Star Formation

The cosmos at our fingertips.
harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:25 pm

Hello All


Star Forming Region NGC 6357
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061220.html

Are these stars new or are they just been rejuvinated with their existing inner cores.

Do they actually form from the gas clouds
The intricate patterns are caused by complex interactions between interstellar winds, radiation pressures, magnetic fields, and gravity
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:34 pm

Hello All

Can large stars house mini black holes and have a solar envelope.
I'm just thinking ouside the circle.
The event horizon can still exist, relative to the size of the black hole which is just an ultra dense plasma matter.

Massive Stars in Open Cluster Pismis 24
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061219.html
Harry : Smile and live another day.

astro_uk
Science Officer
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:59 pm

Post by astro_uk » Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:42 am

In a word no.

The outer parts of stars are held up by the pressure of the inner parts, this pressure is produced by the heat being given off within the core by fusion. Stars are stable because they balance the inwards force of gravity with an outwards pressure force, if either force changes the other tends to push the star back to equilibrium.

If you had a BH in the centre you wouldn't have any force to push back against the gravity and everything would simply pile into the centre. The star would tear apart and form an accretion disc around the BH.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:06 am

Hello Astro

Your words are toooooo quick to say NO.

If I just did what you just said, imagine the shortfalls in science.

Mini ultra dense plasma matter, can have a solar envelope, i would imagine not the same as a normal sun.

But! because they attract other matter and stars towards it they would form some form of solar envelope creating what may seem a star hundreds of times that of our sun.

In other posts we discussed that BH can be formed from just a few solar masses.

Astro said
The outer parts of stars are held up by the pressure of the inner parts, this pressure is produced by the heat being given off within the core by fusion. Stars are stable because they balance the inwards force of gravity with an outwards pressure force, if either force changes the other tends to push the star back to equilibrium.

If you had a BH in the centre you wouldn't have any force to push back against the gravity and everything would simply pile into the centre. The star would tear apart and form an accretion disc around the BH.
Mate if this is what you know and you are doing a PHD, God help us.

I'm not going to tell you how to suck eggs. But! you need more info on star formation and black holes. Its not my position to expalin to you the workings of a star.

Cutting edge info from Prof Oliver Manuel

http://www.omatumr.com/papers.html
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:09 am

Hello All

For those interested in star formation

The Birth of Stars: Herbig-Haro Jets, Accretion and Proto-Planetary Disks
http://www.stsci.edu/stsci/meetings/shst2/ballyj.html
On the 200th anniversary of the publication of Laplace's theory for the birth of the Solar System, we finally have the tools needed to directly observe the formation of stars and planets. We can observe the star formation process at virtually all wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum from X-rays to radio wavelengths. The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) provides us with the highest angular resolution tool with which to investigate the jets produced by stars during their birth and the circumstellar accretion disks where we believe planets might form.
In this paper it falls short of expalining the varies densities of star cores
Stars are born in the dense cores of 10^4 to 10^ 6 M giant molecular clouds (GMCs).
I would put the range
Hydrogen Helium cores 10^ 4 to 10 ^ 6

Neutron Cores 10 ^15 to maybe 10^18 M
and composites in between.

That does not include quark cores 10^ 18 to 10^ 22
and preon star cores up to 10^35 M
Harry : Smile and live another day.

Nereid
Intrepidus Dux Emeritus
Posts: 832
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:01 am

Post by Nereid » Tue Dec 26, 2006 3:41 pm

OK harry, so please show us the details of the equations your source has published, on the hydrostatic equilibrium of such stars. Please be sure to highlight those parts near (both above and below) the neutronium-ordinary matter interface.

Oh, and while you're at it, how about pointing to the transport equations in these papers?

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:32 am

Hello All

Hello Neried you can aslo google for the info.

I do not invent these figures.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:23 am

Hello All

If anybody wants info on neutron stars and quarks stars and you find it difficult to find.

Just let me know.

Look up Preon stars also.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:47 am

Hello All

G11.2-0.3: A Textbook Supernova Remnant.
G11.2-0.3 is a circularly symmetric supernova remnant that contains a dense, rotating dead star at its center, representing a textbook case of what the remnant of an exploding star should look like after a couple thousand years. When a massive star collapses, the outer layers of the star are blown away in an extremely energetic explosion. Depending on the mass of the original star, a dense object such as a neutron star or a black hole, can form and be left behind at the explosion's center. Such a neutron star, known as a "pulsar" when it rapidly rotates, can be kicked by the thermonuclear shock wave created when the star exploded, causing it to race through space at millions of miles per hour
Many think that the resultant star is dead. By no means its dead, its part of the cycle or phase that stars go through. Our star was the result of a supernova and formed on a neutron core or neutron composite.

In many case these stars rejuvinated from taking matter from huge gas clouds.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:46 am

Hello All

I came across this link

THE ELECTRIC SUN
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm
The Presently Accepted Solar Model
"The certainty that the Sun generates its prodigious outpourings of energy through thermonuclear reactions deep in its interior has been with us for about half a century." [Juergens 1979].

