Oops! Universe Expanding “Too Quickly” | Space News

Oops! Universe Expanding “Too Quickly” | Space News

Welcome to Space News from
the Electric Universe, brought to you by The
Thunderbolts Project™ at Thunderbolts.info The current standard cosmological model
tells us that roughly 96% of the universe is composed of strange
invisible dark stuff. About 73% of the total mass
and energy in the universe is said to be composed of
so-called dark energy. The concept of dark energy
was invented in the 1990’s when scientists studying type 1a
supernovae discovered that the supernovae appeared to be accelerating faster, the
farther away they were from the observer. Today, cosmologists say that the mysterious
force of dark energy is responsible for accelerating the expansion of the universe
since the hypothetical Big Bang explosion, although the admit they have no
understanding of what dark energy is, nor how it really works. But a new scientific study has only
made dark energy more mysterious. Scientists that attempt to measure
the so called cosmic expansion rate have discovered that the universe again
appears to be expanding much too quickly, even taking into account the invention
of dark energy’s influence. The study leader states in a recent
Scientific American article. The bottom line is that the universe looks
like it’s expanding about 8% faster than you would have expected based on how it looked
in its youth and how we expect it to evolve. We have to take this
pretty darn seriously. Charles Bennett of Johns Hopkins
University also stated; “Basically is there something going on
in cosmology that we don’t understand, or is there something
going on with the data? One of those is a lot more exciting, but
I think the other may be more likely. The Scientific American article
offers the following analysis; “One of the most exciting
possibilities is that dark energy is even stranger than the
leading theory suggests”. However, as Wal Thornhill explains, the
standard cosmology’s increasingly strange interpretations become unnecessary
in an Electric Universe. It’s no surprise that Big Bang
theorists are having difficulties with each new discovery
about the universe. The most recent problem was
highlighted in Nature on April 11th; “The most precise measurement ever made of the
current rate of expansion of the universe has produced a value that appears
incompatible with measurements of radiation left over from the big bang. If the findings are confirmed
by independent techniques, the laws of cosmology might
have to be rewritten”. The rate of expansion of the
universe is supposed to be due to the competing action of
dark matter with dark energy. Dark matter’s gravity tends
to slow cosmic expansion while dark energy pushes out
what makes it accelerate. It was thought that dark energy
strength has been constant. Now it has been found, the rate of
expansion is 8% faster than that predicted based on the cosmic microwave
background radiation diagram. But it is not the man-made laws of
cosmology that need to be rewritten, it is the entire set of concepts
that underpin Big Bang cosmology. It’s no use making up laws
about things that don’t exist, like dark matter
and dark energy. It is simply assumed because
of the belief in the Big Bang that the cosmic microwave radiation is from
the background, rather than the foreground. However, the evidence of asymmetry in that
radiation suggests it is locally produced. More to the point, Plasma Cosmology and the
Electric Universe requires and simply explains the cosmic radiation as being due to
microwave radiation from the filamentary gallactic electric currents flowing
in the neighborhood of the Sun. Indeed some of the
expected structures, a Galaxy wide sample of dense
filamentary structures correlated with spiral arms and star
formation, have been recently mapped. See here an example of a
network of galactic filaments. Note the roughly orthogonal
branching of tributaries which is characteristic of
an electrical discharge and then compare it with the experimental
discharge filaments shown here. In October 2011 I wrote, “A
Nobel Prize for the Dark Side”, about the prize in physics being
awarded to 3 astrophysicists for the ‘accelerating universe’. Dark energy is supposed to
make up 73% of the universe. The evidence interpreted
in this weird way comes from comparing the
redshift distances of galaxies with the brightness of the supernovae
type 1a, used as a standard candle. It was found that the supernovae in highly
redshifted galaxies are fainter than expected, indicating that they are further
away than previously estimated. This in turn implied a startling
accelerating expansion of the universe, according to the Big Bang model. It’s like throwing a ball into the air
and having it accelerate upwards! So, a mysterious dark
energy was invented which fills the vacuum and
works against gravity. The popular science fiction
author Douglas Adams’ infinite improbability
