IF-I-SEEK-US
Imminent Fulfillment, Immortality, Safety, Empowerment, Equality, Knowledge, Unity, Society

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches
of evil to one who is striking at the root." -
Henry David Thoreau
Suggested Reading Sequence

Modern Myth Articles

Catastrophism Pioneers
Modern Philosophy
Modern Reification
Scientism Religion
The Modern Mythology
Foreword-Pythagorus' Trousers
Origin of Modern Geology
The Great Pyramid

Ancient Myth Articles

Ancient Saturn Worship
Myth to Model
The Golden Age
Jupiter Worship Beginning
Moon Worship Beginning
Saturn Worship Beginning
The Universal Monarch
The Central, Polar Sun I
The Central, Polar Sun II
The Central, Polar Sun III
The Central, Polar Sun IV
The Saturn Myth
The Saturn Theory I
The Saturn Theory II
The Saturn Theory III
The Saturn Theory IV
The Saturn Theory V
The Star of Dawn
The Comet Venus-1
The Comet Venus-2
The Comet Venus-3

Site Section Links

Introduction Material
Word Definitions
Human Condition
Christendom Analyzed
Christendom Challenged
Christendom Condemned
Bible/Canon Issues
Philosophical Issues
Psychological Issues
Theological Issues
Creation Issues
Cosmology Material
Culture/Ancient Culture Issues
Paradigm Material
Jesus' Teachings
Misc Ancient Myth Material
Saturn-Jupiter Material
Venus-Mars Material
Modern Mythology Material
Language Development
Symbol Development
Miscellaneous/Conclusion
PDF Download Files

Stars: Nuclear or Electric?
By Don Scott

Part I

The Electric Sun hypothesis is a logical extension of the Electric/Plasma Universe theory which came into being through the seminal work of Hannes Alfven, Kristian Birkeland, P. Carlqvist and others. The person who originated and codified these ideas is the late Ralph E. Juergens of Flagstaff, Arizona. .The ideas embodied by the Plasma Universe are now being developed further by researchers such as Wallace Thornhill, Anthony L. Peratt, Eric Lerner, and others.

PROBLEMS WITH THE THERMONUCLEAR (FUSION) MODEL

"The certainty that the Sun generates its prodigious outpourings of energy through thermonuclear reactions deep in its interior has been with us for about half a century." [Juergens 1979].

But, there are many reasons to doubt this presently accepted theory of how our Sun (and every other star) generates its radiant energy. In almost every article written for the popular press, the very first sentence usually contains some reference to the "fact" that the Sun is, at its core, a thermonuclear fusion reactor. The heat (energy) produced in this core then "rises to the Sun's surface by convection (a laminar fluid flow) and is there radiated out into space". The granulations we see on the photosphere are supposedly the tops of these convection columns.

The fusion model was first proposed by a "great expert" who simply rejected the idea that the Sun could be getting its energy from outside - because he could not conceive of such a thing happening. Therefore, if the energy was coming from inside, and the Sun hasn't burned up in a few billion years, the source had to be nuclear energy.

There are at least five major things wrong with this scenario. The first and most important is the "Missing Neutrino Problem".

1. Missing Neutrinos

A thermonuclear reaction of the type assumed to be powering the Sun must emit a flood of neutrinos. These neutrinos have not been found after thirty years of searching for them. A series of grandly expensive experiments have failed to find the necessary neutrino flux. Wouldn't a normally intelligent scientist now stop and go back and ask if perhaps some other mechanism might be at the root of this energy production?

Mainstream science has consciously turned a blind eye to the possibility of any other energy producing mechanism in the Sun. Instead, presently there is great activity trying to explain how the flood of neutrinos that "must be there" remains invisible. It is suggested that neutrinos must come in various "flavors", some of which are unobservable.

