The Electric Sun

The Bible speaks of a time when there was war in the heavens. In the book of Revelation we read: “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels“. (Revelation 12: 7)

Well war continues to be waged in the heavens to this day, only this time the combatants are not Michael and his angels against the dragon, but with astronomer pitted against astronomer, and astrophysicist against astrophysicist.

And the reason for this cosmic battle can best be summed up by a quotation from a poem written by the English poet, Alfred Tennyson, called “Idylls of the King”. The poem deals with the passing of the legendary King Arthur of Camelot, and includes these memorable lines as Arthur is placed upon the funeral barge.

“And slowly answer’d Arthur from the barge: The old order changeth, yielding place to the new.”

Once again we are living through times of climactic change where the old order is giving way to the new. And nowhere has this change been more evident, or more heated, than in the field of the queen of the sciences, Cosmology, or the study of the origin and nature of the universe.

We have seen in earlier instalments how the long accepted theory of the origin of the universe is now under siege. It began when the revolutionary theories of Immanuel Velikovsky exploded on the world stage, challenging the idea of the fundamental stability of our solar system.

No sooner had establishment science fought off the assaults of this Jewish-American psychiatrist, when a new combatant appeared on the scene. He was the American astronomer Halton Arp, whose findings questioned the very basis of the entire “Big Bang” theory.

And in the course of the last fifty years, entire platoons of new assailants have emerged, who have attacked the battlements of the monolith that had been the theoretical model of the heavens for centuries, as we have seen in the case of the Thunderbolts project, described in the previous instalment.

The traditional view of science had been dominated by towering geniuses like Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, who not only identified the formative force of the universe as gravity, but underpinned their entire theory by a foundation of extremely complex mathematical analysis that continues to defy lesser minds.

And that is where the core of the battle for an understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe has been joined. It is about the theoretical physicists and astrophysicists on the one hand, and the observational scientists on the other. And one of the foremost fields of battle concerns the nature of our sun.

According to conventional theory our sun is a circular star at the centre of our solar system. It is roughly 865,000 miles (1,393,000 kilometres) in diameter, and has a mass of about 330,000 times the mass of the earth.

As a result of spectrographic analysis, three-quarters of this mass has been found to consist of hydrogen, while the rest is mostly helium. Small amounts of heavier elements such as oxygen, carbon, neon and iron have also been found.

Our sun is thought to have been formed about four and a half billion years ago, and is considered to have been the result of the gravitational collapse of a large molecular cloud that would eventually become the sun with its orbiting planets.

Being at the centre of this gravitational collapse, the sun became increasingly hot and dense until it reached a point when a process of thermonuclear fusion spontaneously occurred. It was this process of nuclear fusion, converting hydrogen nuclei into helium, that was considered to be the source of its heat and light.

According to existing theory, it is believed that most of the stars in our galaxy were formed by a similar process. And as a result of this nuclear reaction at its core, the sun has a corona that emits a stream of charged particles called the solar wind.

The structure of the sun consists of an inmost core, surrounded by inner zones called the radiative and convective zones, as well as a series of outward layers such as the photosphere, the chromosphere and the corona, as illustrated in the diagram shown.

The sun also manifests a variety of features known as sunspots, whose numbers have been observed to vary according to an eleven year cycle, as well as discharges of solar material known as solar flares, or coronal mass ejections (CME’s).

That in a nutshell, and in an oversimplified summary, outlines the conventional understanding of the nature and constitution of our sun, and is the theory that still remains the foundation of the modern sciences of astronomy, physics and astrophysics as taught at all the leading colleges and universities to this day.

And all remained well in this neatly organized world of accepted theory until a Scottish astrophysicist by the name of Charles Bruce arrived on the scene. In 1944, Bruce, who was an electrical researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, made an unusual discovery.

He noted that the sun’s photosphere, which is the visible surface of the sun, had the appearance and temperature, as well as the spectrum of an electric arc. He then went on to make a bold proposition. The sun looked like an electric arc, he said, and had the same characteristics as an electrical arc, because it was an electric arc.

Furthermore, it was the discharge characteristic of a large number of arcs in parallel that accounted for the “granulations” that are observed on the surface of the sun. As one can imagine, Bruce’s idea that the sun manifested electrical properties was an idea that was soundly rejected by all the scientific authorities of the time.

But worse was to follow. For around the same time as the American astronomer Halton Arp was observing quasars that challenged the foundation of the long-established theory of the “Big Bang”, an American civil engineer by the name of Ralph Juergens issued a frontal challenge to the accepted theory of the sun.

In fact, Juergens didn’t so much as attack the bastions of conventional theory, he stormed the castle, swam the moat, and battered down the doors! In the book Velikovsky Reconsidered, (first published in 1966), in words that were anything but civil, Juergens wrote:

“I can find no way to state this diplomatically, so let me be blunt. The modern astrophysical concept that ascribes the Sun’s energy to thermonuclear reactions deep in the solar interior is contradicted by nearly every observable aspect of the Sun.”

