Mass, polar jets and the destruction of maintream theories

[Michael Mozina]

As we all know, the obvious explanation for powerful "jets" around various objects in space are Birkeland currents. In fact various objects end up being the condensation points of matter inside of a Birkeland current. The maintream has consistently and entirely ignored this possibility since the dawn of time, and they continue to do so.

As you may or may not know, they tend to base their claims about powerful polar jets as originally only be caused by "black holes". They were however rather surprised to discover that such jets were not entirely dependent upon the mass of the black hole:

http://www.space.com/18893-black-hole-j ... ities.html

"This was one of the surprises of this work, that this efficiency of conversion of the energy into light is essentially the same for black holes with very different masses, very different ages and completely different environments," Nemmen said.

Apparently the mass of the object isn't directly related to the power of the jets as they originally claimed.

Back in August, they had to again scale back their mass requirements of the object and they had to scale it down in size to something akin to a neutron star:

https://public.nrao.edu/news/pressrelea ... -star-jets

Previously, black holes were the undisputed kings of forming powerful jets. Even when only nibbling on a small amount of material, the radio emission that traces the jet outflow from the black hole was relatively bright. In comparison, neutron stars seemed to make relatively puny jets -- the radio emission from their jets was only bright enough to see when they were gobbling material from their companion at a very high rate. A neutron star sedately consuming material was therefore predicted to form only very weak jets, which would be too faint to observe.

Recently, however, combined radio and X-ray observations of the neutron star PSR J1023+0038 completely contradicted this picture. PSR J1023+0038, which was discovered by ASTRON astronomer Anne Archibald in 2009, is the prototypical "transitional millisecond pulsar"-- a neutron star which spends years at a time in a non-accreting state, only to "transition" occasionally into active accretion. When observed in 2013 and 2014, it was accreting only a trickle of material, and should have been producing only a feeble jet.

"Unexpectedly, our radio observations with the Very Large Array showed relatively strong emission, indicating a jet that is nearly as strong as we would expect from a black hole system," Deller said.

So we have further confirmation that the "jets" around the poles of various objects in space are not necessarily directly related to the mass of the object that is embedded in the jets.

It also turns out that even *failed planets* sit in the middle of these powerful Birkeland currents, and so the mainstream's entire claim about the emission strength of the jets being directly related to the mass of the embedded object is pretty much falsified by recent observations:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/cosmic-lights ... 58212.html

In fact even 'failed stars' have been shown to produce (sit within) these "jets".

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18909876/ns/t ... its-poles/

A "failed star" with only 24 times the mass of Jupiter is the smallest known object to spout jets of matter from its poles, a phenomenon typically associated with much larger black holes and young stars.

So basically the entire basis of the mainstream claims about polar jets and "black holes" is falsified by the fact that such polar jets aren't limited to exclusively heavy massive objects and there doesn't seem to be any real relationship between the mass of the object and the formation of the jets.

[SDK]

Hello Michael.

I certainly love your take on the subject.

Even though I see your fight with the windmills as futile on the level of your personal "dialogues" with whatever trolls, I also see their usefulness in bringing up the best in you for the rest of us to see and appreciate.

Thank you, Slavek.