It's not gravity - it's electricity!

[sophia8]

Please, will somebody with the scientific know-how demolish this for me?
www.thunderbolts.info

In the wake of recent discoveries, a new way of seeing the physical universe is emerging. The new vantage point emphasizes the role of electricity in space and shows the negligible contribution of gravity in cosmic events.

Images returned by high-powered telescopes and recent space probes have challenged astronomers’ long-standing assumptions about galaxies and their constituent stars, about the evolution of our solar system, and about the nature and history of Earth.

The new discoveries also suggest that our early ancestors may have witnessed awe inspiring electrical events in the heavens—the source of myths and symbols around the world......
........Today, we are seeing things in space that were never imagined. We detect magnetic fields everywhere, even in the “empty” depths of intergalactic space. Magnetic fields cannot exist without causative electric currents.

The naked electric force is 39 orders of magnitude (a thousand billion billion billion billion times) stronger than gravity. The visible universe is constituted almost entirely of electrically active plasma.

In the twentieth century the pioneers of plasma science inspired a new school of investigation called plasma cosmology. Plasma cosmologists suggest that electricity is the primary force organizing spiral galaxies and the astonishing galactic clusters now seen in deep space.

Plasma cosmology has achieved surprising success in predicting major discoveries of the space age. This new perspective does not require purely theoretical inventions like the Big Bang, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars, or Black Holes.

 

[Schneibster]

Please, will somebody with the scientific know-how demolish this for me?

In the wake of recent discoveries, a new way of seeing the physical universe is emerging. The new vantage point emphasizes the role of electricity in space and shows the negligible contribution of gravity in cosmic events.

Images returned by high-powered telescopes and recent space probes have challenged astronomers’ long-standing assumptions about galaxies and their constituent stars, about the evolution of our solar system, and about the nature and history of Earth.

The new discoveries also suggest that our early ancestors may have witnessed awe inspiring electrical events in the heavens—the source of myths and symbols around the world.

Sure, no problem.

OK, thunderbolts, make with the negative gravity.

There's the problem; electricity comes in negative and positive everywhere. Gravity, on the other hand, just adds up and adds up.

 

[my_wan]

This appears to me to be an inconsistant rehash of of the plasma universe. The basic concepts were were first championed by Hannes Alfven. Although plasma physics and its importance to cosmology is certain this site is hogwash for the sole purpose of selling books. The original book along these lines was The Big Bang Never Happened by Eric Lerner. It has gone through variuous incarnations since. It doesn't even look like the site creator can faithfully represent the books he's selling, much less the underlying physics. For instance here in his add copy for one of the books,

Dr Scott systematically unravels the myths of “Big Bang” cosmology, and he does so without resorting to black holes, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars, magnetic “reconnection,” or any other fictions needed to prop up a failed theory.

Why would he not resort to "magnetic reconnection" when it is fundamental to the physics he's claiming is the answer to everything.

news and views
Unlocking the Mystery of the Northern Light
01/18/2007

The plasma connection to northern lights was established long ago and Nobel Prize for it awarded in 1970.
nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1970/press.html
I'll not waste my time with more....

 

[Blu]

Please, will somebody with the scientific know-how demolish this for me?

Nice simple answer to that one...

How about the fact that you can build shields against electricity/electromagnetism etc. but gravity cannot be shielded against.

 

[INRM]

It would appear the general consensus is that this is not true and is fictional...

Hypothetically though: What myths were caused by electrical events in the universe?

 

[wollery]

It would appear the general consensus is that this is not true and is fictional...

Hypothetically though: What myths were caused by electrical events in the universe?

That bit's crap too. Why were our ancestors privy to these events and we aren't. On a cosmological timescale humans have been around for an incredibly short span of time. We measure the lifetimes of stars in billions of years, and in astronomy any stellar evolutionary stage with a timespan under ten million years is considered fleeting. Any events that were regularly observable 50,000 years ago should be regularly observable now.

 

[sophia8]

That bit's crap too. Why were our ancestors privy to these events and we aren't. On a cosmological timescale humans have been around for an incredibly short span of time. We measure the lifetimes of stars in billions of years, and in astronomy any stellar evolutionary stage with a timespan under ten million years is considered fleeting. Any events that were regularly observable 50,000 years ago should be regularly observable now.

As far as I can tell from reading various websites devoted to these ideas, plasma cosmology means that the age of stars cannot be deduced with any accuracy and there was never a Big Bang; so the universe could be much younger than those stupid blinkered anti-plasma cosmologists say it is.
The Thunderbolts website is endorsing the Cosmic Plasma theory so that it can assert that many ancient nyths and legends were a direct result of some global catastrophe(s) involving space magnetism - the world-wide dragon motif being a representation of atmospheric magnetic storms, and so on. It's basically an attempt to rehash the tired old ideas of Von Daniiken and other "ancient gods" freaks.
I sduppose you'd have to read the book to find out why similar world-wide celestial events haven't occurred within historically recorded times.

 

[Schneibster]

"Space magnetism?" Wow.

 

[Buckaroo]

It would appear the general consensus is that this is not true and is fictional...

Hypothetically though: What myths were caused by electrical events in the universe?

Sounds like the guy is just adopting some of Velikovsky's schtick, which Carl Sagan thoroughly debunked in the seventies.

(Of course, that didn't stop the nonsense -- my eighth-grade science teacher pushed Worlds in Collision on my whole class. Who knows how much damage she did.)

 

[Cuddles]

Weird. It start off with decent reporting on cutting-edge astrophysics and then suddenly dives off to claim that the Sun is really just a big electric heater. It's hard to believe that anyone could write all that without smoking something really interesting first.

 

[fuelair]

Gravity very weak but very long range (across the universe it is felt).
EM very strong but very (expecially in comparison to gravity) short range.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Gravity very weak but very long range (across the universe it is felt).
EM very strong but very (expecially in comparison to gravity) short range.

My favorite way of looking at this is:

When you jump off a building, gravity is what makes you fall. Repulsion of electrons is what makes you stop when you hit the bottom.

Gravity draws you to the ground even when you're at the top of the building, but the ground doesn't stop you until you are touching it.

Gravity takes several seconds to get you to the ground, but the electrical force stops you instantaneously when you get there.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Maybe I'm being too pedantic for this conversation, but the range on both gravity and EM is infinite. What makes EM appear to be short range is that there are two charges that are usually balanced out. Gravity has only one "charge" (mass) so nothing ever cancels it out. Earth experiences no net EM forces from the Moon because the moon has equal numbers of protons and electrons.

ETA: See someone already made this point. So in the hopes of making this thread useful let me ask a question. Is it accurate to say that, even though there is no net electrical attraction between Earth and the Moon, that there is "more" electrical interaction between the Moon and the Earth than there is gravitational? IOW more virtual particles exchanged in the mediation of the EM force versus the gravitational?

 

[fuelair]

Maybe I'm being to pedantic for this conversation, but the range on both gravity and EM is infinite. What makes EM appear to be short range is that there are two charges that are usually balanced out. Gravity has only one "charge" (mass) so nothing ever cancels it out. Earth experiences no net EM forces from the Moon because the moon has equal numbers of protons and electrons.

When you are accurate, always feel free to be pedantic!!

 

[The Don]

Maybe I'm being too pedantic for this conversation, but the range on both gravity and EM is infinite. What makes EM appear to be short range is that there are two charges that are usually balanced out. Gravity has only one "charge" (mass) so nothing ever cancels it out. Earth experiences no net EM forces from the Moon because the moon has equal numbers of protons and electrons.

ETA: See someone already made this point. So in the hopes of making this thread useful let me ask a question. Is it accurate to say that, even though there is no net electrical attraction between Earth and the Moon, that there is "more" electrical interaction between the Moon and the Earth than there is gravitational? IOW more virtual particles exchanged in the mediation of the EM force versus the gravitational?

The Earth may experience some EM force, it's just that it's trivial in comparison the gravitational one.

So perhaps it should read:

Earth experiences no significant net EM forces from the Moon because the moon has roughly equal numbers of protons and electrons.

 

[aggle-rithm]

The Earth may experience some EM force, it's just that it's trivial in comparison the gravitational one.

So perhaps it should read:

Earth experiences no significant net EM forces from the Moon because the moon has roughly equal numbers of protons and electrons.

On the other hand, if there were gigantic lightning strikes going back and forth between the Earth and the Moon, that would be totally cool.