Comet Plunges into the Sun

A comet plunged into the sun early this month. Traveling at 600 kilometers per second through the hot corona of the sun, it is clear that the object could not possibly have been a dirty snowball, as conventional theory maintains. Rather, it must have been a rock. Its long tail, rich in water, must consequently have been a product of electrolytic processes, or nuclear fission.

With the comet being a mere spec of dust in comparison to the size of the sun, it is interesting to note the violent flaring of the sun that happened just before impact. If this was anything but mere coincidence, it could only have been caused through electromagnetic communication. There is no other way such a small object could have such an out-sized effect on the sun.

All in all, the observations strongly suggest that the Electric Universe model of comets is correct. They are rocks that interact strongly with the highly charged environment of the solar system.

By ESA/Hubble, CC BY 4.0, Link

Galactic Flares and the Climate

There are quite a number of theories related to cosmic radiation that we may soon be able to test now that there has been a galactic flare at the center of our galaxy.

First and foremost of these is the assumption that galactic flares produce cosmic radiation. High energy particles, traveling at speeds in excess of 99.98% of the speed of light should arrive at our solar system this fall and winter.

If this radiation proves significant, we will have the opportunity to test several more theories, of which Henrik Svensmark's theory of cloud formation may be the most well known. He contends that cosmic radiation causes clouds to form, and that more cosmic rays result in more clouds. A significant up-tick in cosmic radiation should therefore result in more cloudy weather.

If the Electric Universe community is right in their position that storms as well as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are due to cosmic radiation, we should not only see more clouds, but more thunder, extreme weather, earthquakes and volcanic activity.

If our sun is electric and externally powered through cosmic radiation and electric plasma, as is generally believed by the Electric Universe crowd, we should also see an up-tick in solar activity. There should be more sun spots and more solar flares. Electric grids, satellites, and sensitive electronics may get hit. Communication networks may go down, and there may be widespread blackouts.

While more clouds on their own, due to less solar activity, means lower global temperatures as per Henrik Svensmark's theory, an up-tic in both cloud formation and solar activity is likely to produce warmer weather. This would certainly be true if the galactic super-wave theory proves correct, as it rests entirely on the premise that large scale galactic flaring has put an end to every major ice age up through the ages. If large scale flaring heats our planet, it seems reasonable to assume that small scale flaring does the same, only at a smaller scale.

If we are really lucky, we might see detectable changes to gravity and inertial mass due to mass condensation. Possibly also a sufficient up-tick in the expansion rate of our planet to verify the expanding Earth hypothesis. Most sublime of all would be a new moon ejected from Jupiter, or a sufficient change in the red spot to verify this theory.

Jupiter ejecting a moon

For all these reasons, it will be interesting to follow the news through the winter to see if any of these predictions come true.

Galactic Flaring

It has long been known that the center of galaxies are prone to flaring, with huge outbursts of radiation. However, such flaring has not been reliably observed in our own galaxy until very recently. It was not until May of this year that such an event was observed for the Milky Way, when radiation in the infrared spectrum shot up by 75 times that of normal levels.

The consensus explanation for this involves a hypothetical super-massive black hole at the center of our galaxy. However, the existence of such an object is theoretically dodgy. It is also in contradiction with observations made back in 2014, when a large object, probably a gas cloud, passed the center without anything happening.

More plausible explanations can be found in the Electric Universe paradigm. Charged plasma, and the high density of charged bodies in the center of galaxies, can combine to produce flares, electric pinches and discharges. The list of possibilities is long.

But regardless of explanation, the observations fit well with the galactic super-wave theory proposed by Paul La Violette in his work. Central to his idea is that our galaxy, like every other galaxy, will flare up every now and again, with particularly violent outbursts producing super-waves of cosmic radiation.

While the recent up-tick in activity at the center of our galaxy is unlikely to be a super-wave, it may be strong enough for astronomers to test some of the predictions of La Violette's theory. We should for instance see an up-tick in very high energy cosmic radiation coming from the center of our galaxy.

