Bitcoin Forum

What does this community think of this Hypothesis?

  “We live in an electric world. Our cities are visible from space at night, blazing with electric lights. The electricity courses invisibly in the darkness over great distances along thin power lines. We find electricity indispensable. Nature does the same since all matter is electrical. Yet astronomy is stuck in the gas-light era, unable to see that stars are simply electric lights strung along invisible cosmic power lines that are detectable by their magnetic fields and radio noise.

It is now a century since the Norwegian genius Kristian Birkeland proved that the phenomenal ‘northern lights’ or aurora borealis is an earthly connection with the electrical Sun. Later, Hannes Alfvén the Swedish Nobel Prize winning physicist, with a background in electrical engineering and experience of the northern lights, drew the solar circuit. It is no coincidence that Scandinavian scientists led the way in showing that we live in an Electric Universe.

Why have they been ignored? The answer may be found in the inertia of prior beliefs and the failure of our educational institutions. We humans are better storytellers than scientists. We see the universe through the filter of tales we are told in childhood and our education systems reward those who can best repeat them. Dissent is discouraged so that many of the brightest intellects become bored and drop out. The history of science is sanitized to ignore the great controversies of the past, which were generally ‘won’ by a vote instead of reasoned debate. Today NASA does science by press release and investigative journalism is severely inhibited. And narrow experts who never left school do their glossy media ‘show and tell,’ keeping the public in the dark in this ‘dark age’ of science. It is often said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” History shows otherwise that entrenched paradigms resist extraordinary disproof.

--Wal Thornhill


Here is the youtube link to all the videos, most of the ideas make sense to me.

Documentary 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EAlTcZFwY

Documentary 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRV1e5_tB6Y

Documentary 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34wtt2EUToo

Official movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA

Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/ThunderboltsProject/videos

Well for one even if this theory was proven to be true, it wouldn't be a lot of use to us right now simply because it would be next to impossible to measure electricity accurately in objects that are light years away. Gas and light are observable. Perhaps with newer technology, they will at some point revisit this theory.

I'm sorry ... But why this topic has been created? You say that you will not tolerate contradictory statements. But I can not be silent. If you do not have resulted articulate arguments in support of his theory. You can also say that the earth is flat. And the fact that the earth is flat, in one of the topics, some have argued, and even provide links to resources where there is evidence of their words. Personally, my opinion is that all these statements complete nonsense.

One of the major points in electric universe is that "red shift," which is interpreted by cosmologists to be produced by stars at great distances moving away from us rapidly, is being interpreted incorrectly by standard cosmologists. Electric universe info shows that the "red" is simply a quality of stars that are near other stars, while exchanging materials between the two through electric plasmas. This is similar to what happens in welding.

The whole electric plasma idea shows us that stars may not be as far away as we think. In addition, being electric in nature, with electric plasma exchanges going on throughout the universe, might afford us electric "levitation" methods for traveling the plasmas to the stars, methods that are much simpler than all the standard propulsion theories and ideas out there today, and far less dangerous.

8)

You must be one of the obstinate, standard cosmologists... one who is so greatly against finding anything new, that you won't even tolerate new ideas that might upset your dogmatic, "religious," scientific thinking.

8)

Haha what?  :D

Go learn 6th grade physics my boy. You should have failed that class.


The stars are made up of hydrogen and helium that burn and emit electromagnetic aura in all frequencies, some are visible light that light up the Earth.Yes the stars are gas balls. Now go back and do your homework!

We are so glad you have set us straight... you who have been out there and analyzed the stars from every angle... and would never lie to us.

Go and do YOUR homework, and see that possibly the greatest part of the things that science tells us doesn't really have much of any backing in science at all, but mostly in speculation... and straight out lies.

8)

Um actually he's correct, there's a huge amount of evidence for what he's saying. It's nothing to do with analyzing stars from "every angle". It's to do with the electromagnetic radiation spectrum visible from stars.

By analyzing the radiation spectrum emitting from stars, we can detect their chemical composition. This has to do with "Fraunhofer lines" and how they show what chemicals stars are made of. It's actually an ingenious way of analyzing stars.

No I'm just saying that nuclear fusion does create electromagnetic radiation. And there is no reason to believe that green pixies and unicorns exist in the sun.

But I guess 200 years of modern physics are not good enough for you.

Well, if you don't believe that green pixies and unicorns are in the sun, why do you even talk about it?

When 200 years of modern science is wrong, it is still wrong.

8)

To all you mathematicians take 6 minutes to check out this video.

Elegant Math and Failed Theory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRFCNCMANws

I fully agree with Mr. Leprikon opinion. Personally, I am not an enemy of the new. I personally agree that science does not stand still. I find it interesting to learn about new discoveries in all fields of science and technology. But I understand, Mr. Leprikon, all the Offer should be made on the basis, not empty words. If not, then all the words of no more than science fiction. Sometimes it's more like a fairy tale.

Earth is a a reflection of electric lady land.  From spirit we come and to spirit we go.

Beyond body is a sea of soul.

This forum isn't really a place for proof. It is a place that we might express logic somewhat. The proof is in the examination of things that the experimenters did. Go and examine. There is a lot more logic to electric cosmos than to a nuclear one.

8)

Smoke DMT and be electricity.

What is the cause of the gravitational lense effect if there is no space time topology?

Perhaps, in this forum, not in the rules that everyone has to take responsibility for his words. And you can write nonsense. Then I say the earth is flat and revolves around the moon. Santa Claus flies reindeer each year, and through the chimneys, distributes gifts. Today, white is black and black is white. Do you believe me? ;)

Interesting, I'll see some of the documentaries.

The do have videos of lab experiments conducted, they simulated a galaxy formation in a lab, seems kinda way out their but check it out.

Pretty hard to do that, you need a black hole in the middle that swirls the gas around it and creates the disk shape of the galaxy.

I'm sure you don't want to make a black hole on earth :D

These experiments have the potential to generate microscopic black holes. They have very short lifespan and not enough to cause significant damage around.

Please no black holes, I dont want the Earth to be sucked in :D

Besides the evaporation of a microscopic black hole causes a blast that is stronger than 10,000 nukes, so no black holes please!

lol I'm not the one doing this.
I think these guys know what they are doing anyway. ;)

I'm not so sure about that, i think the Cern guys are crazy and reckless, they should setup their dangerous experiments on the Moon or Mars, not in the middle of Europe, where anything could go wrong.

Exposing the Myth of Gravitational Lensing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fePQdJNVF9g

Besides, nobody knows that the Cern guys aren't creating the particles rather than simply finding them.

8)

Please point me to just one gravitational lens that was not achromatic.

The nobel prize with some million dollars are waiting.

Btw. You could also try to tell me what the size of the lens for refraction would be for example our sun.

^^^ He should answer the question of course, but you have to show that there even is a gravitational lens, now that we have seen that it is simple aberration of light through particles near a star or other object.

8)

I bolded what is important to answer your post.
The material that is needed for the refraction doesnt exist.

If we take our sun for example and do some calculations then the thickness of the lens has to be around 20.000 km and more of water or air. Or some other material with 700.000 km thickness.

It just doesnt work.

Personally, I am not into this enough to answer your points. But the people in the videos seem to think that the material is there. Didn't they say that it exists in the form of nutrinos?

8)

Here is a string of videos from Youtube that shows the flaws in nuclear and gravitational theory in the stars and cosmos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_9n3cOL690&list=PL0851C89BD3B6ADBA&index=1

8)

The Dark matter hoax

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmROfjgViLE