The Plasma Universe and Max Planck’s Musical Space-Time Revisited
Image: Enganget
Near the end of 2019, signals arrived to Earth from the Voyager 2 spacecraft which have shaken the foundations of modern physics, and brought into question what are the forces and principles shaping the space time of stars within galaxies (and implicitly galaxies within clusters of galaxies).
The data which NASA scientists received from Voyager 2 have catapulted mankind’s ability to finally answer the old question of “what is in the “space” between stars or even between galaxies within our universe? As Voyager Project scientist Ed Stone stated:
“The Voyager probes are showing us how our sun interacts with the stuff that fills most of the space between stars in the milky way Galaxy.”
What did Voyager 2 encounter?
As Voyager 2 exited the Heliosphere (the spherical boundary shaped by the sun’s electro-magnetic field) and moved into the interstellar medium on November 5, 2019, the five sensors still functioning on the craft which was launched in 1977 alongside Voyager-1, measuring magnetic field intensity, cosmic radiation flux and plasma density produced surprising results. As the magnetic field intensity from the sun was no longer felt, an ocean of extremely dense cosmic radiation and plasma was encountered.
Voyager-2’s results corroborate those same measurements which occurred on the faster moving Voyager-1 when it traversed the Heliosphere in 2012 proving that this was not a “localized phenomenon”.
Cosmic rays are the loose term for all forms of highly energized protons and atomic nuclei which are produced in suns, supernovae and other galaxies. Cosmic radiation pervades the solar system and is mediated with terrestrial activity by the earth’s magnetic field. Some examples of cosmic rays on earth include the aurora borealis, cloud formation which mediates warming and cooling of the earth [discovery by Svensmark and co.], and appears to also coincide with earthquake activity, activation/de-activation of viruses and even may play a significant role in the evolution of species.
If you are a layman just encountering this idea, a wonderful introduction to the topic can still be found in the 1957 film “The Strange Case of Cosmic Rays” produced by Frank Capra which is as relevant today as it was 60 years ago.
Plasmas are sometimes known as the fourth fundamental state of matter (the first three being solid, liquid and gas). When the atoms and molecules making up a gas are induced to lose their electrons (becoming ions), an electrically conducive plasma is produced composed of said ions and free electrons.
Rather than supposing the interplanetary and interstellar media is composed of “empty” space or “vacuum”, networks of physicists internationally have accumulated bountiful evidence for decades that an ocean of densely saturated plasma and cosmic radiation is the true medium in which our planets move around the sun, and our sun moves through the galactic center of the milky way every 230 million years.
Some of the most important pioneers in the plasma universe model of solar and galactic space time includes pre-eminent physicists Kristian Birkland, Winston Bostwick, Anthony Peratt and Hannes Alfvén. After winning the 1970 Nobel Prize for his discovery of magneto hydrodynamics, Swedish scientist Hannes Alfvén wrote:
“In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents. Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents. The latter are likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular structure”
The referenced “pinch” effect describes the natural compression of an electrical conducting filament by magnetic forces. It occurs in lightning, aurora borealis and its use by scientists has borne great fruit in magnetically confined plasmas used in fusion energy research. Many breakthroughs in fusion research have been held back for decades due to the pervasiveness of certain false concepts of “forces”, “vacuums”, “black holes” and “dark matter” prevalent in standard theory cosmology. One of the greatest paradoxes encountered in fusion research has involved naive attempts to overcome the Coulomb barrier.
Anyone who has ever attempted to “press” the identical polarities of two strong magnets together will have a visceral idea of the Coulomb barrier. This difficulty increases as the proximity of the magnets is reduced. In the atomic world where the “fusing” of two helium atoms or hydrogen isotopes requires that positively charged nuclei from two atoms occupy one and the same space in order to transmute and release alot of energy in the process, this obstacle is amplified by many orders of magnitude.
Without a concept of the organized harmonics which pervades plasmas which researchers like Bostwick, Alfven, Anthony Peratt et al have proven exist, then the only path to attaining fusion is through brute force as seen by pounding nuclei together, and super-heating and speeding up their motion in giant tokamak reactors.
