Saturn's Rings cannot be described in terms of gravity. Since gravity acts in all directions, the rings should be a sphere. But that's not what we observe. What we observe are rings in a flat plane perpendicular to the lines of force of Saturn's magnetic field.
-759725.jpg){kind=link}
12 comments:
Not only magnetic, but more important, electric currents. Why more important? Because magnetic fields are the result of electric currents.
Neptune with 1000 M.P.H winds has the highest wind speeds of any planet in the solar system.
At a very far distance from the Sun.
Again, Saturn and Jupiter have very active atmospheres. Solar radiance reaching these planets is relatively weak. It has been assumed that forces internal to these planets drive their atmospheric activity.
But these are large planets, many times larger than Earth. Could their size and composition influence how much electrical current they receive from the Sun?
And if so, doesn't this demonstrate how much more powerful electrical energy flowing from the Sun is, as opposed to radiant energy?
And does that inform scientists, here on Earth, just how powerful electrical currents are flowing from the Sun to the Earth?
ARE HUGE CRYSTALS A REFLECTION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY IN THE EARTH'S CRUST?
(Editorial note: The link is for purposes of illustrating the electrical dynamics of Earth, not for any sociological or psychological assertions the link makes.)
Crystals placed under pressure will emit electric current. More important for this comment is the scientific fact that crystals will grow when electric current is applied to them.
Crystal Cave of Giants in Mexico is where giant cystals have formed. It's assumed these crystals formed over long periods of time, but science, so far, has not recognized the possibility that these cystals have been spurrred to such huge size, "...crystals of selenite (gypsum) as large as 4 feet in diameter and 50 feet long," because of the Earth's electrical dynamics.
Scientific questions are raised: How much electricity would be needed and over what stretch of time to grow these cystals?
To understand the electrical dynamics of the Universe it's vitally important to understand the electrical dynamics on Earth.
Why?
Because Earth is closest at hand and can be examined in the most detail and electrical dynamics observed, here, on Earth can be replicated in the laboratory and controlled experiments can be conducted.
Observation and measurement are the key to scientific advancement.
It's time for science to get back to basics.
EARTH'S ELECTRICAL POTENTIAL
If the Electric Universe theory is correct and electric currents and dynamics are major components of Earth's overall dynamics, then the electrical potential of the Earth should be investigated.
Wallace Thornhill has described the Earth's atmosphere as a leaking capacitor. The Earth and the ionosphere are two plates in a giant capacitor. See, Earth: A Self-repairing Capacitor (thunderbolts.info).
If this is an accurate description of Earth's electrical dynamics, then there should be present electrical potential.
And electrical potential, just like kinetic energy potential due to gravity -- think hydroelectric dams, should be able to be tapped into.
Nikola Tesla understood that electrical potential existed between the Earth's surface and the upper atmosphere (ionosphere). And Tesla had a tool to tap it, the Magnifying Transmitter. This tool is not fully understood to this day because many of Telsa's experimental notes were lost to history.
It's imperative that electrical engineers go back and take a look at this remarkable tool and seek to understand all it's capabilities.
Why did Telsa come back from his Colorado Springs experiments and tests convinced that he could construct a commercial tool that could transmit power?
And if it could transmit power to sell (or as Tesla envisioned "free" power) then surely, Tesla also envisioned harnessing the electrical potential of the Earth.
Today, now more than ever, harnessing the Earth's natural electrical potential is a possibility that needs to be explored by the best minds of electrical engineering science.
Anaconda
You need to think about where the sun get's its electrical energy from. As Tony Peratt advised, think bigger.
The outer planets also get the electrical input from the galaxy, as does the Sun.
And the Earth has indeed an electrical potential - tapping into it is THE issue which the oil people would not like you to do.
You might enjoy this one Anaconda:
Nuclear Fusion and Plasma Physics
Louis Hissink:
You are right to remind me of Dr. Peratt's injunction, "think bigger," but is there a way to measure what is coming from the Sun and what is coming from interstellar space?
How much of the galaxtic Birkeland currents go directly towards the Sun as opposed to the planets?
Louis, it would not surprise me that in some quarters, tapping into the Earth's electric potential would not be welcome news.
As my many comments make clear, I recognize how important oil is to our industrial society.
But just as obvious, I don't dance to the oil majors' narrative that oil is scarce. Oil is plentiful and a naturally occuring mineral derived from ongoing abiotic sources.
