You can argue with Eddington's original model being impossible (he used ideal gas laws for a plasma!) and thus the assumptions underlying this approach wrt thermonuclear reactions are wrong.
Your work is an inspiration to those struggling to understand the mechanisms of Earth and Cosmos. I can only hope we will soon have a million ( 1000000 ) man march through the capital cities of the world [ 1000000 / city ] demanding that " the signal be reassigned " for all our sakes. Thank you Doctor.
this makes my more sense to to me but who am I to challenge the faith based physics that mainstream physicists adhere to in order to be accepted by the science community. Keep up the good work
Good thing that no faith is required when you have multiple verifiable lines of evidence to prove mainstream physics is mostly correct. This guy is spouting nonsense, and y'all suckers just eat it up.
The closed mind 'knows' but, the open mind considers. This distinction contemplated 'the standard model. and enquiry as to its veracity. Certain things get set in stone which is guarded and protected by its supporters to the extent that any other enquiry is savagely attacked.We need people like Dr, Robitaille to rustle feathers in the persuit of a better model giving due respect to proven scientific principles.
Always a pleasure, Dr.Robitaille, and it's good to see you. Yeah, I've seen that peeling off effect a great many times. That and the ripple across the surface behaving like liquid. So cool:)
If the Sun was a gas, then its "surface" would experience very large buoyancy oscillations. So the video of the layer ejected during a CME shown here would result in large and apparent deformation of the underlying "gas". But we see no such deformation and it looks like a solid. The gas model is a joke. Somehow we have a rigid surface as if there is a density discontinuity in this alleged gas. But according to the standard model (dogma) there is no such density discontinuity. Gases in gravitational wells do not have surfaces and other discontinuities in density.
Telling ya this guy is freaking smart, and thats why they ignore him, you cant deny his arguments, its not like a crackpot theory, its the kind of theory that when you hear it you go, ohhhh thats the way it really is.
@@adairjanney7109 We have direct evidence that the sun and stars are, in fact, large balls of gas undergoing nuclear fusion. Anyone claiming that this is untrue would be a crackpot. So Robitaille is crackpot.
@@ZygonesBzygones : Tell us just how large a free cloud of gas in space must get before it magically compresses itself and thereby raise its own temperature, decrease its own entropy and change its heat capacity from positive to negative?
@@user-ph2ql2vg1d : " It can be any size really, if you can get the cloud cold enough and are prepared to wait long enough." user-ph2ql2vg1d (Harry Hab) No free cloud of gas in space can magically compresses itself and thereby raise its own temperature, decrease its own entropy and change its heat capacity from positive to negative. Your claim is nonsense. (1) Self-compression to raise own temperature: violation of the 1st law of thermodynamics. (2) Self-compression to reduce own entropy: violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
An interesting analysis would be to extend Dr. Robitaille's model onto red and brown dwarf stars. Also, an interesting candidate for research would be Jupiter known for its exothermic properties.
"The Sun is powered by fusion..." Another assumption. Fusion is occurring in the outer regions but what is at the core of the Sun is unknown. Most likely extreme energy gamma radiation, creating matter and charge.
I believe wal thornhill had the right idea, the sun is hollow, as you can observe with iron spheres formed from plasma discharge on earth. I think there is good evidence for an iron core, it being hollow would also explain the seemingly low density. so the final structure is a hollow iron sphere with a layer of liquid metallic hydrogen on top. the interaction between the solid surface and the flowing metallic hydrogen may be the cause of solar flares
Don’t you see your ”most likely” and ”creating matter” also makes an assumption? But you are very correct that we don’t know, yet. We will actually never know unless the Sun model is corrected.
The main sequence, all of the giants, and all of the dwarfs in the entire Herzspring-Russell chart have a star core fragment (from prior generations of larger stellar objects). That star core fragment is a supercompacted, superconductive material made up of gravitons, providing the gravitational force ... and all ensuing larger sub-quantum particulates and their stellar evolution into matter particles, atoms, elements, .... Outside of the graviton core is the gas to liquid to metallic hydrogen sphere, then surrounded by the gas to liquid fused helium sphere. Outside of these are the actual multiple-levels of graviton, electrino, and electron (tensor bosino and photino bosino) force carriers that are the actual agents of fusion in the photosphere for Hydrogen to Helium up to Iron. The electro-static (ES) and electro-gravitic (EG) model of the corrected Solar Model, the Black Hole, subquantum particulates, and greater understanding of the whole stellar engine disproves all of the direct correlations of thernonuclear activity, radiactive fusion agents, and Kelvins.