What incensed Juergens at the time was not only that the accepted theory of the sun as a thermonuclear reactor was unable to explain the observed features of the sun, but that the scientists who held so firmly to this theory, blithely ignored these features.

The problem that confronted Juergens was this. If the sun truly was a nuclear reactor, converting hydrogen atoms into helium through a process of thermonuclear fusion, then there should be a simple temperature correlation between the inner and outer heat of the sun.

In other words, temperatures should be hotter the closer you got to the surface of the sun. But the actual temperature readings on which all astrophysicists agreed showed the exact opposite. It was actually cooler.

For example, the temperature at about 500 kilometres (310 miles) above the surface of the sun is roughly 4,400 degrees K. But at the top of the Chromosphere about four times further away, the temperature rises steadily to about 20,000 degrees. From there the temperature jumps abruptly until it reaches 2 million degrees in the Corona.

This conundrum, referred to as the reverse temperature gradient, was something that clearly defied all logic. In fact, according to Juergens, based on these readings even a schoolboy could tell that the conventional theories about the sun were wrong.

Then there was the enigma of the sunspots themselves. These are temporary phenomena that appear from time to time on the surface of the sun. But when they were photographed close-up, they exhibited dark patches which seemed to be “openings” into the interior of the sun.

But if the core of the sun was supposed to be a raging nuclear furnace, then how was it possible that these “openings” appeared dark, and that they had temperatures significantly lower than that of the surrounding material?

It is also worth pointing out that the nuclear fusion process, converting hydrogen into helium, has never been successfully demonstrated in a laboratory on earth, and its existence inside the centre of the sun remains an untested hypothesis, as does the supposed role of radiation and convection of heat within the sun.

However, Juergens was not content with merely pointing out the shortcomings of existing theory. In its place he proposed an entirely different theory of the source of the sun’s heat and light. It was one that was based on electricity, in which the sun was explained as a type of sophisticated though complex, electric light bulb.

According to Juergens, the source of the energy that powers the sun comes from space beyond the sun, and this energy is electrical in nature. The sun is therefore the focus of a “coronal glow discharge” that is fed by electric currents coursing throughout the galaxy.

As he wrote in 1972, some years before his death in 1979, in an article entitled “Reconciling Celestial Mechanics and Velikovskian Catastrophism”:

“The known characteristics of the interplanetary medium suggest not only that the sun and the  planets are electrically charged, but that the sun itself is the focus of a cosmic electric discharge – the probable source of all its radiant energy“.

Today, Juergens’ ideas have been amplified and refined by the electrical theorists Wallace Thornhill and Donald Scott of the Thunderbolts group, introduced in the previous instalment. What they and their colleagues have done has been to invite others to conduct a critical comparison between the fusion model of the sun and the electrical model.

Obviously, in a Blog post of this nature it is not possible to do justice to either model in a few pages. However, readers can gain an insight into the differences between the two by listening to the following podcast.

So as things now stand, the contest between the two rival models of the sun, the fusion model and the electrical model, is still being hotly debated. Although the fusion model holds sway for the time being because of its entrenchment in academia, space probes continue to report new findings that are death blows to the old ideas.

It is also important to mention here the role played by Nikola Tesla, the Serbian-born American physicist and engineer who contributed to the design of the modern alternating current (AC) electrical supply system. Tesla’s life-long focus was on the practical application of theory, rather than on theory itself.

Although he was a man renowned for his seemingly miraculous inventions and his showman-like manner, Tesla insisted that the true test of any physical theory must lie in its practical application. As he noted at the time:

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.”

And one of the greatest challenges facing reformers in the field of Cosmology today, is that establishment scientists have concocted elaborate mathematical theories which, as Tesla has argued above, bear “no relation to reality”.

And so we have such abstruse concepts as “black holes”, “white holes”, “dark energy” and “dark matter”, whose sole purpose is to cover up the shortcomings of the existing fusion model. These concepts simply don’t tally with what is actually being observed in space, and even more significantly, are not needed in the electrical model.

So according to Tesla, there are two tests needed to determine whether any scientific theory is a valid one. They are:

1)  Does it explain what is already known?
2)  Can it predict what is not yet known?

And this is what members of the Thunderbolts group are attempting to do. They have assembled a team whose purpose is to devise an experiment in the laboratory that can actually test some of the underlying assumptions of the electrical model, and validate some of the predicted consequences of this model.

This has been called the Safire project, and it is being conducted under the auspices of the Thunderbolts group. The objective of this project is to devise a real world test of the electric sun theory. The nature of this project is outlined in the video below:

The Safire Project

Based on the discoveries of the last six years (up to 2020), the SAFIRE project has now reached the stage of developing a nuclear-plasma reactor that will have the capacity both to generate electrical power, and to remediate radioactive waste, as can be seen from the following video.

This entry was posted on Sunday, April 12th, 2020 at 8:24 am and is filed under Signs in the Sky. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Comments and pings are closed.