand such a simple thing as a star." The misguided certainty of mathematical theorists becomes conspicuous as Gamow continues, "...astronomers can tell the temperature of the central regions of the Sun and of the many stars within a few percentage points and be quite sure about the figures they quote." So scientists have labored ever since, using Eddington's simplistic model, in an attempt to produce nuclear energy "like the Sun" although the model doesn't predict any of the complex features seen on or above the Sun.

The certainty attached to mathematical models is entirely misplaced if the physical model is incorrect. Unbeknownst to the general public and to many scientists, an alternative electric Sun model was proposed in 1979 by an engineer. It has the critical longevity of all electric lights, it is plugged into a Galactic circuit and galactic circuits are the basis of plasma cosmology which is ignored by astrophysicists but was developed by experimental scientists and engineers in the 20th century and it has proven to be predictive, quite unlike mathematical Big Bang cosmology. Only in the last few years have the circumstances arisen to enable the Electric Sun model to be tested. Called the SAFIRE project, the cutting-edge engineering firm Aurtas international incorporated was contacted by the International Science Foundation to experimentally test the Electric Sun model. Aurtas International Incorporated is an independent body which has no affiliation with the Electric Universe or The Thunderbolts Project. Recently, the SAFIRE team shared an extraordinary update on their results to date.

Today, in part 1 of this two-part presentation, physicist Wal Thornhill discusses the SAFIRE experiment, its results and its promise for the future. History was made on July 7th at the University of Bath Electric Universe Conference in the UK, when the 2019 SAFIRE project update announced the success of the SAFIRE experiment at the end of phase 2. On September 2nd, it was shared publicly on The Thunderbolts website.

SAFIRE, the cryptic acronym means stellar atmospheric function in regulation experiment. In plain language, it is the Electric Sun experiment which aimed to reproduce in a lab on earth the plasma features of the Sun, from the photosphere outward into space, to do so reproducibly and to show that it was self-regulating. The aim was to let nature show us, if the model was correct, how and why stars like the Sunshine so steadily. It followed the example of an early pioneer of the Electric Universe, the Norwegian scientist Kristian Birkeland with his terella, or little Earth experiment which he performed at the end of the 19th century. Birkeland demonstrated Auroras using an electric discharge to a magnetized sphere enclosed in a vacuum chamber. Amongst other things, he predicted an electrical connection between the Earth and the Sun, composed of electrons and flying ions of all kinds. In modern terms, he had predicted the solar wind. The concept of electricity in space was clearly not taboo in the 19th century. Montgomery Childs who is president and founder of Aurtas international and manager of the SAFIRE project, together with the physicist Dr. Michael Clarage, provided the experiment update.

Monty summed up with these words, "In all our experiments and discoveries we have found no disparities with the Electric Sun model. We believe the SAFIRE experiment validates and supports the Electric Sun model." The mind-blowing consequences of these words may not be immediately apparent. The SAFIRE experiment was an independent audit of the Electric Sun model by a Canadian engineering company Aurtas international with an interest in solar energy. The project was funded by the International Science Foundation, ISF, whose mission states that it, "was established to support promising new research in the sciences, placing a spotlight on innovative ideas that have met initial scientific tests but lacked recognition or funding. The ISF places its highest value on prospects for far-reaching discovery." These goals are sadly lacking in mainstream science where experts are far too quick to defend the status quo and declare unfamiliar proposals impossible.

At risk was the life's work of a number of scholars who are responsible for the Electric Sun model. Such risk-taking is not something seen in today's inventive science, where model failures are everyday occurrences but rarely seriously acted upon. Generally, they are dismissed by qualifiers such as "the phenomenon is not fully understood" which are weasel words for "send more funding to continue searching for imaginary particles and forces we may invent so as to save appearances and per chance to score a Nobel Prize." This shows that extraordinary disproof is required for modern institutionalized science. The SAFIRE results now proves, cosmologists and particle physicists don't understand stars! Eddington's complicated untestable century-old model is wrong, we don't understand the universe at any level from the subatomic to the Galactic and everything in between. Some background to the electric model is necessary here.

