The solar system is a group of masses which are circling about a star in space.
An engine is a device which converts thermal energy to mechanical energy.
One of the most efficient forms of mechanical energy transfer is rotation.
Most powerful forces are electric, magnetic, and gravity.
Inertia and momentum are affects of the forces.
Vector Laws rule forces in motion.
Thermal energy source: fusion.
Result: Planets moons, rings, and debris making up the solar system, are under power from the star we call Sun. All are under motion mechanical forces driven by a thermal source qualifying it as an engine.
The Sun is the big bang still going. The conversional force is from the cross product of electromagnetic waves moving outward toward space cutting a material boundary. The degree of systematic occurrence is the mechanical efficiency function of a rotating engine. The electromagnetic vortex system is circular about source's equator which allows gravity to function as a massive lock. The lock and power affecting mass makes it mechanical.
The main forces which are operating on the Earth are those of Electric, Magnetic, and Gravitation. Inertia and momentum play a major role in the Earth's position in space as affects. Inertia and momentum are reactionary forces which are a function within the system. An electromagnetic force is being exerted on the Earth by the Sun. And, along with the Earth, all the planets moons, rings, etc.
In physics, an engine is a device which adds energy to some mass in a form of motion. On the other end of the energy equation is the break. A break, removes energy from the system typically causing a mass to loose inertia and momentum. Typical applications which use the engine break combination are automobiles, air plains, ships, and trains. The engine, either combustion, jet, or steam powers these systems. Humans use all sorts of engines and breaks. An automobile engine converts pulsating direct thermal energy bursts to rotating mechanical energy, supplying energy to the drive train, the transmission converts the mechanical advantage, tires put energy to the road, inertia and momentum increase. The break slows down the automobile. Typically, the break applies friction to the wheels, creating heat, subtracting energy, slowing the system. In the scheme of things; what is worse? A car that doesn't start or one that doesn't stop?
In chemistry, hydrogen fusion is defined as a thermal reaction. If the planets the are in systematic motion resulting from a thermal reaction, then the solar system is driven by the Sun, making the Sun an engine. The source of the forces must account for any required energy functions. This is the ultimate power supply. True, humanity does not really know if the Sun is undergoing hydrogen fusion, but it sure look like it. If so, then it would follow, electro-tonic forces as in a H-bomb, in an astronomical way, would affect any mass which has electromagnetic properties affected by such an electro-tonic wave.
The planets are undergoing real circular motion in the scheme of things. The planets are undergoing increases and decreases in motion which can not be explained by gravity but can be accounted for using this electromagnetic engine theory. It takes force to maintain this circular motion. Without force, the magnetosphere would cause the planets to become more eccentric in orbit, slowing them, they would crash into the sun. The planet's magnetosphere is an awesome reactionary event.
The planets are pushed in a circle by the interaction of a continuous wave of pulsating electromagnetic H-bomb thermal bursts, moving perpendicular to the planets motion, and heading outward in space. A very simple theory has been proposed here. That is: an electromagnetic force is cause by the nuclear reaction in the Sun. A hydrogen-hydrogen fusion reaction releases approximately 17.6 million electron volts. Experimentation has shone that a 100 megaton bomb gives an electric field at 186 kilometers from the reaction of about 10 ^4 volts/m and the magnetic flux is about .01 webers/m ^2. This is real and can be measured. A hydrogen-hydrogen fusion reaction is not the only fusion reaction that can supply this type of power. Any fusion where the residue material is iron or lighter will work, however, hydrogen--hydrogen fusion is the best source of mass discrepancy in a conversion. The accuracy of these figures and values is immaterial because there are a lot of considerations not taken into account. Such as the area of the reaction, the dielectric losses in the outer layer of the Sun, the coupling coefficient of the Earth, plasma transmission losses, and instantaneous reaction times.
This electromagnetic flux is in effect moving outward because there is nowhere else it can go. It is a spherically radiating field emanating from the Sun and dissipating in deep space. The electric field has what seems to be a static flux intensity because the value flux is not changing between the source and sink except for Ohmic voltage drops. Ampere Circuital law would be satisfied because space is a big place. In effect, this moving field although dynamic would present itself as a static field with a voltage / meter variance caused by the Ohmic resistance.
The point here is; there is some sort of electromagnetic output with a nuclear reaction, the Sun burns an enormous amount of nuclear material constantly, the electromagnetic flux must go somewhere, the only route available to the flux is outward, and this cuts the Earth's path in space. Should this cause the force on the planets to make motion, then, except for the word "device" we have an engine. Since the Sun is not a device, this system more or less is a motor.
As The Sun Turns
Even the Sun's spin could be attributed to this type of electromagnetic force. The electromagnetic force on the exterior hydrogen or helium atoms outside the reaction area would cause the atoms to deflect in the direction perpendicular to the moving electric field in accordance with vectored law. Another thing this electromagnetic force would do is excite any electrons. In a purely random spherical system at rest, this would result in a three plane force, causing a three plane movement. The Sun is rotating in one direction however. The singular rotational affect could be caused by two events, one being a self exciting expediential function wave created by random probability of extraordinarily large number of reactions in one direction at an instant in time, and the other, the force exerted by an existing field.
Plasmatic atoms are extremely susceptible to electromagnetic fields. A passing electromagnetic wave will cause vectored force of the electric field on the various atoms of the Sun. Eventually a random direction movement will become a single direction movement because random chance will put more atom going in one direction to start a self alignment. The atoms are plasmatic, their mass ionic motion will cause a reaction to the magnetic field and align with the field. Once a motion in one direction of more atoms than the other directions occurs, the magnetic field will keep other atoms aligned with the predominant plane of the greater numbered atoms.
