Alien Anomalies

Credit: NASA/JPL/Arizona State University

Aug 11, 2004
Etched Mars

Grooves of widely varying sizes appear etched on the surface of Mars. The grooves indicate a removal of material by forces unknown to planetary geologists. But a force familiar to plasma physicists -- electrical arc machining -- etches grooves with these exact characteristics.

Grooves such as these appear etched into the surface of Mars. Although their sizes vary enormously, their outstanding features are the same: parallel, steep sides, often scalloped; flat bottoms; sharp intersections that leave each groove undisturbed by the other; flat terraces; sudden terminations that sometimes skip over intervening terrain, leaving "land-locked" basins; and everywhere an absence of the debris that familiar erosional processes should leave. The grooves indicate a removal of material by forces unknown to planetary geologists.

But a force familiar to plasma physicists etches grooves with these exact characteristics: Electrical arc machining. The electrical forces constrain the arc to contact the surface at a 90-degree angle. Because the arc typically consists of one or more pairs of channels that rotate around a common axis, a stationary arc will etch a circular crater. Most of the etched material is lifted from the surface, and the material around the edge is pinched up into a sharp rim. If the rotating channels are sufficiently far apart, they may leave a "peak" of undisturbed material in the center of the crater. Fluctuations in the current may cause variations in the depth and diameter of etching, leaving terraces along the walls.

If the arc travels across the surface, it will etch away material to a uniform depth and leave a groove with parallel sides exactly the width of the arc's rotation. Uneven movement may result in a series of overlapping circular craters, producing scalloped edges, or a jumping of the arc, producing linear chains of craters. When a traveling arc crosses the groove etched by a previous arc, it will be unaffected by the change in terrain. Sometimes a "ghost" of the earlier groove will be preserved as the later arc etches its uniform depth down one side and up the other. (An example of such "ghosting" can be seen at upper right in the image.)  In a process similar to the jumping that produces crater chains, an arc may etch a groove and then jump a ways before etching more of the groove, leaving lines of isolated basins.

The two outstanding characteristics that distinguish electrical arc etching from mechanical erosion processes are the small amount of debris left by etching and the considerable melting of crater and groove floors.  The lack of debris in and around features on Mars has already been noticed. Landers should soon begin reporting evidence of glassification.

Credit: NASA and the Hubble Heritage Team (AURA /STScI )

Aug 09, 2004
V838 Mon

When Australian amateur astronomer Nicholas Brown photographed a region in the constellation Monoceros in early January 2002, he noticed a 10th-magnitude star that wasn't there when he had photographed the same area about two weeks earlier. Over the next month, amateur and professional astronomers worldwide watched as this "new" star brightened to magnitude 6.5 and then faded away again. Now a meager 16th-magnitude star, V838 Monocerotis (V838 Mon) was for a short time intrinsically brighter than any other star in our entire galaxy.

A few weeks after Brown's discovery, astronomers noticed that V838 Mon was surrounded by an expanding glowing cloud. On October 2, 2002, NASA's Astronomy Picture of the Day (APOD) announced another "mystery star": "Observations indicate that the erupting star transformed itself over a period of months from a small under-luminous star a little hotter than the Sun, to a highly luminous, cool super giant star undergoing rapid and complex brightness changes. The transformation defies the conventional understanding of stellar life cycles." [Italics added.].

According to a group of observers who studied the star's spectra with the United Kingdom Infrared Telescope in Hawaii, V838 Mon appears to be the coolest super giant ever seen. At least 800 times larger than the sun, it had a surface temperature in March 2002 around 4,000 Kelvin--typical of a cool super giant star. But seven months later, it was much cooler. "It corresponded to a surface temperature little more than 1,000 Kelvin, well within the temperature range of brown dwarfs," says team member Mark Rushton of Keele University in the U.K.

In the Electric Universe view, it's also significant that V838 Monocerotis is a binary pair.

Binary pairs are not unusual. In fact, more than half of all stars have one or more companions. Because the stars are far apart and chance encounters are rare, this observation suggests that there must be something in the process of a star's birth or evolution that favors the formation of multiple stars. One possible electric mechanism is fissioning of a nova. The electrical stress of a star is concentrated on its surface. If there is more stress than the star can take, one response would be for the star to fission into two stars. The surface area of two stars is greater than the surface area of one, so the new system is able to accept more electrical stress.

V838 Monocerotis has all the basic characteristics of fissioning to relieve electrical stress: nova-like brightening followed by loss of luminosity and loss of temperature; changing to a different spectral type with marked changes in its surface chemical composition; discovery of a binary companion; and the appearance of an expanding nebulous cloud.

If stars are powered by electrical current filaments strung through the galactic plasma in which the stars are immersed, power surges in those circuits can suddenly brighten and dim them. The interiors of the stars will bear little resemblance to the presently accepted model based on the assumption of a thermonuclear core. The electrical generation of starlight explains the many anomalies that remain intractable to theories from the gaslight era of astronomy.