The center of our galaxy is 52850 light years away from us, so only the very fastest particles will strike within months from the initial visible flare. The vast majority of particles will strike later. Particles traveling at 99% of the speed of light will arrive 528 years into the future, and those traveling at 90% will arrive a full 5285 years into the future. We can therefore only hope to detect the most energetic particles in our lifetime. However, we may be able to see what is in store for us by observing stars closer to the center of our galaxy, where events will unfold sooner, and at a brisker pace.

La Violette predicts that stars will flare up as a direct consequence of being hit by a super-wave. We should therefore be able to see some evidence of this due to the recent flaring at the galactic center. There should be a shock wave, as it were, in which stars flare up when hit by the bulk of cosmic radiation. In this way, we should be able to calculate more accurately the timing and magnitude of the flaring we may experience on our own sun.

If we are lucky, we may get some clues as to what happened at the end of the last great ice age. The ice caps that built up over more than 100,000 years, melted away over a mere 6,000 years, despite being interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, which plunged the planet back into the ice age for a period of 1000 years.

The two stages to the melting fits well with what we know about cosmic rays, which are unevenly distributed along the energy spectrum. There are highly energetic particles that travel at near light speeds, and then there are lower energy particles that travel at lower speeds. A super-wave will therefore produce two flaring events on stars as it moves trough the galaxy, one by the high energy particles that arrive early, and another more prolonged heating by the less energetic particles that arrive later.

If we see two stage flaring on stars close to the center of our galaxy, we will have come a long way in confirming the super-wave theory. It will also go a long way towards explaining the events at the end of the last great ice age, as it will lay out the following timeline:

1. Galactic super-wave hit our solar system 16000 years ago
2. The first wave of particles peaked 15000 years ago
3. The gap in radiation reached a minimum 13000 years ago
4. The bulk of lower energy particles reached Earth 12000 years ago
5. We are currently basking in the warm afterglow of the super-wave

By United States Geological Survey - https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1386a/gallery2-fig35.html, Public Domain, Link

Epstein

Government is either so inept that it is incapable of keeping a star witness from committing suicide inside a maximum security prison, or so corrupt that it lets people into his cell to kill or remove him.

Either way, there can only be one conclusion. Government should not be in charge of anything important, least of all anything vital to our health or security.

Jeffrey Epstein

By Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department - Palm Beach County Sheriff's Department [1][2], Public Domain, Link

Electrons as Glue

The proton-electron model of the atom has no neutrons in the nucleus. Instead, there are protons with electrons acting as glue to keep everything together.

Atomic nuclei of hydrogen, deuterium, helium, lithium and beryllium

An objection that can be made against this model is that there does not seem to be enough electrons to keep things from falling apart. This is evident from the helium atom depicted above, where four protons are held together by two electrons. It is clear that every electron has to stick to at least two protons for the assembly to stick together. But electrons are very much smaller than protons. Some sort of deformation of the proton and/or electron would be required. Furthermore, an electron has a net charge of -1, which seems to suggest that there is not enough negative charge to keep everything together.

However, none of the above is a problem for physics laid out in my book. Both the electron and proton are inflated bubbles that can be deformed. The electron is composed of two negative quanta together with one positive quantum. It can either stretch out into a string, or split into three parts. Either way, the two negative quanta can move towards the center of the nucleus to act as glue, thus providing the required cohesiveness to the nucleus. The two electrons in the helium nucleus carry a total of four negative charges, making everything stick together nicely.

Electron splitting into its composite particle quanta

From this, it is clear that Moton Spears' model of the proton and electron fits nicely with the proton-electron model of the atom.

Black Holes

The hypothetical black holes, that are currently presented as science facts, suffer from the same theoretical weaknesses as neutron stars, only more so. The observational evidence we have for their existence can just as well be explained from an electromagnetic viewpoint.

