Posted on 11/12/2014 6:49:28 PM PST by Swordmaker
Measurements indicate that this nebula is one degree above absolute zero. Temperature has little to do with electricity, though.
“Bipolar outflow” is a term used to describe the nebular structure seen above, although the cause of the effect remains baffling to scientists who study such phenomena. One theory is that its shape is due to slow-moving stellar material interfering with dust and gas that was ejected from a red giant star at higher velocities. Magnetic fields are sometimes invoked to describe lobate celestial objects, but the electric current flow needed for their generation is neglected.
Astronomical theories do not provide for a mechanism that can form nebular clouds and their energetic emissions. They do not know how stars “eject” their outer layers or how lobes of matter speed from their polar axes. The reason for that lack of understanding is that nebulae are not composed of inert gas, cold or hot, but of plasma.
According to Electric Universe theory, bipolar formations are not puzzling or surprising. Rather, they are readily explicable and expected. From nebula to galaxy, hourglass configurations are one signature of electric currents flowing through plasma.
Gases obey Newtonian laws of kinetic motion with molecules bumping into each other or accelerated by “shock waves” imparted by other particles. Plasma, on the other hand, behaves according to the laws of electricity. Stars are born within twisting Birkeland currents that flow around a circuit through the galaxy. The z-pinch effect squeezes plasma inside those filaments, igniting stars and forming toroids of electricity around stellar equators. It is actually the electrical current density that causes plasma in nebulae to glow, not reflections or thermal emissions.
Nebulae often exhibit long tendrils and bubbles within their symmetrical hourglass shapes. According to conventional theories, those features are the result of stellar winds blowing off the parent star, crashing into the slower material ahead of them. In the case of IRAS 13208-6020 (and others), the unmistakeable appearance of Birkeland current filaments is clearly visible. The overall configuration corresponds to the helices and pillars that electrical discharges in plasma can create.
In the laboratory, plasma forms cells separated by thin walls of opposite charge called double layers. Could separation of charges also take place in nebulae? That question might take a long time to resolve because the only way to detect a double layer in space is to insert a Langmuir probe into one.
Although no definitive answers are yet forthcoming, Electric Universe advocates assume that plasma will behave in space in the same way as it does in the laboratory. Electric double layers resulting from charge separation impelled Nobel laureate Hannes Alfvén to suggest that they have their own classification alongside stars and galaxies.
If you want on or off the Electric Universe Ping List, Freepmail me.
Thanks for the post. I have been following the Thunderbolts project and subscribe to the electric universe. I impressed by their correlation of solar activity to seismic increases. BTTT.
Yep, that sure looks like a plasma formation to me. It can't be a "blowoff" from a star, since that would either be globular, or ring shaped, but not hyperbolic. Mainstream cosmologists have posited the idea of polar radiation from black holes, but there is no similar theory to explain polar ejecta that I know of.
On the other hand, this seems to exactly match the prediction of EU theory that stars are formed by a z-pinch in an interstellar plasma filament. Notice also, there is no sign of the accompanying planetary nebula that standard cosmologists would have expected to be present prior to star formation. Of course, they have recently admitted that the planetary nebula hypothesis is unworkable, but they don't have any replacement theory for it yet. Well, here is the evidence for one staring them in the face!
BTW, this is not the only hourglass nebula we have observed. There is also planetary nebula M2-9 (Minkowski's butterfly), for example:
Another cool one!
They have no rational gravitation explanation for Herbig Haro objects either. . . except their lawn watering whirligig sprayer analogy which makes no sense at all over multiple light years.
It is hard, no, impossible, for orthodox cosmologists to look at these nebulae and come up with a gravitational explanation
Amazing. Astounding really!
I don’t mind being a second stringer! :-)
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.[2][3][4] This is contrary to the general consensus by cosmologists and astrophysicists which strongly supports that astronomical bodies and structures in the universe are mostly influenced by gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity, and quantum mechanics. These can be used to explain the origin, structure and evolution of the universe on cosmic scales. As of 2014, the vast majority of researchers openly reject plasma cosmology because it does not match modern observations of astrophysical phenomena or accepted cosmological theory.
Wal will not be please ...
. . . This is contrary to the general consensus by cosmologists and astrophysicists which strongly supports that astronomical bodies and structures in the universe are mostly influenced by gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity, and quantum mechanics. . .
Since when has "general consensus" been in the realm of how science been determined? That is where "Global Warming" is being determined to be "settled science." Real science has always been found in the fringes away from the consensus. Copernicus, Galileo, and Einstein were not among the consensus scientists. However, some of the Electric Universe scientist very well qualified. . . and have won prestigious honors including the Nobel Prize for their work.
And, contrary to your assertion, the "modern observations ARE NOT EXPLICABLE by the gravitational model of the vast majority of researchers who are continually "surprised," "shocked," "baffled," and "astonished," at what those modern observations disclose. Just read how often those terms are used in news reports of those new observations and discoveries. Almost every new discovery begins with these phrases: "Scientists were - baffled, shocked, surprised, astonished, surprised - by what was revealed in the. . ." insert new findings. . . Even the latest reports about the landing on comet 67P had comments about the engineers being "baffled" as to why the landing did not work as planned.
On the other hand, those modern observations have been PREDICTED by the Electric Universe cosmologists and most frequently been demonstrated and modeled in the laboratory. Not one of the the gravitational cosmologists can explain the original, structure and evolution of the universe on cosmic scales without invoking magic in the form of "dark matter" and now "dark energy" which no one can find. Everything in the Electric Universe is entirely explicable and demonstrable using PLASMA Physics and theories without invoking anything unknown or unfindable.
These are just a few of the questions the orthodox cosmologists and astrophysicists ignore because they CANNOT answer them, just as you can't. The test of any theory is how well can it predict future discoveries and observations. The Electric Universe Theory is predicting future discoveries and observations quite well. . . yet the orthodox theory is being falsified repeatedly. That is a big FAIL for the orthodox theory, I think. It is time for the the astrophysicists and cosmologists to wake up that they've been following a chimera.
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.[2][3][4]
Just so people know. . . the characterization used in your cut and paste from Wikipedia is quite inaccurate when it refers to "ionized gases" as plasmas are seldom ionized gases. Plasmas are most often bereft of their associated electrons with the electrons flowing freely. In other words, plasma is highly charged electrically. . . and plasma makes up the vast majority of matter in the Universe, easily comprising 99.999% of all observable matter. Because of that charged nature, a plasma does not at all act like a gas. It is for this reason, orthodox cosmologists do not understand plasma reactions and dismiss them as "hot or ionized gases."
Every where we look in the Universe we see Plasma phenomena. It is quite obvious. As far as we've seen, gravity works equally in every direction in a spherical mode. Electromagnetic phenomena does not and it is distinctive in its various forms which can be observed in the laboratory and is scalable. Can you look at the photo that leads this article and seriously think gravity created that object? What do you see in that photo looks spherical? Everything about that photo is identical to a Z-Pinch electromagnetic plasma. . . just on a cosmic scale.
You have me convinced, but probably not what you intended.
In other words, your mind is closed. You cannot explain any of what I posted so you conclude I am a crackpot. Try explaining ANY of those issues. . . instead of dismissing them.
What IS a Herbig Haro object? How does it hold together over 70 light years of length, Moonman62. Please explain using gravitational cosmology.
Here’s some more material for open minded people:
http://neutrinodreaming.blogspot.com/2011/09/electric-universe-theory-debunked.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.