In almost every article or TV program produced for the general population, the very first sentence usually contains some reference to the "fact" that the Sun is, at its core, a thermonuclear fusion reactor - the same reaction that gives us the Hydrogen bomb. The heat (energy) produced in this core then supposedly slowly rises to the Sun's surface by convection (laminar fluid flow) and is there radiated out into space. The granulations we see on the surface of the photosphere are supposedly the tops of the convection columns. This fusion model was first proposed by Sir Arthur Eddington, who simply rejected out of hand the proposal that the Sun might be getting its energy from outside itself. He just could not conceive of such a thing happening. Therefore, if the Sun was getting its energy from inside itself, and it hadn't burned up in a few billion years, Eddington concluded that the source had to be nuclear fusion.
The Electric Sun hypothesis is a logical extrapolation of the Electric/Plasma Universe theory which came into being through the work of Hannes Alfven, Kristian Birkeland, P. Carlqvist and others. The person who originated and codified these ideas is the late engineer Ralph E. Juergens of Flagstaff, Arizona. This work was carried on, after Juergens' death, by Earl R. Milton, Professor of Physics at the University of Lethbridge, Canada. The ideas embodied by the Plasma Universe are now being developed further by researchers such as Wallace Thornhill, Anthony L. Peratt, Eric Lerner, and others. In this day and age there is no longer any doubt that electrical effects in plasmas play an important role in the phenomena we observe on the Sun.



The paper discusses Problems with the Thermonuclear (Fusion) Model.

Not bad reading.

Just because I post the link does not mean I agree with all its pioints.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

The Electric Cool-Aid Solar Test

Post by kovil » Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:57 am

Now I understand Harry, what you mean about "the more I read, the less my previous understanding seems by percentage comparison".

quote from the linked page

<< "The electric star model makes the simplest assumption - that nothing is going on inside the Sun. ..... So for most of the volume of a star where the gravity is strongest, atoms and molecules will predominate. (In the electric model that applies to the entire star). The nucleus of each atom, which is thousands of times heavier than the electrons (proton 1836 x heavier than the electron), will be gravitationally offset from the center of the atom. The result is that each atom becomes a small electric dipole. These dipoles align to form a radial electric field that causes electrons to diffuse outwards in enormously greater numbers than simple gravitational sorting allows. That leaves positively charged ions behind which repel one another. That electrical repulsion balances the compressive force of gravity without the need for a central heat source in the star. An electric star will be roughly the same density throughout, or isodense."

We should remember, considering a pair of such protons, that the strength of the electrostatic repulsion force between them is something like 35 orders of magnitude greater than the strength of gravitational attraction! (Not 35 TIMES, but 35 Orders Of Magnitude). So the offset of the electron from the nucleus can be truly minuscule and yet produce an extremely strong electrical force to counteract gravitational collapse.

The Sun does not require internally generated heat in order to avoid collapse. >>

- - -

So might I presume to say; that gravity, in its gathering of protons into a close proximity, causes an electrical potential to arise, which is opposite in polarity to what the interstellar medium (ISM) is conducting. And that potential difference due to the offsetting of the atomic dipole is what is attracting and reacting to the ISM Birkeland Currents, and in this fashion electric stars shine !

The neon layer, above the silicone layer, and below the helium/hydrogen layer, is what does most of the visible light production.

- - -

What a great idea. It makes the Occam's Razor hypothesis valid, in that the Electric Sun model explains what we see and sense, most simply. The standard solar model (SSM) goes through many contortions and invokes several leaps of unsubstantiated faith (like BBT does) in order to sustain itself in the face of inexplicable observations.

The gigantic massive bodies at the center of galaxies are engines for the galactic wind or ISM, which in turn reacts with stellar size bodies.

Gravity in a way is opposite to the electric force, in that it produces an offset that causes the electric force to arise in opposition to gravity's force effects. A tension is setup that works in balancing ways. The stronger the gravity field, the stronger the electric tension to offset gravity's force.

Gravity is a highly efficient translator of energy; like magnetic fields efficiently translate energy from one form to another with little to no loss, gravity translates its energy into electrical dipole differences with little to no loss. (Heat may be one large loss, of gravity force after the electrical potential translation, but that is almost a different matter as it is a secondary transaction cost after the initial translation)

In one sense the Electric Sun Model allows the Universe to be without beginning or end, and fly in the face of BBT and is thusly most spurned by the Church and Establishment Universities, and may face continued irrational opposition for decades to come. We will watch and see what contortions SSM puts up as resistance to ESM theory. Cheers Harry !
Last edited by kovil on Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:34 am

Hello Kovil

Wow!!!!!!!! I see that you have a smart brain.

Do not jump too quick.

Give it 12 months of reading than step by step.

==========================================

The other questions are:

Why doesn't the solar envelope over heat?

Why doesn't the solar envelope blow out like a balloon.? As we see in some stars.

Answer these and you win a billion dollars.

===========================================
Harry : Smile and live another day.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

Post by kovil » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:44 am

Harry, My two perennial psychological conditions are; I jump to conclusions too quickly, and I don't go far enough. So your words of caution are well received.

In thinking a little more, AGN and Quasars are places of intense gravitational loci and resultant excessive electrical activity.

What a fascinating universe. And our brains use electricity for thinking !

Perhaps Quasars are Cosmic headaches !

Remember, Greek Mythology said Hera was borne out of Zeus's head by being thrust outward from incompatible rejection.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

Post by kovil » Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:09 am

<< Why doesn't the solar envelope over heat? >>

Neon is a very efficient carrier of heat, but that may not be what you refer to. By solar envelope do you mean the corona? That region of 1-2 milllion K. It is so thin the total heat is small tho the temp is large.

<< Why doesn't the solar envelope blow out like a balloon.? As we see in some stars. >>

The magnetics help keep the solar 'plasma atmosphere' contained, the 'double layer' also has some containment capabilities I suspect.

Tho you raise a good question, what changes that causes stars to blowup into red giants from normal size. Something changes in their containment parameters and they balloon up to the orbit of Mars in the diameter of their 'solar atmosphere', even tho they have not accumulated more mass. Something fundamental has changed in the star's force_components organization. Perhaps the ISM has stopped supplying them with electrical potential? and they react to that stopping of 'food' by 'obese-ing'.

