Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Cosmic Ray Hot Spots Identified

Cosmic Ray 'Hot Spots' Bombarding Earth With Cosmic Rays.

ScienceDaily (Nov. 24, 2008) — A Los Alamos National Laboratory cosmic-ray observatory has seen for the first time two distinct hot spots that appear to be bombarding Earth with an excess of cosmic rays. The research calls into question nearly a century of understanding about galactic magnetic fields near our solar system.

Joining an international team of collaborators, Los Alamos researchers Brenda Dingus, Gus Sinnis, Gary Walker, Petra Hüntemeyer and John Pretz published the findings November 25 in Physical Review Letters.

“The source of cosmic rays has been a 100-year-old problem for astrophysicists,” Pretz said. “With the Milagro observatory, we identified two distinct regions with an excess of cosmic rays. These regions are relatively tiny bumps on the background of cosmic rays, which is why they were missed for so long. This discovery calls into question our understanding of cosmic rays and raises the possibility that an unknown source or magnetic effect near our solar system is responsible for these observations.” ...

Researchers used Los Alamos’ Milagro cosmic-ray observatory to peer into the sky above the northern hemisphere for nearly seven years starting in July 2000. The observatory is unique in that it monitors the entire sky above the northern hemisphere. Because of its design and field of view, Milagro was able to record over 200 billion cosmic-ray collisions with the Earth’s atmosphere. ...

But because Milagro was able to record so many cosmic-ray events, researchers for the first time were able to see statistical peaks in the number of cosmic-ray events originating from specific regions of the sky near the constellation Orion. The region with the highest hot spot of cosmic rays is a concentrated bulls eye above and to the right visually of Orion, near the constellation Taurus. The other hot spot is a comma-shaped region visually occurring near the constellation Gemini. ...

Milagro scientists are currently working with researchers in Mexico to build a second-generation observatory known as the High-Altitude Water Cherenkov (HAWC) experiment. If built, the HAWC observatory could help researchers solve the mystery of cosmic-ray origin.


Quantum_Flux said...

lol.... my theory is that aliens were having a game of tugawar or flying saucer pull with scotch tape. Eh, perhaps they were doing it nearby a metallic planet and the electrons were flowing through the intersteller plasma. There are plenty of explanations that don't involve black holes or supercolliders.

Quantum_Flux said...

Check this idea out: The Green Beast

Anaconda said...


While concensus scientists are scratching their heads and questioning nearly a century of assumed understanding of galactic magnetic fields near our solar system, Plasma Cosmology physicists are closely studying cosmic-ray phenomenon with an eye to explaining the phenomenon in terms of electromagnetic forces.

Plasma Universe theory maintains that electromagnetism and not gravity is the dynamic force in the Universe. Cosmic-rays have tremendous energy, spread out over a large area.

Discussion of the findings is going on around the world: Puzzling hot spots in the cosmic-ray sky, Karl-Heinz Kampert, Department of Physics, University of Wuppertal, D-42119 Wuppertal, Germany, Published November 24, 2008 hat-tip BF

"Important complementary insight into the puzzle may soon come from observations of high-energy cosmic-ray electrons. They undergo synchrotron and inverse Compton scattering losses and thus cannot travel very far from their sources, which makes them sensitive probes to nearby galactic sources and propagation."

Synchrotron emissions are a phenomenon that Plasma Cosmology has identified as a signature of the workings of a Universe "fired" by electromagnetism as the dominate dynamic force.

So Hot You're Cool, So Cool You're Hot, November 18, 2008 (thunderbolts.info) "Clouds of ionized gas and dust in space are not heated up by gravity, they are compressed by electrical forces and emit synchrotron radiation."

Consensus science states: "A recent press release from the European Southern Observatory explains that this image shows “an expanding bubble of ionized gas,” shown here in red. The bubble is assumed to be generated by the ultraviolet radiation from a central star. It has caused a “shock wave” that “sweeps up a layer of the surrounding cold interstellar gas and cosmic dust. This layer becomes unstable and collapses under its own gravity into dense clumps…, where new stars are born.”

But Plasma Cosmology knows that:

"Anyone who is familiar with plasma will immediately recognize that “if it’s ionized, it ain’t gas.” And if it ain’t gas, a shock wave is not likely to trigger gravitational instability and collapse. The filaments and knots indicate the “pinch” activity of the much greater electromagnetic forces of Birkeland currents."

Birkeland currents are the undeniable currency of electromagnetism, not "big bang, black hole" theory.

As stated in the above linked thunderbolts article:

"From a plasma perspective, the temperature is also open to question. Consensus astronomy talks a lot about unobservable things like dark matter and dark energy, but it talks hardly at all about observable synchrotron radiation, which is what most celestial radiation is. Thermal radiation is produced by random collisions of atoms, and its “peak” wavelength is a measure of the temperature of the atoms. Synchrotron radiation is produced by electrons moving along a magnetic field."

Let's focus on the last sentence: "Synchrotron radiation is produced by electrons moving along a magnetic field."

The above sentence makes clear: synchrotron radiation is scientific evidence of the electromagnetic nature of the Universe.

Here is the quote previously provided from the German university discussion linked above: "Important complementary insight into the puzzle may soon come from observations of high-energy cosmic-ray electrons. They undergo synchrotron and inverse Compton scattering losses and thus cannot travel very far from their sources, which makes them sensitive probes to nearby galactic sources and propagation."

Cosmic-rays: Scientific evidence of Plasma Cosmology.

"Big bang, black hole" supporters need to face the evidence and acknowledge the power of Plasma Cosmology.