But a new source of electrical energy would propel the modern world to new hights of prosperity.
No gloom and doom from this writer.
Vast amounts of electrical energy, not tied to geographical locations and environmentally unobjectionable would transform world civilazation.
Oil would still be indispensable for various uses -- jet planes for one. Also, Tesla type electrical generation would "prove" electric Universe theory, and ironically, throw cold water all over carbon dioxide, man-made "global warming" theory.
Most important for me, though, is to learn and understand the best scientific evidence for the correct relationships and processes of the Earth and, now, beyond.
Vast electrical power generation that disproves "global warming" is no threat to the oil industry.
Anaconda
It is possible to measure it by space probes and also the magnitude of the magnetic fields via other means.
Astronomy's Achille' Heel is the entrenched belief that magnetic fields are frozen in plasma, Alfven's initial but then found to be wrong, idea of magnetohydronamics. Alfven realised quickly that magneto implies electro and told his peers that.
You are right in that the potential for tapping into the solar electrical field will have tremendous benefits, but how - why did Tesla fail, or did he fail.
There is so little information on this.
Oh, I agree with oil being plentiful - it's continually being produced in the mantle and seeps upwards - I suspect there is an enormous biosphere feeding on it.
Strange thing is that in my area of science, diamond geology, we have never noted hydrocaarbons as inclusions in the diamonds or rocks found in kimberlites.
Anaconda
one extra point - 95% of the world's oil reserves are controlled by governments or government controlled companies, not big oil per se.
So peak oil theory has to be viewed in this light.
Louis Hissink:
LH: "It is possible to measure it by space probes and also the magnitude of the magnetic fields via other means."
This is critical -- observation and measurement is the key to advancing the Electric Universe theory.
LH: "Astronomy's Achille' Heel is the entrenched belief that magnetic fields are frozen in plasma, Alfven's initial but then found to be wrong, idea of magnetohydronamics. Alfven realised quickly that magneto implies electro and told his peers that."
Yes, although, they don't even really want to talk about magnetic fields a whole lot because of the implicit reference to electric currents as Alfven stated. Phil Plait in one of his recent posts had to mention magnetic fields, and went on about how standard model astrophysicists don't deny magnetic fields exist, but the tone was dismissive, and, of course, there was no mention of electric currents, even though the only known cause of magnetic fields is electric currents.
LH: "You are right in that the potential for tapping into the solar electrical field will have tremendous benefits, but how - why did Tesla fail, or did he fail."
The short answer is, "science doesn't know." But mystery surrounds Tesla's Colorado Springs experiments. Tesla was secretive for economic, proprietary, and possibly ideosyncratic reasons.
By all reports, Tesla was able to generate man-made lightning at Colorado Springs. The question is whether Telsa was able to generate additional electric current above and beyond what was supplied to his experimental apparatus by the local municipal electrical generating plant?
Circumstantial evidence suggests that he did manage to generate additional electrical current above and beyond what was supplied to his facility.
But then the question becomes, did Telsa ever manage to control or harnesh this additional electric current, or was it little more than putting up a lightning pole and attracting ambient natural lightning to his pole?
Of course, attracting electric current would be the first step, but being able to "generate" electric current at a "time, place, and manner" of one's choosing is only a prerequisite to harnessing and controlling "generated" current.
Whether Tesla ever managed to truly harness or control any "induced" electric current at Colorado Springs is much harder to answer.
Certainly, Tesla came back from Colorado Springs convinced he could transmit "wireless" electric current (Tesla filed several patents on "wireless" transmission of electric current). But that really isn't where the interest lies. The interest is on whether Tesla ever figured out how to harness Earth's electric potential to generate electric power in a controlled way that could be fed into a transmission system. Tesla's talk of "free" electric power suggests that at least he thought it was a reasonable possibility, if not a scientific certainty.
The Wardenclyffe Tower venture was a failure. Why?
Was it because of technical reasons due to physical impossibilities (the inherent physical properties of Earth's electric dynamics), or was it incomplete technical mastery? Or was it economic reasons when J.P. Morgan pulled the financial plug?
Nobody knows.
Certainly, Tesla had more knowledge and mastery over electrodynamics than anybody else at the time.
Louis, you ask how? Of course, that is the 64 trillion Dollar question. Seriously, harnessing Earth's electric capacity in a patented and protected economically viable fashion would be worth more than a king's ransom to the inventor & patent holder.
Inducing Earth's own electric capacity to form a current between the Earth and the ionosphere was the starting block for Tesla.