Credit: Courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech

Aug 05, 2004
Electric Comet

Recent mages of comet Wild 2 may reveal the telltale sign of electric discharge in the form of unexplained “bright spots”.

Close-up photos of comet Wild 2 taken by the spacecraft Stardust reveal small bright spots.  Several of these hotspots are seen in the photo on the left, and two are seen together in the photo on the right.  A few have adjacent dark spots that may be shadows cast by the material shooting up from the surface.

From an Electric Universe point of view, these are the sparks where electric currents from the sun impinge on the more negatively charged surface of the comet.  This is where electricity is peeling away the surface of the comet's nucleus.  The material removed from the comet is funneled away in tight jets that twice surprise conventional expectations.  The conventional model expects to find an even distribution of evaporated volatiles in the coma and tail of comets.  Instead Stardust finds dense concentrations of particles in the jets themselves and fewer particles than expected in the coma and tail.

During the late 1800's, researchers noted the similarities between comet behavior and electrical phenomena in mainstream magazines such as Nature,Scientific American and English Mechanic and World of Science. But in the early 1900's, astronomers backed away from those ideas because they imply electric currents between the comet and the sun, something 20th century astronomers were not willing to consider. They instead developed the "dirty snowball" theory of comets, which says that comet displays can be explained by ice and volatiles (compounds with low melting points) evaporating under the heat of the Sun.

The Electric Universe researchers are ready to turn the tide of comet theory back toward electrical phenomena. Electricity, not heat, is at work on the surface of Wild 2. If this is true, then a second problem is solved. We don't have to wait for the rare impact to form the cratered landscape. The craters we see are being carved by electric arcs. These arcs also cause the (surprising) dark color of every comet we've seen up close. They produce the (surprising) x- rays that the ROSAT x-ray observatory discovered. And they create the (surprising) streams of rocky particles that pummeled the spacecraft, Stardust.

Textbooks will have to change. It is no longer important that comets be composed of mostly ice and volatiles. Electric arcs are strong enough to strip away rock. We use similar processes in industry here on Earth, both to remove material and to deposit it.

But the biggest effect of looking at a comet from the Electric Universe point of view is that it means we have to re-examine almost everything we know about the universe. Electric currents don't appear alone. They cannot flow unless there is a return current -- a complete circuit. So if the comet is electrically active, then the Sun must be a part of its circuitry. And if the Sun is electrically active, then so are all of the stars, in all of the galaxies, and what about the galaxies themselves? These tiny sparks on Wild 2 could light a fire of discovery for astronomy.

Credit: Optical: NASA/HST; X-ray: NASA/SRON/CXC/SAO

Credit: NASA/SRON/CXC/SAO

Aug 03, 2004
Charge Separation in Space

One of the basic assumptions of astrophysics today is that electrical forces play no part in cosmology because “you can’t get charge separation in space”. But x-ray images of space objects tell a different story.

Standard phrases show up in astronomical lectures and debates, from elementary documentaries to the most advanced texts: "You can't get charge separation in space;" "The solar wind consists of ions [protons] flowing from the sun (with enough electrons to ensure neutrality;)" "... with the need for electrical neutrality paramount ...;" "The necessity for electrical neutrality then forces the details of the decays to be ...;" or even "Of course there's electricity in space, but it doesn't DO anything."

The above spectrum was obtained by the Chandra orbiting x-ray camera in December of 1999. The subject is a tiny point-source of x-rays (a small, coherent cloud or the top of a coherent stream) embedded in the nucleus of an active spiral galaxy named NGC 4458 (upper image.)

The elements in the x-ray spectrum are identified by their chemical symbols: O = oxygen, Mg = magnesium, etc. The roman numerals refer to the number of electrons that have been stripped from these elements. By consulting a periodic table of elements, you can calculate how many electrons are left.  In this very active region of space, we see:

    Mg XII  --  Magnesium with all 12 of its electrons missing
    Ne X  -- Neon with all 10 electrons missing
    Ne IX -- Neon with all but 1 electron missing
    O VIII -- Oxygen with all 8 of its electrons missing
    O VII -- Oxygen with all but 1 electron missing
    N VII -- Nitrogen with all 7 of its electrons missing
    C VI -- Carbon with all 6 of its electrons missing

Among the common arguments against charge separation in space is the calculation that it would take more energy than there is in the universe just to separate all the electrons from the atoms in a single teaspoon of salt. From an Electric Universe point of view, this is begging the question. We aren't starting with a teaspoon of salt and trying to turn it into a plasma universe; we are starting with a plasma universe in which charges are already separated. So we need to consider theories that don't begin with the assumption that you can't get charge separation in space. We don't need theories that explain how imaginary objects like black holes can separate charges; we need theories that explain how charges combine to produce what we see.

Credit: NASA/, HST, WFPC2, Jeff Hester

Credit: William P. Blair and Ravi Sankrit (Johns Hopkins University), NASA

Jul 30, 2004
Cygnus Loop

Aurora-like curtains and filaments of the Cygnus Loop, the aftermath of a supernova, suggest an electric event, perhaps the explosion of a plasma “double layer” in a galactic circuit.

The Cygnus Loop is thought to be a middle-aged remnant of a nearby supernova, the collapse of a star whose nuclear fuel has been used up.  From a plasma cosmology point of view, a supernova has nothing to do with the hypothetical nuclear engine. It is an electric event, perhaps the explosion of a double layer in a galactic circuit.

The aurora-like curtains and filaments seen here have more in common with electric currents in plasma than with mechanical models based on acoustic shocks. A Birkeland current can separate elements because the atoms of each element ionize at an energy level unique to that particular element. The strength of the currents vary where they twist and compress along their length. The result is concentrations of different elements in regions where the ionization potential matches the strength of the Birkeland current. The top photo illustrates this principle. It is color-coded to show regions of the nebula where different elements predominate. Blue is ionized oxygen, red is ionized sulfur and green is ionized hydrogen.

The bottom photo illustrates the intricacy of the twisted Birkeland currents. Other characteristics of the Cygnus Loop that support an Electric Universe interpretation include polarization of light, compression by magnetic fields, acceleration of relativistic electrons, and x-ray hotspots.

The cellular structure that confines and transmits electric currents in space is are not directly detectable from a distance. But we've seen them in action on Earth and in near-space. Here we observe many of the same behaviors. Do we dare assume that our own solar system is the only place in the universe where electric currents play an active role? No--it's much safer to assume that interstellar space beyond our solar system plays by the same rules we observe here. And those rules are electrical

Credit: The Galileo Project, JPL, NASA

Jul 28, 2004
Electric Jets on Io

“Volcanic” plumes on Jupiter’s moon Io, up to hundreds of kilometers high, reveal features similar to those of electric discharge in the laboratory.

This photograph, taken by the Galileo space craft, is one of many images showing plumes of plasma jetting from the surface of Jupiter's closest moon Io and reaching up to hundreds of kilometers into space.  The first to suggest that these plumes were electrical discharge was Cornell University astrophysicist Thomas Gold, whose article on the "Electric Origin of the Outburst on Io," was published in the journal Science, November 30, 1979. In 1987 Gold's interpretation was supported by plasma physicists Alex Dessler and Anthony Peratt in an article published  in the journal Astrophysics and Space Science. Dessler and Peratt observed that both the filamentary penumbra and the convergence of ejecta into well-defined rings are characteristic plasma discharge effects that have no counterpart in volcanoes.

Further evidence was returned by the Galileo probe, which found the source of the plumes to be hotter than any lava on Earth--a predictable discharge feature in the electric model.  But perhaps the biggest surprise was that the "volcanoes" had moved tens of kilometers in a few years, another predictable feature of the electric model.

For the proponents of the "electric universe", the arcing on Io, in its electrical connection to Jupiter, is analogous to the arcing on a comet nucleus as it penetrates deeply into the electrical field of the sun. The one produces streams of plasma and dust that flow from the Jovian domain into the rest of the solar system, while the other produces the familiar comet tail.

This is a more obvious example where scientists have made an obvious, bright as day mistake and then attempted to shoot down anyone who pointed out their errors.  As I said, nowadays ego is more important than actual science and discovery.

It's time for explanations from our scientists.  Logical, believable ones, not ad-hoc explanations and patches to hold together already disproven theories.

Combined VLA and GBT image of the Galactic center           Credit: NRAO/AUI/NSF Yusef-Zadeh, et.al.

Jul 23, 2004
Galaxy Filaments

In an Electric Universe, the observed association of non-thermal radio filaments (NRF's) with star-forming regions is expected.

The region within 900 light-years of the Milky Way Galaxy's core is crisscrossed with glowing filaments 1 to 3 light-years thick and 10 to 100 light-years long. They are a recent discovery, known only since the invention of modern radio and infrared telescopes that can "see" through the visually opaque dust clouds shrouding the galaxy core. The latest radio telescope probes of this region show that the filaments are associated with pockets of star-formation. Researchers admit that the exact mechanism that creates the filaments remains to be discovered, but they suggest that one possibility is the collision of winds blown off by individual stars.

For the Electric Universe, the association of non-thermal radio filaments (NRF's) with star-forming regions is expected. However, the argument is turned on its head. The filaments are gigantic Birkeland Currents--transmission lines feeding electric energy into star-forming regions and the galactic center. They are the prime cause of star formation and other activity at the galactic center, not an effect. All star-forming regions--even all individual stars--have similar filaments. The majority of the filaments are not seen in normal light. They are detectable only by their influence on the gas and dust stretching between the stars. But in a few places, including the region near the galactic core, electric power is concentrated so that the star-feeding currents glow. Since the power source is electrical, a gravitational black hole is not needed to explain the energy pouring from the focus of galactic currents at Sgr A.

Credit: NASA Hubble Space Telescope

Jul 21, 2004
Cometary Knots

Astronomers have named these features of a planetary nebula "cometary knots" because of their resemblance to giant comets. From an Electric Universe point of view, the resemblance may be more than visual.

As long ago as the 1940¹s, an electrical researcher, Dr. Charles Bruce of England, identified planetary nebulae as stellar electric discharge phenomena.

Although the heads, or comas, of these "comets" are twice the size of our solar system and much dustier than our comets, their electrodynamics is essentially the same. The coma of a solar system comet is generated by the difference in electrical potential between the nucleus and the surrounding plasma. A charged body placed in plasma forms a cocoon around itself, called a Langmuir sheath or plasma sheath. The cocoon isolates the charge on the body from the surrounding plasma. At the sheath boundary, two layers of charge, called a |"double layer," take most of the electrical stress. If the electrical stress is high enough the plasma sheath may glow.

The changing electrical stress on a comet is due to its highly elliptical orbit. The Sun has a weak radial electrical field. A comet spends most of its time far from the Sun and becomes adjusted to the voltage there. As it zips in for a quick fly-by of the sun, the voltage and charge density of the solar plasma changes rapidly, generating increasing electrical stress on the comet. When the electrical stress is high enough, the comet¹s plasma sheath lights up to form the classic cometary spectacle. The comet nucleus begins discharging and the resulting cathode jets sweep back to form a tail that is "blown" in a direction aligned with the Sun¹s electric field.

The same thing would happen to an object of any size on a cometary orbit through the Sun's electric field. If the Earth, which is a charged body, were on a cometary orbit, its magnetosphere would glow. Similarly, the objects forming the cometary knots of the Helix Nebula are responding to the strong electric field centered on the star outside the picture at bottom right.

So, in other words, they aren't volcanoes.  That would explain why instead of seeing lava and magma shooting up into space from there, we see these blue, glowing jets.

Credit: NASA, HST, WFPC2, J. Hester (ASU)

Jul 16, 2004
Eta Carinae

The star Eta Carinae suddenly became the 2nd brightest star in the sky from 1837 to 1856. Then it dimmed to invisibility. In 1940 it began to brighten and has again become visible to the unaided eye.

Astronomers expected to see the remains of an exploded star, a small bright core in the center of an expanding shell of gas. But when the Hubble Telescope turned its eye on Eta Carinae, astronomers saw an hour-glass-shaped dust cloud more than a light year wide. (Because it's not a star, the cloud is named Eta Carinae. The star assumed to be at the center is hidden in the cloud.) The two lobes of the cloud are hurtling away from a central disk at more than a million kilometers an hour (600,000 miles per hour). The cloud is the most luminous object in our galaxy. It sheds energy at several million times the rate of our sun, mostly in infrared wavelengths, but also in x-ray.

What lies at the center is as unexplained as it is unseen. The traditional sources of a star's energy--gravitational collapse and nuclear fusion--are unable to account for a 3-million-degrees-hot cloud so far from the central star.

However, in 1968 Dr. Charles Bruce of the UK Electrical Research Association proposed that planetary nebulas, such as Eta Carinae, are electric discharges. Because the discharge is part of a galactic current feeding power into the stars, the nebula will take on the characteristic bipolar form along the axis of the current with a toroid around the equator. In the case of Eta Carinae, most of the power is intercepted by the surrounding dust. This "electric furnace" effect explains both the high temperatures far from the star and the diminished radiation of the star. The onset of such a cosmic thunderbolt would have been heralded by just such a galaxy-illuminating flash as was seen in the 19th century.

Oh yes, and quasars, according to EU, are the beginning stages of new galaxies being ejected from older, larger galaxies.

Credit: FORS1, 8.2-meter VLT Antu,ESO

Jul 14, 2004
Galactic Perspective

If redshift is the effect of an expanding universe, it must be related to distance. Yet three galaxies with very different redshifts are the same distance from Earth.

Astronomer Halton Arp studied this galaxy, NGC 1232, in 1982. He called it "one of those rare and thrilling moments when you can look down a long corridor into the future." What he saw was three galaxies with three very different redshifts. The primary galaxy has a redshift of z = .005. Its first companion (left side of photo) has a redshift of z = .021. The tiny companion on the upper arm has a redshift of z = .1.

Arp was sure that these three galaxies are next-door neighbors. The small galaxy on the left is the archetypal "companion galaxy," not the type observed as an independent galaxy. Its star-forming regions and gas clouds are similar in scale to those of the large galaxy, and the influence of the small galaxy can be traced in disturbances along the larger galaxy's arms.  Arp's Catalogue of Discordant Redshift Associations presents similar in-depth documentation that the tiny knot on the upper arm is also a galaxy connected to NGC 1232.

