Interesting. Hannes Alfven was a proponent of the Electric Universe... and the Electric Sun. PING!
"Queen's University Belfast (QUB) scientists with researchers from the Universities of Sheffield and California State, have shed some light on why the corona, the region around the sun, has a much higher temperature than its surface - something of a puzzle to scientists."
Again, orthodox cosmologists are "puzzled" by something that is explicable by the Electric Universe model. Hannes Alfven, using the tenets of the Electric Universe Theory, predicted the existence of these "newly discovered" waves... which is why they are named after him.
Hmmmm. Isn't one proof of a Theory in how well it predicts future findings?
If you want on or off the Electric Universe Ping List, Freepmail me.
hot off the THUNDERBOLTS press:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/descott08/090321_des.htm
NASA Pseudo-skeptic Receives Rebuttal from Electric Universe Theorist
by Dr. Donald E. Scott
March 21, 2009
[Editor’s note: On March 16 Dr. Donald E. Scott gave a presentation of electric universe concepts to a gathering at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, which appeared to be well-received by many of the attendees.
However there he met with pseudo-skeptic Dr. Tom Bridgman who had offered a “critique” of Scott’s book The Electric Sky last year, and who, whilst ‘personable’ to Scott’s face, has since written further pseudo-criticism of Scott’s presentation. The following are a few excerpts from Scott’s rebuttal of Bridgman’s original “critique”.]
When I first heard about Dr. Tom Bridgman’s 48-page onslaught against me and the material I present in my book, The Electric Sky (TES), I thought I would simply ignore him. But friends I admire and trust have repeatedly implored me to take up my pen so that the casual reader of his criticisms will not assume I accept them. These following paragraphs are not a comprehensive dissection of each and every allegation he made. They are simply my reaction to what stood out as being most outrageously inaccurate, and uninformed.
Bridgman’s ‘critique’ can be found here:
http://homepage.mac.com/cygnusx1/anomalies/ElectricSky_20080322.pdf
The following is my response to Bridgman (TB) roughly in the order in which he states his objections...
Velikovsky said that the key to reconciling his claims with scientific theory would be ELECTROMAGNETISM, a force in which astronomers and cosmologists had no interest in 1950. He stated that if the Sun and the planets are not the “electrically neutral” bodies astronomers assume, then even “the law of gravitation must come into question.”
http://www.thunderbolts.info/velikovsky-ghost.htm