However, when dealing with plasmas, and the electro-magnetic dynamics of Birkeland currents we are now dealing with frequencies, pulses, and wavelengths that can amplify or de-amplify, create consonances or dissonances with measurable observable effects. In this sense, space actually has more in common with a symphony than with kinetic objects emiting “forces” in a vacuum.
Anthony Peratt’s Galactic Insight
One of the leading figures of the plasma universe school is Anthony Peratt (a leading physicists at the Max Planck Institute for Physics and Astrophysics and close collaborator with Hannes Alfvén), who generated an incredible model of spiral galaxy structures forming within a charged plasma which he conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory. It has long been observed that plasmas have a tendency to create minuscule steady state superstructures like vortices and spheres (called “solitons” for their likeness to the sun). These observed structures form in plasmas for reasons that have not yet been fully ascertained and endure for very short intervals of time. In spite of their mysteriously short duration, they do exist and cannot be accounted for under any mathematical analysis that features Newtonian concepts of empty space and self-evident “masses” or “forces”.
Pratt took these observations to a new level of cosmology when he began to apply the results of two spherical plasmas “pinched” by two magnetic Birkeland filaments of 10 (to the 18) amperes. In his 1986 paper “Evolution of the Plasma Universe II: The Formation of Systems of Galaxies“, Peratt published several simulations which are featured under the M81 spiral galaxy image below.
While this evolution of two adjacent plasma spheres into a fully formed microscopic spiral galaxy endures for mere picoseconds under Peratt’s models whereas the evolution of actual galaxies takes billions of years, the fact that the plasma universe model generates such analogues to the macro verse is incredible. It is merely the matter of SCALE of physical space time which differs in both cases but the qualitative effects are the same.
What is also extraordinary is that this model doesn’t rely on any recourse to the imposition of imaginary entities like black holes, or dark matter to account for the galaxy’s structure as mainstream mathematical physicists have been forced to do!
In another fascinating experiment, Peratt used information from three radio telescopes to form models of double radio galaxies and found similar analogies of the evolution of these galactic structures within laboratory plasmas as documented in his paper 3 Dimensional Spiral Cell Simulations of Spiral Galaxies. Peratt’s simulations generated identical macro-structures in his laboratory as those same double radio galaxies observed in the universe.
Peratt has been very clear that popular difficulty to accept this principled pathway in physics is connected to the poisonous effects of Newtonian assumptions of empty space and matter on the minds of many of today’s leading scientists and stated as much recently when he said:
“Space, being the most voluminous of the cosmos, when treated as pure vacuum, gives a false sense that most of the universe is in a known state, the only unknowns being the point-like masses occupying Newton’s universe. The discovery of the complexity of the planetary plasma magnetospheres proved that space is plasma with an electrodynamic complexity that exceeds that of the first three states of matter.”
As Above so as Below
Peratt’s identification of Newtonian assumptions as the core mental crutch holding back researchers in the fields of cosmology, and atomic physics alike is incredibly important.
A few words would be appropriate to here clarify how and why these Newtonian assumptions crept into modern science when those brilliant physicists like Max Planck and Einstein who revolutionized both domains over a century ago were not only un-encumbered by Newton’s assumptions, but in fact shattered them brilliantly.
Throughout their lives, both men stated applied not the method of Newton in their creative work, but rather Johannes Kepler whose work on the New Astronomy (1609), On the Six Sided Snowflake (1609) and Harmonice Mundi (1619) not only created the basis for a modern astrophysics establishing Kepler’s three laws (later plagiarised by the Bank of England’s autistic kaballist Isaac Newton), but set that new physics upon the foundations of musical harmony.
It is not uncommon for a mathematician to freak out when confronting the argument that the laws of macro-physics are in harmony with the laws of micro-physics, or even that the inner subjective world of mankind is in harmony with the outer subjective universe. One could imagine a statistical probability theorist exclaim: “Everyone knows that 20th century quantum mechanics has proven that the random, chaotic laws of the microcosm are entirely incompatible with the pre-deterministic laws of gravitation, electricity, etc dominant in the macrocosm!”