Aurtas international had developed a new solar panel microfilament technology and was investigating new energy systems. Monty first called me in Australia, in 2011, to find out if I could help him with his research, since he had looked at the Electric Sun model and for the first time in his extensive engineering experience he could, in his words, find no disparities. That is, no inconsistencies when he compared it to the standard solar model. So I introduced Monty to my Thunderbolts partner in the US, David Talbott who persuaded him to write a paper addressing his stated concern that, if after 14 years of our Electric Universe collaboration we don't test the Electric Sun model, we may find ourselves in the same place in another 14 years. So in January 7th, 2012, Monty presented an experimental test of the Electric Sun at the annual Electric Universe conference in Las Vegas.

An engineer from Flagstaff, Arizona, Ralph Juergens had his well-researched Electric Sun model published in 1979 under the headline: Stellar Thermonuclear Energy, a False Trail? Shortly after his untimely death his friend and colleague Dr. Earl Milton, associate professor of physics at the University of Lethbridge in Canada, edited Juergens' unpublished material. Both Ralph and Earl, like many others, had been inspired by Immanuel Velikovsky's 1950 challenge to astronomers in his best-selling book "Worlds in Collision". It demanded critical attention to dramatic early global stories of an incandescent cometary Venus, and battles between nine planets hurling Thunderbolts of the Gods which raised fundamental questions about recent electrical activity and orbital instabilities in the solar system.

That was the gauntlet Velikovsky threw down at astronomers. Electricity plays a role in celestial dynamics. Critical support for this foundational challenge to gravitational cosmology came at a historic meeting in Portland, Oregon in 2000, where the leading expert in high-energy plasma discharge phenomena, Anthony Peratt, matched the various worldwide petroglyph representations of the cosmic Thunderbolt with the complex forms of plasma instabilities he had documented using the high-energy z-pinch facility at Los Alamos National Laboratories. He wrote later of the "uncanny accuracy of mythology originating in prehistory that precedes by millennia what is discovered in high-energy density plasma experiments today." It explained why our prehistoric forebears around the world had laboriously chiseled the same strange-looking stick figures and concentric circles into hard rock. Whatever they were depicting must have been seen in the sky and held the greatest importance for them. T

he echoes of their existential doomsday fears from that time, still reverberate in us today. Velikovsky's research should not have been dismissed on the mere authoritative pronouncement that it had disobeyed Newton's law of gravity. Neither Newton nor anyone after him has explained the force of gravity. So it was that Velikovsky alone predicted before the Space Age; the extreme temperature of Venus, the remanent magnetism in the Moon rocks returned by the Apollo missions, and electrically generated radio noises from Jupiter. The last prediction drew Einstein's attention, but astronomers showed they learn nothing from history. As the noted astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle wrote in his book "Home Is Where the Wind Blows, “Velikovsky’s book caused a sensation both with the public and among astronomers, the latter becoming stirred to near violent displays of outrage.

Such eminent figures as Harlow Shapley were heavily involved. It could be said that Shapley became angry even to the point of incoherence." They set up a metaphorical modern-day book burning by forcing the textbook publisher Macmillan to cease publishing their best-seller and hand it to Doubleday. Astronomy is still ruled by its fearful high priests. Hoyle seemed to intuit the answer, could it be that somewhere in the shadows there is a past history that it is inadmissible to discuss? So I'm pleased that, inspired by Velikovsky's leading research into the recent catastrophic history of the Earth and humanity, the Electric Universe has an unparalleled record of successful predictions in the Space Age and is freeing astronomy from its misunderstood past. In 1977, Juergens wrote, "One would think that the sheer weight of Space Age discoveries -- most of them pointing to an Electric Universe in the Velikovskian mode -- might have rallied at least a few professionals. But strangely enough, this has not happened. And it is left to us who might rather be bystanders to take up the study."

Earlier, in 1973, Juergens wrote, "As I pursued the phenomenology of electric discharges, it gradually dawned on me that, structurally, the atmosphere of the Sun bears a striking resemblance to the low-pressure type of electric discharge known as the glow discharge..." Of course, this questions the Sun's internal thermonuclear energy source. Juergens stated the obvious, the modern astrophysical concept that describes the Sun's energy to thermonuclear reactions deep in the solar interior, is contradicted by nearly every observable aspect of the Sun. He opened up another major front in the battle for recognition and acceptance, this time with particle physicists. Only now, it seems it's time for change, with experts declaring a crisis in physics. But the experts don't know where to turn. Their training gives them no historical perspective beyond the October 1927, 5th Solvay international conference in Brussels, where the world's most notable physicists met to discuss the newly formulated quantum theory, which to this day no one understands. That is inexcusable.