A detailed description of the "Missing Neutrino Problem" is available at:

http://home.thezone.net/~squires/text/SciSoc/NEUTRINO.html

A Quote from Astronomy Magazine Jun 1999

"The results of Davis's experiment are now the stuff of science legend. While the cleaning solution proved successful at capturing solar neutrinos, the surprise was how few of them there were to catch - less than half the number predicted by [thermonuclear] solar models. The results have since been confirmed by other experiments, all of which use different means of detecting neutrinos. No matter how astrophysicists adjust their [thermonuclear] solar models, it has proven impossible to accommodate the experimental results within standard theory. ... With astrophysicists confident that their understanding of solar physics was on firm ground, suspicions turned toward the neutrino itself as the source of the problem."

WHY were they confident they were on "firm ground" when all the experimental evidence strongly suggests just the opposite?

Some solar neutrinos have been observed - but less than half the number required if the fusion reaction really is there in the Sun's core. If any fusion is taking place at all, it is most certainly not at the sun's center. The negative results from the neutrino experiments have resulted not in any re-examination of solar models, but rather, an intense theoretical discussion of new magical properties that solar neutrinos "must have" because we cannot see them.

In the Electric Sun model there is no energy produced in the core - energy is produced at the surface and not by nuclear fusion, but by electric arc discharge. There is no "missing neutrino" problem in the Electric Sun model.

2. Convection of Energy Up from the Core

The accepted view of how the sun transports its energy from its central core outward to its surface is the mechanism dubbed "non- stationary convection." The granules that are visible on the photosphere are, in the accepted view, the tops of laminar columns that penetrate down toward the core. Supposedly, heat (energy) is smoothly transported outward from the core in this "convection zone" via these tubes. There are several problems with this idea.

The Reynolds Number

"The Reynolds number is a dimensionless measure that combines several physical parameters and pinpoints conditions under which a moving fluid will behave this way or that way. The number is essentially a ratio between forces tending to accelerate a fluid medium and viscous forces that resist such acceleration. Under given conditions, motions in one fluid - liquid, gas, or plasma - will be unlike those in another fluid unless their respective Reynolds numbers are approximately the same."

When the Reynolds number of any fluid exceeds a critical value, flow in that fluid due to convection or any other accelerating force will be turbulent and highly complex.

"The actual Reynolds number of the photosphere, as calculated from observable characteristics of the plasma, turns out to be in excess of 10^11, which is to say, at least 100 billion times greater than the critical value! Clearly, then, any convective motion in the photosphere should be violently turbulent and highly disordered..." [Juergens 1979].

Again, to quote Juergens: "Many facile assertions to the contrary, it becomes increasingly obvious that photospheric granulation is explainable in terms of convection only if we disregard what we know about convection. Surely the cellular structure is not to be expected."

In the Electric Sun model there is no transporting of energy from the core up to the surface - energy is produced at the surface. There is no need for magical "non-stationary convection." The "granules" are really anode tufts (electric arc discharges).

3. Temperature Minimum below the Corona

Any typical source of radiant energy is expected to obey the inverse square law. That is to say, the farther we get away from it, the less energy we receive per unit area. A wood stove is hottest at its core, a bit less on its outside surface, and as we backup away from it, we feel continually less and less radiant energy on our body. This too is the way the Sun ought to act if it really is generating all its energy in its core and then liberating that energy at its surface.

Instead, however, the Sun is coolest at its surface - only about 6000K! But then, as we back farther away from it, the temperature abruptly jumps to about 2 million K in the corona.

http://electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm Figure 1. Energy, E-field, and Charge density profile as a function of radial distance from the Sun's surface.

The standard fusion model is completely incapable of explaining (let alone predicting) this behavior. . . . The Electric Sun model predicts the temperature minimum and shows why it occurs (see below).

4. Acceleration of the Solar "Wind" Ions

The positive ions that are the main constituent of what mainstream astronomers euphemistically call the solar "wind" move faster and faster the farther away from the Sun they get. They accelerate! Nothing in the fusion model predicts nor explains this observed phenomenon. The orthodox "explanation" is that photons collide with the ions and accelerate them.

Any student of physics who has heard of electric charge and electric fields, knows that the way to get electrically charged particles to accelerate is to apply an electric field to them. The acceleration of the positively charged solar "wind" particles is a purely electrical phenomenon. It is accurately predicted by the electric sun model.