Red giants may not swell up, that may be a total mistake by SSM theory. Has any red giant been caught in the act of swelling? Or is it all SSM theory.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:30 am

Hello Kovil

Quarsars

Are star like bodies formed from either collisions of stars or breaking up of stars before they enter compacted matter (black hole). You also have mini quarsars formed by the ejection of material from BH.

So they are a pain going in and a pain going out.

===========================================

The compacted core of any star will determine its size and life span.

The amount and rate of energy released from the core will determine or control the heat within the solar envelope.

As the core loses mass it also loses the control to hold onto the solar envelope, allowing it to ballon out. This could take billions of years.

As the core loses mass it also loses its abilty to control the amount of energy released into the solar envelope.

The elements that formed over the past few billion years have roughly segregated into layers Fe and Ni lower laters and the lighter elements above.

What causes, or what triggers the high energy photons to breakup the Fe and Ni atoms into neutrons is the billion dollar question.

Could it be that the core, by losing its mass, starts to release the high energy photons or is this created by the fusion within the solar enevelope?

What ever provides the high energy phontons triggers the chain events that lead to a supernova.

There is much research to be done. We are just starting to learn what is actually going on.

Too many hurdles had to be overcome, placed there by BBT people. One large hurdle is money the second is the ad hoc ideas placed by the BBT.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

Post by kovil » Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:09 am

Hi Harry,

In thinking about the stellar core of Fe and Ni, and doing my best to stay within the parameters of what we really know to be true (no small task); There is a Reynolds number of very high value assigned to these superfluid core soups. I wonder if as the core 'steams' away by protons and electrons boiling off of the neutrons, or out of 'whole court basketball' (as Dobson would say for the electrons); does the evaporating mass which lowers the gravitational strength cause or allow a 'change of state' or of 'geometry' to the way the interior matter is packed to effect this superfluid state; and when that loss of gravitational packing strength is finally realized by the core, it has surpassed the critical 'change' point by some distance already, and it then suddenly 're-aligns' into a different packing and that new geometry has much different parameters to size and volume and even gravity strength, as this new state (like if it changed from body centered to face centered as crystal lattices use for instance) that would allow an expansion of volume to contain the same number of 'particles'; and that resultant enlargement would lessen the gravity pull at the perimeter as well, which would allow it to expand even more. In this way a star could suddenly expand !! The space packing of the 'particles' and the lessening of the gravity pull on the fringes.

Also, as the organization of the particles changes, the Reynolds numbers would likely drop significantly, and the resultant angular momentum consequences from rotation being resisted by the new organization may impart angular momentum into the particles and cause intense heating. Which would also cause expansion of the red giant.

If the superfluid core suddenly becomes not superfluid, what would be the resultant effects?

Can I have my billion dollars now ! ? LOL

That's an off the top and requires no jumps of faith to imagine forces etc that would make a star suddenly expand, maybe not nova, but maybe swell to red giant size.

I'll take that $B challenge, and split it with you!

ps, I crawled around for 3 hours exploring the Electric Sun and Electric Cosmos websites. It really was an eye opener. It makes tons of sense. I wonder if Neried would ever read it? Would he argue against it or consider it?

Ride Captain ride,
upon your Mystery Ship
it's an Ion trail and electric sail
that makes you hip

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:24 am

Hello Kovil

The more I read your writing the more I think that you have the potential to go beyond.

Must keep an eye on you.

As for Neried, he will one day come around. He wants to see evidence, and some people are like that and I respect that highly.

I never become emotional over theories and what ever. I also understand that I'm not that smart and need to read much more.

=========================================

As for the matrix in the core, you maybe on track. What ever happens in the core effects the hold and heat control of the solar envelope.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:56 pm

Hello Kovil

Interesting short link.

Stellar Evolution
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_sources ... ution.html
Harry : Smile and live another day.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

SSM vs ESM

Post by kovil » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:20 pm

Yes, that is the backup reasoning of the standard solar model (SSM).

Have you read this tho . . .


Electrical Cosmology

Introduction
If the Sun is essentially an electrical phenomenon, as seems the case, and it is also a fairly typical star, then all stars should exhibit properties that are consistent with the Electric Sun (ES) model. Do they? Let us extrapolate the ES model and compare it to what we have observed about stars.

In 1911 Ejnar Hertzspung constructed a plot of the absolute brightness vs. spectral class (temperature) of the stars whose distances we could then accurately measure by the parallax method. In 1913 Henry Norris Russell independently repeated this exercise. This plot is therefore named the Hertzsprung-Russell (HR) diagram, and is one of the first topics presented in introductory astronomy courses. It is clear that the HR diagram is a plot of actual observations – not something deduced from theory. So, any viable model of the workings of a star must be consistent with it. Is the Electric Sun (ES) model of how a star is powered consistent with the HR diagram? If it is not, then this would disprove the ES hypothesis.

The Hertzsprung-RussellDiagram
In the HR diagram, as it is usually presented, the vertical axis is labeled with two scales: Absolute Magnitude (linear scale from about 18th magnitude at the bottom running up to perhaps -8 or so at the top), and Luminosity x Sun (log scale with 0.00001 at the bottom running up to 100,000 at the top). The horizontal axis also is labeled with several scales: Spectral Class - left to right: O and B [blue], A [white], F [yellow], G [yellow-orange], K [orange], M [red]). More often, recently, the "Johnson B-V index" replaces the Spectral Class scale. B = blue, and V = visual. A star is viewed through a blue (pass) filter and then in visible light. The star's "color index" is the difference in apparent magnitude between the two observations. B-V is zero for the star Vega (spectral class A0), and is about 0.61 for the Sun which is redder than Vega. Red giant Betelgeuse has a B-V index of 1.83 and spectral class M2. Originally, the B-V index was simply the difference between a star's visual and photographic magnitudes.