The Magnifying Transmitter was the key apparatus.
My idea which is reflected in recognized electromagnetic characteristics observed in nature is inducing a toroidal electric current "portal" between the Earth and the ionosphere.
In essence, it takes electrical current to induce more electrical current. Take a look at this picture of a Tesla coil, and as Dr. Peratt suggested: "Think bigger."
Notice the "toroidal" structure of the coil.
I believe Tesla thought he could induce an electric current by creating a artificial toroidal portal and by way of resonant manifying and focussing could then transform the electric current he induced down to a level that could be fed into an electric power transmission system.
But likely it was never perfected.
Tesla probably thought with enough financial backing the "harness and control" obstacle could be overcome.
But it never was overcome.
So, still the question remains: "Can Man harness or control the Earth's electric potential?
In my opinion, there is enough of a possibility, based on recognized electrical engineering principles and the huge upside versus the risk of failure to make the investigation worthwhile.
LH: "Strange thing is that in my area of science, diamond geology, we have never noted hydrocaarbons as inclusions in the diamonds or rocks found in kimberlites."
That is interesting because I have read several scientific papers reporting and discussing hydrocarbon inclusions in diamonds and the presence of hydrocarbons in kimberlite pipes.
LH: "95% of the world's oil reserves are controlled by governments or government controlled companies, not big oil per se."
Yes, and because of that I encourage oil industry companies to maintain the proprietary control of their advanced exploration & development technology, especially regarding offshore deepwater technology.
(Nationalzation of oil resources is a trend [wrongly in my opinion] that will likely continue.)
That way countries have to come to the oil majors & and oilfield services companies to develop their offhsore oil resources.
Man-made technology has every reason to be kept secret and proprietary for economic advantage -- rewarding technological innovation -- geological facts such as abiotic oil are not proprietary and the truth of oil's origin should be made known to the general public.
Anaconda
The most important task is to fully understand the electrical nature of the earth's atmosphere.
Bear in mind that hurricanes/cyclones/typhoons develop from low pressure systems which I suspect are the entry and exit points for the electric currents, the rotational motion being powered by Birkelands in dark current mode.
The problem with doing in-situ measures in life threatening hurricane systems is the very fact that it's life threatening.
One thing we do know is that lightning is absent in high pressure systems, which I would guess are the compensatory effects of the low pressure vortices, couple together the already well understood atmosphere dyanamics.
Apparently on Telsa's death J Edgar Hoover of the FBI took possession of his manuscripts etc.
One of the problems with discovering an energy source of this scope and magnitude would be its effect on the existing energy infrastructure - it's discovery could make oil worthless and thus could well generate and even bigger energy crisis by having our whole oil-based civilisation grind to a halt simply because of a shortage of oil that no one wants to sell or extract out of the ground.
But if Abiotic oil theory is correct, perhaps we are getting too far ahead of ourselves in replacing something that does not need replacement at present.
Louis,
Excellent discussion.
LH: "The most important task is to fully understand the electrical nature of the earth's atmosphere."
Absolutely.
And the Earth's atmosphere is closest at hand. We have the technology to fully observe and measure the electrical dynamics of the Earth's atmosphere. There is no reason other than Man's own lack of will that prevents us from fully investigating the Earth's electrical dynamics.
Man can get to the bottom of all scientific questions concerning Earth's electrical dynamics if science is willing to ask the right questions and seeks to make the appropriate observations and measurements.
Sadly, there are many in the mainstream scientific community that seemingly turn a "blind eye" to the above prospect.
LH: "Bear in mind that hurricanes/cyclones/typhoons develop from low pressure systems which I suspect are the entry and exit points for the electric currents, the rotational motion being powered by Birkelands in dark current mode."
Excellent hypothesis. It would explain the spiral formation and the lack of lightning ("being powered by Birkelands in dark current mode.")
Louis, I do disagree with your next sentence: "The problem with doing in-situ measures in life threatening hurricane systems is the very fact that it's life threatening."
The U.S. already sends "weather planes" into the eye of hurricanes and through the eye wall and has for decades. And they do record electrical activity levels, see, The Electric Hurricanes of 2005, April 20, 2006 (thunderbolts.info)-- "We observed steady fields in excess of 8 kilovolts per meter. That is huge--comparable to the strongest fields we would expect to find over a large land based 'mesoscale' thunderstorm”.
