Biggest star ever discovered “astonishes scientists”

Posted: July 22, 2010 by Rog Tallbloke in solar system dynamics

We seem to get a lot of astonishment from mainstream astrophysicists and cosmologists these days. Presumably because frequently, new data doesn’t fit the model well.

From the UK Guardian:

Montage-of-the-Tarantual--001

Montage-of-the-Tarantual--001 VLT telescope

Visible-light image of the Tarantula nebula (left), zoomed-in image from the Very Large Telescope (centre), and the R136 cluster in near-infrared (right) with the cluster itself lower right. Photograph: ESO/PA

Astronomers say they have discovered the most colossal star on record, in a region of space known as the Tarantula nebula in a neighbouring galaxy to our own.

The record-breaking star has a mass 265 times greater than the sun and is millions of times brighter, they said.

The discovery has astonished scientists, who thought it was impossible for stars to exceed more than 150 times the mass of the sun.

When the star was born it could have been more than twice as massive. Because it is so far away – about 165,000 light-years – it can only be seen with the use of powerful telescopes in the southern hemisphere.

Rest of the story here: Guardian story

So, why were they “Astonished”? Because the standard theory on star formation via accretion discs in a gravity dominated universe such as the Big Bang model won’t allow a star to get that big before it starts losing mass via radiative activity or blows up in a supernova event. Obviously, something else is going on.

The ‘Electric Universe’ folks say stars are formed by ‘z pinch’ events caused by unpredictable field collapses in interstellar plasma flows. The quantitative theoretical side of this is still young, but lab scale experiments and computer simulations are looking good, according to proponents such as Wallace Thornhill, Anthony Perrat, Donald E. Scott and others.

Comments
  1. That´s it. So, what is left for “consensus scientists” ?, to humbly revisit their “twilight zone” theories or, as an honourable japanese would do, to accept a bamboo sword.

  2. tallbloke says:

    It’s much more genteel than that these days. It usually involves ‘waiting for dead man’s shoes’.

    There’s a nice Tolstoy quote about the reasons why people won’t give up their pet theories.

    “I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.”

  3. DirkH says:

    When i saw this on the BBC i immediately recognized the 2-strand plasma twists when seeing the middle picture. It’s really everywhere…

  4. tallbloke says:

    It’s all done with smoke, mirrors and gravity. Honest. :)

  5. Found the father of many galaxies and stars!

  6. P.G. Sharrow says:

    “Astonished”
    I am astonished that an accretion disk is required for star formation. For a solar system, OK. But why for a star. Seems that standard theories have more holes then a cheap swiss cheese. If the formation nebula has little angular momentum there would be little or no disk. During star formation hydrogen, the lightest element, accelerates toward the center of mass first and the heavier material is much slower. I see no reason that a new star could not be quite large. the only limit is the amount of material that is influenced to head toward the center. A huge star with little or no planetary disk may not last long, but what a spectical. This star could be under formation at this time of view. pg

  7. Tenuc says:

    T standard model predicted that no stars exceeding more than 150 times the mass of the sun would ever be found. The discovery of a star with 265 times solar mass therefore falsifies the already creaking model.

    Next contender please…

  8. tallbloke says:

    Come on down, it’s time for Paradigm Paradiddle!

  9. On electric drums!

  10. tallbloke says:

    Much arm waving in the dark from all cosmologists. So far as thinking about the solar system is concerned, I was interested in this part of the article Adolfo linked:

    “Plasma astronomy posits a relationship between electrical stress and luminosity. Gravity, and consequently mass, is a weak manifestation of electrical stress. In regions that are relatively insulated from the primary effects of electricity (within stellar sheaths, such as the Sun’s heliosphere), gravity will largely determine orbital motions.

    However, the mass that is calculated from analysis of the orbits is a result of the charge contained, not of the quantity of matter as is commonly assumed.”

    I’d like some further explanation of that comment. Is Mel referring to the masses of planets in the solar system, or the stars being formed in the tarantula nebula? Or both?

  11. There is a common confusion about weight, mass,etc.So I will tell something in the practical world.
    Some company was in need of two different types of copper carbonate, with the same particle size (as determined by laser difrraction apparatus or, alternatively, by common sedimentation methods-Stokes´law-), so both, when obtained, had different bulk densities. Then what was the difference between them?, can´t think of anything other than the electrostatic charge of the individual particles making them to be, in one case, more separated among them and thus having less bulk density.
    Another fact from my personal experience: It happened, many years ago, than, when accidentally pouring hot sand on a cellulose sheet it shrank from a current A4 size to a sheet of about 5 cms.long. This phenomenon made molecules closer to one another; the weight of the sheet did not changed at all, so ….. you can see this in:
    http://www.giurfa.com/mass.html
    and as PDF at:
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/31010610/Mass-Shrinkage

  12. I have had a very disturbing idea: The EU theorists say, as proven in the lab, that stars are Z-pinch electric phenomena, a kind of arc; Ok, but, would it be possible for the plasma current to change of focus, say from its current location in the Sun to, say, Jupiter?

  13. Zeke the Sneak says:

    tallbloke wrote,
    “However, the mass that is calculated from analysis of the orbits is a result of the charge contained, not of the quantity of matter as is commonly assumed.” ~Mel Acheson

    I’d like some further explanation of that comment. Is Mel referring to the masses of planets in the solar system, or the stars being formed in the tarantula nebula? Or both?
    ————————————————————————————————————————–
    I think what astronomer Mel Acheson is saying is that the model they used to calculate the mass of the stars is incorrect, and he is contradicting it in the same breath.

    From the article, the model used to calculate the mass of the stars is also used to verify the model:

    The star R136a1, found in the R136 cluster, is the most massive star ever found, with a current mass of about 265 solar masses and with a birthweight of as much as 320 times that of the Sun.
    In NGC 3603, the astronomers could also directly measure the masses of two stars that belong to a double star system [1], as a validation of the models used. The stars A1, B and C in this cluster have estimated masses at birth above or close to 150 solar masses.

    In the Electric Universe, attention is drawn to the fact that many stars are binary, triples, and quadruples. This seems a quandry for the gravitationally collapsing hydrogen cloud model for forming stars. In the EU model, stars come under increasing electrical stress and to reduce the electrical stress expel matter wihich forms a companion star, or a gas giant.

    And it has happened that following super nova events, a companion star is discovered.

  14. tallbloke says:

    Heh, shades of 2001 – A Space Odyssey

  15. In the crossing of waves foci are formed…

  16. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Yes, it’s a lot like that movie, especially where Hal gets unplugged.

    “Daisy…Daisy….give me your…answer…do… I’m half craaaaaazy…”

    But, that’s their computerized gravity model such as it is. :-)

  17. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Also, Mel Acheson is discussing the fact that two methods are being used to calculate the masses of the stars: their luminosity, and mass calculated from analysis of the orbits.
    So that’s interesting if they are using the one to validate the other.

    I could not find this method of calculating mass using luminosity explicitly stated in the original article. It might be implicitly said here in the third paragraph: “Comparisons with models imply that several of these stars were born with masses in excess of 150 solar masses…In NGC 3603, the astronomers could also directly measure the masses of two stars that belong to a double star system, as a validation of the models used. ”

    In contrast,
    “Plasma astronomy posits a relationship between electrical stress and luminosity,” not mass and luminosity.

  18. Thornhill explains:
    An electric star is formed by the equivalent of a lightning bolt in a molecular (plasma) cloud. Just like earthly lightning, cosmic lightning scavenges, squeezes and heats matter along the discharge channel. Where the squeeze is most intense, the current may ‘pinch off’ to give the effect of ‘bead lightning.’ In high-energy plasma lab discharges researchers have found that hot plasma ‘beads’ (known as plasmoids) form along the discharge axis before “scattering like buckshot” when the discharge quenches.

    Another important phenomenon known as ‘Marklund convection’ occurs along the discharge axis. It separates the chemical elements radially. Marklund convection causes helium to form a diffuse outer layer, followed by a hydrogen layer, then oxygen and nitrogen in the middle layers, and iron, silicon and magnesium in the inner layers. So electric stars should have a core of heavy elements and an upper atmosphere mostly of hydrogen. This renders the difference between stars and planets to be more apparent than real.
    http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=x49g6gsf&keywords=core%20of%20heavy%20elements#dest

    Then our planet earth with its “thermosphere”would be a “proto star”…Nice!

  19. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Adolfo Giurfa said,
    “Then our planet earth with its “thermosphere”would be a “proto star”…Nice!”

    Hi Adolfo. I am not familiar with anything I have read that says that rocky bodies in the solar system will ever become stars.

    However, Wal Thornhill notes this statement in an Oxford Physics Series:

    “A star like the Sun is remarkable… We have the strange phenomenon of a relatively cool body in space enveloped in an immensely hot atmosphere. (We can note in passing that the Earth’s upper atmosphere is hotter than its surface but this is less remarkable as in the Earth’s case the energy comes from without.)” Prof. R L F Boyd, F.R.S., Space Physics – the study of plasmas in space, Oxford Physics Series.

    Well, perhaps the hot corona is furthere evidence that the Sun’s energy comes from without.

  20. Zeke the Sneak says:
    July 27, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    Dear Zeke: Alchemists said that they could transmute “lead” into “gold”. As the earth evolves it possibly will develope higher energies.
    This Assumption of matter is the key to the alchemical work, which simply helps substances “to plunge into the Father-nature,” that is, to incorporate, according to their mode of being, the greatest possible spiritual light. “Creatures must plunge into this Father-nature and become Unity and only Son….,” for “…nature, which is God, seeks only the image of God.” “Copper, because of its nature, can become silver, and silver, by its nature, can become gold: so neither one nor the other stops or pauses until this identity is realized.” For gold is the most perfect of metals, the one whose luminous density best expresses the divine presence in the mineral realm : through spiritual continuity each metal is virtually gold and each stone becomes precious in God.
    This transfiguration of nature-memory of Eden and expectation of the second coming ( Parousia )- can at present only take effect in the heart of man, the central and conscious being of the creation. Indeed, that being so, “the eye of the heart” can see gold in lead and crystal in the mountain, because it can see the world in God.

    http://www.giurfa.com/alchemy.html

  21. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Thank you, Adolfo, that is such an edifying thought. It is wonderful to step back and remember our unique place as “conscious beings,” making these incredible discoveries of the intricate structures both at the molecular and the galactic scales.

  22. If “working” the earth has an electromagnetic charge, if this charge increases, as Wal Thornhill says, it will develop an increasing “double layer”…so, chances are, that below sun’s “chromosphere” we can find a cold and solid core. ( a la Oliver Manuel but without fighting neutrons)

  23. tallbloke says:

    Indeed, and the discovery that the planets and stars are arranged relationships which exhibit simple numerical harmonies which are mirrored in the structure of crystals, atomic electron shells, and all scales of objects and phenomena between gives pause for reflection, and a deeper appreciation for the universe of which we are a part. Small and large are concepts which no longer divide a universe which sings of its inner correspondences at all levels and makes the very strings of our bows quiver with the music of the spheres. Let’s aim high and loose the arrows representing our quest for understanding fly to the heart of the cosmos.

  24. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Rather “I am not familiar with anything (at least from what I have read so far) that says the rocky bodies in the solar system will ever become stars.”

