[The Thunderbolts Project, Japan Division]公式ブログ Takaaki Fukatsu’s blog

[The Thunderbolts Project,Japan Division] エレクトリックユニバース  電気的宇宙論、プラズマ宇宙物理学、 電気的観察物理学、解説、翻訳、 深津 孝明

Comets Impact Cosmology  彗星は宇宙論に衝突する by Wal Thornhill

Comets Impact Cosmology 

by Wal Thornhill | July 20, 2004 1:35 pm

“Comets are important, they could be the key to the universe …maybe.”
– Burt Lancaster, in the movie Local Hero. 


 [Comet Hale-Bopp]

From Nature, 5, 174, December 28, 1871: 
ネイチャー、5、174、1871 年 12 月 28 日より:

“Encke’s Comet and the Supposed Resisting Medium,” by Professor W. Stanley Jevons.
W. スタンリー・ジェヴォンズ教授による「エンケ彗星と想定される抵抗媒体」。

“The observed regular diminution of period of Encke’s comet is still, I believe, an unexplained phenomenon for which it is necessary to invent a special hypothesis, a Deus ex machina, in the shape of an imaginary resisting medium.

…It is asserted by Mr. R. A. Proctor, Prof. Osborne Reynolds, and possibly others, that comets owe many of their peculiar phenomena to electric action.

… I merely point out that if the approach of a comet to the sun causes the development of electricity arising from the comet’s motion, a certain resistance is at once accounted for.”

From Scientific American, July 27, 1872: 
サイエンティフィック・アメリカン紙、1872 年 7 月 27 日より:

“Professor Zöllner, of Leipsic, in a lately published work on the nature of comets, makes it his purpose to explain the remarkable phenomena they present by an application of the established principles of physical science alone.

…The self-luminosity of comets he sets down to electrical excitement…

…the nuclei of comets, as masses, are subject to gravitation, while the vapors developed from them, which consist of very small particles, yield to the action of the free electricity of the sun.

…It is therefore sufficient to attribute to the sun an electrical energy no greater than that supposed to account satisfactorily for the appearances presented by cometic trains…”

From English Mechanic & World of Science, 11 Aug 1882, pp. 516-7: 
英国のメカニックと科学の世界、1882 年 8 月 11 日、516-7 ページより:

COMET’S TAILS”…There seems to be a rapidly growing feeling amongst physicists that both the self-light of comets and the phenomena of their tails belong to the order of electrical phenomena.” 

From Nature, No. 1370, Vol. 53, Jan 30, 1896, p. 306: 
ネイチャーより、No. 1370、Vol.  53、1896年1月30日、p.  306:

Theory of Comet’s Tails “It has long been imagined that the phenomenon of comet’s tails are in some way due to a solar electrical repulsion, and additional light is thrown on this subject by recent physical researches.
彗星の尾の理論 「彗星の尾の現象は何らかの形で太陽の電気的反発によるものであると長い間想像されてきましたが、最近の物理的研究によってこの主題にさらなる光が当てられています。

… Prof. Fessenden suggests that negatively charged particles are emitted from that side of a comet which is turned towards the sun…” (Astrophysical Journal, vol. iii. No. 1)
…フェッセンデン教授は、マイナスに帯電した粒子は太陽に向かって向いている彗星の側面から放出されると示唆しています…」 (天体物理学ジャーナル、vol. iii. No. 1)

〈Science at the end of the 19th century was closer to the truth about comets than we are now!〉

Astronomy throughout the ages has been dogged by beliefs about the universe that have dictated how facts are to be interpreted. 

〈Modern astronomy is crippled by the belief that although there is electricity in space, it doesn’t do anything.〉

At the end of the nineteenth century there was considerable interest in electricity and the phenomena of electric discharges in evacuated glass tubes.
19 世紀の終わりには、電気と、真空になったガラス管内の放電現象に大きな関心が集まりました。


 Here 15,000 volts DC is applied to electrodes at each end of a partially evacuated glass cylinder. Some of the complex phenomena of a glow discharge can be seen.

ここでは、部分的に真空になったガラスシリンダーの両端にある電極に 15,000 ボルトの DC が印加されます。 グロー放電の複雑な現象のいくつかが見られます。

Scientists of the day could see the many parallels between the behavior of the luminous comet and a laboratory glow discharge. 

But in the following decades they abandoned that vision

Electrified comets required an electrified Sun. 

Astronomers in the 20th century were never taught the physics of gas discharges, and the idea of electricity in space was anathema to them. 
20 世紀の天文学者はガス放電の物理学を教えられたことはなく、宇宙に電気が存在するという考えは彼らにとって忌まわしいものでした。

They turned their eyes away from the signs of electrical activity and adapted the older mechanical theories to explain comet behavior as buffetings in a solar “wind.” 

The gas discharge model was passed over for Fred Whipple’s ‘dirty ice ball’ model of comets.

In January this year I wrote about the initial reports coming from the closest flyby ever of a comet nucleus, that of Comet Wild 2[1]. 

Recently, the first scientific reports of that encounter were published. 

As anticipated, Comet Wild 2 provided more puzzling questions for astronomers while adding confirmation to the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model.
予想通り、ワイルド 2 彗星は、エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルに確証を与えると同時に、天文学者にさらに不可解な質問を提供しました。

〈On 18 June, Nature magazine printed a special section: ‘Stardust at Comet Wild 2.’〉

Anny-Chantal Levasseur-Regourd writes in ‘Cometary Dust Unveiled’ (p. 1762):
アニー・シャンタル・ルヴァスール・ルグールは、『明らかになった彗星の塵』(p. 1762) で次のように書いています:

“Cometary nuclei are unique objects that have preserved the primitive matter out of which the solar system was born. They are conglomerates of ice and dust….”
「彗星核は、太陽系誕生の原始物質を保存しているユニークな物体です。 それらは氷と塵の集合体だ……」


Although these statements are presented as fact, they are opinion … opinion that Comet Wild 2 defies. In fact, all of the recent discoveries about comets contradict the “gravity-dominated” consensus.
しかしながら、これらの声明は事実として提示されていますが、それらは意見…ワイルド 2 彗星が反抗する意見です。 実際、彗星に関する最近の発見はすべて、「重力が支配する」という共通認識に矛盾しています。

Harold Weaver, writes in Not a Rubble Pile? (p. 1760):
ハロルド・ウィーバーは『瓦礫の山ではない?』にこの様に書いている。  (p.1760):

“New in situ observations of a comet are demonstrating once again how little we understand about these dark and mysterious planetesimals. 

Just when a consensus was being reached that cometary nuclei are gravity-dominated ‘rubble piles,’ stunning images of the nucleus of Comet Wild 2 …are challenging that paradigm.”

Weaver refers to a new textbook, Comets II, from the U. of Arizona press. 
ウィーバーは、アリゾナ大学出版局の新しい教科書、「Comets II」について言及しています。

The continued use of textbooks that uncritically peddle the old consensus, when there is so much opposing evidence available, is a condemnation of science education.

“Astronomers as a class they hug caution and are as fearful of having their dogmas upset as a witch-doctor his magic.”
– Comyns Beaumont, The Mysterious Comet, 1932.
– カミンズ・ボーモント、謎の彗星、1932 年。

Again in the June 18th issue of Nature, Weaver asks:

“why was the surface so littered with features if sublimation was peeling off layers every time the nucleus passed through the inner solar system where its ices were heated by the Sun? …the implication is that the nucleus of Wild 2 has substantial strength and that gravity plays little role in the shaping of the features, which is contrary to the conventional wisdom that cometary nuclei are gravity-dominated rubble piles.”
「核が太陽によって氷が加熱される内部太陽系を通過するたびに昇華が層を剥がしていくのであれば、なぜ表面にはこれほど特徴が散らばっているのでしょうか?  …その意味するところは、ワイルド 2 の核にはかなりの強度があり、重力はその特徴の形成にほとんど役割を果たしていないということであり、これは彗星の核は重力に支配された瓦礫の山であるという従来の通念に反している。」
As usual, the pits and craters are ascribed to impacts, with no evidence whatsoever.
Weaver goes on:

“The rubble pile proponents can still point to the tidal disruption of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 during its close approach to Jupiter in 1993, and to the frequent and apparently spontaneous disruptions of many other cometary nuclei…”
「瓦礫の山の支持者たちは、1993 年に木星に接近した際のシューメーカー・レビー第 9 彗星の潮汐の乱れを今でも指摘することができます、そして、他の多くの彗星核の頻繁かつ明らかに自然発生的な破壊にも…」

That comets can be tidally disrupted is pure supposition.

 It is the most ineffectual model imaginable and fails to explain the suddenness and violence of the observed disruptions, or the fact that some occur far from the Sun. 

I wrote in January:

“Powerful internal stresses caused by redistribution of charge within an actively discharging comet are responsible for their observed tendency to fragment. The effect is like an exploding condenser. It is not due to the comet being a weakly coherent rubble pile.”
「活発に放電している彗星内の電荷の再分布によって引き起こされる強力な内部応力が、観測された彗星の断片化傾向の原因となっています。 コンデンサーが爆発するようなエフェクトです。 それは彗星が粘着性の弱い瓦礫の山であることが原因ではありません。」

Comet Wild 2 conforms to the electric model of comets, which sees them as complex planetary fragments instead of pristine primordial matter.
Referring to the three comets that have had their nucleus imaged by spacecraft, Halley, Borrelly and Wild 2, Weaver writes:

“The surfaces of all three nuclei appear to be mantled with non-volatile material, and the infamous activity of comets seems to be confined to very localized portions of the surface, or possibly, even subsurface geysers.”

The only reason for suggesting the comets are ‘mantled with non-volatile material’ is that the dirty ice ball model demands it. 

They are ‘the darkest objects in the solar system’ so, ipso facto, the bright ices must be hidden inside. 
Comet Wild 2 is supposed to have been diverted into its current orbit by Jupiter only 30 years ago so it is surprising that it seems to be as dark as comet Halley, which is thought to have passed through the inner solar system hundreds or thousands of times.
ワイルド2彗星は、わずか 30 年前に木星によって現在の軌道に変更されたと考えられているため、太陽系内部を数百回または数千回通過したと考えられているハレー彗星と同じくらい暗いように見えるのは驚くべきことです。

The dark mantle hypothesis is symptomatic of pathological science, where ad hoc adjustments are made to save a theory and the adjustments are not testable. 

The observation that comet Borrelly was ‘dry and hot’ can be regarded as evidence that comets do not have a mantle. 

Comet surface features and composition are indicative of their bulk composition. 

Electrical arcs burning the surface may explain their remarkable darkness. 

A similar effect can be seen on Io, where wandering cathode arcs similarly cause dark depressions, Io’s so-called ‘volcanic calderas’.

Weaver goes on:

“Detailed geometrical analyses of the jets have been used to identify the sources of activity on the nucleus, which is one of the outstanding unresolved issues in cometary science. 〉
「ジェットの詳細な幾何学的分析は、〈「彗星科学における未解決の未解決問題の 1 つである核の活動源を特定するために使用されています。〉

Surprisingly, the largest depressions on the surface of Wild 2 are apparently devoid of activity. …most of the jets apparently originate near the latitude of the subsolar point and nine of the jets appear to rise from two depressed regions on the surface.”
驚くべきことに、ワイルド 2 の表面にある最大のくぼみには明らかに活動がありません。  …ジェットのほとんどは明らかに亜太陽点の緯度付近で発生しており、ジェットのうちの 9 つは地表の 2 つの窪んだ領域から上昇しているように見えます。」

These are not surprises in the electrical model. Cathode arcs tend to strike from high points or sharp edges, in preference to flat surfaces. 
これらは電気モデルでは驚くべきことではありません。 陰極アークは、平坦な表面よりも高い点または鋭いエッジから発生する傾向があります。

They will tend to strike where the electric field is strongest, at the subsolar point. 
The depressions are caused by steep arc erosion of the crater edges. 

One of the research articles (p. 1764) states:
研究論文の 1 つ (p. 1764) には次のように述べられています:

“The flat floors [of the depressions, bounded by nearly vertical cliffs] seem to be inert at the present time and resistant to sublimation because none of them are detectably associated with observed jets.”

Later, (p. 1766) we find:
その後 (p. 1766)、我々は気付きました:

“…it is not clear why sublimation processes, driven by solar illumination on a spinning body, would form globally distributed circular structures.” 


There is only one process that will do that
 – electric arc machining!
それを行うプロセスは 1 つだけです
– 電気アーク加工!

The electrical model is more precise about where to look for the source of the observed jets. 

In January, I wrote:

“In the electric theory, unresolved bright spots are to be expected where the cathode arcs impinge on the nucleus and give rise to the cathode jets”

What do we find? 
On page 1768:
1768 ページ:

“The most significant albedo, or at least brightness, features are rare small bright spots that occur in multiple images at different phase angles …ruling out the possibility that it is a phase effect or image artifact. 

In stereoimages, it [a <50-m bright spot at the edge of a flat-floored depression] has no height. 
There is an adjacent shadow-like dark spot that could be the shadow of an optically thick jet… 
The bright spots are small and rare, suggesting that they may be short-lived.”
立体画像では、[平坦な床の窪地の端にある 50 m 未満の明るい点] には高さがありません。

Some of the jet sources are reported as tending “to coincide with the locations that are brighter than average.”


 [Left. The closest image of Comet Wild 2. ]
[左。 ワイルド2彗星の最も近い画像。]

The bright spot mentioned can be seen near the terminator in the 11.00 o'clock position. 
前述の明るい点は、11 時の位置のターミネーター付近に見られます。

Other bright spots can be seen at the edges of depressions. 

We are seeing the electric discharge machining (EDM) of the nucleus of Comet Wild 2 in progress. Right is a scanning electron microscope view of a surface that has been exposed to EDM in the lab. 
ワイルド 2 彗星の核の放電加工 (EDM) が進行中であることがわかります。 右は、実験室で EDM にさらされた表面の走査型電子顕微鏡写真です。

The same process is occurring constantly on Io where the cathode arcs were also seen to be eroding crater edges.


The spacecraft:

“…encountered regions of intense swarms of particles, together with bursts of activity corresponding to clouds of particles only a few hundreds of meters across. This fine scale structure can be explained by particle fragmentation.” (p. 1776).
「…直径わずか数百メートルの粒子雲に対応する活動の爆発とともに、激しい粒子の群れの領域に遭遇しました。 この微細スケールの構造は、粒子の断片化によって説明できます。」  (p.1776)。

Here we see another ad hoc explanation for a discovery that surprised the investigators. 

In the electric model, cathode jets carry electric current. 

The current generates a magnetic field that ‘pinches’ the jet and maintains its constriction over great distances. 

In January I wrote:

“Because they constitute an electric current, the [cathode] jet streams will remain separate and coherent over vast distances. 

Comet Hyakutake’s tail was detected by the Ulysses spacecraft half a billion kilometres away! 

Cometary filaments cannot be explained by outgassing. 

They are definitive evidence for the electrical nature of comets and the solar environment. 

The trajectory, velocity and filamentary nature of the comet’s ion tail conform to that known experimentally as a ‘plasma gun’.”

In short, we should expect the dust detection to occur in bursts with nothing in between the bursts. 

On page 1778, it is reported that:
1778 ページには次のように報告されています:

“The swarms consist of short bursts of impacts, a fraction of a second in duration. 

Some bursts are seen as single events of duration less than or equal to 0.1 s, surrounded by a relatively silent period lasting up to several seconds. 
一部のバーストは、最大数秒続く比較的静かな期間に囲まれた、持続時間 0.1 秒以下の単一イベントとして見られます。

Structure on such a short time scale (i.e., small physical scale in the coma) was unexpected and offers insight into the physical mechanisms at work in the coma.” 
このような短い時間スケール (つまり、コマ状態における小さな物理スケール) での構造は予想外であり、コマ状態で働いている物理的メカニズムについての洞察を提供します。」

It certainly does, provided you choose the right model. 

Unfortunately, astronomers choose a mechanical ‘three-dimensional fluid-dynamical coma model.’ 

This brings to mind the comment by an astronomer who has suffered for demonstrating the big bang theory is based on false assumptions:

“If you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education, then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality.”

The above-mentioned model fixes it so that the troublesome jets are not jets at all. 

They are:

“shocks resulting from nonradial gas flow and depend critically on the nucleus shape and topography (but do not require discrete active regions). 

This implies that the dust particles in the inner coma are also concentrated along the gas flow discontinuities, creating the visual impression of jets even though the dust may originate from different areas on the nucleus.”
The ingenuity of such nonsense is breathtaking. 

So how does one account for the short intense bursts of impacts with such a model? 
The paper continues airily:

“All can be explained by grain fragmentation. 
The very high level, but short duration, bursts are the result of the spacecraft passing through a compact cloud of fragmentation products.”

Nowhere are we told what might cause the mysterious delayed fragmentation, hundreds of kilometres from the comet nucleus

There is no visual evidence for it. 

It is another ad hoc notion to pile on top of all the others.

〈I repeat my opening question: 
How many failures of the ‘dirty ice ball’ theory does it take before it is falsified?〉
[The Electric Comet and its Impact on Cosmology] 

〈Comets are important, they are the key to the universe!〉

If comets are essentially an electrical phenomenon then the implications for cosmology are profound. 

It means that everything we believe about the Sun, and therefore all stars, is wrong. 

Rather than assuming the universe is electrically dead, it raises the possibility that Nature is at least as smart as we are and finds electrical energy extremely useful in creating and energizing the structures we see in space. 

Already the plasma cosmology section of the IEEE has published many papers on the natural formation of spiral galaxies by the interaction of intergalactic plasma current filaments, or ‘Birkeland currents.’ 
すでに、IEEE のプラズマ宇宙論部門は、銀河間プラズマ電流フィラメント、または「バークランド電流」の相互作用による渦巻銀河の自然形成に関する多くの論文を発表しています。

It does not require invisible matter or mysterious forces to produce the spiral patterns. 

Yet astronomers ignore the subject. 

Plasma cosmology has a beautiful symmetry with our everyday experience of electric power. 

Just as we light our cities with electric power generated hundreds or thousands of miles distant, so galaxies are lit by cosmic transmission lines that seem to extend beyond the visible universe.

Positive ions (protons) are accelerated from the Sun, which indicates that the Sun is positively charged. 

Yet the solar wind is electrically neutral (within the limits of our measurements, it contains equal numbers of positive ions and electrons), so how can a comet exhibit electrical effects?
しかし、太陽風は電気的に中性です (測定の範囲内では、同数の陽イオンと電子が含まれています)、では、彗星はどのようにして電気的影響を示すのでしょうか?

The answer, as always, is to go back to the proposed model to see how it fits with the data, or to see if the experiments performed so far can actually answer the question. 

In classic ‘Back to the Future’ style, Ralph Juergens proposed in the 1970’s that the Sun was the anode focus of a glow, or corona discharge. 
古典的な「バック・トゥ・ザ・フューチャー」スタイルで、ラルフ・ジョーガンス(=ヨーガンス=ユルゲンス)は 1970 年代に、太陽がグローまたはコロナ放電の陽極焦点であると提案しました。

It simply requires the Sun to be a body positively charged relative to its galactic environment. 

Welcome back to the nineteenth century!

Juergens wrote:

“Transmission lines carrying high-voltage direct current
 – electric trolley wires, for example – discharge almost continuously to the surrounding air
– 例えば、トロリー線など –

In the case of a positive (anode) wire electrons ever present in the Earth’s atmosphere drift toward the wire, attracted by its positive charge. 
プラス (アノード) ワイヤーの場合、地球の大気中に存在する電子は、そのプラス電荷に引き寄せられてワイヤーに向かってドリフトします。

As they penetrate the increasingly intense electric field close to the wire, the electrons gain energy from the field and are accelerated to energies great enough to initiate electron avalanches as they collide with and ionize air molecules. 

The avalanching electrons, in turn, intensify the ionization immediately surrounding the wire

Positive ions, formed in the process, drift away from the wire in the electric field. 

In this way, a more or less steady discharge is maintained, although there is no tangible object other than the surrounding air that can be considered a cathode.”
Electric Discharge As The Source Of Solar Radiant Energy, KRONOS Vol 8 No. 1, Fall 1982.
太陽放射エネルギーの源としての放電、KRONOS Vol 8 No. 1、1982 年秋。

In the second instalment (KRONOS Vol 8 No. 2.), Juergens wrote:
2 番目の記事 (KRONOS Vol 8 No. 2.) で、ジョーガンスは次のように書いています:

“the postulated discharge
 – though focused on a central solar anode – 
would appear to embrace a vast region of space, most of it devoted to cathode mechanisms. 
– 中央の太陽陽極に焦点を当てていますが –

The solar corona, and its extension through interplanetary space and beyond, finds an analog in the “negative glow” region of a glow discharge. 

The chromosphere we shall interpret as the inner limit of this negative glow. 

Only the photosphere, at the inner limit of the vast discharge cavity, will be assigned an anode function in this model.”


 [Diagram showing the important features of a glow discharge. ]
[グロー放電の重要な特徴を示す図。  ]

Note that in a spherically symmetrical corona discharge the cathode glows are absent because the energy is spread through a huge volume. 

On the other hand the anode, because of its small size relative to the entire heliosphere, is likely to be stressed and exhibit complex discharge phenomena to relieve that stress. 

The Sun exhibits the features of a stressed anode. 

Top diagram from J. D. Cobine, Gaseous Conductors, p. 213.
上の図は、J. D. Cobine、「ガス伝導体」、p. 5 より引用 213.
The ‘negative glow’ region can be seen to have a strong electric field. 

People objected to Juergens’ model because we don’t find relativistic electrons, accelerated by a strong radial field in interplanetary space, rushing toward the Sun. 

But plasma phenomena in a glow discharge are complex, so appeals to simplistic models based on electrostatics are irrelevant. 

Instead, I propose that Juergens’ model be modified and that interplanetary space is the extensive ‘positive column’ region of a glow discharge. 

Cobine writes, “The positive column is a region of almost equal concentrations of positive ions and electrons and is characterized by a very low voltage gradient.” 

This model, with planets orbiting within the anode discharge of a star, is of extreme importance when considering life on other planets[2].

The most important feature of the positive column region of a glow discharge is that the plasma is quasi-neutral. 

That is, sampling will reveal equal numbers of positive ions and electrons. 

And that is what we find in the solar ‘wind.’ 

It merely forms the conducting plasma medium between the cathode region at the heliospheric boundary and the anode region near the Sun. 

So looking for excess relativistic electrons rushing toward the Sun is no more sensible than looking at a current-carrying wire and asking where are all the excess electrons rushing from one end of the wire to the other.

The next most important feature of the positive column region of a spherical glow discharge is that throughout most of its volume the plasma maintains a weak but constant radial electric field. 

That field is what accelerates protons from the Sun to produce the solar ‘wind’ and it assists the drift of electrons to the Sun. 

That field also creates a mystery for astrophysicists in their discovery of the small but constant radial deceleration of spacecraft that are moving in the solar plasma. 

The discovery of that deceleration was a striking confirmation of this glow discharge model of the Sun. See ‘Mystery Solved[3].’
その減速の発見は、太陽のグロー放電モデルの驚くべき裏付けとなった。  「謎は解決しました[3]」を参照してください。

Having described the solar electrical environment we can go on to answer the question posed earlier: 
“How can a comet exhibit electrical effects?” 

A comet’s tail arises from the interaction between the electric charge of the comet and the solar discharge plasma. 

The comet spends most of its time far from the Sun, where the plasma charge density and voltage with respect to the Sun is low. 

The comet moves slowly and it easily accumulates enough charge to balance the ambient voltage.

As the comet approaches the Sun, the nucleus moves at a furious speed through regions of increasing charge density and voltage. 

The comet’s surface charge and internal polarization, developed in deep space, respond to the new environment by forming cathode jets and a visible plasma sheath, or coma. 

The strong electric field in the comet’s plasma sheath generates x-rays. 
彗星のプラズマ・シース(さや)内の強い電場によって X 線が発生します。

The cathode discharge hot spots characteristically jump about the nucleus, and the comet may shed and grow new tails. 

Or the comet may explode like an overstressed capacitor, breaking into separate fragments or simply giving up the ghost and disappearing. 

The ‘non-gravitational’ forces observed perturbing comet orbits are simply due to these electrical interactions.

None of these phenomena were expected from an inert object. 

The dirty ice ball model was never tenable and has been discredited. 

It has profound implications for theories of the origin of the solar system and cosmology.

Wal Thornhill

1.    Comet Wild 2: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=ayxpdjcb
2.    life on other planets: http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_other.htm
3.    Mystery Solved: http://www.holoscience.com/news/mystery_solved.html
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/comets-impact-cosmology/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Cassini’s Homecoming カッシーニの帰郷 by Wal Thornhill

Cassini’s Homecoming カッシーニの帰郷

by Wal Thornhill | June 19, 2004 8:22 am


 Cassini closes in on the beautiful ringed planet — Saturn. Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute

土星に接近します。 クレジット: NASA/JPL/宇宙科学研究所

”Nothing so evokes gasps of delight as Saturn’s ring. 

The reason I think, is a collision of the expected and the improbable. 

A ringed sphere is the archetypal planet of our childhood, familiar from a thousand comic strips, coloring books, classroom poster boards, stickers, rubber stamps, birthday cards — you name it. 

So, when we see Saturn, there is a kind of instant recognition, like meeting a relative one knows only from the family photo album. 

But there is also the shock of reality, a sense of ‘Oh my God, it actually exists!”
– Chet Raymo.
 – チェット・レイモ。


From the NY Times of June 15, 2004:
2004 年 6 月 15 日のニューヨークタイムズ紙より:

“The Saturn system represents an unsurpassed laboratory, where we can look for answers to many fundamental questions about the physics, chemistry and evolution of the planets and the conditions that give rise to life,” 
Dr. Edward J. Weiler, associate administrator for science at NASA, said in a statement.

Scientists dare not predict the discoveries waiting to be made as the spacecraft focuses its cameras and instruments repeatedly on Saturn and its signature rings and takes the measure of the icy moons during at least 76 orbits.

“Prepare to be amazed,” Dr. Carolyn Porco, head of the mission’s imaging team, said in an interview last week.
— John Noble Wilford
— ジョン・ノーブル・ウィルフォード


Scientists hope that the US$3.7 billion spacecraft will solve many of Saturn’s mysteries. 

However, if the Galileo mission to Jupiter is any guide, Cassini will discover more mysteries during its extended visit to Saturn. 

Scientists “dare not predict the discoveries waiting to be made” because their success rate in the past has been appalling. 

The catch phrase “it’s back to the drawing board” has been worn out. 

The old drawings are merely scribbled over. 

The problem for scientists analyzing the flood of data to be returned from Cassini and its probe to Titan is the set of unshakeable beliefs they bring to the task. 

The belief in the nebular accretion theory of formation of the solar system colors every confident assertion. 

For example, the official caption for this close-up of Saturn’s moon, Phoebe, reads:


 [1]"Phoebe's true nature is revealed in startling clarity in this mosaic of two images taken during Cassini's flyby on June 11, 2004. 
「2004 年 6 月 11 日のカッシーニのフライバイ中に撮影された 2 枚の画像のこのモザイクでは、フィービーの本当の性質が驚くほど鮮明に明らかにされています。

The image shows evidence for the emerging view that Phoebe may be an ice-rich body coated with a thin layer of dark material. 

Small bright craters in the image are probably fairly young features. 

This phenomenon has been observed on other icy satellites, such as Ganymede at Jupiter. 

When impactors slammed into the surface of Phoebe, the collisions excavated fresh, bright material
 — probably ice — 
underlying the surface layer. 

— おそらく氷 —

Further evidence for this can be seen on some crater walls where the darker material appears to have slid downwards, exposing more light-colored material. 

Some areas of the image that are particularly bright — especially near lower right — 
are over-exposed. 
— 特に右下付近 —

An accurate determination of Phoebe's density
 — a forthcoming result from the flyby — 
will help Cassini mission scientists understand how much of the little moon is comprised of ices." Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute
— フライバイの今後の結果 —
クレジット: NASA/JPL/宇宙科学研究所


That the craters on Phoebe were formed by impact is stated as a fact. Instead, it is a supposition unsupported by observation or experiment. 
フィービーのクレーターが衝突によって形成されたことは事実として述べられています。 むしろ、それは観察や実験によって裏付けられていない推測です。

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model explains the craters as Phoebe’s birthmarks. 
エレクトリックユニバース® モデルでは、クレーターはフィービーのバースマーク(母斑)であると説明されています。

It is a model supported by examination of spark-machined surfaces. 

Just as stars are observed to do, gas giant planets may also expel a jet of matter during periods of electrical instability. 

Accretion of matter in the jet is mediated by the electromagnetic pinch effect and electrostatic deposition. 

Both of these mechanisms are far superior to accretion by impacts (tending to shatter and scatter instead of to accrete). 

Electrostatic deposition easily creates the layering seen in all rocky objects to date. 

Electrical discharges between the parent and departing child carve out the circular craters. 

Because they are not formed by a sudden mechanical impact, the craters are neat and do not cause disruption to adjacent craters or fill them with debris
 — as we see on Phoebe
— フィービーで見られるように、

That is not to say that Phoebe was born from Saturn. 

Its retrograde orbit suggests capture by Saturn.

Other limiting beliefs concern gravity and the electrical neutrality of celestial objects. 

Either one is sufficient to cause misleading or wrong deductions about Saturn and Titan,
— the two major targets of the Cassini mission. 
カッシーニ計画の 2 つの主要目標の、土星とタイタンに関して誤解を招く、または誤った推論を引き起こすのに十分です。

Newton’s famous law of gravitation relates the force between two bodies to the product of their masses and the square of the distance between their centers. 
ニュートンの有名な重力の法則は、2 つの物体間の力を、それらの質量と中心間の距離の 2 乗の積に関連付けます。

But ‘mass’ and its relation to matter remains a metaphysical concept. 

However, we know from particle accelerator experiments that the mass of a particle of matter increases when subjected to acceleration in an electromagnetic field. 

So the internal electromagnetic state of a planet or a star may alter its apparent mass. 

Yet scientists calculate the mass of Saturn or its moon, Phoebe, by measuring the gravitational force and assuming a universal constant of gravitation, written ‘G.’ In an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® ‘G’ is neither universal nor constant. 
しかし、科学者は、重力を測定し、「G」と書かれた普遍的な重力定数を仮定することによって、土星またはその衛星フィービーの質量を計算します。エレクトリック・ユニバース® では、「G」は普遍的でも一定でもありません。

We cannot simply calculate the density of celestial bodies by estimating mass using Newton’s law of gravity. 

In Saturn’s case, using Newton’s law, it is calculated that it is 95 times more massive than the Earth, which gives it a mean density only 0.7 that of water. 
土星の場合、ニュートンの法則を使用すると、土星の質量は地球の 95 倍であると計算され、平均密度は水のわずか 0.7 になります。

Given a big enough bath, Saturn would float! 

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model suggests that Newton’s law will not give a true picture of the planet’s density and therefore of its composition. 
エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルは、ニュートンの法則では惑星の密度、したがって惑星の組成の正確な像を与えられないことを示唆しています。

Saturn may have considerably more heavy elements than its gravity would suggest. 

Low gravity suggests low internal electric stress. 

And that may tell us something about Saturn’s recent history.

The belief in the electrical neutrality of the universe has led to the theory that stars must generate their energy by feeding on themselves. 

Despite decades of ad hoc adjustments, the theory still fails to explain most of the observed features of the Sun. 

The electric model of stars shows that the classification of stars and gas-giant planets on the basis of their calculated mass is incorrect. 

Stars are an electrical phenomenon and rely on their electrical environment for their mass, appearance and classification. 

Their cores do not burn with a thermonuclear fire and they are much cooler than the hot plasma discharge that envelops them. 

〈The Sun is stone cold compared to its corona. 〉

That is why the interior of the Sun, seen through its sunspots, is much cooler than the electrical storms that rage above in its photosphere. 