The Electric Sun Model: Wal Thornhill: SAFIRE and the Future of Science Part 2

For the first time, an independent experiment has been conducted to audit the Electric Sun model, first proposed by the engineer Ralph Juergens in the 1970s. At the recent University of Bath Electric Universe conference in the UK, SAFIRE's principal scientist and chief engineer Montgomery Childs said of SAFIRE's results; in all our experiments and discoveries, we have found no disparities with the Electric Sun model. We believe the SAFIRE experiment validates and supports the Electric Sun model. Childs is president and founder of the engineering firm Aurtas International Incorporated, which was contacted by the International Science Foundation to experimentally test the Electric Sun.

Wal Thornhill: SAFIRE and the Future of Science, Part Two | Space News:

As noted previously, Aurtas International Inc. is an independent body which has no affiliation with the Electric Universe or The Thunderbolts Project. In this episode, Thornhill continues with his thoughts on some of the most stunning SAFIRE results to date. This famous photo of settled science will be recognized in future as the moment we stopped doing physics in the 20th century. Quantum theory discarded the physics principle of cause followed by effect.

Einstein didn't like it but he had already done the fatal damage. He isolated his arbitrary inertial observers from the rest of the universe, discarded the absolute standards of length and time, invented an imaginary proper clock, which doesn't exist, removed the ether, and the effect of gravity became an illusion, all unforgiveable nonsense to the great physicists of the past. We were propelled back almost 2,000 years to the Greek Ptolemaic era, when geometric symmetry and mathematical beauty dictated that endless ad-hoc epicycles be added to perfect circular planetary orbits in order to match appearances. That dogma lasted for over 1500 years.

How long will we allow relativity dogma and its taboos to persist? It should be no surprise that since that conference, science has failed to produce fundamental breakthroughs, anything like the 19th century, when some of the finest experimental physicists: Weber, Ampere, Gauss, Faraday, were discovering the secrets of electricity and magnetism. For example, Wilhelm Weber produced an electrodynamic orbital model of the atom in the 1870s, 40 years before it was experimentally discovered by Ernest Rutherford. Weber's electrodynamic law will form the foundation of future physics. The Electric Universe follows the lead of those experimenting electrical pioneers. The SAFIRE project shows our century-old understanding of stars, and therefore the universe, is fundamentally wrong. There is no mention of electricity in space in any textbook on astronomy or cosmology. The Electric Sun model accepts and extends electrical Plasma Cosmology, the only experimentally tested and predictive cosmology today.

The Nobel-Prize-winning plasma physicist Hannes Alfven developed it based on a universal network of Birkeland current filaments connecting and driving the rotation of galaxies, which matches modern observations. 50 years ago, he predicted a crisis in astrophysics because theorists chose to misunderstand his pioneering research in Plasma Physics. The SAFIRE project proves he was right. Galaxies are an electrically powered phenomenon, and electric stars light their spiral circuits. It shows we have wasted more than 60 years trying to produce energy "like the Sun," based on the unshakable belief that stars are isolated thermonuclear- powered campfires in the sky. The SAFIRE project exposes the complicated untestable life-and-death story of thermonuclear stars as fictional. Plasma Cosmology has a long history of peer-reviewed literature in the nuclear and plasma sciences society of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the IEEE. The dysfunction of modern institutionalized science is epitomized by the absence of astronomers at the IEEE conferences. In my experience, there was one notable exception, the radio astronomer Gerrit Verschuur who used his expertise to map local interstellar Birkeland currents.

He wrote, "The role of large-scale currents may be far more important in defining interstellar structure than has generally been recognized within the astronomical community." Plasma Cosmology supports the Electric Sun model in another crucial aspect. It successfully predicted that stars are formed by powerful electromagnetic pinches strung along Birkeland current filaments inside molecular clouds. The electrical formation easily accounts for the observed but unexplained flickering of newborn stars, and witnessed in SAFIRE. The electromagnetic accretion process is called Marklund convection, which deposits heavy elements at the cool center of the star, and hydrogen and helium in the outermost atmosphere. There is no thermonuclear core in a star. Of course, the evidence has always been plain to see in the fact that sunspots are dark and cool compared to the surrounding bright photosphere. Astrophysics and particle physics are the two pillars of cosmology. The SAFIRE project knocks down both pillars.