generator type of argument, was called upon to produce
this vacuum energy. The language defining
vacuum energy is revealing. “Vacuum energy is an underlying
background energy that exists in space even when the space is devoid
of matter, that is, free space. The concept of vacuum energy has been deduced
from the concept of virtual particles, which is itself derived from the
energy-time uncertainty principle”. You may notice the absurdity of the concept
given that the vacuum contains no matter, background or otherwise. Yet it is supposed
to contain energy. This is impossible! Incredibly, energy has no
definition in physics. Merely different examples. Douglas Adams was parodying Heisenberg’s
uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is merely a
probabilistic description of what happens at the scale
of subatomic particles with no real physical understanding
of cause and effect. Heisenberg was uncertain because he
didn’t know, in a physical sense, what he was talking about. He was being truthful
though when he wrote; “We still lack some essential feature in
our image of the structure of matter”. The concept of virtual particles
winking in and out of existence defies the first
principle of physics. ‘Thou shalt not magically materialize
nor dematerialize matter.’ Calling matter virtual merely
underscores its non-reality. Indeed, the discovery of the
acceleration of the expanding universe is an interpretation based on total
ignorance of the real nature of stars and the standard candle,
the supernova type 1a. A supernova type 1a is supposed to be due to
a hypothetical series of incredible events resulting in an exploding
white dwarf star. But in an Electric Universe a supernova is
simply an electrical explosion of a star that draws its energy
from a galactic circuit. The remarkable brilliance
of a supernova, which can exceed that of its
host galaxy for days or weeks, is explained by kind of power
transmission line failure that can also be seen
occasionally on Earth. If such a circuit is suddenly opened, the
electromagnetic energy stored in the circuit is focused at the point where
the circuit is broken, producing catastrophic arcing. Stars too, can suddenly have the
current, focused on them, switched off by a plasma instability, causing
it to be magnetically pinched off. The result is what’s known
as an exploding double layer which results in ejection of
matter from the body of the star. This turning inside out of a supernova has
been observed, to the puzzlement of theorists. The standard candle of the
supernova and it’s light curve are then simply due to the circuit
parameters of galactic transmission lines which power all stars. What of the discovery of fainter and more shortly
lived supernovae in high redshift galaxies? The astronomer Halton Arp showed
from numerous observations that faint, highly redshifted
objects like quasars, are intrinsically faint because of
their youth and not their distance. There was no big bang! He proved that quasars are born episodically
from the nucleus of active galaxies. Their light is initially
faint and highly redshifted as they move rapidly along the
spin axis away from their parent. As they mature, they grow brighter and their
redshift decreases while they slow down, as the matter within
them increases in mass. Finally, the quasars evolve
into companion galaxies. The decreasing quasar redshift
occurs in discrete steps which points to a process
whereby protons and electrons go through a number of small
quantized, that is resonant, increases in mass as the electrical
polarization within the quasar increases. The charge required comes via
an electrical umbilical cord in the form of the observed
parent galaxy’s axial jet. Based on Arp’s discovery and the
electrical model of galaxies and stars, both stars and supernovae
type 1a are naturally dimmer. And the supernovae more short-lived in high
redshift galaxies than in low redshift galaxies because of the lower
galactic energy density. The Big Bang laws of cosmology need
to be discarded, not re-written. They don’t work! All is darkness in the
Big Bang universe, with its black holes, dark
matter and dark energy. The Electric Universe throws
a new light on the subject because its laws of cosmology are
simply those of electromagnetism with, for the very first time, definitions of mass and energy in terms
of the electrical structure of matter. Of course, I don’t expect a Nobel
Prize for the sensible explanation, otherwise I could meet the
fate of the hapless student who created the Infinite
Improbability Generator, in Douglas Adams’ wonderful
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. “When just after he was awarded the Galactic
Institute’s Prize for Extreme Cleverness he got lynched by a rampaging
mob of respectable physicists who had finally realized that the one thing
they really couldn’t stand was a smart-ass”. For continuous updates on Space
News from the Electric Universe stay tuned to Thunderbolts.info

