Stars: Electrically Connected And Externally Powered (Electric Universe)

[charlie]

 

[tankasnowgod]

Interesting! So, maybe stars are like exponentially larger lightbulbs! Or maybe lightning bugs are a better analogy, if we view them as living things.

 

[ecstatichamster]

Interesting! So, maybe stars are like exponentially larger lightbulbs! Or maybe lightning bugs are a better analogy, if we view them as living things.

We need brooder fixtures that are large enough to hold stars. Great source of red light!

 

[lollipop]

The Electric Universe Theory Does Electricity Rule the Solar System [FULL VIDEO]

 

[Ritchie]

So interesting! What he is saying makes a lot of sense. Rather than stars generating their own energy as random chemical reactions in a vast, random space expanse, the entire universe is an energy system expressing energy through stars all the way down the line to humans, animals, plants and microscopic organisms. I think modern quantum physics is recognising the implicit interconnectedness of everything however probably hasn't developed enough to encompass the entire universe, potentially multiverse, within that paradigm. Energy systems always have an on/off cycle that they adhere to, and this being THE energy system it would make sense that it holds the same properties. That would potentially explain black holes, dark matter, stars collapsing and expiring, void/space/nothingness in contrast to the vast and immense expression of energy in suns or stars, electricity and pure light, heat, planets, life in all its forms and all that exists on planets, etc. The On and the Off of one whole energy system. The vastness and immensity of the "off" is directly related and proportionate to the complexity, diversity and immensity of the "on", which i believe is what we see in the universe, within our selves and the myriad of life in existence. This theory could even be extrapolated to explain gravity, for gravity may be the energetic pull toward the "off" part of the cycle, being the source of all energy for the "on" part of the cycle. Black holes are the biggest focal point of gravity we have observed in the known universe, seemingly sucking everything within their surroundings, including light, into absolute void or nothingness with incomprehensible force (gravity). And black holes are created when a star burns out or comes to the end of its lifespan and collapses in upon itself, suggesting that black holes are the observable point between the on and off cycle of the one energetic system we are part of. And what is beyond a black hole is that "off" part that everything must come from and go back to and then come from again and so on. Like life to death, night to day or sleep to wake. Food for thought
Thanks Charlie, very interesting video!

 

[pimpnamedraypeat]

Interesting! So, maybe stars are like exponentially larger lightbulbs! Or maybe lightning bugs are a better analogy, if we view them as living things.

I'm very glad you mentioned this.

According to the expanding earth theory the Earth is growing.

Gynamede and other solar bodies have been shown to grow

"The bright terrain formed as Ganymede underwent some extreme resurfacing event, probably as a result of the moon's increase in size". -- Prockter, L.M., Icing Ganymede, Nature, Volume 410, Pages 25-27, 2001

Collins et al. (1999) agree that the formation of the grooved terrain on Ganymede was likely the result of post-formation "global expansion".

"Researchers now believe that Ganymede's more youthful-looking half could be due to a crust that stretched--as has happened in the past few million years on Europa--rather than any sort of icy volcanism, as many had assumed." -- Richard. A. Kerr, 2001

I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that the planets and stars are living things with a consciousness of their own. Extra terrestrial life might exist in forms we are not primed to recognize as life and thus might pass us by unseen and unacknowledged. Being terrestrial creatures, we are biased towards animal and plant life. Living beings that fall outside that narrow spectrum would be invisible to us.

It took until fairly recently in human history for us to reckognize that bacteria and fungi possess life. We could not envision of any living thing being that small. Their apparent lack of motion and agency didn't help. Now we know they move towards food source, can learn, can grow, can evolve due to changing conditions. They can communicate electromagnetically. With each other and with other forms of life.

Perhaps the same principle applies on the other end of the scale. We find it hard to imagine that things the size of planets and stars could possess life. At first glance planets seem little more than inert masses of rock and dust accrued over millions of years. Yet observation has shown that planets and stars can grow. They are connected over vast distances by magnetic fields and plasmic tethers. They possess a harmonious motion which, according to the electric universe theory, is directed by electromagnetic fields rather than the yet to be found gravity.

