It's pretty tough to falsify something when no tests or experiments are ever proposed. All I've seen so far from the EU-PU woo crowd is bad physics, worse physics, contradictory arguments, hand-waving, ad-hoc assertions, and arguments from ignorance.
Plasma cosmoloigts have made many predictions.
"According to some scientists and philosophers of science, a theory is or should be judged by its ability to make successful predictions. This paper examines a case from the history of recent science - the research of Hannes Alfven and his colleagues on space plasma phenomena - in order to see whether scientists actually follow this policy. Tests of five pre-dictions are considered: magnetohydrodynamic waves, field-alligned ('Birkeland') currents, critical ionization velocity and the existance of planetary rings, electrostatic double layers, and partial corotation. It is found that the success or failure of these predictions had essentially no effect on the acceptance of Alfven's theories, even though concepts such as 'Alfven waves' have become firmly entrenched in space physics. Perhaps the importance of predictions in science has been exaggerated; if a theory is not acceptable to the scientific community, it may not gain any credit from successful predictions."
Alfven also predicted double radio sources, and that most of the mass in the universe is plasma.
Kristian Birkeland predicted auroral electrojets in 1908. In 1967 Alex Dessler wrote an article arguing that Zmuda et al had indeed detected field align-currents. Alfvén subsequently credited (1986) that Dessler "discovered the currents that Birkeland had predicted" He also predicted that we would observe birkeland currents in space, which turned out true.
In 1913, Birkeland was the first to predict that plasma was ubiquitous in space. He wrote: "It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds."(
Ref), which has been confirmed, as 99% of the universe is matter in a plasma state.
In 1916, Birkeland was probably the first person to successfully predict that the solar wind behaves as do all charged particles in an electric field, "From a physical point of view it is most probable that solar rays are neither exclusively negative nor positive rays, but of both kinds"; in other words, the Solar Wind consists of both negative electrons and positive ions.
Wallace Thornhill
predicted the flash produced by a small electrical discharge in the deep impact excercise. He said "The electrical energy will be released before impact" and this was confirmed by NASA investigator Peter Schultz, describing the event recorded from the spacecraft: "What you see is something really surprising. First, there is a small flash, then there's a delay, then there's a big flash and the whole thing breaks loose”.
And he also said that "An abundance of water on or below the surface of the nucleus (the underlying assumption of the dirty snowball hypothesis) is unlikely.", which was also confirmed.
There are many more, Nobel prize winner Langmuir also made a couple of predictions that turned out true, as did Anthony Peratt with galaxy shapes and pinch effects in the cosmos, Gerrit L. Verschuur made predictions in the field of CIV, etc,
Can I get published in the Plasma Universe journals now?
your jokin right? Did you actually read any of the site? it even states what journals the work is published in.
Heres a small list of some of the plasma cosmology papers published in mainstream astronmy journals;
*
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 227, Issue 1-2, pp. 3-11
*
Electric space: Evolution of the plasma universe - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 244, Issue 1-2, pp. 89-103
*
Advances in numerical modeling of astrophysical and space plasmas - Astrophysics and Space Science Volume 242, Numbers 1-2 / March, 1996
*
How Can Spirals Persist? - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 227, Issue 1-2, pp. 175-186
*
Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasmas 2 - Astrophysics and Space Science Volume 256, Numbers 1-2 / March, 1997
*
Plasma and the Universe: Large Scale Dynamics, Filamentation, and Radiation - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 227, Issue 1-2, pp. 97-107
*
Rotation Velocity and Neutral Hydrogen Distribution Dependency on Magnetic Field Strength in Spiral Galaxies - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 227, Issue 1-2, pp. 167-173
*
Radiation Properties of Pulsar Magnetospheres: Observation, Theory, and Experiment - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 227, Issue 1-2, pp. 229-253
*
Confirmation of radio absorption by the intergalactic medium - Astrophysics and Space Science (ISSN 0004-640X), vol. 207, no. 1, p. 17-26
*
X-Ray-emitting QSOS Ejected from Arp 220 - The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 553, Issue 1, pp. L11-L13.
*
A Possible Relationship between Quasars and Clusters of Galaxies - The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 549, Issue 2, pp. 802-819.
*
On Quasar Distances and Lifetimes in a Local Model - The Astrophysical Journal, 567:801–810, 2002 March 10
*
GALACTIC NEUTRAL HYDROGEN EMISSION PROFILE STRUCTURE - The Astronomical Journal, 118:1252È1267, 1999 September
*
Filamentation of volcanic plumes on the Jovian satellite I0 - Astrophysics and Space Science (ISSN 0004-640X), vol. 144, no. 1-2,
*
On the evolution of interacting, magnetized, galactic plasmas - Astrophysics and Space Science (ISSN 0004-640X), vol. 91, no. 1, March 1983
*
Magnetosphere-ionosphere interactions —near-Earth manifestations of the plasma Universe - Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 144, Issue 1-2, pp. 105-133
*
Distances of Quasars and Quasar‐like Galaxies: Further Evidence That Quasi‐stellar Objects May Be Ejected from Active Galaxies - The Astrophysical Journal, 616:738–744, 2004
I really can't be bothered to post any more, you can see about seventy or so other papers published in mainstream astronomy journals here;
http://www.soundintent.com/
Is there something wrong with journals like The Astrophysical Journal, the Journal of Astrophysics and Space Science, The IEEE Journal of Plasma Physics MattusMaximus?
Sometimes it helps to actually know about what you are arguing against
I am still waiting for your scientific reasons to dismiss plasma cosmology material.
