Homopolar Generators

[Michael Mozina]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator

In his book Cosmic Plasma, Hannes Alfven described massive rotating objects in space as "homopolar generators" which transfer some of their spin energy momentum by inducing charged particle flow movement in the surrounding plasma. That energy exchange results in massive current carrying Birkeland current jets near the poles. Indeed we see high speed jets form at the poles of M-87

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/ ... alaxy-m87/

They describe the polar Birkeland current jets as cosmic searchlights. Only these "searchlights" are powerful current carrying plasma filaments from powerful electrical current generators.

Assuming they are able to measure supermassive rotating objects at the core of our galaxy and every galaxy, essentially every galaxy has it's own primary electrical generator in the form of black holes along with billions of rotating suns.

Essentially Birkeland currents wire all the objects in space together.

I hold no belief in the notion of a "singularity" that collapses to a single point, but EU/PC theory certainly allows for massive objects to exist at the cores of galaxies. According to Scott's Birkeland current model, Marklund currents separate the currents by ionization state, with iron near the core, and hydrogen at the outskirts of the filament. It's therefore probable that the core of galaxies contain massive objects, possibly massive enough to form an event horizon around themselves. The "density" of the object need never reach infinity, in fact I would argue that the Pauli's exclusion principle forbids such a thing.

It certainly makes sense to me that the cores of galaxies convert rotational energy into electrical current.

I do however have personal reservations about the mass estimates of supermassive objects based on x-rays and gamma rays without factoring in the existence of electrical current into the equations. They could *easily* be significantly overestimating their mass. That's because they *only* including the energy of the rotation of the black hole into those calculations, when in fact they're wired into an electrical grid made of plasma filaments.

I'm looking forward to seeing whole movies of these objects, and particularly the overlay images at various wavelengths.

[jacmac]

Michael:

I hold no belief in the notion of a "singularity" that collapses to a single point, but EU/PC theory certainly allows for massive objects to exist at the cores of galaxies.

If large Birkeland currents create and /or sustain " massive rotating objects" in space (in galactic centers), it would follow that: As...

Hannes Alfven described massive rotating objects in space as "homopolar generators" which transfer some of their spin energy momentum by inducing charged particle flow movement in the surrounding plasma.

This looks similar to a DC electric motor creating a back electromotive force (emf) when it turns.
But we would not say the back emf is doing the primary work of the motor.

Then you said:

Assuming they are able to measure supermassive rotating objects at the core of our galaxy and every galaxy, essentially every galaxy has it's own primary electrical generator in the form of black holes along with billions of rotating suns.

Micheal, I don't quite follow what is your opinion versus the standard Black Hole theory.
Jack

[Michael Mozina]

I don't have a scientific problem with the concept of massive rotating objects sitting at the centers of galaxies, even massive enough objects to have event horizons around them.

I *do* have a significant problem with "assuming" that such massive objects turn into a "singularity" at a "point".

https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?query ... st&size=50

If they do "collapse" into something "exotic" at high density, I suspect it's a neutron star, or a neutron star with a quark core. I believe that the Pauli Exclusion principle applies to all objects in space.

I also suspect that the mainstream significantly overestimates the amount of mass that such objects possess because they don't consider the electrical (induction) properties of the object when using x-rays and gamma-rays to determine their mass. IMO that probably results in a significant overestimation of their mass and/or their rate of rotation.

[nick c]

Neutrons cannot exist for more than about 15 minutes on their own. They break up into component parts. A neutron star can never be as it would turn into a plasma.
Neutron Stars, Black Holes, and dense cores of Stars are modeled by consensus astrophysics with the a priori assumption that they start as an ideal gas. This is an unrealistic assumption and casts doubt upon the validity of all conclusions derived from such models. All of the above have alternative electrical/plasma models.
Has it ever been demonstrated that a plasma can collapse due to gravitation?

[Michael Mozina]

Neutrons cannot exist for more than about 15 minutes on their own. They break up into component parts. A neutron star can never be as it would turn into a plasma.
Neutron Stars, Black Holes, and dense cores of Stars are modeled by consensus astrophysics with the a priori assumption that they start as an ideal gas. This is an unrealistic assumption and casts doubt upon the validity of all conclusions derived from such models. All of the above have alternative electrical/plasma models.
Has it ever been demonstrated that a plasma can collapse due to gravitation?

Does a sun count? It's entirely possible that you're right that matter doesn't necessarily condense beyond a certain point, but it's still possible for a massive object to exist at the center of Birkeland current. Scott even describes Marklund currents which act to separate the elements by their ionization state, moving iron toward the core of the filament, and moving hydrogen further away from the core. The dense part of the filament is going to dump or carry away massive amounts of ions and electrons through a small area. It certainly seems likely to me that the largest and most massive objects in any galaxy will end up in the core.

Mass does seem to "clump" itself together in space as our own solar system demonstrates. Even the polar jets are successful predictions of Alfven's homopolar generator model.

NASA Viz: Galactic Lobes
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/10918

https://youtu.be/Ya2OXXgn8FU

Our own Milky Way galaxy has visible "gamma ray lobes" that come up through the center of the galaxy, just as a Birkeland current model predicts.

Alfven's homopolar generator model makes sense to me.

Again, I'm pretty certain that the mainstream overestimates the spin rate and mass of such objects by trying to calculate them without respect to electrical currents and larger circuits. Even still, there's no reason that massive objects cannot reside at the core of galaxies, even if you don't believe in neutron stars and singularities.