The bright plasma shell of a star, particularly giant stars, may be much larger than the solid core that is the focus of the cosmic discharge. 

Stars and gas giants may occasionally reduce internal electrical stress by ejecting some of their charged core, usually equatorially, in a nova type outburst. 

The light curves of novae show the typical rapid onset and slow decay of lightning. 

The result of the outburst is an expulsion disk and closely orbiting companions.

With that picture of an electric star in mind, the following scenario is proposed, stripped of the volumes of evidence available to support it. 

The test will be to see how predictive it turns out to be:

〈Until recently Saturn was an independent brown dwarf star with its own entourage of close-orbiting small planets.〉

As a small star approaching the Sun, Saturn flickered like a faulty electric light when the two stellar magnetospheres (plasma sheaths) touched. 
小さな恒星が太陽に近づくとき、2 つの恒星の磁気圏 (プラズマ シース) が接触すると、土星は故障した電灯のようにちらつきました。

Saturn’s electrical power was usurped by the Sun and its appearance changed dramatically. 

Such rapid variability in the appearance of stars is well documented. 

Before dimming forever, Saturn would have flared up to relieve the stresses caused by the sudden change in electrical environment. 

Saturn’s present low internal electrical stress, as indicated by its low apparent mass, suggests ejection activity. 

But even so, the core of the electric star has not completely cooled
 — Saturn still radiates more than twice the heat it receives from the Sun. 
土星は依然として太陽から受け取る熱の 2 倍以上の熱を放射しています。

And we have a simple explanation for the origin of Saturn’s mysterious short-lived rings.


 [Credit: X-ray: NASA/U. Hamburg/J.Ness et al; Optical: NASA/STScI]
[クレジット:X線NASA/U. ハンブルク/J.Ness ら; 光学:NASA/STScI]

Like the Sun, Saturn radiates X-rays strongly from near its equator. 

This is quite different to Jupiter where the X-rays come from polar auroral discharges. 

Saturn’s X-ray spectrum is like the Sun’s, which led scientists to say that X-rays from the Sun were being reflected by Saturn’s atmosphere. 
土星の X 線スペクトルは太陽と似ているため、科学者らは太陽からの X 線が土星の大気によって反射されていると主張しました。

That seems unlikely given the similarities between Saturn and Jupiter. 

It would require that Saturn reflect X-rays 50-times more efficiently than the Moon! 
それには、土星が月の 50 倍効率的に X 線を反射する必要があります。

Instead, Saturn still shows stellar characteristics. 

Saturn’s X-rays are concentrated, like the Sun’s, at low latitudes. 
土星の X 線は、太陽と同様に低緯度に集中しています。

Voyager 2 also found an immense, hot donut of plasma encircling Saturn that is believed to be the hottest in the solar system, 300 times hotter than the solar corona. 
(Temperature estimates are misleading if particle motions are non-random, which is the case in electric discharges).


 [Solar plasma donut viewed in UV light by the SOHO spacecraft.]


Saturn’s rings form part of the circuit that feeds energy into its plasma donut, where it is stored before discharging into Saturn’s ionosphere and generating X-rays. 
土星の環は、エネルギーをプラズマドーナツに供給する回路の一部を形成しており、エネルギーは土星の電離層に放出されて X 線を生成する前に蓄えられます。

The Sun has a similar plasma donut that discharges to the Sun, causing sunspots and solar flares. 

We might then expect Saturn’s storms to show similar behavior to sunspots, which are the Sun’s electrical ‘storms.’


[Saturnian storms Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute]
土星の嵐 クレジット: NASA/JPL/宇宙科学研究所

Saturn occasionally ‘burps,’ creating a great white spot 3 times the size of the Earth. 
土星は時々「げっぷ」をし、地球の 3 倍の大きさの大きな白い斑点を作り出します。

It is inexplicable on standard models. 

However, it is the kind of thing to be expected following an exceptionally powerful lightning discharge deep into Saturn’s atmosphere. 

The discharge forms a vertical jet of matter from the depths that spouts into the upper atmosphere. 

Saturn’s high-speed equatorial winds are also driven electrically and they have been observed to diminish in speed from 1,700 km/hr to 1,000 km/hr since the Voyager flybys. 
土星の赤道付近の高速風も電気で駆動されており、ボイジャーの接近以来、風速が時速 1,700 km から 1,000 km に減少することが観察されています。

That may tie in with the disappearance of the mysterious ‘spokes’ in Saturn’s rings that were discovered in Voyager images in the early 1980’s. 

Radial lightning, 10,000 times as powerful as lightning bolts on Earth, form the spokes across the rings to Saturn’s ionosphere. 
地球上の稲妻の 10,000 倍の強力な放射状の稲妻が、リングを横切って土星の電離層までスポークを形成します。

Reduced electrical activity at Saturn would be expected to reduce the occurrence of ring spokes and to slow the equatorial winds.

Saturn’s ephemeral rings are strong evidence in favor of recent ejection. 

The term “recent” in relation to Saturn’s ring structure means tens of thousands of years. 

That’s how long astronomers calculated it would take for gravity to cause them to rain down upon Saturn. 

However, there is more to the ring structure than gravity can explain. 

If a 1-meter wide model of Saturn were made the rings would be 10,000 times thinner than a razor blade! 
幅 1 メートルの土星の模型が作られたとしたら、その輪はカミソリの刃の 10,000 倍も薄くなるでしょう。

Equatorial currents at Saturn are responsible for the thinness and odd dynamics of the rings, so gravity-based calculations of their age are misleading. 

More evidence for recent ejection came when Voyager 1 discovered radio discharges that were diagnosed as a continuous electrical storm stretching over 60 degrees in longitude near Saturn’s equator! 
最近の放出のさらなる証拠は、ボイジャー 1 号が土星の赤道付近で経度 60 度以上に広がる継続的な電気嵐として診断された電波(=ラジオ波)放電を発見したときにもたらされました。

Something much larger than Phoebe must have erupted from Saturn, creating the rings and leaving a scar on the surface (like Jupiter’s Great Red Spot) that has not yet healed. 

If so, where are Saturn’s children now?

By this stage, cognitive dyspepsia will have taken its toll of those readers who have faith in the established fairytale of a solar system formed gravitationally 5 billion years ago, with the planets in the same order and roughly the same orbital spacing as we find them now. 

For them there is much more that could be written to prepare the way for this radically new paradigm. 

That task will be undertaken by a new website called thunderbolts.info[2]. 
その任務は、サンダーボルツ・ドット・インフォ[2]と呼ばれる新しい Web サイトによって引き受けられます。

For the moment, a scenario follows that is so alien[3] to any conventional theory of Saturn’s history that it should be easily tested against information gained from the Cassini mission. 

It shows striking connections between many seemingly unrelated facts about certain planets. 

That is something that conventional cosmogony has not been able to do.

[Saturn and the Recent History of the Solar System]

The challenge to convention begins with the use of the words “Recent History.” 

The solar system is not supposed to have a recent history

We assume that the dinosaurs roamed under the same Sun we see in the sky today. 

But no, in round figures I am talking about changes in planetary orbits only 10,000 years ago. 

The changes occurred during the era of the earliest human art in the form of petroglyphs, or rock carvings. 

The petroglyphs are not merely prehistoric doodles on rock. 

They required a prodigious global effort by our distant ancestors to produce. 

The breakthrough in decoding them came when the strange petroglyphs were compared with powerful electrical discharge phenomena. 

[My earlier news item, Mystery of Mars’ Polar Spirals[4], outlines some recent results in the search for the true meaning of petroglyphs.]

It is now clear that petroglyphs are an enduring record of the frightening collapse of a former cosmos. 

It has taken 10,000 years for us to be able to see in laboratory plasma discharge experiments what our forebears saw in awesome cosmic proportions in the sky. 

We can now understand why the first civilizations were obsessed with the capricious and warring planetary gods, who fought with thunderbolts, when today we can hardly identify those planets in the sky. 

With a real perspective of chaos in the solar system in prehistoric times we can see why the astronomer-priests of old were so powerful in their societies. 

They knew planets had had a dramatic impact on humanity and the Earth. 

And Saturn was remembered as the most prominent. 

〈The solar system as we see it today is less than 10,000 years old!〉
〈今日私たちが見ている太陽系は誕生してから 1 万年も経っていません!〉


 [Image: NASA/JPL Cassini orbit insertion at Saturn]
[画像:NASA/JPL 土星へのカッシーニ軌道投入]

All being well, Cassini is due to arrive at Saturn on July 1. 

Only a select few on Earth recognize the event as a kind of homecoming; 
a homage to our most ancient Sun god ‘ Sol, Ra, Helios

All of these names were originally given to the planet Saturn. 

Yet Saturn today is an unremarkable speck in the sky, less bright than many of the brightest stars.

In recent news reports, Saturn has been called the original ‘Lord of the Rings.’ 

There is a profound truth behind such a glib by-line. 

But it wasn’t until the advent of the telescope that Christian Huygens, in 1656, was able to suggest that Saturn had a ring. 
しかし、1656 年にクリスチャン・ホイヘンス土星に輪があることを示唆できたのは、望遠鏡が登場してからでした。

So how do we explain that Saturnian symbolism of the ring pervades our cultures? 

The halo of the saints, the royal crown, and the ring given in marriage are Saturnian symbols, as are the circled or Celtic cross, the Egyptian ansate cross, or ankh, the “Eye of Ra,” and the star inside the crescent. 

The star at the top of the Christmas tree, covered in lights, is pure Saturnian imagery. 

It is truly amazing that we are still haunted by prehistoric archetypes. 

It helps us to understand the extraordinary subconscious attraction of Tolkien’s fantasy of Lord of the Rings. 

J. R. R. Tolkien was well versed in mythology.


 [5]In December, 1999, I wrote in Other stars, other worlds, other life?[6]
[5]1999 年 12 月に、私は「他の恒星、他の世界、他の生命?」に書きました[6]。

“If the following sounds like science fiction, so be it. 
「以下の内容が SF のように聞こえるかもしれませんが、それはそれで構いません。

Science fiction writers are far better than experts at predicting future knowledge. 
SF 作家は、将来の知識を予測する点では専門家よりもはるかに優れています。

What then might be the Earth’s history

The distant orbits from the Sun suggest that we were captured along with our Brown Dwarf parent. 

In the process, the electric power that drove our parent star was usurped by the Sun. 

As well as turning out the primordial light, the Sun stripped the Earth from its mother’s womb along with the Moon. 

Night fell for the first time and stars appeared. 

Ice ages began suddenly. 

The polar caps formed. 

High latitudes became uninhabitable. 

It is worth adding that many of the moons, or remaining offspring, of the gas giants have surprisingly icy surfaces and some have atmospheres. 

Life may have existed once on Mars and some of those moons.”


As the ancients observed, Saturn was our primordial parent star. 

Of course we must be careful in our identification. 

But there is one physical characteristic that links the parent with its offspring. 
しかし、親とその子を結び付ける物理的特徴が 1つあります。

It is the axial tilt. 

Like our moon, satellites tend to orbit their primary with the same face always turned toward it. 

If they orbit in the equatorial plane, their spin axis will be aligned with that of the primary. 

As gyroscopes, the satellites will retain the same tilt even if jolted from their orbit, although the process may induce a wobble of the spin axis. 

〈It is therefore highly significant that two key planets identified by the ancients
 — Saturn and Mars — 
have axial tilts closely similar to that of the Earth. 
The tilt of Saturn, at 27 degrees to the ecliptic plane, is itself an enigma
 — unless it formed independently from the Sun.〉
土星と火星 —
— 太陽から独立して形成された場合を除いて。〉

But Venus was also identified as a spectacular discharging comet in the ancient congregation of planets. 

What can be made of that? 

It can be explained if Venus was the latest child of Saturn. 

As explained earlier, Saturn shows the symptoms of having given birth recently. 

The birth would be triggered by a sudden change in Saturn’s electrical environment when it crossed from interstellar space into the Sun’s plasma envelope, or heliosphere. 

The voltage drop across the Sun’s plasma sheath would almost equal the full driving potential of the Sun, measured in tens of billions of volts. 

Rather than being an anode in the galactic discharge, Saturn would become a cathode in the Sun’s environment and subject to forming cathode jets. 

Saturn could be expected to ‘spit the dummy’ in such a circumstance! 

Venus was one such ‘dummy,’ ejected from the equator of Saturn. 

Saturn’s swift rotation delivered a ‘slap on baby’s bottom’ to Venus giving it a slow retrograde spin. 

The magnitude of the axial tilt of Venus to the ecliptic is much less than Saturn’s, which suggests that the Venusian orbit was tilted away from Saturn’s equatorial plane due to electrical capture forces acting on that dying star. 

We have abundant pictorial evidence that Venus was wrenched from its orbit in a polar direction shortly after it was born. (See the Egyptian “Eye of Ra” above).
金星が誕生直後にその軌道から極の方向へ、もぎ取られたことを示す豊富な写真証拠が私たちにはあります。  (上記のエジプトの「ラーの目」を参照)。

This account explains many odd things about Venus; 
its slow retrograde spin; 
its hellish temperature, having being born recently from the core of a brown dwarf star; 
its thick atmosphere inherited from the brown dwarf and subsequently modified by cosmic discharges; 
and its equatorial scars caused by spectacular radial discharging, which was faithfully recorded by the petroglyph artists. 

Venus carried away significant charge from its parent so that it still has a ‘cometary’ magnetotail and its mountains glow with plasma discharges. 

Venus also shows a surprisingly young surface that gave rise to ad hoc theories of resurfacing events. 

They are unnecessary. 

Venus is a baby.


 Planet-girdling filamentary scars on Venus are due to equatorial cosmic discharges through a thick atmosphere.


What can we expect Cassini to find, based on this dramatic recent history of Saturn? 

We should expect to see family traits amongst the members of the Saturnian family
 — including the departed Earth, Mars and Venus. 
— 旅立った、地球、火星、金星も含めて。

For example, the moon Titan, which is larger than the planet Mercury, seems to be a close sibling of Venus, probably born from Saturn at about the same time. 

That Titan may be young is hinted at by its eccentric orbit, which cannot have persisted for billions of years. 

So we should be alert to similarities between Titan and Venus. 

It is already known that Titan has the densest atmosphere of any terrestrial planet, after Venus. 

That is a huge puzzle for scientists. 

After all, two of Jupiter’s moons, Ganymede and Callisto, have no atmosphere yet they are of similar size. 
結局のところ、木星の 2 つの衛星、ガニメデとカリストには大気がありませんが、大きさは似ています。

So it would not be surprising if Titan had warm spots over the poles, like Venus. 

Titan also has a global layered haze like Venus. 

(Haze layers seem to be the condensed form that non-polar molecules take in an electrified atmosphere. 
They are quite distinct from the vertically moving clouds that polar molecules, like water, form). 

And just as Mars has a whiff of the Venusian atmosphere, with carbon dioxide and nitrogen as major constituents, we may expect to find that the Titan atmosphere has some of the smell of Venus about it. 

Both Venus’ and Titan’s atmospheres, being very young, will not yet be in equilibrium. 

So calculations about atmospheric constituents that assume equilibrium as a starting point will be wrong. 

The methane found in Titan’s atmosphere is quickly destroyed by sunlight so it has to be replenished. 

That has led to the suggestion that Titan must have a hydrocarbon ocean for the methane to have lasted for the conventional age of the solar system. 

However, radar, infrared and radio observations of Titan have not found signs of a hydrocarbon ocean. 

In fact one radar return was “of a type that we would expect to get back from Venus.” 
実際、レーダーからの返還された(電波)の 1 つは「金星から返還されると予想されるタイプのもの(電波)」でした。

〈Titan is most likely a baby brother of Venus!〉

We should not overlook the fact that so many of the satellites are comprised of a large proportion of water ice, as are Saturn’s rings. 

It offers an explanation for the origin of the Earth’s amazing abundance of water. 

So we should not be surprised if, under the orange haze, that Titan has copious ice or water. 

We must await the descent of the Huygens probe into Titan’s atmosphere for answers. 

That raises the obvious question; why doesn’t Venus have much water? 

When performing comparisons, we must allow for the fact that the Venusian atmosphere is being modified continually by electric discharge activity on the surface of that planet. 

It has increased the carbon dioxide content of the Venusian atmosphere at the expense of nitrogen and water vapor. 

Scientists think that most of Venus’ water must have split into hydrogen and oxygen and all the hydrogen was lost to space. 

But if so, where is the oxygen that was left behind? 

The four Pioneer probe craft didn’t find it in the atmosphere. 

The answer is that it has combined with carbon monoxide to form a heavy atmosphere of carbon dioxide. 

The process I envisage is this:

Venus probably began with an atmosphere more like Titan’s and the Earth’s, where nitrogen dominates, and with more water. 

It suggests that Saturn must have considerable nitrogen at depth in its atmosphere. 

The icy rings and satellites of Saturn and abundant water on Earth also point to water on Saturn. 

On the Venusian surface, nitrogen molecules are converted to carbon monoxide molecules by a catalytic nuclear reaction in the presence of red-hot iron. 

The brilliant French chemist, Louis Kervran, when investigating carbon monoxide poisoning of welders, discovered this surprising nuclear transformation. 

The carbon monoxide reacts at the hot surface of Venus with water vapor to form carbon dioxide and hydrogen. 

It is a well-known industrial process. 

The hydrogen produced escapes from Venus. 

This process explains the puzzling discovery made by Venus-landers that the water vapor concentration diminished as they approached the Venusian surface

A purely chemical approach to the puzzles of the Venusian atmosphere is not likely to work.

Like Venus, surface temperatures are globally uniform on Titan within a few degrees. 

It is thought that there is a greenhouse effect operating on Titan. 

However, the heat of Venus is due to its origin and has nothing to do with a greenhouse effect. 

The same will likely be true for Titan. 

Like Venus, Titan seems not to have a magnetic field and yet it has a distinct magnetotail. 

Titan’s electrical plasma interactions may be like those of Venus. 

Titan shines on the dayside in UV light too brightly to be explained by solar radiation. 

It should be very interesting as Titan swings in and out of Saturn’s magnetosphere. 

The plasma sheath crossings could provide some surprises.


There is much more that could be written about Saturn’s other moons. 

But there are enough outrageous claims here to add spice to the anticipated revelations from Cassini’s extended visit to Saturn and the Huygens probe to Titan.

Wal Thornhill

1.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2004/06/Phoebes_face.jpg
2.    thunderbolts.info: http://www.thunderbolts.info/
3.    alien: http://www.holoscience.com/views/alien.htm
4.    Mystery of Mars’ Polar Spirals: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=yk0dspt4
5.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2004/06/Dark_tower2.jpg
6.    Other stars, other worlds, other life?: http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_other.htm
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/cassinis-homecoming/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Electric Weather  電気的天候 by Wal Thornhill

Electric Weather 

by Wal Thornhill | May 30, 2004 8:10 am

The following excerpts come from a report[1] that appeared in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) magazine, SPECTRUM, for April. 
以下の抜粋は、電気電子学会 (IEEE) の雑誌 SPECTRUM の 4 月号に掲載されたレポート [1] からのものです。

The report demonstrates that when science has lost its way, engineers must use their intuition to make progress.

[Electric Rainmaking Technology Gets Mexico’s Blessing]

But for now, doubters prevail north of the border. 

From at least the early 1940’s to the end of the 20th century, it always rained more in the state of Jalisco, in central Mexico, than in its neighbor Aguascalientes. 
少なくとも 1940 年代初頭から 20 世紀末までは、メキシコ中部のハリスコ州では、隣接するアグアスカリエンテス州よりも常に雨が多かった。

But in 2000, on a patch of parched pasture in Aguascalientes, workers from Mexico City-based Electrificación Local de la Atmósfera Terrestre SA (ELAT) erected a peculiar field of interconnected metal poles and wires somewhat resembling the skeleton of a carnival tent. 
しかし 2000 年、アグアスカリエンテスの乾いた牧草地に、メキシコシティに本拠を置く地方電力局 (ELAT) の労働者たちが、カーニバルのテントの骨組みに似た金属の柱とワイヤーを相互接続した奇妙なフィールドを建設しました。

Since then, about as much rain has fallen on the plains of Aguascalientes as on its more lush neighbor.

The brainchild of a fractious group of Russian emigré’s, the poles and wires are in fact a network of conductors meant to ionize the air

If the technique is done properly, the thinking goes, the natural current between the earth and the ionosphere is amplified, leading
 — through a mechanism that is not fully understood — 
to rainfall. 
— 完全には理解されていないメカニズムによって —

There are now 17 such installations in six states in Mexico, and in January, federal government agencies decided to back construction and operation of 19 more by 2006, potentially altering the weather in much of parched north and central Mexico. 

Meanwhile, by May, ELAT’s competitor Earthwise Technologies Inc., of Mexico City and Dallas, could win the right to establish ionization stations in southwest Texas’s water-starved Webb County, which would make it the first such installation in the United States.



Scientists and authorities differ over whether ionizing the air can bring on big weather changes.

But some atmospheric scientists aren’t so sure the Russians aren’t selling snake oil. 

“[Ionization] is highly unconventional and in my realm of experience, I have seen no concrete evidence published in a refereed journal, nor have I seen sufficient credible eyewitness verification that the technology works as touted,” says George Bomar, the meteorologist charged by the Texas government with licensing the state’s weather modification projects.



This is the common phenomenon of cognitive dissonance in science. 

The Russians are performing a weather experiment which should fail according to accepted theory. 

So the scientist complains that he has “seen no concrete evidence published in a refereed journal.” 

But the complaint reduces to a matter of belief. 

Scientists do not believe electrical power is input to weather systems. 

Referees who believe atmospheric electricity is an effect, rather than a cause of weather, would almost certainly find grounds for rejecting funding for, or publication of, such an experiment. 

The same applies to the publication of reports from credible eyewitnesses. 

For decades airline pilots witnessed strange lightning above storms but were discouraged from reporting it. 

The objection is unfair and unscientific. 

Advances come from challenging established beliefs.

Ionization technology is called either IOLA (ionization of the local atmosphere) by Earthwise or ELAT (electrification of the atmosphere) by the company ELAT. 
イオン化技術は、Earthwise または ELAT (大気の電化) 社による ELATによる、IOLA(局所大気のイオン化)と呼ばれます。

IOLA and ELAT compete with conventional cloud seeding, which
 — though it also remains scientifically unproven — 
is used in more than 24 countries and 10 U.S. states. 
— ただし、科学的にはまだ証明されていない —
従来のクラウド・シーディングと競合します、これは 24 か国以上と米国の 10 州で使用されています。

Cloud seeding usually involves dispersing a chemical agent such as silver iodide into cloud formations, which helps ice crystals form, leading, it is thought, to bigger clouds and more precipitation than without seeding. 

The ionization approach, according to Bissiachi, now ELAT’s vice president of R&D and operations, does a similar job but twice over. 

Ions attract water in the atmosphere, creating the aerosol that produces clouds, and they also charge the dust already in the air, making particles become more attractive nuclei for water droplets, which coalesce and fall to the ground as rain.



It seems that the basic problem in gaining acceptance for ionization technology is the facile description of what causes rain. 

And that is a problem inherited from the experts –’ the meteorologists and atmospheric scientists. 

The water molecule is fascinating because, unlike the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the air, it is electrically polarized.


[3]The oxygen (blue) side of the water molecule is more negative than the hydrogen side (red), forming an electric dipole.
水分子の酸素側 (青) は水素側 (赤) よりも負であり、電気双極子を形成します。

In an electric field, the water molecule will rotate to line up with the field

When it condenses in a cloud the average electric dipole moment of a water molecule in a raindrop is 40 percent greater than that of a single water vapor molecule. 
雲の中で凝縮すると、雨滴中の水分子の平均電気双極子モーメントは、単一の水蒸気分子の平均電気双極子モーメントより 40% 大きくなります。

This enhancement results from the large polarization caused by the electric field induced by surrounding water molecules. 

In the atmospheric electric field the water molecules will be aligned with their dipoles pointing vertically and in a sense that is determined by the charge polarization in the cloud. 

It is interesting to note that the tops of storm clouds are positively charged and the base is negative. 

That is the reverse of the radial charge polarization within the Earth itself. 

And it is this charge polarization that gives rise to the low-order attractive force we call gravity. 

So it is proposed that water droplets in clouds experience an antigravity effect[4]. 

It appears to be related to the ‘Biefield-Brown Effect,’ where a charged high-voltage planar capacitor tends to move in the direction of the positive electrode. 

That effect may explain how millions of tons of water can be suspended kilometres above the ground, when cloud droplets are about 1,000 times denser than the surrounding air.
この効果は、雲の水滴が周囲の空気よりも約 1,000 倍密度が高いときに、地上数キロメートル上空にどのようにして数百万トンの水が浮遊できるかを説明する可能性があります。

Of course, this raises the issue of charge separation in clouds. 

The conventional ‘isolated Earth’ view is that positive and negative charge is ‘somehow’ separated by vertical winds in clouds and that this process in thunderstorms is responsible for charging up the ionosphere and causing the atmospheric electric field. 

But this begs the question of cause and effect. 

Recent high-altitude balloon flights find that charge is not built up in the cloud, it already exists in the ionosphere above. 

In January 2002 I argued the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model[5]:
2002 年 1 月、私は エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルについて次のように主張しました[5]:

“Thunderstorms are not electricity generators, they are passive elements in an interplanetary circuit, like a self-repairing leaky condenser. 

The energy stored in the cloud ‘condenser’ is released as lightning when it short-circuits. 

The short-circuits can occur either within the cloud or across the external resistive paths to Earth or the ionosphere. 

The charge across the cloud ‘condenser’ gives rise to violent vertical electrical winds within the cloud, not vice versa.”

This view accords with a recent report (17 November 2003) in Geophysical Review Letters by Joseph Dwyer of the Florida Institute of Technology, which says that according to conventional theory electrical fields in the atmosphere simply cannot grow large enough to trigger lightning. 

“The conventional view of how lightning is produced is wrong.” 
And so “the true origin of lightning remains a mystery.”

Water vapor in rising air cools and condenses to forms clouds. 

The conventional explanation for rising air relies upon solar heating. 

The electrical weather model has an additional galactic energy source (the same that powers the Sun) to drive the movement of air
電気的気象モデルには、空気の動きを駆動する追加の銀河エネルギー源 (太陽に電力を供給するものと同じ) があります。

It is the same energy source that drives ferocious high-level winds on the giant outer planets, where solar energy is extremely weak. 

Once the water vapor condenses into water droplets it is more plausible that millions of tons of water can remain suspended kilometres above the Earth by electrical means, rather than by thermal updraughts. 

The clouds would act to reduce thermals.

Returning to the article, can we explain how “the natural current between the Earth and the ionosphere is amplified” and how that might increase rainfall? 

It seems to follow naturally from the electric weather model because the ion generators are supplying mobile charge carriers into the dielectric or atmosphere, which increases the leakage current between the Earth and the ionosphere. 

The vertical leakage currents drive vertical motion of the air

In some instances these invisible currents are probably responsible for that unseen danger to aircraft
 — clear air turbulence. 
— 澄んだ空気の乱気流(晴天乱流)

And we find the most severe vertical winds in thunderstorms, where electrical power is dramatically evident. 

Earthwise’s installations are structures about 7 meters high, shaped like short open-topped air-traffic control towers, that house proprietary ion generators and blowers to lift the ions. 
Earthwise の施設は高さ約 7 メートルの構造物で、上部が開いた短い航空管制塔のような形をしており、独自のイオン発生器とイオンを上昇させる送風機が内蔵されています。

Separate antennas amplify the ionization by manipulating the local electric and electromagnetic fields. 

ELAT’s installations work in the same manner but are more primitive in appearance, consisting of a 37-meter high central tower surrounded by 8-meter posts arranged hexagonally at a distance of 150 meters. 
ELAT のインスタレーションも同様に機能しますが、外観はより原始的で、150 メートルの距離に六角形に配置された 8 メートルの柱で囲まれた高さ 37 メートルの中央塔で構成されています。

The tower and posts are interconnected by wires, which when set to a high dc voltage by a 2-kilowatt generator, ionize air molecules such as nitrogen and oxygen. 
タワーと支柱はワイヤーで相互接続されており、2 キロワットの発電機で高 DC 電圧に設定すると、窒素や酸素などの空気分子がイオン化されます。

According to Bissiachi, as the ions waft upward, they produce about 1 milliampere of current. 
ビシアチ氏によると、イオンが上向きに漂うと、約 1 ミリアンペアの電流が生成されます。

This current swamps the Earth’s natural current
 — about 1 picoampere — 
and can affect the weather up to 200 kilometers from the station, he says.
— 約1ピコアンペア —

Summing up all its tests from 2000 to 2002, ELAT and its U.S. and Canadian counterpart Ionogenics, in Marblehead, Mass., claim that ionization led to about double the average historical precipitation stimulating, among other things, a 61 percent increase in bean production in Mexico’s central basin in the last three years. 
2000 年から 2002 年までのすべてのテストを要約すると、マサチューセッツ州マーブルヘッドにある ELAT とその米国およびカナダの対応会社 イオノジェニックスは、イオン化により過去3年間の平均降水量が約2倍に達し、特にメキシコ中央盆地における豆の生産量が過去3年間で61パーセント増加したと主張している。

Cloud seeding, in comparison, typically claims only a 10-15 percent improvement in rainfall.
それに比べて、クラウドシーディングによる降雨量の改善は通常 10 ~ 15% にすぎません。

Despite the claimed successes, ionization has its critics. 

Atmospheric scientists contacted for this article noted that even the four years of testing was too brief a period to prove that the effects seen were not due to some sort of extraordinary variability in the local weather. 

Bissiachi claims that the criticism goes to a deeper prejudice. 

“Meteorologists are not used to thinking that electrical phenomena could be important to the normal hydrodynamic model,” he says.

Weather modification technology has always had a hard time standing up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. 

Ross N. Hoffman, a vice president at Atmospheric and Environmental Research Inc. in Lexington, Mass., helped complete a scientific review of cloud seeding, which was released by the U.S. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., in November 2003. 
マサチューセッツ州レキシントンにある大気環境研究所の副社長であるロス N. ホフマンは、2003 年 11 月にワシントン D.C. の米国国立研究評議会によって発表されたクラウドシーディングの科学的レビューの完成に貢献しました。

It found that even after more than 50 years of use, cloud seeding remained unproven from a scientific standpoint. “[Ionization] faces the same problems cloud seeding does,” he says. 
50年以上使用されてきた後でも、クラウドシーディングは科学的な観点から証明されていないことが判明した。  「(イオン化は)クラウドシーディングと同じ問題に直面しています」と彼は言う。

Among those are uncertainty about the natural variability of precipitation, the inability to accurately measure rainfall, and the need to randomize and replicate experiments. 

The last is particularly troublesome, since weather modification companies are typically hired to induce rain whenever they can. 

Randomly turning on or off the system to prove a point is not in the customer’s interest, Hoffman notes.

Ionization also suffers doubts about its basic plausibility. 

Brian A. Tinsley, a physicist at the University of Texas, Dallas, and an expert on the effects of ions and current in the atmosphere, points out that the ionosphere is about 250,000 volts positive compared with the ground. 

But the effect of the resulting current, and changes to it from cosmic rays and other phenomena, on droplet formation and precipitation is “relatively small” and restricted to certain types of clouds in specific locations, he says. 

Considering the size of the natural voltage and the modesty of its impact on rainfall, effective weather modification using ionization, he believes, would require enormous power input and hundreds of square kilometers of antenna arrays.



If conventional theory fails to explain electrical storms it cannot be used to discount the results of ionization experiments. 

Instead, conventional theory suffers doubts about its basic plausibility. 

Weather experts have a limited view of the electrical nature of the Earth and its environment. 

The “enormous power input” is freely available from the galaxy. 

That galactic electrical power drives the weather systems on all of the planets and even the Sun. 

So the ionization experiment is rather like the control gate in a transistor, where a small current into the control gate influences the entire power output of the transistor. 

This method of weather control should eventually force the critics to think again.

