(The Electric Universe) - '..In reality, moving magnetic fields within a plasma create electric currents.'

'As we’ve reported recently, new papers in peer-reviewed astrophysical journals propose that powerful electric currents flow in extra-galactic jets and that the jets themselves are “fundamentally electromagnetic structures.” However, if you follow science media, it’s likely that you’ve not noticed any attempt to contextualize the development as significant for astrophysics. One person who has noticed this disconnect is Thunderbolts colleague Chris Reeve, who has spent many years documenting online discourse on scientific controversies. Recently, Chris published a commentary exploring why the recognition of vast, cosmic electric currents has apparently yet to register either with science journalists or most online commentators.'

- Who Still Denies Electric Currents in Space? | Space News, April 2, 2018



'The hypothesis that the universe is expanding is a basic pillar of the Big Bang theory. But observations of the size and brightness of thousands of galaxies contradict predictions based on the Big Bang expansion hypothesis, thus shaking this key pillar, according to a new paper [Observations contradict galaxy size and surface brightness predictions that are based on the expanding universe hypothesis] published in the leading astrophysical journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, a publication of Oxford University Press..'

- LPPFusion Chief Scientist Publishes Evidence Against Cosmic Expansion in Leading Journal, March 29, 2018



'In his 1970 acceptance speech of his Nobel Prize in Physics, Alfvén pointed out that this idea of ‘frozen-in’ magnetic fields, which he had earlier endorsed, was false. In reality, moving magnetic fields within a plasma create electric currents. This fact is one of the basic concepts embodied in the Electric Sky.'

'Alfvén .. offered this comment about Langmuir [another of the pioneers of electric plasma theory]:

The facts his always-active brain combined were anything from electrical discharges and plasmas to biological and geophysical phenomena. Science as fun was one of his cardinal tenets. From this, one gets the impression that he was very superficial. This is not correct. He won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry because he was recognized as the father of surface chemistry. He knew enough of biology to borrow the term plasma from this science, and the mechanism of double layers from surface chemistry. Langmuir’s probes were of decisive value for the early exploration of plasmas and double layers, and they are still valuable tools.

Langmuir discovered many properties of plasma, including the ‘plasma frequency’ that we will describe later. His most important tool for investigating plasma in his lab is still used and to this day carries his name – the Langmuir probe.

..

Alfvén was the first to predict (in 1963) the large-scale filamentary structure of the universe, a discovery that confounded astrophysicists in 1991 and added to the woes of Big Bang cosmology. Hannes Alfvén has played a central role in the development of several modern fields of physics, including plasma physics, the physics of charged particle beams, and interplanetary and magnetospheric physics.

Twenty years before the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belt, Alfvén developed the basic tools we use today to describe it. He proposed a mechanism explaining the acceleration of cosmic rays that is now known as the Fermi Mechanism. Alfvén did it before Fermi. And he fought for years to make astronomers aware of the existence and importance of electric fields and currents in space.

In the last half of the Twentieth Century, an ongoing dispute ensued between Alfvén and the astrophysics community. Alfvén considered himself to be, first and foremost, an electrical power engineer who had experienced and measured the various plasma phenomena that often occurred on the super-high-voltage electrical transmission lines and circuits in his native Sweden. From his knowledge of astronomy, he could see the applicability of his plasma discoveries to the study of cosmic phenomena. He rather enjoyed the accusation of being an ‘outsider to astrophysics,’ thrown at him pejoratively by theoretical cosmologists and others such as Sydney Chapman. He was an expert in a research field they had never studied. He knew the physics of both electric plasmas and astronomy.

When Alfvén entered a large astronomical convention hall, a hush would fall over the crowd. Any discussion about how space was electrically neutral would immediately cease. Alfvén had the deep respect of professional astronomers, but they almost never heeded his advice. It was their loss.

Alfvén continued the earlier experimental work of Kristian Birkeland and Irving Langmuir on electric plasmas. He, his students, and associates developed the theoretical and mathematical foundation for those earlier experimental results. Alfvén was awarded not only the Nobel Prize in Physics but also the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society (1967), the Gold Medal of the Franklin Institute (1971), and the Lomonosov Medal of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1971).

But even he and his co-workers were not able to change the mindset of most astrophysicists who decided to follow the unsound, purely deductive mathematical approach championed by Chapman and his followers. It continues to be standard procedure to view as ‘flawed’ any observations made either in earthbound electric plasma laboratories or in space that conflict with traditional mathematical models that ignore the importance of electric currents and fields and that treat plasmas as if they were gases.

..

In his 1970 acceptance speech of his Nobel Prize in Physics, Alfvén pointed out that this idea of ‘frozen-in’ magnetic fields, which he had earlier endorsed, was false. In reality, moving magnetic fields within a plasma create electric currents. This fact is one of the basic concepts embodied in the Electric Sky.

Hannes Alfvén was unique among Nobel laureates in taking the opportunity of his acceptance speech to declare that he had been wrong in what he had said previously. Alfvén said, "I thought that the frozen-in concept was very good from a pedagogical point of view, and indeed it became very popular. In reality, however, it was not a good pedagogical concept but a dangerous ‘pseudo-pedagogical concept.’ By ‘pseudo-pedagogical’ I mean a concept which makes you believe that you understand a phenomenon whereas in reality you have drastically misunderstood it."

When he used the term ‘classical plasma theory,’ Alfvén was referring pejoratively to this erroneous ‘frozen-in’ idea and its cause – the false assumption that plasmas are ‘ideal conductors.

..

Because plasmas are good (but not perfect) conductors, they are equivalent to wires in their ability to carry electric current. It is well known that if a wire cuts through a magnetic field a current will flow in that wire. This is how electric generators and alternators work. Therefore, if there is any relative motion between a cosmic plasma, say in the arm of a galaxy, and a magnetic field in that same region, Birkeland currents will flow in the plasma. These currents will produce, in turn, their own magnetic fields, which will generate more currents in plasmas moving relative to them.'

- Donald E. Scott, The Electric Sky, 2006 (Electric Cosmos)



Context

(SAFIRE) - '..the foundation by which these energies can be beneficially harnessed.'

(Electric Universe - SAFIRE) - Case Western University - 'I remember being completely laughed at by certain astronomers..'

'..ignoring the fruits of 150 or so years of electrical science.' - Donald E. Scott


Review The Northern Lights -- Excellent Material for History of Science - By Chris Reeve "pln2bz"

LPPFusion fund raising - Cheap, safe and clean energy generator: the power of the sun recreated on Earth