"...the great truth, accidentally revealed and experimentally confirmed, is fully recognized, that this planet, with all its appalling immensity, is to electric currents virtually no more than a small metal ball...." -- Nikola Tesla, physicist, 1904


But living things need to eat don't they?

Unlike other forms of life, planets and stars exist in such a way that they don't need biological processes to digest their energy source. They absorb it directly from the electromagnetic energy of the cosmos. The video posted by @charlie shows that star formation, long thought to be random, is in facts clustered around intergalactic filaments of high energy plasma, a potent energy source for any growing star. The stars metabolize that plasma and transform the light elements into the heavy elements from which you and I are composed. Is this metabolism not a sign of life?


But do they think?

Consciousness comes in many forms and is generally considered to be a property of human life. And yet we have many example of those who, though living, lack all signs of consciousness. If human consciousness is so delicate and so easily lost, how then can a massive star or planet, possessing none of the intricate machinery necessary to host human consciousness, be said to possess such a thing?

Humans beings are a highly complex biological form of life. This complexity leads to a myriad of failpoints , some of which this forum deals with. Because of it's reliance on human life, human consciousness is highly fragile and buggy. The complicated and delicate nature of human consciousness has biased us to expect the same complexity in any forms we would think to imbue with that quality. But that does not have to be the case. Human conciousness is, at a basic level, an emergent effect of the electromagnetic activity of the brain. This does not mean that brains are necessary for conciousness, anymore than silicon and copper is necessary for computation. Any computation that can be done by a computer can be done via sticks or water or pebbles. It is the function, not the form that is important.

Humans consciousness is fundamentally electromagnetic yet relies on a matrix of wet neurons and biochemical reactions. It is slow and dirty and complex. The stars are much simpler in form and more dynamic. They are made of lighter elements and come as close to pure energy metabolism as possible. Human metabolism has been shown to be intrinsically linked to consciousness, with higher metabolism linked to clearer thought and a higher state of being. Due to their superior form of metabolism, I would wager that the stars posses a much clearer and unmuddied consciousness.

@haidut @Parsifal @Diokine @Drareg @RePeatRePeat @baggywrinkle @pboy

I know I wrote quite a bit, some of it probably misguided. Do you guys have any thoughts?

"Since the stars come into existence in the aether, it is reasonable that they possess sensation and intelligence. And from this it follows that the stars are to be reckoned as gods. For it may be observed that the inhabitants of those countries in which the air is pure and rarefied have keener wits and greater powers of understanding than persons who live an a dense and heavy climate [Peats high altitude theory from 1st century B.C.] .... It is therefore likely that the stars possess surpassing intelligence, since they inhabit the ethereal region of the world. Again, the consciousness and intelligence of the stars is most clearly evinced by their order and regularity ... the stars move of their own free will and because of their intelligence and divinity.... Not yet can it be said that some stronger force compels the heavenly bodies to travel in a manner contrary to their nature, for what stronger force can there be? It remains therefore that the motion of the heavenly bodies is voluntary...Therefore the existence of the gods is so manifest that I can scarcely deem one who denies it to be of sound mind." -- Marcus T. Cicero, philosopher, 1st century B.C.

 

[denise]

The Electric Universe Theory Does Electricity Rule the Solar System [FULL VIDEO]

That was fascinating, thank you. I ended up having an electric-universe marathon! After watching this one, I watched Thunderbolts of the Gods and then the first episode of Symbols of an Alien Sky, both of which (especially the latter) talk about the relationship of this theory to ancient mythology--super interesting.

 

[charlie]

the first episode of Symbols of an Alien Sky

I think this might be getting ready to happen again.

If you go to the Montana Sky Watchers 2 Facebook group they say they are tracking 7 planets in our skies right now.

MONTANA SKY WATCHER 2 /..SAMUEL HOFMAN

 

[pimpnamedraypeat]

I think this might be getting ready to happen again.

If you go to the Montana Sky Watchers 2 Facebook group they are tracking 7 planets in our skies right now.

MONTANA SKY WATCHER 2 /..SAMUEL HOFMAN

I've been reading that we're headed towards a pole shift in the next couple of years.