This could be purely random but more likely the system would align itself with any outside magnetic influence. The magnetic field of the predominant plane will restrict motion in the other planes. Even the smallest magnetic field would cause initial alignment. Once the system stabilized, momentum, inertia, and the magnetic field would allow only one major plane of motion with internal waves.
Although it has never been measured, it has been postulated that the galaxy has a magnetic field, and that the universe has a magnetic field. Thus, any solar magnetic field dipole would align with the existing galactic magnetic field. A galactic dipole field would align with a universal field. Since the galactic and universal field would be present at the time of solar ignition, it is more than likely that the galactic field influenced the Sun's spin at ignition. Either by random chance or guided at ignition, once started, the system stays going. The single plane vectored electric force would be greatest in that direction perpendicular to the equator and weakest at the poles, because the reaction distance in a single plane would be greater at the equator than poles. The result in a liquid, gas or plasmatic system would be that the equator would spin faster than the poles.
The magnetic field at the surface of the Sun is evidence of surface waves which seem to reverses the surface magnetic structure from time to time. But, the interplanetary space magnetic field with respect to the Earth from the Sun does not reverse. Because the Zeeman Effect measures the magnetic field present at the point of radiation the reversal of the magnetic field at the surface is a wave propagated on the surface and may not give true representations of the magnetic field internal of Sun. Or, as they say "The Big Picture." The Zeeman magnetic measurement is a surface measurement. Along with the polar magnetic reversal of the Sun is a contraction and expansion of the Sun's surface and the appearance and disappearance of so called Sun spots. The timing of these occurrences are somewhat coinciding with Zeeman effect magnetic reversals and they follow a oscillating time of occurrence. Because this is surface condition and that the Zeeman effect only measures radiating atoms on the surface, we do not have an accurate "Big Picture" of the Sun's internal magnetic field.
Interplanetary space magnetic measurements tend to repute the Sun's polar magnetic reversal theory as seen using remote long range surface magnetic measurements. We have not been making interplanetary space magnetic measurements for vary long and our measuring techniques are somewhat limited. Actually, our magnetic measurement techniques are very primitive. To conserve power on most voyages the magnetometer is turned off. This means that the Sun's solar space dipole magnetic field probably does not reverse and that the Sun's magnetic reversal effect is surface only. The theory here is that the H-H reaction's electromagnetic flux not only excites the outer layer of hydrogen atoms but also drives them. If the theory is correct, changing the direction of the field would change the direction of electric drive, thus changing the Sun's direction of rotation.
The internal core electromagnetic force would drive the magnetic field. As the flux penetrates through the outer layer of the Sun, the flux would set up extraneous oscillatory waves. One primary reactionary wave would be to attempt to expand the surface. Eventually, the surface gravity would pull back against the expanding force. The contracting force would pull back the outer surface area and overshoot the mean area. Eventually, the contracting atoms would loose momentum and the expansion force would push the atoms out again. The total effect would make the surface of the Sun seem like it were breathing in and out. Sort of a 3D like spring effect. Such a wave would generate it's own electromagnetic field. Due to the enormous size of the Sun, it could easily take 22 years to happen.
Side affects of the expanding - contracting surface wave could be responsible for the surface magnetic reversals, to change the surface volume rate of the Sun may explain the presence of Sun spots. Suppose the Sun captured a body the size of a large meteor made of iron. The iron would have a very large heat capacity compared to hydrogen and as such, would seem much cooler. The iron would tend to accumulate and it would generate some enormous magnetic flux. During an expanding - contracting cycle the iron mass could be forced to the surface of the Sun and would look like a dark spot with an intense perpendicular magnetic field associated with it. One condition to support this theory, is that an electromagnetic force drives the Sun's spin and the magnetic field doesn't reverse is the Sun's spin doesn't reverse. This condition supports a stable vectored force. On the other hand, if the deep solar space magnetic field does reverse then take this theory and chuck it. As The Solar Wind Blows
By measurement, the solar wind is a major factor in the solar system. The solar wind is highly plasmatic and very hot. The solar wind is made up of both electrons and protons moving spaceward from the Sun with what seems to be more electrons than protons. A tremendous amount of material is being spewed out.
The nuclear reaction area of the Sun is in the Sun's core. Therefore, the material thrown out by the Sun does not have a kinetic energy inertia associated with it due to being in close proximity to a nuclear reaction. Even if there were a kinetic type force which initially accelerated these particles to their present velocity, the force of gravity would suck them back. Thus, a force other than kinetic must be acting on these particles.
Because measurements indicate that electrons are flowing spaceward in greater amounts than protons, this would eventually leave a charge on the Sun. Even if there were a kinetic energy associated with the departing particles, kinetic forces are very small compared to coulomb forces and the coulomb force would stop the flow of electrons in a very short while. Thus, again, there must be a force other than kinetic acting on these particles. And, additionally, there must be a supply of electrons to the Sun.
Solar space within the wind can easily support a dynamic electromagnetic flux. The solar space can easily support both electron and proton motion. One of the characteristics of a plasma is charge isolation or Debye shielding. A rather simplified explanation is that the dynamic electromagnetic flux is driving the electrons out into space and protons are going along to balance the coulomb forces. Because protons are much more massive than electrons, it would take a greater electron charge to suck out the protons.
Like a kinetic system, as soon as the electromagnetic force magnitude diminished sufficiently such that it couldn't drive out electrons, the total outward particle motion would stop. However, as long as there were a nuclear reaction of single polarity a lopsided charged particle migration could be maintained because a nuclear reaction may create charge particles.