    Pardon the anguished English,
    I have nothing against the language to have mistreated it so (-:

  25. Tenuc says:

    Some good stuff from Miles Mathis here about gravity and tides:-

    The Unified Field Theory
    http://milesmathis.com/uft.html

    What is G?
    http://milesmathis.com/g.html

    The Trouble With Tides
    http://milesmathis.com/tide.html

    Enjoy :-)

  26. Zeke the Sneak says:

    tallbloke says: “Indeed, and the discovery that the planets and stars are arranged relationships which exhibit simple numerical harmonies which are mirrored in the structure of crystals, atomic electron shells, and all scales of objects and phenomena between gives pause for reflection, and a deeper appreciation for the universe of which we are a part.”

    A clue to the beautiful structures we observe in space is the ability of complex plasma to self-organise and self-duplicate.

    These forms are delightful and stunning, from the tiniest foram to the furthest nebula…

  27. tallbloke says:

    Tenuc, in my opinion, the Mathis tides theory is a bit undercooked, but given the guy’s astonishing rate of output, and breadth of enquiry, I forgive him.

    I had a good exchange of emails with him earlier this year, he is very approachable.

  28. DirkH says:

    Tenuc says:
    “Some good stuff from Miles Mathis here about gravity and tides:-

    The Unified Field Theory
    http://milesmathis.com/uft.html

    Thanks! I just read through it. I still don’t get why everything’s expanding in his worldview or how this could work out in the real world but if he’s right with his notion that our idea of gravity is already a compound force that could be a real shipwrecker for a hundred years worth of physics. An idea that fills me with a certain curiosity.

    I’m torn between Miles and Nigel Cook who proposes a sort of LeSage gravity (which could IMHO explain certain controversial experiments with superconductors and apparent shielding of gravity):
    http://nige.wordpress.com/about/

  29. johnnythelowery says:

    Okay. I’m good at reading between the lines sometimes. I sense a lot of reservation in opining on a view that is looked at askance(sp?) or rather ‘as-skunk’ by the main stream physics bloc. This is very interesting but, not sure what you lot are talking about. How is the dead lock going to be broken? What is the LHC going to tell us. Any predictions? What is the future of this battle ground? I’m with you bhoys. Signed…. anon.

  30. tallbloke says:

    Johnny, I think things could change quite fast at NASA if the administration chooses to wield its influence. After all, it holds the purse strings. The astrophysics departments around the world are busy studying the data coming from satellites. Bright research students are going to start pushing the envelope of the Paradigm.

    These things take time.

  31. Tenuc says:

    I’ve never understood the standard explanation about how tides work on our planet, and Miles seems to have indicated where it goes wrong. Not sure if his replacement theory is correct, but a good attempt I think. The real value in his work is making transparent what science does and does not know. Once this is done the search for a sound theory of tides/gravity can begin.

  32. tallbloke says:

    I’m trying to remember where I came across a rebuttal of Mathis’ tidal theory. The standard equations are definitely a bit of a hodge podge, though tidal prediction does seem to be reasonably accurate. Given the additional variability due to wind, the errors are probably not apparent.

    I’m not clever enough to work on tidal theory.

  33. DirkH says:

    The crucial problem is IMHO Einstein’s postulate that gravitation acts not as a force but by creating a curvature in space. Miles Mathis points this out in many places in his papers; every time theorists NEED a force, for instance to explain tides, they revert to Newton because Newton talks about forces, not spacetime curvatures.

    I found Nigel Cook by asking google why we think of E/M as a force field but of gravity as a spacetime curvature. Nigel says it’s down to the way Einstein formulated the theory. They went down this way with rank 2 tensors and added corrections til it fit the observations; Mercury’s orbit and all that.

    Now we’re stuck with two incompatible descriptions; 3 of the forces (E/M, electroweak and electrostrong nuclear forces) described as force fields, gravity OTOH as spacetime curvature.

    Will QED solve this? Miles Mathis? Nigel Cook? I don’t know; i don’t even understand tensor mathematics (can’t invest the time.). I only kow that somethings going to happen and i don’t think string theory will be of any use in this regard.

  34. tallbloke says:

    Mathis says that by regarding G as the acceleration caused by objects expanding towards each other instead of things being pulled together, relativistic calculations can be performed much more simply. I haven’t tried it, but if true, it is intriguing.

  35. DirkH says:

    I found Mathis’ explanation for the “G as acceleration of expansion of objects” here:

    http://milesmathis.com/rel4.html

    for those people interested…

  36. P.G. Sharrow says:

    DirkH thanks for the reference to the Mathis paper on relativity and the math treatment for gravity calculations. Nice read on GR and SR, the concept of expansion to explain gravity math may be helpful in doing the calculations but not so good in visualization of reality. Acceleration effects on matter by matter yields the the “force” we call gravity. I have heard of many theories on what it is, none of which I totally buy. Purhapes we will figure it out here. ;-)

    “Gravity is a myth, the Earth sucks” pg

  37. Tenuc says:

    tallbloke says:
    July 28, 2010 at 8:10 pm
    “I’m trying to remember where I came across a rebuttal of Mathis’ tidal theory. The standard equations are definitely a bit of a hodge podge, though tidal prediction does seem to be reasonably accurate. Given the additional variability due to wind, the errors are probably not apparent.”

    Some time ago I read somewhere that Tide Tables where not done from basic theory, but from harmonic analysis of tidal observations, with corrections for various factors such as currents and geography. If this is the case then tide predictions used by mariners say nothing about tidal theory?

  38. Zeke the Sneak says:

    johnnythelowry says: “Okay. I’m good at reading between the lines sometimes. I sense a lot of reservation in opining on a view that is looked at askance(sp?) or rather ‘as-skunk’ by the main stream physics bloc. This is very interesting but, not sure what you lot are talking about.”

    A lot of us are looking “askance(sp?) or rather ‘askunk'” right back at mainstream views, and here is one reason. F. Capra, a theoretical physicist, states it in this way:

    “The purpose of this book is to explore this relationship between the concepts of modern physics and the basic ideas in the philosophical and religious traditions of the Far East. We shall see how the two foundations of twentieth-century physics quantum theory and relativity theory both force us to see the world very much in the way a Hindu, Buddhist, or Taoist sees it, and how this similarity strengthens when we look at the recent attempts to combine these two theories in order to describe the phenomena of the submicroscopic world: the properties and interactions of the subatomic particles of which all matter is made. Here the parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism are most striking, and we shall often encounter statements where it is almost impossible to say whether they have been made by physicists or Eastern mystics.”

    The theories and strange zoo of particles and undetectable and unobservable phenomena to which scientists and astrophysicists are continually resorting are getting just that bizarre.

    They are now working on theories which require more and more “dimensions” to even work, and many are untestable and even unfalsifiable.

    The LHC is looking for a particle which imparts mass, but doesn’t have any charge, the so-called “God particle.” That sounds well and good, but they have spent many many years and 6 billion dollars on it, and some of us are getting tired of going to such heroic lengths to save theories which should die a natural death at this point. It is time to question instead whether gravity is not really a warping of time and space at all.

  39. DirkH says:

    Whenever i see an alternative cosmology or theory, i always look for whether the author has made an attempt to explain the double slit experiment.

    Luckily, Miles Mathis didn’t shy away from it:

    http://milesmathis.com/double.html

  40. Tenuc says:

    Zeke the Sneak says:
    July 29, 2010 at 5:49 pm
    [johnnythelowry says: “Okay. I’m good at reading between the lines sometimes. I sense a lot of reservation in opining on a view that is looked at askance(sp?) or rather ‘as-skunk’ by the main stream physics bloc. This is very interesting but, not sure what you lot are talking about.”]

    “…A lot of us are looking “askance(sp?) or rather ‘askunk’” right back at mainstream views…”

    Your not wrong there, Zeke, and more and more scientists are seeing right through the Emperor’s clothes to the paucity of substance beneath.

    Up to the 1930’s, science was making good progress at simplifying how things work based on a solid foundation of mathematics and observational data. Since then we seem to have got into a buggers-muddle, with more and more ‘pixie dust’ being applied to various fundamental theories, or ‘standard models’. Complexity is being heaped on complexity to try to salvage these outdated ideas and while technology has advanced in leaps and bounds, the theoretical side has made little real progress.

    It’s good to see people like Miles Mathis challenging current dogma. Only ny opening the debate to allow for new ideas will science once again start to progress – provided that a way can be found to circumvent the current high levels of political influence which government funding brings.

  41. tallbloke says:

    The big paradigm shifts have usually been caused by outsider individuals like Newton and Einstein, who turn establishment science in a new direction by successfully explaining phenomena and making sussessful predictions which are irrefutable. The establishment then promptly makes the maverick “one of their own”, and rewrites the narrative to make it appear that the progress of science is a serene process by pushing internal dissenters with conflicting observations to the footnotes of history.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

  42. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Tenuc
    “while technology has advanced in leaps and bounds, the theoretical side has made little real progress.”

    I think that is where the disconnect is, exactly. Because the public sees the incredible instrumentation and technology used to take measurements and to send probes to other planets, we assume naturally that they must also be correct about the interpretation of the data that they gather. We can “see” stars, galaxies, and nebula in gamma, x-rays, UV and radio waves. The telescopes and dishes work marvelously. But then they tell us that there must be black holes generating these phenomena.

    The Tarantula Nebula here is an example of the disconnect between the excellence of the technology and the poverty of the theory used in interpretation. These images are exquisite and include zoomed in and near infrared views. Much is made of the mass of the stars, but there is a context that is being utterly ignored and shut out:

    “The objects of interest to plasma astronomers are the helical filaments that give the regions around the clusters their characteristic electrical structure. In the far view (left), arcs of parallel filaments appear to wind around kinked tubes that converge on the cluster, evidence for large plasma discharge channels.”

    Helical and hourglass figures in space are electrical phenomena in plasma.

    Gamma, Xrays and relatavistic electrons are signatures of electrical discharge.

  43. Zeke the Sneak says:
    August 1, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    Suspect wheresoever there is a complicate explanation : It is but self conceit. Truths is always simpler than we think. Education must be totally changed. We must clean all the garbage which brought us the so called “illustration” and before that, the agnosticism of the official church(*). Could you imagine how the world would be if the simple laws of music, arithmetic, geometry were tough to our kids?
    In these pages we always find the laws of the armonics, of the music of the spheres. The real communion with the eternal nature of the cosmos is hidden in our forgotten memories. We do not properly realize that humanity has been uprooted on purpose from the source of truth, because ignorant mobs are easier govern upon.
    Not necessarily through big conspirations, it just began with a perverted idea or group of ideas, using the same laws of sound waves, which supported by opportune rewards it develops almost automatically.

    (*)Pope Benedict invites Copenhagen representatives to rediscover the ‘moral dimension of human life´ life’http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope_benedict_invites_copenhagen_representatives_to_rediscover_the_moral_dimension_of_human_life/

  44. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Hopefully the paradigm shift comes when more private individuals become patrons and benefactors of individual scientists. Charity, art and science are persuits for free and prosperous people only.

    The Unions, Societies, and Universities are not to be bothered with, in my opinion. They are traditional institutions whose purpose is to uphold traditions. There is no hope for reform of those organizations.

    The public will sometimes realize that science does matter, because they can see that it is being used for political ends as in the case of climate science. In the case of physics, traditional institutions will not acknowledge important breakthroughs which could make an enormous difference in our lives. Some example are: obtaining power from the Hydrogen atom through creating a new lowered state, low temperature fusion, or superconduction at room temperatures.

    This is being supressed because it does not fit the current physics theories.
    Climate scientists are rightfully experiencing public wrath. But physics and astronomy are equally rife with “protected irresponsibility.” When it is seen to touch every day life, I hope more people will become alert and aware, and a breakthrough comes.