The two disciplines have fed off each other's misinformation for decades giving birth to futile and hugely expensive projects; fusion power unlike the Sun, the Large Hadron Collider in a futile attempt to explain mass independent of the matter exhibiting mass, and the baseless quest for imaginary dark matter and dark energy. As one theoretical physicist admitted, we gratuitously blow the public's mind with our crazy ideas. As for the Big Bang, it is plainly unscientific. There is no idea how matter is constructed, let alone created, which defies a principle of physics. And thanks to Einstein, mass and energy are physically undefinable, and we have no physical idea how gravity works. Einstein's universal speed limit of light is applied to the electric force and gravity, despite the inverse square law applying to them, both being independent of time. Introducing a speed of light delay renders orbital systems like those in the atom and the solar system incoherent and unstable.

This also reveals that gravitational wave detectors are not detecting gravity signals because their coincident detection assumes gravity operates at the speed of light. As for super-collapsed gravitational objects like black holes and neutron stars, Plasma Cosmology explains in detail the phenomena associated with them, both by theory and experiment, and has no need of them. The SAFIRE project exposes the misbegotten taboo by fusion researchers against low energy transmutation and energy production. That has held up progress in nuclear power for more than 60 years. In 1979, Juergens asked, "Could it be that the search for thermonuclear energy is a false trail that has been followed all these years with no real hope of success?

If the Sun and the stars indeed succeed in fusing lighter elements to form heavier ones, are the relevant activities carried out more or less in plain sight -- in their atmospheres?" Supporting evidence has since been found of an anti- correlation between sunspot number, a photospheric effect, and neutrino count from the Sun. In about the same year, 1979, I read the work of a noted French scientist, professor C. Louis Kervran, who in the 1960s published important research demonstrating low-energy biological transmutations of the chemical elements which, surprise, surprise, "...falls outside mainstream physics and is not part of the scientific discourse..." according to Wikipedia. However, the SAFIRE project is now verifying low-energy nuclear transmutations.

In 1981, I read a small pamphlet titled 'Electron Structure' by Ralph Sansbury, an independent researcher from New York. He proposed an orbital model of the electron which, when applied to nucleons, provides a simple alternative model of nuclear reactions involving resonant catalytic nuclear chemistry at low energies. It provided a real physical basis for understanding quantum mechanics. It shows, the picture of fusion requiring high-energy particle collisions to overcome a high nuclear Coulomb barrier is too restrictive. Weber's electrodynamics shows a short-range resonant attraction between two like-charged particles, such as two atomic nuclei. With this in mind, I spoke to Monty regularly in the design stage about the requirements for the experimental star and the detection of elemental transmutation. My friend and Thunderbolts colleague, Professor Donald Scott also extended Juergens' Electric Sun model by recognizing the PNP transistor action of the anode tufts or photospheric granulations, which was successfully produced in phase one of SAFIRE's proof of concept. This mechanism was important in the model to steady the radiant output of the Sun, while in X-rays the Sun is a variable star. The steadiness of starshine from billions of stars is one of the disparities of the standard thermonuclear model. Don also provided electrical engineering advice in the construction phase. Don's most recent contribution to understanding the electromagnetic structure of Birkeland current filaments, promises a deeper understanding of the connection between an electric star and its interstellar circuit, as well as many mysterious phenomena in deep space and within the solar system.

The Thunderbolts team are grateful to Monty and a remarkable dedicated team who successfully designed and built the historic experiment, then devised and performed the SAFIRE experiments employing the latest Design Of Experiments methodology to independently test the Electric Sun model. Their professional investigation and results change everything we thought we knew about our place in the universe. That, I hopefully predict, will have a beneficial effect on all of us. It is a far more inclusive, coherent and hopeful, big picture than we have ever had. Best of all, responses show, it inspires people and just makes sense.

VIDEO PROOF The Moon, Stars + Planet X Are MUCH CLOSER Than You Were Told!! | Fe PROOF 15 pt1:

PROOF Stars ARE NOT What You Were Told!! + They ARE NOT Trillions Of Miles Away!! | FE PROOF 15 pt2:

Stars ARE NOT Distant Suns!! They ACTUALLY ...😮!! | THINK QUICK ep23

Scientist CREATE Star In Water Using Sound Waves!! PROOF of Waters Above? | FE ADVANCED ep24: