On 01/09/2012 02:41 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Thanks, Jones.
I read the paragraph. I'm not surprised read that the paper states
"...The global stellar electrostatic field is 918 times stronger than
the corresponding stellar gravity..." More on that later.
Meanwhile, yes, I am basically aware of Mills' explanation of the
corona, having something to do with the manufacture of hydrinos, as
atomic hydrogen transform into hydrinos due to chance encounters with
helium. Mills claims such chance encounters explains why the corona is
exceedingly hotter than the surface of the sun. I gather that at
present there is no satisfactory mainstream theoretical explanation as
to why the corona is as hot as it has been measured to be. Therefore,
Mills' audacious CQM explanation remains tantalizing to the eyes of
many. Regardless of whether CQM is correct or not, the theory
certainly deserves further study.
However, the conundrum I'm trying to acquire a better understanding
about is whether there exists a distinct electrical charge associated
withIN the sun. And if one exists, is it positive or negative? I
assume there probably exists an aggregate positive charge within the
interior of the sun.
Where I'm going with this line of questioning is trying to achieve a
better grasp of the balance act between the attractive forces of
gravity versus the much stronger repulsive force of like-charged
particles (particularly protons).
It would seem logical for me to assume that since we know that on a
particle-by-particle basis gravitational forces are magnitudes weaker
than electrically charged attractive/repulsive forces the aggregate
internal electrical charge within the sun must therefore be fairly
close to neutral - on average, that is. Otherwise, it would seem to me
that the accumulated repulsive forces attributed to all those unpaired
protons (with no associated electron charge to even the score) would
cause our sun to rip apart violently.
Did I miss something fundamentally wrong in my analysis?
Hi Steven,
I think that you didn't miss much (at the level of your analysis) except
maybe that neutrons should be considered also, contributing to the
gravitational force.
What follows is original research, plus some things I borrowed from a
number of other sources:
At any moment, the mass of the Sun is in a state of unstable equilibrium
between the collapse due to gravitational force, and the expansion due
not only to heat/pressure, but also to electromagnetic repulsion from
one side(from the massive Sun), and attraction from the other side(from
to the whole of the surrounding space).
The excess of electric charge is being expulsed in the form of charged
particles, in the solar wind. The corona is hotter because in that zone
charged particles are accelerated, and their increase in velocity is
seen as heat.
Those charged particles are accelerated because when in the corona, they
are already out of the surface of equal charges, and are therefore
repelled. At the same time, they are attracted by the general field of
surrounding space, which is relatively negative, and therefore
attractive for the majority of those particles. The surface of the Sun
can be seen as the point of equilibrium between gravitational attraction
on one side, vs. electric repulsion on the other side.
Of course, I'm not talking about electromagnetic emissions (i.e. emitted
light and X-rays, which are concomitant phenomenons) but about
electrical currents (i.e. protons and electrons) taking place in tenuous
plasmas.
Sunspots indicate deficits of charge, whereas coronal mass ejections
indicate excesses of charge.
Some additional references:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2011/12/26/which-came-first/
and particularly
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2011/12/08/voyager-1-updates-solar-electron-flux/
Now, all that description is of course only a very small part, or
aspect, of what is really taking place there; and here too!
Regards,
Mauro