  45. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Adolfo Giurfa:
    “Suspect wheresoever there is a complicate explanation : It is but self conceit. Truths is always simpler than we think. Education must be totally changed. We must clean all the garbage which brought us the so called “illustration” and before that, the agnosticism of the official church(*).”

    It really does come down to education in the end! It is possible that our imaginations need to be sparked again by great lives. I am inspired by people here who have developed great expertise and knowledge on their own time, and because a subject has personal meaning to them. These are people to watch, the “other” scientists.

    But people should be careful of their money; just because you go get a degree, it does not necessarily mean you did anything but accept indoctrination and purchase a fine title.

  46. Zeke the Sneak says:

    “Could you imagine how the world would be if the simple laws of music, arithmetic, geometry were tough to our kids?”

    Barely! (-:

    Abigail Adams was unable to go to school because of weak health, so she read all of her parents’ books. She helped found this country.

    We teach, but it is not generally known that children can become interested in many subjects and learning can become self-organized and self-motivated. Far more than we realize, any way.

  47. Zeke the Sneak says:
    August 1, 2010 at 5:40 pm
    You are right, not me (at least my typo about teaching) :-)
    A virulent female feminist was asked what she would do in the case of a woman who is alcoholic as her husband and both ill with tuberculosis and 4 children and she was pregnant. She was asked if she had made that woman to abort. As she answered: Yes, the interviewer told her: You have just killed Beethoven.

  48. Tenuc says:

    Zeke the Sneak says:
    August 1, 2010 at 4:00 pm
    “…The Tarantula Nebula here is an example of the disconnect between the excellence of the technology and the poverty of the theory used in interpretation. These images are exquisite and include zoomed in and near infrared views. Much is made of the mass of the stars, but there is a context that is being utterly ignored and shut out:

    “The objects of interest to plasma astronomers are the helical filaments that give the regions around the clusters their characteristic electrical structure. In the far view (left), arcs of parallel filaments appear to wind around kinked tubes that converge on the cluster, evidence for large plasma discharge channels.”

    Helical and hourglass figures in space are electrical phenomena in plasma.”

    The good news is that most of the current standard models in both cosmology and physics are hitting more and more brick walls. I predict that results from experiments like the LHC and SDO will change the direction of science, as they reveal that belief in many major pillars of understanding are based on false premises. Should the people running the experiments try to fudge/hide the results, then I’m sure that there are enough people involved that a ‘whistle blower’ will emZekeerge.

    Prepare for lots of turmoil over the next few years as many sacred cows go to the slaughter…:-)

    Zeke, your comment that gamma rays, x-rays and relativistic electrons are signatures of electrical discharge is on the money. Perhaps, with the inclusion of radio waves, we can listen to the harmonies of the cosmos as the all pervading galactic EM field spreads the word to furthest limits of this magnificent domain!

  49. Tenuc says:

    Whoops! Sorry for the typo:-

    emZekeerge = emerge

    Ridikipedia Definition – emZekeerge

    To come out of the closet in a discrete way…:-)

  50. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Try rubbing your hands on your jeans rapidly before you type, ah ah ah

    Tenuc: “I predict that results from experiments like the LHC and SDO will change the direction of science, as they reveal that belief in many major pillars of understanding are based on false premises.”

    That’d be good!

    The implausible fables and tales we get explaining the scarring on the rocky bodies in the solar system are particularly vulnerable to a plasma revolution!

    Introducing you all to Soupdragon42 and electrical scarring/plasma geology. Enjoy

    The Mystery of Planetary Scars

  51. Zeke the Sneak says:
    August 2, 2010 at 8:59 pm Electric engraving!: Just get an impedance from a fluorescent light tube, connect it to one of the mains plug, the out coming wire to a isolated pin (engraver “pencil”), work on a metallic surface connected to the other line of main’s plug.

    [reply] Don’t try this at home folks! :)