Another horizontal axis scale - Absolute Temperature, also runs from left to right (from around 20,000 K down to 3000 K) corresponding to the (decreasing!) black-body temperature of those spectral classes. [As an engineer, I object to plotting increasing temperature from right to left! But such is the convention of astronomers. We will live with it.] A single given star defines a single point on this plot. A web search for the topic "Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram" will yield many different renderings of the HR plot.

Our Sun, being a fairly typical star, falls almost at the center of the diagram (at Luminosity = 1 and Absolute magnitude. = 5, Spectral Class G, and (photospheric) Temp. = 6,000K). The points on the plot seem to group nicely, generally forming a long, slightly diffuse line, that snakes from the upper left down toward the lower right. The line falls very steeply at the lower right end. There are two other less populated clouds of points: one group at the upper right and another one strung out across the bottom of the plot from a concentration in the lower left of the diagram.

Add A New Horizontal Axis Scale
In the ES model the important variable is: current density (Amps/sq m) at the star's photospheric surface. If a star's current density increases, the arc discharges on its surface (photospheric granules) get hotter, change color (away from red, toward blue), and get brighter. The absolute luminosity of a star, therefore, depends on two main variables: current density at its effective surface, and its size (the star's diameter).
Therefore, let us add a new scale to the horizontal axis of the HR diagram: "Current Density at the Surface of each Star". Consider moving from the lower right of the HR diagram toward the left. In so doing we are moving in the direction of increasing current density at the star's surface.

Red and Brown Dwarfs
The first region on the lower right of the diagram is where the current density has such a low value that double layers (DLs) (photospheric granules) are not needed by the plasma surrounding the (anode) star. This is the region of the brown and red "dwarfs" and giant gas planets. Recent discoveries of extremely cool L - Type and T - Type dwarfs has required the original diagram to be extended to the lower right (See below). These "stars" have extremely low absolute luminosity and temperature.


Notice that the surface temperature of the T - Type dwarfs is in the range of 1000 K or less! For comparison purposes (only) recall that some points on the surface of Venus are in the range of 900 K. T - Type spectra have features due mostly to Methane - they resemble Jupiter's spectrum. The plasma that constitutes a star of this type is in its "normal glow" range - or perhaps, even the "dark current" range. If all stars are indeed powered by a nuclear fusion reaction as is claimed, with the T dwarfs we must be in the "cold fusion" range! Indeed, for any fusion reactions to occur at all, standard theory requires that the temperature in a star's core must reach at least three million K. And because, in the accepted model, core temperature rises with gravitational pressure, the star must have a minimum mass of about 75 times the mass of the planet Jupiter, or about 7 percent of the mass of our sun. Many of the dwarfs do not meet these requirements. One mainstream astrophysicist, realizing this, has said that these dwarfs must be powered by "gravitational collapse".

The orbiting X-ray telescope, Chandra, recently discovered an X-ray flare being emitted by a brown dwarf (spectral class M9). This poses an additional problem for the advocates of the stellar fusion model. A star this cool should not be capable of X-ray flare production.

However, in the ES model, there are no minimum temperature or mass requirements because the star is inherently electrical to start with. In the ES model (if a brown/red dwarf is operating near the upper boundary of the dark current mode), a slight increase in the level of total current impinging on that star will move it into the normal glow mode. This transition will be accompanied by a rapid change in the voltage rise across the plasma of the star's atmosphere. Maxwell's equations tell us that such a change in voltage can produce a strong dynamic E-field and a strong dynamic magnetic field. If they are strong enough, dynamic EM fields can produce X-rays. Another similar phenomenon can occur if a star makes the transition from normal glow to arc mode.

As we progress leftward in the HR diagram, the plotted points move steeply upward; we enter the spectral M range where some arc tufting becomes necessary to sustain the star's electrical discharge.

As current density increases, tufts (plasma in the arc discharge mode) cover more and more of the surface of each star, and the stars' luminosity increases sharply – plasma arcs are extremely bright compared to plasma in its normal glow mode. You can look directly at neon signs but not at electric arc welders. This accounts for the steepness of the HR curve in the M region – a slight increase in current density produces a large increase in luminosity. As we move upward and toward the left in the diagram, stars have more and more complete coats of photospheric arcs (tufting).

A case in point – NASA recently discovered a star, half of whose surface was "covered by a sunspot". A more informative way to say this would have been that "Half of this star's surface is covered by photospheric arcing." The present controversy about what the difference is between a giant gas planet and a brown dwarf is baseless. They are members of a continuum – it is simply a matter of what the level of current density is at their surfaces. NASA's discovery supplies the missing link between the giant gas planets and the fully tufted stars. In fact, the term "proto-star" may be more descriptive than "giant gas planet".

Main Sequence Stars
Continuing toward the left, beyond the "knee of the curve", all these stars (K through B) are completely covered with tufts (have complete photospheres), their luminosity no longer grows as rapidly as before. But, the farther to the left we go (the higher the current density), the brighter the tufts become, and so the stars' luminosities do continue to increase. The situation is analogous to turning up the current in an electric arc welding machine. The increased brightness of the arcs accounts for the upward slope of the line toward the left. Mathematically we have the situation where the variable plotted on the horizontal axis (current density) is also one of the factors in the quantity plotted on the vertical axis (luminosity). The more significant this relationship is, the more closely the plot will approach a 45 degree straight line.

[Reminder: Our progression from right toward the left is not a description of one star evolving in time - we are just moving across the diagram from one static point (star) to another.]

That the stars do not all fall precisely on a line, but have some dispersion above and below the line, is due to their variation in size. The relatively straight portion of the HR diagram is called the "main sequence." This nomenclature gives a false impression, that stars move around "sequentially" in the HR plot. The HR diagram is a static scatter plot, not a sequence.