Wal Thornhill

1.    report: http://www.holoscience.com/news/img/Electric_Rainmaking.pdf
2.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Storm_clouds.jpg
3.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Water_molecule.jpg
4.    antigravity effect: http://www.holoscience.com/news/antigravity.html
5.    ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model: http://www.holoscience.com/news/balloon.html
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric-weather/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Electric Dust Devils  電気的ダストデビルズ by Wal Thornhill

Electric Dust Devils  電気的ダストデビルズ

by Wal Thornhill | April 25, 2004 12:40 am

‘.. it may sometimes be that not to know one thing that is wrong could be more important than knowing a hundred things that are right.’
– Halton Arp, Quasars, Redshifts & Controversies
「...100 の正しいことを知るよりも、間違ったことを 1 つ知らないことの方が重要なこともあります。」
– ハルトン・アープ、クエーサー赤方偏移、そして論争
The electrical character of dust devils and tornadoes is rarely mentioned. 

In fact, researchers only recently began to examine the electrical nature of dust devils in an effort to understand what is happening on Mars. 

Mysteries still surround electrical activity in our atmosphere. 

For example, the Earth has a vertical electric field, in the order of 100 volts per meter in dry air, whose origin is unknown. 
たとえば、地球には乾燥空気中で 1 メートルあたり 100 ボルト程度の垂直電場がありますが、その起源は不明です。

And scientists do not know what causes the most obvious electrical phenomenon in the atmosphere –’ lightning. 
-' 稲妻、

See ‘The Balloon goes up over lightning![1]‘ for a discussion of the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model of lightning.
稲妻の エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルの説明については、「The Balloon gos up over lightning![1]」を参照してください。

However, last week saw another success for the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model. 
しかしながら、先週は エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルのさらなる成功が見られました。

It’s now official that dust devils on Earth exhibit strong electric fields, in excess of 4,000 volts per meter. 

They generate magnetic fields as well. 

The researchers who made the discovery added the qualification ‘”on Earth”‘ because the discovery was a surprise. 

They cannot be certain that it applies to the dust devils on Mars because their purely mechanical model did not predict the electrical effects found in earthly dust devils. 

However the tentative connection was made and resulted in the following artist’s impression of what an electrified Martian dust devil might look like.


 [2]The artist seems to have intuitively included a glow discharge near the base of the dust devil. Credit: University of Michigan
[2]アーティストは、ダストデビルの基部近くにグロー放電を直感的に組み込んだようです。 クレジット: ミシガン大学

In July, 1999, I wrote:
1999 年 7 月に、私は次のように書きました:

‘The 5 mile high dust devils on Mars and the global Martian dust storms are, I believe, a manifestation of electric discharges on Mars. 

In the very low atmospheric pressure lightning would be more like a diffuse auroral glow. 

The problem of generating dust storms on Mars is how to get the particles on the surface to “saltate”, or leave the surface, with such little force in the wind.

Electrostatic forces could easily do the job.’

Several years ago, the electrical nature of dust devils and tornadoes was suggested on this website in the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® Synopsis[3]. 
数年前、ダストデビルと竜巻の電気的性質が、このウェブサイトのエレクトリック・ユニバース® の概要 [3] で示唆されました。

And a fuller explanation of the electromagnetic effects of a tornadic electric discharge was presented in Sunspot Mysteries[4]. 

There I wrote:

‘Make no mistake, the Martian dust devils are tornadoes that dwarf their earthly counterpart. 
It shows that clouds are not required to generate them. 
They are an atmospheric electric discharge phenomenon.’
More recently I suggested that the Mars Exploration Rover, Spirit, which landed in a dust devil scarred area, suffered electrical interference[5] severe enough to cause computer problems.

Now in a report from Astrobiology Magazine, Dr. William Farrell of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center says:

‘Dust devils are common on Mars, and NASA is interested in them as well as other phenomena as a possible nuisance or hazard to future human explorers.’ 

‘If martian dust devils are highly electrified, as our research suggests, they might give rise to increased discharging or arcing in the low-pressure martian atmosphere, increased dust adhesion to space suits and equipment, and interference with radio communications.’ 

Farrell is the lead author of the paper about this research published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

‘Two ingredients, present on both Earth and Mars, are necessary for a dust devil to form: 
「ダストデビルが形成されるには、地球と火星の両方に存在する 2 つの成分が必要です:
rising air and a source of rotation,” said Dr. Nilton Renno of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., a member of the research team and expert in the fluid dynamics of dust devils. 

“Wind shear, such as a change in wind direction and speed with altitude, is the source for rotation. 
Stronger updrafts have the potential to produce stronger dust devils, and larger wind shear produces larger dust devils,” Renno said.



In the words of Halton Arp, ‘not to know one thing that is wrong could be more important than knowing a hundred things that are right.’ 

In this case it is the confusion of cause and effect. 

It is simply assumed that the Earth and its environment in space is electrically neutral. 

Therefore some energy is required to cause charge to separate and produce the strong electric field in the dust devil. 

The only energy available is solar radiation and the movement of air (fluid dynamics). 
利用できる唯一のエネルギーは、太陽放射と空気の動き (流体力学) です。

However, in an electrified universe charge is already separated on the macroscopic scale 

and the movement of air in a dust devil is an effect of charge recombination, not a cause of charge separation.


Dust particles become electrified in dust devils, when they rub against each other as they are carried by the winds, transferring positive and negative electric charge the same way you build up static electricity if you shuffle across a carpet. 

Scientists thought there would not be a high-voltage, large-scale electric field in dust devils, because negatively charged particles would be evenly mixed with positively charged particles, so the overall electric charge in the dust devil would be in balance.



It is clear from laboratory experiments that different size dust grains can charge to opposite polarities upon collision. 

However, the electric force between oppositely charged grains would tend to prevent their separation. 

That is what scientists expected and it explains their surprise when the opposite was found. 

But it may not be so surprising if we stop treating a dust devil as a fluid dynamics problem and consider it instead as weakly ionized plasma subject to the Earth”s vertical clear-air electric field. 

In such circumstances the electric field may be strongest (and the electric field reversed) at the base of the dust devil due to the formation of a plasma ‘double layer’ or ‘virtual cathode.’


However, the team’s observations indicate smaller particles become negatively charged, while larger particles become positively charged. 

Dust devil winds carry the small, negatively charged particles high into the air, while the heavier, positively charged particles remain near the base of the dust devil. 

This separation of charges produces the large-scale electric field, like the positive and negative terminals on a battery. 

Since the electrified particles are in motion, and a magnetic field is just the result of moving electric charges, the dust devil also generates a magnetic field.



The earth and all other bodies in the universe are not isolated and electrically inert. 

They are intimately connected to and influenced by the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE®. 
これらは エレクトリック・ユニバース® と密接に関係しており、エレクトリック・ユニバース® の影響を受けています。

This means that dust devils are not a local event, but are driven like motors by a cosmic current. 

Dust devils and storm clouds do not act as ‘batteries’ or ‘dynamos’ to provide power to a global atmospheric circuit. 

As for the magnetic effects of a tornado or dust devil, they will be very strong because the charges are moving at meters per second instead of centimeters per hour, as happens in a current-carrying wire.


If martian dust grains have a variety of sizes and compositions, dust devils on Mars should become electrified the same way as their particles rub against each other, according to the team. 

Martian dust storms, which can cover the entire planet, are also expected to be strong generators of electric fields. 

The team hopes to measure a large dust storm on Earth and have instruments to detect atmospheric electric and magnetic fields on future Mars landers.



In the electrical model of the solar system, all planets must contrive to supply electrons to the positively charged Sun. 

Mercury probably does it in a similar way to our Moon, through photoelectric and cold-cathode emission. 

Occasionally the emission may be strong enough at certain ‘hot spots’ to cause the anomalous glows seen on the Moon. 

The next planet from the Sun, Venus, has an ionosphere entwined in current ‘ropes’ from the solar wind. 

It causes powerful ‘super bolts’ of lightning to fly between the planet’s ionosphere and the surface

It seems the electric field at Venus’ hot surface is so strong that above a certain altitude the atmosphere hugging the surface glows with a surface discharge known as St. Elmo’s fire. 

Being dense plasma it reflected the radar signal from the Magellan Orbiter as if the mountains of Venus were plated with metal, much to the puzzlement of planetary scientists.

On Earth we have water clouds to charge up between the ionosphere and the Earth and spare us the super bolts of Venus. 

Although there are rare reports of ‘bolts from the blue,’ the Earth contrives to discharge in two stages, by lightning from ground to cloud and by glowing jets from the cloud to the ionosphere. 

The latter stage has only recently been recognized and the flashes given whimsical names like ‘sprites,’ ‘elves’ and ‘gnomes,’ which probably reflects the scientists’ disbelief before they were finally acknowledged. 

On rare occasions, a powerful lightning bolt strikes directly from the cloud tops to Earth. 

Such super bolts rip electrons violently from the earth and may form small-scale furrows like those seen on all other solid bodies in the solar system.


[6]This 40 foot rille was torn out by lightning. The more tortuous path of the narrow lightning stroke can be seen as a groove in the bottom of the trench. Credit: National Geographic, June 1950.

[6]この40 フィートのリルは雷によって引き裂かれました。 狭い落雷のより曲がりくねった経路は、溝の底にある溝として見ることができます。 クレジット: ナショナル ジオグラフィック、1950 年 6 月。


 [7]This is a section of a prominent lunar rille, Schröter's Valley, which also shows the tortuous path of the lightning along the floor of the wider trench.

Usually the cloud to ground discharge takes the form of the multiple sparks we call lightning. 

However, in some parts of the world the lightning switches to the slower discharge of the tornado. 

Then, instead of the electric charge rushing directly between the ground and the cloud along a thin lightning channel, it is constrained by powerful electromagnetic forces to rotate in a long, thin cylinder or vortex. 

Measurement of the magnetic field and earth current near touchdown of a tornado shows that it is electrically equivalent to several hundred storm cells. 

It is this concentrated electrical power in the central vortex that creates damage far in excess of that possible for a simple wind vortex. 

It also explains the burnt surfaces and objects sometimes found after the passage of a tornado.

The thin dry atmosphere of Mars and the large temperature gradient near the surface is certainly conducive to the formation of dust devils. 

However, like the other planets, Mars has to supply electrons to the solar discharge. 

The high electron density above Mars was remarked upon when the first orbiting spacecraft arrived there. 

Images from Mars landers of a dust laden pink sky were also a surprise. 

Scientists expected a deep blue-black sky because the atmosphere is about a hundred times thinner than ours and less able to hold dust suspended. 

In the thin, practically cloudless air of Mars, the dust devils provide the best means of moving electrons from the surface toward the Martian ionosphere. 

The dust particles, becoming charged, would be suspended in Mars atmospheric electric field to give the pink sky. 

In other words, Martian dust devils are more akin to tornadoes. 

Towering up to 8 kilometers into the sky their destructive capability at the surface would be far more powerful than that of a simple spinning wind in Mars” thin air.
空に向かって最大 8 キロメートルもそびえ立つそれらの地表での破壊力は、火星の薄い空気で回転する単純な風よりもはるかに強力です。

When these Martian tornadoes pass over the surface of Mars, they often leave dark, criss-crossing streaks on the land. 

It is simply assumed that the wind removes bright dust from the terrain, revealing a darker surface underneath. 

It is possible however, that electrical damage to the surface, and therefore erosion, is being caused by the Martian tornadoes. 

They certainly pose a much greater risk to landing craft and future visiting astronauts than scientists expect.

Meanwhile there is another example of an electrically damaged body whose surface patterns bear a strong resemblance to those formed by the electric tornadoes on Mars. 

It is Jupiter’s moon, Europa.


[8]Traveling discharges created giant furrows on Europa[9] reflecting the great strength of those wandering arcs compared to the diffuse discharges on Mars today. 
[8] 移動放電はエウロパに巨大な溝を生み出しました[9]。これは、今日の火星の拡散放電と比較して、それらの放浪アークの強さを反映しています。

The furrows on Europa are not cracks in the ice. They are instead a frozen record of the catastrophic power of Jupiter’s thunderbolt, when unleashed by that electrical powerhouse of a planet.
エウロパの溝は氷の亀裂ではありません。 代わりに、それらは、惑星の電力源によって解き放たれたときの、木星の落雷の壊滅的な力の凍結された記録です。

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model provides a unifying concept for understanding the solar system by simply accepting the overwhelming evidence for the primary role of electricity and the electric force in the mechanism of the cosmos. 
エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルは、宇宙のメカニズムにおける電気と電気力の主な役割に関する圧倒的な証拠を受け入れるだけで、太陽系を理解するための統一的な概念を提供します。

Future historians will find the science of the 20th century extraordinary for its insistence on a cosmology based on pre-industrial-revolution thinking. 

Electricity was a mystery then and remains so into the 21st century for astronomers and geologists. 
天文学者や地質学者にとって、電気は当時も謎であり、21 世紀になっても謎のままです。 

Once again, to not know this simple fact is more important than all things they do know.

Wal Thornhill

1.    The Balloon goes up over lightning!: http://www.holoscience.com/news/balloon.html
2.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mars_dust-devils.jpg
3.    ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® Synopsis: http://www.holoscience.com/synopsis.php?page=9
4.    Sunspot Mysteries: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=s9ke93mf
5.    suffered electrical interference: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=b50z4mj1
6.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2001/10/earth_rille.jpg
7.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Schroters_Valley.jpg
8.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Dust_devilsEuropa.jpg
9.    created giant furrows on Europa: http://www.holoscience.com/news/jupiter.htm
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric-dust-devils/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


An Open Letter to Closed Minds閉ざされた心への公開書簡 by Wal Thornhill

An Open Letter to Closed Minds閉ざされた心への公開書簡

by Wal Thornhill | April 12, 2004 12:18 am


Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal.

Everything astronomers can see, stretching out to distances of 10 billion light-years, emerged from an infinitesimal speck. 
– Martin Rees, Our Cosmic Habitat (2001).
– マーティン・リース、私たちの宇宙の生息地 (2001)。

“A widely-accepted foundation stone of scientific logic involves a process of elimination, requiring all available possibilities to be considered with incorrect ideas discarded when they fail to predict experimental results. Just as the police must consider all possible suspects during an investigation, so a scientist must, as a matter of professional responsibility and competence, consider all possible explanations when forming his conclusions. However, some scientists are able to ignore these duties, while the safeguards built into the scientific bureaucracy, supposedly to ensure quality, do not prevent such malpractice but rather enable it.” 
– John Hewitt, A Habit of Lies[1].

「広く受け入れられている科学論理の基礎には消去法が含まれており、利用可能なすべての可能性を考慮し、実験結果の予測に失敗した場合には誤ったアイデアを破棄する必要があります。 警察が捜査中に考えられるすべての容疑者を考慮しなければならないのと同じように、科学者も専門的な責任と能力の問題として、結論を下す際に考えられるすべての説明を考慮しなければなりません。 しかし、一部の科学者はこれらの義務を無視することができますが、品質を確保するために科学官僚制度に組み込まれた安全装置は、そのような不正行為を防ぐものではなく、むしろそれを可能にしています。」
– ジョン・ヒューイット、「嘘の習慣」[1]。
The open letter exhibited here is addressed to the scientific community by a leading group of concerned scientists. 
It questions a core belief
 – the belief in the so-called big bang theory. 
– いわゆるビッグバン理論への信念。

So it will be instructive to watch the behavior of that community in response. 

Already, the first line of defense
 – censorship – 
has held. 
– 検閲 –

The journal Nature rejected the letter for publication. 

New Scientist, the more populist magazine, on 22 May 2004 finally published the letter under the title ”Bucking the big bang.” [Note: This news item was temporarily withdrawn while waiting for publication of the final version of the letter[2]. (Link updated July 2018)]
より大衆向けの雑誌であるニュー・サイエンティストは、2004 年 5 月 22 日、最終的に「ビッグバンを阻止する」というタイトルでこの書簡を掲載しました。  [注: このニュース項目は、書簡の最終版の出版を待っている間、一時的に取り下げられました[2]。  (リンクは 2018 年 7 月に更新されました)]
“You could write the entire history of science in the last 50 years in terms of papers rejected by Science or Nature.” 
– Paul C. Lauterbur, winner of the Nobel Prize for medicine, whose seminal paper on magnetic resonance imaging was originally rejected by Nature.
「サイエンスやネイチャーによって拒否された論文という観点から、過去 50 年間の科学の歴史全体を書くことができます。」
– ノーベル医学賞受賞者、ポール・C・ローターバー氏。磁気共鳴画像法に関する彼の独創的な論文は当初、ネイチャー誌に拒否されました。

That scathing commentator on errant human behavior, John Ralston Saul, has compared the scientific community to the medieval church. 

Some of the signatories to the open letter would agree with him. 

We humans, at least the males it seems, have a penchant for setting up organizations
 – political, religious, and scientific – 
that with time become authoritarian, exclusive and dogmatic. 
– 政治的、宗教的、科学的 –

Despite this we are led to believe that scientists are somehow trained to be above such human failings. 

The deception only succeeds because there is no effective investigative reporting of science.

A challenge to orthodoxy tends to be ignored at first. 

But if it gains popular support, the first move is to discredit and silence the challenger. 

The protectors of the scientific faith often parade the “scientific method” like a holy icon to warn off evil, heretical spirits. 

And the demand is made that “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.” 

However, as Robert Matthews in the New Scientist of 13 March 2004 notes:

“Over the years, sociologists and historians have often pointed out the glaring disparity between how science is supposed to work and what really happens. 

While scientists routinely dismiss these qualms as anecdotal, subjective or plain incomprehensible, the suspicion that there is something wrong with the scientific process itself is well founded. 

The proof comes from a rigorous mathematical analysis of how evidence alters our belief in a scientific theory.” 
“Belief” is the crux of the matter. 

The usual declaration that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence is merely a smokescreen for the fact that no amount of evidence will change the consensus view until a sufficient number “convert” to a belief in the new theory. 

Science is therefore a political numbers game based on subjective beliefs. 

Max Planck was right when he said:

“An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents. 
What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning.”

Matthews continues:

“It gets worse. As the evidence accumulates, the two camps will not only fail to reach consensus but actually be driven further apart
 – propelled by their different views ..
And worst of all, there is no prospect of such a consensus unless the two sides can agree about the cause of the data.”
"それは、更にひどくなります。 証拠が蓄積されるにつれて、両陣営は合意に達することができないだけでなく、実際にはさらに離れていくことになるだろう
– それぞれの異なる見解によって推進される ..

Such a conclusion bodes ill for any attempt to change the status quo

Meanwhile, the big bang theory continues to make extraordinary claims based upon little or no evidence. 
[An Open Letter to the Scientific Community]

(Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004)

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed
– inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. 
– インフレーション、暗黒物質、暗黒エネルギーが最も顕著な例です。

Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. 

In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. 

It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.

But the big bang theory can’t survive without these fudge factors. 

Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation.

Without some kind of dark matter, unlike any that we have observed on Earth despite 20 years of experiments, big-bang theory makes contradictory predictions for the density of matter in the universe

Inflation requires a density 20 times larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory’s explanation of the origin of the light elements. 
インフレーションには、軽元素の起源を理論的に説明するビッグバン元素合成によって示唆される密度よりも 20 倍大きな密度が必要です。

And without dark energy, the theory predicts that the universe is only about 8 billion years old, which is billions of years younger than the age of many stars in our galaxy.

What is more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation. 

The successes claimed by the theory’s supporters consist of its ability to retrospectively fit observations with a steadily increasing array of adjustable parameters, just as the old Earth-centred cosmology of Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles.

Yet the big bang is not the only framework available for understanding the history of the universe

Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesise an evolving universe without beginning or end. 

These and other alternative approaches can also explain the basic phenomena of the cosmos, including the abundances of light elements, the generation of large-scale structure, the cosmic background radiation, and how the redshift of far-away galaxies increases with distance. 

They have even predicted new phenomena that were subsequently observed, something the big bang has failed to do.

Supporters of the big bang theory may retort that these theories do not explain every cosmological observation. 

But that is scarcely surprising, as their development has been severely hampered by a complete lack of funding. 

Indeed, such questions and alternatives cannot even now be freely discussed and examined. 

An open exchange of ideas is lacking in most mainstream conferences. 

Whereas Richard Feynman could say that “science is the culture of doubt”, in cosmology today doubt and dissent are not tolerated, and young scientists learn to remain silent if they have something negative to say about the standard big bang model. 

Those who doubt the big bang fear that saying so will cost them their funding.

Even observations are now interpreted through this biased filter, judged right or wrong depending on whether or not they support the big bang. 

So discordant data on red shifts, lithium and helium abundances, and galaxy distribution, among other topics, are ignored or ridiculed. 

This reflects a growing dogmatic mindset that is alien to the spirit of free scientific enquiry.

Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. 

Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big bang. 

As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the theory.

Giving support only to projects within the big bang framework undermines a fundamental element of the scientific method
 — the constant testing of theory against observation. 

Such a restriction makes unbiased discussion and research impossible. 

To redress this, we urge those agencies that fund work in cosmology to set aside a significant fraction of their funding for investigations into alternative theories and observational contradictions of the big bang. 

To avoid bias, the peer review committee that allocates such funds could be composed of astronomers and physicists from outside the field of cosmology.

Allocating funding to investigations into the big bang’s validity, and its alternatives, would allow the scientific process to determine our most accurate model of the history of the universe.
*New signer
The Thunderbolts Project,  Japan Divison
Takaaki Fukatsu

 深津 孝明
Initial signers:
(Institutions for identification only) 

Halton Arp, Max-Planck-Institute Fur Astrophysik (Germany)
Andre Koch Torres Assis, State University of Campinas (Brazil)
Yuri Baryshev, Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg State University (Russia)
Ari Brynjolfsson, Applied Radiation Industries (USA)
Hermann Bondi, Churchill College, Cambridge (UK)
Timothy Eastman, Plasmas International (USA)
Chuck Gallo, Superconix, Inc.(USA)
Thomas Gold, Cornell University (emeritus) (USA)
Amitabha Ghosh, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur (India)
Walter J. Heikkila, University of Texas at Dallas (USA)
Michael Ibison, Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin (USA)
Thomas Jarboe, Washington University (USA)
Jerry W. Jensen, ATK Propulsion (USA)
Menas Kafatos, George Mason University (USA)
Eric J. Lerner, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (USA)
Paul Marmet, Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics(retired) (Canada)
Paola Marziani, Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica, Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova (Italy)
Gregory Meholic, The Aerospace Corporation (USA)
Jacques Moret-Bailly, Université Dijon (retired) (France)
Jayant Narlikar, IUCAA(emeritus) and College de France (India,France)
Marcos Cesar Danhoni Neves, State University of Maringá (Brazil)
Charles D. Orth, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (USA)
R. David Pace, Lyon College (USA)
Georges Paturel, Observatoire de Lyon (France)
Jean-Claude Pecker, College de France (France)
Anthony L. Peratt, Los Alamos National Laboratory (USA)
Bill Peter, BAE Systems Advanced Technologies (USA)
David Roscoe, Sheffield University (UK)
Malabika Roy, George Mason University (USA)
Sisir Roy, George Mason University (USA)
Konrad Rudnicki, Jagiellonian University (Poland)
Domingos S.L. Soares, Federal University of Minas Gerais (Brazil)
John L. West, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology (USA)
James F. Woodward, California State University, Fullerton (USA)
ハルトン・アープ、マックス・プランク研究所天体物理学 (ドイツ)
アリ・ブリニョルフソン、応用放射線産業 (米国)

ティモシー・イーストマン、プラズマ・インターナショナル (米国)
ジェリー・W・ジェンセン、ATK推進力 (米国)
エリック・J・ラーナー、ローレンスビルプラズマ物理学 (米国)
アンソニー L. ペラット、ロスアラモス国立研究所 (米国)
ビル・ピーター、BAE システムズ アドバンスト テクノロジーズ(米国)
ドミンゴス S.L. ミナスジェライス連邦大学ソアレス校(ブラジル)

[What is the Real Problem with Cosmology?]
The sentiments expressed in the open letter are welcome. 

However, I don’t think it will result in any change. 

The proposal that “the peer review committee that allocates such funds could be composed of astronomers and physicists from outside the field of cosmology,” is a small step in the direction that science generally should be taking. 

However, many astronomers and physicists outside the field of cosmology believe in the big bang theory or have a vested interest in it. 

It would be preferable if there were a kind of jury system with educated people from engineering and the humanities as well. 

Any proposal that could not be explained simply to such an audience would demonstrate that the author did not understand it either. 

In addition, arguments against a proposal should be admissible from any quarter.

The modern problem with cosmology began with an assumption about the nature of the redshift in the spectrum of faint extragalactic objects, discovered by Edwin Hubble. 

Hubble wrote:

“If the redshifts are a Doppler shift … the observations as they stand lead to the anomaly of a closed universe, curiously small and dense, and, it may be added, suspiciously young. 

On the other hand, if redshifts are not Doppler effects, these anomalies disappear and the region observed appears as a small, homogeneous, but insignificant portion of a universe extended indefinitely both in space and time.”
(Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices, 17, 506, 1937).


[The astronomer Edwin P. Hubble]

Hubble’s logical scientific attitude toward the phenomenon of extragalactic redshift is in stark contrast to the illogical and nonsensical opening quotation from the Astronomer Royal. 

The big bang theory sprang from a theoretical preference for Hubble’s first possibility

Hubble’s brilliant student, Halton Arp, later confirmed that the second possibility was correct. 
ハッブルの優秀な弟子であるハルトン・アープは、後に 2 番目の可能性が正しいことを確認しました。

But by then the big bang theory had become dogma. 

Arp was effectively “excommunicated” for his heresy.


 [Abbé Georges Lemaitre, astrophysicist and a monsignor in the Catholic church, with Einstein in 1933.]

The medieval church of science now has its own miraculous version of creation, partly because the astronomer who first proposed the Big Bang, Georges Lemaitre, wanted to reconcile the creation of the universe to Genesis

It is reported that after the Belgian detailed his theory, Einstein stood up, applauded, and said, “This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened.” 

But the great surrealist artist, Salvador Dali, has effectively parodied Einstein’s appreciation of aesthetics. 

Einstein also said, “When I examined myself and my methods of thought, I came to the conclusion that the gift of fantasy has meant more to me than my talent for absorbing positive knowledge.” 

Is it any wonder that big bang cosmology is a fantasy?

Modern astronomers have never understood what the ancients meant when they talked about “creation.” 

It is clear from comparative religion that creation stories are NOT about the origin of the universe

In fact, our modern view of the concept of “creation” would be incomprehensible to the authors of the religious texts. 

What they were memorializing was the “re-creation” of a new cosmic order in the skies following apocalyptic chaos.



We have stared annihilation from heaven in the face and it has deeply scarred us. 

It fuels our irrational fear of comets and imagined impacts from space. 

It colors our cosmology as we desperately seek to understand the cosmos in reassuring terms.

So my misgivings about cosmology run much deeper than the theories written in scientific journals. 

My concern is with human fallibility in observing and interpreting the cosmos. 

I consider that the human psyche and therefore our cosmological beliefs are deeply affected by the past, which science has chosen not to recognize. 

It is a past of cosmic catastrophe. 

Recent genetic research has shown that the entire human race “may have been in such a precarious position that only a few thousand of us may have been alive on the whole face of the Earth at one point in time, that we almost went extinct, that some event was so catastrophic as to nearly cause our species to cease to exist completely.” 

It is therefore not surprising that ALL religious symbolism relates back to the heavens, the home of the capricious gods of chaos.


This could help explain the tendency for cosmologists to be drawn into a theory that has much in common with the biblical creation story and little to do with science. 

Ironically, if astronomers took the time to understand the earliest information we have about the heavens we would be closer to seeing the universe clearly for the first time. 

Observation and experience should come first, not theory. 

Until we understand our own planet’s history and that of our solar system a lot better we cannot hope to chart the history of the universe

And that, necessarily, will require a wider perspective than the current tunnel vision predominating in astronomy and physics. 

But first we must understand ourselves.

1.    A Habit of Lies: http://freespace.virgin.net/john.hewitt1/pg_pref.htm
2.    the final version of the letter: http://cosmology.info/open-letter/index.html
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/an-open-letter-to-closed-minds/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Mystery of Mars’ Polar Spirals 火星の極渦巻の謎 by Wal Thornhill

Mystery of Mars’ Polar Spirals 火星の極渦巻の謎

by Wal Thornhill | March 30, 2004 11:30 pm

‘Before each revolution, all the pegs seemed square and all the holes round. In each case, it was not until it was realized that one had to discard the whole frame of reference and seek another that answers came in a flood. 
..It is not our methods nor our observations that have been wrong, but our whole attitude.’ 
– J. Tuzo Wilson

「それぞれの革命の前には、すべてのペグは四角く、すべての穴は丸く見えました。 いずれの場合も、基準の枠組み全体を捨てて、別の基準を探さなければならないことに気づいて初めて、答えが洪水のように湧き出てきました。
– J. トゥーゾ・ウィルソン

There is an attitude in geology, a legacy of James Hutton in the 1780’s and later the lawyer, Sir Charles Lyell, which says ‘the present is the key to the past.’ 
地質学には、1780 年代のジェームズ・ハットンとその後の弁護士チャールズ・ライエル卿の遺した、「現在は過去への鍵である」という考え方があります。

It is a complacent mantra of uniformity that allows trivial forces such as surface erosion to be extrapolated back over stupefying time spans to give the illusion that geologists understand the processes that have shaped the Earth. 

This attitude is now being applied to Mars. 

It resulted last week in a claim to have solved the mystery of the spiral patterns at that planet’s poles. 

The real mystery is why anyone considers a simple computer model that produces spiral patterns solves the many puzzling details of the Martian polar caps. 

Furthermore the claim comes too late. 

The explanation was outlined last August on this website (see below).
この説明は昨年 8 月にこの Web サイトで概説されました (下記を参照)。

The geologists’ uniformitarian creed has become anachronistic. 

As soon as they accepted that the Earth has suffered global catastrophes in the dim past the attitude should have changed to THE PRESENT IS NOT THE KEY TO THE PAST. 

Instead it has been business as usual. 

After all, geology becomes very rickety when that central support is taken away. 

So the computer model mentioned above extrapolates a slow process back in time over millions of years. 
したがって、上記のコンピューター モデルは、数百万年にわたる遅いプロセスを推定します。

The result is trivial because no one is going to be able to verify it and it is easy to falsify.

It will be the unusual, one of a kind event that upsets such complacency. 

And some of the strangest reports come down from antiquity. 

Given the extremely short time we have been making modern scientific observations, it seems plain good sense to make use of human experience of the natural world as far into the past as we can. 

Such an investigation must be forensic in style and not restricted to geology or astronomy. 

It should rely on observation over theory. 

When that has been done we can perhaps have more confidence in theories about the Earth and other planets.

In December 2003, one of the most important scientific papers ever published appeared in IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 31, NO.6. It is titled Characteristics for the Occurrence of a High-Current, Z-Pinch Aurora as Recorded in Antiquity, by Anthony L. Peratt, Fellow, IEEE.
2003 年 12 月、これまでに出版された最も重要な科学論文の 1 つが、IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE、VOL. 2 に掲載されました。  31、NO.6。 これは、IEEE フェローの アンソニー・L・ペラットによる「古代に記録された高電流 Z ピンチ オーロラの発生の特徴」と題されています。


[Anthony Peratt]
You may be forgiven if you missed it. 

Hidden behind the usual unexciting academic title is a bombshell for science. 

It provides definitive evidence for the electrical nature of the Earth and the solar system. 

But the biggest surprise for geologists and astronomers is that modern prehistoric humans witnessed in the heavens a cosmic scale electrical discharge involving the Earth. 

How can we be so certain? 

The author is an authority on the behavior of the most powerful electrical discharges unleashed by man. 

Such discharges develop instabilities (the kind of thing that has defied all attempts at producing hot fusion power). 

Plasma physicists know them as ‘Peratt instabilities.’ 

