plasma cosmology

[bigwaga]

hi all

I have been researching plasma cosmology since i heard the topic on the truth hertz show. looks like we have been lied to about how the universe works as well as everything else.

check out the following and judge for yourself.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/home.htm
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm
http://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderbolt ... _T6__JDeyw

enjoy

john

[sullivan]

hi all

I have been researching plasma cosmology since i heard the topic on the truth hertz show. looks like we have been lied to about how the universe works as well as everything else.

check out the following and judge for yourself.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/home.htm
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm
http://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderbolt ... _T6__JDeyw

john

I've been a "fan" of the Electric Universe theory for some time now. It certainly is far more plausible than anything that preceded it. I don't think we have been lied to, but I do think that those who have invested their effort into and gained their status from the more accepted theories will fight to discredit this one.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Another related interesting link on Electric Weather and EMHD ... I think an EMHD style weapon was used on 9/11 on the Twin Towers. If you look at the "Exploding Houses" theory below...it has a similarity to the towers collapse and turning into "dust" rather than multiple large blocks of concrete and steel. --CSR

------------------

http://charles-chandler.org/Geophysics/ ... 20Main.php

The study of coupled electromagnetic and thermodynamic forces is a young discipline. Here is a quote from a recent work that describes the types of problems that are being tackled with such interdisciplinary methods.86

    Electro-Magneto-Hydro-Dynamics (EMHD) addresses all phenomena related to the interaction of electric and magnetic fields with electrically conducting or magnetic fluids. Electric and magnetic flow control, for example, is a challenging area of mathematical and engineering research with many applications such as the reduction of drag, flow stabilization to delay transition to turbulence, tailored stirring of liquids, pumping using traveling EM waves, and many others. The application of electric and magnetic fields in diverse branches of materials science such as crystal growth, induction melting, solidification, metal casting, welding, fabrication of nanofibres, fabrication of specialty composites and functionally graded materials, or ferrofluids is recently of growing interest. Fully coupled EMHD systems, that is, in situations where the flow-field is influenced by the electric and magnetic fields and where these fields are in turn influenced by the flow-field, are challenging research subjects with applications in geo- and astrophysics (dynamo, magneto-rotational-instability, etc.). Numerical simulations of many important processes (the growth of single crystals, metal casting for aerospace applications, aluminum electrolysis, etc.) require sophisticated tools for coupled fluid flow ~ heat/mass transfer ~ electromagnetic fields. In summary, computational EMHD is a vital subject of recent research with a long list of interdisciplinary applications and scientific problems.

In a more general sense, it's instructive to note that meteorologists have learned to rate tornadoes on the basis of the degree of damage, not the speed of the wind. In the early days of tornado research, before a large volume of tornado videography was available, the degree of damage, measured after the fact, was the only information available. But this practice persists, even now that tornado videos are abundant, and rarely does anybody bother to calculate the wind speeds of a tornado from the frame-to-frame motion, which is a straight-forward task if you know the distance of the tornado from the observer and the zoom factor to which the camera was set. The reason is that meteorologists know that they're not going to be able to make sense of the results, so this is not useful information to them. But if we know the degree of damage and the speed of the winds, the discrepancy is a measure of "other force" present, which is useful within the EMHD framework.

Then there is a different type of levitation that sometimes occurs outside of the vortex. Scientists have not applied any critical scrutiny to these reports, and the common "explanation" is flatly absurd. A tornado was nearby; tornadoes are suction vortexes; things were picked up; any questions? Yet outside of the vortex, the lines of motion are parallel to the ground. So the vertical motion within the vortex would be irrelevant, even if the conventional framework could explain it. A critical treatment of the topic requires that we explain how objects are picked up just with horizontal air motion.

At first blush, this doesn't seem like a hard task. Cars will become airborne if subjected to crosswinds above roughly 60 m/s. (See this video for an example.) Contrary to popular belief, it is not the Bernoulli Effect that lifts up the cars, wherein a low pressure has developed above the car. Rather, when air broadsides the car, some of it gets forced under the car, creating a high pressure below it, and this is the force that lifts up the car. Once off the ground, the car is then rapidly accelerated in the direction of the wind, and hits the ground (for the first time at least) 5 m or more away. If it bounces, wind can once again get under the car and lift it up, and the process repeats. So all that is necessary for cars to get levitated is that the windspeed be in excess of 60 m/s, which is in the EF2 range. And there is plenty of evidence of cars being picked up and bounced for some distance in the strong winds of EF2+ tornadoes.

