gravity and hollow earth
in [Vegetarian]
|
From: Rupert on 1 Jul 2008 09:38 On Jul 1, 9:29 pm, "pearl" <t...(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: > 'THE OLD PARADIGM > > The old paradigm for understanding the origin and functioning of the > solar system is overwhelmingly dominated by gravitational mechanics. > It dates back to Newton when little was known about electricity. > Similarly, the Kant-Laplace hypothesis concerning the nebular original > of the solar system knows only gravitation; electromagnetism plays > no part in either the origin or functioning of the system. The same is > true of the next major step in the history of scientific cosmology - > Einstein's 1917 "Cosmological Considerations Concerning the General > theory of Relativity". > > In the 1940's and 1950's, Velikovsky championed the importance of > electromagnetic phenomena in the solar system, both in his books, > and in his correspondence and discussions with Einstein, in which > Velikovsky insisted that "celestial mechanics without taking into > account the electromagnetic fields is in conflict with the facts." (1952) > > ENTER HANNES ALFVEN > > At about the same time, this theme was taken up by the mathematical > physicist Hannes Alfven, in great experimental and theoretical detail > as described below. > > The nature and importance of "the fourth state of matter", and specifically > of matter in an electrically charged state, has a history that goes back to > Crookes in the 19th century. Crookes realized that gasses through which > an electrical current has been passed, themselves acquire a charge. In > 1928, Langmuir coined the term 'plasma' to describe that mixture of gas, > charged ions and electrons. The advent of plasma physics has created a > revolution in science which has not yet been fully recognized. Indeed, > partly by accident, and partly with cold deliberation, the reality of the > plasma revolution in cosmology has been utterly played down. > > The groundwork for the new electromagnetic dimension of cosmology, > crystallized around a single outstanding figure - Professor Hannes Alfven > and his team at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm. 1942 > marked the beginning of Alfven's application of hydrodynamic theory > to plasma physics. He created the magnetohydrodynamic equations > describing the motion of plasma as a fluid in electromagnetic fields. He > drew attention to the fact that "Waves of electrons and ions are found > not only in laboratory plasma but also in the atmospheric and solar > plasmas." Such waves are now known as Alfven waves, and for this > work, Alfven shared the 1970 Nobel Prize in Physics. > > In 1946, Landau formulated the equations that describe the interaction > between particles and waves in plasma, and about the same time Bohm > used the term plasmons to refer to the concerted behavior of electrons > in a plasma. Let us take a brief look at the first two editions of Alfven's > Cosmical (sic) Electrodynamics, published by the Clarendon Press, > Oxford, in 1950 and 1962 respectively. The second edition was co- > authored by Falthammar, and the English of both editions has an > interesting Scandinavian flavor. In 1954, Alfven published On the origin > of the Solar System which, in 1975, was expanded as Structure and > Evolutionary History of the Solar System, co-authored with Gustaf > Arrhenius. > > In the Preface (written in 1948) to the first edition of Cosmical > Electrodynamics, Alfven spoke softly, but already sounded a big drum, > [warning]: > > "Recent discoveries have revealed that electromagnetic phenomena are > of greater importance in cosmic physics than used to be supposed. > The time now seems to be ripe for an attempt to systematically trace > the electromagnetic phenomena in the cosmos." > > In the General Survey, Alfven continued : "It seems very probable that > electromagnetic phenomena will prove to be of great importance in > cosmic physics. Electromagnetic phenomena are described by classical > electrodynamics which, however, for a deeper understanding, must be > combined with atomic physics. This combination is especially important > for the phenomena occurring at the passage of current through gaseous > conductors which are treated by the complex theory of 'discharges' in > gas. No definite reason is known why it should not be possible to > extrapolate the laboratory results in this field to cosmic physics." > (op.cit. p.1) > > What emerges from a comparison of the two editions is the consolidation > of the densely mathematical and cosmological arguments of the first, into > the virtual certainty of the new paradigm in the second. As the authors > point out in the preface to the second edition: > > The purpose of the first edition...was to draw attention to a field of > research in an early