5. Periodic Fluctuations in the Sun's Output and Size

There is experimental evidence that the Sun vibrates in a way that throws doubt on both the assumed convection process for heat transportation and the thermonuclear reaction itself. There is a fluctuation with a 27 day 43 minute period observed in the stream of particles emanating from the sun.

In the 1970's the Sun was observed to be oscillating in brightness with variable cycles lasting from a few minutes to nearly one hour.

The sun actually expands and contracts in size (diameter) with a periodicity of 2 hours and 40 minutes. Russian investigators found a periodic rise and fall of the entire solar surface, the amplitude of which was 10 kilometers in height. Then another observer recorded a regular expansion and contraction of the Sun with a period of two hours and forty minutes.

These pulsations are much more consistent with a homogeneous model of the Sun - like a balloon whose gases are of uniform density throughout its body. In Nature (Jan 15, 1976) two British theorists, J.Christensen-Dalsgaard and D.O. Gough emphasized the unlikelihood that any model can be devised for the Sun to accommodate both the observed radial oscillations and the thermonuclear theory. They are also consistent with a model wherein the Sun is an isodense sphere of gas that supports, on its outer surface, an electric arc discharge powered externally, electrically.

THE ELECTRIC SUN HYPOTHESIS

Juergens, Milton, Thornhill (and others) propose an electrical mechanism for the energy release of the Sun. The major properties of this Electric Sun model are as follows:

Most of the space within our galaxy is occupied by plasma (rarefied ionized gas) containing electrons (negative charges) and ionized atoms (positive charges). Every point in the plasma has a measurable (electric) potential energy (or voltage).

The Sun is at a more positive electrical potential (voltage) than is the space plasma surrounding it - probably in the order of 10 billion volts.

The Sun is powered, not from within itself, but from outside, by the electric (Birkeland) currents that flow in our arm of our galaxy as they do in all galaxies. In the Plasma Universe model these currents create the galaxies and the stars within them. It is a small additional step to propose that these currents also power those stars. Galactic currents are of low current density, but, because the size of the Sun is large, the total current (Amperage) is high. The Sun's radiated power at any instant is due to the energy imparted by incoming cosmic electrons. As the Sun moves around the galactic center it may come into regions of higher or lower total current and so its output may vary (both periodically and over time).

Positive ions leave the Sun and cosmic electrons enter the Sun. Both of these flows add to form a net positive current leaving the Sun. This constitutes a plasma discharge analogous in every way (except size) to those that have been observed in electrical laboratories for decades.

The Sun's radiative lifetime will extend only until the solar charge (and therefore, its electrical potential [voltage]) equals that of its galactic surroundings. Incoming cosmic ray protons, which bombard the Earth and Sun from every direction, represent currents (solar "winds") from higher voltage stars which liberate positive ions with sufficient energy to overcome the Sun's repelling voltage and impinge on its surface. (Is this mechanism, by which the Sun is able to regain some + charge, significant in extending its ultimate lifetime? No one knows at this point.)

Because of the Sun's positive charge (voltage), it acts as the anode in a plasma discharge. As such, it exhibits many of the phenomena observed in earthbound plasma laboratories, such as anode tufting. The granules observed on the surface of the photosphere are anode tufts.

Part II

The Electric Sun Hypothesis

Juergens, Milton, Thornhill (and others) propose an electrical mechanism for the energy release of the Sun. The major properties of this Electric Sun model are as follows:

1) Most of the space within our galaxy is occupied by plasma (rarefied ionized gas) containing electrons (negative charges) and ionized atoms (positive charges). Every point in the plasma has a measurable (electric) potential energy (or voltage).

2) The Sun is at a more positive electrical potential (voltage) than is the space plasma surrounding it - probably in the order of 10 billion volts.

3) The Sun is powered, not from within itself, but from outside, by the electric (Birkeland) currents that flow in our arm of our galaxy as they do in all galaxies. In the Plasma Universe model these currents create the galaxies and the stars within them. It is a small additional step to propose that these currents also power those stars. Galactic currents are of low current density, but, because the size of the Sun is large, the total current (Amperage) is high. The Sun's radiated power at any instant is due to the energy imparted by incoming cosmic electrons. As the Sun moves around the galactic center it may come into regions of higher or lower total current and so its output may vary (both periodically and over time).

