Uh huh , roight, where and when did they explain that BAC, in some newpaper tabloid. Let us see the math , okay? ... snip ... So , put the pedal to metal and show where that is demonstrated and accepted.
Sigh.
Don't let me stop you from looking foolish, David.
Here is something recent from the mainstream:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/071031-star-collapse.html: "New Spin on How Stars are Born By Ker Than, 31 October 2007 ... snip ... New stars form from enormous clouds of gas and dust collapse under their own gravity into dense spheres. The packed cores are ignited by thermonuclear reactions. As they collapse, the clouds rotate, and like an ice skater pulling in his arms while spinning, rotation speed increases as the collapsing cloud gets smaller. Some of this rotation energy, called angular momentum, must be dissipated before the star can contract completely. How this happens, though, is unknown. 'Given the size difference between an ordinary star like our sun and a typical molecular cloud, if the rotation was allowed to increase as the cloud collapsed, the [apparent] centrifugal forces would never allow the material to collapse into anything small enough to form a star," said study team member Antonio Chrysostomou at the University of Hertfordshire in the United Kingdom. "Hence, there needs to be a mechanism present which removes this angular momentum." A new model by Chrysostomou and colleagues suggests excess material and energy are borne away from the protostar along helical magnetic field lines that surround the star. This stellar exodus carries away enough angular momentum to allow the spinning cloud to undergo the final phase of collapse necessary to become a star. Their findings are detailed in the Nov. 1 issue of the journal Nature."
Now in case you are having difficulty understanding that, they are saying EM phenomena (see where they talk about helical magnetic fields, David?) are transferring the angular momentum out of the mass that will become the sun. If that doesn't happen, then the cloud of plasma can't become a star.
What is funny is that these mainstream astrophysicists apparently didn't know (perhaps because they aren't taught this stuff in school?) that Alfven (you know, that Nobel Prize winner in physics) already solved this problem using EM phenomena. They should have located and read "Cosmogony As An Extrapolation Of Magnetospheric Research" by Hannes Alfven, 1984, "Abstract. A theory of the origin and evolution of the Solar System (Alfven and Arrehnius, 1975, 1976) which considered electromagnetic forces and plasma effects is revised in the light of new information supplied by space research." Reading that paper, they'd have seen that Chrysostomou's finding aren't all that original. And Chrysostomou is approaching the problem from the wrong direction. Basically he's saying the magnetic fields are twisted due to the charged particles spinning as a result of the gravitational collapse. He overlooks the question of why particles are charged and therefore ignores the role that electricity has in the process. He apparently missed the fact that helically wound magnetic fields are characteristic of Birkeland Currents. And perhaps the greatest symptom of Chrysostomou's lack of understanding is calling the material "gas" instead of "plasma". Now mainstream astronomers may eventually get there ... but they sure are taking a circuitous route to understanding the role that EM has in the formation of the solar system (and galaxies).
According to Alfven, the Sun behaves as a unipolar inductor producing a current that flows (look at the the drawing
http://www.plasma-universe.com/imag...it.png/400px-Heliospheric-current-circuit.png ) outwards along both axes B2, and inwards in the equatorial plane, C, and along Solar magnetic field lines B1. The current closes at a large distance, B3. Alfven wrote (
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Heliospheric_current_circuit ) "The central body acts as a unipolar inductor and the e.m.f. is produced in region A. The mechanical force on the solar atmosphere d
F = I ds x
B tends to decelerate the rotation of the central body. The current transfers angular momentum from the central body to the surrounding plasma. Hence, we have a decelerating force applied to the solar atmosphere in the polar region. This should produce a non-uniform rotation of the Sun of the type which is observed (angular velocity decreasing with increasing latitude. Whether this interpretation is the correct quantitative explanation of the non-uniform rotation is an open question. In region B1 , the currents are field-aligned. It seems to be a general rule of cosmic physics that field-aligned currents frequently manifest themselves as luminous filaments (II.4). If the current in B1 is spread over an extended region, we should expect filaments. Equatorial streamers in the solar corona may be explained in this way. Similarly, in the polar region, the vertical currents near the solar surface may produce the polar plumes in the solar corona. The model predicts that there should be currents near the axis strong enough to match the current in the equatorial plane. Such currents should be observed when a spacecraft is sent to the high latitude regions. It is an open question to what extent they flow very close to the axis. They may be distributed over a large region and may in part flow at medium latitudes."
I've noted (with sources) in previous threads that you participated in, David, that currents have been found flowing above the axes of the sun. They've been detected at medium latitudes too. And it's now an established fact that a heliospheric current sheet, like Alfven postulated, exists. So I'm curious why you doubt the role EM played in distributing the angular momentum of the original cloud of plasma throughout the solar system. I'm curious why you still think it's *all about gravity*
Now just for you, David, here are some other sources you can fail to actually read or understand.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v258/n5537/abs/258692a0.html "Nature 258, 692 - 693 (25 December 1975) ... snip ... Angular momentum transfer to the inner Jovian satellites, A.MOGRO-CAMPERO... snip ... THE transfer of angular momentum from a central rotating body in the presence of a magnetic field has been discussed in connection with the evolutionary history of the Solar System
1. We here consider angular momentum transfer in the inner Jovian satellite system. Electron flux measurements near Io's flux tube, and theoretical estimates of the electric current flowing through Io's flux tube are used to estimate the angular momentum transfer during the evolutionary history of the Jovian system. We find that, under certain conditions, those currents are sufficient to produce an angular momentum transfer from Jupiter equal to the present angular momentum of the inner satellites. References 1. Alfvén, H., and Arrhenius, G., Astrophys. Space Sci. 21, 117 (1973)."
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1402-4896/1995/T60/023 "Plasma vortex structures and the evolution of the solar system—the legacy of Hannes Alfvén, Rickard Lundin et al 1995 Phys. Scr. T60 198-205 ... snip ... The transfer of angular momentum from the magnetized sun to the planets was due to partial plasma corotation in the early solar nebula. In this report some important aspects of plasma vortex structures and the Alfvén cosmogony will be addressed and it will be shown that a number of new observations within the plasma environment of planets and in interplanetary space corroborate cosmogony as envisaged by Hannes Alfvén."