Why were these observations so thrilling? They directly contradict the assumption upon which big bang cosmology is based. Because redshift is interpreted as an effect of the expansion of the universe, it must be related to distance. Yet here are three galaxies with very different redshifts that are at the same distance.

The astronomical community responded by dismissing his evidence and taking away his telescope time. But in the years since he made these observations, Arp has added hundreds of similar discordant associations to his collection. These associations will change our view of the distribution of galaxies, their ages, and the size of the "known" universe. And that will require a new theory of cosmology.

The dust storms idea has been given more credence because of the video which has been bandied about made from the images captured by the Rovers on Mars.

There may be dust storms, but there is no evidence in the close-up images of landscape to support it. There is not much bunching-up of sand around rocks, and given that there is supposed to be a fair number of sand/dust storms, you would have thought there should be very obvious signs of leeward and windward build-up. There is a bit, its true, but nothing like the amount there should be if there are all these storms. The other evidence I do not see, comes from spherules. These are not 'blown' into huge piles which is what you would have expected if there were any wind at all.

The Rovers apparently rely on dust storms to clean their solar panels we are told. However, the panels and other machinery looks pretty clean for vehicles which have been out and about for years without anyone to clean them. 

Looking at the cars around where I live, the dust on Earth makes things pretty dirty and people normally have their car cleaned occasionally too. How do the Rovers solar panels get cleaned, is a question which no-one has yet answered and leads to conspiracy theories in themselves.

Yes, I realise that the wind is supposed to be a weak pathetic cousin of our wind s here on Earth, but a wind strong enough to create dust devils which can be captured on film, should also be strong enough to blow millimetre-sized granules around.

Forgive me for questioning these things, but they do not make sense to me.

Someone, maybe it was Skipper, has suggested that these images of dust devils from above, could actually be water/steam geysers (similar to Old Faithful in Yellowstone Park) and not dust devils at all. The result would probably look the same. 

The other thing to consider which is more controversial, is that we have more than once, found localised small-scale steam or smoke made by the Martians (if you believe in them, of course). This means that if, what we have found is actually steam/smoke, then these dust devis could be something generated by the beings living there and not dust devils at all.

Credit: N. Thomas (MPAE) et al., 1.5-m La Silla Telescope, ESO

Jul 13, 2004
The Jets of Hale-Bopp

When the comet Hale-Bopp began discharging beyond the orbit of Jupiter, it marked the beginning of the end for standard comet theory.

One of the observations leading to the dirty snowball theory of comets was that most of the periodic comets begin to grow tails at about the same distance from the Sun: between Jupiter and Mars. The determining factor was thought to be the distance at which the comet became hot enough for water and other volatile substances to evaporate into space, creating the coma, or "head," and tail of the comet.

But not every comet obeys even this tenuous "dirty snowball" criterion. Hale-Bopp in particular broke many of the rules. In the photo seen here, it is still too far from the sun for a "snowball" to melt, but it already displays seven jets.

Four years after Hale-Bopp left the inner solar system, it was still active. It displayed a coma, a fan-shaped dust tail, and an ion tail -- even though it was farther from the Sun than Jupiter, Saturn or even Uranus. The comet's tail was shrinking, but it was still about five times longer than the distance between the Earth and the Moon. At this distance, the Sun's heat will not melt ice. If it could, the icy moons of Saturn and Jupiter would be as dry as our own scorched Moon.

From an Electric Universe point of view, a comet's tail arises from the INTERACTION between the electric charge of the comet and the solar discharge plasma. The comet spends most of its time far from the Sun, where the plasma charge density is low. The comet moves slowly and its charge easily comes into balance with that region. On the other hand, as the comet approaches the Sun, the nucleus moves at a furious speed through regions of increasing charge density and varying electrical characteristics. The comet's surface charge and internal polarization, developed in deep space, responds to the new environment by forming cathode jets and a visible plasma sheath, or coma. The jets flare up and move over the nucleus irregularly, and the comet may shed and grow anew several tails. Or the comet may explode like an overstressed capacitor, breaking into separate fragments or simply giving up the ghost and disappearing.

The dirty snowball model was never tenable and has been discredited.  This has profound implications for theories of the origin of the solar system.

Credit: NASA/NEAR Shoemaker

Jul 12, 2004
Craters on Eros

The NEAR-Shoemaker probe of the asteroid Eros revealed a non-random cratering pattern that continues to baffle astronomers.

Craters on asteroid Eros were expected to show a typical random distribution. There should be a few large craters, more medium-sized craters and many more small craters, because impacts of smaller objects should happen more often than impacts of large objects.