White and Blue Stars
When we get to the upper left end of the main sequence, what kind of stars are these? This is the region of O type, blue-white, high temperature (35,000+ K) stars. As we approach the far upper-left of the HR diagram (region of highest current density), the stars are under extreme electrical stress - too many Amps per sq. meter. Their absolute luminosities approach 100,000 times the Sun's. Extreme electrical stress can lead to a such a star's splitting into parts, perhaps explosively. Such explosions are called novae. The splitting process is called fissioning.

Fissioning
To quote from page 6 of Wal Thornhill's web site on the Electric Universe:
"….. internal electrostatic forces prevent stars from collapsing gravitationally and occasionally cause them to "give birth" by electrical fissioning to form companion stars and gas giant planets. Sudden brightening, or a nova outburst marks such an event. That elucidates why stars commonly have partners and why most of the giant planets so far detected closely orbit their parent star."

If a sphere of fixed volume splits into two smaller (equal sized) spheres, the total surface area of the newly formed pair will be about 26% larger than the area of the original sphere. (If the split results in two unequally sized spheres, the increase in total area will be something less than 26%.) So, to reduce the current density it is experiencing, an electrically stressed, blue-white star may explosively fission into two or more stars. This provides an increase in total surface area and so results in a reduced level of current density on the (new) stars' surfaces. Each of two new (equal sized) stars will experience only 80% of the previous current density level and so both will jump to new locations farther to the lower-right in the HR diagram.


A possible example of two equal sized offspring may be the binary pair called Y Cygni. This is a pair of giant O or B type stars that orbit each other in a period of 2.99 days. Each star is some 5 million miles in diameter and 5000 times as luminous as our Sun - absolute magnitudes about -4.5. They are some 12 million miles apart (less than 2.5 times their diameters!). Their masses are 17.3 and 17.1 times the mass of our Sun.

If the members of the resulting binary pair turn out to be unequal in size, the larger one will probably have the larger current density - but still lower than the original value. (This assumes that the total charge and total driving current to the original star distributes itself onto the new stars proportionally to their masses.) In this case, the smaller member of the pair might have such a low value of current density as to drop it, abruptly, to "brown dwarf" or even "giant planet" status. That may be how giant gas planets get born (and are in close proximity to their parents).

There was an interesting statement made in this regard in the Jan. 1, 2001 issue of Science Now magazine (p.4). "Astronomers are scratching their heads over a strange new planetary system. A team discovered a huge gas ball -- apparently a failed star called a brown dwarf -- circling a star that holds another planet in its sway. But no one understands how something so massive as a brown dwarf could form so close to a normal star with a planetary companion." This was in an article called "An awkward trio disturbs astronomers" by G. Schilling.

The final distribution of mass and current density is sensitive to the mechanics of the splitting process. Such a process can only be violent - possibly resulting in a nova eruption. Some mass may be lost to the plasma cloud that later can appear as a planetary nebula or nova-remnant that surrounds the binary pair. If the charge on the original star was highly concentrated on or near its surface, and the fissioning process is similar to the peeling off of a onion's skin, then most of that original charge (and current) may end up on the offspring star that is constituted only of the skin of the original star. In this way the smaller, rather than the larger of the two members of the resulting binary pair, can be the hotter one. In any event, both stars will move to different positions in the HR diagram from where their parent was located.

Stellar Evolution
Mainstream astronomy attempts to describe how stars "age" (run out of nuclear fuel) and slowly migrate, taking hundreds of thousands of years to do so, tracing paths from one location on the HR diagram to another (the star going from one spectral class to another). The paths that stars "must take" are, of course, completely predicated on the assumption that stars are fueled by the various stages of nuclear fusion of the lightest elements.

The ES model does not make that assumption. Humans have not been around long enough to actually observe any stars making the predicted slow migrations from one place on the HR diagram to another. So, at present, slow "stellar evolution" is another one of those complicated theoretical constructs that live brightly in the minds of astrophysicists without any observational evidence of their actual existence.


Examples That Falsify (Disprove) The Accepted Stellar Evolution Process

FG Sagittae
The star FG Sagittae breaks all the rules of accepted stellar evolution. FG Sagittae has changed from blue to yellow since 1955! It, quite recently, has taken a deep dive in luminosity. FG Sagittae, is the central star of the planetary nebula (nova remnant?) He 1-5. It is a unique object in the sense that for this star we have direct evidence of stellar evolution but in a time scale comparable with the human lifetime. [CCD Astronomy, Summer 1996, p.40.]

"Around 1900 FG Sge was an inconspicuous hot star (T = 50,000 K) of magnitude 13. During the next 60 years it cooled to about 8000 K and brightened in the visual region to magnitude 9, as its radiation shifted from the far-UV to the visual region. Around 1970 a whole new bunch of spectral lines appeared due to elements such as Sr, Y, Zr, Ba and rare earths. .... The star cooled further in the 1970s and 80s and then all of a sudden in 1992 its magnitude dropped to 14. Further drops occurred from 1992 to 1996 with a very deep minimum near magnitude 16 in June of 1996." [Italics added]

So, after abruptly brightening by four magnitudes, it has dropped seven magnitudes. From the end of the last century FG Sagittae has moved across the HR diagram changing from a normal hot giant to a "late spectral type" (cool) star with marked changes in its surface chemical composition. Its present surface temperature is in the range of 4000K. This is not the kind of slow stellar "evolution" mainstream astrophysicists preach.

And FG Sagittae is a binary pair!