45 Replies to “Oops! Universe Expanding “Too Quickly” | Space News

  1. the ether-vortex atom model was confirmed when e.p. nemes photographed and filmed the nuclei of an atom. the vortex structure was first delineated, theoretically, by C.F. Krafft. Krafft's proton consists of two vortices in face to face and rolling contact such that the ether flows in at the dipole equator, and out the poles, just as the sun does. the electron is also a two vortice entity, conversely drawing ether in at its poles and out at the equator. Krafft deduced this ether had to possess a facet corresponding to hydrodynamic confluence and other properties seen in aerodynamics which he termed viscidity. viscidity meant that two vortices coming into contact will repel each other if of identical rotations. the vortice has four forms of rotation: at right angles or orbital to the axis and parallel to the axis or coaxial; of the first kind: clockwise and counterclockwise; of the 2nd kind: positive or a efflux; negative or influx.

    Hilgenberg was able to fairly accurately predict the masses of transuranic elements ahead of discovery using the Krafft model. he showed a periodic table up to 200 elements or so.

  2. 425/5000
    He asks me seriously, the universe creates matter, and how it succeeds, I think precisely in the law of heisenberg energy time, to create matter from there, I do not stop physically but I'm not really physical and apart, Question that there is in the basio,
    There are theories that there is still light, no movement, there is another experiment that are the casimir plates, good greetings, and luck

  3. When galaxies are far away from eachother, there is a redshift also when those galaxies are not moving away from each other?
    Or not?
    There is a redshift between galaxies also when they are not moving away from each other. When the galaxies move away from each other(with a constant or not), there is an increasing redshift…

  4. If every one gets in their cars and heads to the same building for work, and on the way to work looks out the rear view mirror to notice that it appears as if their neighborhoods are all rushing away from them. When they get to work and have a talk, they all agree that the surrounding neighborhoods must be expanding away from this central place that they have work.
    I am not so sure about all this. i think all these people were just headed away from the neighborhoods and in the same central direction.

  5. That's why we should study everything! When I came across this explanation of the Electric Universe, and other things that you have already done, I realized that not only "science" (religion of pastors skeptics and atheists), or the disgusting big media we know that propagates error, but Hollywood too! I like the movies but Hollywood doesn't fool me anymore 🙂 Unfortunately Hollywood should also be discarded 🙂 Actually, the Big Ban theory, and all knowledge of modern physics must be discarded once and for all. They are afraid that the human species will be free in terms of "generation" (transformation) of energy, and other things like the worldwide loss of credibility of controlling our mind and blocking us from questioning them and unmasking them in front from everybody 🙂

  6. Love that guy! He's like one man standing alone, against a world of scientists that are pissed off cause they know they have got it all wrong. And just don't have the balls to admit it! You are not alone Wal! We are all right here with you!

  7. From what I can see, the only thing terribly wrong with the electric universe theory is that if we end up heaving overboard the Swiss-Jew byword-for-genius guy with the crazy hair, and the guy who talks through a computer and cant move, for some Aussie named "Thornhill" I'm going to drown from absolutely wetting myelf.

  8. I think the same energy holding our billions of atoms together for our bodies is what is making up the universe. Once the good ol' boys die out then the light will shine.

  9. I don't think "dark matter" even exists. An "Electric Universe" seems to make more sense to me. I suppose higher, (older), intelligences tap into the electric universe to travel between the stars.

  10. the one thing i could never understand about the so called "big bang and gravity" theories were the cone diagrams. shouldn't they be spherical. i did really enjoy this one, and that's from a smartas_.