The importance of these Peratt instabilities for our forensic investigation is that they evolve through extremely complex and distinctive shapes. 

Globally, prehistoric man preserved those forms on rock in the form of petroglyphs, like still frames from a movie. 

The petroglyphs show a highly unusual event ‘ a cosmic electrical catastrophe. 

And because the instabilities are three dimensional, it is possible to determine their location in the sky through the perspective depicted. 
そして、不安定性は 3 次元であるため、描かれた遠近法を通じて空における不安定性の位置を決定することが可能です。

The discharge was polar, hence the ‘aurora’ in the title.

The discovery that objects from the Neolithic or Early Bronze Age carry patterns associated with high-current Z-pinches provides a possible insight into the origin and meaning of these ancient symbols produced by man. 
新石器時代または青銅器時代初期の物体が高電流の Z ピンチに関連するパターンを持っているという発見は、人間が作り出したこれらの古代のシンボルの起源と意味についての洞察を可能にする可能性を提供します。

This paper directly compares the graphical and radiation data from high-current Z-pinches to these patterns. 
この論文では、高電流 Z ピンチからのグラフィック データと放射線データをこれらのパターンと直接比較します。

The paper focuses primarily, but not exclusively, on petroglyphs. 

It is found that a great many archaic petroglyphs can be classified according to plasma stability and instability data. 

As the same morphological types are found worldwide, the comparisons suggest the occurrence of an intense aurora, as might be produced if the solar wind had increased between one and two orders of magnitude, millennia ago.
同じ形態のタイプが世界中で見つかっているため、この比較は、数千年前に太陽風が 1 ~ 2 桁増加した場合に発生した可能性のある、強烈なオーロラの発生を示唆しています。

Peratt uses carbon dating and a recent plasma extraction dating method by Rowe and Steelman for pictographs to estimate that the intense auroras ‘occurred within a time period of 10,000 BC’2,000 BC.’

Peratt’s paper has ramifications far beyond plasma physics, but because it does not support the attitude adopted by other specialist fields, I predict we will not see it featured in Nature or Science anytime soon. 

The author sidesteps the highly contentious question about the origin of the intense auroral current by attributing it to the solar wind. 

But an increase in solar electrical activity by several orders of magnitude would be accompanied by an increase in solar radiation of the same order. 

The Earth and its prehistoric artists would have been char-grilled! 

The serious researcher must search for a more realistic explanation of global events.

It is known, but not widely reported, that gravity acting alone can only produce a chaotic solar system. 

The solar system cannot be a Newtonian clockwork. 

But the question of what stabilizes planetary orbits has not been asked. 

Meanwhile, for those who understand the ancient mythic theme of planetary gods hurling thunderbolts, we now have rock-solid human evidence that gargantuan cosmic electric discharges have occurred prehistorically between the Earth and another planet. 

And it is this hidden electrical nature of planets and the solar system that ensures its stability. 

It is hidden because plasma in space is capable of electrical shielding, provided two bodies remain far enough apart. 
2 つの天体が十分に離れていれば、宇宙空間のプラズマは電気を遮蔽できるため、これは隠されています。

The electric shields are given the misleading name of magnetospheres because they trap the planet’s magnetic field inside too. 

In extremis the electric force prevents impacts between planets, but the price is high. 
Interplanetary thunderbolts cause terrible electrical damage in the form of cratering; 
huge canyons like Valles Marineris; 
and raised lightning blisters like Olympus Mons. 
Mars is a battle-scarred planet ‘ as befits the ancient god of war
With this additional background, my statement, in Mysterious Mars[1] (August 2003) gains firm support.
この追加の背景により、謎の火星[1] (2003 年 8 月) における私の声明は確固たる支持を得ています。

‘…Mars was also depicted by the ancients as sitting within a glowing tornadic column for a period. 

That would explain the huge swirling erosion patterns at both of the Martian poles. 

It also means that the polar caps are only about 10,000 years old and probably still accommodating to Mars’ ‘new’ environment. 
それはまた、極冠が誕生してからわずか約 1 万年であり、おそらくまだ火星の「新しい」環境に適応しているところだということを意味します。

The puzzling difference between the northern and southern hemispheres of Mars is explained simply if the north pole was the cathode in the tornadic electrical exchange. 

Material would then have been removed from the northern hemisphere to give the low, flat and relatively uncratered terrain found there.’


The south pole played an anode role and would have suffered deposition. 

It sits on top of a high altitude dome and tends to have equator-facing scarps instead of canyons. 

The south polar deposit (SPD) is delicately layered. 
南極堆積物 (SPD) は繊細な層状になっています。

An ‘unexpected finding’ was abundant small pits close to the bounding scarp of the SPD
「予期せぬ発見」は、SPD の境界崖近くに多数の小さな穴があったことでした。

Some have been neatly overlaid by the SPD
一部は SPD によってきれいにオーバーレイされています。

There is no sign that the bounding scarp has moved like a glacier or weathered to fill the pits. 

The abundant circumpolar pits in the south lack the raised rims expected of impacts. 

They exhibit the alignments of so-called ‘secondary crater chains.’ 

There are no such things. 

All linear arrangements of craters are the result of an arc moving across a surface

Both the pits beneath and the delicate layering are the kinds of things we should expect if the SPD was electrically deposited.
下のピットと繊細な層の両方は、SPD が電着された場合に予想される種類のものです。

The SPD is quite distinct from the circum-polar sand and layered deposit at the north pole. 
SPD は、北極の周極の砂や層状の堆積物とはまったく異なります。

The difference between the two polar caps is very important. 
2 つの極冠の違いは非常に重要です。
Bruce Murray of Caltech wrote:

‘The increasing recognition of differences between the two caps has progressively made a straightforward global alternation in aeolian deposition of suspended sediment between the two poles (driven by obliquity and eccentricity changes) a less likely explanation, though it once seemed so appealing. 
However a new paradigm has not yet emerged to explain the rapidly growing body of information.’
(Icarus 154, 80-97 (2001))
「2 つの極間の違いに対する認識の高まりにより、両極間の浮遊堆積物の風成堆積における直接的な全球規模の変化(傾斜と偏心率の変化によって引き起こされる)は、かつては非常に魅力的であるように見えましたが、徐々に説明可能性が低くなりました。
 (イカロス 154, 80-97 (2001))

The differences between the north and south poles on Mars make a single geological explanation for them both unworkable.


 The north pole of Mars sits on top of a dome that is almost 3km above the surrounding surface but is still 2km below the average elevation at the equator. 
火星の北極は、周囲の地表からほぼ 3 km 高いドームの頂上にありますが、赤道の平均高度よりはまだ 2 km 低いです。

A colossal amount of material has been machined from the northern hemisphere. 

In effect, the polar cap is the central peak of a hemispheric-sized crater. 

The enigmatic grooves and ‘chasma’ in the polar caps are a natural consequence of travelling arcs. 

They have been carved up to a kilometre deep into the polar caps. 

Their marked difference in size is explained by differences in the power of the arc. 

Their tendency to a spiral form is due to the rotating Birkeland currents that form the arc. 

There are other examples of a spiral or corkscrew effect in craters on Mars and the Moon. 

Unconformities have been noted in the exposed layering of the north polar deposit (NPD). 
北極堆積物 (NPD) の露出した層に不一致が認められています。

That discounts the idea that it was formed like a ‘layer cake’ by cyclic deposition due to some unspecified climatic oscillation effect. 

It is a remnant of exposed subsurface rock like that found as peaks in the centers of most large craters.

 The NPD has been described as resembling cottage cheese, with a flat pitted and etched surface
NPD は、平らな穴があり、エッチングされた表面を持つカッテージ・チーズに似ていると言われています。

As I showed in the earlier news item, such pitting and etching is characteristic of a cathode surface.

As an example of the possibilities of this interdisciplinary pattern matching approach, here are three images:
この学際的なパターン マッチング アプローチの可能性の例として、以下に 3 つの画像を示します:


 This is a "heteromac" type plasma discharge instability. Heteromacs can include filamentary, cellular, and bubble- like clusters. 
これは、「ヘテロマック」タイプのプラズマ放電の不安定性です。 ヘテロマックには、繊維状、細胞状、および泡状のクラスターが含まれる場合があります。


These are Scandinavian petroglyphs of the "ship of heaven." You can also find examples in North America and elsewhere, even away from any water.

これらはスカンジナビアの「天の船」の岩面彫刻です。 北米や他の地域でも、水域から離れた場所でもその例が見つかります。


 Here, numerous layers are seen in the south polar region. The pattern has no geological explanation but it matches closely the heteromac instability pattern.
ここでは、南極地域に多数の層が見られます。 このパターンには地質学的説明はありませんが、ヘテロマックの不安定性パターンとよく一致しています。



For more information see the introductory draft of the forthcoming book THUNDERBOLTS OF THE GODS[2].

This recent news report[3] is offered for the reader to judge who has solved the ‘mystery.’

[Mystery of Mars’s giant icy spirals solved]
18:33 26 March 04
NewScientist.com news service
「新しい科学者ドットコム」 ニュース サービス



The model (below) produces the right spacing and the right curvature (Images: Jon Pelletier/Mars Global Surveyor)
モデル (下) は、適切な間隔と適切な曲率を生成します (画像: ジョン・ペルティエ/火星全球測量機)

Giant, icy spirals found uniquely on Mars’s polar caps are the result of the red planet’s peculiar combination of temperature, tilt, and thin atmosphere, suggests a new computer model. 

The concentric whorls, hundreds of kilometres long, were first spotted by NASA’s Viking spacecraft in 1976, but scientists did not know how they formed.
この長さ数百キロメートルの同心円状の渦巻きは、1976 年に NASA のバイキング宇宙船によって初めて発見されましたが、科学者たちはそれらがどのように形成されるのかを知りませんでした。

Now, Jon Pelletier, a geomorphologist at the University of Arizona, US, has developed a surprisingly simple model that reproduces the spiral shapes nearly perfectly. 

“They had the right spacing, the right curvature and the right relationship to one another,” he says. 

“These things have always been a puzzle,” says John Murray, a Mars geologist at the UK’s Open University

Previous theories involving wind and shifting ice caps “don’t really explain the spiral pattern”, he says, but explanation provided by Pelletier’s model “seems the most likely”.

[Freeze and thaw]

The average annual temperature at the martian poles is a frosty -40 degrees Celsius, but for a few days every summer, the temperature rises enough for ice to vaporise. 

Pelletier’s model ignores wind and shifting ice, focusing instead only on how sunlight heats and vaporises small cracks in the ice. 

Because Mars is tilted on its axis, the sunlight falls mostly on one side of the crack, vaporising the ice. 

Some of this water vapour then refreezes on the shaded side of the cracks. 

But the overall effect is the cracks widen and deepen over time and
 – crucially – 
migrate towards the pole, merging with one another as they go.
– 決定的に –

In his model, the cracks began as randomly distributed points that lengthened into individual spirals and a jumble of shapes. 

Over a simulated five million years
 – the same amount of time estimated for the real spirals to form on Mars – 
they merged into one giant spiral. 
シミュレーションされた500万年以上– 火星で実際の渦巻きが形成されるのと同じ時間の推定 –

The spiral arms appear to move about one kilometre per million years. 

“I wanted to show the model self-organises,” Pelletier told New Scientist. 

“I put in something completely random and got out a system similar to what we see today.”

[Thin atmosphere]

While the underlying physical reasons why the spirals form remain unclear, one factor that is likely to be important is the fact that temperatures decrease steadily to their lowest point at the poles, meaning less ice vaporises there. 

Another factor, says Pelletier, “is the cracks want to line up along the equator – they get the most solar radiation when facing that way”.

And no spirals might form at all, if it was not for Mars’s thin atmosphere. 

Very little heat gets transferred around the planet via air currents, meaning the localised melting on one side of each crack in the polar ice is the dominant mechanism. 

Pelletier got the idea for his model when he saw the spiral shape of a slime mould in a biology book.

Maggie McKee

Details of the computer simulations are in the April issue of the journal Geology.
コンピュータシミュレーションの詳細は、Geology 誌の 4 月号に掲載されています。

The simulations do not include wind, which some previous studies had suggested might contribute to the spirals.

Visiting the author’s website at the University of Arizona Department of Geosciences we are told that ‘Landforms on Earth’s surface are sculpted by flowing water in the form of rivers and glaciers and by the wind and windborne particles’ and ‘the focus of the group is currently in computational modelling and analysis of digital topographic data’.’

In an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® these simplistic assumptions are hopelessly inadequate. 
エレクトリック・ユニバース® では、これらの単純な仮定は絶望的に不十分です。

So the computer modelling that is based upon them will be misleading or trivial. 
したがって、それらに基づいたコンピューター モデリングは誤解を招くもの、または、取るに足らないものになります。

It is disturbing to see geologists adopting the physicists’ fad of computer modelling. Science is becoming a ‘virtual reality’ computer game.
地質学者が物理学者の流行であるコンピューターモデリングを採用しているのを見るのは憂慮すべきことです。 科学は「仮想現実」のコンピューター ゲームになりつつあります。

Wal Thornhill

1.    Mysterious Mars: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=0414prqf
2.    THUNDERBOLTS OF THE GODS: http://www.thunderbolts.info/
3.    news report: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994823
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/mystery-of-mars-polar-spirals/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


The Shiny Mountains of Venus 金星の輝く山々 by Wal Thornhill

The Shiny Mountains of Venus 金星の輝く山々

by Wal Thornhill | December 16, 2003 2:07 pm

The astronomer Victor A. Firsoff in his book, The Solar Planets (1977), wrote:

“I once described Earth and Venus as ‘non-identical twins.’ 
It used to be thought that their differences were more apparent than real. 
But in the words of Sherlock Holmes, ‘Eliminate the impossible and what is left, however improbable, is the truth.’ 
And it would be hard to find a more improbable planet than Venus.”


David Grinspoon writes in, Venus Revealed, (1997):
デヴィッド・グリンスプーンは、『金星が明らかになった』(1997) に次のように書いています:

“One of the most puzzling [patterns] was this: 
the highest mountains of Venus are all surprisingly shiny. 

At altitudes above about thirteen thousand feet, the reflectivity jumps up and the ground abruptly gets very bright. 
高度約 13,000 フィートを超えると、反射率が跳ね上がり、地面が突然非常に明るくなります。

Surface roughness cannot explain this, so something in, or on, the ground at these high elevations is different, making it highly reflective.”
Grinspoon puts forward the idea that some chemical reaction takes place at the lower temperature found at high elevations, 820 degrees F, to form a radar reflective mineral
 – fool’s gold. 
– 愚者の金、が形成されるという考えを提唱している。

But this requires the unlikely situation that all peaks on Venus have the same chemistry.

A more recent report from the BBC News Online[1] science editor addresses the issue again and comes down on the side of the rocks being coated by condensing lead vapor.
BBC ニュース オンライン [1] 科学編集者による最近のレポートでは、この問題が再び取り上げられており、凝縮した鉛蒸気によって覆われている岩石の側面に焦点が当てられています。

[Venus has ‘heavy metal mountains’] 

By Dr David Whitehouse, 25 November 2003
デビッド・ホワイトハウス博士、2003 年 11 月 25 日

The highlands of Venus are covered by a heavy metal “frost”, say planetary scientists from Washington University

Because it is hot enough to melt lead at the surface, metals vaporise and condense at cooler, higher elevations. 

This may explain why radar observations made by orbiting spacecraft show that the highlands are highly reflective. 

Detailed calculations, to be published in the journal Icarus, suggest that lead and bismuth are to blame for giving Venus its bright, metallic skin.
[Bright hills]

Frequently seen as a brilliant point of light in the evening or morning sky, Venus has been identified with beauty by many cultures. 

But the truth is somewhat different. 

Although it is about the same size as the Earth, its closer proximity to the Sun means that it is a very different planet. 

Its thick atmosphere
 – composed chiefly of carbon dioxide – 
gives it an intense greenhouse effect, whereby trapped solar radiation heats the surface of the planet to an average temperature of 467 Celsius. 
は、強い温室効果があり、閉じ込められた太陽放射が地球の表面を平均摂氏 467 度まで加熱します。

Also, its pressure is 90 times greater than that at the Earth’s surface.

I cannot let this glib reference to the supposed Venusian ‘greenhouse effect’ pass without comment. 

The very high surface temperature of Venus of 750°K or 900°F is usually explained by the ‘greenhouse effect’ of a thick atmosphere of carbon dioxide, or even the ‘runaway greenhouse effect,’ first suggested by Fred Hoyle in 1955 and worked out in detail in the late 1960s by Ingersoll and Pollack of Caltech
金星の表面温度が 750°K または 900°F という非常に高いことは、通常、二酸化炭素の厚い大気による「温室効果」、あるいは「暴走温室効果」によって説明されます、1955 年にフレッド・ホイルによって最初に提案され、1960 年代後半にカリフォルニア工科大学のインガソールとポラックによって詳細に検討されました。

Such explanations assume that both Venus and Earth have had largely parallel development (so-called twins) and that therefore something went seriously wrong with the atmospheric evolution on Venus. 

However, there is not a shred of evidence for the ‘twin planets’ theory.

As for the greenhouse effect, it is a desperate model clutched at by theorists who have no alternative ideas. 

Yet the astronomer Firsoff noted: 
“Earth’s seas are not boiling hot, despite the total greenhouse effect of water and average sunlight stronger than at the ground level of Venus. 
Nor is it at all clear how such a condition could have become established.”


Venus receives 1.9 times more solar radiation than Earth but its clouds reflect about 80% of that sunlight, so that Venus actually absorbs less solar energy than the Earth. 
Solar radiation measured at the surface is 10-20W/m2 (compare this with 340W/m2 at the Earth’s surface in the tropics). 
地表で測定された日射量は 10 ~ 20W/m2 です (これを熱帯地方の地表の 340W/m2 と比較してください)。

Even with the maximum greenhouse effect, the effective surface temperature of Venus should be low enough to freeze water. 

What is being asked of the ‘runaway greenhouse effect’ is equivalent to expecting a well-insulated oven to reach a temperature sufficient to melt lead by having only the pilot light switched on!

The humorous but sadly apt inversion, ‘I’ll see it when I believe it,’ seems to apply to the interpretation of results relayed to Earth from all four Pioneer lander probes as their radiometers began to give anomalous results as they descended through the atmosphere.
ユーモラスだが悲しいほど適切な逆転、「信じれば必ず見える」これは、パイオニア着陸船探査機 4 機すべてが大気圏を降下する際に放射計が異常な結果を出し始めたため、地球に中継された結果の解釈に当てはまるようです。
“Taken at face value, the anomalies suggest that parts of the atmosphere are transmitting about twice the energy upwards that is available from solar radiation at the same level.”
[Pioneer Venus, NASA Report SP-461, p. 127].
 [パイオニア ヴィーナス、NASA レポート SP-461、p.  127]。
Despite the obvious interpretation that the laws of thermodynamics are not being violated and that, put simply, Venus is intrinsically damned hot and still cooling, the investigators are able to blandly state in the same paragraph:

“In spite of these difficulties in interpreting some of the observations, the greenhouse effect, coupled with global dynamics, is now well established as the basic explanation of the high surface temperature.”

This is merely consensus ignorance, not science.
The BBC report continues:

The only way to glimpse what lies beneath its opaque clouds is by radar, and several missions have carried our radar surveys from orbit, principally the Magellan probe which operated from 1990 to 1994.
その不透明な雲の下にあるものを垣間見る唯一の方法はレーダーによるもので、いくつかのミッションで軌道上からレーダー調査が行われ、主に 1990 年から 1994 年まで運用されたマゼラン探査機が行われました。

Magellan’s images astounded astronomers who were able to see the surface of Venus in detail for the first time. 

They showed the planet was covered in volcanic features, such as vast lava plains, fields of small lava domes, and large shield volcanoes. 

But the images were puzzling as well. 

It appeared that parts of the highlands were abnormally bright, reflecting radar beams much better than lower elevations. 

Several explanations were put forward ranging from the presence of a loose soil to a coating of metal – specifically, tellurium.
– 具体的にはテルル(テルリウム)に至るまで、
Lined with lead

The theory suggests at Venus’s hot lower layers any metal would be vaporised and exist as a metallic mist. 

Only at higher elevations, where it is a little cooler, would that metal condense to form a thin, highly reflective layer on the ground. 

Using detailed chemical calculations involving 660 metal compounds, Laura Schaefer and Bruce Fegley, of the Washington University in St Louis, conclude that tellurium is not responsible, but that common lead probably is. 

The researchers estimate that the timescale for the coating of the Venusian highlands by metallic frost is somewhere between a few thousand and a few million years, demonstrating that it is an active process. 

They point out that at the highest elevations on Venus there is evidence that the metallic frost is absent
 – possible evidence of weathering, they say. 
– 風化の痕跡の可能性がある、と彼らは言う。

If it were possible to examine these lead deposits, from a Venus lander craft, the respective abundances of certain atom types, or isotopes, could give astronomers an estimate for the age of Venus.


In March, 1997 I wrote in response to Grinspoon’s colorful suggestion that the radar bright highlands of Venus are coated with ‘fool’s gold’:
1997 年 3 月、私は、金星のレーダーで明るい高地は「愚者の金」で覆われているというグリンスプーンの多彩な提案に応えて次のように書きました:

“A much simpler answer is that diffuse electric discharge, known on Earth as ‘St. Elmo’s fire,’ occurs preferentially at the higher altitudes of the mountains on Venus. In that thick atmosphere it forms a highly conductive dense plasma, which is a superb reflector of radar signals.” 
「もっと単純な答えは、地球上で「セント・エルモの火」として知られる拡散放電であるということです、それらは、金星の高地の山で優先的に発生します。 その厚い大気の中で、導電性の高い高密度プラズマが形成され、レーダー信号の優れた反射体となります。」

“The density of the atmosphere at the surface of Venus is about 1/10 that of water. 
St. Elmo’s fire is a highly ionised state involving actual discharge. 
Put the two together and you have dense plasma
 – which conducts like a metal and therefore reflects radar like a metal surface.
セント エルモの火は、実際の放電を伴う高度にイオン化された状態です。
– 金属のように伝導するため、金属表面のようにレーダーを反射します。

The thickness of such a plasma would have no more effect on radar reflectivity than the thickness of a metal sheet would. 

Since the plasma would coat the surface rocks (whatever their composition), the radar return would be an enhanced version of that being received from nearby, uncoated, electromagnetically dissipative rocks, and would be greater than that returned from fool’s gold. 

I consider my hypothesis is simpler than one relying on chemical or physical changes in rocks of unknown composition.”
St. Elmo’s fire should be prevalent at the highest elevations, so the lack of radar reflectivity there would be due to the lower plasma density. 

As the plasma density falls it becomes more transparent to the radar signal and tends to refract, rather than reflect it. 

One way to test this might be to use radar equipment at lower frequencies.
これをテストする 1 つの方法は、より低い周波数でレーダー装置を使用することです。

Of course, my proposal begs the question of the origin of electric discharge activity in the atmosphere of Venus.

“The most striking [the pun seems unintended] observations made by the Galileo spacecraft during its flyby of Venus was evidence of lightning. 
[R. L. Guyer: ‘Galileo flyby of Venus’, Science 253 (1991), p. 1463]. 
[R.  L. ガイヤー: 「金星のガリレオ飛行」、サイエンス 253 (1991)、p.  1463]。

The surprise is curious. 

Earlier reports of lightning were discounted, it seems, because they did not fit the pattern of earthly lightning. 

The Venera spacecraft found 
‘continuous lightning activity from 32km down to about 2km altitude, with discharges as frequent as an amazing 25 per second.’ 
[NASA News 79-12 (19.4.79), p. 1]. 
「上空 32km から高度約 2km まで継続的な雷活動があり、毎秒 25 回もの頻度で放電が発生します。」
[NASA ニュース 79-12 (19.4.79)、p.  1]。

The highest recorded rate on Earth is 1.4/sec during a severe blizzard. 
地球上で記録された最高頻度は、激しい吹雪の際の 1.4回/秒です。

The Pioneer lander recorded 1000 radio impulses. 
イオニア着陸船は 1000 件の無線インパルスを記録しました。

Thirty-two minutes after landing, Venera 11 detected a very loud (82 decibel) noise which was believed to be thunder. 
着陸から 32 分後、ベネラ 11 号は雷と思われる非常に大きな騒音 (82 デシベル) を検出しました。

Garry Hunt suggested at the time that: 
‘… the Venusians may well be glowing from the nearly continuous discharges of those frequent lightning strokes.’ 

A ‘mysterious glow’ was detected coming from the surface at a height of 16km by 2 Pioneer probes as they descended on the night hemisphere. 

The glow increased on descent and may have been caused by the St. Elmo’s fire and/or chemical reactions in the atmosphere, close to the surface.

Lightning is poorly understood. 

The mechanism of charging of storm clouds remains a mystery. 

Because lightning is conventionally associated with violent vertical cloud movement on Earth, it was a surprise when investigators found strong evidence of lightning in the quiescent atmosphere of Venus. 

‘On Venus the clouds tend to resemble fogbanks,…. You don’t see much lightning in fog.’ 
[R. A. Kerr: ‘Lightning found on Venus at last?’, Science 253 (1991), p. 1492].
「金星の雲は霧の堤に似ている傾向があります…。 霧の中では稲妻はあまり見えません。』
[R.  A. カー: 「ついに金星で雷が見つかった?」、サイエンス 253 (1991)、p.  1492]。

A planet’s magnetosphere is the region in space surrounding the planet where its magnetic field dominates. 

Under the influence of the solar wind it is compressed on the sunward side of the planet and stretches away behind the planet like a comet’s tail. 

The early Mariner spacecraft provided a surprise when they found an extensive ‘cometary’ magnetotail stretching behind Venus along the Sun-Venus line. 

It is longer than that found for any other planet. 

The ‘scale length’ of the tail is about 700, compared to Earth’s less than 300. 

[The scale length is the tail length divided by the size of the planet’s magnetosphere. In the case of Earth, the tail wake stretches for 3000 Earth radii (RE) and the magnetosphere varies between 10 and 15 RE]. 
[スケールの長さは、尾の長さを惑星の磁気圏のサイズで割ったものです。 地球の場合、尾流は地球半径 (RE) 3000 まで伸び、磁気圏は 10 ~ 15 RE の間で変化します。]

Later, it was discovered that the tail of Venus survived to the Earth’s orbit, where it was described as being composed of ‘stringy things.’ 

Those ‘stringy things’ are diagnostic of Birkeland currents flowing between Venus and the Earth.

The magnetic flux of the solar wind appears to interact directly with the ionosphere of Venus. 

This was not anticipated either, and is unlike all other planets in the solar family. 

Spikes in the Pioneer Venus orbiter magnetometer readings were interpreted as twisted magnetic field lines wrapped around each other like ropes.

Alternatively, the magnetic field spikes may be induced in the ionosphere by electric current flows in the solar wind. 

Once again, the twisted magnetic ropes herald field-aligned Birkeland currents flowing between the Sun and Venus.

Another major surprise is the presence of an ionosphere on the night side of Venus. 

Ionospheres are thought to be formed by dissociation of atoms in the upper atmosphere by the action of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation. 
電離層は、太陽紫外線 (UV) 放射の作用による高層大気中の原子の解離によって形成されると考えられています。

It was thought that the extended Venusian night would be long enough for recombination to take place and for the ionosphere there to disappear.

Any cosmic body which is charged relative to the surrounding plasma has a plasma sheath or magnetosphere. 

It is a region in which electric current flows and energy is released. 

The sheath is generally invisible unless the current is strong enough to generate light, such as on the Sun, in auroras, and in the coma and tails of comets.

Venus, with its cometary tail, is evidently still discharging strongly today after a recent cometary past noted globally by ancient witnesses. 

Venus was described variously as a ‘hairy star’ or ‘bearded star’ and a stupendous prodigy in the sky. 

Today, Venus’ comet tail operates in the dark discharge mode and is invisible. 

It can only be detected by magnetometers and charged particle detectors.

More evidence for the electrical nature of Venus comes from the Dutch astronomer Houtgast. 

He found there is a marked reduction in the solar corpuscular radiation reaching the Earth whenever Venus is interposed between it and the Sun at or near an inferior conjunction. 

He estimated that the effect could be accounted for on the assumption that Venus has a magnetic field about five times stronger than the Earth’s. 
[Houtgast: Sky and Telescope 15:8 (1955), p. 419.]. 
彼は、金星の磁場が地球の磁場の約 5 倍強いという仮定に基づいてこの影響を説明できると推定しました。
[ハウトガスト: 空と望遠鏡 15:8 (1955)、p.  419.]。

Since Venus has no measurable magnetic field, it is better explained as an electrical shielding effect.

The principal difficulty in understanding the origin of lightning is due to the assumption that the Earth and Venus are closed electrical systems with no input from the solar plasma environment via the magnetosphere. 

The Venusian ionosphere is directly coupled to the solar wind. 

Intense airglow emission in long wavelength UV was observed to occupy a large volume of the ionosphere on both the day and night sides of the planet. 

The intensity seems to be linked to solar activity. 

I would therefore expect lightning activity on Venus to be generated, not from cloud motions, but from electrical input originating in the Sun.

If charged particles are scarce in the lower atmosphere (and there are no counterparts to earthly clouds on Venus), fewer but more equally energetic lightning discharges would be expected than on Earth. 

There is evidence that this is so; 
the rate detected by the Galileo spacecraft as it swung around Venus would require 2,000 years for a strike to occur in a given square kilometre. 

On Earth, 7 strikes would be expected each year in a square kilometre. 

Six out of nine events detected by the Galileo spacecraft were strongly clustered in frequency spectrum and power, a situation not found on Earth. 

If the extremely rapid lightning detected by the Venera spacecraft is verified, there may be two modes of discharge on Venus: 
firstly, a continuous glow of St. Elmo’s fire at high points on the surface with rapid, low energy lightning, and secondly, high energy superbolts which fire from the upper atmosphere
 – as detected by the Galileo spacecraft.
ベネラ探査機によって検出された非常に速い雷が確認された場合、金星には 2 つのモードの放電がある可能性があります、第1に、まず、地表の高い地点でセントエルモの火が継続的に輝き、低エネルギーの急速な稲妻が発生します、そして第二に、上層大気から発射される高エネルギーのスーパーボルトです

The comet-like tail of Venus would suggest that the planet has not yet achieved electrical equilibrium after a recent cometary history

That being so, lightning of considerable violence and/or frequency would be expected on Venus. 

It would also fit the observation that the solar wind is tightly coupled to the planet. 

The magnetic flux ‘ropes’ of the solar wind, entwined about the planet, are indicative of electric currents flowing from the solar wind directly into the planet’s ionosphere. 

This is most simply explained by a high potential difference between the planet and its surroundings.

Another manifestation of electrical effects in the ionosphere of Venus is the well-known ‘Ashen light’ which is often seen as a faint illumination of the dark part of the crescent disk. 
金星の電離層における電気的効果のもう 1 つの現れは、よく知られている「灰色の光」です、これは、三日月円盤の暗い部分のかすかな照明としてよく見られます。

Firsoff wrote, “There can be no doubt that the true origin of the Ashen Light is electric. It is a night-sky glow, similar to that in our own sky but estimated to be 50-80 times stronger. It has a line emission spectrum sufficiently strong to be photographed….”
「灰の光の本当の起源が電気であることに疑いの余地はありません。 これは夜空の輝きで、私たちの空の輝きと似ていますが、その輝きは 50 ~ 80 倍強いと推定されています。 写真に撮るのに十分な強度の線発光スペクトルを持っています…」

The associated puzzle as to why Venus maintains a nightside ionosphere, given that night on Venus lasts about 58 Earth days, may now be answered. 

It is known that the nightside atmosphere is bombarded by fast electrons and that there is an unexplained large, fast drift of plasma (up to 10km/sec or 23,000mph) from day to night hemispheres.

The comet-like magnetosphere, strong electrical interactions with the solar wind and intense lightning, ionospheric and atmospheric activity suggest that Venus has not yet achieved electrical equilibrium with its environment in the solar plasma.

The odd composition of the Venusian atmosphere may also be due to the high levels of heat and electrical activity at the planet’s surface

Venus may once have had an atmosphere more like that of the Earth, with a preponderance of nitrogen and oxygen and water vapor. 

It was shown many years ago by the French scientist, Louis Kervran, that nitrogen in the presence of a hot iron surface becomes ‘activated’ and may be subsequently resonantly transmuted to carbon monoxide. 

Carbon monoxide and water vapor in the presence of heat will form carbon dioxide and hydrogen as in a well-known industrial process. 

The hydrogen combines with available oxygen to form more water vapor, until the oxygen is consumed. 

Thereafter the hydrogen tends to escape to space leaving behind a heavy carbon dioxide atmosphere. 

It is significant therefore that the water vapor content of the Venusian atmosphere was found by several Venera landers to mysteriously decrease near the surface of the planet. 

It can only mean that water is being absorbed or destroyed at the surface

What is more, the rate of disappearance could not be sustained for more than a “geological instant,” Nitrogen remains the only significant constituent of the Venusian atmosphere, following carbon dioxide.

The present cometary Venusian magnetosphere lends strength to the identification of Venus as a comet by early man. 

If, in years to come, we can measure a steady decline in the temperature of Venus, or a steep sub-surface temperature gradient, or changes in its electrical interaction with the solar wind, then Venus may finally be recognised as the youngest planet in the Solar System and only a distant relative of the Earth.

Wal Thornhill

1.    BBC News Online: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3236018.stm
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/the-shiny-mountains-of-venus/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


THE SUN — Our Variable Star 太陽 — 私たちの変光恒星 by Wal Thornhill

THE SUN — Our Variable Star 太陽 — 私たちの変光恒星

by Wal Thornhill | November 9, 2003 10:12 am
This article updated on 25 Nov 2003

“Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the growth in our understanding of the universe is that we understand anything at all.”
– Martin Harwit, from a talk given at the American Physical Society’s meeting in Philadelphia in April 2003. 
– マーティン・ハーウィット、2003 年 4 月にフィラデルフィアで開催されたアメリ物理学会の会合での講演より。

Harwit is an emeritus professor of astronomy at Cornell University and a former director of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C.
ハーウィットはコーネル大学天文学の名誉教授であり、ワシントン D.C.スミソニアン国立航空宇宙博物館の元館長です。
But do astronomers really know what they say they know? 

The expressions of surprise at each new discovery hints that they don’t. 

And their theories sound far-fetched. 

To make their models work they use invisible matter, invisible strange objects, dark energy, and magical magnetic fields that exist without any electrical activity. 

It suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of the universe

Even the closest star, our Sun, defies their understanding[1].

As if to highlight this fact, the last week has seen nine major solar flares ‘ a historically unprecedented outburst from the Sun. 

Moreover, this is a period of declining solar activity, when the sun should be experiencing fewer, less-energetic outbursts. 

With each flare billions of tons of solar matter, known as coronal mass ejections (CME’s), were hurled into space at millions of kilometres per hour in defiance of the Sun’s powerful gravity. 

The energy released in these unusual outbursts is phenomenal.


 [2]Click on image to enlarge.

[Solar super-flare amazes scientists]

A flare released by the sun on Tuesday could be the most powerful ever witnessed, a monster X-ray eruption twice as strong as anything detected since satellites were capable of spotting them starting in the mid-1970’s.

 “This is an R-5 extreme event,” said Bill Murtagh, a forecaster at the center. “They don’t get much bigger than this.” 
— Robert Roy Britt, Space.Com
「これはR-5の極端な出来事だ」と同センターの予報官ビル・マーター氏は語った。  「これ以上大きくなることはありません。」
— ロバート・ロイ・ブリット、Space.Com

No one has any basis for saying what the largest matter expulsions from the Sun may be. 

It is obvious from looking at powerful mass expulsion activity in active stars and galaxies that gravitational models are inadequate to explain what is going on. 

Gravity is an attractive force only. Recourse to magnetic field behavior magically divorced from electric currents serves merely to reinforce the mystical quality of modern physics without telling us anything about the true cause.
A news item by Jenny Hogan on NewScientist.com of 2 November says:
新人科学者ドットコムの ジェニー・ホーガンによる 11 月 2 日のニュース記事には次のように書かれています:

‘The Sun is more active now than it has been for a millennium. 

The realisation, which comes from a reconstruction of sunspots stretching back 1150 years, comes just as the Sun has thrown a tantrum. 

Over the last week, giant plumes of material have burst out from our star’s surface and streamed into space, causing geomagnetic storms on Earth.’ 

The history of solar activity was estimated from sunspot counts stretching back to the seventeenth century. 
太陽活動の歴史は、17 世紀にまで遡る黒点の数から推定されました。

Beyond that, the sunspot numbers were deduced from levels of radioactive beryllium-10 trapped in ice cores taken from Greenland and Antarctica. 
さらに過去の、黒点の数は、グリーンランドと南極から採取された氷床コアに閉じ込められた放射性ベリリウム 10 のレベルから推定されました。

When Mike Lockwood, from the UK’s Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, saw the results he said, “It makes the conclusion very stark. 
We are living with a very unusual Sun at the moment.” 


 [Here is a chart of the Sun's variable sunspot behavior.]
The idea that the Sun is behaving unusually is based on an assumption about what is normal for stars like the Sun. 

We are told that stars are self-consuming thermonuclear engines that have sufficient fuel (hydrogen) to maintain a steady output for millions or billions of years. 

However, while the Sun’s visible light output varies by only tenths of a percent, its energy in UV and X-rays varies by a factor of 20!
ただし、太陽の可視光出力はわずか 10 分の 1 パーセントしか変化しませんが、紫外線と X 線のエネルギーは 20 倍も変化します。


 Above are X-ray images of the Sun captured 4 months apart between 1991 and 1995 by the Yohkoh spacecraft.
上は、1991 年から 1995 年の間に 4 か月の間隔で「ようこう」探査機が捉えた太陽の X 線画像です。

There has never been a satisfactory explanation for this variable behavior of the Sun. 

The sunspot cycle remains a complex enigma that has no established connection with the thermonuclear model of the Sun. 

However, it has long been known that sunspots are sites of powerful magnetic fields. 

So theorists have spent decades unsuccessfully trying to model a hidden dynamo inside the Sun that can reproduce the complex tangle of magnetic fields seen above the Sun. 

This kind of thinking is reflected in the NewScientist.com report: 
“The dark patches on the surface of the Sun that we call sunspots are a symptom of fierce magnetic activity inside.” 

Notice there is no mention of the powerful electric currents required to generate the magnetic fields. 

It is pure speculation, stated as fact, that the magnetic field of a sunspot is generated by activity inside the star.

The key to understanding our star, and the first stepping-stone to understanding the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE®, is that stars are an electrical phenomenon! 
私たちの恒星を理解するための鍵、そして エレクトリック・ユニバース® を理解するための最初の足がかりは、恒星は電気現象であるということです。

The thermonuclear model of stars is a product of its time — the early 1900’s.
—1900 年代初頭の当時の産物です。

That it remains essentially unchanged into the new millennium is a measure of the rigidity of the peer structure and narrow focus within academia. 

We have since discovered that space is full of charged particles (plasma) and magnetic fields. 

The Sun is a ball of plasma and its behavior more complex than was dreamt a century ago. 
太陽はプラズマの球であり、その動作は 1 世紀前に夢見られていたよりも複雑です。

Eddington, who gave us the standard solar model, did so using gravity and ideal gas laws. 

He did not know that space is threaded with magnetic fields and flows of charged particles (electric currents), with the Sun as a focus. 
彼は、太陽を中心として、宇宙には磁場と荷電粒子 (電流) の流れが存在することを知りませんでした。
A beneficiary of Eddington’s model, George Gamow, was moved to write effusively:

According to a Greek legend, Prometheus flew all the way to the Sun in order to bring back to mortals some of the heavenly fire. 

But even Prometheus would not risk diving into the Sun’s photosphere to see what was under it. 

However, this feat was carried out by the British astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, who was able to find out everything about the interior of the Sun and other stars without leaving his comfortable study at Cambridge University. 

“It should not be too difficult,” Sir Arthur used to say, ”to understand such a simple thing as a star.” And he had very good reasons for that statement. 
「恒星のような単純なことを理解するのは、それほど難しいことではありません」とアーサー卿はよく言っていました。 そして彼がその発言には十分な理由がありました。

Indeed, while geophysicists are still unable to agree on the exact value of the temperature in the center of the Earth, which is only about four thousand miles below our feet, astronomers can tell the temperature of the central regions of the Sun and of many other stars within a few percentage points and be quite sure about the figures they quote. 
[A Star Called the Sun, George Gamow, p.93.]
実際、地球物理学者たちは、私たちの足下わずか約 4,000 マイルにある地球の中心部の温度の正確な値についてまだ同意できていませんが、天文学者は、太陽や他の多くの恒星の中心領域の温度を数パーセント以内で知ることができ、彼らが引用する数値についてはかなりの確信を持っています。
I included Gamow’s comments as an example of the hubris of mathematical physicists and as a warning. 

It can be argued that astrophysics is in worse shape than geophysics. 

There is absolutely no way that anyone can be sure about the temperature of the center of the Sun. 

Yet confident statements like this are reported daily in the media as fact. 

It has resulted in the science fiction cosmology of today. 

More caution would be welcome. 

The visible activity on the surface of the Sun remains a puzzle. 
Sunspots are an enigma

When we look through the centers of dark sunspots it is thousands of degrees cooler beneath the bright photosphere.

If we do not understand the Sun, we know nothing about the universe
“What I believe to be the basic misconception of modern mathematical physicists
 – evident, as I say, not only in this problem but conspicuously so throughout the welter of wild speculations concerning cosmology and other departments of physical science – 
is the idea that everything that is mathematically true must have a physical counterpart; 
and not only so, but must have the particular physical counterpart that happens to accord with the theory that the mathematician wishes to advocate.” 
[Herbert Dingle, Science at the Cross-Roads, pp. 124-5.]
– 私が言うように、この問題だけでなく、宇宙論や物理科学の他の分野に関する乱暴な憶測の渦全体にわたって顕著にそのことが明らかです –
[ハーバート・ディングル、岐路に立つ科学、124-5 ページ]

Of course, Eddington the mathematician would see a star as a simple thing. 

Mathematicians require simple models to allow a mathematical solution. 

But as spacecraft have expanded our view of the Sun it is clear that that bright ball of plasma is not ‘a simple thing.’ 
Even so, Eddington seemed to intuit that stars exhibited electrical effects:

“If there is no other way out we may have to suppose that bright line spectra in the stars are produced by electric discharges similar to those producing bright line spectra in a vacuum tube… 

We conclude provisionally that bright lines in the spectrum of a static star indicate that either (a) the star is greatly disturbed by ‘thunderstorms,’ or (b) it is a nebulous star.” 
[The Internal Constitution of the Stars, pp. 344-5].
私たちは暫定的に、恒常的恒星のスペクトル内の明るい線は、(a) その恒星が『雷雨嵐』によって大きく乱されているか、(b) それが星雲状であることを示していると結論付けています。」
The problem for Eddington was that the origin of electricity in thunderstorms was, and still is, not understood. 

Therefore, as a mathematician, he did not pursue the problem. 

The simple answer is that both the earthly and the solar phenomena are due to the electrical nature of the universe

An earthly thunderstorm is mere sparks beside the global electrical storm that constitutes a star.
Eddington did momentarily consider an external source for a star’s energy:

“In seeking a source of energy other than [gravitational] contraction the first question is whether the energy to be radiated in future is now hidden in the star or whether it is being picked up continuously from outside.

Suggestions have been made that the impact of meteoric matter provides the heat, or that there is some subtle radiation traversing space that the star picks up.”
‘Subtle radiation’ sounds like the kind of explanation that might be favored by modern theorists but it was dismissed immediately by Eddington. 

Today we know there are streams of charged particles moving in space. 

But Eddington had already decided what must be inside the Sun:

“Strong objections may be urged against these hypotheses individually; 
but it is unnecessary to consider them in detail because they have arisen through a misunderstanding of the nature of the problem. 

No source of energy is of any avail unless it liberates energy in the deep interior of the star. 

It is not enough to provide for the external radiation of the star. 

We must provide for the maintenance of the high internal temperature, without which the star would collapse.”
There we have it. 
The thermonuclear engine inside stars is required to save Eddington’s mechanical stellar model! 

Yet for decades the solar neutrino counts have been telling us that that model is incorrect[3].

If we can find a reason why the Sun is the size we see, given its mass, without requiring internal heat then an external source of energy is possible. 

A few pages earlier, Eddington seems to deal with electric charge in the interior of a star when he invokes the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution law for a gas at uniform temperature in a gravitational field. 

It simply says that the lighter molecules will tend to rise to the top. 

He writes:

“In ionized material the electrons are far lighter than the ions and tend to rise to the top… 
But this separation is stopped almost before it has begun, because the minutest inequality creates a large electrostatic field which stops any further diffusion.” 
The calculated result is “a deficiency of 1 electron in every million tons of matter. 
… The electric force, which varies in proportion to gravity in the interior, is absurdly weak, but it stops any diffusion of the electron outwards.”
Eddington’s argument is too simplistic. 
It seems aimed to keep the model simple rather than realistic. 

Thermal ionization of hydrogen only becomes significant at a temperature of about 100,000K. 
水素の熱イオン化は、約 100,000K の温度でのみ顕著になります。

Therefore, atoms and molecules will predominate through most of a star‘s volume, where the gravity is strongest. 

That applies to the entire star in the electric model. 

The nucleus of each atom, which is thousands of times heavier than the electrons, will be gravitationally offset from the center of the atom

The result is that each atom becomes a small electric dipole. 

It is significant that if you want to discover the physics of atomic and molecular dipole forces you need to turn to chemistry texts. 

Such is the problem with specialization. 

The atomic and molecular dipoles align to form a radial electric field that causes electrons to diffuse outwards in enormously greater numbers than Eddington’s simple gravitational sorting allows. 

It leaves positively charged ions behind which repel one another. 

That electrical repulsion balances the compressive force of gravity without the need for a central heat source in the star.
[Important Consequences of the Electric Star Model for the Sun]

1.    A star is formed electromagnetically, not gravitationally, and is powered thereafter electrically (by Eddington’s “subtle radiation”).

2.    Near the Sun, galactic transmission lines are in the form of 0.3 parsecs wide rotating Birkeland filaments (based on those detected at the center of the Milky Way). 
Their motion relative to the Sun will produce a slowly varying magnetic field and current density
 – in other words a solar activity cycle. 
To that extent, all stars are variable. And just like real estate, location is vital.
太陽の近くでは、銀河伝送線は幅 0.3 パーセクの回転するビルケランド フィラメントの形をしています (天の川銀河の中心で検出されたものに基づく)。
その意味で、すべての恒星は変化します。 不動産と同じように、立地も重要です。

3.    An electric star has an internal radial electric field. 
But because plasma is an outstanding conductor it cannot sustain a high electric field. 
So plasma self-organizes to form a protective sheath or ‘double layer’ across which most of the electric field is concentrated and in which most of the electrical energy is stored. 
It is the release of that internal stored energy that causes CME’s, nova outbursts, polar jets, and the birth of stellar companions.

4.    In a ball of plasma like the Sun the radial electric field will tend to be concentrated in shells or double layers above and beneath the photosphere. 
A double layer exists above the solar photosphere, in the chromosphere.

5.    The photosphere and chromosphere together act like a pnp transistor, modulating the current flow in the solar wind.* 
It has an effective negative feedback influence to steady the energy radiated by the photosphere so that astrophysicists can talk of a ‘solar constant,’ while the Sun”s other external electrical activity (UV light and x-rays) is much more variable. 
Because the photosphere is an electrical plasma discharge phenomenon it also expands or contracts to adjust to its electrical environment. 
That explains why the Sun ‘rings’ like an electric bell.
光球と彩層は共に、 pnp トランジスタのように機能し、太陽風の電流の流れを調節します。*
太陽の他の外部電気活動 (紫外線や X 線) ははるかに変動しやすい一方で、天体物理学者が「太陽定数」について語ることができるように、光球から放射されるエネルギーを安定させる効果的な負のフィードバック効果があります。

6.    Double layers may break down with an explosive release of electrical energy. 
A nova outburst is a result of the breakdown of an internal stellar DL. 
Hannes Alfvén suggested that billions of volts could exist across a typical solar flare double layer.
新星爆発は、内部恒星ダブルレイヤー(DL )の崩壊の結果です。

7.    A star is a resonant electrical load in a galactic circuit and naturally shows periodic behavior. 
Superimposed is the non-linear behavior of plasma discharges. 
Two stars close together can induce cataclysmic variability or pulsar behavior through such plasma discharges.
2 つの恒星が接近すると、そのようなプラズマ放電を通じて激変的な変動やパルサーの挙動が引き起こされる可能性があります。

8.    The correct model to apply to a star is that of a homopolar electric motor. 
It explains the puzzle of why the equator of the Sun rotates the fastest when it should be slowed by mass loss to the solar wind. 
(The same model applies to spiral galaxies and explains why outer stars orbit more rapidly than expected. 
The spiral arms of the galaxy and the spiral structure of the solar ‘wind’ then have an obvious connection).

9.    The current that powers the Sun can be viewed as flowing in along the wavy polar magnetic field lines[4], then from the poles toward the equator. 
That current flow manifests as huge sub-photospheric flows of gas. 
In the mid-latitudes the circuit is completed as the current flows outward in a current sheet called incorrectly the solar ‘wind.’
太陽に電力を供給する電流は、波状の極磁力線 [4] に沿って流れ込み、極から赤道に向かって流れると考えることができます。

10.    The transfer of charge to the solar wind takes place through the photosphere. 
It occurs in the form of a tightly packed global tornadic electrical discharge[5]. 
The importance of the tornadic form for us is that it is slower than lightning, being under the tight control of powerful electromagnetic forces, and less bright than lightning. 
The intense, equally spaced solenoidal magnetic fields of the photospheric tornadoes gives rise to the surprisingly evenly spaced magnetic field lines of the Sun.


11.    Encircling the Sun’s equator is a ring current forming a doughnut-shaped plasmoid. 
It is visible in UV light and is a source of stored electromagnetic energy. 
Occasionally the plasmoid discharges directly to lower levels of the Sun, punching a hole, that we call a sunspot, through the photosphere. 
A sunspot group can be compared to regional lightning on Earth. 
Scientists were surprised when they discovered ‘awesome plasma hurricanes’ just beneath a sunspot. 
Electric discharges in a plasma naturally drive such rotation. 
Sunspots of the same magnetic polarity are drawn toward each other, which is inexplicable if they are simply magnetic phenomena. 
However, two parallel electric current filaments following the magnetic field lines are naturally drawn together.

12.    Sometimes the slow discharge that forms a sunspot may trigger a stellar lightning flash, resulting in a more sudden and powerful release of stored electrical energy. 
An x-ray flash is the signature of such lightning. 
That arc may result in a CME. 
The corona often dims as power is withdrawn from the solar plasmoid.
このアークにより CME が発生する可能性があります。

13.    The conventional thermonuclear story of stellar evolution is incorrect so we do not know the age of the Sun, or its character in the past or future. 
The inexplicable and drastic global climate changes on Earth in the past may have found an answer at last in the variable nature of stars.

[The Bottom Line]

Our Sun, like all stars, is a variable star. 

We must learn to live with the uncertainty of a star that is a product of its environment. 

We can expect our Sun to change when it enters regions of interstellar space where there is more or less dust, which alters the plasma characteristics. 

In the meantime, we can only look for reassurance by closely examining the behavior of nearby stars. 

A few massive CME’s are the least of our concerns.
少数の大規模な CME については、私たちの懸念はほとんどありません。

* I am indebted to Professor Don Scott[6] for this insight. 
* この洞察については ドン・スコット教授 [6] に感謝します。

He points out that the complete shutdown of the solar wind for two days in May 1999 is understandable with his transistor model. 
彼は、1999 年 5 月の 2 日間太陽風が完全に停止したことは、彼のトランジスタ モデルで理解できると指摘しました。

It is inexplicable on the thermonuclear model since there was no change in the Sun’s visible energy output that accompanied the phenomenon.

Update 25 November 2003:
2003 年 11 月 25 日の更新:

Louis Lanzerotti, of the New Jersey Institute of Technology/Bell Labs, released the following startling report on November 14, 2003. 
ニュージャージー工科大学/ベル研究所のルイス・ランゼロッティ氏は、2003 年 11 月 14 日に次のような驚くべき報告書を発表しました。

It is a result of observations from the Ulysses spacecraft, which is orbiting over the poles of the Sun:

Data from Ulysses show that the solar wind originates in holes in the sun’s corona, and the speed of the solar wind varies inversely with coronal temperature. 
“This was completely unexpected,” said Lanzerotti. 
“Theorists had predicted the opposite. 
Now all models of the sun and the solar wind will have to explain this observation.”
「これはまったく予想外だった」とランゼロッティ氏は語った。 「理論家たちは反対のことを予測していました。
I missed an opportunity. 

This finding could have been predicted from the electrical model of the Sun.

The standard model of the solar wind has it “boiling off” the Sun so that you would expect a direct correlation between coronal temperature and solar wind speed. 

That is precisely the opposite of what the Ulysses spacecraft saw.

In the electric model of the Sun, where the solar electric field is strong in the coronal holes, protons of the solar wind are being strongly accelerated away from the Sun. 

Their random motion becomes less significant in a process called de-thermalization. 

Outside the coronal holes, where the coronal electric field is weaker, the protons move more aimlessly. 

As a result they suffer more collisions and move more randomly. 

The degree of random movement of particles directly equates to temperature. 

So the solar wind is fastest where the corona appears coolest and the solar wind is slowest where the corona appears hottest
 — as Ulysses found.

Wal Thornhill

1.    Even the closest star, our Sun, defies their understanding: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=x50hfzxa
2.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/X40-Solar-Flare-November2003.jpg
3.    Yet for decades the solar neutrino counts have been telling us that that model is incorrect: http://www.holoscience.com/news/puzzle.html
4.    wavy polar magnetic field lines: http://www.holoscience.com/news/kinks.htm
5.    tightly packed global tornadic electrical discharge: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=s9ke93mf
6.    Professor Don Scott: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/the-sun-our-variable-star/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Comets & Lightning Jets 彗星と雷ジェット by Wal Thornhill

Comets & Lightning Jets 彗星と雷ジェット

by Wal Thornhill | October 19, 2003 8:35 am

I recently picked up a second-hand book titled “The Big Splash” by Dr. Louis Frank of the University of Iowa. 
私は最近、アイオワ大学のルイス・フランク博士による「The Big Splash(大きな水しぶき)」というタイトルの古本を手に入れました。

Although it was published in 1990, the issues it raised remain unresolved. 
この本は 1990 年に出版されましたが、この本が提起した問題は未解決のままです。

The cover proclaims excitedly in large bold type: 
“A scientific discovery that revolutionizes the way we view the origin of life, the water we drink, the death of the dinosaurs, the creation of the oceans, the nature of the cosmos, and the very future of the Earth itself.” 

Dr. Frank comes with impeccable credentials. 

He was a full professor at 32 and at the time of writing the book was reputed to have “more instruments on more spacecraft than anyone else on the planet.”
彼は 32 歳で正教授となり、この本が書かれた時点では「地球上の他の誰よりも多くの機器を多くの宇宙船に搭載している」と評判でした。

The flyleaf of the book announces Frank’s interpretation of his discovery of mysterious holes punched in the uppermost reaches of the Earth’s atmosphere:
“Every minute, twenty 100-ton comets, made up of water and ice, slam into the Earth’s atmosphere. Each is about the size of a small house. According to Frank, these comets have been dumping water on the Earth for more than 4 billion years.”
「毎分、水と氷でできた100トンの彗星が20個地球の大気圏に衝突します。 それぞれは小さな家ほどの大きさです。 フランクによれば、これらの彗星は40億年以上にわたって地球に水をまき散らし続けているという。」


But as Frank found, 
“if you propose that something from out there is affecting us here and now, rather than millions of years in the past or millions of years in the future, beware the wrath of orthodox science. Science guards our isolation well.” 
「もしあなたが、地球外からの何かが過去や数百万年先ではなく、今ここで私たちに影響を与えていると主張するなら、正統派科学の怒りに気をつけてください。 科学は私たちの孤立をしっかりと守ってくれます。」

See Not a snowball’s chance… in New Scientist vol 155 issue 2090 – 12 July 97, page 24.
「新しい科学者」Vol 155 号、2090 年 – 1997 年 7 月 12 日、24 ページの「雪だまのチャンスではない…」を参照。

Frank’s “proof” of his interpretation comes from a few images from orbiting spacecraft of glowing trails plunging toward the Earth, hundreds of kilometers above the surface

The glowing, ionized trails are said to emit the characteristic radiation of excited atoms and ions associated with water. 

The size of these “mini water comets” is thought to be about 5-20 meters diameter and density about 0.2g/cc, which would mean they are fluffy like a snowball.

Dr. Frank’s theory was developed from observations, beginning in 1981, of “holes” in dayglow images of the Earth returned by orbiting spacecraft. 
フランク博士の理論は、1981 年に始まった、周回宇宙船によって返された地球の昼光画像にある「穴」の観察から発展しました。

Dayglow is caused by sunlight exciting oxygen atoms 100 km high in the ionosphere, which then emit invisible ultraviolet light. 
昼光は、太陽光が電離層の高さ 100 km の酸素原子を励起し、目に見えない紫外線を放出することによって引き起こされます。

Frank and a co-worker noticed that the day-glow images had small blemishes in the form of dark spots. 

After considerable effort to determine that the spots were not just noise or errors in transmission (since the spots were often no more than a pixel wide) it was concluded that the spots were real. 
スポットが単なるノイズや伝送エラーではないことを確認するために多大な努力を行った後 (スポットの幅が 1 ピクセル以下であることが多いため)、スポットは本物であると結論付けられました。

They grew and faded quickly and moved in a prograde fashion like meteoritic dust.

The next question was what could cause the rapid extinction and recovery of the dayglow over a circle about 30 miles (48km) in diameter? 
次の疑問は、直径約 30 マイル (48 km) の円上での昼光の急速な消滅と回復の原因は何でしょうか? でした。

Frank considered the possibility that a meteor could heat the air below a height of 100 km and cause it to rise into the dayglow level, quenching the glow there from atomic oxygen. 
フランクは、流星が高度 100 km 以下の空気を加熱し、昼光レベルまで上昇させ、原子状酸素によってその光を消す可能性があると考えました。

A simple calculation showed that it would require meteors of 70 kg or more. 
They are rare. 

If the dayglow holes are too big to be caused by a meteor, Frank decided the cause “had to be” extraterrestrial molecules forming a UV absorbing layer above 100 km. 
日光の穴が流星によって引き起こされるには大きすぎるのであれば、その原因は 100 km 上空に UV 吸収層を形成する地球外分子である「に違いない」とフランク氏は判断しました。

To absorb the UV light from the oxygen atoms below, it must be a cloud of water vapour. 

This led to the notion that comets must be the cause of the dayglow holes because comets are believed to be composed largely of water ice.

The biggest hurdle for Frank’s theory is the number of holes measured, which implies that 20 comets per minute are striking the Earth. 
フランクの理論の最大のハードルは測定された穴の数で、これは毎分 20 個の彗星が地球に衝突していることを意味します。

That’s 10 million comet-like objects per year, up to the size of a small house!
これは年間 1,000 万個の彗星のような物体に相当し、最大で小さな家ほどの大きさになります。

It is understandable that people in the Spacewatch program were very concerned that they haven’t seen anything of these impactors. 
スペースウォッチ プログラムの関係者が、これらの衝突物質を何も見ていないことに非常に懸念していたことは理解できます。

Astronomers have rightly asked why it is that we have not detected this barrage by some other means. 

It should provide ample water to make the rare, stratospheric noctilucent clouds a continuous feature of our skies. 

It would be sufficient to give the Moon an appreciable atmosphere and cause seismic shocks and surface erosion there
 – none of which are apparent. 
– どれも明らかではありません。

Earth satellites would be expected to have detected the plasma disturbance in their wake. 

It is unlikely the military would have missed them. 

Frank’s answer to the objections is that the phenomenon is real and no one has come up with an alternative explanation. 

In his words, “There was no other reasonable explanation.” 

The new photographs of the few bright trails of objects entering the Earth’s ionosphere, reported widely, focussed attention on Frank’s theory but in no way constitute proof.

I have an alternative explanation for the ionospheric holes. 

My proposal was posted on the Internet on 2nd June 1997, under the title, “Comments on Interplanetary Snowballs.”
私の提案は、1997 年 6 月 2 日に「惑星間の雪玉に関するコメント」というタイトルでインターネット上に掲載されました。

Frank noted two important characteristics of the ionospheric “holes.” 
フランクは、電離層の「穴」の 2 つの重要な特徴に注目しました。

First, the rate of occurrence is qualitatively similar to that for radar meteors (that is, meteors whose presence can be detected by radar echoes from their ionized trail through the atmosphere). 

Second is that the movement of the holes showed the prograde motion characteristic of meteoritic debris. 

These observations provide a strong link between the holes and simple meteors. 

But there is another essential element to the puzzle
 – the connection between ionized meteor trails and electrical discharge activity in the ionosphere. 
– イオン化した流星跡と電離層における放電活動との関係です。

The meteor trail acts as a giant lightning rod that connects the conducting ionosphere to the upper atmosphere. 

If the earth is an electrical body in an electrical solar system, it is the equivalent of a temporary short-circuit of a giant capacitor. 

The current flowing along the meteor trail gives rise to the unexplained brilliance and long-lasting glows of some meteors. 

It causes them to disintegrate like an exploding capacitor, high in the atmosphere. 

The Tunguska explosion was probably the most noteworthy example of the effect.

In an earlier news item I expressed my opinion that the Columbia shuttle disaster[1] was a result of a rare ionospheric discharge to the spacecraft. 

I am not convinced by an experiment that fired foam plastic at a Shuttle wing. 

Experiments performed with a desired outcome can usually be made to “succeed.” 

There are many infamous examples, along with some yet to be recognized. 

Airline pilots expressed disquiet about the lightning jets discovered above storms. 

No one knows what effect it might have on an airliner. 

However, due to the diffuse nature of the discharge and because airliners don’t leave much of an ionized wake to act as a lightning rod, there is probably nothing to fear. 

Anyway, airliners do their best to avoid flying above electrical storms. 

It should be noted also that meteors and space shuttles entering the atmosphere from above and descending rapidly through many tens of kilometres could remove the need for a 10 km high storm below to offer a preferred electrical path through the atmosphere to the ground.

My hypothesis is a logical extension of my earlier explanation of red sprites, blue jets and elves[2]. 

The recent discovery of giant lightning jets [see below] provides even stronger evidence for such a link.

One practically unknown characteristic of lightning is its ability to compress and accelerate atmospheric ions along the discharge channel from regions of high pressure to regions of lower pressure. 
雷の実質的に知られていない特性の 1 つは、高圧領域から低圧領域まで放電チャネルに沿って大気イオンを圧縮および加速する能力です。

In other words, it creates a roughly vertical jet of warmer air

These fountains can sometimes be seen from aircraft flying above electrical storms, protruding as filaments of cloud. 

Eric Crew, a colleague of the British electrical researcher, Dr. Charles Bruce, has suggested that such jets of warm, moist air into the stratosphere may be the cause of very large hailstones. 

The warm jet phenomenon has been reported at ground level: 
In July 1971 a retired general practitioner, Dr L.H. Worth, climbed to the rounded summit of the Puy Mary, 1770m, in central France. 
1971 年 7 月、退職した一般開業医の L.H. ワース博士は、フランス中部にある標高 1770 メートルのピュイ マリー山の丸い頂上に登頂しました。

He could see a storm in the valley below him about 3km away and he heard the thunder. 

