Safire 2016

I’ve just watched Monty Child’s update of the SAFIRE project at the 2016 EU conference recently held in the US.  Safire is an experiment to discover and understand the working of the sun using electrified plasma in the laboratory. The test chamber houses a small spherical iron anode at its centre and two copper cathodes. The chamber can be evacuated and an enormous  DC electric current power source is used to create the plasma in the chamber.  It is high tech and expertly designed with a full suite of measurement aparatues etc. It was commissioned only a couple of days before the conference, and demonstrated to work.

The test experiment involved a low voltage variable current mode to generate electric plasma in the chamber and the results were startling. The following is imagery captured from the video presentation and shows glow-mode plasma starting to envelop the spherical anode.

Screen Shot 2016-07-03 at 1.23.00 PM.png

This second image capture is when the plasma totally enveloped the spherical iron anode.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 2.36.04 PM.png

This third image was copied from the Wattsupwiththat post on the present day image of the sun minus all its sunspots for solar cycle 24, the lowest in nearly 200 years.

06-30-16-solar-sdo-latest_512_hmiic.jpg

Monty also mentioned that a necessary production of a nuclear fusion reaction is the production of gamma rays. Apparently the Sun, our Sun, does not produce gamma radiation which it should if the standard model is correct.

Does this mean the Sun has an iron core? No, because we have no way of ever knowing this, nor can we specify what represents the core, outer core and mantle of the Earth for similar reasons.

Whatever, this experimental result shows no disparities with the electric sun model.

So it’s likely the sun is electrically powered; which changes things.

About Louis Hissink

Retired diamond exploration geologist. I spent my professional life looking for mineral deposits, found some, and also located a number of kimberlites in NSW and Western Australia. Exploration geology is the closest one can get to practicing the scientific method, mineral exploration always being concerned with finding anomalous geophysical or geochemical data, framing a model and explanation for the anomaly and then testing it with drilling or excavation. All scientific theories are ultimately false since they invariably involved explaining something with incomplete extant knowledge. Since no one is omniscient or knows everything, so too scientific theories which are solely limited to existing knowledge. Because the future always yields new data, scientific theories must change to be compatible with the new data. Thus a true scientist is never in love with any particular theory, always knowing that when the facts change, so too must he/she change their minds.
This entry was posted in Electric Universe, plasma universe, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Safire 2016

  1. THX1138 says:

    Actually, there is evidence of an iron core for the Sun:

    The surface of the Sun:  The sun has a rigid iron surface located under the photosphere that is revealed by satellite imagery.  The solar surface sits beneath the sun’s visible photosphere and is electrically active.

    “The sun’s photosphere is often mistakenly referred to as the surface of the sun. In reality however, the sun’s photosphere is only a “liquid-like” plasma layer made of neon that covers the actual surface of the sun. That visible layer we see with our eyes is composed of penumbral filaments that are several hundred kilometers deep. This visible neon plasma layer that we call the photosphere, and a thicker, more dense atmospheric layer composed of silicon plasma, entirely covers the actual rocky, calcium ferrite surface layer of the sun. The visible photosphere covers the actual surface of the sun, much as the earth’s oceans cover most of the surface of the earth. In this case the sun’s photosphere is very bright and we cannot see the darker, more rigid surface features below the photosphere without the aid of satellite technology. “

    You can click the yellowish image on the right at the website and see a video of the iron core.

    This is an example of a “running difference” image of the sun’s surface revealed by the TRACE satellite using its 171 angstrom filter. This filter is specifically sensitive to iron ion (FE IX/X) emissions and records a C3.3 flare and mass ejection in AR 9143 in 171Å on 28 Aug. 2000. The flare activity is caused by increased electrical activity as fast moving plasma sweeps over surface ridges, resulting in increased electrical activity on the windward side of the mountain ranges.

    I think this video illustrates the rigid nature of the iron core, and its electrical activity very well. If you have difficulty viewing the video, I have made a 4MB .gif of it, which I can send you.

    http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/

    Like

    • Which leads to the problem of estimating the Sun’s density. This needs to be sorted out because the method by which it is estimated is also based on the physics of getting the space probes out there to get the data. Gravity theory at present works in predicting orbits etc of objects etc. It also works in estimating the density of objects on the Earth etc.

      But in the case of the Sun’s density, 1410 Kg/M^3, too low for an iron cored object. Is the theory of gravity incomplete? This has to be sorted before any further progress can be made in EU theory.

      Like

      • THX1138 says:

        The density compared to what? A similar Iron object on Earth? An Iron meteor or asteroid? The density of Iron in the Sun will be far different than the density of Iron elsewhere. Why? Because electrical charge affects gravitational attraction. Scientists today are having intense difficulty understanding why a comet, such as 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko seems to have a density of fluffy snow (based on gravitational theory), but then visually appears to be made of solid rock. (Hint: it is made of solid rock).

        Wal Thornhill is putting together a very nice theory of gravity, partly based on work done by Ralph Sansbury (RIP), and others.

        If you have an hour to spare, you might like to hear Wal speak about it (I’m re-listening now, it’s an excellent introduction):

        Like

      • Wal and I keep in close contact so I am familiar with his work, but thanks for the heads up.

        Like

  2. tempestnut says:

    Most interesting for me was the fact that they seem to generate energy. Perhaps this experiment will finally put to bed nuclear fusion as a source of clean energy, the panacea they will never get to.

    Like

    • My guess is that it’s working out what resonant frequency this energy could be tapped from. But I’m stalled in a particulate cut de sac at present – toying with what an electron actually is – particle or wave? And does it actually exist or is the electron cloud around a nucleus/proton a disturbance in the aether from a spinning proton? All to do with the definition of light. I’m trying to understand gravity in other words.

      Like

      • THX1138 says:

        There are no particles. No electrons, protons, neutrons or photons, and certainly no gravitons. As far as I know, nobody on the Electric Universe team is considering this theory.

        Here’s a nice introduction to the Wave Structure of Matter by Milo Wolff (it’s an index to some of his papers, you’ll have to retrieve and read them yourself):

        Milo Wolff Published Physics Articles

        “Origin of the Natural Laws (January 2002) – using quantum wave particle structure
        This paper describes how How all the laws of Nature are mathematical results of the Three Principles of the Wave Structure of Matter. The three principles are properties of a single entitity – space, the quantum wave medium in which we all exist but seldom notice. Since all of science derives from the natural laws, which are now seen to be properties of space, we deduce that everything – matter, ourselves, the universe – is simply a a result of wave structure in space. This was proposed by the mathematician Clifford, 140 years ago! It is now the next revolution in science. The ‘Standard Model’ is obsolete. ”

        http://mwolff.tripod.com/body_papers.html

        Like

      • Thanks, seems I am walking down a similar path. I’ll download them and have a read.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s