But there are a number of well-documented cases of vehicles being picked up and behaving in a manner that cannot be explained in such simple terms. In these cases, the vehicles were picked up after the strongest winds had passed, and instead of being accelerated in the direction of the winds, they simply hovered for a while.

For example, during the tornado that hit La Plata, MD, on April 28, 2002, a bus with 30 people aboard was lifted off the ground, kept suspended in air for several seconds, and then set back down on the wheels. High wind speeds could have picked up the bus, but then the bus would have been accelerated horizontally, and it would have hit the ground hard and rolled several times, destroying the bus and probably killing many of the passengers.

Here's a similar report, again from Maryland, this time from Steve Tracton, Ph.D. (meteorology):

    In 1995, I was in my car one night, patiently waiting the opportunity to turn from a driveway onto a street in Temple Hills, MD, when seemingly out of nowhere the wind increased to what I perceived as hurricane strength. Needless to say, I was totally surprised and scared beyond belief when my car rose at least two feet off the ground. Fortunately, the wind decreased as rapidly as it had increased, and my car settled back down on the driveway.

Watching any of the videos of cars hitting the ground after being picked up by high wind speeds, do the words "settled back down" come to mind?

There are also confirmed reports of people being picked up by a tornado, and sometimes carried for some distance, and then set back down gently enough that they were relatively unharmed. (The longest confirmed distance that a tornado carried a person who survived was 400 m.163 The person suffered no injuries when hitting the ground.) High wind speeds could certainly have picked up the people, but then the people would have been rapidly accelerated to a substantial percentage of the speed of those winds. It's hard to imagine how people could hit the ground after being airborne for 50 m in winds powerful enough to pick them up, and not be injured in process. (Hitting the ground at 15 m/s without breaking bones takes skill. In an uncontrolled fall, hitting the ground at 5 m/s can break bones. So how do strong winds pick people up, and then set them back down at less than 15 m/s?)

And then there have been cases where entire houses have been picked up and carried, and then set back down, damaged but still relatively intact. The anomalous aspect of this is not that an object as big as a house could be picked up. Houses are mainly empty space, with lots of surface area upon which the winds can exert force. But houses simply are not built in such a way that they can be picked up, except from underneath, without falling apart. Without being able to get underneath the house to pick it up, the only other way to generate the necessary uplift without destroying the house is with a force that can act upon the entire mass at once. There are only two such forces in nature operative at this scale — gravity and electromagnetism. It's not gravity, because the houses were picked up. That leaves electromagnetism.

The EMHD model asserts that the tornadic inflow is positively-charged, and the surface of the Earth has an induced negative charge. This means that particulate matter from the surface that is getting blown in the wind will be negatively-charged. Objects exposed to the tornadic inflow (such as people, cars, etc.) will be sandblasted with this particulate matter, and will therefore pick up a negative charge. After becoming negatively charged, the objects will be attracted by the electric force to the positively-charged air around them. Since there is more air above them than below them, the net force will be upward. And since electromagnetism is 39 orders of magnitude more powerful than gravity, even an extremely small EM force can be the determining factor. Also, if the strongest positive charge in the storm is in the RFD, objects will be subjected to the most powerful uplifting force after the tornado passes.

Figure 103 shows a house that was picked up and moved by winds that were rated EF2 (because of the removal of the roof), but the car in the garage was left untouched. This is anomalous because EF2 winds are capable of blowing cars off of roads, or even picking them up.164

We should now take an even closer look at the most anomalous cases — the ones in which the objects actually hovered. The reports are consistent in asserting that the fastest winds had already passed, and the eyewitnesses guessed the wind speeds at something like 30 m/s when the objects started "floating." Such winds are clearly insufficient to levitate the objects, and this section presents the more plausible explanation, that the electric force was at work. Yet even in 30 m/s winds, we still wouldn't expect objects to hover — the drag force should have accelerated the objects in the direction of the wind. For example, when Dr. Tracton's car was picked up at least two feet off the driveway, there shouldn't have been a way for it to "settle back down" onto the same driveway. (Watch the videos of cars being picked up by high wind speeds.) The car should have hit (first) at least 5 m off the driveway, and Dr. Tracton probably wouldn't have lived to tell the story.