state of development...to the fundamental principles > of plasma physics and magneto-hydrodynamics...the magnetosphere... > interplanetary space, to solar physics and to cosmic radiation. During the > 15 years that have elapsed since the first edition was written, the subject > has been developed by two of the largest research efforts of our time: > thermonuclear research has increased our knowledge of magneto- > hydrodynamics and plasmas, and... space research has been devoted to > the exploration of the magneto-hydrodynamic conditions around the > Earth. > > Consequently, the second edition incorporates all the relevant findings > from these new fields of research - plasma physics as developed in > thermonuclear research etc., along with the early space data into the > consolidation of the crucial importance of electrodynamics in astronomy > and astrophysics. Thus Alfven states "In cosmic physics, electromagnetic > processes have recently attracted a rapidly increasing interest, and it is > now generally realized that they are of fundamental importance. In the > interior of the Earth there exist electromagnetic processes by which the > earth's general magnetic field is generated. In the ionosphere electric > currents change the earth's magnetic field, especially during magnetic > storms, and also produce luminous phenomena, aurorae, in certain regions > around the geomagnetic poles.. In the magnetosphere, a complicated and > rapidly varying system of currents [were] found by space research > measurements. In certain regions (the radiation or Van Allen belts) there is > also a flux of high-energy charged particles trapped in the magnetic field." > (Cosmological Electrodynamics, 2nd edition, p.1) > > Furthermore, "The conditions in the ionosphere and the magnetosphere > of the earth are influenced by the electromagnetic state in interplanetary > space, which in turn is affected by the sun. There are a number of solar > electromagnetic phenomena sunspots, prominences, solar flares, etc. > In other stars electromagnetic phenomena are of importance, most > conspicuously in the magnetic variable stars." (ibid., p.1.) > > Alfven goes on to point out that it was not "until classical electrodynamics > had been combined with hydrodynamics to form magneto-hydrodynamics, > which further must be combined with plasma physics in order to allow a > deeper understanding of electromagnetic phenomena in cosmic physics." > (ibid., p.2.) > > The term 'plasma' refers to an ionized gas, an ensemble of neutral molecules, > electrons, positive and often also negative ions, together with the energy > released from the excited atoms. Alfven stresses the crucial importance of > plasmas for cosmology. The properties of plasmas are of paramount interest > in cosmic physics because most of the matter in the universe is in the plasma > state. In the interior of stars, the gas is almost completely ionized. In the > photosphere of the sun (and other stars) the degree of ionization is not very > high, but above the photosphere, in the chromosphere and the corona, the > ionization is again almost 100%. Vast regions of interstellar space, particularly > around the hot stars of early spectral type, are highly ionized. In the sun and > interplanetary space, probably also in interstellar and intergalactic space, the > plasma is penetrated by magnetic fields. As a consequence, the > astrophysicist's interest in plasma physics is mainly concentrated on magnetic > plasmas." (Alfven, op.cit. p. 134) > > In their volume Structure and Evolution of the Solar System, (published in > 1975 by Reidel), Alfven and Arrhenius continue to refine their astrophysical > model. In their Introduction, they assert that: "Many of the 'generally > accepted' theories [in this field] lack a valid foundation" (p.xv) One such > theory "which cannot stand critical examination is the Laplacian concept of > the formation of the sun and the solar system by non-hydromagnetic > processes". (p. xv) > > They go on to criticize the fact that whereas, "In most other fields of cosmic > physics it was realized already 25 years ago that electromagnetic processes > have a dominating influence on the dynamics of cosmic gas clouds (plasmas), > the majority of cosmogonic papers published today are still based on the > assumption that such forces can be neglected" (p. xv) This is only marginally > less true today than when it was stated by Alfven in 1975. > > Alfven and Arhenius insist that "The processes involved in the formation of > celestial bodies in our solar system requires us to use not only the methods > of ordinary chemistry and ordinary celestial mechanics, but also those of > plasma chemistry and magnetohydrodynamics generally ignored or > incorrectly applied." (op.cit., p. 4) > > Here is how Falthammar, a colleaugue of Alfven described