The existence of the solar wind is evidence of a force other then kinetic acting on the particles. Gravity is in the opposite direction that particle flow so gravity is not the force acting on these bodies. The only other force which produces such an action is electromagnetic. Early astronomers believed that solar space was a vacuum. It turns out, solar space is far from a vacuum. All sorts of hydrogen and helium atoms are out in solar space. However, consider intergalactic space, what is the material content of space outside the solar system. Then consider universal space, this is the material between galaxies. Like solar space, these two areas are far from a total vacuum. These atoms are not only in space but they are moving outward while gravity is pulling them back. The atoms are going somewhere? Then what is out beyond the galaxies?
As The World Turns
Starting with Earth, we can generalize a pattern that relates to the electro-magnetic motion principal. The Earth is basically an iron slug surrounded by silicon in space. Iron is a ferromagnetic material which has a very high susceptibility to magnetic fields. Any magnetic field which is similar to those on Earth would tend to be intensified by the iron slug. Because the two interplanetary magnetic sheets would cancel exactly at the solar equatorial center, within the iron slug would be a uniform magnetic field from solar space. The electric force going by would apply a force on the atoms. The fields and motions would align. The perpendicular reaction force is in the proper direction applying the impact vector and the solar magnetic field vector. The space magnetic field is in proper direction with the Earth's magnetic field to the Earth's material. Different materials would have different reactions. Once a force is applied to the material, the material inertial magnetic moment cause torque. Should there be a force and torque caused by an electrical energy source, one would expect to have heat generated in the body which the energy is imparted from I^2R losses. To experience this effect, all one would have to do is feel an electric motor when it has been running for a while. If the inner core is made of a material which does not have I^2R losses, and high heat transferability, then the core could stay solid.
The Earth's internal heat generated by fission is a fallacy. If the center of the Earth were heated by fission, there would be high intensity radio waves emitted by the Earth. The little currents measured which are part of the Earth interior are no sign of internal fission. However, these currents are a sign that there is no fission because scientist are measuring the affect if there were fission. The Earth must maintain a heat source, many believe in fission because there is not another explanation. Now there is!
Physically, this would explain why the Earth does not slow down in space in its trip about the Sun, maintains its spin, allows for great convection currents, supports eddy currents, and stays hot. Simply the Earth is driven by the thermal action of the Sun.
A very big mystery as to why the Earth speeds up and slows down in its spin can be answered. Because the Earth is in an elliptical orbit, the distance between the Sun and Earth is changing. As the Earth gets closer to the Sun, the increase in electric field intensity would affect torque. Allowing sluggishness from the liquid interior the Earth's crust would respond in delayed time. As the Earth moved away from the Sun the reverse the energy relationship would reverse. Thus, maximum rate and maximum speed could appear at different times each year and would not correspond directly with maximum and minimum positions in the elliptical orbit. The Earth has a strong magnetic tail extending spaceward in the solar wind, the force of this tail would act as drag. Drag slows down the Earth. Drag would be greatest closest to the Sun and minimum furthers from the Sun. This is an engine-break affect on rotation. Changing power and breaking would affect spin rates, which would explain the occurrence.
Also, solar conditions would affect the torque. Things such as solar flares and the Earth running through the spiral rings would affect day to day periods. The Great Solar Storm of August 1972 demonstrated a solar flares affect on the Earth's spin.
This power drag cycle would sum. The sum of direct power force and restrictive drag force would account for the non-cyclic spin relationship Chandler plotted. The solar conditions would account for the anomalies. Both the Earth's rotational velocity and magnetic field would change. The Earth's inclination of orbit would cause force with respect to the spherically radiating electric field. Deflecting the magnetic field. The magnetic field moves in a yearly periodic pattern. Torque or attempt to alter the iron core, would result in a corresponding magnetic field deflection. Vibrations and eddy currents within the liquid structure would be set up by the magnetic field change. (Transformer Effect)
Other Planets
With the exception of Uranus' spin, all the planets seem to follow vectored force motion theory. Uranus really seems to be outside the Solar Motor theory. However, with imagination one can theorize how Uranus works into the theory. Uranus is barrel rolling around in its spin and the magnetic field is doesn't fit the dipole pattern either. Uranus could have been hit by another body or simply be new to the Solar System and has not yet aligned itself or has two magnetic materials battling each other. NASA's magnetic engineers stated for Uranus to have a bipolar type magnetic field, the magnetic field would have to know where the Sun is. This theory supports that. Uranus follows the trajectory part of the theory.
Venus being one planet which doesn't seem to be spinning in the right direction and at a proper speed. However, the magnetic field and torque force are functions of material. Supposing Venus were made of a diamagnetic material. Then its magnetic field and torque would be very small. The direction of torque would be opposite that of paramagnetic materials. Venus is spinning backwards, it is spinning slowly, and it has a real weak magnetic field when compared to other Planets. Thus, Venus can theoretically fit into the Solar Motor theory.
A planet like Mars can fit into this scenario too by material makeup. Mars can have a thin layer of ferromagnetic material which is acted upon by the expanding field to cause torque but has limited magnetic properties. Or, the planet's outer layer of material conducts allowing for torque but not a trapped charge.
Mercury can fit the scenario. Mercury's magnetic field is small but it's spin is fast. This is also a function of materials. Magnetic flux sums. It's possible that the drive torque is great for inner materials but there is no charge layer to generate a field. Then it is possible that the drive is in the outer layer and no magnetic field is formed.
The outer planets Jupiter and Saturn fit the scenario because they seem to be made up of hydrogen which is diamagnetic. Since metallic hydrogen would have a strong susceptibility to a magnetic field and that the planets themselves are very large one can conclude that the field would be strong and reversed to that of the Earth. The planets spin is generated by emf rather than reacting to the magnetic moments of hydrogen.
Who knows about Neptune and Pluto? However, they are going in the right direction. That's a big plus to the scenario. The planets seem to be following a pattern which does not lend itself to random chance. All in all, except for Uranus, there are any of a dozen different scenarios which can explain strong magnetic fields with slow spins, weak magnetic fields with fast spins, reverse magnetic fields with normal direction spins, and a little magnetic field with a reverse spin. Spin, temperature, and magnetic field are all functions of material and how that material reacts to an electromagnetic wave. Combinations of materials makes combinations of effects.
This scenario will work for planets which are liquid or solid. The interior conducting structure of a planet accounts for the I ^2R losses which determines the heat generated by the planets interaction rather than pressure. The differences between the actions of a planet with liquid compared to a solid interior would be the affect of drive. The more solid the planet's material which interacts with the passing wave, the more direct the drive forces. Again, this concept of direct drive can be demonstrated with a hard boiled egg and a natural egg.
The planet's mass has a direct function with momentum forces. The interior of a planet directly affects the interaction with a traveling electromagnetic wave. The combination of spin momentum and electromagnetic radiation create a power system. If the planet is undergoing spin within an electromagnetic flux, then there would be energy waves given off. A sub wave would be created by the interaction of the static electromagnetic field and planet's spin motion. The sub wave would have both an internal and external function. The external function could easily support a sub equatorial vortex in space. Moons and rings can be trapped within these sub vortexes.
Uranus' rings and moons tend to support the theory of a sub vortex. The odds on each planet trapping satellites in orbits about the equator is low but possible. Most moons orbit about the planet's equator. Uranus is unique in respect to the other planets, because it does not spin perpendicular to the Sun's equator. Uranus' satellites orbit Uranus about Uranus's equator even though the equator is not aligned with the Sun. These satellites would not track under the Sun's gravity force. Eventually, the Sun's gravity would tend to alter Uranus' moons and rings off Uranus' equator. Therefore, Uranus fits the theory with respect to Uranus' satellites.
In time, by gravity, Pluto may become a moon of Neptune. Given enough time, Pluto will close in on Neptune, because Pluto crosses Neptune's path. Their distance will cause them to attract sufficiently to be force Pluto to be a moon. Pluto will then drop to a orbital vortex which will support it as a moon. On the other hand, Pluto may be new to the solar system and has not gained enough energy to have a more circular orbit. If Pluto is under power, soon its orbit will become more circular and it may not become a moon.
Jupiter is another planet which tends to support the theory of reflected electromagnetic energy. One of Jupiter moons has an electron current flowing between the moon and the planet. The only way the moon will stay in any form of orbit is the moon must be trapped. Momentum could not hold the moon against such a current. Early measurement indicate that the radio parameters emitted by Jupiter tend to change periodically. Such a change can be expected if the electric properties of space about the current change with distance from the Sun.
No one is going to convince me that the Earth speeds up and slows down 60 milliseconds per year due to weather conditions. There has to be energy supplied to this system.
The Moon
The Earth's moon is another body which does not function by momentum alone. The moon's orbital increases and decreases speed do to its slight eccentricity, yet its spin is such that the surface seen is always aligned with the Earth. Physical momentum will not allow this. The moon must be magnetically locked to account for the alignment.
It has been suggested that the Moon was at one time attached to the Earth. The Moon was thrown off by the Earth from some sort of lopsidedness. If this occurred, then physical momentum for sure would not account for its spin. If the Moon were a part of the Earth then its ejection required in impulse of energy or a force acting on the lopsidedness. The moon couldn't accelerate to its present orbit without power. The probability that it's spin would align with Earth the way it has is next to zero.
However, the power theory would support either the Moon as a part of the Earth or like most planets, Moons which are extra bodies within an orbital trap. As the bodies orbited their gravitational forces caused them close their distance and the predominate body became the planet and the smaller body became a Moon.
The Astroid Belt
The Astroid Belt is said to be maid up of much smaller bodies than the Earth circling the Sun. They ring the orbital. The material seems to be largely iron. Iron is a magnetic material. If the bodies were strictly under gravitational forces, they would attract and one day form a planet. The bodies are not attracting. A simple and easy answer is they are charged all alike. Locked into a planet vortex, driven by an electrotonic wave, all moving together, kept apart by static electricity. The Astroid Belt movement can be explained using this theory.
Another component of the Astroid Belt is its vibration. There is some evidence that the bodies are moving toward and away from each other. This is easily explained because the tendency of a large spread of bodies under electromagnetic forces would be to oscillate in some manner.