It's simply that these planes haven't been set up to make detailed and sensitive observations and take minute measurements detecting electrical activities in the hurricanes.
More sophisticated electrical detection equipment could easily be installed on these planes, but as stated above questions about electric currents and activity levels in hurricanes hasn't been asked in the mainstream meteorological community.
But perhaps that will change with the increasing amount of observation and measurement that does verify electromagnetic activity in the Earth's atmosphere.
And if little or no electrical currents or activity levels are detected in hurricanes then your hypothesis will be falsified and science can move on.
But my thinking is your hypothesis/prediction would be verified and confirmed.
Either way, Man would learn something from the exercise.
LH: "One thing we do know is that lightning is absent in high pressure systems, which I would guess are the compensatory effects of the low pressure vortices, couple together the already well understood atmosphere dynamics."
Good point.
Let me say, that after studying the evidence of Earth's "electric weather," I don't think it's an either/or proposition. I suspect that heat dynamics compliment and interact with electrical dynamics. The level of interaction between the two dynamics is what the observation and measurment would find out.
But we can't understand that dynamic interaction (if there is interaction) if we don't ask the right questions and then seek out observations and measurements in accordance with those questions.
This exercise at bare minimum could falsify hypothesis regarding "electric weather" postulated by Plasma Cosmology supporters. Again, a useful exercise in itself.
LH: "Apparently on Telsa's death J Edgar Hoover of the FBI took possession of his manuscripts etc."
An intriquing undisputed fact.
And, of course, we don't know if Hoover found anything of value, or if government scientists made any use of the material that resulted in advances in technology or the understanding of physics.
It's a mystery...
LH: "One of the problems with discovering an energy source of this scope and magnitude would be its effect on the existing energy infrastructure - it's discovery could make oil worthless and thus could well generate and even bigger energy crisis by having our whole oil-based civilisation grind to a halt simply because of a shortage of oil that no one wants to sell or extract out of the ground."
I don't believe for a second that such a discovery would "make oil worthless..."
Oil is the most productive substance on Earth (other than the mind of Man).
I am convinced of oil's abiotic origin based on the overwhelming body of scientific evidence. Oil prices should not be based on false ideas of "Peak" oil, but I also recognize ultra-deepwater, ultra-deep drilling is expensive. Oil prices need to be above $70 a barrel to generate healthy investment in this deep offshore oil.
Regrettably, politics sticks its nose in at this point -- ultra-deepwater, ultra-deep drilling is needed not only because it proves Abiotic Oil theory (that's a side benefit), but because the West and the world need oil supplies outside the politically volatile Middle East. Middle East oil is the cheapest oil to produce in the world. If oil stays too cheap, the Middle East will, after some point in time, regarding world oil supplies, be even more in the choke-hold postion than they are currently.
That is to be avoided.
So, it's a balancing act, which of course, oil supplies always have been.
And, if the Earth's electric potential was harnessed to produce abundant and inexpensive electrical power then any one "point source" of oil supplies would be less important.
My friend, that would be a good thing.
So, no, "our whole oil-based civilisation" will not grind to a halt.
Again, even in the face of abundant, inexpensive electrical energy, oil would still be "the most productive substance on Earth."
LH: "...simply because of a shortage of oil that no one wants to sell or extract out of the ground."
Louis, remember your Austrian school of economics: There would be demand created by the desire to avoid "civilization grinding to a halt," that would generate a "price" that would equalize supply and demand, at some presently unknown point price equilibrium.
So, no, your articulated concerns would be unlikely to come to pass.
LH: "But if Abiotic oil theory is correct, perhaps we are getting too far ahead of ourselves in replacing something that does not need replacement at present."
Again, remember your Austrian school of economics: A new source of economically viable energy, in this case electrical energy, would be a good thing because, one, Man will always need more energy, two, this would truly be an economically efficient source of energy, so would compete with oil, thus making all energy more affordable, allowing Man to do more things spurring real economic growth on a world-wide basis.
Man doesn't need less, Man needs more.
To think otherwise is to fall into the "gloom & doom" mindset that seemingly is gripping a stunningly large segment of the intellectual class in the world, today.
Beyond examining the science according to the empirical scientific method to the best of my ability, and demonstrating the existence of abiotic oil, that has been my quest on this website from the beginning, to dispell the idea of diminishing economic horizons.
I will not shrink from it now.
if it wasn't for science and logic, this pointless blog and the rest of the internet will cease to exist.
Post a Comment