A few seconds later he felt a blast of hot air, so powerful that he had to lean against it, and this occurred three times in the next few seconds. 
数秒後、彼は熱風を感じました。その勢いはあまりにも強く、その風に寄りかかなければなりませんでした、それが次の数秒間に 3 回発生しました。

That it was not an imaginary or hallucinatory experience is shown by the fact that people on the mountain near him rushed away for shelter.


From a New Scientist report [vol 178 issue 2401 – 28 June 2003, page 16] by Hazel Muir:
“Scientists in Taiwan have filmed five enormous lightning bolts they are calling “gigantic jets” reaching an altitude of 90 kilometres. The jets could play a vital role in dissipating the electrical charge that thunderstorms transport to the upper atmosphere.”
ヘイゼル・ミューアによる New Scientist レポート [第 178 巻 2401 号 – 2003 年 6 月 28 日、16 ページ] より:
「台湾の科学者たちは、高度90キロメートルに達する5つの巨大な稲妻を撮影し、彼らは「巨大ジェット」と呼んでいます。 ジェットは、雷雨嵐によって上層大気に運ばれる電荷を消散させる上で重要な役割を果たす可能性がある。」



It’s true that thunderstorms transport charge in the form of electrons to the upper atmosphere. 

However, it is not true that thunderstorms somehow need to “dissipate” their charge to feed the ionosphere. 

Storm clouds can be regarded simply as an impurity in the atmosphere that serves to increase the conductivity between the charged earth and the differently charged ionosphere. 

The result is that electrical breakdown occurs preferentially where the clouds stretch highest. 

Without them we would suffer much more rare but devastating “bolts from the blue,” or giant electrical tornadoes like those on cloudless Mars.
“..The jets, which lasted a few hundred milliseconds, look like hybrids of a sprite and a blue jet, with a slim lower section fanning out at the top (Nature, vol 423, p 974). ..
「...数百ミリ秒続いたジェットは、スプライトと青いジェットのハイブリッドのように見え、細い下部セクションが上部で扇形に広がっています (Nature、vol 423、p 974)。  ..

In September 2001, Victor Pasko of Penn State University at University Park spotted a similar hybrid jet over the ocean near Puerto Rico

Su’s work confirms that they are a new class of lightning. 

Receivers in Japan and Antarctica also detected extremely low-frequency radio waves from the jets
 – a sign that they were electrical discharges between the ionosphere and the clouds. 
– それは、電離層と雲の間の放電であることを示す兆候です。

Su thinks they compensate for the effects of thunderstorms, which constantly drive an upward current that keeps the ionosphere positively charged with respect to the ground.

Su’s theory is guesswork since experts on lightning do not know what is “cause” and what is “effect” when looking at the electrical activity associated with storms. 

He is a victim of the reductionist approach to science where no one can see the big picture. 

Certainly, no scientist has considered that the electrical storm may be an effect caused by the giant lightning above! 

Nor have they considered that it is the Earth that is charged negatively with respect to the solar plasma, which means that the ionosphere appears to be mysteriously positively charged to an Earthbound observer.

”He [Su] now wants to know how common gigantic jets are. 

And he is mystified about why the six jets seen to date all occurred above tropical oceans. 

An observing programme in the Rocky Mountains has picked up nearly 10,000 sprites since 1992, but not a single gigantic jet. 
ロッキー山脈の観測プログラムでは 1992 年以来、約 10,000 個のスプライトが検出されましたが、巨大なジェットは、1つも検出されませんでした。

Su speculates that the high salinity of tropical oceans might trigger gigantic jets, although he is not sure how. 

‘It reminds us that our understanding of the Earth’s environment is not as complete as we would like to believe,’ he adds.”

It has been found that lightning occurs preferentially over the oceans and in the lower latitudes. 

The salty oceans of Earth make an ideal conductor to transfer charge from the Earth to space. 

The Earth’s continents are not such good conductors and inhibit the flow of charge. 

However, some continental regions are better conductors than others, resulting in unusual storm and tornado activity there
 – like that seen in parts of the U.S. 

The latitudinal effect has been demonstrated in laboratory electrical plasma discharges to a magnetized sphere.
Pasko agrees. 
‘This field is in its infancy,’ he says in an accompanying article in Nature. 

That could change soon, however, as there are several proposed projects to observe lightning and sprites globally from space. 

That would reveal just how common gigantic jets really are.

The jets might have interesting effects on the chemistry of the atmosphere, adds Pasko. 

Their electric fields could accelerate electrons enough to dissociate oxygen molecules, triggering a chain of reactions that leads to ozone formation.”

That is likely. 
However, to return to the case of Louis Frank’s mysterious ionospheric holes, it seems plausible that giant lightning discharges could be triggered by the ionized trail created by a meteor. 

The result would be a fountain of un-ionized air from lower levels that punches through the airglow level. 

It would cause a sudden decrease in the airglow until the newly exposed atmospheric gases can be dissociated by solar radiation. 

The tops of the giant lightning jets reaches the altitude of the airglow layer and their dimensions are of the right order to explain the diameters of the ionospheric holes. 

I expect the study of sprites from space to clear up Louis Frank’s mystery.

Postscript: This model of the electrical interaction between planetary atmospheres and comets or large meteors has a lot to tell us about the strange effects seen when comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 struck Jupiter. But that’s another story.
追記: 惑星大気と彗星または大型流星の間の電気的相互作用のこのモデルは、シューメーカー レヴィ第 9 彗星が木星に衝突したときに見られた奇妙な影響について多くのことを教えてくれます。 しかし、それはまた別の話です。

Wal Thornhill

1.    Columbia shuttle disaster: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=r4k29syp
2.    red sprites, blue jets and elves: http://www.holoscience.com/news/balloon.html
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/comets-lightning-jets/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Mysterious Mars  謎の火星 by Wal Thornhill

Mysterious Mars 

by Wal Thornhill | August 27, 2003 7:43 am

Today, 27 August, at 9.51 am GMT, Mars will be a mere 56 million kilometres from Earth, the closest it has been since 57,617 BC. 


[1]Mars as seen by the Hubble Space Telescope

The claim that Neanderthals 60 millennia ago witnessed a Mars approach similar to what we are seeing today should be re-evaluated on two counts, one astronomical and one historical.

First: the equations used by astronomers produce the numbers which tell us where the planets have been (or will be) for millions of years, provided nothing has changed. 

Mathematically, these equations can be trusted for only a few centuries into the past, and not at all into the future. 

It is only the astronomers faith in the unchanged orbits of the planets that allows them to assume that the equations will yield accurate records of where the planets were tens of thousands of years ago.

to solve the mysteries of Mars astronomers must first answer the following historical questions posed by Ev Cochrane in Martian Metamorphoses: The Planet Mars in Ancient Myth and Religion[2]:

“Earthlings have long been fascinated by the planet Mars.

Well before modern science fiction speculated about advanced civilizations upon Mars and the dire threat of invasion by little green men, the red planet was regarded as a malevolent agent of war, pestilence, and apocalyptic disaster. 
現代の SF が火星の高度な文明や緑の小人による侵略の恐ろしい脅威について推測するずっと前に、赤い惑星は戦争、疫病、終末的な災害の悪意のある主体とみなされていました。

In an attempt to appease the capricious planet-god, various ancient cultures offered it human sacrifices. 

What is there about this distant speck of light that could inspire such bizarre conceptions culminating in ritual murder? 

And how do we account for the fact that virtually identical beliefs are to be found around the globe, in the New World as well as the Old?”


Cochrane continues:

“For untold millennia prior to the advent of scientific astronomy and well before there were any records which could properly be called historical, human beings recounted myths surrounding their favorite heroes and gods. 

Prominent themes in these sacred traditions include the Creation, the Deluge, the wars of the gods, and the dragon-combat. 

Despite the passage of eons and the destruction of countless cultures, such myths were committed to memory and told again and again primarily because they represented sacred knowledge regarding the history of the world. 

Until recently, however, such traditions have been given short shrift by scholars in general and all but ignored by mainstream science. 

This is most apparent, perhaps, in the modern astronomer’s faith that more can be learned about the recent history of our solar system from running computer simulations than from considering what our ancestors had to say on the matter.”

The date given with computer generated accuracy for Mars’ last closest approach to Earth is worthless. 

The computer has not been programmed with the real history of this world or that of Mars. 

Astronomers simply assume that the solar system is a Newtonian timepiece with no real history for billions of years. 

If that is wrong
 – and our ancestors obsessively repeat a different story – 
then the first law of computing applies to the computed date: 
Garbage in = garbage out.
– そして私たちの祖先は別の物語を執拗に繰り返します –


An artist’s picture appearing on Space.com of Neanderthalers having a barbeque under the peaceful glow of a reddish spot in the sky is pure fantasy.

Cochrane again:

“..many of the greatest mythical themes reflect ancient man’s obsession with the red planet. 

Indeed, we will attempt to show that Mars’ prominence in ancient consciousness is directly attributable to the peculiar behavior of the red planet, which only recently participated in a series of spectacular cataclysms involving the Earth and various neighboring planetary bodies. 

If our thesis has any validity, it follows that the orthodox version of the recent history of the solar system is itself little more than a modern ‘myth’ and stands in dire need of revision. 

With implications this far-reaching, the ancient traditions surrounding the planet Mars suddenly take on new significance.”

Science is supposed to consider all relevant data in attempting to find the truth. 

It is unscientific to ignore the references to Mars passed down by our ancestors worldwide, and which they considered of paramount significance. 

“We instinctively dismiss the idea that five or ten thousand years ago there may very well have been thinkers of the order of Kepler, Gauss or Einstein, working with the means at hand,” wrote De Santillana & Von Dechend in Hamlet’s Mill.

In addition, it is naïve to think that our infinitesimally small time window of modern scientific investigation can be extrapolated back over 60,000 years, let alone over millions or billions of years. 

Mars is a mystery simply because of our unscientific and naïve approach.

In New Scientist of 23 August 2003, in an article by David L. Chandler titled “All eyes on Mars,” some of the mysteries faced by experts were outlined. 
2003 年 8 月 23 日号の『ニュー・サイエンティスト』誌のデビッド・L・チャンドラーによる「火星に注目している」というタイトルの記事で、専門家が直面している謎のいくつかが概説されました。

“..Mars is proving more enigmatic than ever at the moment. 

The latest images of the Martian surface taken by NASA’s orbiting Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) have revealed profoundly mysterious landforms that have left geologists scratching their heads. 

The features include a combination of surprisingly stable dunes, canyons without craters and rapidly eroding ice caps. 

All point to amazingly fast processes taking place on the surface

Mars has changed considerably in the past few thousand years
 – in some places, even the past two years. 
– 場所によっては、過去 2 年間でも。

Yet nobody knows why.

Unraveling the mystery will require a radical leap in theoretical thinking, says Michael Malin, the geologist in charge of the MGS camera.”
No amount of theorizing based on slow evolutionary geological principles will explain how the giant canyons on Mars are so young that they have no craters in their walls. 

The very formation mechanism of Valles Marineris is a mystery to geologists. 

However, if we make use of the forensic evidence from the past, the formation of Valles Marineris was witnessed by modern humans in late prehistory. 

We don’t need to theorize. 

Mars, the god of war, was memorialized as the heroic figure in a celestial battle fought with thunderbolts. 

Mars was struck and a visible scar remained. 

For the scar of Valles Marineris to be seen by the naked eye requires that Mars was about one hundred times closer to the Earth than it is on this closest approach! 
マリネリス峡谷の傷跡を肉眼で見るには、火星がこの最接近よりも約 100 倍地球に近かったことが必要です。

Unfortunately, such a radical overhaul of astronomy and geology are implied by such information that it’s just not going to happen any day soon. 
Arthur Koestler wrote, in The Ghost in the Machine:

“The revolutions in the history of science are successful escapes from blind alleys. 

The evolution of knowledge is continuous only during those periods of consolidation and elaboration which follow a major breakthrough. 

Sooner or later, however, consolidation leads to increasing rigidity, orthodoxy, and so into the dead end of overspecialization – to the koala bear.”
So it is left to a few adventurous seekers after the truth to scout far ahead and to find the way out of the blind alley into which science has led us.

Based on an interdisciplinary approach to the mysteries of Mars, some suggested solutions to the problems follow the excerpts from the new Scientist article. 
“On Mars today, it looks as if glaciers are receding after an ice age. 

At the planet’s south pole, alternate layers of ice and dust are vanishing before our eyes. 

These long, sweeping, arm-like peninsulas were deposited as a result of past climate oscillations. 

According to MGS images from 1999 and 2001, they are eroding at a rate of 3 metres per year or more. 
1999 年と 2001 年の MGS 画像によると、年間 3 メートル以上の速度で浸食されています。

The images show peninsulas of ice narrowing, and occasionally being pinched off into islands, with some islands disappearing altogether. 

By measuring the amount of erosion seen over two years, Malin calculates one entire layer will disappear within 20 years.
マリン氏は、2年間に見られる浸食の量を測定することにより、20 年以内に、1つの層全体が消失すると計算しています。

“We were absolutely shocked by that,” said Malin when he presented his results at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Denver, Colorado, in February. 

The magnitude of the changes implies an enormous amount of energy is being pumped into the ice to melt and vaporise it. 

And the speed of the vaporisation has helped to resolve a long-standing controversy over whether the ice is frozen water or carbon dioxide. 

“Calculations showed the only material that could have changed that rapidly is carbon dioxide,” says Malin. 

It is hard to tell from above how thick each layer of ice is, but best estimates are that with every layer eroded, the thickness of the Martian atmosphere increases by 1 per cent.

More questions remain. 
How many layers were there in the first place, before the erosion started? 
How many remain below? 
Nobody knows. 

But the implications for one of Mars’s best-known surface features are astounding. 

“All the visible ice, all the carbon dioxide that we see in this ‘permanent’ ice cap could be eroded in less than a century,” Malin says.

The fact that thunderbolts were remembered by the ancients as a cause of surface scarring on Mars opens a whole new realm of rapid electrical deposition and erosion to explain surface features. 

It happened yesterday in geological terms so that we may expect faster adjustments today than otherwise expected. 

Electric discharges tend to remove matter from the cathode and transfer it to the anode. 

Electrical deposition from another body would explain the global layering seen on Mars. 

Electric discharge machining would tend to remove surface material by an etching process. 

That has resulted in many weird surface features.


[3]This enigmatic landform on Mars shows the extensive layering followed by powerful electric discharge etching of the surface

On the right is an electric discharge machined surface viewed under an electron microscope. 

The scalability law of plasma phenomena allows a direct comparison

The Earth today suffers minor electrical interaction with the solar plasma, which results in lightning at mid to lower latitudes and a diffuse auroral discharge at the poles. 

Another form of diffuse atmospheric electric discharge is the more energetic tornado. 

Mars was also depicted by the ancients as sitting within a glowing tornadic column for a period. 

That would explain the huge swirling erosion patterns at both of the Martian poles. 

It also means that the polar caps are only about 10,000 years old and probably still accommodating to Mars’ “new” environment. 
それはまた、極冠が誕生してからわずか約 10,000 年であり、おそらくまだ火星の「新しい」環境に適応していることを意味します。

The puzzling difference between the northern and southern hemispheres of Mars is explained simply if the north pole was the cathode in the tornadic electrical exchange. 

Material would then have been removed from the northern hemisphere to give the low, flat and relatively uncratered terrain found there.

[Mars Photo Credit: NASA/JPL/Malin Space Science Systems]
[火星の写真提供者: NASA/JPL/Malin Space Science Systems]

On the left is the raised swirling terrain at the Martian north pole. 

At right, we see that the layers of the martian north polar cap are divided into upper, light-toned layers and lower, darker layers. 

It shows the deposition process to have been discontinuous. 

Streamers of dark sand join a nearby "dune field" a few kilometers away. 

Erosion of the lower layered unit liberates sand that was long ago deposited in these layers. 

The upper unit, by contrast, contains almost no sand. 

Wind may have created the dunes or they may have been shaped by earlier spark "pitting" of the surface



For comparison, this surface has been pitted by the process of electric spark machining.

“Other features indicate a [recently] changing world, too. 

For example, huge fields of granular dunes preserve detailed features that show that they once marched across the landscape like sand dunes on Earth, blown by the wind. 

Yet these dunes are frozen in place, without a trace of motion over a two-year interval.
しかし、これらの砂丘は、2 年間にわたって動きの痕跡もなく、その場に凍りついています。

The only plausible explanation is, again, climate change. 

If the atmosphere was much thicker in the recent past, its winds may have been able to push along dunes that today’s winds can no longer even ruffle. 

Mars may have lost much of that thicker atmosphere in the past and perhaps it is now regaining it from the evaporation of its polar caps.”


It was the most catastrophic climate change imaginable involving a drastic shift of orbit as a result of the close electrical and gravitational encounters with other planets. 

Electrical forces in an essentially chaotic gravitational system can quickly change and stabilize planetary orbits. 

It renders computer orbital retro-calculations invalid. 

No such computation will place Mars near the Earth only 10,000 years ago! 
この様な、ほんの 10,000 年前に火星が地球の近くに位置するような計算はありません!

The tornadic circumpolar winds mentioned above were capable of moving heavy sand grains and forming vast fields of sand dunes around the polar caps. 

However, the electrical interactions were capable of stripping much of Mars’ atmosphere too. 

The final result was a tenuous atmosphere no longer capable of moving sand dunes.
“Perhaps the most mysterious new-found feature on Mars lies inside its version of the Grand Canyon, the huge Valles Marineris, a 2000-kilometre-long canyon near the equator. 

In a side canyon called Candor Chasma, the floor lies 3.5 kilometres below the surrounding plateau and the walls are spectacularly layered. 
カンドール・チャズマと呼ばれる横峡の底は周囲の台地から 3.5 キロメートル下にあり、壁は見事に層になっています。

But there are few impact craters on Candor Chasma’s floor, implying that it is less than a million years old, as it has not had time to be bombarded by many meteorites. 

But if it is that young, Malin asks, “how did it get exposed from under three and a half kilometres of material?” 
“So far, there is no answer.”

I have explained how a powerful cosmic thunderbolt tore out the canyons of Valles Marineris[4] and the event was witnessed by humans. 

As for dating surfaces by crater counting, almost all of the craters on Mars are electrical. 

Impacts do not form such neat circular craters. 

Because they are electrical craters they tend to form on high points. 

That is why they are often seen perched on the raised rims of earlier craters (earlier possibly only by minutes) and the edges of canyons and not on the walls of existing craters and canyons.
“ ‘Altogether,’ says Malin, ‘we have maybe eight to ten landforms that indicate that what you see on Mars today, in terms of the environment, is not what formed the features we see.’ 
「『全部で、おそらく 8 ~ 10 個の地形があり、環境という観点から、今日火星で見られるものは、私たちが見ている地形を形成したものではないことを示しています。」とマリンは言います。

That points to climate change, agrees planetary scientist Chris McKay of NASA’s Ames Research Center in California, who viewed Malin’s images at a Mars conference in Pasadena, California, last month. 

But until scientists develop a detailed hypothesis that describes the type of climate change and links it to the features observed, the images don’t make sense, says McKay. 

‘We’ve reached a point of diminishing returns from orbital imaging,’ he says.

Malin and McKay aren’t the only ones feeling puzzled. 

‘The problems are becoming more difficult, instead of becoming easier,’ said Bruce Jakosky, a planetary scientist at the University of Colorado at Boulder, who was at the meeting in Pasadena. 

‘People are seeing things they just don’t understand, and coming up with wild ideas to try to explain them,’ he says. 
“Many suggestions invoke glaciation, but none can explain all the enigmatic features.”

Malin is correct. 
The present environment of Mars did not form the features on Mars. 

Unfortunately, as specialists, geologists have little else to work with other than climate change to explain recent surface changes. 

For Koestler’s “koala bears,” more orbital imaging just adds to the confusion. 

However, continued orbital imaging remains valuable for interdisciplinary advance scouts. 

They have the entire remembered experience of the human race to assist their understanding of the images. 

They are not limited by the myths created by modern science. 

They can see beyond to an interdisciplinary science created by the study of myths.

We must use myths to create a new science, not science to create new myths. 
“The most ‘ancient treasure’ -in Aristotle’s words- that was left to us by our predecessors of the High and Far-off Times was the idea that the gods are really stars, and that there are no others. 
「―アリストテレスの言葉を借りれば― 盛期と遠い時代の先人たちが私たちに残した最も「古代の宝」は、神々は実際には星であり、他には存在しないという考えでした。

The forces reside in the starry heavens, and all the stories, characters and adventures narrated by mythology concentrate on the active powers among the stars, who are planets.”
— Giorgio Di Santillana and Hertha Von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill
— ジョルジョ・ディ・サンティリャーナとヘルタ・フォン・デチェンド、ハムレット工場

Wal Thornhill

1.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mars_HST.jpg
2.    Martian Metamorphoses: The Planet Mars in Ancient Myth and Religion: http://www.aeonjournal.com/mars.htm
3.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mars_layering.jpg
4.    cosmic thunderbolt tore out the canyons of Valles Marineris: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=rnde0zza
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/mysterious-mars/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Spiral Galaxies & Grand Canyons 渦巻銀河とグランドキャニオン by Wal Thornhill

Spiral Galaxies & Grand Canyons 渦巻銀河とグランドキャニオン

by Wal Thornhill | August 18, 2003 11:33 pm

The grandest canyon in the solar system is Valles Marineris on Mars. It stretches a third of the way around the planet. But what in heaven can spiral galaxies have to do with the geology of Mars? 
太陽系で最も壮大な峡谷は、火星のマリネリス渓谷です。 それは地球の周囲の3分の1に伸びています。 しかし、一体、渦巻銀河が火星の地質とどのような関係があるのでしょうか?


The great scar of Valles Marineris looks as if it has been burnt into the planet’s face. 

Behind, a barred spiral galaxy glows from the depths of space. 

It is so called because the spiral arms begin from the ends of a bar rather than the center of the galaxy. 

About 1/3rd of all spirals are barred, including our Milky Way galaxy.

天の川銀河を含め、すべての渦巻きの約 3 分の 1 が、棒状になっています。

In October 2001[1], I wrote 
“In light of more than a century’s research in the field of plasma cosmology and the 20th century discoveries of the space age, we can confidently propose the celestial thunderbolt as a common cause of the formation of canyons and rilles on rocky planets and moons.”

2001 年 10 月 [1] に、私はこう書きました、

At that time I had not come to any conclusion about the details of the electrical event that created the colossal Valles Marineris canyons on Mars. 

Like geologists, I use a process of pattern matching when attempting to understand the processes that may have formed a feature seen on the surfaces of planets and moons. 

But unlike geologists, who have been seriously misled by astrophysicists and are now confused by what they see on Mars, I have the luxury of contemplating the effects of the most powerful erosion force in the universe
 – that of the electric arc.
– 電気アークのこと、

Following the lead provided by Ralph Juergens in the 1970’s I looked at the detailed morphology of Valles Marineris to conclude that it was a scar caused by a cosmic discharge. 

But the question remained: 
how did the arc move to create a chasm at least 4000 kilometres long? 

There is no obvious start or finish to the canyons. 

Indeed there is a kind of symmetry about the central region of Melas Chasma.

Electrical effects offer a unique advantage in being scalable over more than 14 orders of magnitude. 
電気的エフェクトには、14 桁以上に拡張できるという独自の利点があります。

In other words, erosion effects observed under an electron microscope provide direct insights into planetary features on a scale of hundreds or thousands of kilometres. 

However, I had limited my perspective by not looking at large scale galactic objects to see if there were any clues in their patterns to the much smaller features on planetary surfaces. 

The connection lies in the fact that galaxies are the largest visible electric discharge phenomenon in the universe.

That may be a controversial statement when conventional astrophysics uses the weakest force in the universe, gravity, in a fruitless attempt to explain the dynamics of galaxies. 

It is a glaring indictment of the way science works when a compelling competing theory is neither mentioned nor tested against an accepted theory that requires ad hoc and mysterious “dark matter” and “dark energy” in order to appear to work. 

It has forced plasma physicists and the IEEE to hold separate meetings and to publish papers on plasma cosmology[2]. With a very few notable exceptions, the astronomical community ignores the subject.
これにより、プラズマ物理学者とIEEEはプラズマ宇宙論に関する会議を別々に開催し、論文を発表することを余儀なくされました[2]。 ごく少数の顕著な例外を除いて、天文学界はこの主題を無視しています。

The strongest support for plasma cosmology comes from the close correspondence between observations, supercomputer simulations and experiment. It does not require any new forces, new physics or phantom particles to force a match with observations. It explains why galaxies naturally favor the beautiful spiral form. 
プラズマ宇宙論の最も強力なサポートは、観測、スーパーコンピューターのシミュレーション、実験の間の密接な対応から生まれます。 観測値と強制的に一致させるために、新しい力、新しい物理学、またはファントム(=幻想の)粒子は必要ありません。 これは、銀河が自然に美しい渦巻き形状を好む理由を説明しています。

Gravity alone can only produce featureless disks. The current theory of planet formation relies on this fact.
重力だけでは、特徴のないディスクしか作成できません。 現在の惑星形成理論はこの事実に基づいています。


On the left is a series of single frame stills from a computer animation of a cross-section through two interacting Birkeland current filaments. 
左側は、相互作用する 2 つのバークランド電流フィラメントの断面のコンピューター アニメーションからの一連の単一フレームの静止画です。

Not shown is the elliptical core of plasma trapped at the geometric center of the simulation. 

Top right is the form taken by two interacting plasmoids fired at each other across a magnetic field (courtesy of W. Bostik). 
右上は、磁場を越えて互いに発火した 2 つの相互作用するプラズモイドによってとられる形態です (W. ボスティック提供)。

Below that, side by side to show the striking correspondence between lab experiment and computer simulation in plasma cosmology, are the development of auroral instabilities as current increases from top to bottom. 

All images are from Physics of the Plasma Universe by Anthony Peratt.

In the simulation of the electrical formation of a spiral galaxy the two fuzzy spots in the earlier frames show where two cosmic current filaments pass vertically through the plane of the developing galaxy. 

The force between these cosmic current filaments is more powerful and long-range than gravity, declining linearly with distance. 

It leads to a natural pairing of filaments when many filaments are present in plasmas in which the magnetic field plays a major role.


I accounted for the pairing and rotation of plasma current filaments when explaining the formation of circular craters. 

However, it was not until I examined the MOLA topographic map of Mars (above) that I realized the extended form of Valles Marineris and connected canyons was identical to that of a classic barred-spiral galaxy.
しかし、私が火星の MOLA 地形図 (上) を調べるまで、マリネリス渓谷とそれに接続された峡谷の拡張された形状が古典的な棒状渦巻銀河の形状と同一であることに気づきませんでした。



It seems that a cosmic thunderbolt has struck Mars with two huge filaments or plasmoids focussed on a spot now occupied by the deepest central canyons of Valles Marineris. 

Electromagnetic forces then constrained the discharge across the surface of Mars to the classic shape of a barred spiral.



All of the enigmatic large-scale features of Valles Marineris then have a coherent and simple explanation. 

Note the tendency for Ius Chasma to be concave downwards and Coprates Chasma to be concave upward. 

That matches the effect seen in Bostik’s lab experiment above. 

Also many odd details make sense. 

For example, for the aficionados of powerful plasma discharges, the “bar” is formed by Ius Chasma to the west and Coprates Chasma to the east. 
たとえば、強力なプラズマ放電の愛好家にとって、「バー」は西のイウス チャズマと東のコプラテス チャズマによって形成されます。

At their extremities they “pinch” down before entering large chaotic regions, Noctis Labyrinthus in the west and Capri Chasma and Eos Chasma in the east. 

This is typical of diocotron instabilities that sometimes occur in the arms of spiral galaxies. 

After pinching down, the discharge curves and balloons out. 

The surface damage is spread over a greater area, forming chaotic etched terrain in the east and a vast system of pitted trenches in the west. 

The act of pinching the discharge leads to filamentation, which may be seen in the thin parallel channels at the extremities of the main canyons. 

The filamentation instability occurs most readily at large currents. 

This effect could also explain the tendency to “doubling” of the canyons, to form a central ridge.


Electrons rushed from remote regions along the outer “spiral arms” of Claritas Fossae in the west and a number of channels including Tiu Vallis in the east. 

In doing so they created the usual electrically scoured channels. 

As Michael Carr, leader of the Viking Orbiter imaging team noted, “Canyons, chaos and outflow channels are thus physically connected, and their origins may be in some way related.”

There are some smaller parallel canyon systems, closed at both ends, to the north of Valles Marineris. 

They appear to be the result of smaller discharges of the same type as created Valles Marineris, probably immediately following the main stroke. 

Multiple strokes, decreasing in intensity, are a well-known characteristic of lightning.

[The Accepted Model]

No one was there to witness the evolution of the Earth, so geologists have constructed an elaborate story about the history of the Earth. 

It is founded upon a simple belief that the planets were all formed at about the same time and have remained for billions of years in their present orbits. 

It was inevitable that chapters of the Earth’s story would be translated to Mars. 

The result is a succession of hypothetical Martian “ages” including a “Noachian” age of deluge. 

And remember that this is a story about a frozen desert planet!

One of the most highly developed capabilities of the human mind is to concoct stories. 
人間の心の最も高度に発達した能力の 1つは、物語をでっち上げることです。

Equally, we have a strong desire to be told stories and to believe them. 

If we believe a story to be true we have a strong tendency to accept confirming evidence and to ignore contrary evidence. 

Geologists are human and show the same tendencies when explaining planetary surface features.

The idea of former oceans and rivers existing on Mars came from the many scoured channels and the flat, low terrain in the northern hemisphere. 

This marked hemispheric dichotomy is inexplicable by any known geological or astronomical effect. 

It has never occurred to geologists that the agent involved was electrified plasma. 

Why should it? 

Astrophysicists tell them that we live in an electrically neutral universe in which cosmic charge separation is impossible. 

But if that single assumption is incorrect everything changes. 
しかし、その 1 つの仮定が間違っている場合は、すべてが変わります。

If the visible universe suffers cosmic charge separation then we have a source of energy to build and shape galaxies, light stars, give birth to planets, organize stable orbits and leave the resulting scars of electrical transactions on all solid bodies.
[Implications of the Plasma Model]

Gigantic fresh scars show that Mars has suffered recently and terribly. 

Millions of cubic kilometres of jagged boulders were burnt and torn from its surface and strewn from horizon to horizon
 – as all of the images relayed from the surface have shown. 
– 地表から中継されたすべての画像が示しているように、

The implications for the search for life on Mars are profound. 

If there was a past environment conducive to life on Mars it has been wrecked. 

Not only the surface suffered but also the atmosphere was stripped and exogenous gases and solids dumped on the hapless planet. 

Mars’ orbit and climate changed drastically.


 [6]It is interesting to compare a geological story of Mars with that of the electrical. 

The image above has the following explanation attached: 
"The steep canyon walls and ridge forming layers of Valles Marineris are on display in this THEMIS picture. 

Landslides and gullies observed throughout the image are evidence to (sic) the continued mass wasting of the martian surface

Upon close examination of the canyon floor, small ripples that are likely migrating sand dunes are seen on the surface

Some slopes also display an interesting raked-like appearance that may be due to a combination of aeolian and gully forming processes."


See the THEMIS website for the fullsize image of the eastern end of Ius Chasma[7].
イウス・チャズマの東端のフルサイズ画像については、THEMIS Web サイトを参照してください。

The term “mass wasting” for Valles Marineris is a euphemism for the disappearance of millions of cubic kilometres of rock and soil. 

The two mechanisms proposed for the formation of Valles Marineris are underground water erosion or massive surface rifting. 
マリネリス渓谷の形成について提案されている 2 つのメカニズムは、地下水の浸食または大規模な地表の亀裂です。

Neither stand up to scrutiny. 

There is no mechanism available to geologists to cause mass wasting, particularly on such a gargantuan scale. 

The minor features are merely explained in an ad hoc fashion.