The superconductive graviton core manifests a Meissner force field in the surrounding layers of the stellar engine out to the corona region. This force field also applies its own tension field to the fusion process. 4 layers of graviton construction, 2 (+?) layers of electrino construction, and 2 (+?) layers of electron consturctions lie within the photosphere. Each of the above additional layers above the original graviton, electrino, and electron particulates creates its own tension, as they have their own gravity field and gravity waves. The same chromosphere tension of electrons, muon electrons, and tau electrons have their own gravity field and gravity waves. Anybody making generic "universal" gravity constants and gravity wave constants will find nothing matching their criteria with these sub-quantum and quantum fields and waves. With each of these additional layers of constructed particulates and particles, the photinos (having variable light, less-than-light speed) are gravitationally captured in the photosphere, while the larger photon particles have full light speed (and escape velocity). These photons also as force carriers supply the electrical field keeping the outward tension of the multiple layers and spheres from collapsing.
"...further compression would lead to a diamond-like structure, which is completely transparent..." sounds very intriguing! I'm wondering if the cores of some stars could be this diamond-like lattice structure, if pressure and density increase towards the center of the structure. On the other hand, because the hexagonal planar lattice structure is layered, and goes all the way around the star, the tension within the lattice layers could be enough to support the layers against gravitational collapse; and so because each layer isn't weighing down upon the next, the pressure and density actually goes down, or at least doesn't increase towards the center. As far as I know current geological and stellar models assume that the bulk of astronomical bodies are too fluid to have this kind of 'globular arch' structural support, but maybe that's just a paradigm.
@@Dan-gs3kg Neither can gases. No gas can compress itself and thereby raise its own temperature and decrease its own entropy. Gravitational collapse of an unenclosed gas in space is just self-compression nonsense. But that does not register with astronomers, astrophysicists and cosmologists.
@@ZygonesBzygones : Provide your evidence that the alleged CMB monopole has been detected beyond the orbit of COBE. It is a scientific fact that no CMB monopole was detected at L2.
@@ZygonesBzygones "that's a lovely idea, but a little bird tells me you are not actually going to do this" So what. A little bird tells me you might be Ian or Midlander.
#you're performing real science and doing an amazing job of it. I've been an enthusiast of the Plasma physics and the Electric Universe hypothesis for sixteen years, and have followed your channel four years.
I’m excited about the possible structures in the non-main sequence stars! Perhaps what we see as pulsars and white dwarfs might be more metallic or diamond-like latices of hydrogen?
I hope you'll address all the nonsense videos about the James Webb discoveries, which talk endlessly about things like red shift, black holes, cosmic microwave background and gravitational lensing.
None of the things you called nonsense are nonsense. They're components of a larger scale we're just figuring out. Man-made climate change is non-sense, dark-matter is non-sense.
Never in 5780 years would i have expected to live long enough to see the climate change heresy fall, the standard solar model collapse, the "spontaneous emergence of biological life emerging from chemistry" notion mathematically dissolved, and the CMB evicerated. What a time to be alive!
@@ZygonesBzygones "none of these things happened - but what did happen is that eviscerated was misspelled." If you are going to call someone out on the spelling, how about getting your punctuation right. Climate change, in terms of manmade CO2 burning the earth to a crisp, is nonsense. "Science" has 40 years of climate predictions absolutely wrong. So you fault the guy for not being more specific? How about making a decent point on something. And yes, the standard model is total crap and has already fallen. Astrophysics is too stunned and corrupt to admit it.
that plot of flux vs WL (1:22) suggests it's not the nature of the stars but what happens to the light emitted. It's more likely it accounts for IS matter rather than the actual temperature or condition of the star.
very impressed and in awe of how u always seem genuine and dont bend to general consensus in your studies. wishing u all the luck and energy for your future ❤️ i really appreciate u.