4) Positive ions leave the Sun and cosmic electrons enter the Sun. Both of these flows add to form a net positive current leaving the Sun. This constitutes a plasma discharge analogous in every way (except size) to those that have been observed in electrical laboratories for decades.

5) The Sun's radiative lifetime will extend only until the solar charge (and therefore, its electrical potential [voltage]) equals that of its galactic surroundings. Incoming cosmic ray protons, which bombard the Earth and Sun, represent currents (solar "winds") from higher voltage stars which liberate positive ions with sufficient energy to overcome the Sun's repelling voltage and impinge on its surface. (Is this mechanism, by which the Sun is able to regain some + charge, significant in extending its ultimate lifetime? No one knows at this point.)

6) Because of the Sun's positive charge (voltage), it acts as the anode in a plasma discharge. As such, it exhibits many of the phenomena observed in earthbound plasma laboratories, such as anode tufting. The granules observed on the surface of the photosphere are anode tufts.

A cross-section taken through a granule is shown in the three plots below. See Don Scott's website for graphs at: http://www.users.qwest.net/~dascott/Sun.htm

The horizontal axis of each of the three plots is distance, measured radially outward, starting at a point near the bottom of the photosphere (the true surface of the Sun - which we can only observe in the umbra of sunspots). The first plot shows the energy per unit (positive) charge of an ion as a function of its radial distance out from the solar surface. The second plot, the E-field, shows the outward radial force (toward the right) experienced by such a positive ion. The third plot shows the locations of the charge densities that will produce the first two plots.

Figure 3. Energy, Electric field strength, and Charge density as a function of radial distance from the Sun's surface.

All three of these plots are related mathematically. By the laws of physics: E = - dV/dr, and Chg density = dE/dr. In words: The value of the E-field, at every point r, is the (negative of) the slope of the energy plot at that point. The value of the charge density at each point, r, is the slope of the E-field plot at that point. The charge density plot necessary to produce the compound energy curve between points c and e used to be called a "double sheath". Modern nomenclature calls it a "double layer"(DL). It is a typical and well known phenomenon in a plasma discharge. Because of the DL being there between points c and e, a +ion to the right of point e sees no electrical force from +ions to the left of point c.

The energy plot (above) is for positively charged particles. Because the E-field represents the force (toward the right) per unit charge on a positively charged particle, the region wherein the E-field is negative (a to b) is a region where positively charged particles will be accelerated toward the left - inward, toward the Sun's surface. One can visualize them falling down the energy hill from point b to a. Any +ions attempting to escape outward from within the body of the Sun must have enough energy to surmount this energy barrier.

In order to visualize the effect this energy diagram has on electrons (negative charges) coming in toward the Sun from cosmic space (from the right), turn the energy plot upside down. Doing this enables us to visualize the "trap" that these photospheric tufts are for incoming electrons. As the trap fills, the energy level between b and c (inverted for electrons) rises, and so the tuft shrinks, and eventually disappears. This is consistent with the observed random movement and shrinkage of photospheric granules.

Charged particles do not experience electrical forces in the range b to c. Only random "thermal" movement occurs due to diffusion. At a point just to the left of point c, any such random movement toward the right (radially outward) that carries it even slightly to the right of point c will result in a + ion being swept away, down the energy hill, toward the right. Such movement of charged particles due to an E-field is called "drift". This drift of positive ions is the source of the solar "wind" (which is a serious misnomer).

As positive ions accelerate down the potential energy hill from point c through e, they gain extremely high radial velocity and lose random motion. Thus, they become "dethermalized". In this region, the movement of these ions becomes extremely organized (parallel). The pinch effect of parallel current filaments in a plasma should be very strong. If any fusion is taking place on the Sun it is likely occurring here (not deep in the core).