The electrical model now has a coherent explanation for the broadest features of five major and distinct landforms associated with Valles Marineris. 
この電気的モデルは、マリネリス峡谷に関連する 5 つの主要で異なる地形の最も広範な特徴についての一貫した説明を備えています。

The five features are:
1.    the Valles Marineris canyons;
2.    Noctis Labyrinthus;
3.    Claritas Fossae;
4.    the eastern chaos region;
5.    the great eastern valley systems.
 1. マリネリス峡谷。
 3. クラリタス・フォッサイ。
5. 東部の大谷系。

The missing mass (shades of the purely gravitational thinking of astronomers) was not transported or buried on Mars. 

It was lofted toward space by blast and electrical forces. 

The same kind of process operates far more quietly today on Io, lofting matter hundreds of kilometres into space. 

The fact that we receive martian meteorites today is solid evidence of the removal of rocks from the surface of Mars in the recent past.

The electrical model also explains the detailed features. 

The small ripples on the canyon floor are not sand dunes but a solid reminder of the path of the arc that blasted the canyon. 

They are massive “fulgurites”
 – the glassified sand formed by underground lightning. 
– 地下の雷によって形成されたガラス化した砂。

They are transverse to the arc because they record the corona discharge filaments associated with lightning. 

The same effect seems to have solidified the soil along the ridge crests into “Lichtenberg figures,” which is another characteristic pattern created by lightning. 

Ridge crests and canyon edges would be the focus of secondary discharges. 

The raked appearance of the slopes are probably the result of surface lightning feeding the ridge crests with electrons to satisfy the discharges there. 

We find such patterns of grooves on objects as diverse as asteroids, moons and planets.

For reasons yet to be revealed, I think it likely that Mars in the recent past had an environment not much different to that of the Earth. 

But the extensive layering on Mars suggests the earlier environment was globally and episodically buried and electrically scarred when that changed. 

That could explain the detection of extensive subsurface ice, if the hydrogen signature found by the Odyssey spacecraft is due to water. 

Certainly, Martian craters with flow features away from their rims fit such a picture. 

The flows are due to electric heating of ices by subsurface currents flowing away from the arc that formed the crater.

What about the Grand Canyon? 

As many geologists have pointed out, the Grand Canyon is the size of a mere tributary of Valles Marineris. 

The Grand Canyon shows detailed similarities to the canyons of Valles Marineris but the discharge that created it did not take the same striking shape. 
グランド キャニオンは、マリネリス渓谷の峡谷と詳細な類似点を示していますが、グランド キャニオンを形成した噴出物は、同じ印象的な形状をしていませんでした。

If forced to use a galactic analogy, it could be the equivalent of a dwarf irregular galaxy.

Wal Thornhill

1.    In October 2001: http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_mars.htm
2.    plasma cosmology: http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/TheUniverse.html
3.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mars_topographic.jpg
4.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Valles_Marineris_MCU.jpg
5.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Diocotrons.jpg
6.    [Image]: /wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Valles_Marineris_CU_a.jpg
7.    See the THEMIS website for the fullsize image of the eastern end of Ius Chasma: http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20030820a.html
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/spiral-galaxies-grand-canyons/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Puzzling Star Stuff 不可解な恒星の素材 by Wal Thornhill

Puzzling Star Stuff 

by Wal Thornhill | August 2, 2003 11:20 pm
“Twinkle, twinkle little star. How I wonder what you are.” 
「キラキラ光る、小さなお星様。 あなたは何者なのか不思議です。」

In a report for the New Scientist of 26 July, titled ‘The Sun Catcher,’ Hazel Muir writes about the daring exploits required to retrieve samples of the Sun to be returned to the Earth in 2004 by the GENESIS spacecraft. 
ヘイゼル・ミューアは、「サン・キャッチャー」と題された7月26日号の「New Scientist」誌へのレポートで、2004年にジェネシス宇宙船によって地球に持ち返される太陽のサンプルを回収するために必要とされた大胆な悪用について書いている。

Astronomers hope that the solar samples collected on five separate 1-metre round collector arrays will shed light on the birth of the Sun and planets. 

I hope they are successful but 
I predict that it will add to the utter confusion resulting from earlier samples from the Moon, Mars and meteorites.


From New Scientist:

By April 2004, the arrays will have trapped only about 20 micrograms of solar material other than hydrogen and helium
 – the weight of a few grains of salt. 
2004 年 4 月までに、アレイは水素とヘリウム以外の太陽物質を
– 数粒の塩の重さの、わずか約 20 マイクログラムしか捕捉しないでしょう。

That tiny amount could still be enough to revolutionise our view of the sun. 

To date, our best estimates of the make-up of the sun come from detailed studies of the light it emits and from spacecraft that have analysed the solar wind. 

In terms of mass, hydrogen and helium make up about 98 per cent of the sun, with other elements making up the rest.
質量の点では、水素とヘリウムが太陽の約 98 パーセントを占め、残りは他の元素で構成されています。

Previous studies of the solar spectrum have identified the fingerprints of over 60 elements. 
太陽スペクトルのこれまでの研究では、60 以上の元素の指紋が特定されています。

But measuring their abundances isn’t so easy and most elements come with an error of at least 10 per cent. 
しかし、その存在量を測定するのはそれほど簡単ではなく、ほとんどの元素には少なくとも 10% の誤差が生じます。

For some, astronomers confess they can’t measure the amounts at all. 

Even worse, the solar spectrum says nothing about the various different isotopes of a particular element in the sun. 

That’s because the light an atom emits or absorbs depends on the energy levels of its electrons
 – not on the number of neutrons in its nucleus, which is what varies according to the isotope. 
– 核内の中性子の数ではなく、同位体によって異なるためです。

Spacecraft measurements of isotope ratios often have uncertainties of 40 per cent or more.
宇宙船による同位体比の測定には、多くの場合 40% 以上の不確実性があります。

With the Genesis sample safely back in the lab, astronomers will be able to analyse it with the most sophisticated equipment to hand. 

This will improve their measurements of solar elements by a factor of 3, and will also allow them to pin down isotope ratios with errors of just 0.1 per cent, making them tens or hundreds of times more accurate than before.
これにより、太陽元素の測定が 3 倍向上し、わずか 0.1 パーセントの誤差で同位体比を特定できるようになり、以前よりも数十倍、又は、数百倍正確になります。

Having such a precise list of raw ingredients for the solar system might help astronomers understand all the inexplicable differences between elements on Earth, the moon and Mars. 

For decades researchers believed that the isotope ratios of different elements
 – such as the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon-12 – 
are the same everywhere, from the sun to the outer planets. 
炭素14と炭素12の比率など –は、太陽から外惑星に至るまで、どこでも同じであると信じていました。

But following the Apollo missions, it became clear that things are not that simple.

Between 1969 and 1972, astronauts on Apollo missions to the moon planted aluminium sheets on sticks into the powdery lunar surface to trap solar-wind particles. 
1969 年から 1972 年にかけて、アポロ計画による月へのミッションに参加した宇宙飛行士は、太陽風の粒子を捕捉するために、棒に付けたアルミニウム・シートを粉状の月面に埋め込みました。

Back on Earth, scientists extracted helium, neon and argon from the metal, and found that the ratio of neon-20 to neon-22 was inexplicably 38 per cent higher than in the Earth’s atmosphere.
地球に戻った科学者たちは、金属からヘリウム、ネオン、アルゴンを抽出し、ネオン 20 とネオン 22 の比率が地球の大気中よりも不可解にも 38 パーセント高いことを発見しました。

Even on the moon’s surface, the ratios of different nitrogen isotopes in a rock vary depending on its age. 

One possible explanation is that the nitrogen content of the solar wind has gradually changed over time, although how the sun could arrange that is a mystery.

The most dramatic variations in isotope mixes are for oxygen. 

The ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 is completely different in moon rocks and terrestrial rock, and in meteorites from Mars and the asteroid belt. 
酸素 18 と酸素 16 の比率は、月の石と地球の石、火星や小惑星帯の隕石では、まったく異なります。

“As time has gone by, we have found more and more differences, as measurements get more precise,” says Burnett. 

“There are now a whole string of elements whose isotopes are known to vary in the moon, meteorites and in the Earth, and no one really knows why these variations exist.”

The Genesis sample could help resolve some of these puzzles by filling in gaps in our picture of the sun’s chemical make-up, and how that differs from the make-up of the Earth, Mars and the asteroids. 

There could be underlying patterns in this “map” that reveal why all these bodies came to be so different. 

That’s assuming nothing goes badly wrong on the sample’s return to Earth.


“These puzzles” are manifold because astronomers’ assumptions fly in the face of the data. 

The very name of the mission, “GENESIS,” betrays the assumption that the outer layers of the Sun reflect the exact composition of the giant interstellar cloud that is presumed to have originated the solar system. 

This assumption, in turn, is based on the belief that the only element that changes over time in our Sun is the hydrogen it “burns” in its core to form helium. 

Practically all heavier elements must remain in the same abundances and isotopic ratios as “in the beginning” of the star.

Another assumption is that the planets were born at the same time as the Sun and from the same material. 

If either assumption is wrong, the results of the GENESIS experiment will not make any sense.
どちらかの仮定が間違っている場合、GENESIS の実験結果は意味をなさないことになります。

I claim that both assumptions are wrong. At best the GENESIS results will only add more isotopic variations to those already discovered. In the worst case, astronomers will be confounded by the discovery of one or more short-lived radioisotopes in the solar wind samples. That cannot happen if the Sun works the way astronomers believe it does. However, isotopic variation is expected if the Sun is a cosmic electric discharge phenomenon. 
『私はどちらの仮定も間違っていると主張します。 せいぜい、GENESIS の結果は、すでに発見されている同位体バリエーションにさらなる同位体バリエーションを追加するだけです。 最悪の場合、太陽風のサンプル中に 1 つ以上の短寿命放射性同位体が発見され、天文学者は混乱するでしょう。 太陽が天文学者が信じているように機能するのであれば、そのようなことは起こりません。 しかし、太陽が宇宙の放電現象である場合、同位体の変化が予想されます。』

In an electric star, both isotope ratios and heavy-element abundances would not be fixed at the time of its birth but would be “cooked up” in the outer layers by the high-energy discharges. 

It’s ironic that physicists use an electrically driven plasma pinch in laboratory experiments to mimic the nucleosynthesis they believe occurs at the core of the Sun. 

The question seems never to be asked: 
if they find it easiest to drive nucleosynthesis using electrical power, why would Nature do it in a more difficult way? 

This very same plasma pinch, scaled up from the lab by many orders of magnitude, can produce the 60 elements found in the atmosphere of the Sun.

The formation of planets by electrical expulsion[1] of part of the parent’s core material also leads to nucleosynthesis in the grandiose lightning flash of a nova. 

That is why some of the expulsion debris, in the form of meteorites, contains the products of very short-lived radioisotopes in their flash-heated minerals. 

This is a far simpler explanation than to require rare supernova events nearby at just the right moment during the formation of the solar system.

The episodic expulsion of planets results in a period of readjustment within the solar system after each event. 

The powerful electric force mediates that process when the comet-shaped plasma sheaths of the planets interact during close approaches. 

The sheaths (misnamed magnetospheres) tangle and the planets abruptly “see” each other electrically. 

When this first happens, gargantuan electrical discharges snake between the bodies and scar their surfaces with circular craters, mounds, sinuous channels and etched terrains. 

These cosmic thunderbolts too are capable of inducing nucleosynthesis and radioactivity.


[Artist's impression of the formation of the lunar crater Copernicus by an interplanetary arc. ]
[惑星間のアークによる月のクレーターのコペルニクスの形成に関する芸術家の印象。  ]

The features of planetary craters have not been reproducible on Earth by impact experiments. 

However, the tornadic cutting and removal of material by an interplanetary arc can explain all of the characteristics of circular craters.

Apollo astronauts found radioactive hotspots on the Moon, associated with young craters. 

These are the signatures of cosmic thunderbolts. 

Atmospheric and surface materials are dumped from one body to the other, and their elemental abundances are altered in the process. 

Most importantly these electrical interactions limit solid body collisions and mediate capture. 

The Moon was not formed by a collision with Earth but was captured recently.

It should have been obvious following the Voyager missions that the solar system shows myriad signs of a chaotic history

The old fairy tale that the solar system was formed “once upon a time, long, long ago” should have been retired immediately. 

The chapter of imaginary early impacts is not required to explain the heavy and oddly distributed craters on Mercury, the Moon, Mars and other bodies. 

It is amazing the amount of evidence against these fictions. 

Yet space age contradictions have not been able to dispel what has become a core belief in science. 

The story of the condensation of the solar system is a hangover from an earlier era, the time when science was superseding religion in chronicling mankind’s place in the scheme of things. 

It seems the human craving for certainty in the face of a violent universe took precedence. 

Unfortunately all we got is a new religion of science.

So, what good can come from the GENESIS mission? 

The greatest wake-up call would be the discovery of short-lived radioisotopes in the solar samples. 

That would show we don’t know how stars shine. 

The knock-on effects would be prodigious. 

The entire elaborate fiction of stellar evolution would come crashing down. 

Our certainty about the ages of stars and galaxies would be removed. 

The anomalies in stellar metallicities would be revealed as pointing to the need for a complete rethink of how stars and galaxies are formed and evolve. 

Eventually it would require acknowledgement that we inhabit an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE®.
最終的には、私たちが、エレクトリック・ユニバース® に住んでいるという認識が必要になります。

Within the solar system, knowing the isotopic composition of the solar wind might help us to identify atmospheric gases that have come from the solar wind and those that have been transferred from one body to another in past electrical interactions. 

We may be surprised to find that Mars has a whiff of Venus’ atmosphere, the Earth and Moon have traces of Martian noble gases, and that the new, hot planet
 – Venus – 
has an atmosphere that is changing composition as we watch, mediated by continuing surface electrical activity.
火星には金星の大気の香りがあり、地球と月には火星の希ガスの痕跡があり、新しい熱い惑星– ヴィーナス –が存在し、継続的な表面電気活動によって媒介され、私たちが観察するにつれて組成が変化する大気を持っていることを知って私たちは驚くかもしれません。

Wal Thornhill

1.    The formation of planets by electrical expulsion: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=rbkq9dj2
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/puzzling-star-stuff/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Planet Birthing – more evidence  惑星の誕生 – さらなる証拠 by Wal Thornhill

Planet Birthing – more evidence  惑星の誕生 – さらなる証拠

by Wal Thornhill | July 24, 2003 9:57 pm


In my May news item[1] I wrote, 
“It is far simpler and infinitely more efficient if planets are “born” at intervals by the electrical ejection of charged material from the similarly charged interiors of larger bodies – gas giants from stars, and rocky planets from gas giants.”
5 月のニュース項目 [1] で、私は次のように書きました、

The following report[2] is from Astronomy.com of July 23 and provides further evidence in favor of such a model:
 次のレポート[2]は、7 月 23 日の「天文学.com」からのもので、そのようなモデルを支持するさらなる証拠を提供します:

[Planets Prefer Metal]

Stars with high metal content are most likely to harbor planets.
by Vanessa Thomas

When looking for planets beyond our solar system, astronomers often target stars like the sun. 

But they may want to refocus their attention on stars that hold more metals than our own. 

A new study reveals that the more metal-rich a star is, the better the chance it hosts a planet.

Extrasolar-planet hunter Debra Fischer of the University of California, Berkeley, and astronomer Jeff Valenti of the Space Telescope Science Institute analyzed the composition of 754 nearby stars and looked to see which stars had planets. 

They found a strong, nearly linear correlation between a star’s metal content and the likelihood that it has a planet.

“We now know that stars which are abundant in heavy metals are five times more likely to harbor orbiting planets than are stars deficient in metals,” says Fischer, who presented the results Monday at the International Astronomical Union meeting in Sydney, Australia. 

“If you look at the metal-rich stars, twenty percent have planets. That’s stunning.”
「金属が豊富な恒星を見ると、20% に惑星があります。 それは素晴らしいですね。」

Fischer and Valenti examined the abundances of iron, nickel, あtitanium, silicon, and sodium in the spectra of more than 1,000 stars. (In astronomy, all elements heavier than helium are considered “metals.”) 
フィッシャーとヴァレンティは、1,000 個以上の恒星のスペクトルにおける鉄、ニッケル、チタン、ケイ素、ナトリウムの存在量を調べました。  (天文学では、ヘリウムより重い元素はすべて「金属」とみなされます。)

Of these, 754 were monitored for at least two years, so the astronomers could tell whether the stars had any close-orbiting gas giant planets. 
(A large, orbiting planet exerts a gravitational force on a star, causing a “wobble” that’s detectable in the star’s spectrum.)
このうち 754 個は少なくとも 2 年間監視されたため、天文学者たちは、その恒星達に近接軌道を周回する巨大ガス惑星があるかどうかを知ることができました。

Planets orbit 61 of the studied stars while the other 693 have no known planets.
研究された恒星のうち 61 個は惑星が周回していますが、他の 693 個には既知の惑星がありません。

After grouping the stars by metal content, the pair compared how many stars of each type had planets. 

Stars with sun-like metal abundances have a 5 to 10 percent chance of having planets. 
太陽のような金属を豊富に含む恒星には、惑星が存在する確率が 5 ~ 10% あります。

Those with three times more metals than the sun have a 20 percent chance. 

Metal-poor stars with only one-third as much as the sun have just a 3 percent probability. 
太陽の 3 分の 1 しか金属を含まない恒星に、(惑星)が存在する確率はわずか 3% です。

None of the 29 most metal-deficient stars of the study had planets.

“These data suggest that there is a threshold metallicity, and thus not all stars in our galaxy have the same chance of forming planetary systems,” Fischer says. 

“Whether a star has planetary companions or not is a condition of its birth. 
Those with a larger initial allotment of metals have an advantage over those without.”

The findings also suggest that younger stars are more likely to have planets. 

That’s because stars born in the galaxy’s early days formed from nebulae that included fewer heavy elements. 

As time passed, more stars exploded as supernova and heavier elements fused in their cores were scattered into the interstellar medium.

“Stars forming today are much more likely to have planets than early generations of stars,” comments Valenti. “It’s a planetary baby boom.”
「今日形成されている恒星は、初期世代の恒星よりも惑星を持っている可能性がはるかに高いです」とヴァレンティ氏はコメントする。  「それは、惑星のベビーブームだ。」


Given the orthodox notion of how planets form, it is not clear why we should expect more gas giant planets about a star simply because it has more heavy elements in its spectrum.

However, I argued in my earlier news item that stars “give birth” from time to time by electrical parturition. 

It occurs in a nova-type discharge from their charged interior. 

Unlike the hydrogen-bomb model of stars, there is no internal heating. 

Intense plasma discharges at the stellar surface give rise to starshine. 

Those discharges synthesize “metals” that continually rain into the star’s depths. 

The heavy element abundance in a star’s spectrum is not just an inheritance from old supernovae. 

Stellar interiors become enriched in heavy elements. 

The star “children” are gas giants or binary partners formed from those heavier elements after expulsion from the star.

Therefore we should simply expect from the electric star model that the longer a star has been shining the more heavy elements it will show in its spectrum and the more time it has had to “give birth.” 

So stars forming today are not more likely to have planets than earlier generations. 

They probably have not had time to have planetary “children.” 

Whether a star has planetary companions or not is NOT a condition of its birth. 

We should expect that below a certain metallicity (that is, age) a star will not have planets. 

We do not expect babies to give birth! 

Planet formation has more to do with the growth of internal electrical stress in a star. 

It can be enhanced by episodes of unusual electric stress in its environment. 

We should be looking closely at stars that have undergone nova outbursts.

It should be noted that plasma cosmologists have a view of star formation that allows for a number of condensed bodies to be formed in close proximity at the same time. 

And the separation of elements by their “critical ionization velocity” in a plasma pinch may offer an alternative explanation for differences in metallicity between the bodies. 

However, it is not clear to what extent this mechanism plays a role in the development of planets about a star. 

Certainly, it does not explain the propensity for planets to be found in higher numbers near stars of higher metallicity.

The stellar parturition model seems to offer a simple solution to:

a)    the presence of heavy elements in gas giants,

b) a greater number of gas giants being found around stars of high metallicity, 

c) the propensity for close orbits of the gas giants about their parent star.
そして、 巨大ガス惑星が親恒星の周りを、近い軌道で周回する傾向が有ります。

Wal Thornhill

1.    May news item: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=rbkq9dj2
2.    following report: http://www.astronomy.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/001/418hmyvu.asp
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/planet-birthing-more-evidence/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Squashed Star Flattens Solar Theory 押しつぶされた恒星は太陽理論を平らにする by Wal Thornhill

Squashed Star Flattens Solar Theory 押しつぶされた恒星は太陽理論を平らにする

by Wal Thornhill | June 24, 2003 9:36 pm

The following report appeared in New Scientist for 12 June 2003:
次のレポートは、2003 年 6 月 12 日の New Scientist に掲載されました:

[Flattest star puts astronomers in a spin][最も平らな恒星は天文学者を混乱させる]
Danny Penman

The flattest star yet seen is forcing researchers to revise their ideas on the dynamics and structure of celestial bodies. 

The star, called Achernar, was observed by astronomers at the European Southern Observatory in Chile.

According to standard celestial theories, the fast spinning star should be only 20 to 30 per cent wider across its equator than from pole to pole. 
標準的な天体の理論によれば、高速で回転するこの恒星の幅は、赤道全体の幅が極から極までの幅よりも 20 ~ 30 パーセントしかないはずです。

But Achernar, which spins at 225 km per second, has a colossal bulge around its equator and is 50 per cent wider.
しかし、秒速 225 km で自転するアケルナール(アチェルナール)には、赤道付近に巨大な膨らみがあり、その幅は 50% も広がっています。


 Artist's impression of ACHERNAR (Alpha Eridani). 

Brilliant blue Achernar, the ninth brightest star in the sky, lies at the southern tip of the star-river Eridanus. 
鮮やかな青色のアケルナール(アチェルナール)は、全天で 9 番目に明るい恒星で、星の川エリダヌス座の南端にあります。

It has a belt of emitting gas circling its equator. 

It is a member of a peculiar class of stars known as "Lambda Eridani" stars that show tiny but very regular periodic light variations.

All stars and planets that reach a critical spin velocity bulge slightly at the equator. 

The Earth is 40 kilometres, or 0.3 per cent, wider from east to west than from north to south. 
地球は 40 キロメートル、つまり 0.3 パーセントあり、南北よりも東西の方が広いです。

Astronomers had been confident that their calculations of this oblateness were fairly accurate. 

“But the new observation means that the model for fast rotating stars is not complete,” says astronomer Pierre Kervella, one of the team at the European Southern Observatory. 

“We clearly do not know enough.” “Either the core is rotating faster than the surface or the star’s matter is circulating in an unexpected way. 
「私たちは明らかに十分な知識を持っていません。」  「核が表面より速く回転しているか、恒星の物質が予期せぬ方法で循環しているかのどちらかです。

We’re not sure which possibility is correct at the moment,” he told New Scientist.

The discovery was made by astronomers using the Very Large Telescope Interferometer at ESO’s Paranal site in Chile. 

This uses two 40-centimetre reflecting telescopes to produce images which are then combined and passed through an interferometer. 
これは、2 つの 40 センチメートル反射望遠鏡を使用して画像を生成し、それらが結合されて干渉計を通過します。

This permits extremely accurate measurements
 – the instrument could spot a one euro coin at 2500 kilometres distance.
– この機器は 2500 キロメートル離れたところにある 1 ユーロ硬貨を見つけることができました、

The astronomers now plan to gather even higher resolution images using a trio of 1.8 metre telescopes. 

“But our immediate task will be to re-design our computer models,” says Kervella. 

The team hopes to use the models to distinguish between the two possible explanations for the star’s extraordinary flatness.
研究チームは、このモデルを使用して、この恒星の並外れた平坦性について考えられる 2 つの説明を区別したいと考えています。

There is a third important alternative, notable for its absence from the discussion. 
3 番目の重要な代替案がありますが、議論に参加していないことが注目に値します。

Perhaps we don’t know how stars work! 

The simplest way to explain stellar flattening due to swift rotation would be if the star were more homogeneous in density. 

But that would require giving up the notion of a central thermonuclear fire.

Predictive success is a key indicator of the correctness of a theoretical model. 

The above report demonstrates once more the predictive failure of present astrophysical models. 

The recommended scientific approach to such a dilemma is to question all of the assumptions that go into the failing model. 

However, when it comes to the question of how stars work, embodied in the “standard solar model,” there is no question. 

Stars shine, so obviously something must be burning within the star.

But electric lights shine without consuming themselves. 

In the above report, two ad hoc solutions are offered to complicate things. 
上記のレポートでは、状況を複雑にするために 2 つのアドホックなソリューションが提供されています。

But this is merely tinkering with a model that is already in deep trouble according to other fundamental observations. 

Unfortunately it seems scientists are encouraged by their training to indulge in “confirmatory bias.” 

That is, “the tendency for humans to seek out, attend to, and sometimes embellish experiences that support or ‘confirm’ their beliefs.”
“One study found that the vast majority of scientists drawn from a national sample showed a strong preference for “confirmatory” experiments. 

Over half of these scientists did not even recognize disconfirmation (modus tollens) as a valid reasoning form! 
In another study the logical reasoning skills of 30 scientists were compared to those of 15 relatively uneducated Protestant ministers. 

Where there were performance differences, they tended to favor the ministers. 

Confirmatory bias was prevalent in both groups, but the ministers used disconfirmatory logic almost twice as often as the scientists did.”

– Michael J. Mahoney, Publication Prejudices: An Experimental Study of Confirmatory Bias in the Peer Review System Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1977, pp. 161-175.
– マイケル・J・マホニー、出版上の偏見: ピアレビューシステムにおける確証バイアスの実験的研究、認知療法と研究、Vol.  1、No.2、1977年、161-175ページ。

Two fundamental observations about the Sun do not support the standard solar model but they have been minimised or ignored. 
太陽に関する 2 つの基本的な観測結果は標準的な太陽モデルをサポートしていませんが、それらは最小化されるか無視されてきました。

The first is the celebrated “neutrino problem” where the neutrinos arriving from the Sun are far too few to account for the Sun’s presumed thermonuclear energy output. 

No scientist could contemplate trashing the standard solar model so the problem had to be with the neutrinos. 

After decades of expensive research it was shown by the “KamLAND” experiment [see below] that neutrinos can oscillate between different forms, known whimsically as ‘flavors.’ 
数十年に及ぶ費用のかかる研究の後、「カムランド」実験 [下記参照] によって、ニュートリノは気まぐれに「フレーバー」として知られる異なる形態間を振動できることが示されました。

Following the habit of confirmatory bias, this notion was seized upon as “proof” that the standard solar model was correct. 

A report in Physics Today, March 2003, put it this way: 
“After 36 years of solar neutrino experiments, the inescapable conclusion is that a large fraction of the electron neutrinos produced by nuclear processes in the Sun’s core are metamorphosing into other neutrino varieties somewhere en route to the detectors on Earth.” 
「今日の物理学」誌 2003 年 3 月号のレポートは次のように述べています:

The report came to the conclusion that neutrinos were not undergoing any significant change of flavor in the vacuum of space between the Sun and Earth. 

Instead they were performing “an irreversible flavor change that takes place in high-density regions of the Sun.” 

So not only does the Sun need a hypothetical hot, high-density core to have any hope of generating thermonuclear energy, it now needs a hypothetical “critical-electron-density region” as well, to fudge the neutrino results. 

No doubt this will give rise to a flurry of theoretical activity using neutrinos to probe the imagined interior of the Sun.

A widely viewed site[1] on the Internet reported the KamLAND experiment in triumphal terms:
インターネット上で広く閲覧されているサイト [1] は、カムランド実験を勝利の言葉で報告しました:


 A large sphere beneath Japan has helped verify humanity's understanding of the inner workings of the Sun. 

..leading astrophysicists now consider the long standing solar neutrino deficit problem as finally solved.

But neutrino metamorphosis is not an “inescapable conclusion.” 

It is confirmatory bias with bells on! 

Conflicting evidence about the source region of the neutrinos is being ignored. 

There have been several reports of a correlation between the neutrino count, the sunspot number and solar wind strength. 

These are solar surface effects that should have no connection with what is going on in the Sun’s core, where the hidden energy of the nuclear furnace is supposed to take hundreds of thousands of years to “leak out” to the surface.

The electric star model suggests a simpler explanation of solar neutrino observations. 

The Sun produces all of the neutrino flavors on the surface in more complex nuclear reactions than mere heat and pressure allows. 

The nuclear reactions are ignited by the plasma pinch effect in the gigantic electrical discharges that cover the star and produce starlight. 

Ironically, it is the same phenomenon as that employed in some laboratories attempting to mimic the Sun’s energy production! 

In this model, the connection between neutrino count, sunspot number and solar wind is expected, because the driver for them all is the same – galactic electrical power.
– 銀河電力であるからです。

The second serious challenge to the standard solar model comes from solar oscillations. 
標準的な太陽モデルに対する 2 番目の深刻な課題は、太陽振動から生じます。

In the 1970’s, the Sun was unexpectedly found to ring like a bell. 

In 1976 Severny, Kotov & Tsap discovered a dominant 160-minute ringing mode of the Sun. 
1976 年、セヴェルニー、コトフ、ツァップは、太陽の支配的な 160 分間の鳴動モードを発見しました。

They wrote, “The simplest interpretation is that we observed purely radial pulsations. 

The most striking fact is that the observed period is almost precisely
… the value if the Sun were to be an homogeneous sphere

… We have investigated two possible solutions to this dilemma. 
…私たちはこのジレンマに対する 2 つの解決策を検討しました。

The first alternative is that nuclear
… reactions are not responsible for energy generation in the Sun. 

Such a conclusion, although rather extravagant, is quite consistent with the observed absence of appreciable neutrino flux from the Sun, and with the observed abundance of Li and Be in the solar atmosphere.”

The second alternative involved force fitting the data to the standard solar model by assuming that the oscillations were not simply radial but of a more complicated form. 
2 番目の代替案では、振動が単純に放射状ではなく、より複雑な形式であると仮定して、データを標準的な太陽モデルに強制フィッティングする必要がありました。

However, the implications were so disturbing for theorists that the work was repeated in various locations and all sources of error considered. 

The result in 1981 was that the original oscillation was found to be the highest peak in the power spectrum, and “one may conclude that 160-min oscillation shows mostly radial motion.” 
1981 年の結果では、元の振動がパワー スペクトルの最高ピークであることが判明し、「160 分の振動は主に半径方向の動きを示していると結論付けることができる」ということでした。

In reporting the status of solar oscillation observations in 1991 in “Solar Interior and Atmosphere”, F. Hill et al mention the 160-minute oscillation without any reference to the implied homogeneous Sun. 
F. Hill らは、1991 年の「太陽内部と大気」の中で太陽振動観測の状況を報告する際、暗黙の均質な太陽については一切言及せずに 160 分間の振動について言及しました。

Rather, they spend half a page casting suspicion on the extensive observations and attempting to minimize its significance. 

The reason is only thinly veiled; 
“Additional doubt comes from the difficulty of theoretically describing the nature of the oscillation. …”. 
 「振動の性質を理論的に説明することが難しいことから、さらに疑問が生じます。  …」。

The authors were merely behaving with the usual confirmatory bias.

The question of what is ringing the stellar bell has not been satisfactorily answered. 

It should be noted that the size of an electric star is determined by the degree of electric stress it suffers. 

And since the electric Sun forms part of a galactic circuit, it will exhibit resonant effects. 

The Sun is an electric bell as well as an electric light! 

It seems particularly significant that the 160-minute oscillation also appears with high statistical significance in the solar intensity, infra-red, radio and radio polarization (connected with the solar magnetic field). 
160 分間の振動が、太陽強度、赤外線、電波、および電波偏波 (太陽磁場に関連する) においても高い統計的有意性をもって現れることは、特に重要であると思われます。

All of these effects are to be expected in an electric star model because they are driven by the same resonant electrical power circuit.