Well, if Neils Bohr, Heisenberg, Paoli and the Copenhagen School interpretation of the quantum which took over the narrative of quantum mechanics at the turn of the century is correct then this claim is certainly true, and there is no point in searching for discoverable principles that unify the universe within mankind’s mind. Although adherents to the Copenhagen interpretation assert this schism to be an absolute truth beyond which no mind can pass, the irony is that this very school is celebrated for having “disproven” the notion of causality or truthfulness all together!
If anything, the micro and macro worlds may only be united under the presumed “irrationalism and statistical probability” which governed the inner universe of Bohr’s own mind [See Billington, Michael ‘Taoist Perversion of 20th Century Science, Fidelio, 1994].
However, the question should be asked: what if those founding fathers of today’s quantum physics such as Albert Einstein and Max Planck were right in their assertion that the new breed of statistical probability theorists of the Copenhagen school were wrong to deny causality and truth? What if Einstein was right in stating that “God doesn’t play dice with the universe”?
About the author: Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , a BRI Expert on Tactical talk, and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and in 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Herb Rose
| #
The laws of physics are the same despite our concept of large and small. The guiding principle of the universe is equilibrium not entropy.
The Copenhagen school was wrong but so were Einstein and Planck. If there is no vacuum in space then the speed of light is no constant but changes with the electric sand magnetic fields it travels in. All physic based on c is wrong.
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
Is all physics not in agreement with Herbphysics to be discarded immediately?
Reply
Binra
| #
Perfect equilibrium would be static, and yet charge differentiation patterns a disequilibrium, by which balance points extend a static or infinite to a relational unfolding of principles or derivative values or states.
I clicked here because this site is cosmologically invested in a mainstreamed model or rather fudge by which to lose empiric science for a dissociated modelling set in technologism of markets and controls. Plasma or Electric Universe perspectives are part of releasing an object model that has become Saturnian in terms sacrificing or feeding on life rather than serving its movement in synchrony with all that is..
Recognition of Law is indeed a balance – and all relational expression embodies balance.
The = sign in all equations is itself a representation of Is.
The nature of resonance in frequency and rotational spin is part of a ‘feedback looping’ as the generation of communication or synchrony beyond scale and distance. Whether zero-point or ‘ = ‘ or some other signifier to Is, set in motion. Yet never truly defined.
The predicates we accept by extending give their results. Adaptation within our results develops the idea as exploration of themes for experience of the only Existence. If we lose awareness of Communication as a Field, it is to structure.
The interplay of communication and form is Life or Existence that is the balancing of inner and outer qualities, states, that are always relational and never ‘thing-in-itself’.
Object model reflects the idea ‘self-in-itself’. An imaginary posit. A creative act of ‘dissociation’ or self-differentiation. Reaping as it sows, as masking overlay upon ‘know Thyself’ to perceive the idea of non-existence by reactive boundaries set as a segregative, oppositional identity.
Thanks for sparking this reflection.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Binra,
The universe is made from 2 components: mater, which produces inertia, and energy, which produces motion. When the two combine they form a unit that radiates an attractive force (energy) trying to bring things together and a repelling electric force (mater) that tries to keep things apart. It is these fields that both form individual units and combine those units into larger iunits. In each unit equilibrium is trying to be established but because there must be motion from energy the relationship with other units continually changes disrupting the equilibrium and causing re-adjusting of the components of the unit and the larger unit of which it is a component. Equilibrium can never be achieved as long as there are two objectives: motion and resistance to motion.
Herb
Reply
MattH
| #
I thought I just read psychobabble. Maybe I am a simpleton.
Reply
MattH
| #
Sorry Herb. I was not referring to your comment.
Charles Higley
| #
The red shift of stars and galaxies is standardly interpreted to indicate how fast it is receding from us, which greater redshift indicating faster speed and thus greater distance. This is the essence and origin of the Big Bang Theory (BBT).
