Question about the current powering the sun

[webolife]

First of all, nice critique Zeus. Hit all the cogent points very well.
My problem with Setterfield is not that he's a creationist, but that he binds himself to the governing presuppositions of relativity while still trying to refute constant light speed. Many creationists are bold enough to challenge core assumptions of post-modern science but still want to hang on to failed relativistic premises, often weakening their case. My problem with Bridgman (and perhaps with you?) is the flat dismissal of "creationism" as somehow counter-scientific. If we limit our meaning of "scientific" to the study of only things that are natural and material, then we do well, but we don't have the right to dismiss those things that are outside the pervue of our study, such as creation, design, etc., as though these are by definition or necessity opposed to science. Not saying you, ZeuZ, necessarily intended to do this, but your tone at least hinted same.
Secondly, I am a backyard astronomer myself, and find that astronomy is a valid science for at least these reasons:
1. What I see is what I get. Nothing unscientific about that!
2. The closer we look, eg. with bigger, better, less-obstructed instruments, observing across the whole spectral range, the more we realize that what we see is what we get; eg. the Hubble deep survey images revealed that clusters of galaxies at the universe's "edge" look pretty much just like galactic clusters in our own neighborjood in terms of variety, complexity, alleged age, etc.
3. Processes and principles observed on earth are better suited to explain astronomical phenomena than processes and principles observed to be impossible on earth! Obvious example: "solar flares" observed in a plasma lab vs. failed fusion experiments.
4. My own oft-stated claim, that light action is instantaneous across distance, provides me the additional insight that what I am looking at through my telescope is presently happening "out there", in other words, I am getting what I see!

[junglelord]

So you think that time is not a limiting factor for light?

[vadar]

Journey Into the Science of the Sun
By Dave Bullock
04.17.08
http://www.wired.com/science/discoverie ... ery_plasma

PASADENA, California -- Researchers at the Bellan Plasma Group at Caltech are using a giant vacuum chamber to simulate the jets of plasma found on the surface of the sun.

Plasma, or ionized gas, is all around us -- in HD displays, fluorescent lamps, neon signs and arc welders. But even though plasma is the most common state of matter in the universe, relatively little is known about how it works. Scientists hope that by studying it in the lab, they may understand the sun's fusion energy, which would provide limitless, clean power for the planet.

In addition to shedding light on fusion, this close-up view could reveal information about the formation of stars and forecasting space "weather" -- magnetic-field disruptions and solar flares that can damage or destroy spacecraft.

Click through the gallery to explore this state-of-the-art lab where scientists are zapping gas to make plasma and extend our understanding of the universe.

Two separate gasses become plasmas and interact inside the vacuum chamber. The colors shown are false, but help to differentiate between the different plasma streams.


Photo: E. V. Stenson and P. M. Bellan, from a paper titled "Dual-species plasmas illustrate MHD flows", to be published in IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science: Images in Plasma Science in June 2008. Copyright © 2008 IEEE.

I hope this article isn't out of place on this thread. These experiments can hardly confirm "the sun's (disputed) fusion energy" because - I presume - there is an external electrical input. But they seem to have all the right ingredients for creating a mini planetary nebula:


RCW79; 'Stars in a Bubble'

[webolife]

Great photos, vadar.
JL asked: So you think that time is not a limiting factor for light?
Have you read Ralph Sansbury's treatise on "Gravity Magnetism and Light"?
http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns
I'm not yet "all the way there" with Sansbury, but the brief dialogues I had with him a couple years back were very influencial on my thinking,
and led me to the EU. Someone suggested elsewhere that a thread be started on Sansbury's work... let's do it!
My unified field view answers some questions for me that Sansbury's work doesn't seem to touch, but he has info that I never dreamed of.

[bboyer]

<snip>Someone suggested elsewhere that a thread be started on Sansbury's work... let's do it!
<snip>

See http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=8&t=384 in The Future of Science section.

[vadar]

Webolife wrote: "Great photos, vadar".

Thank you. However, I didn't mean to disrupt the flow of discussion on "the current powering the sun" with that article, and will back off after making this brief clarification.

"Researchers at the Bellan Plasma Group at Caltech are using a giant vacuum chamber to simulate the jets of plasma found on the surface of the sun"...

The fundamental logical flaw marring this experiment: To demonstrate the result of internal "fusion" reaching the surface of the sun the experimenters' model must begin with an INTERNAL source of energy, which must be shown to affect or cause observed surface events.

What they are actually demonstrating with their expensively equipped, state-of-the-art facility is the way plasma (their word - actually 'gases') behaves when 'zapped' by an EXTERNAL electrical source - ie, they are inadvertently confirming the EU hypothesis.

Also, their laboratory example might better illustrate processes that form and develop large-scale planetary nebulae than solar flares or 'jets'. But such matters belong elsewhere.

[rduke]

Interesting to note.. Not a single sunspot on the sun for the past two days.

http://www.spaceweather.com/

[nick c]

A response to the Bridgman attack on Scott's The Electric Sky:

Scientism: The new religion of modern mythology, part 1
http://www.mikamar.biz/sc-sk/scientism-b.htm



nick c