The official wording was, "In 1995 FG Sge changed in brightness in a quite sporadic manner from V~10.5 to ~13.0 according to the data by Hungarian Astronomical Association-Variable Star Section. During the spectral observations on 9/10 and 10/11 August, FG Sge was very faint (HAA-VSS data: V~12.5-13.0, according to Variable Stars Observers' League of Japan: ~13.3) and therefore erroneously the visual companion 8'' apart from FG Sge was actually observed. This is probably the first high resolution spectrum of the companion ever obtained. The spectrum turned out to correspond to a quite normal giant with the spectral type around K0."

Is FG Sagittae an example of the binary fissioning (caused by electrical stress) that was described above? It seems to have all the basic characteristics: nova-like brightening followed by loss of luminosity and loss of temperature - moving to a different spectral type with marked changes in its surface chemical composition, discovery of a binary companion, and the entire systems lies within a nebulous nova remnant.

Two More Examples That Falsify the Accepted Stellar Evolution Process
Virginia Trimble, professor of physics at the University of California, Irvine, and visiting professor of astronomy at the University of Maryland, has said recently:

"We don't often see stars change their spectral types in a human lifetime. Thus, FG Sagittae, which brightened, cooled from about BO to K, and added lines of carbon, barium, and other elements to its spectrum in the century after 1890 was long seemingly unique. The standard interpretation has been that it experienced its very last flash of helium shell burning (the products are carbon and oxygen) and was about to become an R Coronea Borealis variable. These are carbon-rich stars that fade suddenly and unpredictably (which FG Sge started doing a couple of years ago) and that have hydrogen-depleted atmospheres (which FG Sge has just developed). In addition, the "galloping giant" is no longer alone. Examination of old images and spectrograms reveal that V 605 Aquilae, studied by Knut Lundmark in the 1920's was a similar sort of beast, though it is now very faint And the latest recruit is V 4334 Sagittarii, better known as Sakurai's object, for its 1994 discoverer. It, too, changed both spectral type and surface composition very rapidly, and is now hydrogen-poor and carbon-rich, and well on its way to becoming the century's third new R CrB star."

And Yet A Fourth Example - V838 Monocerotis
THE NEWEST EVIDENCE !!
On October 2, 2002, NASA's Astronomy Picture of the Day (APOD) announced what is to them another "mystery star".
Click here for the official announcement.
The official "explanation" reads, in part:

"V838 Mon was discovered to be in outburst in January of this year. Initially thought to be a familiar type of classical nova, astronomers quickly realized that instead, V838 Mon may be a totally new addition to the astronomical zoo. Observations indicate that the erupting star transformed itself over a period of months from a small under-luminous star a little hotter than the Sun, to a highly-luminous, cool supergiant star undergoing rapid and complex brightness changes. The transformation defies the conventional understanding of stellar life cycles. A most notable feature of V838 Mon is the "expanding" nebula which now appears to surround it." [Ital and emphasis added.]

So now there are at least four prime examples of stars that do not evolve according to the accepted thermonuclear model of how stars are powered. These are stars that falsify the conventional understanding of stellar life cycles. All of them act in a manner predicted by the Electric Star hypothesis.

In the Electric Star version of "stellar evolution" things can happen quickly. If the fusion model were correct, it would take hundreds of thousands of years for a star to change from one place in the HR diagram to another. It would not be observed within a "human lifetime". It didn't take FG Sagittae hundreds of thousands of years to "run down." The star V838 Monocerotis has moved half way across the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram in a few months. Migrating across the HR diagram can happen very rapidly - and apparently does! How many such counter-examples does it take for astrophysicists to realize their stellar fusion theory has been falsified?

Red Giants
The diffuse group in the upper right hand corner of the HR diagram are stars which are cool (have low values of current density powering them) but are luminous and so must be very large. They are highly luminous only because of their size. These are the red giants. They are not necessarily any older than any other star. Notice that some are relatively quite cool - in the range of 1000 K. How do stars at this low a temperature maintain an internal fusion reaction? The simple answer is: They cannot! And they do not!

White Dwarfs
Similarly, the group in the lower left hand corner have very low absolute luminosity but are extremely hot. The ES model simply explains them as being very small stars that are experiencing very high current densities. These are the "white dwarfs." Although most of them are concentrated in the lower-left corner of the diagram, the white dwarf group actually extends thinly across the bottom of the diagram. Thus the name white dwarf is a kind of misnomer. The shape of this thin grouping begins to drop off steeply at its (cooler) right end much as the main sequence does.

A professional astronomer has been quoted as saying:
"The observed white dwarfs are basically cooling embers. The nuclear fire of the stars burned out billions of years ago. The light emitted comes from the heat remaining from the earlier nuclear burning. By measuring the spectrum of the light, the brightness in various colors, the temperatures of the stars were determined. The two coolest of the white dwarfs studied, PSR J0034-0534 and PSR J1713+0747, are 3400 degrees Kelvin (5600 F), making them the coolest known white dwarfs. For comparison, the surface of the sun measures 5800 degrees Kelvin and the coolest previously known white dwarfs are 4000 degrees Kelvin."

But then, why are these relatively cool stars called "white"? One presumes it is only because they seem to be members of the grouping in the HR diagram that was originally given that name.
Spectral Lines in Various Types of Stars
In a paper entitled “Stellar Spectra” (Aeon, Vol. V, No. 5, Jan. 2000, p. 37.) the late Earl R. Milton, Professor of Physics, University of Lethbridge reported on research he had performed on spectral line broadening in 1971 while at the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory in Vancouver, British Columbia. This work provides strong evidence in support of the Electric Sun model.

If a relatively cool gas comes between a wide-band light source and an observer, absorption lines will appear in the light's spectrum. These lines arise because of the absorption of (light) energy by the atoms of the gas. Electrons in those atoms jump from lower to higher discrete quantum energy states - they get the energy to make that jump from the light (having exactly the frequency that corresponds to that energy gap) that is passing through the gas. Each element in the gas produces its own signature pattern of lines. By recognizing the line patterns, we can identify the gas that is causing those lines. This method is used to discern what elements and molecules are present in the upper atmospheres of stars.