Kotov went on to publish a paper in 1985 that detailed a number of other significant astrophysical manifestations of this basic 160-minute resonance in the solar system, binary stars and RR-Lyrae variable stars in globular clusters. 
コトフは 1985 年に、太陽系、連星、球状星団内の RR-Lyrae 変光恒星におけるこの基本的な 160 分間の共鳴の他の多くの重要な天体物理学的現象を詳述する論文を発表しました。

He concluded, “beyond doubt, ..the nature of the 160-min oscillation, firstly found in the Sun and then in the solar system as a whole and then among the stars, does present a new challenging problem for astrophysics. 
「疑いの余地なく、...最初は太陽で、次に太陽系全体で、そして恒星間で発見された 160 分間の振動の性質は、天体物理学にとって新たな困難な問題を引き起こしています。

..the next thing to suggest is that a fundamental aspect of the physics of gravitation is not yet understood(?).” 

I suggest that the problem has nothing to do with gravity. 

Instead, problems arise because incorrect gravitational models are used in astrophysics. 

The correct electrical models are much simpler and can be verified by direct observations instead of inferences about the hidden interiors of stars.

As outlined in an earlier news item[2], an electric star is expected to be much the same density throughout. 
So the peculiar flattening of fast-spinning Achernar is easily understood. 

In the not-too-distant future we will look back on attempts to explain the Sun in terms of a central fire with the same dismissive humor that we use for earlier notions of the Sun as some sort of fire in the sky, steadily consuming itself. 

What appears at first glance a perfectly natural and simple explanation fails to explain almost all of the strange solar phenomena we see. 

Our old fiery model of the Sun, and consequently of all stars, has become a complicated theoretical nightmare.

It seems that the leap from an old worldview to a new one is difficult for the human mind. 

But once achieved we can teach young children ideas that defeated the greatest minds for centuries. 

Our grandchildren will view it as perfectly obvious that Nature should provide us with an electric light, the Sun, powered over galactic distances by a vast network of invisible transmission lines, humming at an ultra-low frequency. 

Plasma physicists already know those transmission lines as Birkeland currents.

Wal Thornhill

1.    A widely viewed site: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030623.html
2.    earlier news item: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=rbkq9dj2
Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/squashed-star-flattens-solar-theory/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.


Planet Birthing 惑星の誕生 by Wal Thornhill

Planet Birthing

by Wal Thornhill | May 25, 2003 4:41 pm

Dan Falk prefaced a recent news report in Nature, on the subject of planet formation, with these words:

“Our knowledge of planets outside our Solar System has been transformed in the past few years. But these new-found worlds don’t look much like our planetary neighbours, and no one is quite sure why.” 
「太陽系外の惑星に関する私たちの知識は、ここ数年で変わりました。 しかし、これらの新たに発見された世界は、私たちの近隣の惑星とはあまり似ておらず、その理由については誰もよくわかっていません。」

At a rough glance the traditional nebular disk model used to explain the formation of planets in our solar system seems plausible. 

After all, the orbits of the planets do describe a thick disk about the Sun. 

But could this model be wrong? 

It requires that the planetary orbits be in the same plane. 

Instead we find them tilted at substantial angles to the Sun’s equator. 

Now that new discoveries challenge our cherished notions it is time to revisit the basic questions:

Are planets formed slowly by accretion over millions of years or “born” suddenly and violently from a larger body? 
Does the solar system have a more complex history

The likelihood is extremely high that planets do not form slowly. 

The accretion disk model is riddled with assumptions about initial conditions and glosses over many problems that have remained stubbornly unsolved. 

For example, there are severe problems in getting a rotating nebula to collapse gravitationally to form a star in the first place. 

The large rotational momentum of a cosmic nebula has somehow to be dissipated. 

And an embedded magnetic field conspires to prevent collapse. 

The Nobel Prize winner, the late Hannes Alfvén, wrote in Evolution of the Solar System, 
“..the ‘generally accepted’ theory of stellar formation may be one of a hundred unsupported dogmas which constitute a large part of present-day astrophysics.”

The protoplanetary disk model assumes that the planets were formed largely where we find them now. 

That seems not to be true. 

Long-term computer integrations of physically different models of the solar system show chaotic behavior (that can mean planets being thrown out of the solar system) in an interval of 3 to 30 million years
 – a blink of the eye in the accepted age of the system. 
– この(太陽)系が受け入れられた時代では、瞬きするほどの時間です。

The authors of one study described this result as “very striking and disturbing.” 

(Chaotic Evolution of the Solar System, Sussman & Wisdom, Science, Vol. 257, 3 July 1992, pp. 56-62). 
(太陽系の混沌とした進化、サスマン&ウィズダム、サイエンス、Vol. 257、1992 年 7 月 3 日、56-62 ページ)。

If this is so we cannot use the present plan of the solar system to say anything about the initial plan or its evolution.

The protoplanetary disk model also assumes that planets can accrete by collisions of particles in the disk. 

A recent study of hyper-velocity impacts between small objects, which assumes very different orbits of those particles, showed that the crater formed was larger than the impactor with the result that fragmentation rather than accretion is the rule. 

Also, objects in similar orbits about a central mass merely swap places without colliding. 

For example, two moons of Saturn, Epimetheus and Janus, swap orbits every 4 years or so. 
たとえば、土星の 2 つの衛星、エピメテウスとヤヌスは、約 4 年ごとに軌道を入れ替えます。

These problems have resulted in a spate of additional ad hoc requirements to be added to computer models. 

For example, the matter in the disk must have been hot and “squidgy” to allow particles to stick together.

In fact, the very term “accretion disk” used by computer modellers begs the question about the origin of such disks observed elsewhere in the galaxy. 

When we see objects with strong gravitational fields ejecting huge masses of material at great speeds we must consider the possibility that we are observing “expulsion” disks. 

After all, it is not clear what is responsible for energetic expulsions if we are looking at systems governed solely by gravity. 

Explanations based upon magically conjured and trapped magnetic fields merely shove the problem out of sight within the central star or hypothetical black hole. 

And without exception they ignore the electrical origin of magnetic fields.

When it comes to detailed examination of the planets, theories go from bad to worse. 

No plausible model exists to explain the fruit salad of characteristics we find. 

A good theory should explain the obvious dichotomy between the rocky planets and the gas giants without requiring more ad hoc early conditions. 

It must explain the odd axial tilts of the planets. 

After all, they behave as giant gyroscopes whose spin axes will merely wobble when struck by another sizeable object. 

We should expect the giant planets to have their equators in the plane of the ecliptic but we have Saturn tipped over by 27 degrees and Uranus by 98 degrees!
巨大な惑星の赤道(面)は黄道面内にあると考えるべきですが、土星は 27 度、天王星は 98 度傾いています。

If we are ever to be satisfied that we understand the basic principles of planet formation we must include all of the information available to us from human observations of the sky. 

As Alfvén wrote,:
“Because no one can know a priori what happened four to five billion years ago, we must start from the present state of the solar system and, step by step, reconstruct increasingly older periods. 

This actualistic principle, which emphasizes reliance on observed phenomena, is the basis for the modern approach to the geological evolution of the Earth; 
‘the present is the key to the past.’ This principle should also be used in the study of the solar system.”

Even in this wise advice there is an assumption that the sky we see today is the same as that seen by our prehistoric ancestors. 

Recent forensic examinations of astronomical petroglyphs and global creation myths argue strongly against such a cosy assumption. 

The present may not be the key to the past. 

It should be remembered that theories of evolution, both geological and biological, are easily demonstrated by their effects but remain without plausible causes. 

We have progressed to the point of accepting the possibility of cosmic impacts but even they cannot explain all of the evidence. 

Perhaps there is a common mechanism for evolution on Earth that includes evolution of the solar system? 

Perhaps the solar system has a recent history

If so, attempts to explain the solar system by modelling theoretical initial conditions based on modern observations must fail.

It is worth highlighting some of the unconscious assumptions with reference to Falk’s report, which follows in part. 

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® alternative will be outlined to give an impression of its relative simplicity.
エレクトリック・ユニバース® の代替案の概要を説明し、その比較的単純な印象を与えます。

[Planet formation: Worlds apart]
(Nature 422, 659 – 660, 2003)

Cloudy picture: computer simulations have yet to nail down the finer points of planetary evolution. L. Mayer, T. Quinn, J. Wadsley, J. Stadel/Pittsburgh Supercomp. Cen.
曇った状況: コンピューター シミュレーションでは、惑星の進化の詳細な点はまだ解明されていません。  L. メイヤー、T. クイン、J. ワズリー、J. シュテーデル/ピッツバーグ スーパーコンプ。 セン。

This remark is disingenuous and demonstrates a disturbing trend to believe that computer “game playing” can reveal the truth of a theory. 

Even the evolution of the gross characteristics of the solar system remains to be “nailed down.” 

Computer simulations can only help to eliminate some models if all of the variables are known. 

But that is practically never the case in complex, real-world situations.
Less than a decade ago, planetary scientists were working with a tiny data set: 
the nine members of our Solar System. 
10 年も前まで、惑星科学者は次のような小さなデータセットを扱っていました:

But the past few years have been a boom time for planet hunters
 — more than 100 planets orbiting other stars have now been logged. 
— 他の恒星達を周回する 100 を超える惑星が現在記録されています。

As new detection methods come into use, this tally is certain to climb higher.

Not everyone is celebrating, however. 

Extrasolar planets have peculiar properties, and our understanding of how planets form, which was incomplete even before the new data became available, now looks even shakier. 

The newly discovered bodies have strange, highly elliptical orbits. 

They are also far closer to their stars than equivalent planets in our Solar System. 

Amid the thrill of discovery, planetary scientists are wondering how to make sense of the processes that shaped these strange new worlds.

In terms of mass, the new planets are similar to Jupiter, weighing between one-tenth and ten times as much
 — the majority fall between 0.75 and 3.0 jovian masses. 
— 大部分は 0.75 から 3.0 の木星質量の間にあります。

Measuring size is more difficult, as only transit studies can provide information on the object’s radius

The planet observed using the transit method
 — an object orbiting a star in the constellation of Pegasus— 
is slightly larger than Jupiter.

But that’s where the similarities end. 

The orbits of most extrasolar planets follow elliptical paths, in contrast to the near-circular orbits of our Solar System’s giant planets. 

They also orbit much closer to their parent stars, most at a distance of less than 2 astronomical units (1 AU being the distance between Earth and the Sun), compared with more than 5 AU for Jupiter.
また、それらは親星に非常に近い軌道を周回しており、そのほとんどは 2 天文単位 (1 天文単位は地球と太陽の間の距離) 未満の距離にありますが、木星の場合は 5 天文単位以上です。

It is these properties that seem to defy popular models of planetary formation. 

The two main theories each start with a slowly spinning ball of gas. 
2 つの主要な理論はそれぞれ、ゆっくりと回転するガスの球から始まります。

The hot, central part becomes a star, while the material farther out is flattened by its rotation into a cloud known as a protoplanetary accretion disk. 

This provides the raw materials from which planets form.

Here are two fundamental assumptions that drive all current models of stellar and planet genesis
ここでは、恒星と惑星の起源に関する現在のすべてのモデルを動かす 2 つの基本的な仮定を示します。

The first is that stars form simply by gravitation from a rotating “accretion disk” of neutral matter. 

The second is that planets accrete later from the widely scattered leftovers. 

Both processes have theoretical difficulties and are the most inefficient imaginable
 – only 1% of the proposed nebula “leftovers” remains in the planets. 
– 提案されている星雲の「残り物」はわずか 1% だけが惑星に残っています。

Neither process has been observed in action, merely inferred.

The idea of what goes on inside a star stems from the work of Sir Arthur Eddington in his famous 1926 work, The Internal Constitution of Stars. 
恒星の内部で何が起こっているのかという考え方は、アーサー・エディントン卿の 1926 年の有名な著作『恒星の内部構成』に由来しています。

He made a serious error of judgement when he applied mechanical ideal gas laws to the Sun’s interior. 

On that basis he calculated that there would be “no appreciable separation of the [electrical] charges.” 

It was a convenient conclusion because it simplifies the standard solar model so that it is “do-able.” 

It seems not to have been questioned since.

In fact, atoms in the Sun’s strong gravitational field will distort to form small electric dipoles, with the positive nucleus offset within each atom toward the center of the Sun. 

The aligned dipoles will create a radial electric field that will tend to separate charge
 – free electrons moving toward the surface and positive ions toward the core. 

Gravitational compression inside the Sun is therefore offset by electrical expansion because like charges repel. 

Stars do not require a central furnace to maintain their size. 

The result is that the Sun is much the same density throughout. 

This was discovered decades ago by pioneering helioseismologists but not announced because it was believed that eventually a more acceptable explanation would be found in terms of the standard model! 

The enigma remains to this day. 

To accept the obvious conclusion would destroy the elaborate story of the evolution and death of stars. 

And another source of stellar energy would be required because nuclear fusion would be impossible in the core of an isodense star. 

Ah well, that’s the price of progress.

However, it is acknowledged that stars can explode in a nova or supernova event because such things are regularly observed. 

But the explosion mechanism remains obscure. 

An explosion originating in the core was always expected to be spherically symmetric. 

But we observe stellar explosions to be highly directional, often forming bipolar cones or even collimated jets. 

Plasma physicsts are well aware that powerful electric discharges form thin jets, often with condensations/knots of matter along them. 

And a collimated jet is a prime requirement for the birth of a planet from a star. 

Significantly, the light curve from stellar explosions is the same as that of lightning.

There is a more simple and efficient process that fits the latest discoveries. 

It requires the expulsion, or “birth” of a fully formed proto-planet from the core of a star or gas giant. 

Astrophysicists have not seriously considered it because of their strongly held views about the internal nature of stars and the forces at work there.


HD 141569A is a five-million-year-old star 320 light-years away in the constellation Libra. 
HD 141569A は、天秤座にある、320 光年離れた年齢 500 万歳の恒星です。

Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys captured this visible-light image on July 21, 2002, with a coronagraph, which blocked light from the star, creating the black area in the center. 
ハッブルの高度測量カメラは、2002 年 7 月 21 日にコロナグラフを使用してこの可視光画像を撮影しましたが、恒星からの光が遮断され、中心に黒い領域が作成されました。

Surrounding the star is a tightly wound spiral-structured dust disk with two faint arms in the outer part of the disk. 
この恒星の周りには、しっかりと巻かれた螺旋構造の塵の円盤があり、円盤の外側には 2 本のかすかな腕があります。

One of these arms reaches toward a binary star in the upper left of the image. 
これらの腕の 1 つは、画像の左上にある連星に向かって伸びています。

NASA / M. Clampin (STScI) et al. / ACS Science Team / ESA
NASA / M. クランピン (STScI) 他 / ACS 科学チーム / ESA
This is the best image of a so-called accretion disk. 

It was produced on January 6 by a team headed by Mark Clampin of the Space Telescope Science Institute. 

The disk contains a tight spiral structure with two diffuse arms reaching outward like those of a spiral galaxy. 
この円盤には、渦巻銀河のように外側に伸びる 2 本の拡散腕を備えた緊密な渦巻き構造が含まれています。

It is excellent evidence for the electrical discharge nature of these disks since plasma physicists have successfully modelled galaxy formation and produced the classic spiral formation. 

That modelling requires electric currents flowing along the spiral arms. 

Notably it doesn’t require invisible dark matter!

The physicist, Peter Warlow, made the colorful comment in 1982 that we assume that planets are formed outside stars “for the ‘obvious’ reason
 – that’s where we find them.” 
– それが私たちがそれらを見つける場所です。」

However, “We humans, equally ‘obviously,’ are outside our mothers
 – yet we did not start there!” 
― でも、そこから始まったわけではないのです!」

It is far simpler and infinitely more efficient if planets are “born” at intervals by the electrical ejection of charged material from the similarly charged interiors of larger bodies
 – gas giants from stars, and rocky planets from gas giants. 
– 恒星からのガス巨星、そしてガス巨星からの岩石惑星が、

We have circumstantial evidence for such a proposal in the binary stars found after a nova outburst. 

Also most of the rocky bodies in the solar system closely orbit a gas giant. 

Electrical ejection in a massive internal lightning flash answers the question of the source of the energy. 

It is not dispersive like an explosion. 

The electromagnetic pinch effect will produce a jet of matter, rather like a coronal mass ejection, only on a much grander scale. 

The result is a proto-planet plus a stream of gases and meteoric debris.

The electrical expulsion model solves the many riddles of meteorites. 

They are the afterbirth of a new planet, not a star. 

What is the origin of tiny melted spheres of silica, called chondrules, found in many meteorites? 

How were they flash-heated and just as suddenly cooled? 

How did radioactive isotopes with half-lives measured in hours and days become trapped in meteorites? 

A powerful cosmic electric discharge provides simple answers. 

Astrophysicists in the past have suggested lightning in the accretion disk as an explanation for chondrules, but without understanding what causes lightning the idea died. 

The May 17 issue of New Scientist reports a new idea from astrophysicist Frank Shu. 
「新しい科学者」の 5 月 17 日号は、天体物理学者フランク・シューによる新しいアイデアを報告しています。

He argues that meteorites were formed in “furious winds that blew red-hot rock out from the Sun at hundreds of kilometres per second.” 

Lightning creates just such “furious winds” of heated matter along the discharge channel. 

Shu’s explanation, on the other hand, suffers the usual lack of understanding of plasma electrical behavior and relies, once more, on magnetic fields to perform the necessary miracles.

Falk’s report notes that extrasolar giant planets are too close to their stars to have formed there from a protoplanetary accretion disk. 

Rather than question the protoplanetary accretion disk model, the obvious proposal is to have the giant planets migrate after their formation elsewhere. 

However, it does not explain the orbital eccentricities. 

In our solar system, Uranus and Neptune are too far from the Sun to have formed where we find them. 

Why have our giant planets seemingly migrated outward and the extrasolar planets inward? 

When theoretical expectations fail scientists are required to re-examine all of the assumptions in their models. 

However, that is not done when some assumptions have become self-evident truths.
[Rocky start]

From there on, the process is open to debate, with the answer partly depending on the size of the disk. 

The core-accretion model, which dates from the 1960s, argues that planets start life as small chunks of rock, dust and sand-grain-sized debris that come together through collisions. 

As the rocky core grows, its gravitational pull scoops up more dust and gas from the disk. 

If the core is heavier than a few Earth masses, it accretes enough gas over a few million years to become a gas giant like Jupiter and Saturn. 

Less-massive cores result in rocky planets like Earth.

This model ran into problems even before extrasolar planets were identified. 

For one thing, it seems to take too long. 

Accretion disks are thought to evaporate within a million years or so, probably as a result of the stream of electrically charged particles that all stars emit, or of bombardment from high-energy ultraviolet photons from other nearby stars.

Here is an additional assumption. 

Having somehow gravitationally formed an accretion disk we must follow that with a special active stellar condition to blow it away after a convenient time interval. 

Studies have shown that the stellar wind would merely shift the disk further away and not disperse it. 

Alfvén argued that the most efficient (and Nature is nothing if not efficient) method to accrete matter over cosmic distances is that of the electromagnetic “pinch effect” caused by parallel electric current filaments in plasma. 

The electromagnetic accretion force diminishes slowly with distance from the filament axis, rather than rapidly with the square of the distance as we find with gravity. 

The result is condensed, rotating objects strung along the dusty current filaments. 

The spin axes of stars formed in this manner are aligned with the filaments. Such alignments have been discovered in groups of stars.
このようにして形成された恒星達の自転軸はフィラメントと一致します。 このような配列は恒星達のグループで発見されています。
The main rival theory, which also surfaced in the 1960s, avoids this problem. 
同じく 1960 年代に浮上した主なライバル理論は、この問題を回避しています。

Known as the disk-instability model, it proposes that, in larger disks, patches of denser gas can form and pull in more gas
 — leading, in some cases, to a sudden collapse that forms one or more planets. 
— 場合によっては、突然の崩縮につながり、1つまたは複数の惑星が形成されます。

Such collapses do not occur in the core-accretion model, either because the disk is not large enough to produce them, or because any small instability that forms will tend to spread throughout the disk, restoring stability.

Planets are thought to form more rapidly in the disk-instability scenario. 

Last autumn, Lucio Mayer, a theoretical astronomer then at the University of Washington in Seattle, described high-resolution computer simulations of protoplanetary disks using the disk-instability model. 

Together with colleagues elsewhere in North America, Mayer showed that giant planets could form in as little as 1,000 years. 
メイヤー氏は、北米の他の地域の同僚とともに、巨大惑星がわずか 1,000 年以内に形成される可能性があることを示した。

The difference in planet-forming rates is probably the most important distinguishing characteristic between the two models, and is a boost for the disk-instability idea, says Alan Boss, a theoretical astrophysicist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington.

Others urge caution. 

Jack Lissauer, a planetary scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California, says that the resolution of the computer models is still too poor to give conclusive results. 

Perhaps more importantly, the new data on extrasolar planets do not sit happily with either theory. 

The models have trouble explaining, for example, why Jupiter-sized planets are created rather than brown dwarfs
 — objects that are intermediate in size between planets and stars.
— 惑星と恒星の中間の大きさの天体。

“You would expect the mass of planets to range from Jupiter mass up to stellar masses,” says Douglas Lin, an astrophysicist at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

There ought to be just as many brown dwarfs as Jupiters orbiting Sun-like stars
 — something that observations have not turned up.
— 観察では判明していない何か多くの褐色矮星が存在するはずです。

Computer simulations are fun but they have no significance if the models are wrong. 

The lack of brown dwarf stars is expected in the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® model. 
エレクトリック・ユニバース® モデルには褐色矮星が存在しないことが予想されます。

In that model, stars are essentially a plasma discharge phenomenon. 

A bright star usurps almost the entire electrical power in its vicinity. 

Hypothetically, if Jupiter were to be removed beyond the Sun’s electrical influence it would become a more electrically active brown dwarf star. 

Its moons would become a small planetary system orbiting a dim star. 

The dull red shell, or “anode glow,” of a brown dwarf would surround most of the moons. 

The conditions for establishment of atmospheres and life on those satellites within the glowing shell would likely be fulfilled. 

Just like real estate, the prime requirement to become a star is LOCATION. 

A brown dwarf simply won’t shine when placed close to a bright star.

Unfortunately, astrophysicists and most plasma physicists never contemplate an electrically driven model because they assume strict electrical neutrality throughout the universe

Meanwhile the observational evidence shrieks of electric discharge effects in plasma. 

A few examples are: 
all X-ray sources; 
stupendously long glowing filaments and jets; 
radiant nebulae with no effective internal energy source; 
and compact pulsating radiation sources.
すべての X 線源;

[Inner workings]

Other aspects of the new data are causing problems for both models. 

Neither, for example, accounts for the proximity of the extrasolar planets to their stars. 

There isn’t much material in the inner region of the disk, and the particles there should have enough energy to resist clumping. 

The solution, astronomers suggest, is that giant planets form farther out and then migrate inwards as a result of interactions between the disk and the planet. 

The mechanism differs in the two models, but the end result is that young planets sail through the disk towards the star.
カニズムは 2 つのモデルで異なりますが、最終的には若い惑星が円盤を通って恒星に向かって航行します。

But this raises another question: what stops the planet from ploughing into its parent star? 

Several mechanisms have been suggested. 

One option is that the migration ends when the disk evaporates
 — but it’s not clear whether this can happen quickly enough, as migration occurs on a roughly million-year time scale. 
1 つのオプションは、ディスクが蒸発したときに移行を終了することです

Another option is that the planet’s gravitational pull distorts the shape of the star, and that this in turn affects the pull of the star on the planet in such a way as to balance the planet’s inward movement. 

Finally, it could be that the star’s magnetic field clears out the inner disk by repelling electrically charged particles. 

In this situation, says Boss, the inner 0.5 AU of the disk would be empty
 — and few extrasolar planets have orbital radii much smaller than this. 
この状況では、ディスクの内側の 0.5 AU は空になる、とボス氏は言います
- そして、これよりもはるかに小さい軌道半径を持つ太陽系外惑星はほとんどありません。

“It’s attractively simple,” says Boss.


If that’s simple I would not like to see a complicated explanation! 

There comes a time when attempts should be abandoned to reverse-engineer a doubtful model of the solar system to fit data from other planetary systems. 

A far simpler explanation is that gas giant planets are born by electrical expulsion from a star in a nova outburst. 

How else should we expect to find an extrasolar planet whipping around its parent in a few days or in an eccentric orbit? 

Eccentric orbits should be short-lived. 

They hint at recent events in those distant planetary systems; 
perhaps the birth of a new planet. 

Perhaps clockwork planetary systems that endure unchanged for billions of years do not exist?


Such explanations are plausible, but there is no way of knowing which is correct. 

Even if this issue is resolved, it is still unclear whether planets form by disk instability or by core accretion before they begin their migration. 

And on top of that, astronomers are struggling to explain why so many extrasolar planets follow elliptical paths, as both formation models predict roughly circular orbits. 

The best explanation so far proposed is based on the gravitational tug-of-war between different planets in a multi-planet system.

The problems arise because an inappropriate gravitational model is used in both cases. 

Granted that a multi-planet system is inherently chaotic if gravity is the only force operating. 

But in an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® there is a damping mechanism to limit wild excursions. 
しかし、エレクトリック・ユニバース® には、乱高下を制限する減衰メカニズムがあります。

It seems that exchange of charge between planets via their magnetotails (plasma sheaths) is capable of maintaining orbital spacing so as to limit further electrical interaction. 

This mechanism may provide a physical basis for Bode’s relationship. 

And a planet moving eccentrically in the weak electric field of a star suffers a cometary discharge that acts to reduce the eccentricity of its orbit. 

The effect has been noted for tiny solar comets and mysteriously termed a “non-gravitational” force. 

It is more effective than tidal interactions at circularising orbits.

[Science rewrites Genesis

Present theories of the origin of the universe and the Earth have taken on the mantle of religious truth. 

It is as if scientists feel obliged to provide an alternative “scientific” Genesis story to replace the biblical one. 

All that has been achieved is a Hollywood rewrite complete with the obligatory stupendous explosion, an imaginary hell of black holes and the occasional miracle to allow the plot to continue. 

The story has been limited by cultural preconceptions and by restricting the “writers” to experts in one narrow specialty. 
この物語は、文化的な先入観と、「作家」を 1 つの狭い専門分野の専門家に限定することによって制限されてきました。

The story is overdue for a shake-up. 

The irony is that Genesis is only one version among many of a major evolutionary event in the history of the solar system; 
a “re-creation” event witnessed by prehistoric man and memorialised by all of the earliest civilizations. 

It has much to offer in a more general approach to discovering the real history of the Earth and the origin of planets.

Meanwhile the astronomers’ script for Earth history is showing its age.
It comes straight from the early Industrial Revolution
 – it is purely mechanical and clockwork-like with nary a hint of new-fangled electrics. 
– それは純粋に機械的で時計仕掛けのようなもので、新しい電気機器のヒントはまったくありません。

Indeed there are no electric lights at all! 

Dissenting electrical engineers and plasma physicists have been practically ignored. 

It has fallen to the IEEE to establish a separate chapter of Plasma Cosmology, which now holds separate meetings.
プラズマ宇宙論の別の章を設立するのは IEEE の責任であり、現在は別の会議が開催されています。

It has not been felt necessary to check the fundamental assumption that ‘the present is the key to the past.’ 

No astronomer is qualified to do a forensic examination of the earliest planetary mythologies and depictions of the sky to see if that sky looks familiar. 

The fact is it doesn’t! 

That renders all of the comfortable armchair theorizing and computer simulations a nonsense. 

Mark Twain was right:
 “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.” 
「科学には何か魅力的なものがあります。 人は、このような些細な事実への投資から、これほどの大きな推測の利益を得るのです。」

Computer modelling is usually only possible with “a trifling investment of fact.”
[The Prehistoric Sky]

“A man receives only what he is ready to receive. 

. . . The phenomenon or fact that cannot in any wise be linked with the rest of what he has observed, he does not observe.”
– Henry D. Thoreau
. . .彼が観察した残りの部分といかなる点においても結びつけられない現象や事実を、彼は観察しない。」
 – ヘンリー・D・ソロー


Throughout the ancient world the star between the horns of a crescent was an important religious symbol. 

Yet it is physically impossible if the crescent represented the Moon. 

What is more, the apparition was universally reported to have occupied the top of a tapering column of light in the motionless center of the northern sky
 – the north celestial pole – 
where the Moon never goes. 
– 天の北極 – 

It was often pictured as a figure with arms stretching upwards.

The north celestial “pole” was commemorated by all ancient cultures as the home of the prehistoric sun and the planetary gods. 

A true history of the Earth must explain these astronomical enigmas. 

And a true history of the Earth is necessary before we can speculate meaningfully about planet origins.

“Like a man was the sun when it showed itself, and its face glowed when it dried the surface of the earth…

It showed itself when it was born and remained fixed in the sky like a mirror. 

Certainly it was not the same sun which we see, it is said in their old tales.”

– D. Goetz & S. Morley, Popol Vuh, 1972, p. 188.
– D. ゲッツ & S. モーリー、ポポル・ヴフ、1972 年、p.  188.

The detail (left) in these early renditions shows a raised central hemisphere in front of another radiating star-like body, superimposed upon a crescent.
これらの初期のレンダリングの詳細 (左) は、三日月の上に重ねられた別の放射状の星状天体の前に盛り上がった中央半球を示しています。


[The Bottom Line]
The bottom line is that a better theory of the formation of planets requires the observational skills of astronomers, the forensic input of comparative mythologists, the theoretical input from plasma physicists and the practical experimental capabilities of electrical engineers. 

Most importantly, the common thread for this interdisciplinary approach is provided by the new paradigm of an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE®. 
最も重要なことは、この学際的なアプローチの共通スレッドが、エレクトリック・ユニバース® の新しいパラダイムによって提供されることです。

But we should keep in mind that the odd natures of the planets in our solar system argue for a complex history that may never be entirely amenable to computer modelling. 

The orbital and axial tilts of the giant planets are strong evidence for one or more capture events. 

Perhaps we may be able to determine a planetary genealogy?

“It is possible that this new era also means a partial return to more understandable physics. 

For the nonspecialists, four-dimensional relativity theory and the indeterminism of atom structure have always been mystic and difficult to understand. 

I believe that it is easier to explain the 33 instabilities in plasma physics or the resonance structure of the solar system. 
プラズマ物理学の 33 の不安定性や太陽系の共鳴構造を説明する方が簡単だと思います。

The increased emphasis on the new fields means a certain demystification of physics. 

In the spiral or trochoidal motion which science makes during the centuries, its guiding center has returned to these regions from where it started. 

It was the wonders of the night sky, observed by Indians, Sumerians, or Egyptians, that started science several thousand years ago. 

It was the question why the wanderers
 – the planets – 
moved as they did that triggered off the scientific avalanche several hundred years ago. 
– 惑星の –

The same objects are now again in the center of science
 – only the questions we ask are different. 
– 私たちが尋ねる質問が異なるだけです。

We now ask how to go there, and we also ask how these bodies once were formed. 

And if the night sky on which we observe them is at a high latitude, outside this lecture hall
 – perhaps over a small island in the archipelago of Stockholm – 
we may also see in the sky an aurora, which is a cosmic plasma, reminding us of the time when our world was born out of plasma. 
– おそらくストックホルム諸島の小さな島の上空では –

Because in the beginning was the plasma.”

– H. Alfvén, Science 4 June 1971. From a lecture he delivered in Stockholm, Sweden, on 11 Dec 1970 when he received the Nobel Prize in Physics.
– H. アルヴェーン、科学、1971 年 6 月 4 日。彼がノーベル物理学賞を受賞した 1970 年 12 月 11 日にスウェーデンストックホルムで行った講演から。

Wal Thornhill

Source URL: https://www.holoscience.com/wp/planet-birthing/
Copyright ©2023 holoscience.com | The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE® unless otherwise noted.