But when NEAR-Shoemaker passed close to Eros in 2000-2001, researchers discovered that the craters don't follow the expected distribution curve. The few large craters and the many medium-sized craters appear as expected, but craters smaller than 100m in diameter are rare.  This is a problem for the impact-model: how can most of the small rocks in space have consistently missed the asteroid for billions of years?

A lower limit to the size of craters is an expected feature from an Electric Universe point of view. The size of craters is related to the strength of the arc discharge that carves them. Below a specific threshold, the arc cannot be maintained. It quenches, so smaller craters are not produced.

Arc discharges, and the conditions which ignite and quench them, will vary with the size, composition, charge, and other factors unique to each individual world. The number of times a surface is electrically etched can vary, too. Comets experience arcing every time they pass through the inner solar system. Asteroids may have received most of their craters during the event in which they were born. A single episode of arcing would leave craters characteristic of the conditions prevailing at that one time. The record may or may not be "overwritten" depending on whether further arcing episodes occur under different conditions.

Credit: NASA/JPL/Malin Space Science Systems

Jul 09, 2004
Martian Dust Storms

MOC PICTURE OF THE DAY CAPTION: From time to time, the Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) catches--in action--an afternoon dust storm, dust devil, or other dust-raising event. The dust-raising event shown here, probably the result of a sudden strong gust of wind, occurred in November 2003 in a crater located near 57.5°S, 60.6°W. Sunlight illuminates the scene from the upper left, so the dark area below the dust plume is its shadow. The picture covers an area about 3 km (1.9 mi) across.

On Mars, the air is 100 times thinner than on Earth—too tenuous to raise dust. Yet Martian dust storms are larger than any seen on Earth.

What makes a Martian dust-storm? On Earth, we think dust storms are raised by the wind, and we think we know what makes the wind blow -- sunlight heats the ground; conduction heats the air above it, and convection makes the air move. If the air moves violently enough, as you see in thunderstorms, it can even separate charges and create lightning.

On Mars, the air is 100 times thinner and 75 degrees colder. Yet Martian dust storms are larger and taller than any seen on Earth. Occasionally, when Mars is closest to the sun, billowing dust envelopes the whole planet. The viking landing craft discovered the Martian sky was pink from all the dust in it. Scientists expected the sky would be dark because the atmosphere is so thin. They expected Martian winds would be too weak to raise dust, let alone to generate dust devils.

NASA scientists studied the dust devils in Arizona in order to understand more about what causes them on Mars. They discovered an unexpectedly high electric field of up to 10,000 volts per meter associated with dust devils on Earth. This suggests that dust devils on both planets are an atmospheric electric discharge phenomenon akin to the electric winds produced by air ionizers.

If all planets are involved in a solar electric discharge their atmospheres must be forced to conduct electricity. Mars does not have thunderstorms like the Earth. Instead, in its extremely thin and dry atmosphere, it produces a scaled up version of discharges in the dry air of earthly deserts – dust devils.

Radio image of Sagittarius A taken with the VLA by Y. Farhad-Zadeh & M. Morris

Jul 08, 2004
Driving Forces of the Milky Way

The core of our galaxy is a region full of mysteries, including flares that can brighten the central area by a factor of four in a few days or by a factor of two in forty minutes.  From an electric universe point of view, this is the most active expression of the electric power of the Milky Way.

Dust veils most of the core of the Milky Way from optical observations, but today's radio, infrared, ultraviolet and x-ray telescopes uncover intriguing images and data about the activity at the center of our home galaxy. It's a region full of mysteries, including the remnants of an unexplained hyper-explosion a few thousand years ago and flares that can brighten the central area by a factor of four in a few days or by a factor of two in forty minutes.

From an electric universe point of view, this is the most active expression of the electric power of the Milky Way. This is where currents are focused from the spiral arms down into a tiny donut-shaped plasmoid. From the center of this plasmoid, electric currents spray out from the axis of the galaxy, then return along the spiral arms, inducing magnetic fields and lighting up the stars. The energy stored in the plasmoid is released in  prodigious outbursts of high speed particles and radiation, heralded by explosive flares.

Credit: A. Zijlstra (UMIST) et al., ESA, NASA

Jul 07, 2004
NGC 6302: Bug Nebula

A hundred years ago astronomers assumed that any body larger than an asteroid would be constrained by gravity to a spherical shape. But as telescopes got better, reality intruded.

Planetary nebulae in particular, now thought to be the final explosive stage of large stars, fail to live up to spherical expectations. Over 60 years ago, Dr Charles Bruce, of the Electrical Research Association in England, began to note the similarities between planetary nebulae and electrical discharge phenomena. In this Hubble Telescope image of the planetary nebula known as the Bug Nebula, you can see many examples of these electrical characteristics. The overall shape is an hourglass, not a sphere. The central star is hidden by a dark dust torus. The light of the star is rich in ultraviolet, one of the signatures of electric discharge. And the shapes within the nebula mimic the twisted filaments, spirals and pillars typical of electrical discharge in plasmas.