When these rapidly traveling + ions pass point e they lose most of the radially directed E-field force that has been accelerating them. Because of their high velocity, any collisions they have at this point (with other ions or with neutral atoms) are violent and create high amplitude random motions, thereby "re-thermalizing" the plasma to a much greater degree than it was in the photospheric tufts (in the range b to c). This is what is responsible for the high temperature we observe in the lower corona. The photosphere has temperatures reported to be from 4000 K to 6000 K. Ions in the lower corona (just to the right of point e) are reported to be at temperatures of 1 to 2 million K. Nothing else but exactly this kind of behavior could be expected from the electric sun (anode tuft - double layer) model. The "re- thermalization" takes place in a turbulent region analogous to the "white water" boiling at the bottom of a smooth waterfall. In the fusion model no such "waterfall" exists - and so neither does an explanation of the temperature minimum.

The energy plot in figure 3 (to the right of point e) actually trails off, with slightly negative slope, toward the negative voltage of deep space (our arm of the Milky Way galaxy). Consistent with this, a low amplitude (positive) E-field extends indefinitely to the right from point e. This is the effect of the Sun being at a higher voltage level than is distant space. The outward force on positive ions due to this E-field explains the observed acceleration of +ions in the solar "wind" (which is another unexplained phenomenon in the "accepted" thermonuclear model). Mainstream astronomers normally fall back on vague references to the "Sun's mysterious magnetic field" to explain just about everything they can't explain; this acceleration of solar "wind" +ions is a case in point.

The particles in our solar wind eventually join with the spent solar "winds" of all the other stars in our galaxy to make up the total cosmic ray flow.

Astrophysicists tell us that the Sun is a rather mediocre star as far as radiating energy goes. If it is electrically powered, perhaps its mediocrity is attributable to a relatively unimpressive driving potential. This would mean that hotter, more luminous stars should have driving potentials greater than that of the Sun and should consequently expel cosmic rays of greater energies than solar cosmic rays. A star with a driving potential of 20 billion volts would expel protons energetic enough to reach the Sun's surface, arriving with 10 billion electron volts of energy to spare.

It is interesting to note in passing that the three plots shown in figure 3 are analogous to the plots of energy, E-field, and charge distribution found in a pnp transistor. Of course in that (solid- state) device there are different things going on at different energy levels ("valence band" and "conduction band"). In the solar case there are no fixed atomic centers and so there is only one energy band where "the action is". In a transistor, the amplitude of the collector current (analogous to the drift of +ions in the solar "wind" toward the right) is easily controlled by raising and lowering the difference between the energy levels at points a and b (base-emitter voltage). Is the same mechanism (a voltage fluctuation between the anode-Sun and its photosphere) at work in the Sun? e.g., If the Sun's voltage were to decrease slightly - say because of an excessive flow of incoming electrons - the voltage rise from point a to b in the energy diagram of figure 3 would quickly reduce the solar wind (both the inward electron flow and the outward +ion flow). In May of 1999 the solar wind completely stopped for about two days. The mechanism proposed above explains it. The fusion model is at a complete loss in doing so.

The volt-ampere characteristic of a laboratory plasma discharge has the general shape shown in figure 4: The volt-ampere plot of a plasma discharge. [see website -- same as above].

This plot is for a plasma contained in a column - a cylindrical glass tube with the anode at one end and the cathode at the other. These two terminals are connected into an electrical circuit whereby the current through the tube can be controlled. In such an experiment, the plasma has a constant cross-sectional area from one end of the tube to the other. The vertical axis of the plot in figure 4 is the voltage rise from the cathode up to the anode (across the entire plasma) as a function of the current passing through the plasma. When we consider the Sun, of course, a spherical geometry exists - with the sun at the center. Assume a constant total electron drift moving from all directions toward the Sun and a constant flow of +ions outward. As we approach the Sun from deep space, the spherical boundary through which this total current passes has an ever decreasing area. Therefore, for a fixed total current, the current density (A/m^2) increases as we move toward the Sun.

1) In deep space the current density there is extremely low even though the total current may be huge; we are in the dark current region; there are no glowing gases, nothing to tell us we are in a plasma discharge.

2) As we get closer to the Sun, the spherical boundary has a smaller surface area; the current density increases; we enter the normal glow region; this is what we call the Sun's "corona".

3) As we approach still closer to the Sun, the spherical boundary gets to be only slightly larger than the Sun itself; the current density becomes extremely large; we enter the arc region of the discharge. This is the anode tuft. This is the photosphere.

Sunspots and Coronal Holes

In a plasma, the dimensions and the voltage of the anode tufts are both functions of current density at that location (near the anode). The tufts appear and/or disappear, as needed, to maintain a certain required relationship between +ion and electron numbers in the total current. This phenomenon was discovered and reported by Irving Langmuir. In the Electric Sun model, tufting disappears wherever the flux of incoming electrons impinging onto a given area of the Sun's surface is not sufficiently strong to require the shielding produced by the plasma double layer shown in figure 3. At any such location, the anode tufting collapses and we can see down to the actual anode surface of the Sun. Since there is no arc discharge occurring in these locations, they appear darker than the surrounding area and are termed "sunspots". Of course, if a tremendous amount of energy was being produced in the Sun's interior, the "spot" should be brighter than the surrounding photosphere. The fact that sunspots are dark supports the contention that very little, if anything, is going on in the Sun's interior.

Because there is no anode tuft where a spot is located, the voltage rise (region a to b in figure 3), which normally controls the local flow of positive ions leaving the anode surface, does not exist there. In sunspots, then, a large number of ions can be ejected upward toward the lower corona. Such a flow constitutes a large electrical current - and, as such, will produce a strong localized magnetic field.

The Sun's corona is difficult to see except in solar eclipses and in X ray images. In some X ray images of the Sun (such as the one shown in figure 1(b) at the very top of this page) we can see "coronal holes" - large dark regions in the brighter image of the solar corona. The bright regions indicate hotter, more energetic areas of the solar corona, mainly above the sunspot regions. Strong electric currents also flow in and above the Sun's surface in the vicinity of sunspots due to the voltage difference between nearby anode tufts and the sunspots (where there are no tufts). This region is called the sunspot's penumbra. These currents produce magnetic fields. Since, in plasmas, Birkeland currents follow magnetic field lines, the glowing plasma in these regions often shows the complicated shapes of these spot-related looping magnetic fields.

Part III

Prominences, Flares, and CME's

All of the above discussion applies to the steady-state (or almost steady-state) operation of the Electric Sun. But there are several dynamic phenomena such as flares, prominences, and coronal mass ejections (CME's) that we observe. How are they formed? Hannes Alfven, although not aware of the Juergens Electric Sun model, advanced his theory (3) of how prominences and solar flares are formed electrically. It is completely consistent with the Juergens model.

Any electric current, i, creates a magnetic field (the stronger the current - the stronger the magnetic field, and the more energy it contains). Energy, Wm, stored in any magnetic field, is given by the expression Wm = 1/2 Li^2. If the current, i, is interrupted, the field collapses and its energy must be delivered somewhere. The magnetic field of the Sun sometimes, and in some places on its surface, forms an "omega" shaped loop. This loop extends out through the double sheath layer (DL) of the chromosphere. One of the primary properties of Birkeland currents is that they follow magnetic field lines. A strong current will produce a toroidal magnetic field that will expand the loop. If the current following this loop becomes too strong, the DL is destroyed1. This interrupts the current (like opening a switch in an inductive circuit) and the dissipation of the energy stored in the magnetic field is explosively released.

It should be well understood (certainly by anyone who has had a basic physics course) that the magnetic field "lines"2 that are drawn to describe a magnetic field, have no beginning nor end. They are closed paths. In fact one of Maxwell's famous equations is: "div B = 0". Which says precisely that in the language of vector differential calculus. So when magnetic fields collapse due to the interruption of the currents that produce them, they do not "break" and "recombine" (as some uninformed astronomers have claimed). The field simply collapses (very fast!). On the Sun this collapse releases a tremendous amount of energy and matter is thrown out away from the surface - as with any explosively rapid reaction. This release is consistent with and predicted by the Electric Sun model as is shown above.

1. Double layers can be destroyed by at least two different mechanisms: a) Zener Breakdown - The electric field gradient becomes strong enough to rip all charges away from an area, thus breaking the discharge path; b) Avalanche Breakdown - A literal avalanche occurs wherein all charges are swept away and no conducting charges are left - thus the conducting path is opened.

