acsinuk

The energy light from the sun is emitted through the magnetic tunnel formed by the solar wind. Once it hits the target it is released as free light and can be reflected in any direction and is isotropic and that is why we can see the moon and asteroids etc. But the light from a faraway star is confined to its magnoflux tunnel until it hits its target planet earth. To balance the arrival of a +ion an electron must be sent back to the transmitting star. We really need new physics that prioritizes the conservation of charge not just energy and establishes where the balancing charges are situated at any instant inside the magnetised volume of space. Almost certainly the engineers working on the tocamak experiments must know all about this as they need electrically and magnetically to confine and direct the ions so they do not touch the sides of the tunnel . Why not ask them? CliveS

Yes, it is expanding slowly because as matter gradually gets pushed out the volume magnetized increases fractionally Any evidence that the sun's emission is not isotropic? Not easy to detect as the sun sees the rotating satellite detector as a very small negativly charged matter target. Yes, it is as well that some galaxies are at slightly oblique angles due to traumer in their past, otherwise the shape of the universe would be even flatter than it is. CliveS

To prove that I am correct or the standard model is correct is not possible but we can apply logic to the universe and use some common sense. At the time of the big bang it was necessary to confine the plasma flash of AC light and stop the created energy from moving away at the speed of light which would have lead to an infinite dispersion. This restriction still applies today, for if 99.99% of the stars/Sun energy is just blasted off into space which is 99.99% empty, then 99.99% of the energy will arrive at the edge of the universe with nowhere to go except outwards leading to a catastrophic dilution. As the edge of the universe is defined by a known amount of red-shift and the edge is not shining brilliantly, we can deduce that the random T^4 energy law may only apply to a tiny number of Wolf Rayet type stars. Stars in the main sequence are not emitted in all directions, as believed by Stefan but only through the magnetic-flux tunnels in space directly towards an attractive target. Thus the Sun beams most of its output directly to the planets and the intervening space is mostly dark. Stars appear as lighthouses, beaming light directly to all the planets but mostly their own planets, moons, comets & asteroids. At present the Voyagers are travelling into outer space and will at some stage come to the boundary of the solar system which is the point where the incoming star light energy exactly balances the output energy from our sun. It is predicable that they will cross some of the light beam tunnels that are emitted from our sun to other stars planets and also cross some light beam tunnels of external starlight coming into our systems planets etc. Please just be patient and hopefully the Voyagers will come up with this evidence for us. CliveS

Well, the internet often has articles by UCLA, NASA and ESA and other top research organisations that give details of some unexplainable behaviour of stars which they attribute to magnetism. However, despite this obvious magnetic connection cosmologists preferred to believe that stars were just rotated by chance at creation; as spin is not a gravity related force. A massive gamma ray burst in 1979 baffled scientists until it was finally traced to a magnetar which exploded magnetically without the assistance of gravity. Considerable work has now been commenced on magnetic surveys of some galaxies using the Faraday rotation techniques, that positively identify these magnetic fields in space. Unpolarised random emission light may be isotropic but laser light and star light I am sure are magnetically focused in a specific direction. CliveS

No, we do not require a magnetic tunnel if the volume of space through which the light moves is fully magnetized at right angles to the direction of transmission. But it is just a convenient way of showing that light can move forward in one direction rather than outwards in all directions equally. I believe that outer space is magnetized and that the microwave background radiation is evidence of that fact. Outside the universe we will find no radiation at all. It is total void of nothingness. CliveS

Yes, the 3D magnetic flux wave I have in mind would certainly obey Maxwells law. We really need to re-order Maxwell so instead of E/D we need to have it in the form of energy = voltage times current loop Cos angle per unit volume x,y,z. CliveS

wave theory seems to indicate that a photon vibration would expand outwards in all direction leading to infinite dilution pretty fast. light travels in straight lines so what is restricting its movement into a sort of helixing pulse if not a magnetic tunnel? CliveS

What I am trying to understand is how electromagnetic energy can move across empty space without touching any matter. It is as if the space itself is magnetised thus allowing an electrically charged photon pair to tumble forward. CliveS

Light and non-classical light are made from electro-magnetic energy waves of photons which are massless. I read recently that evanescents waves can pass on the energy without any particles or charges being exchanged! Can this be true? CliveS

I am not sure that the Zeeman light splitter will indicate a magnetic field in space. I note that voyager has now moved into a stagnation area where the charged particle count is down but magnetic direction still the same. Well. here is a prediction for you; if the voyager crosses a magnoflux tunnel between our sun and any other large cosmic matter, such as an asteriod in the Ourt cloud belt or a planet rotating any other star then the solar wind particles will suddenly increase as it crosses and then reduce again. The magnetic field will be unaffected as it is now beyond the suns magnetic bubble and controlled by the magnetic hub at the centre of our galaxy. CliveS

Why, because you need a force that is massless that's why. There is no such thing as dark matter or dark energy. All that is necessary to balance the universe is to magnetize the galaxies so the magnetic hubs [black holes] repel at 22G and inside each system have an additional massless attractive force of 5G. That is what the WMAP evidence shows. CliveS

The WMAP teams 10 year investigation has proved that the standard model based on relativity is totally inadequate in explaining the balance of the universe as only 4.6% of the matter necessary to balance it is there. What you see is what you’ve got! To balance there has to be dark energy force [which I presume is magnetic repulsion] of 22.2 times our gravity{G} that is pushing the galaxies apart Why the WMAP team should further hypothesize that there is five times more dark matter than real baryonic matter is a complete mystery if the solar system is anything to go by. Anyway, to balance we need a force that attracts all matter inside each stars system together of 5{G}[which I presume is electrostatic attraction]. Using this new physics of the 3D electromagnetic universe will instantly balance the universe and make it stable. Remember, it used to be matter that needed to be conserved; then with relativity it was declared that energy must be conserved, but now it turns out that it is electric charge that must be fundamentally conserved. What do you think?? CliveS

OK Imatfaal I would like to extend the star orbit non-star to look at it from not only a gravitational but 3D magnetic attraction point of view. But keeping in mind what you have just said will start a new topic called " WMAP balance of universe using 3D electromagnetic forces only" as this needs new physics. CliveS

Wait a minute though. Originally, we had to conserve mass but after relativity we decided that what we really meant was that we must conserve energy. Right . But because there is nothing identifiable inside molecules apart from the electric charges and neutrons so why dont we establish the new physics law that only electric charge must be conserved and further that if these charges are not balanced that the resultant unbalance will be emitted as electromagnetic energy. Simple! CliveS

Just joined this forum. The idea of non-stars is most interesting as these would normally be called major planets and I suppose if there was only one major planet and a smallist star then the pair would orbit the common gyro barycentric centre as shown in the wiki reference above. The question is why do stars give out energy and planets, asteroids moons etc all absorb energy. Could it be that stars are made of antimatter whilst everything outside of the stars surface is made of matter?? What do you think? CliveS