If we consider the conditions in which this will happen, we find the answer. The objects were subjected to triboelectric charging as the tornado passed by. Then they were levitated. This means that they were then between the RFD and the tornado. There the winds will be traveling from the RFD toward the tornado. If the RFD is the primary source of positive charge, the lines of electric force would not have been straight up. If we look at Figure 75, and assume that the entire RFD is positively-charged, and then consider the force exerted on a negatively-charged object halfway between the RFD and the tornado, we see that the net force will be angled upward, toward the main body of charge in the RFD. (See Figure 104. Note that while electric lines of force intersect a plane conductor perpendicular to it, the Earth is only an excellent conductor below the water table, and the soil above the water table could be a good or fair conductor. So the lines of force will not be perpendicular to the surface, but rather, to the water table, which could be several meters below the surface.) So while the wind will be blowing toward the tornado, the electric force will be upward and back toward the RFD, the net result of which could be no net lateral acceleration. It would be a rare case indeed that the forces happened to be perfectly matched. And so it is in fact. Nevertheless, this is the only way that hovering in 30 m/s winds is possible.

So what can lift a roof straight up, in the absence of aerodynamic uplift, and in winds slight enough that the roof isn't even accelerated (much) in the direction of the winds by the drag force, then to fall back down on walls that were "blown outward"? If it's not aerodynamics, the only other possibility is that it's the electric force. If so, here are two possible signs of charge that could be at work.

First, it's possible that the house becomes negatively charged, by getting sandblasted with negatively-charged particulate matter, or by ingesting such particles matter through broken-out windows. Once the house develops a negative charge, it will be attracted to the positive charge aloft. This is the more likely explanation if the house gets levitated (as discussed in the previous section).

The other possibility is that the dominant force is the positively-charged air flowing through, around, and over the house, that could draw electrons out of the house, leaving it positively charged. In this case, the electric force that would cause the house to "explode" would simply be the electrostatic repulsion of each piece of the house from each other piece. If the structure fails, the pieces will be accelerated upward and outward (simply away from each other). They will not be lofted as we would expect if they were negatively charged. Hence they will "explode" upward and outward, but will then fall to the ground.

It's also significant to note that a house subjected to a strong positive charge might be weaker than a neutrally-charged house. Ionization loosens the covalent bonds that give solids their strength. So the factors acting on the house might include all of the following:

    lateral and/or vertical aerodynamic force,

    electrostatic repulsion, and

    weakened structural beams, posts, and fasteners.

This might also help explain why building materials (such as lumber) seem to "disintegrate" under the force of a tornado, to a degree that cannot be explained simply by the force of the winds. Some damage assessments have explicitly mentioned the surprisingly small size to which everything was reduced. This would make more sense if all of it had a strong positive charge, and therefore did not have its normal strength.

There have also been numerous cases of unusual combinations of strength and weakness in the collisions of objects in tornadoes. Some of these are easily explained away. Figure 105 is frequently cited in cult literature as an example of the bizarre things that a tornado can do. It is easy to understand how a projectile moving at 100 m/s could penetrate wood. The hard part is understanding why the vinyl didn't shatter.



Figure 105. A phonograph record blown into a telephone pole, courtesy NOAA.


It is somewhat more plausible to assume that the record did not get driven into the windward side of the pole, but rather, into the leeward side. With 100 m/s winds against the pole, it would have been leaning, and this means that cracks in the wood (clearly visible in the photograph) would have opened up on the leeward side. Airborne debris could then fall in behind the pole, trapped in the eddy downwind of it, and then be drawn toward the pole. A piece of debris could then happen to get wedged gently into one of the cracks in the wood. After the winds subsided, the pole would have straightened up again, closing the cracks, and then gripping the debris tightly.

Other cases are harder to explain away, such as the board that was rammed through another board in Figure 106, and pieces of straw that were driven into telephone poles.



Figure 106. Damage from the Tri-State Tornado, 1925-03-18, courtesy NOAA.
Damage from the Tri-State Tornado, 1925-03-18, courtesy NOAA.

Some of these cases are explicable just with Newtonian forces, but all of them become far easier to understand if the object being impacted had been ionized.  :shh:

To summarize this and the previous section, we can expect shorter objects (such as people and cars) in the tornadic inflow to become negatively charged as they get sandblasted with saltating particulate matter. They will then become candidates for levitation. Taller objects (such as houses) might be more prone to positive charges, where the ionization, combined with aerodynamic forces, compromise their structural integrity, in which case they will appear to "explode."

[-Pas-]

Bigwaga wrote :

I have been researching plasma cosmology since i heard the topic on the truth hertz show

Yeah that is a fascinating subject, Charlie Giuliani once again did a great show :

http://mp3.oraclebroadcasting.com/Truth_Hertz/Truth_Hertz.2011-06-10_16k.mp3

Thanks for the links.