2. A magnetic field is a continuum. It is not a set of discrete "lines". Lines are drawn in the classroom to describe the magnetic field (its direction and magnitude). But the lines themselves do not actually exist. They are simply a pedagogical device. Proposing that these lines "break" and "recombine" is an error (violation of Maxwell's equations) compounded on another error (the lines do not exist in the first place).

The Power Source

The question, "Are there enough electrons out there in nearby space to power the Sun?" is a valid one. Juergens studied it and came up with the following answer: In an article compiled from Juergen's notes after his death by Earl Milton, "Electric Discharge As the Source of Solar Radiant Energy", Juergens (Milton) says the following:

"The solar constant, defined as the total radiant energy at all wavelengths reaching an area of one square centimeter at the Earth's distance from the Sun, is about 0.137 watts per square centimeter (see R.C.Wilson, Journal of Geophysical Research, 83,4003-4007 1978). It works out, then, that the Sun must be emitting about 6.5x10^7 watts per square meter of solar "surface", and the total power output of the Sun is a (very nearly) constant 4x10^26 watts. The hypothetical electric discharge must then have a power input of 4x10^26 watts.......suppose that the Sun's cathode drop may be of the order of 10^10 volts, ...then..the total power input divided by the cathode drop [is] 4x10^16 amperes.....

Let us suppose that the effective velocity of a typical interstellar electron would be about 105 m/s, corresponding to a kinetic temperature of a few hundred Kelvin. From current estimates of the state of ionization of the interstellar gas, we might conclude that there should be as many as 50,000 free electrons per cubic m.(S.A. Kaplan, Interstellar Gas Dynamics - Pergamon 1966). The random electric current of these electrons then would be Ir = NeC/4 where N is the electron density per cubic meter, e is the electron charge in coulombs, and C is the average velocity of the electrons. Using the given values, we find that the random electric current density should be about 2x10^-10 amperes per square meter through a surface oriented in any manner. The total electron current that can be drawn by the discharge is the product of the random current density and the surface area of the sphere occupied by the cathode drop. There is little to indicate how large this sphere might be, but in view of the enormity of the cathode drop it seems likely that the radius of the sphere would be large in terms of solar system dimensions.

The mean distance of Pluto's orbit is 39.5 AU, or about 6x10^12 meters. We might guess that the cathode drop would reach to at least 10^13 meters from the Sun, so that its spherical boundary would have a collecting surface area of somewhat more than 10^27 square meters. Such a surface could collect a current of interstellar electrons amounting to practically 10^18 amperes - twenty five times greater than the total current that seems proper. And of course a larger sphere could collect an even greater current."

So there are enough electrons out there to power the Electric Sun.

Note that although astronomers ought to be aware that magnetic fields require electrical currents to make them, currents and E- fields are never mentioned in standard models. Nor do they seem to be included in astrophysics curricula.

Why Doesn't the Sun Collapse of Its Own Weight?

How can we account for the fact that the Sun has been around for a long time with something like the same luminosity, yet has not collapsed in upon itself.3 In orthodox theory, a main-sequence star like the sun behaves like a ball of gas, its temperature and pressure both increasing monotonically from the outer surface towards the center. The temperature is needed to sustain the pressure, and the pressure is needed to fend off gravitational forces which, in the absence of sufficient pressure, would lead to collapse. It is hard to understand how in Juergens' theory, with no fusion going on in the core, such a "reverse" temperature gradient can be maintained.

The answer is best stated by Wal Thornhill: "The electric star model makes the simplest assumption that nothing is going on inside the Sun. ..... So for most of the volume of a star where the gravity is strongest, atoms and molecules will predominate. (In the electric model that applies to the entire star). The nucleus of each atom, which is thousands of times heavier than the electrons, will be gravitationally offset from the centre of the atom. The result is that each atom becomes a small electric dipole. These dipoles align to form a radial electric field that causes electrons to diffuse outwards in enormously greater numbers than simple gravitational sorting allows. That leaves positively charged ions behind which repel one another. That electrical repulsion balances the compressive force of gravity without the need for a central heat source in the star. An electric star will be roughly the same density throughout, or isodense."