the situation in > 1988: "It was widely believed that cosmic plasma would have negligible > restistivity. From that it was [mistakenly] concluded that the electric field > would be a secondary parameter, of little importance. Therefore, electric > fields, and especially magnetic-field- aligned electric fields, which we now > know to be of crucial importance, were long disregarded. Even today, > only a few space missions in the outer magnetosphere have included > measurements of electric fields." > > "It is a sobering fact", adds Falthammar, "that even after hundreds of > satellites had circled the earth, the concept of our space environment was > still fundamentally wrong in aspects as basic as the existence and role of > electric fields of the near Earth plasma itself." Leaving these earlier but > absolutely essential contributions to our understanding of the fundamental > electromagnetic component of the solar system, which complement and > certainly do not exclude, the classical gravitation/inertia view of celestial > dynamics, let us see how and where McCanney fits into the picture. > > ENTER JAMES McCANNEY > > McCanney took up the baton in 1979 and the early 1980's at the Physics > and later the Math departments at Cornell. Given the retardation effect with > respect to the electromagnetic component, that Alfen has made clear, it is > easy to understand, yet utterly lamentable that McCanney was not given > tenure at by either department. The other side of that coin is that > McCanney was free to take up the role of "an independent scientist," not > subject to the pressures of the scientific community, peer pressure or > governmental non-disclosure agreements and funding." (ibid. p. 32) Cornell > had certain advantages: the Library was part of the Library of Congress > network, so if a book was in print, it was available. Even more importantly, > it was a repository of data from NASA. As we read in the introduction to > his book, Armed with his existing theoretical work, and this incredible source > of information, and with the timing that coincided with the daily arrival of > new data from the Voyager and other space craft, he [McCanney] was in a > totally unique position to do what he has done. (loc.cit. p.iii) In other words, > schematically speaking, McCanney took over where Alfven left off. Here is > the core of McCanney's position with respect to the electromagnetic part of > the paradigm. > > THE ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPONENT OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM > > (1) "Our solar system acts like a large electrical circuit. Our sun forms an > electric capacitor (a separation of electrical charge as done by a simple > DC battery in a flashlight). > > (2) This solar capacitor has its negative pole at the surface of the sun, and > also has a negative pole far out beyond the outer planets in the form of a > sparse nebular cloud of dust and gasses. > > (3) "An excess current of protons continually generates and supports the > solar capacitor by way of the 'solar wind' (literally a wind of such particles > leaving the sun and blowing outwards into space). > > (4) All stars and galactic nuclei, and even unlit small stars such as our > 'planets' Jupiter and Saturn are producing cosmic batteries around > themselves. > > (5) This is a natural by-product of the nuclear fusion process (the burning > of nuclear fuel such as hydrogen, helium, etc.) in the atmospheres of these > celestial objects." (McCanney, op.cit. p.10) > > (6) "The sun is powered at its atmospheric surface by an electrical fire of > hydrogen and helium that we call 'fusion' that is constantly ignited by > energetic lightning bolts in its turbulent atmosphere. It is the local electric > field at the outer surface of the sun (the solar corona of high energy > electrons) that hurls the vast solar flares out into the far reaches of the solar > system. The positively charged protons are accelerated outwards, while the > negatively charged electrons are retarded, thus causing what I have called > the excess current of protons in the solar wind. The sun produces far > more energy in the form of electrical energy than it does in the form of light > energy." > (ibid. p.13) > > (7) To give an idea of the stupendous magnitude of solar flares, they "release > the force of 10 million volcanic eruptions in a matter of minutes. Furthermore, > a single coronal mass ejection (CME) can carry "more than 10 billion tons of > hot, electrically charged gas" [i.e. plasma] from the sun's corona into space, > " a mass equivalent to that of 100,000 battleships" packing a punch > "comparable to that of 100,000 hurricanes" and traveling at "between 1-5 > million miles an hour." > > (8) "The power of CME lies in its ability to drive currents in the Earth's > magnetosphere" and "if the magnetic field carried by the CME has a > southward orientation (opposite Earth's northward-flowing magnetic field > lines) the magnetosphere gets a major jolt transferring millions of amperes > of electric current to the magnetosphere." (Carlowicz and Lopez, op.cit. > p.89) This can knock out power lines and electric generators, and disrupt > all forms of electronic communication > . > (9) That is as far as the establishment position goes - and Carlowicz & > Lopez represent the establishment viewpoint which McCanney denounces, > because it deliberately fails to warn against the far greater dangers which > the solar storms hold - namely their capacity, when triggered by comets or > planets intruding into the solar system, to produce major earth changes > such as polar shifts, flash freezing of continents, which certainly occurred > in the past. > > That Carlowicz & Lopez do in fact mislead their readers is evident from > their statement, on p.91, that "storms from the sun cannot harm life on > the surface of the Earth." > > (10) "In the summer of 2001, at the recommendation of a panel of space > and solar physicists, NASA announced the cancellation of the International > Solar-Terrestrial Physics (ISTP) program. The Agency decided that 'official > coordination of the international missions was a scientific luxury it could no > longer afford.' NASA withdrew its support for the (solar) Wind mission, > and for participation in Japan's Geotail mission. Funding for some of the > key elements of the ISTP success story - the theory and modeling programs, > the data centers, the ground-based observatories - was almost entirely cut > off." Why? Because the coordination of the data from all of those sources > would have let the cat out of the bag and made it a lot more difficult to > sustain the two illusions that (1) electromagnetism plays a negligible part in > solar physics and (2) there is no real, imminent threat of major catastrophic > Earth changes > ...'http://www.detailshere.com/solarcapacitor.htm As I say, if you want to make major revisions in the edifice of modern physics we really do need to see a paper with an actual presentation of a mathematical model. If you can find me a paper where some actual mathematics is done I'll have a look.
From: pearl on 1 Jul 2008 09:51 "Rupert" <rupertmccallum(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2a8eb456-bad3-40ea-8998-d37a21798a3e(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > ...' http://www.detailshere.com/solarcapacitor.htm > > As I say, if you want to make major revisions in the edifice of modern > physics we really do need to see a paper with an actual presentation > of a mathematical model. If you can find me a paper where some actual > mathematics is done I'll have a look. I'll see what I can find online this evening. Strapped for time right now.
From: pearl on 1 Jul 2008 10:41 "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:... > "Rupert" <rupertmccallum(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2a8eb456-bad3-40ea-8998-d37a21798a3e(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > > ...' http://www.detailshere.com/solarcapacitor.htm > > > > As I say, if you want to make major revisions in the edifice of modern > > physics we really do need to see a paper with an actual presentation > > of a mathematical model. If you can find me a paper where some actual > > mathematics is done I'll have a look. > > I'll see what I can find online this evening. Strapped for time right now. .... Meanwhile, here's something I bookmarked a few days ago which you may wish to have a look at: http://www.ntpo.com/physics/opening/open2000_2en/17.shtml
From: dh on 1 Jul 2008 09:24 On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:45:07 +0100, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: >'Einstein's General Theory was devised to explain gravity. How is gravity supposed to work in your supposed inner Earth? I've asked you that before, and you won't answer. Do things just float around? Do they have some attraction to the outer walls or whatever, but less so than on the surface? How do you think it works in there?
From: Rupert on 1 Jul 2008 14:48
On Jul 1, 9:24 pm, dh@. wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:45:07 +0100, "pearl" <t...(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: > >'Einstein's General Theory was devised to explain gravity. > > How is gravity supposed to work in your supposed inner Earth? > I've asked you that before, and you won't answer. Do things just > float around? Do they have some attraction to the outer walls > or whatever, but less so than on the surface? How do you think > it works in there? Newton's laws would imply that there would be zero gravitational field inside there, that's a result called the shell theorem. |