Ring currents of hot plasma will pull matter towards themselves while retaining dark central spots. This can easily be confirmed in a laboratory. Furthermore, everyone who has ever played with static electricity knows that charged matter attracts neutral matter. They will also know that charged matter has a much greater pull on neutral matter than mere gravity. A statically charged balloon will pull dust off the floor without any trouble, despite having to fight the gravitational pull of our entire planet.

If anyone mistakenly interpret static electricity as gravity, their mass estimates will be off by trillions upon trillions in magnitude. The statically charged balloon will be interpreted as a black hole, a super-dense object far smaller than our planet, with a tremendous "gravitational" pull on dust.

What makes it even more likely that astronomers have mistakenly interpreted static charge in hot plasma as gravity produced by black holes is that the theory behind black holes is extremely dodgy. It relies on unsound mathematics where no less than two singularities have been redefined as infinities. There is a singularity at the so called event horizon, from which no electromagnetic signals can escape, and there is a singularity at the black hole center where everything becomes infinitely dense and hot.

Another problem with this theory is that it relies entirely on Einstein's curved space. If gravity relies on particles of any kind, or is electromagnetic in nature, no information can be communicated from within the event horizons where the bodies of black holes are supposedly hidden. Since nothing can escape black holes, all information about their masses must necessarily be lost.

With only a single theory of physics allowing for black holes, and dodgy math required to support them, chances are that they do not exist.

Black hole, ring current of hot plasma, or something else entirely

By Event Horizon Telescope - https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1907a/ (image link) The highest-quality image (7416x4320 pixels, TIF, 16-bit, 180 Mb), ESO Article, ESO TIF, CC BY 4.0, Link

Neutron Stars

Modern science is riddled with theories that are presented as facts to the general public. As Mark Twain bluntly put it: "There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact."

This is especially true in astrophysics, where distant objects are given all sorts of exotic properties based on a handful of observed facts. As an example, we have the neutron star. Virtually all literature on it is presented as facts when in reality it is mainly conjecture.

All that we know from observations is that there are some distant objects that emit little to no visible light, yet radiate strongly in radio-wave and x-ray bandwidths. To conclude from this that we are dealing with stars made up of super-dense matter is quite a stretch of the imagination. The observations may just as well be caused by electromagnetic interactions between stellar bodies, in which case no super-dense matter is required.

Further undermining the conventional interpretation is the fact that the observed radiation has glitches in it. While very regular in general, there are little lapses ever now and again, something that is easy to explain electrically, but very difficult to explain in terms of gravitation and rotation. The best explanation they could come up with was that neutron stars undergo seismic tremors that upset the rotation rate from time to time.

The whole premise of the existence of neutron stars is also dodgy. The idea is that stars in a certain size range will collapse into this kind of body when they run out of fuel. But is this necessarily true?

Gravitational collapse defies the laws of thermodynamics, in that it suggests that a system can do work on itself. It also presupposes that gravity is a continuous force that is completely unaffected by matter when transmitted, but very receptive to matter when communicated. However, in the strict particle model of physics suggested in my book there are limits to how dense something can be before the electric, magnetic and gravitational forces break down, because these forces are transmitted through an aether.

The only reason gravity can be communicated from the center of a body is that matter is made up of atoms that are largely empty space. The aether has plenty of room to communicate information from the center of objects and out into the surrounding space. However, if all this space would disappear, as would be the case for a body made up of nothing but neutrons, then there would be no room for the aether to enter and leave. Gravity would not be communicated for the whole body. Only the outer surface would do this, making neutron stars very weak when it comes to gravity. Hence, there's nothing to keep neutron stars from reverting to ordinary matter.

Neutron stars do not exist for much the same reason that free neutrons do not exist for more than a few minutes after leaving an atomic nucleus. With no space between the proton and the electron, there is no electric force keeping the neutron from decaying into a proton and an electron. Gravity will similarly be non-existent inside a neutron star, and therefore unable to keep it together.

Free neutron decay