However, in a Steady State Plasma Universe (SSPU), light from more distant stars passes through more tangential gravitational fields on the way to Earth and will also be redshifted more than closer light sources.
Then, we have quasars, which exhibit very high redshifts. Current BBT says they are metaphysically huge energy sources as the edges of the expanding universe. However, in SSPU, this redshift is from light climbing out of the steep gravity well of the quasar. It is clear now that quasars are localized to galaxies, born from galaxies, and basically fetal galaxies, which evolve over time into protogalaxies and then galaxies.
No need for blackholes and the dark physics of the current BBT. Einstein, Oppenheimer, and even NASA have indicated that blackholes do not exist. No initial seconds, no huge explosion out of nothing.
Just as we could never know what came before the BB explosion, in the SSPU, which appears to be infinite and forever, we will never know what came before or what come after. Some things we simply cannot know and nor do we need to.
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
Does the Plasma Universe ever…sort of…kinda…you know…collide with the Electric Universe?
Reply
Binra
| #
Plasma is ionised matter which is not confined to gases or vapours. The electric force is not actually confined to atomic scale, accepted natural results and effects, or of course man made circuitry.
There are factions of difference in PU and EU thinking, but regardless, the field is revealing itself as the expression or interaction we call matter – 99% of which is what we call or generally assume to be the vacuum of empty space. The vastness of which – along with the magnitude of EM relationships relative to gravitation, is active in ways that have been unseen and discarded by a dissociation to matter based thought system.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
This site had an article the other day about a burned out comet. I have read that all comets will be burned out in a few thousand years. I have also read that these objects were there at the beginning. Is this correct and if so does this indicate the age of the universe?
Reply
Binra
| #
No, but it suggest that what gave rise to them occurred a few millennia ago rather than billions of years ago….
Mainstream is so divorced from Reality as to roll its own – along the lines of established patterns of funding that follows established patterns of fear driven identity – which corresponds to archetypal patterns acquired as separation trauma, re-enacting its pasts upon the face of the present.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
These scientists know it’s not a good idea to stray very far from the established sanctioned paradigm. Same with the evolution crowd. Darwin would never have got any further than Wallace had he not been the elite’s choice to peddle their propaganda. Not knowing about DNA, his simplistic assumptions get more ridiculous all the time. The evolutionists now have their hopes pinned on mutations but thats not working either. One scientist has already gone through over 60,000 generations of bacteria and no new organisms. Some of them have dropped some of their genetic material along the way but thats like throwing the cargo off a sinking ship. Guess the just need a few more billion years.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Mark,
Evolution is not the result of mutations, which are almost always detrimental, but by gene splicing where genetic sequences that had benefited one species are transferred and incorporated in another species. It’s done by viruses (which you don’t believe in), mosquitos, and other organisms. There is a well documented case where a teenage boy was bitten by a radioactive spider and gained enhanced abilities from the spider.
Herb
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb: Tell me what new organisms have emerged from this gene splicing. Mosquitos have been biting people and animals for thousands of years. What beneficial mutations have resulted from it? Even the best plant geneticists are very limited with what they can accomplish. The fact remains that mutations are incapable of creating a new organism but rather may in some limited cases express traits of the original animals such as when you breed a horse and a donkey you get the hybrid mule that by the way is except in very rare cases sterile.
Top plant geneticist John Sanford of Cornell U. states that mutations over successive generations are not evolving into better organisms as the evolutionists claim but are causing more problems as more mutations accumulate each generation. He says that the human genome is picking up more mutations every generation and that at some point this will result in complete infertility. He points to the widespread practice of interbreeding long ago by some of the European Royalty (he could have included the Egyptians also) that resulted in lots of mental and physical problems. Interbreeding has caused lots of detrimental mutations in pedigree dogs as is well known. Herb you might want to back off from the spider man movies for awhile.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Mark,
It is environment that drives evolution by allowing an organism with one genetic code to prosper where others fail. Look at the life around thermal vents based on the utilization of the energy of hydrogen sulfide. They’ve exploited an extremely hot and toxic environment that would kill other organisms and they in turn would die if the venting stopped. Are they not a new (or perhaps older) species?