We should also remember, considering a pair of similar particles (say protons) that the strength of the electrostatic repulsion force between them is something like 35 orders of magnitude greater than the strength of gravitational attraction! (Not 35 TIMES, but 35 Orders Of Magnitude). So the offset of the electron from the nucleus can be absolutely miniscule and yet produce an extremely strong force to counteract gravitational collapse.

The Sun does not require internally generated heat in order to avoid collapse.

3. The same question ("Why doesn't it collapse due to gravity?") should be asked about globular clusters of stars or even galaxies. The real answer in these cases is also electrical in nature.

Questions

There are many questions still to be answered regarding the Electric Sun model. Is there any fusion at all occurring in or on the Sun? If so, where - the chromosphere? - the bottom of the corona? - penumbrae of sunspots? What is the exact circuit diagram - precisely what paths do the galactic currents take in the vicinity of the Sun? Will the solar charge be replenished over time by cosmic ions ("rays")? Do incoming cosmic rays help power the Sun? We know that large currents are necessary to produce the Sun's strange and changing magnetic fields. Are the magnetic field reversals observed on the Sun due to reversals (or changes of some sort) in the galactic currents across which the Sun is traveling? Or is the Sun simply traveling through many different current streams? Are pulsars binary stars that act together as relaxation oscillators?

Conclusion

This has been a brief introduction to the Electric Sun model: - the idea that our Sun is a ball of lightning - a huge electrically charged relatively quiescent sphere of gas that supports an electric plasma arc discharge on its surface and is powered by the subtle currents that move throughout the tenuous plasma that fills our galaxy.

The scientific community now ought to at least begin to re-examine the assumptions of today's orthodox thermonuclear models which fail to explain the most basic, observed, solar phenomena. Juergens' Electric Sun model does predict the existence of the temperature minimum. It doesn't require convection to occur where it cannot. It does predict both the existence and the acceleration of the solar wind. The neutrinos are not "missing" they just aren't there.

All of the above are failures of the "generally accepted" thermonuclear model that are easily understood from the point of view of the Electric Sun.

Ralph Juergens had the genius to be the first to develop the Electric Sun model after reading the works of Alfven, Birkeland, Langmuir and other giants of electrical/plasma science. His model uniquely passes the harsh tests of observed reality. His seminal work may eventually get the recognition it deserves. Or, of course, others may try to claim it, or parts of it, and hope the world forgets who came up with it first.

References:

1. The Physics of the Sun and the Gateway to the Stars - Eugene N. Parker, Physics Today June 2000 p26-31.

2. Guest Editorial - Anthony L. Peratt IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.613.

3. Double Layers and Circuits in Astrophysics - Hannes Alfven (Nobel Prize) IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.779.

4. Model of the Plasma Universe - Hannes Alfven (Nobel Prize) IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.629.

5. The Persistent Problem of Spiral Galaxies - Halton Arp, IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.748

6. Evolution of the Plasma Universe: I Double Radio Galaxies, Quasars, and Extragalactic Jets - Anthony L. Peratt IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986 p.639.

7. Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II The Formation of Systems of Galaxies - Anthony L. Peratt IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.763.

8. Intergalactic Plasma - Grote Reber IEEE Transactions on Plasma Physics, Dec 1986. p.678.

9. STELLAR THERMONUCLEAR ENERGY: A FALSE TRAIL? - Ralph Juergens, KRONOS A Journal of Interdisciplinary Synthesis, Vol. IV, No. 4 Summer 1979, pp. 16-27.

10. THE PHOTOSPHERE: IS IT THE TOP OR THE BOTTOM OF THE PHENOMENON WE CALL THE SUN? - Ralph Juergens, KRONOS A Journal of Interdisciplinary Synthesis, Vol. IV, No. 4 Summer 1979, pp. 28- 54.

11. THE NOT SO STABLE SUN - Earl R. Milton, KRONOS A Journal of Interdisciplinary Synthesis, Vol. V, No. 1 Fall 1979.

Home  Definitions  Site Article Map   Contact  Store  Contributions