Plasmas in the lab form cellular structures separated by thin layers of opposite charge called double layers. Does the same thing happen in nebulas? That's a tough question to answer, because the only known way detect a double layer is to send a probe through it, and nebulas are far beyond the reach of our spacecraft. But everywhere we've sent probes in our solar system, we've found cellular structures separated by double layers, just as we found in the plasma lab. We call these structures magnetospheres, magnetotails, bow shocks, comet heads and tails.

Hannes Alfvén says, "... it is unpleasant to base far-reaching conclusions on the existence of a structure which we cannot detect directly. But the alternative is to draw far-reaching conclusions from the assumption that in distant regions, the plasmas have properties which are drastically different from what they are in our own neighborhood. This is obviously far more unpleasant ... " Although the answers are not yet known, Electric Universe researchers begin by assuming that the behavior of plasma will be the same whether you encounter it in the plasma lab or in a far-away stellar formation like the Bug Nebula. And that assumption offers a whole new viewpoint for the universe we live in.

Credit: NASA/JP//SSI

Jul 06, 2004
Saturn's Spokes

When Voyager I and Voyager II flew past Saturn in Nov 1980 and Aug 1981, astronomers were surprised to see that the middle ring had dark "spokes".  But when the more recent Cassini probe reached Saturn, astronomers were surprised again: the spokes were gone.

The Electric Universe may explain this mystery. The spokes are caused by radial discharges from Saturn¹s magnetosphere into the planet¹s ionosphere. Such low-latitude discharges are observed in the laboratory when a magnetized sphere is immersed in an electrified plasma. In Saturn¹s case, the rings provide a more easily ionized, "dusty" plasma that would tend to concentrate the discharges in the plane of the rings. The effect on the ring particles is to temporarily alter their polarization and to move them out of the plane of ring. This change in optical properties causes the "spokes" to appear.

But why was Saturn's magnetosphere discharging then and not now? In 1980-81, the Sun's electric activity, the solar sunspot cycle, was at its maximum and Jupiter, Saturn and the sun were in a line. Today the solar cycle is approaching minimum and the planets are separated by about 75 degrees. We already know that the activity of solar maximum produces global electrical effects on Earth: the auroras brighten and move toward the equator, radio communications are disrupted, power grids and satellites may be affected.

Are the spokes of Saturn another electrical expression of the solar cycle? Is Jupiter's giant magnetosphere, which stretches almost to Saturn's orbit, a factor? Since Cassini is scheduled to orbit Saturn for much longer than the brief fly-bys made by the Voyagers, it may observe the rings long enough to learn more about the relationship between Saturn's spokes, the solar electric cycle and the relative positions of the giant planets.

Cassini's journey to Saturn promises new insights for the growing field of plasma cosmology. But there's another Saturn question related to the history of human culture. Saturn is the dimmest of the planets visible to the unaided eye. Few people today know how to find it in the night sky, and even Galileo's telescope-power was so low that the rings appeared only as ear-like extensions. In spite of this, ancient cultures cast Saturn in central role. They spoke of him as a supreme ruler, king of the sky, master of time, and lord of the rings. Can Cassini solve this mystery, too?

Mars photo credits: MSSS/THEMIS                           Lab photos on upper right by Wal Thornhill

Jul 05, 2004
Olympus Mons

Olympus Mons on the planet Mars defies categorization as a "volcano," but bears a striking similarity to a lightning blister.

Olympus Mons on the planet Mars is taller than three Mount Everests and about as wide as the entire Hawaiian Island chain. But it¹s almost as flat as a pancake. Its edge is nearly as abrupt as a pancake, too, ending in a scarp up to 6 kilometers (almost 4 miles) high.

The huge mound rises amidst several lesser regions of the Tharsis Bulge. Planetary scientists call Olympus Mons a volcano. But when examined in detail, it bears only a superficial resemblance to some earthly volcanoes.

Olympus Mons has all the characteristics of a lightning blister. Such raised bell-shaped blisters can be found on the caps of lightning arrestors after a cloud-to-ground strike. They are called "fulgamites". The material that forms the elevated fulgamite is scavenged from the surrounding surface to produce an encircling depression or moat. Olympus Mons has such a moat, which does not match the bulge expected from upwelling magma beneath a volcano.

Earthly lightning usually consists of a number of strokes in quick succession along the same ionized path. So the discharge that creates a fulgamite is often followed by successive lesser strokes that may excavate overlapping pits on the top of the fulgamite. The six overlapping circular craters on the summit of Olympus Mons display this pattern.  The smaller craters center on the walls of the larger and are cut to different depths, as if with a cookie cutter. Such a pattern is not volcanic, where the caldera floors are supposed to be due to collapse or draining of magma from beneath.

