Global Eruption Rocks the Sun

Leif Svalgaard It is turtles all the way down..
Each called Brahma..? Our present Brahma is around middle age according to Vedic calculations, around 155 trillion years old, (life span of Brahma 100 Brahma years, 72,000 kalpas of 4.32 billion years (a day or night); the life span 311.04 trillion years is less than one nimesa, one second, of the life of the beginningless Lord, which is the Soul of the Universe.
Leif Svalgaard replying to ge0050 You’re right about that! It might turn out to be more like 13.697 billion..
Are these adjustments made because speed of expansion increasing?
Increasing into what space? I’ve read recently that Einstein meant ‘time’ as discrete unit of measurement, not the whole concept of time – is this right?

@ur momisugly Myrrh:
Plasma is NOT ether.
Plasma consists of charged particles, free electrons and ions. As opposed to neutral atoms, where electrons are in balance with protons within the structure of the atom.
Plasma is where the electrons have been stripped away from the nucleus of the atom.
Plasma is subject to the fundamental force of Electromagnetism.

Myrrh,
Is ‘plasma’ used to describe this ‘neutral ether’ or ‘ionised’?
Plasma is matter that has enough ions separated from some of their electrons that, while the total average electric charge of the plasma may be near zero, the separation of charges into positively charged ions and negatively charged ions (including in many cases a large amount of regular atoms that haven’t separated their charges, but there are enough that have that it acts like a plasma) is sufficient that the whole behaves as a plasma including has the ability to transmit electricity and so produce magnetic fields. Plasma makes up the majority of the visible universe and is all around us.
Strike a match? You’ve just created a plasma. Turn on a fluorescent light? Plasma. Lightning? Plasma. Sun’s corona? Plasma. Northern lights? Plasma. Ionosphere? Definitely plasma.
Etc.
Plasma is relatively rare on Earth where we’re familiar with solids, liquids, and gases, but it is exceedingly common in space.
Yet, for some reason, while acknowledging it exists, mainstream cosmologists haven’t fully grasped the importance of plasma and electrical phenomena in space in my lay opinion.
It’s easier to measure magnetism at a distance than it is directly measure electron flow (electricity). So mainstream scientists have been surprised many times to discover just how much magnetism exists in space. Everything from the Sun to the Northern lights were basically assumed not to be magnetic, until scientists (such as Kristian Birkeland) showed that they are.
So mainstream scientists are postulating that some huge, massive magnetic fields that we can measure in space are essentially created internally in the various bodies, like in the core of the Earth, to use one example, or in the Sun’s alleged internal dynamo.
Plasma cosmology proponents and their arguably more radical electric universe brethren don’t necessarily deny that their may be internal electrical processes within the planets and stars, but what they insist on is the majority of these magnetic fields are actually created by electron (electricity) flow in space plasmas.
In fact, they hypothesis that these often flow in so-called “Birkeland currents” — that the magnetic fields generated by the electric current within the plasmas condense the current into narrow bands, usually twinned, that intertwine and twirl.
You’ve observed this phenomena if you’ve ever observed the (mind-boggingly beautiful) Northern Lights in person or if you’ve ever looked at the close-up video of the Sun’s surface).
In short, mainstream astrophysicists say the Sun’s internal dynamo produce its immense and stunning (and pretty much unpredicted) magnetism, solar wind, etc. Plasma cosmology proponents say maybe so, but the majority of this can be explained by interstellar and even intergalactic flows of electricity.
That we can see evidence of both in how the galaxies form, and from directly measured magnetic fields and solar wind in our solar system, and by inference from observing many other events in the universe that can be more elegantly explained using known, laboratory reproducible plasma physics rather than speculating about black holes, and dark matter and dark energy.
Both dark matter and dark energy were “discovered” when it was learned that the amount of visible matter in galaxies, including plasma, is woefully insufficient to explain the formation of or angular momentum of galaxies.
And yet, computer models show that galaxies can form with these qualities using plasma physics with the known quantities of matter visible through observation.
I am not overtly impressed by the “computer modelling” aspect of that, but I do find plasma cosmology far more elegant than continually “discovering” new forms of matter and energy, not because we’ve actually, you know, discovered them … but because mainstream’s cosmology’s theories and calculations don’t explain the universe we see unless you add them in to their equations.
On the nature of stars: The theory that they are internally nuclear powered was devised by Sir Arthur Eddington, a very smart man by all accounts. But he knew, and said, that the competing theory was that the Sun drew energy through some unknown process from the surrounding solar system (and galaxy).
If true, that would quickly and easily explain why the corona of the Sun can be 1-3 million K in temperature, while the surface of the Sun (nearer the supposedly super hot core) is about 6,000 K.
So, according to the standard model, the Sun is amazingly hot in its core, cools down toward its surface, and heats up outside of its surface, in its atmosphere.
There are two main theories used to explain this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Coronal_heating_problem
but neither one of them is sufficient according to their own mathematics. Mainstream scientists use a combination of, “We don’t really know”, hubris, and, “probably both,” to explain this observation.
Ironically, that article refers to Alfvén waves, named after Hannes Alfvén, as one of the possible partial explanations of the coronal heating problem. Yet Hannes Alfvén, who received the 1970 nobel prize in physics for his work on magnetohydrodynamics (the theoretical basis for the fictional “caterpillar drive” in the Tom Clancy submarine thriller, Hunt for Red October), used his nobel speech to caution physicists, and in particular astrophysicists, that they are overlooking much that is important regarding plasmas in space.
Is that not irony? I think it is. The takeaway point is that not everyone who believes plasma and electricity play a far, far bigger role in space than mainstream science currently accepts are idiots.
Would Sir Arthur Eddington, knowing more about the coronal heating problem, be as certain about his internal fusion solar model? Or would Eddington have been a little less certain?
I can’t tell you. Indeed, I can’t tell you who’s right here.
But to say the mainstream cosmology, astrophysics, and solar physics models things satisfactorily is a stretch … they are all very beautiful, on paper.
I love mathematics. I believed them for a long time just because the math is so damn beautiful.
But, their predictions are very often wrong, and they throw new “fudge factors” to maintain the models, especially in cosmology.
That troubles me. Keep an open mind, I say.
Leif may be right, but right or wrong, he doesn’t appear to be especially open minded. Leif said:
“‘Mainstream’ is mainstream because it works.”
That’s one of the reasons it might be, but that’s by no means the only one as readers of this site should know.

Myrrh,
“If plasma isn’t ether, what is ether?”
Ether is a hypothetical medium needed to transmit waves of electro-magnetic energy and in particular of photons (light).
There is nothing in the mathematics requiring ether to have charge separation, or any particular electric charge, for this purpose to the best of my understanding. Einstein said that his special relativity theory allowed for there to be this type of ether, but that mechanics may allow for yet another, to do with accelerating objects in space. I have my doubts that ether in either of these senses is real and physical. I think we’re grasping for a concept to explain things there. We know light does, in fact, reach us, and we wonder how if it has nothing to travel through (we now say that space is teeming with virtual products popping in and out of existence due to the laws of quantum mechanics and, no, I don’t think that’s the “ether” either).
Regardless of what ether is, it isn’t plasma. Plasma’s quite real and non-theoretical. Moreover, it’s easy to make and to observe. There’s probably some in the room with you now, most likely in your computer monitor. (Even if you’re using an LCD or cathode ray tube monitor, they’ll still be some in there: But good luck finding the “ether”!)

Christoph Dollis says:{December 17, 2010 at 2:12 pm}
” The theory that they are internally nuclear powered was devised by Sir Arthur Eddington, a very smart man by all accounts. But he knew, and said, that the competing theory was that the Sun drew energy through some unknown process from the surrounding solar system (and galaxy).”
So there is an unknown process that draws energy to the Sun and that is the basis of EU?

Ah, apologies, should be Christoph. And forgot to close italics.