Gonna buy some land in siberia before it turns tropical.

 

[Nokoni]

I've read and watched a good bit of the work these guys have done, and found them to be convincing. It's somewhat analogous to Peat in that the mainstream is hopelessly infested with fraud, in Peat's case, the medical establishment, in Thunderbolts case, science, particularly physics, particularly astrophysics. There was no big bang, there is no expanding universe, there are no black holes, there is no dark matter, and no dark energy, and no speed limit of the speed of light. There is even no gravity, in the sense of a fundamental force. In the words of Wal Thornhill, "The universal gravitational constant is neither universal nor constant." Instead gravity is an electrical phenomenon. Even a simple hydrogen atom is a dipole -- when the electron is on one side there is a net positive charge on the other. Stack them up in their quadrillions or whatever and you get "gravity". (Gotta keep in mind, the electric force is roughly 38 orders of magnitude (!!!) greater than gravity.) And in different arrangements of the same mass, the net charges will vary, thus so will gravity. In the age of dinosaurs gravity on earth was somewhere around half of what is is today. Such animals could never fly, and the land giants would be crushed by their own weight, in today's gravity.

And that's just the light stuff. Earth was originally born when it erupted out of Saturn (positive charges accumulate in the core and eventually become too great), and existed for however long orbiting Saturn. Likewise Mars, and likewise Venus, in that order. But then Saturn wandered too close to the Sun and was captured and all three of us broke free from Saturn. But in the turmoil of the transition, sometime in the last 10,000 years or so, Venus got too close to Mars causing massive and catastrophic electrical arcing, which excavated the northern hemisphere of Mars to a depth of 10 km (or perhaps it's 10 miles). That feature is known to exist on Mars encompassing perhaps the top 40% of the planet. And that is the source of meteorites. (And BTW, comets are just meteorites with a trajectory that makes them approach and then recede from the Sun, that is, in highly elliptical orbits.) The grand canyon and many geological features are also the result of monstrously powerful electric arcing. And Venus is hot not because of any greenhouse effect but because it is still hot from it's birth and has yet to achieve thermal equilibrium. That's another recognized fact, that Venus emits more thermal energy than it receives from the Sun. I've never heard any of them speculate about it, but it would seem likely, in that scenario, that Mars was similarly teeming with life. Sucked to be them.

And like I said, if you read closely, review actual test results where possible (like what will happen when they shoot a copper bullet at a "comet"), their view much more closely conforms to the known facts. Their stuff is convincing.

Their web site is here:
The Thunderbolts Project ™ – A voice for the Electric Universe

 

[charlie]

The grand canyon and many geological features are also the result of monstrously powerful electric arcing.

Electric Universe Meets Geology (Mountains Made With Electricity)

 

[denise]

I think this might be getting ready to happen again.

If you go to the Montana Sky Watchers 2 Facebook group they are tracking 7 planets in our skies right now.

MONTANA SKY WATCHER 2 /..SAMUEL HOFMAN

As I was watching that one, and becoming more and more amazed by the correlations with ancient cultures and myths, I thought to myself--damn, wouldn't it be amazing if that happened again?

 

[lollipop]

That was fascinating, thank you. I ended up having an electric-universe marathon! After watching this one, I watched Thunderbolts of the Gods and then the first episode of Symbols of an Alien Sky, both of which (especially the latter) talk about the relationship of this theory to ancient mythology--super interesting.

Glad you liked it @denise! I thought it was a simple, clear, evidence based introduction to EU. Like @Don says above, it truly is convincing especially after making my way through soooo much observable evidence. I once did a similar marathon of their videos - fun ＼(^o^)／

@charlie thank you for posting this thread EU and Ray Peat are my two fields of research these days.

 

[Nokoni]

Electric Universe Meets Geology (Mountains Made With Electricity)

I've never encountered a community, apart from the Thunderbolts-ers themselves, that was even open, much less welcoming, to these ideas. How comfy. Thanks for the link.