So Goes The Galaxy
There are three basic types of galaxies: Spirals, elliptical, and irregulars. In most galaxies like ours, there is a concentrated center with many stars clustered together in a ball type structure. As the distance from the center becomes grater the galaxy resembles a flat dish or have fingered spirals. Stars are less concentrated at far ends of the galaxy. The galaxies tend to have star concentration about the dish in what is termed archimedes spirals. Then there are those galaxies which don't resemble a dish or fingers
| Spirals | Elliptical | Irregulars | |
| Mass (times solar mass) | 10 ^9 to 2 x 10 ^11 | 10 ^6 to 10 ^13 | 10 ^8 to 3 x 10 ^10 |
| Diameter (10 ^3 light years) | 20 to 150 | 2 to 500+ | 5 to 30 |
| Luminosity | 10 ^8 to 10 ^10 | 10 ^6 to 10 ^11 | 10 ^7 to 2 x 10 ^9 |
| Absolute Visual Magnitude | -15 to -20 | -9 to -23 | -13 to -18 |
| Population Type | I and II | II | I and II |
| Composite Spectral type | A to K | G to K | A to F |
| Interstellar Matter | Gas & Dust | Little Gas | Much to Little |
| No Dust | Gas & Dust |
Some Gross Features of Galaxies
One of the more interesting features of the galaxies which terminology doesn't quite match is that of dust. Our own Milky Way galaxy has dust in it. This is the term given to reflective bodies typically near the center of the galaxy. Recent pictures from the Hobble telescope show a lot of "dust" particles near the center of the Milky Way. The interesting part is these dust particles referred to in the picture are larger than the Earth. Non-energy sourcing - yes, reflective - yes, small like dust - no. This is a relative word. Relative to the galaxy's size, these are dust. Relative to us, these bodies are huge astronomical bodies the size of planets, moons and stars. Undoubtedly, there are real small dust particles too, but the Hobble telescope isn't going to take pictures of dust particles like we see every day.
Galaxies also operate like the solar system. They all rotate. The galaxy stars (Suns) rotate about their centers as with the planets about the Sun. As with the Sun and Solar System, the galaxy would generate an electric field which is the vector sum of the individual stars' electromagnetic fields. This field would account for the shape of the galaxy and its spin. And again, the galaxy would stop spinning if it were not under power. The center cluster of the galaxy responds to gravitational forces holding the spherical shape. The dish or fingers corresponds to the electric forces similar to those in the solar system. Such an electric force would lock stars in an orbit about the galaxy. Thus, giving order to the galaxy and allowing stars to fix their relationship to other stars.
Another galactic condition which supports this theory is collisions and mergers. Galaxies pass through each other and crash into one another. Galaxies merge with other galaxies, forming a big galaxy which cannibalizes other galaxies. There is also companion galaxies. But through it all, there is one thing which requires this theory, that thing is star collisions. The stars do not collide. Given the number of stars in a galaxy, the separation, and gravity, stars should collide. Yet, they don't seem to. At least not in numbers which we can see. This requires a separation force. Such a force would be supplied by this theory. Simply, it is an electro dynamic pressure.
Another condition which supports this theory is alignment. Galaxies cluster. Galaxies locate in lines. These lines have huge gaps between them. Only an electro-tonic condition would allow such alignment. Galaxies tend to gather along what looks to be a cell fringe. Within the cell, there is nothing. No galaxies, no stars, no nothing. This is analogous to thermal cells. Thermal cells like seen on the surface of the Sun and those supposed in Earth's core. Applying this theory, electromagnetic cells could easily appear in a three dimensional spherical system.
Yet another condition which supports this theory is spirals. A star is similar to a graphite particle only on a bigger scale. Thus, interaction of magnetic fields would cause what is misstated as lines of flux. In a spherical environment under torque, a flat spiral alignment would occur. And, it does!
Many of the galaxies exhibit characteristics which can only be explained by emission of an electromagnetic wave pressure. This theory powers the galaxy. This would also account for a galactic magnetic field. Applying this theory, there is a whole host of things which can be explained about galaxies.
Nova
One of the rarer sights the Hobble telescope shows is a twin spiral loops picture said to be from a Nova. Like the Northern Lights, Lasers, and the such, electrons can be excited giving off light. Nova is a really high energy fast exploding star. Type this arrangement into a good 3d autocad. Move the whole thing around and you will see the two dimensional sight of a 3 dimensional electromagnetic wave's resonance point like the picture's rings some billion miles in diameter. If NASA shoots this blast from both sides of Earth's orbital, I'd bet we could see the 3d effect.
A Black Hole
Black Holes are fascinating. For the last five years I've been studying black holes. Some of the black holes which the Hobble Telescope have theoretically seen will not fit the original theory. At least I didn't think so, until I stopped listening to those who purport to know what a black hole is. Actually, black holes are predicted by the theory. I just took a while to develop the relationship. The truth is, it doesn't fit the old traditional theory.
For example, black holes which astronomers theorize from studying Hobble pictures has far too much gravity for such little mass. One such object from a mass sink calculates to have a diameter a bit less than the Earth, six thousand kilometers, with a gravitational force of twelve billion times that of the Sun. This would not fit original Newtonian theory.
Here is the original theory.
When a star burns out it is said to go Nova, or, explodes. After nova, the material collapses. Lawrence Livermore Labs old computer calculations states when a star goes nova, the collapse is continued beyond the boundaries of the mass material such that it crushes the mass to a single point. This is where singularity as a name for a black hole's center came about. The problem is, a star, no matter how big, simply doesn't have the total mass to crush into a singularity generating a gradational force large enough cause the force seen. So I supposed, like a star, a whole galaxy burns out, then what would be the affect?
One of the affects would be the collapsing of this huge amount of material pushed spaceward because the electric pressure ceases. Along with all the heavier materials, the hydrogen ions and electrons would be sucked to the center of the dead galaxy. The internal galactic pressure from thermally agitated material would not be present, thus, the material would condense into an astronomically horrendous cold mass. All the mass would tend to condense into a single body. The gravitational force of this mass would be equally horrendous. Fundamentally, this body would become an energy sink. What use to be a pressure out, would become a sucking pressure in.
Since more electrons were forced spaceward than protons, the charge on such a mass would not be even. The mass itself, as a whole, would have a proton center with an electron cloud. The consequence of galactic condensation would be sucking in energy. Another consequence of the horrendous gravitational force would be sucking in mass and energy from space.
