My views on Cosmology and Physics
site navigation menu
Paradigm Shift to an Incomplete EU Model
The Thunderbolts Project (TBP) presents its Electric Universe cosmology as a paradigm shift from the current foundation of standard cosmology.
The word incomplete is in the post's title because the EU cosmology as currently defined by Thunderbolts remains incomplete , in my following of EU.
This possible paradigm shift to EU was described in the recent TBP video titled
Ghada Chehade: Path To the Next Model of Cosmology | Thunderbolts
I take strong exception to Wal's claimed first confirmed prediction for EU.
At about minute 3:40. the slide says
1. that solar radiant energy is due largely to transmutation of elements in the electrically active solar plasma which was confirmed by a independent SAFIRE experiment in 2019.
There is no justification for the "due largely to transmutation" claim.
I will justify my objection after some backgound.
The work by Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille is the important reference for this post. He produced multiple series of videos on his YouTube channel Sky Scholar.
Among the relevant playlists are:
Laws of Thermodynamics (5)
Black body Radiation (13)
For this post, 2 videos by Robitaille are most relevant.
Gravitational Thermodynamics - Is it Science?
This first video explains the cases where current cosmology violates thermodynamics in the cases of 1) a gravitational collapse of a gaseous star (to seek fusion) and 2) a black hole temperature.
What Colors are the Stars? Luminosity, Color, and Temperature Explained!
The second video is about the format of the light from a star.
These 2 videos describe how standard cosmology makes mistakes, like in its Gaseous sun model.
Robitaille developed his condensed matter model of the Sun to explain all of its observed behaviors.
The Sun must be condensed matter to emit the observed solar radiation.
The solar surface emitting its light is called the photosphere.
This light has the form of thermal radiation, aka black-body radiation.
The color of a star is driven by its thermal spectrum.
In thermodynamics, thermal radiation is the transfer of thermal energy held in the molecular vibrations within condensed matter to the energy in electromagnetic radiation, in the form of black-body radiation.
Energy is always conserved. Here, only its form is changed.
There are 2 notable ways that EU is incomplete
My 1st concern with EU is
TBP ignores the Robitaille LMH model, with its complete explanation of a star and its light.
TBP claims the SAFIRE project has confirmed their electric Sun model by showing its source of radiant energy is in transmutation..
SAFIRE attemped to duplicate conditions only on the photosphere surface, where transmutation could occur.
Nearly all elements in the periodic table have absorption lines in the solar spectrum, indicating these atoms are likely being created on the photosphere surface.
SAFIRE confirmed transmutation occurs because new elements were found on the anode's surface. The anode was part of the electrical circuit generating a voltage from the cathode for the electric force needed for transmutation on the anode.
SAFIRE achieved electric discharges near the anode. SAFIRE could never achieve the correct, basic (or ignoring absorption lines), solar spectrum from a mechanism other than condensed matter having that temperature.
In this experiment, the solid anode was not heated to any target temperature, certainly not to that of our Sun at 5778K.
SAFIRE had no source of thermal radiation in the chamber, despite the anode being condensed matter.
SAFIRE detected radiant energy from near the anode, but not of the form coming from our Sun.
SAFIRE is not testing a complete model of the Sun.
All of the radiant energy from the Sun is in the form of thermal radiation. The Sun maintains an ouput of about 4x10^26 watts of energy.
For Wal to claim SAFIRE matched the radiant energy of the Sun, both the scaled amount and its form of energy must be matched from the smaller scale experiment.
The form was wrong. I know of no calculation of a comparison of scaled energy output.
Ralph Juergens defined a model for the Sun's behaviors above the light-emitting surface. He was explaining features like sunspots. He never explained its measured surface temperature.
Therefore, I propose that TBP, by accepting the Juergens model for sunspots, missed the more important mechanism for the photosphere and its temperature.
Donald Scott proposed a mechanism of subsurface loop currents and their magnetic fields to explain sunspots above the photosphere. His internal mechanism is compatible with the LMH model which explains the solar layers from core to corona.
Robitaille's LMH model is needed by TBP to complete the set of mechanisms to explain all solar behaviors, as a supplement to SAFIRE.