A laboratory example of an electric arc scar on a clay anode surface is shown on the right. At moderate power, the electric arc rotates (top right) and raises an extensive circular blister, seen clearly in the middle right image. As the power is increased, the arc briefly stops moving and burns a small circular crater, seen as a glowing spot in the top image and at 4 o¹clock in the bottom image. The tendency for the arc to "stick" to one spot on the anode creates localized very high temperatures, sufficient to vaporize some of the anode surface to form smooth circular crater floors and steep terraced walls ­ exactly as seen in the Olympus Mons calderas.

Do we see any volcano on Earth produce such a configuration on its summit now? We can find none. Yet the pattern is repeated more than once on the Martian Tharsis Bulge (row of pictures below), including the summit of neighboring Ascraeus Mons (lower left), a striking replica of the Olympus Mons "calderas".

The electrical hypothesis maintains that within minutes successive strokes from a cosmic lightning bolt lifted the peak and carved the craters on the summit. It seems likely that the Tharsis Bulge will also trace to the same period of Martian history, when the planet must have engaged another charged body at close range. If so, evidence of such an exchange must be pervasive on the Martian surface, and all the major features of the planet must be reconsidered from this new viewpoint. Though geologists have never entertained the electrical scarring of rocky planets and moons, rapidly accumulating evidence has the potential to change this situation dramatically.

Photo Credit: Mel Acheson, C.J.Ransom

Jul 02, 2004
Craters in the Lab

Planetary scientists have long assumed that most craters in the solar system are due to impact. But laboratory experiments reveal that electrical discharge can replicate observed cratering patterns in surprising ways.

How do you make a crater? Scientists have been asking that question ever since Galileo turned his telescope on the moon in 1610. The discussion was between those who thought craters were made by volcanoes and those who thought craters were made by impacts. In the late 20th century, geologists on Earth and astronauts on the moon showed that they weren't volcanic. The impact hypothesis won by default.

But there is a third possibility, one that has now been explored in detail by advocates of the "electric universe." The craters in the photo above were made in a laboratory by electric discharge. This cratered surface duplicates many characteristics of planetary geology. The craters tend to clump according to size, to fall in lines and arcs. Notice also that the ground appears burnt or discolored where the discharge was strongest and the craters the densest-not unlike the surface of Mars and other rocky bodies in the solar system. The centers of some of the craters have bumps, as do many enigmatic craters on the Moon, Mars, and other surfaces. Also of interest are the dark streaks from two larger craters close to the center of the picture, a pattern similar to the "wind"-streaked craters found on Mars.

This third possibility was first voiced in the 1960's. But astronomers have had little interest in such lines of investigation because they have long assumed that electric forces cannot reach across the vacuum of space. However, numerous space age findings have contradicted that belief. From the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts in 1958 to the latest discoveries of galactic magnetic fields and x-ray galactic clusters, it has become increasingly clear that charged particles fill what once was called the "void" of space. Electrical activity is pervasive across both interplanetary and interstellar space.

Is it possible that our solar system was once more active electrically than it is today? When electric sparks strike a solid surface, they can produce not only craters but many other common geological features as well. Experimental research on the electrical etching of rocky surfaces must therefore be a priority. According to the electrical theorists, most of the large-scale geological features in our solar system can only be generated by electric arcs. And if this is true, then the actual history of our solar system bears little or no resemblance to textbook descriptions.

Posted by Eaol:

Look at me with a straight face and in all honesty and tell me that looks nothing like the sidewalks in my previous post.  The electric universe theory may not be supported by mainstream science, but it has been scientifically verified beyond reasonable doubt (lab experiments and , much unlike the gravity-only theories that mainstream "science" so desperately clings to.

1)How do you know that these hexagonal structures are formed by huge lightning bolts rather than for example, as a result of some aliens warring between themselves in the ancient past?
Well, I don't. Not for certain, however, I am not afraid to admit that tiny uncertainty. But then again, their weapons would have to be working on a similar principle, given that the events leading to Mars looking as it does now have been experimentally proven to be caused electrically. Whether that was natural or unnatural is uncertain at this time, but may be known in the near future.
 
By the way, the electric universe model can easily explain how a flying saucer might work, using antigravity and a virtually unlimited power source, and it would also explain faster-than-light travel, and almost gurantees that there must be a few extraterrestrial civilizations that must already know of our existence.  While it is speculative, it is based in science in the EU model, and on at least one publicly-known experiment (as far as antigravity goes).

2) It is not recognised by mainstream science and cannot be proved. 
Just please remember that there is a difference between being accepted by mainstream science and being proven.  The geocentric model was accepted by mainstream science.  So was creationism.  And so is the Big Bang, right now.  It doesn't remotely mean that it is true (much as some less-free minded individuals would like you to think).
And things that have been "proven" (really only better theories) qaren't necessarily supported by the mainstream scientific community out of fear, ignorance, and greed.