If, on the other hand, a sufficiently strong electric current is passed through a gas, the gas itself will emit a light spectrum in which only a few discrete colors (frequencies) appear. These are called emission lines. They are located precisely at those wavelengths (frequencies) at which that same gas produces absorption lines as described in the previous paragraph.

The spectra of most stars are heavily dominated by absorption lines. Spectra from the cooler stars (such as types G and K) are dominated by molecular bands arising from oxides (like ZrO and TiO) and from compounds of carbon like CH, CN, CO, and C2. Stars like the Sun (type G) show “metal” absorption lines. Astronomers call any element heavier than Helium a “metal”. In fact the Sun shows the presence of 68 of the known elements. The spectra of hot O and B type stars show few lines, and what lines they do have appear quite blurred or “broadened”. There are a few possible causes of this broadening.

If the absorbing gas is in a magnetic field, each line may split, symmetrically, into multiple, closely spaced lines. This is called the Zeeman effect - named for its discoverer, Pieter Zeeman (1865-1943).

If the gas is in an electric E-field, then lines split unsymmetrically - this is called the Stark effect named for Johannes Stark (1874-1957). These secondary lines are very closely spaced in frequency (wavelength) and so the effect is sometimes called line-broadening or blurring. A most important property is that the degree of Stark (electric field) broadening depends on the atomic mass of the affected gas. The lines of heavy elements are only slightly broadened whereas those of lighter atoms and ions are quite smeared out. This effect is not noted in Zeeman (magnetic field) broadening.

As we progress from right to left up the “main sequence” in the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram – from the less electrically stressed stars toward those experiencing higher current input, we see an increasing broadening of spectral lines. In fact at the upper left end (O-type stars) there is so much blurring that we can distinguish very little structure in the line spectra. Is this caused by the increasing strengths of the E-fields in the stars' DLs as electrical stress increases? And, is increased E-field strength the only possible explanation for this line broadening? Milton states that two pieces of evidence strongly suggest that the answer is yes.


In highly stressed B-type stars:
1. A line at 4471.6 Angstroms is accompanied by a “forbidden” partner at 4469.9 Angstroms. It is well known that this latter line only occurs when an electric field is present.
2. There is an extreme difference between the degree of broadening of the lines from hydrogen and helium (light elements) and those arising from sodium and ionized calcium (heavier elements). This effect is only noted in Stark effect broadening.

The usual mainstream explanation of line broadening is that the star must be rotating rapidly – light from the limb going away from us is red shifted, and light from the limb coming at us is blue shifted – the total effect being to smear out the line widths. BUT, if that were the true explanation, the lines from hydrogen should be no more smeared out than those from calcium. Both of these observations (1 and 2 above) strongly suggest that it is the Stark effect that is selectively broadening the spectral lines in B-type stars. And that indicates the presence of strong electric fields above their surfaces.

There is no simple explanation of these spectral effects via the (non-electrical) thermonuclear core model. So, let us consider to what degree this phenomenon – the existence of spectral absorption lines and their selective broadening – is consistent with the Electric Sun model.

In the Electric Sun model it is clear that the photosphere is the site of a strong plasma arc discharge. This produces the Sun's continuous visible light spectrum. Immediately above this in the Sun’s atmosphere there is the Double Layer (DL) in which an intense, outwardly directed electric field resides. It is within this strong E-field that many heavy elements are created by z-pinch fusion. Recall that the strong E-field dethermalizes the ions in that region and thus it is the (relatively) coolest layer of the Sun's atmosphere. Light that originates in the photosphere passes through the relatively cool, newly formed heavier elements in the DL. These heavier elements selectively absorb energy from the light's spectrum and thus the absorption lines are created. In fact they are created in exactly the place where the Sun's E-field is strongest. Thus we have the ideal situation for selective broadening of those lines due to the Stark effect.

In those instances wherein we see emission lines in a star’s spectrum we may speculate that, just as in the laboratory, the easiest way to generate them is by passing a strong electric current through a tenuous gas cloud. For example, type W (Wolf-Rayet) stars are under such intense electrical input that they are hotter even than type O stars. They are located to the left of the top of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram. They typically show strong emission lines in their spectra. Since these stars experience stronger electrical currents than any other type star, there is ample probability that any tenuous coronal gases will be excited by such currents to produce emission lines.

At the other end of the HR diagram, type M (relatively cool) stars also sometimes exhibit spectral emission lines. Can we explain this via the Electric Sun model as well? Consider the star Betelgeuse – a type M red giant. The average density of Betelgeuse is less than one ten thousandth of the density of the air we breathe. A star of such tenuous nature has often been called a “red hot vacuum”. The outer “surface” of this tenuous sphere (the radius of which is larger than the orbit of Jupiter from the Sun) has been found to have three bright areas of photospheric tufting above which we would expect to find DLs wherein z-pinch fusion may occur. It is from this source that the absorption lines in the M-type spectra come. But, in addition, Betelgeuse is surrounded by a coronal plasma that extends out several hundred radii from the surface of the star. This corona is even less dense than the star itself. Thus we have a gigantic gas cloud through which (according to the Electric Star model) electric current is passing – an ideal situation for the production of spectral emission lines.

So, once again, in the case of stellar emission and absorption lines and their selective broadening, we observe a stellar phenomenon that is more consistent with the Electric Sun model than it is with the “fusion core” model (in which, of course, no mention is made of electric fields).

there is more to this but that's enough for now. Thanks Michael !!!

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:39 am

Hello All

Hello Kovil

I noticed that you have been busy.

I have to go and pick up the kids.