  12. A balloon is often used to aid imagination of the expanding universe but a balloon will expand when the exterior air pressure drops, such a when it floats and rises high enough that the air becomes thinner…..is that expansion called a force? I realize this next thought might be silly but, if our universe was inside a gigantic black hole, the interior space would be expanding as the black hole grew in radius and might do so at varying rates depending on the amount of matter within its grasp/event horizon at any particular time…..is this a stupid thought?

  13. Dark matter and energy are fabrications now needed because technology has threatened to expose a lie told a long time ago about gravitational theory.

  14. The decadent and arrogant thinking of Big Bang theory being the only one has to go! A new start will get us somewhere instead.

  15. If you fill a space with air and then surround that with a boundary and enclose it then surround it with another like itself and so on your center and original space will be in a vacuum from the pressure exerted from each layer…

  16. The outer parts of galaxies move faster for no good reason???
    Seems, maybe, the same ought to apply to the universe⚫️

  17. If current thinking is relying on unproven theories made by someone who died over 70 years ago then it's clearly not very current.

  18. You are electrical. You can focus this. However, it's easier and far more effective to focus love, which may or may not be electrical. 1. feel love. 2. extend that feeling to others. 3. feel the field and how you can control it
    My opinion is that while the EU is mostly correct, us real people who aren't that smart should focus on the real life applications like the bio-rhythmic tuning and other stuff that will help change the world. Sad fact is that when the guys (EU genius heroes) get too famous and powerful they will be removed, and I tell this as a warning to all of you EU guys. Being right does not make you immune. The bullshit system didn't survive by examining and accepting alternate theories. They will make you die if you threaten too hard. Please be careful.

  19. I don't think it's electricity. I think it's the waves and the only example we see is electricity. I think the electricity is the result of something.Just because humans can create electricity this is the way we see it. You call it thunderbolts and that's not really what it is if you can see my point. I think electrical may be the wrong term as it seems to be much greater and bigger than that and you may need to rebrand (lie) to really get people involved.

  20. Ben over at suspicious observers, scoffs at "expanding universe", calling every scientist with a doctrine in the field, "PhD unicorns". (youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=SLAdgO4obSE)

  21. Its nut no? You have 1 theory that provides answers and 1 that provides endless and increasingly bizzzzzzarre questions…………
    Am I missing something?

  22. This one is one of my favorites as Wal not only has an excellent presentation, as per usual, but lays waste some of the dogmatic "Scientific religions" of mainstream science. "Big Bang" my butt!…

  23. 1. What caused the Big Bang from nothing? 2. What caused inflation? 3. Is inflation the same speed now … faster or slower? 4. If slow down how did inflation slow down? If inflation faster … how did this happen? 5. How do particles come from nothing? How were the first stars made since you need stars to make stars? TU on the vid…

  24. Why does mathematics define the universe? Because there is always a fudge factor thrown in to make it fit observations. This means that the astronomy of our time is actually astrology because is can never be falsified.

  25. For a long time I wasn’t sure about electron orbiting an atom. Regretfully, I had to earn a living as EE so I go along with that “electron” as a tool to work on EE problems but deep down inside I think it isn’t any bits of charged matter or any atom associated “-tron” like charges particles nor in any orbit.

    Simply put i view electron isn’t any particle but an electric energy, it is structured electric charge associated with an atom, structured in a way that it varies in integer steps corresponding to hexagonal or sub-hexagon numbers. It make more sense, to me, that atoms are bonded(give or take charge, coulomb push and pull simultaneously) by specific electric charge conditions in an atoms of like and unlike kinds, and not by electrons or multiple electrons exchange as academia prescribed in chemical reactions.

    Only through such hypothesis can we migrate freely back and forth between microcosm and macrocosm.

    I would like to see that become reality to a grand theory for our electric universe as well as our universe as a whole, before my next life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *