Home   Contact   LinksBookmark this site   

        History I
        History II
        Technical I
        Technical II

   The Electric Universe

   Science and Philosophy    

   Ancient Testimony

   Cutting Edge

   The Way Forward

   Latest News


Some of the implications of Plasma Cosmology    
Shift happens!    

It seems a perspective shift may be required before the paradigm can do likewise.

From a conventional perspective, planets and stars are seen as tiny dots of matter punctuating the vast 'emptiness' of space. In this dubious model gravity and inertia dominate, albeit with a little magnetism stirred into the equations now and again.

Plasma Cosmology turns this perspective on its head.

In reality 'empty' space is actually a vast sea of Plasma, and dominated by electromagnetic forces. The tiny dots of matter are formed by the Z-pinch effect (see Technical I), and surrounded by protective sheathes or Double Layers (again, see Technical I).

"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents."
Hannes Alfvén

Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over vast distances. The currents have a tendency to pinch into filaments which give rise to cellular structures. These are separated by capacitor-like double layers, producing plasma phenomena which are characterized by conditions of non-isotropy, discontinuity and inhomogeneity.

Galaxies are thus expected to lie like pearl beads on a filamentary necklace, as is observed.

  The filamentary universe
Radio Astronomy puts the universe in a new light    

Mysterious Circular Radio Objects — could they be Plasmoids? A new set of precision distance measurements made with an international collection of radio telescopes have greatly increased the likelihood that theorists need to revise the "standard model" that describes the fundamental nature of the Universe.

Full paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.14805.pdf

"We have found an unexpected class of astronomical objects which have not previously been reported, in the Evolutionary Map of the Universe Pilot survey, using the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder telescope. The objects appear in radio images as circular edgebrightened discs about one arcmin diameter, and do not seem to correspond to any known type of object…"

  "Radio telescopes shed new light on the universe - an electic light!" Anon
EM versus Gravity    

Contrast the plasma model, capable of being reproduced in straightforward simulations, with the Nebular hypothesis — the idea that vast clouds of dust produced by the BB eventually accreted to form planets and stars. The latter relies almost entirely on gravity, and that most famous of Free Variables — Time. It ignores the existence of plasma and its electrodynamic properties!

Gravitational forces are only attractive, whereas electromagnetic forces are both attractive and repulsive, and 10^39 stronger! They both vary inversely with the square of the distance.

EM forces are known to produce the spheroid, toroid, and spiral structures that we witness throughout the universe. Gravity is NOT the only force at work.

Misconception #1

"Sure, the electric force is much stronger than gravity at the sub-atomic level, but at the macrocosmic level gravity is incomparably more powerful than electricity.”

Martin Rees compares the electrostatic forces between two submicroscopic charged particles with the force of gravitational attraction between two Jupiter-sized masses and makes the statement above. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! By this method we could say: “Compare the power of the water coming over Niagara Falls with the power emitted by the average incandescent flashlight bulb – see – falling water is much more powerful than electricity.” Such incompatible comparisons defy clarification.

Don Scott, retired professor of Electrical Engineering, adds the following:

"This assertion is like saying gravity affects elephants more than microbes. It is simply invalid. “For two protons, the electrostatic force of repulsion between them is 1.2x10^36 times the force of their gravitational attraction. The electrostatic repulsion between two electrons is 4.2x10^42 times their gravitational attraction. For one proton and one electron, the electrostatic force of attraction between them is 2.2x10^39 times the force of their gravitational attraction.”
The Electric Sky (TES)

  Spiral galaxy
'Gravitational Lensing' or simple Refraction?    

Light appears to bend around large objects in space. Proponents of gravitational cosmology are quick to interpret this to fit their cherished theory - that of mass bending space and time. They even invoke mysterious dark matter on occasion, but it turns out there is a more simple and verifiable explanation at hand.

Ranitesh Gupta is a professor of Electrical Engineering & Technology at Lucknow university, India. He explains it in terms of refraction. See his paper here.

From the conclusion:

"It is suggested that Gravitation is only between material bodies and that the zero-rest mass photon is unaffected by gravity. The alternative novel approach to explain phenomena such as bending of light near a star and gravitational red/blue shift is based on refraction phenomenon of optics. Bending of light is due to bending of ray due to refraction within the star’s atmosphere. The red/blue shift is due to optical-phenomenon of change of wavelength (frequency remaining same) due to change in velocity of light in the atmospheric medium. Other aspects such as blackhole and gravitational-lensing are also re-examined in the new perspective of refraction phenomenon. Interesting predictions are also made. In fact many of the general-relativity-tests are explained without general-relativity on the basis of refraction. The new approach could have important bearing on understanding of space-time, gravity and cosmology."

The straightforward idea that refraction causes the lensing effect attributed to General Relativity has also been proposed by Dr. Edward Dowdye, a physicist and laser optics engineer formerly with the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. He has derived a mathematical solution for lensing using refraction, and presented his findings at the EU 2012 conference. Paper: Gravitational Lensing in Empty Vacuum Space Does NOT Take Place

Dr. Dowdye points to the fact that observations of solar lensing are in the plasma ionized atmosphere of the Sun, as predicted by refraction, and not at varying elevations from the mass of the Sun, as predicted for gravitational lensing. He also highlights the lack of gravitational lensing observed in the stars rapidly orbiting the Milky Way's galactic center. YouTube - The Failed Attempts to Detect Macro Lensing

"Evidence of gravitational light bending at the site of Sagittarius A*, as is predicted by the light bending rule of General Relativity, is yet to be observed."
Dr. Edward Dowdye

Schoolboys the world over know that if you put a stick in water it will appear to bend as a result of refraction. We also know that the atmosphere of planets and stars is more dense than the space between them. In other words, why resort to complicated mathematics and esoteric hypotheses when simplicity will suffice? KISS (keep it simple, stupid) is the expression that springs to mind.


Professor Gupta


"Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity." Occam's razor


Dr. Dowdye

Matters of no little importance    

Standard scientific texts focus on just three states of matter — solids, liquids, and gases. This is no small omission. Not only should Plasma be added to this list, but it should take first place, not least because of the fact that it constitutes 99% of the known Universe! Space travel has confirmed this fact. It is misleading to describe plasma as an ionized gas when it is in fact a state in its own right.

Given the dominance of Plasma in the universe, it seems more sensible to consider solids as cooled Plasma (Or matter with energy removed), as opposed to highly energised or heated matter.

Moreover, because of the ability of Plasma to interact with electromagnetic forces, it is capable of forming far more complex structures than those seen in solids, liquids, or gases.

Plasma is for everyone as Anthony Perratt, a leading contemporary astrophysicist, is wont to say.


“[T]he professional tends to interpret the pictures by using the theory he was taught while the amateur tries to use the picture to arrive at a theory.” Halton Arp, Seeing Red

Houston, we have a problem!    

Within the limited confines of our own backyard, the Solar System, existing gravitational models seem to be holding-up. We have succeeded in sending probes to neighbouring planets and, despite the crashes and anomalous accelerations that have afflicted many space programs, the Huygens mission recently scored a spectacular success — landing on Titan, a moon of Saturn, despite unexpected atmospheric conditions.

It should be noted, however, that g models begin to break down when we look further a field. Gravity, of course, is generally described as a property of mass. The trouble is that we have not discovered enough mass in our own galaxy, The Milky Way, to account for its fortunate tendency not to disintegrate.

The existence of mysterious Dark Matter is hypothesised to account for this shortfall in mass, but it is yet to be discovered despite extensive searches. Its existence is only inferred on the basis that g models 'must be' correct. The alternatives raise too many uncomfortable questions!

Furthermore, Dark Matter is no small kludge factor — it is alleged to account for about 80% of the universe, but accounts vary from one moment to the next. This has lead to further problems in relation to expansion models, and another hypothetical, Dark Energy, has been invented to overcome these. In summation, Dark Matter and Dark Energy are the blank cheques required to postpone the falsification of bankrupt theories.

Moreover, as per the work of Anthony Peratt, it can be shown that electromagnetic forces are several orders of magnitude greater than gravitational forces in certain types of plasma, and also that electromagnetic forces can have a longer range. On the largest scales, evidence that plasmas exhibit external forces on physical objects such as galaxies is the same as that which has lead standard model researchers to postulate dark matter and dark energy. Need anymore be said?


"It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the universe remain hypothetical." Jim Peebles, Princeton Cosmologist



The space tether experiment    

In 1996, in a joint venture between the US and Italy, a large spherical satellite was deployed from the US space shuttle at the end of a conducting cable (tether) over 12 miles long. The idea was to let the shuttle drag the tether across the Earth's magnetic field, producing one part of a dynamo circuit. The return current, from the shuttle to the payload, would flow via the Earth's ionosphere.

The deployment was almost complete when things went wrong. The tether suddenly broke free, and it took some smart detective work to discover the cause. The nature of the break suggested it was not caused by excessive tension, but that a strong electric current had melted the tether.

  "In the beginning was the Plasma." Hannes Alfvén
As Above ... So Below    

It is often said that there is no reason to believe that the universe knows about us, or that our solar system knows about the universe. In this purely mechanistic view, contradictory evidence is generally explained away as merely coincidental.

Anomalies in CMB measurements seem to suggest that our solar system reacts to conditions outside it, which was not expected, but this situation is dismissed as ... coincidental.

sciencealert.com hint that new physics may be required.

Plasma Cosmology promotes a more holistic view of the universe. This is a profound differentiation, and permits many theories previously excluded in a purely mechanistic gravity-dominated universe. Bodies immersed in plasma are not isolated — they are connected by circuits.

  "When Kepler found his long-cherished belief did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the uncomfortable fact. He preferred the hard truth to his dearest illusions; that is the heart of science." Carl Sagan
Quasars and quasi-science    
Quasars (quasi-stellar radio sources) question Big Bang assumptions. The galaxy below, NGC 7319, is a Seyfert type 2 galaxy. That's a Seyfert galaxy where most of the bright and active nucleus that defines a normal Seyfert is shrouded by heavy dust clouds. The galaxy has a redshift of 0.0225. The white spot is a quasar that has a redshift of 2.114. That's a big problem.    

"...past 90% it [Dark Matter] begins to make observations irrelevant." Halton Arp




"The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend." Novelist, Robertson Davies


These differing redshifts expose the big bang for what it is — quasi-science. One of the two major foundational principles of the big bang hypothesis is that redshift is proportional to distance. That means the bigger the redshift of an object, the farther away it should be. Redshift is also supposed to be a measure of velocity. Again, the bigger the redshift, the faster the object is supposed to be moving away from us. Combined, these two foundational principles give rise to the notion of an expanding universe starting out at the big bang.

In other words, this quasar should be billions of light years farther from us than the galaxy, because its redshift is so much larger, and yet the galaxy is opaque, so the quasar must be near the surface of the dust clouds or even in front of them. This is not the first definitive falsification of the redshift = distance claim, although it is one of the best. Halton Arp has been accumulating discordant redshift evidence since the late 1960's. See also the big bang page.


The Dynamic Universe


The Plasma Universe is an extremely dynamic, quasi Steady-State Universe. It may seem strange to consider Galaxies lasting billions of years as mere transient phenomena, but this is how it is. Planets, Stars and Galaxies are born and die. The universe is cyclical!

In the plasma model, super clusters, clusters and galaxies are formed from magnetically confined plasma vortex filaments. The plasma cosmology approach can easily accommodate large scale structures, and in fact predicts them. Since the plasma approach hypothesises no theoretical starting point, the amount of time necessary for large-scale structures presents no problem for the theory.

  "The universe is an unending transformation in flux whose previous states we are not privileged to know." David Bohm
The Queen of The Sciences    
Cosmology is considered the Queen of the Sciences because it provides the building blocks for most other scientific disciplines. This adds to the inertia against change, as mentioned on the home page. A new approach to cosmology will require a reassessment in most if not all scientific disciplines. See also Skepticism / Paradigm Shifts.