I will read it and come back to you.

Three I's
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:51 am

Hello Kvil

What do you think of
If a sphere of fixed volume splits into two smaller (equal sized) spheres, the total surface area of the newly formed pair will be about 26% larger than the area of the original sphere. (If the split results in two unequally sized spheres, the increase in total area will be something less than 26%.) So, to reduce the current density it is experiencing, an electrically stressed, blue-white star may explosively fission into two or more stars. This provides an increase in total surface area and so results in a reduced level of current density on the (new) stars' surfaces. Each of two new (equal sized) stars will experience only 80% of the previous current density level and so both will jump to new locations farther to the lower-right in the HR diagram.
From your above link.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

Post by kovil » Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:12 pm

Harry,

It makes inescapably good sense, and provides irrefutable logical evidence in support of the Electrical Theory of the Sun and the Galaxy and the Universe. Basic electrical engineering principles are at work here, nothing far fetched nor beyond what has already been observed in laboratories and can be duplicated on a months notice.

As somebody said, 'Astronomers are not educated in electrical engineering, and don't eat lunch with the guys across the campus, so they consider the cosmos to be electrically neutral. Actually they don't think about electrical consequences much, so it never crosses their mind when a braided comet tail is observed.'

My present big burning question is "How does the electrical circuit become completed?" If the sun is exporting 4 x 10^26 watts of energy so that we can receive 0.137 watts per square centimeter here on earth, and that's for each and every cm^2 facing the sun; it must be importing that same 4 x 10^26 watts of energy. This is according to the Electric Sun Theory.

OK so the ISM is drifting 50,000 free electrons per cubic meter, that's plausible and they are moving at 105 meters per second drift. That seems doable too. And a postulated 10^10 volts differential between the anode of the sun and the cathode of the ISM at a distance of 100 times the radius of Pluto, I'm OK with that too. This provides the 'slope' for positive ions to be accelerated, which we do observe! That leaves an amperage of 4 x 10^16 amperes needed to resolve the current flow requirements to keep the sun empowered. Fine, but how do all those incoming electrons complete the circuit??? Do the electrons convert into protons and leave that way to complete the circuit? A proton is 1836 times heavier than an electron, are the suns departing ions 1/1836 times less than the electron influx? (it seems not likely that electrons are converting into protons in the sun and then being expelled) I do not have a gut feeling of how the circuit is being completed, and I believe it must be completed somehow, or it wouldn't flow.

Another idea that crossed yesterday during the 3 hours website crawl (as opposed to a pubcrawl ! , my liver prefers webcrawling these days !) was, 'Does the creation of an event horizon cause a formerly gravitationally caused anode object to become a cathode object?' In this fashion the galactic center could be expelling the electrons while ingesting the ions that stars expel and this would complete the galactic circuit, as the gravity objects that stars are, ingest electrons and expel ions.

The resultant magnetic fields, which the photo in Infrared light titled the Galactic Center Radio Arc, would provide the structure that rotates the disk of the galaxy; in a homopolar motor fashion.

I was Googleing 'homopolar motor' yesterday for 2 hours too!

It seems a 5th grader constructed the Cosmos !

(there is a new tv comedy game show here in the States, called "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader" hosted by Jeff Foxworthy, he did the comedy albums some years ago about 'Rednecks' eg, 'Have you ever mowed the lawn and discovered a car?' etc. The show pits adults against 5th graders to see who can answer the questions correctly. It's a bit 'staged' but there is a deeper truth about it.)

Unfortunately most of the theorists running the sciences have all been through graduate school and have trouble seeing beyond the end of their noses; they have all become so specialized they have lost sight of the wholeistic picture. As Science becomes more complex, and it has at an astonishing rate the last century, on must specialize in order to have a chance to rise in that field, the downside is one loses sight of the bigger picture, and if the different disciplines don't communicate (like the CIA and FBI didn't) then there is a loss of the big picture. We are in that position today, and I seriously wonder how long it will be until they all start to work together to figure things out and stop fighting for turf to enlarge each ones bailiwick.
Last edited by kovil on Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kovil
Science Officer
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:58 pm

Post by kovil » Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:44 pm

Michael,

So you are saying that the positive ions the sun expels as the 'solar wind' is how the circuit is being completed?

The sun is a light bulb in a way, and the electrons are being turned into heat and other wavelengths and that is how some of all those electrons are disappearing. OK, and the rest of the equation is protons streaming 'down the slope' of the electrical gradient toward the solar sheath 100 Pluto radii away. OK I'll think on that for a while, thanks.

What happens to those protons? (positive ions) after they get 100 Plutos away? Do they make their way toward the galactic center and ultimately the accretion disk? and then electrons are spewed out and recycle north and south ward from the poles of that giant dynamo to curve around along the magnetic field and enter the disk to be ingested by stars?
Last edited by kovil on Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:07 am

Hello All

Hello Kovil

I was reading your post, I was ready to reply by saying, get Michael to answer your questions.

Smile,,,,the next post was Michaels.

========================================
Kovil said
What happens to those protons? (positive ions) after they get 100 Plutos away? Do they make their way toward the galactic center and ultimately the accretion disk? and then recycle north and south ward from the poles of that giant dynamo to curve around along the magnetic field and enter the disk to be ingested by stars?
The matter that falls into the so called black hole, a proportion of it is broken down to subatomic particals others are caught in the jet stream being ejected.

How the jet stream is formed is a Billion dollar question.

Some say its formed from the infalling matter.

I think the explanation may come from the properties of plasma. Creating the internal forces that drive the jet stream, creating a corridoor that is not affected by the forces that suck matter into the black hole.

I'm just thinking aloud. What I say is not fact, but an opinion.

Is there a plasma person out there.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

Post Reply