Anaconda said...


diatreme takes great exception to Plasma Cosmology as expressed in his comments on the Oil Is Mastery post: Consensus and the Crab, November 22, 2008

"[T]his site leaps off into the abyss and rejects virtually every hard-won finding of modern science as if EVERYTHING that science has done in the past century can be safely ignored."

Of course, this is a melodramatic overstatement. Not everything that science has done in the past century can be ignored, nor has that been advocated as such on this website or by this writer.

But certainly "big bang, black hole" theory CAN be safely ignored.

(diatreme writes as if "big bang, black hole" theory is all of science -- if that isn't a display of ego and arrogance I don't know what is. True, this website also advocates for Expanding Earth theory and Abiotic Oil theory, but we know from diatreme's comments, what he cares about is "big bang, black hole theory.)

Now, mainstream science is starting to take notice of actual observations in the
Cosmos and coming to the conclusion diatreme so greatly fears.

As ScienceDaily put it in the posted article:

"The research calls into question nearly a century of understanding about galactic magnetic fields near our solar system." (ScienceDaily is a beacon of mainstream science.)

So, whether diatreme and his fellow "big bangers" like it or not, they are seeing even mainstream science turn against their theory because the physical observations in the Cosmos are stacking up and are overwhelming in favor of an Electric Universe.

In diatreme's defense of "big bang, black hole" theory, he holds up the neutron star as fact -- even though they have never been observed.

(And this guy was bitching about "ultra-mundane matter" being proposed as a possibly mechanism for Expanding Earth theory, when "big bang, black hole" theory relies on "dark matter", "strange energy", and "dark energy", none of which have ever been observed; the arrogance and hypocrisy is truly stunning.)

diatreme goes on to make his case for neutron stars:

"[B]ut to anyone who knows anything about, for instance, neutron stars, how they are formed, and the vast, coherent web of observations and theory that surrounds the general subject of collapsing stars..."


"Getting back to specifics, pulsars' high rates of rotation and enormous densities are scientific facts, and both features of neutron stars were predicted before the first such objects were discovered."

And finally:

"On the other hand, there is... lots of evidence... that: "The (Crab) nebula is powered by a rapidly rotating, highly magnetized neutron star, or pulsar."

Not so fast, partner...

Electric Universe theory and even some consensus scientists note major falsifying observations which contradict and call into question the assumption of neutron stars.

Magnetic Monsters, Nov 26, 2008 (thunderbolts.info) "Extreme magnetic fields in space are said to be caused by the high-speed rotation of neutron stars. One of many cases where a theory is built on the incorrect assumptions of another theory."

The article explains the observations and problems with the neutron star hypothesis.

The thunderbolt article states: "Deficits in gravity-only cosmology made the neutron star hypothesis necessary in order to defend gravity's ostensibly endless powers."

It goes on: "Neutron stars were proposed as the answer to pulsar behavior. Pulsars are stars whose brightness fluctuates over a short period of time."

So neutron stars were proposed as a remedy because gravitational models of the Universe (read "big bang, black hole" theory) could not explain specific observations.

Conventional "big bang, black hole" theory holds in part:

"Pulsars are described as "light houses" with beams of energy concentrated at specific points. Consensus gravitational theory demands that any new information conform to the tenets of the theory rather than the other way around, so a rotational mechanism was proposed for the pulsations. When the spin of a pulsar brings its beam inline with telescopes on Earth, a flash of light is visible."

However, "Mission Control, we have a problem," with neutron star theory:

"However, when the rotation rates of some pulsars were measured at once per second or less (even with many times the mass of our Sun), "neutron stars" were fabricated. Only a super dense material like neutronium was thought able to withstand those rotational speeds. Neutronium is a hypothetical material that has had all of its electrons smashed down into the nuclei, where the protons and electrons combine into neutrons."

Remember, "It must be stressed, though, that the evidence is indirect and no neutron star has ever been observed."

The thunderbolts article goes on to say:

"The Electric Universe hypothesis requires no collapsed stars or rotational speeds so great that ordinary matter could never take the strain. The oscillations in magnetars (or pulsars, in general) are caused by resonant effects in electric circuits. The sudden release of stored electrical energy in a “double layer” is responsible for the occasional outburst of gamma rays. The outburst begins with a sudden peak of energy, and then declines gradually, like a stroke of lightning."

The scientific body of evidence is substantial: Electrmagnetism, something Man knows a lot about, here, on Earth also is the driving force in the Cosmos.

Imaginary stars conjured up to save a dying theory need to get shelved back into men's imaginations where it belongs.

Yes, a century of "big bang, black hole" theory, or however long its been floating around, needs to get flushed down the toilet.

Anaconda said...


Just kidding. Gravity is important, as a bonk on the head from Newton's apple will tell you.

Now, since gravity has fallen from its dominate place in the Universe, what role does it have?

Plasma Cosmology, as any cosmology, has to account for gravity.

Where does gravity get plugged into an Electric Universe?

In researching Plasma Cosmology, I've seen a lot about what gravity fails to do, but not much on what gravity does do.

It seems encumbent on Plasma Cosmologists to assign a role for gravity in their theory.

Perhaps, assigning a role for gravity in an Electric Universe would ease the fear and loathing in the "big bang, black hole" community.

It also seems like an item of house keeping that needs to be done to round out Plasma Cosmology.

I say this as someone who is convinced by scientific compulsion of Plasma Cosmology's validity, but insists that the Scientific Method be fulfilled.

And if gravity has been dealt with by Plasma Cosmology and I just don't know it...well...somebody let me know what happened to gravity!