A byproduct of such a condensation would be awesome pressure at the center of the mass. Pressure sufficient to create heavier materials. Eventually, given enough time, U^238 would be created, or some more heavier fission type material. Like Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, hydrogen surrounding this mass would be dense enough to support a liquid soup forming around the mass. Eventually, the center of the dead galaxy would be under great pressure. Not the type of pressure we humans can imagine. By a great pressure, I mean a pressure large enough to push the protons of heavy atoms together. Suppose this pressure grew to a point where the center of the mass were one huge atom instead of a galaxy of atoms. Electrons pushed out into a cloud about the mass. More than likely, such an atom would be unstable. Suppose, that at a point, the mass under went cold in a major way. Such a way that energy is sucked into the system. The system sucks in the energy in order to fuse. Thermodynamically, this system is a refrigerator. Simply, in effect, the system is subtracting energy instead of adding energy. Then after a large amount of energy were sucked in, a huge bang, much of the residue could become hydrogen atoms again.
Such a blast would chucked out pieces of heavy mass. More interestingly, the blast could create hydrogen. At various points electromagnetic resonance would occur. At these resonance points, extreme magnetic conditions could ignite hydrogen if a sufficient amount of concentrated hydrogen were present. Upon a group of detonations, galactic pressure would be created, further forcing pieces and resonance points spaceward. Some pieces would travel indefinitely and others would remain trapped. Eventually, those spaceward pieces would come across another galaxy. Along with the far flung pieces of heavy material, a new galaxy would be born. Such a galaxy would look as though it followed the "Big Bang Theory."
Ultimately, this is an oscillating system where energy would moved out into space, stop, collapse back toward the center, over shoot, and suck in energy, to support reignition to blast spaceward. The plutonium donut theory. Even Black Holes fit this theory.
But wait! What if the whole universe did this?
Well, that was the original black hole theory. One problem with this black hole theory is its size. It would not collapse to such a small size of six thousand kilometers, although it could easily have a gravity twelve billion times the Suns. Additionally, it is not likely it would create a single large proton, however, again, it would be easy for such a gravitational mass to crush atoms into a larger proton mass plutonium. If on Earth, as mass was squeezed together, it would create plutonium and ignite, I like "fizz," as plutonium would. Thus, it would heat up by fission rather than fusion and create expanding pressure.
More consistent with Earthly experiments, such a galaxy would more than likely just be a huge massive cold object. I'll give it a name, a galactic cinder.
The Hobble Telescope in extreme field sightings shows a lot more galaxies than we previously knew of. Go out at night and look at the stars, if we picked out an average brightness star it would represent the size of a patch of space the Hobble Telescope looked at. The Hobble Space Telescope (HST) people say it is the size of a grain of sand at arms length. What ever the area is, to us on the planet, it is small. In that patch of space, where near field sighting showed black, the far field sighting showed fifteen hundred galaxies. Thus, there are a lot more galaxies out in space than anyone previously estimated.
Additionally, the Hobble Telescope has found areas of gas which seem to be creating a galaxy. Not all that surprising.
Given that mapping of known galaxies has shown galaxies tend to form in three dimensional nodules similar to those convection nodules seen on the surface of the Sun. Sort of a cellular structure, if you will. It would not be far fetched at all to state that the newly discovered galaxies would follow such a pattern. But when we look way way out in areas where galaxies are known not to exist, where quasars are, the pattern can be associated with a larger cellular structure. (But, on the other hand, Hobble Telescope hasn't been used to probe those areas yet.) That is, a whole group of galaxies reside in a cellular form within a larger cell surrounded by enormous nothingness and a few quasars.
Should we ever have the capability of looking even further out than the limits of our known universal galactic package, I believe we will see other universal galactic packages with huge distances of nothing but a few quasars between them.
It is impossible for humans to imagine how far out is far out? We say we can see to the edge of the universe, but the universe is infinitely larger than that which we see. Humans are extremely limited in their knowledge but become more limited by what they fear. Rather than just saying "I don't know" we make up things based on nothing what so ever. "God" is a fine example. Then self proclaimed messenger says God said such and such. Then we start brain washing our children in to believing such a fantasy as soon as our children learn to speak. Then we defend that fantasy. Because the world is a dangerous place, we develop fears. Those individuals who demand control, create the situation of fearing their fantasy. "Fear of God" is such a condition. Who we should fear are those who say they talk to God. As associated with how far out the universe goes, we put limits on the imagination. We infer that the universe was started by a big bang and we are somewhere near the center. What a fantasy. Existence of the universe did not start with one big bang no more than the Earth was made in six days and six nights with a one day and night rest period. All that needs be stated to disprove such a statement is ask "what was present before the big bang?" The pope has admitted that science has shown the Earth may have developed as an astrophysical body than being created in a finite length of time and is not the center of the universe or solar system. It will be harder to take out the big bang theory. The absolute truth is no one what so ever knows, nor can even imagine, how far out is far out and how old is the universe or how long it will continue.
Given the above fantasy explanation, here is how it applies to black holes and modern theory. The most modern explanation of a black hole is it distorts time and space. Distorting time and space was great so we created the concept of worm holes. Worm holes somehow will allow transport for those who can enter them, to go from one space to another billions of light years away in an instant in time.
Fantasies like this are actually taught in college. Here is a real whopper told by a Phd in astrophysics. "If we could move two black holes together so a worm hole were developed and then move one hole to another part in space many million light years away, we could enter one end of the worm hole and exit the other instantaneously. Thus, traveling through space a million light years in an instant." Yea, right!
As a species, we can't see a black hole. We could not stop a small few mile wide meteor from hitting the planet. We hardly can get off the planet, let alone move it. We can't move the Sun. How can it be some college professor suggests moving a mass beyond our reach and a billion times greater gravitational force than the Sun's to create a worm hole? I swear, I did not make this statement up. It was on T.V. Think about it. Isn't this a ridiculous foolish statement?
This is a common statement which roots are in pure science fiction fantasy but it is being defended and expounded on. The point being, laws of time and space are not breaking down, it's the people who don't know, who are in power, who are breaking down.
Nothing but nothing is going to change time or space. The affect of time on living cells may change the faster we go, but time itself will remain constant. The same with space, we may be able to crush matter into a smaller space, thus increasing the gravity component in that space, but space itself will always be the same. The effect of crushing more matter into a smaller space may change the affect on us too, but it will not change the space.
Unfortunately, if matter, time and space remain constant as we know it, the amount of matter required to create such a gravitation force as seen in black holes, would not fit in the space observed under the present mass theory. Not that plutonium would exist in this form, but 6000 kilometers of plutonium would not have the gravitational force of a black hole, nor would it if it were made of iron or any thing else. Furthermore, some of these objects observed in deep space are spewing out particles some million light years long from the object's poles in straight lines. As the objects are spinning, and the spin is wobbling at fast rates, the far end particles of these objects polar streams, in order to remain straight, must exceed the speed of light by a very large margin. So, the concept of time and space distorts got started to explain the observable.
Here is my new black hole theory:
One thing must be gotten straight, no hocus pocus. The laws of physics must hold true or the theory is bogus.
The observable fact: an objects about 6,000-20,000 kilometers in diameter with the gravitational force between 1 and 12 billion times the Sun seem to exist. There seems to be these things at various locations. Three locations have been very well identified; at the center of galaxies, at the center of quasars, and all by their lonesome. Many have been said to have been found. However, I only have data on six. Light does in fact, seem to be sucked into the hole in space.
Further observable fact: the universe as we know it, stars can not account for the gravitational action seen on various galaxies, stars, and quasars. There must be some sort of "dark matter" in space.
Applying this theory to the problem, what are these things?
First, dark matter: This theory states that during a proton proton fusion reaction, proton matter is expelled spherically outward. Although the actual segment matter expelled is quite small, when one accounts for the billions of atoms burning at any given time, times the billions of stars, times the billion of galaxies, over billions of years of burning, there is a significant amount of disassociated proton matter flying through space. Not only would this stuff assess an electric pressure, but it would also assess a gravitational force. Using both the electric pressure and gravitational force, this matter can be shown to account for much of the gravitationally discrepancy observed in deep space. Simply put, this stuff accounts for dark matter gravitational discrepancies.
Second part of the theory: this matter would seek sinks. Vortexes of low resistances to this matter in three dimensional space. Eventually, this matter would become disassociated from the original proton pair and free float similar to an electron. This freedom of action would allow it to ooze like an electron. As with the Sun's convection nodules, boiling water, and Earths convection currents, this ooze would move along lines of least resistance to the sink. Given nothing at the sink to annihilate said matter, it would build up. Should such a build up of material maintain its original mass density as it got to 6000 kilometers of a single proton material, it would easily account for a gravitational force in excess of 12 billion times greater than that of the Sun.
One of the names which were given to the center of a black hole is "singularity." Singularity is a good name for this object too. As the object would be made of a single proton mass.
Furthermore, the old theory and new theory along with observable facts would support such an event. By sightings, light is observed to be sucked into known black holes. Some of the cold black holes show this very dramatically. If the hole could suck in light photons, it surly could suck in fusion photons.
Such an object would attract matter from the rest of the universe too. As matter got close to said object, its electro-tonic force would cause vectored rotation like that observed in quasars. As a normal mass crashed into this object, it would annihilate some of the material. My guess would be it would reverse the process, add to the individual mass protons of the impact element, and eject the mass as hydrogen with the electrons in tact along lines of least resistance. Such lines would be at the poles. This object may even burn neutrons by adding to the element sufficient proton charge and material, thus, separating the neutron up into a proton-electron element and ejecting it too.
If no matter were around the singularity, it would look like a nothing was there. As sufficient atomic matter is around the singularity, it would look like a quasar. Furthermore, as proton-electron material is created, it would form a cloud of hydrogen around the sink area. The object's mass would have an enormous electromagnetic force associated with it. The nature of such a electromagnetic force would be to excite atoms near it. In this case, near it would be a million light years or so. Such a force would travel at group velocity and not associate itself with actual motion of particles. This could account for the straight line affect of the excited poles particle ejection. Group velocity exceeding the speed of light has been known about for forty years in microwaves.
As sufficient atomic matter is grabbed by this object, and matter were being transformed by the object, the space around the object would tend to loose sink. Thus, additional proton matter would stop the unique build up. In time, atomic matter would annihilate the object. If sufficient elemental matter were present around the object when the object lost its sink and sufficient proton mass such that it was not the primary gravitational force, the elemental matter could associate itself, ignite, thus, creating a galaxy. In such an event, this would put a proton mass at the center of a newly formed galaxy.
Now, one of the things which people will argue right off is that all galaxies are started this way. No, no, no... All this states is that a galaxy may start this way.
Additional situation of such an event, and of other galaxies is that of an energy dump. An energy dump is similar to that of an energy sink except that a dump is pressure forced and a sink is a lack of pressure with an absorbing characteristic. At the center of a galaxy, the inward electric force by billions of burning stars burning spherically around the center, could cause an energy dump. Such a galactic dump could hold a proton singularity structure easily. So this theory, could explain why intense gravitational objects are at the center of galaxies in two ways. One way would be the black hole started a galaxy and the other way, the galaxy made the black hole.
