Big bang .. Problems anyone ?

Have you ever heard of ? Nicola Tesla ?  Guglielmo Marcion ? Thomas Edison ? Hannes Alfvén ? Albert Einstein ? Halton Arp ? quayzarqazquasarqawaz Why is it we have a theory that is taught in schools, verified so many times in the media, that has so many unknowns..? Black holes that so far haven’t been proved to be real. Dark Energy that is said to make up 70% of the universe, but we don’t know what it is and can’t see it. Dark Matter that makes up another 20%, another complete unknown. Why is it a gravity based theory is being taught, whilst it is starting to become obvious, that is an Electric  universe. The Sun is a massive electric fusion,complete with magnetic ropes. Gravity does not cause the fusion, electricity does.”,Estimates of 400 trillion trillion watts! Where does this prodigious amount of energy come from? The answer is very simple. The nuclear fusion process that takes place in the central region of the sun converts hydrogen into helium plus energy. ” Making stuff.. At the middle of our galaxy there is not a black hole, but a super massive fusion reactor ejecting matter outwards. Stars being created, Quasar ejection, the energy is phenomenal . From the Thunderbolts crew

The electromagnetic force is so much stronger..

Coulomb’s Law

The interaction between charged objects is a non-contact force that acts over some distance of separation. Charge, charge and distance. Every electrical interaction involves a force that highlights the importance of these three variables. Whether it is a plastic golf ball attracting paper bits, two like-charged balloons repelling or a charged Styrofoam plate interacting with electrons in a piece of aluminum. “How weak is gravity? We can find out by comparing the gravitational force with the electromagnetic force, the other long-range force in nature, in the case of a hydrogen atom. By using Coulomb’s law of electrical attraction and repulsion we can compute the magnitude of the attractive electrical force, the gravitational force remains almost 39 orders of magnitude weaker than the electric force at all distances. That is a NUMBER so large that we can hardly fathom it: roughly the ratio of the size of the observable universe to the size of an atomic nucleus. Relatively speaking, at short distances the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces all have comparable strengths, 39 orders of magnitude stronger than gravity.”

And when it comes to nuclear fusion gravity based theories have this to say. “Gravity also caused stars and galaxies to form in the first place. The standard model of cosmology has the universe beginning in a Big Bang roughly 14 billion years ago, followed by an expansion that continues today. At an early age, before stars existed, the universe could be described as a nearly homogeneous gas of matter and radiation. The matter consisted mostly of hydrogen atoms, helium atoms, neutrinos, and dark matter (an unknown form of matter that interacts via gravity but whose exact nature is currently a field of intense research, ). In regions of space where the density of matter slightly exceeded the average, the gravitational attraction between the constituents of the matter caused the gas to coalesce into large clouds. Friction inside the clouds due to collisions between the atoms and further gravitational attraction caused regions of the clouds to coalesce to densities so high as to ignite nuclear fusion, the energy source of stars.”

Ok so the electrical force are orders of magnitude stronger, than gravitational forces , but the relativists suggest it is gravity that causes fusion..!!@Wtf

Isn’t time to consider the electrical phenomenon in the Universe ? Halton Arp and his practical work and experience in the field of Astronomy, shows a different way of doing things. Not a gravity centric universe that requires the existence of theoretical Black Holes that apparently live in the middle of the galaxy. But a matter creating phenomenon that happens with the immense energy in the fusion reactions.

Arp discovered, from photographs and spectra with the big telescopes, that many pairs of quasars (quasi-stellar objects) which have extremely high redshift z values (and are therefore thought to be receding from us very rapidly – and thus must be located at a great distance from us) are physically connected to galaxies that have low redshift and are known to be relatively close by. Because of Arp’s observations, the assumption that high red shift objects have to be very far away – on which the Big Bang theory and all of “accepted cosmology” is based – has to be fundamentally reexamined.!

Hannes Alfvén , from wikki ” Swedish electrical engineer, plasma physicist and winner of the 1970 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on magnetohydrodynamics (MHD). He described the class of MHD waves now known as Alfvén waves. He was originally trained as an electrical power engineer and later moved to research and teaching in the fields of plasma physics and electrical engineering. Alfvén made many contributions to plasma physics, including theories describing the behavior of aurorae, the Van Allen radiation belts, the effect of magnetic storms on the Earth’s magnetic field, the terrestrial magnetosphere, and the dynamics of plasmas in the Milky Way galaxy.

In the 20th century no scientist added more to our knowledge of electromagnetism in space than Hannes Alfvén (1908–1995). His insights changed the picture of the universe, revealing the profound effects of charged particle movement at all scales of observation. Awarded the Nobel Prize in 1970 for his contribution to physics, Alfvén emerged as a towering critic of directions in astronomy, cosmology, and astrophysics. Though he was surely not correct on everything he proposed, decades of space exploration eventually confirmed a lifetime of observations and hypotheses, often with implications that many space scientists did not want to hear. “In the world of specialized science,” wrote plasma scientist Anthony Peratt, “Alfvén was an enigma. Regarded as a heretic by many physicists, Alfvén made contributions to physics that today are being applied in the development of particle beam accelerators, controlled thermonuclear fusion, hypersonic flight, rocket propulsion, and the braking of reentering space vehicles.” “But Alfvén’s impact reached far beyond new technologies. He devoted much of his life to the study of plasma, a highly conductive, elementary form of matter characterized by the presence of freely moving charged particles, not just electrically neutral atoms. Normal gases become plasma through heating and partial ionization as some percentage of the atoms give up one or more of their constituent electrons. Often called “the fourth state of matter” after solids, liquids, and gases, plasma is now known to constitute well over 99 percent of the observed universe.” Hannes Alfven was well known for his criticism of the big bang, in part this led to ostracizing from mainstream cosmology. But his ideas were brilliant and were constituted from Laboratory work and observation of the sky.  His research and contributions to space science, including explanations of the Van Allen radiation belt, the reduction of our magnetic field during magnetic storms, the formation of comet tails, the formation of our solar system, the magnetosphere around the earth, the properties of plasmas in out galaxy and the fundamental nature of the universe alive with plasma ! Thunderbolts info  A plasma/electric universe !! I put it to you . the electromagnetic force is stronger than gravityquasarhub

“Paul Davies and John Gribbin write: ‘the big bang was the abrupt creation of the Universe from literally nothing: no space, no time, no matter. This is a quite extraordinary conclusion to arrive at – a picture of the entire physical Universe simply popping into existence from nothing.’2 This theory is not just ‘extraordinary’ – it is utterly absurd! If there was no space, no matter, and no energy before the hypothetical big bang, then there was obviously nothing to undergo a random fluctuation and nowhere for it to occur. Moreover, expanding space requires the continuous creation of space (i.e. energy) out of nothing.

Albert Einstein popularized the notion of curved space with his general relativity theory (1916): celestial objects allegedly warp the space (or more precisely, ‘spacetime’) around them, producing the force of gravity. However, spacetime is simply a mathematical abstraction in which time is treated as a negative length. And while lines, paths, and surfaces in space can be curved, no concrete evidence for the slightest curvature of space itself has ever been found; nor is there any reason to think that three-dimensional space can be curved – unless we conjure up a fourth dimension of space for it to be curved in.” Teszla

6 thoughts on “Big bang .. Problems anyone ?

  1. Indeed, the EM force is stronger than gravity. But, you are not mentioning the fact that on the large scales of the solar system, the galaxy, the universe, etc… the number of positive charges in the universe is equal to the number of negative charges. This essentially “cancels out” the long-range effect of EM forces in the universe, making cosmology and its implications a function of general relativity rather a subject of EM.


      1. To have such dynamical currents, requires a dynamical magnetic field by Maxwell’s equations, which implies that space time should be highly anisotropic, which is not what we observe.


  2. Interesting comment to make, if one wikkis anisotropic and one can find so many examples of anisotropic behaviour in space.
    “Physicists use the term anisotropy to describe direction-dependent properties of materials. Magnetic anisotropy, for example, may occur in a plasma, so that its magnetic field is oriented in a preferred direction. Plasmas may also show “filamentation” (such as that seen in lightning or a plasma globe) that is directional.” Birkeland currents.

    Plasma science is the best used to define magnetic fields in plasma, which I am sure follows Maxwells equations.


  3. I agree that the universe cannot have exactly zero energy in it when you add up all the positive and negative energy in it. How can we have any existence at all when the forces that promote existence cancel each other out. You don’t have to be a scientist to know that the measurement has error in it. It is plain logic.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s