 

[Nokoni]

Glad you liked it @denise! I thought it was a simple, clear, evidence based introduction to EU. Like @Don says above, it truly is convincing especially after making my way through soooo much observable evidence. I once did a similar marathon of their videos - fun ＼(^o^)／

@charlie thank you for posting this thread :) EU and Ray Peat are my two fields of research these days.

I almost can't believe this. I totally expected to get hammered, but hey, I didn't bring it up and maybe somebody will be moved enough to give it a look. So great to know there are folks like you here.

And I agree about the Ray Peat/EU combo. What I had never run across before, until I followed Charlie's link, was that RP talked about Halton Arp. RP continues to amaze.

 

[lollipop]

I almost can't believe this. I totally expected to get hammered, but hey, I didn't bring it up and maybe somebody will be moved enough to give it a look. So great to know there are folks like you here.

And I agree about the Ray Peat/EU combo. What I had never run across before, until I followed Charlie's link, was that RP talked about Halton Arp. RP continues to amaze.

And @Don Ray also talked about EU theory in addition to Arp. It was on the Politics and Science Podcasts - I think the fund raising episodes. You might check it out

Yes, I would say this community continues to amaze me, strong powerful thinkers, and each one has their lens which makes for sometimes fascinating, interesting discussion and other times a bit of chaotic, wild conversations. ALL of them do share one quality: free thinking. THAT juices me. Like you, also why I love Ray and EU: both willing to be free, out of the box thinkers.

 

[pimpnamedraypeat]

There was no big bang, there is no expanding universe, there are no black holes, there is no dark matter, and no dark energy, and no speed limit of the speed of light. There is even no gravity, in the sense of a fundamental force. In the age of dinosaurs gravity on earth was somewhere around half of what is is today. Such animals could never fly, and the land giants would be crushed by their own weight, in today's gravity.

And that's just the light stuff. Earth was originally born when it erupted out of Saturn (positive charges accumulate in the core and eventually become too great), and existed for however long orbiting Saturn. Likewise Mars, and likewise Venus, in that order. But then Saturn wandered too close to the Sun and was captured and all three of us broke free from Saturn. But in the turmoil of the transition, sometime in the last 10,000 years or so, Venus got too close to Mars causing massive and catastrophic electrical arcing, which excavated the northern hemisphere of Mars to a depth of 10 km (or perhaps it's 10 miles). That feature is known to exist on Mars encompassing perhaps the top 40% of the planet. And that is the source of meteorites. (And BTW, comets are just meteorites with a trajectory that makes them approach and then recede from the Sun, that is, in highly elliptical orbits.) The grand canyon and many geological features are also the result of monstrously powerful electric arcing. And Venus is hot not because of any greenhouse effect but because it is still hot from it's birth and has yet to achieve thermal equilibrium. That's another recognized fact, that Venus emits more thermal energy than it receives from the Sun. I've never heard any of them speculate about it, but it would seem likely, in that scenario, that Mars was similarly teeming with life. Sucked to be them.

100% agree with the stuff about gravity, big bang, dark matter, etc.

Velikovsky was right about venus but I don't know about earth coming from saturn. Where's the proof of that one? IIRC he claims that venus came form jupiter.

According to science and historical accounts, there was another life wielding planet in our solar system that was destroyed by thermonuclear warfare 3 mil years ago, about the same time modern humans showed up.

"Is there other evidence that comets and minor planets originated in the 'recent' explosion of a planet? Yes, a great deal. We can study the orbits of comets, and by using the laws of gravitation we can do what amounts to tracing those orbits back in time. We find a statistical tendency of those orbits to emanate between a common point between Mars and Jupiter about 3 million years ago...." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

"... I must admit to my fascination with the idea that the rough correspondence between the time of the origin of man on Earth and the date of the planetary breakup event ... is perhaps not at all coincidental. Both can be approximated at about 3 million years ago. This rough coincidence begs the intellect to wonder if the two events could be causally related." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

 

[Nokoni]

And @Don Ray also talked about EU theory in addition to Arp. It was on the Politics and Science Podcasts - I think the fund raising episodes. You might check it out :)

Yes, I would say this community continues to amaze me, strong powerful thinkers, and each one has their lens which makes for sometimes fascinating, interesting discussion and other times a bit of chaotic, wild conversations. ALL of them do share one quality: free thinking. THAT juices me. Like you, also why I love Ray and EU: both willing to be free, out of the box thinkers.

Another guy you might find interesting is Gerald Pollack. For me, Peat is the greatest thinker on health, EU is the most astounding scientific revolution, and Pollock has made the most important practical contribution to science in my lifetime. He figured out how water works, and almost nobody had the slightest clue. Water is so comprehensively ubiquitous, but nobody knew how it worked, or put better, that it worked very differently than they ever suspected. And the details have profound ramifications, including, perhaps, what makes the earth continue rotating. His book is "The Fourth Phase of Water" and it's beautifully and clearly written. I've read it several times and will read it many more. And there's a Peat connection (though I don't believe he made it) which explains, at least in part, why red light is so beneficial. It directly structures the cellular water. Pollack speaks regularly at the EU conferences, and they're available on youtube, so maybe you're way ahead of me. But if you like your science important and outside the box, you'll love him.

 

[lollipop]

Another guy you might find interesting is Gerald Pollack. For me, Peat is the greatest thinker on health, EU is the most astounding scientific revolution, and Pollock has made the most important practical contribution to science in my lifetime. He figured out how water works, and almost nobody had the slightest clue. Water is so comprehensively ubiquitous, but nobody knew how it worked, or put better, that it worked very differently than they ever suspected. And the details have profound ramifications, including, perhaps, what makes the earth continue rotating. His book is "The Fourth Phase of Water" and it's beautifully and clearly written. I've read it several times and will read it many more. And there's a Peat connection (though I don't believe he made it) which explains, at least in part, why red light is so beneficial. It directly structures the cellular water. Pollack speaks regularly at the EU conferences, and they're available on youtube, so maybe you're way ahead of me. But if you like your science important and outside the box, you'll love him.

I do like Gerald Pollack! He and Gilbert Ling's work convinced me OUT of the membrane/pump view of the cell. Good stuff.

 

[Nokoni]

100% agree with the stuff about gravity, big bang, dark matter, etc.

Velikovsky was right about venus but I don't know about earth coming from saturn. Where's the proof of that one? IIRC he claims that venus came form jupiter.

According to science and historical accounts, there was another life wielding planet in our solar system that was destroyed by thermonuclear warfare 3 mil years ago, about the same time modern humans showed up.

"Is there other evidence that comets and minor planets originated in the 'recent' explosion of a planet? Yes, a great deal. We can study the orbits of comets, and by using the laws of gravitation we can do what amounts to tracing those orbits back in time. We find a statistical tendency of those orbits to emanate between a common point between Mars and Jupiter about 3 million years ago...." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

"... I must admit to my fascination with the idea that the rough correspondence between the time of the origin of man on Earth and the date of the planetary breakup event ... is perhaps not at all coincidental. Both can be approximated at about 3 million years ago. This rough coincidence begs the intellect to wonder if the two events could be causally related." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

Well now I'm flabbergasted. I would never have expected to run across anyone who'd ever even heard of Van Flandern, much less having him quoted to me. So give me a sec to recover my wits.

I'm not familiar with these quotes, or really much about him at all, except that he was the guy that calculated (if I have the right guy, and I'm pretty sure I do, but it's so obscure it would take a while or longer to verify) that the velocity of an electron around a nucleus could not be less than [distance from here to the far side of the andromeda galaxy] per second. Yeah, that's gonna break the ol Universal Speed Limit :) But the quotes are very intriguing and I look forward to checking it out.

As for Jupiter, I think you'll find it's Saturn. And as for proof, it's mostly inference, but the same is true of much of science, and the inferences are fairly reasonable. Certainly more reasonable that the fantastic leaps taken by mainstream astrophysics. You can find the story told on this website: The Thunderbolts Project ™ – A voice for the Electric Universe. But the path is somewhat steep and very, very long, though every step is fascinating. I wish I could produce a single thing you might find convincing but I'm afraid I'm just not that good. Wal Thornhill could do it, but I couldn't carry his calculator :)