This does explain three situations of modern time's astrophysical speculation. It accounts for dark matter, it allows for a singularity, and a galactic cinder. All of which are possible. All of which, in one way or other, have been observed. As Goes The Sun, Goes The Universe
From the spin of the Sun to the rotation of the universe, all bodies could be powered by the same source. No matter how big a system is, this spherical expanding electromagnetic wave would power it about some center. Astronomical values of electromagnet energy output is the only way to account for the universal torque required drive the universe as it is. A secondary phenomenon which would occur would be universal electromagnetic pressure. The pressure would keep stars and galaxies separated while like magnetic lines in graphite, there would be a tendency toward system alignment too.
The fact is, there is no known material which could possibly maintain the Earth's magnetic field in the intensity which exists at the temperatures of the Earth's core in the form of hysteresis. An expanding electric flux acting on a 3.6 x 10 ^13 cubic meter slug of high susceptibility iron could account for it. The field would be constant so long as the expanding electric flus were constant. Any thing which altered the flux would show up as repositioning of the poles. Kepler noted that decaying gravitational orbits tend to be more eccentric. This is the case with gyroscopes, tops, spinning coins and comets. The Earth's orbit however, is not very eccentric. In fact, all the planets are not very eccentric in orbit compared to comets. This would suggest that the Earth is not decaying in orbit. Kelvin did not believe that the Earth could sustain its temperature by simple insulation. Now we find that the center of the Earth may be about 12,000 degrees instead of 6,000 degrees and that the thermal conductivity of space is grater than previously supposed. Meaning, it is more apt that Kelvin is right.
What other energy source is there than the Sun? So gravity and momentum are not the only forces acting on the planets. So what! This theory doesn't contradict gravitational affects proposed by Newton, Kepler, Kelvin or Einstein; it augments them. Many scientists have worked out the Dynamo Theory of the magnetic structure of the Earth. Smarter minds than mine have postulated that there must be some other force acting on the Earth to keep it going. Newton, Kepler, Kelvin, and Einstein all questioned the theory of physical momentum being capable to sustaining the solar system as it is. Modern scientests suggest that there must be dark matter in space to account for gravitational affects on objects in deep space. No laws of physics are being broken by suggesting that the Earth is being powered by the electrical energy generated by the Sun's nuclear reaction. Einstein agreed with the Sun's source of energy is a nuclear reaction. Nuclear reactions create electro-tonics, the solar wind can transport it, and the Earth can absorb it.
The expanding electric wave theory simply puts a probable source to what many believe to be the theory of the Earth's magnetic system. A Dynamo can easily be a motor or an electric generator. To be an electric generator the Dynamo must have a source of physical force and to be a motor must have a source of energy. In this case, the Sun is the electric force energy source, the motion of the planets is the motor and Earth's magnetic field is a resultant affect. No classical physical laws are broken and this theory, if true would, explain dozens of nagging questions. If there is such a reaction within the Sun that causes the vortex trap which Earth and the planets are trapped in, and such a reaction further applies a force to those planets, then it is a mathematical certainty that the same reaction would affect everywhere in the Universe.
If an atomic reaction expands spherically, a group of atomic reactions would expand spherically, and a group of a group of reactions would expand spherically spaceward from the group of groups' center. The center of origin is the zero point at which any mass energy is emitted. This mass energy is everywhere. It is emitted form a whole lot of sources. It permeates the entire fabric of space. At any given point in space, it has an element of mass and energy. It has a velocity vector. Because there are, for the lack of a more definite term, a grillion (meaning a whole lot of unknown number) emitting points, it has a tensor pressure. Such a pressure is more intense within a star, followed by a solar system, followed by galactic intensity, followed by galactic package intensity, and emits into black space. Such a force would account for how the universe is acting. Such a zero point energy would also account for the residual reflective energy which has been measured and has been said to prove the big bang theory.
The Human Gravity of the Situation
Thirty years went into this theory. More time has been spent attempting to disprove it than prove it. It does have some problems. Unfortunately, I have very little money to spend on this project. So, it is left up to someone else to prove it.
Humanity must take stock in the gravity of their position. The Earth's surface environment is extremely fragile. To believe that an astroblem event won't happen in a lifetime or believe God will help humanity survive such event is ludicrous. It is naive to say the least. To believe the dinosaurs were wiped out by disease instead of a meteorite hit isn't correct either. Diseases caused by animal migration don't kill all of a species let alone many species at once. Awesome amounts of meteorite dust in rock layers, huge circular mountain ranges, extinction periods, and pole reversals all support the theory of a big hit.
Personally, I believe that such major hits occur every million or so years, and, we are due for one. A real whopper will occur every 100 million years but it is not an astroblem impact. Just a big one. Take it form someone who was wiped out by a 100 year flood four years after the last 100 year flood, it is going to happen. A major meteor hit which can alter the magnetic poles of the Earth would do immense damage. There is too much evidence of such events to discount them. The mathematical energy capability is present, the probability of occurrence is present, and evidence in more ways than one support such hits. To be naive discounting such an event or fearing such an occurrence and not do any thing about it is to doom humanity.
The only safe place in such an event is off the planet. Even off the planet it wouldn't be that safe if a meteor storm blasted the area. Then if it where only a few people in space, the surface support infrastructure would fail any way. To save humanity, the masses would have to live in space at many different locations. Not just within the solar system either. Humanity should make haste to permanently get off the planet. Time is running out. Noah's ark and NASA have a lot in common.
TABLE OF CONTENTS