SAFIRE tests only the mechanism for transmutation on the photosphere.
Technically the transmutation could occur on the surface where all the new elements were found
Presentations by Thunderbolts describe the color of a star as a behavior resulting from the diameter of the spherical electric discharge layer.
When the layer is larger with the electric discharge mechanism covering more surface area, than it is claimed to be a red star.
When the diameter is smaller, then an electric discharge is within a smaller surface are, so the color becomes blue.
This mechanism cannot match the Sun's thermal radiation, or that of other stars.
All stars exhibit thermal radiation. Each is classified by its measured temperature from its thermal spectrum.
The TBP Electric Sun has no explanation for it.
The SAFIRE environment does not explain a mechanism for the anode to achieve the Sun's temperature so when lacking a source of thermal radiation, it violates thermodynamics, until it integrates the LMH mechanism.
If an example is useful, an astronomer in France has a web site astrosurf. He recorded the spectra of 3 different star types, so they had different surface temperatures. Each star has a unique color in the graph.
Here is a copy of the image in his site's page "The radial velocity measure of nearby galaxies"
Blue is the hottest star, green is a medium hot star like our Sun.
Red is the warm star, Aldebaran which is a red giant.
Each star emits the wavelength distribution of thermal radiation, which is emitted by condensed matter, from its thermal energy held in molecular vibrations.
The wavelength having the highest intensity is related to the temperature of the heat source.
Each star also exhibits absorption lines from atoms on the photosphere surface.
My 2nd concern with EU is its mistake with redshifts.
TBP accepts Halton Arp's theory of intrinsic redshifts.
We measure the redshift velocity of a galaxy or quasar by changes in absorption or emission lines.
These lines arise only from atoms in the line of sight, never from the original light source, like a galaxy or quasar.
The motion of the atom can affect the wavelength by the Doppler effect because the atom's kinetic energy participates in the transfer of energy.
A blue shift involves some of the atom's kinetic energy transferred to decrease the wavelength.
A red shift occurs when the total energy of the transfer is reduced by the contribution from the atom's kinetic energy.
Energy is always conserved in the moment of the Doppler effect.
Arp noted that quasars having the same redshift were often associated wth a Seyfert galaxy between them. In his data set, the galaxy always had a lower redshift than the quasars. This suggested to Arp that the quasars had the same age, but older than the galaxy. Arp called this an intrinsic redshift, meaning it arose in the light source, or in the quasar.
Arp went so far as suggesting both the color and amount of shift are driven by the age of the light source, or the quasar.
M31 has a blueshift, known since 1914. Arp proposed M31 is younger than other galaxies, like those having a redshift.
Presentations by Thunderbolts Project have consistently supported Arp's intrinsic redshift mechanism, meaning an increase in wavelength occurs at the source.
An intrinsic redshift violates thermodynamics.
A redshift is a particular wavelength being increased (toward red, or away from blue).
A blueshift is a particular wavelength being decreased (toward blue, or away from red).
As an intrinsic redshift, the wavelength increase is a loss of energy emitted from the source. As Arp defined no transfer of this energy within the quasar, this loss violates thermodynamics.
As an intrinsic blueshift, the wavelength decrease is a gain of energy within the source. As Arp defined no transfer of this energy within the quasar, this gain violates thermodynamics.
Therefore, every red or blue shift of a galaxy or quasar is caused by atoms in the line of sight.
Arp was wrong. There is no special intrinsic spectral line shift found only in galaxies and quasars. A light source cannor reveal its age in its light.
Therefore, I propose that TBP, by accepting the Arp intrinsic redshift mechanism, missed the correct mechanism for observed red and blue shifts.
With this current combination in its cosmology, EU accepts an incomplete stellar model and a wrong explanation of redshifts
EU is a candidate for the paradigm shift in cosmology.
However, any claims that it is ready are premature.
I identified 2 concerns with EU and their solutions.
EU must abandon the outdated, incomplete theories of Arp and Juergens.They should have been replaced by recent theories which both match the observations and conform to thermodynamics.