Mutations are mistakes in the genetic code and do not cause evolution. Evolution is caused (IMO) by the adding of new genetic code to an existing organism and it is the environment that choses what part of that code is expressed or utilized. Man and chimpanzees have 98% of their genetic code in common and even though they are distinct species it seems evident that they have a common ancestor.
Organisms are not just the product of the DNA in the nucleus but also the composition of the cytoplasm of the cell (e.g. mitochondria) and that cytoplasm is susceptible to environmental factors. There must be a feed back mechanism that can allow for advantageous traits to be incorporated into the genetic code in order for survival of organisms through changing conditions, otherwise there would be no evolution or survival. Life would have to start all over from scratch when conditions changed. Birds evolved from dinosaurs and survived when they died off as marsupials were able expand and evolve to exploit available resources. Aren’t the birds of the Galapagos islands examples of evolution?
Survival of a species is the result of two things, the ability to better exploit existing conditions than competitors and the adaptability to change when those conditions change.
Herb
Reply
Mark tapley
| #
Hello Herb: Now you’re back to Darwin’s (or should we say Wallace’s) survival of the fittest but there are lots of animals that would have been extinct long ago if that were true. We now know that all organisms are coded with information similar to a computer program. This can only be done by an intelligent source. When you see a building or a painting your know there was a mind at work. It was not random. That is even more true with living organisms. If the code is not in the DNA it cannot be expressed by the organism and as has been shown, mutations cannot supply the new material for a new organism. Man and apes have similar building material. But that is true of others as well. We have much of the same DNA as say a cat or a rabbit. There are profound anatomical differences between apes and humans not even including the brain (at least for most people). All animals are designed for certain environments and all have limited ability to adapt. If some have genetic characteristics that give them an advantage in a particular environment then they will predominate. This is not evolution but just due to inherent genetic advantage. Some cattle are bread to produce milk and some for beef. Some horses are bread to be fast and some to pull heavy loads.
Millions of fossils have been found but still no missing link. If it were there the evolutionists would have found it by now. The idea of birds evolving from a reptile is another one of those ridiculous evolutionary fabrications. The evolutionists have a long list of “missing links” including Lucy, the Pilt Down Man, Java man, the coelacanth, the Nebraska hog tooth and others I remember. As far as dinosaurs several separate paleontologists have now found blood vessels, ligament and tissue in some specimens proving that they were here very recently. There are even petrified foot prints in the Dallas area (although evolutionists have now destroyed much of it) of men and dinosaurs at the same time.
The Birds of the Galapagos evidence no evolution but merely genetic variation within the same species. Dogs are a good example. You may have a Tea Cup Chihuahua or a Great Dane but they both are from the same species. They both have dog features, exhibit dog behavior and smell like a dog. They will never become a cat. The main focus here is not survival but the possibility of evolution. As far a survival, I don’t see how chickens ever made it in the wild. Animals can only change to the extent that certain genetic characteristics that are already coded within the animal and may be expressed. Pottinger showed this with his well known experiment with generations of cats and their ability to reset their genes through the epigenetics of the proper diet and to even pass these genes on to their offspring. If we had honest science at work instead of CDC-WHO big Pharma drug and vaccine cartels pushing poisons, Pottengers prophesy could be helping the human race instead of making them infertile, debilitated and dead.
I will sum up by stating that the vast diversity of organisms are not the result of gradual change over millions of years. There is no real evidence for this in the fossil record nor is an animal capable of modifying it’s code of DNA (building material) to make it happen. Look for instance at the incredible design of some wood peckers that roll their tougne back around their specially adapted skull and utilizing that special tongue to spear insects in crevices. Look at the special neck of the girraph or how would evolution explain the metamorphosis of the caterpillar into a butterfly. Or the intricate webs of spiders. This is all the code work of intelligent design.
We do not agree on all issues but that is what free speech is about. I always read your posts and thanks for the reply.
Best regards, Mark
Reply