These videos are such a good learning experience. This cloud of information is slowly condensing in to a vast sea of knowledge. Thanks again Dr. P.M. of the sun Robitaille
remember the UV Catastrophy of black body radiation?, That's the same process, UV absorbing matter is somewhere in the line of sight. In the BB, it was on itself, the graphite that was in the BB substance.
I have an issue in accepting that fusion of lighter elements can be exothermic. Not only don't we see any positive evidences in terms of the Q factor which cannot be also accounted to secondary effects, but when I speak to people they always hint at the Sun as the perfect example. Or to the hydrogen bomb, which also only exists on paper as a pure fusion weapon since every working model was always coated in fissile materials. Do we really have empirical evidence for this claim?
@@ZygonesBzygones can you point me towards the evidence? See, I've set up this question very simple on purpose. It is actually a highly complex question which requires knowledge of how fusion research utilizes the Q factor of the plasma and the total input energy. Although organizations like the DoE, LLNL or the MPI try to sell you the idea that we're close to break even, I can tell you that in fact the highest achived total Q was one of 0.0075. Which basically means they've burned 99.25% of the input energy and the thermic output is rather due to reactions of impurities than through the fusion process itself. To make it clear, it is all based on mathematical models, there are no proven evidences.
Another good selling point of this idea is that the sun is more spherical than it should be if it were merely a spinning ball of gas. Why is it not oblate from rotation? If you are familiar with research on air bubbles, you know that it is the charged double LAYERS at the surface that keep so spherical. The layer itself tends towards be planar. Over a volume like the bubble, the closest is spherical. So, using this model for the sun, we see a reason for the sun to be as spherical as it is.
Actually, there has not been a star observed directly to be oblate. Correct me if im wrong. The oblateness is calculated only, and that from the spread of redshifts, and the wrong idea that it is Doppler Shift only. Most stars too distant to be visually resolved, but if they see a lot of light out at the blue and redshifted extremes, that appears as an oblate star. The problem is there is so much spreading and splitting and smearing of lines from Zeeman, Stark,Doppler, etc, that too much is seeing what they expect to see. Truth is, by all calculations the sun should be more oblate than it is, even with its low spin rate
Compression of a gas requires the presence of real surfaces and the action of an external agent. Think for example about a bicycle pump. The astronomers however, advance the absurdity that a gas can self-compress to form a star. Since they can't even get compression right they have no chance of getting the Sun and stars right.
Great overview. Sunspots also have strong magnetic fields. Which is evidence of strong electric currents. And we can see such currents in the plasma as they form solar ropes. These currents will affect the ion composition, and probably any lattice. You already pointed out the abundance of +2 and -2 ions in the solar spectrum. There should be a thorough investigation in how these currents are formed and how much they affect nuclear and chemical reactions. Unlike mainstream astronomers I know how electromagnetism works, and that magnet reconnection is just bullshit. We can see both the magnetic fields (with Zeeman effect) AND the currents that cause these fields. The original astronomers were confused and rotated the magnetic fields in sunspots 90 degrees. They turned sunspots into weird particle accelerators. And invented a fantasy world mixed with maths to make it all work. Like: astronomers made eddy currents increase the magnetic field, while these currents always reduce it. They switched the left and right hand rules. Maybe they had two left hands? Yet, we can clearly see electrical currents in all solar ropes. They behave exactly like currents moving in a plasma ball. They always connect a "positive" sunspot to a "negative" sunspot (electric polarity still unknown). We can sometimes see plasma moving into both directions, which means that there are both positive and negative ions. If there is a "shortcut" the plasma-current changes accordingly. If a new plasma-current forms, the other currents get weaker. This all very visible.
Hexagonal planar lattice layers. Is that why Light travels Helically? And, Lights rate of induction is perpendicularly through these hexagonal metallic structure layers?
Would it be possible to construct, on earth, an hexagonal carbon lattice with an interchelatic plane underneath. I am guessing the pressure may pose an issue.
I am with this model except for one aspect. Fusion has never been shown to provide the amount of energy needed to give off energy on par with the Sun. Fusion only gives off energy on par with plasma recombination, not e=mc^2. Annihilation of the proton does give off energy on par with e=mc^2 in super-collisions. Fusion has never been shown to give off neutrinos and there is a discrepancy of the neutrino count of the Sun under the Hans Bethe fusion models. Neutrinos have only been shown by experiment to be given off in fission reactions and proton annihilation, not fusion. Annihilation, or Fission, of the proton has been shown to give off energy on par with e=mc^2 as well as neutrinos Protons have been broken down into smaller particles and neutrinos by super-collision and do give off the amount of energy needed to power the Sun.
How could the photosphere (at a near vacuum in the standard model ~10^-9g/cm^3) uphold an atmosphere of ~6000 km? In the standard model how could an imaginary surface like the photosphere act as a barrier between gas under pressure and a vacuum, preventing the chromosphere from collapsing into the sun? All this while maintaining its own integrity, opacity, etc. Also isn't the atmosphere of the sun visible during an eclipse - does it shine? does it exhibit characteristics of a real atmosphere w pressure gradient or those of a near vacuum?
@@weekendtradesman102 :"I cannot understand his model either. Any liquid in the sun must be under a very high pressure. A very thick atmosphere is needed to make high pressures." weekendtradesman Indeed - you don't understand. I suggest that you do some study. I suggest you begin here: Robitaille P.-M., Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter - The Sun on Trial: Liquid Metallic Hydrogen as a Solar Building Block, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.90-142, 2013,vixra.org/pdf/1310.0110v1.pdf
If the sun is rotating does is it's almost spherical shape consistent with the gaseous model? Should it not be more disk like if it is a rotating plasma?
Great to see "settled" science being properly challenged. Personally I prefer Donald Scott's Electric Sun model, it is much more predictive and elegant.
You are not correct. The electric sun model cannot even properly explain the thermal spectrum of the Sun let alone the different star types. There is not one shred of evidence that the surface of the Sun acts as an anode. The atoms at the photosphere are overwhelmingly neutral and the voltages required by Mr Scott have never been measured. Also, there is no evidence that the Sun is connected by an electrical circuit to another star.
I hope someday P.M. Robitaille gains a competent peer. Science demands adequate peer counterance. I am certain he would prefer to be validly challenged, as that leads to best thought...but thusfar, he is pre-eminent and not intellectually challenged.
@@ZygonesBzygones : Why don't you advance a scientific argument as to any aspect of Dr. Robitaille's presentation instead of scribbling inane graffiti all over this page?
I'm thinking that the micronova will put to bed any idea or notion that there will be enough peeps left in the any scientific community to go through any paradigme shift. Those who do survive it will be way too busy just finding food/shelter to really care about what the sun is made of. I do agree with your general analysis.. regarding the details.
Hey now, don’t be telling to much truth here. Lol God is going to do God and humans don’t have a choice. The sun will do the sun and a consensus isn’t required. Humanity has been knocked back many times and it will happen again.
Your absolutely correct and must re design our total understanding of the old model.that being said, all your theories are correct in observation yet you have kept too many of the old model as understood reality to acheive truth. I suggest you erase all fundamentals of historical understandings of observations as well until you review even the earliest most common ones again for your self..this will show your developed models actual placement in reality ..let go of all space and cosmos as you know it and review from the beginning for your self.. humor the possibility that there is no old light.. humor the possibility that these are not even objects.. humor the all the possibilities..review paraselene's closely..in this natural phenomenon , there is simple obvious truths that destroy much of the current science model development stemming back around a hundred years.. even the lights coming directly to us from their source is in question..bells theorum is false And there is no duality.. there is a hidden variable that had been overlooked..when u see those elements in the lights ,it doesn't mean that those elements make up the matter of that source.just thst the light has been in contact with them while in travel.. this is very important..another example is that we don't know if the moon effects our tides due to gravity..we assume .they are part of the great cycle and might just coincidentally have synchronicity in that cycle..paraselene are also In that cycle and not atmospheric phenomenon at all.. they only happen when the moon is full and midnight is close by..this demonstrates that there is no gravitational lensing and e=mc2 is the beginning of a pile of mathematical errors ..leading to quantum entanglement which also needs to be forgotten..the lattice is between us and the light of the sun.. the sun dot of light is converged omega wavelength poison spot of the laser been behind a spherical apature it penetrates the lattice of structured water that has lost its complete structure . This dot of structured light is converging turoidal vortice of omega laser arago spot.you don't see the source directly..the sun is liquid electrified liquid mercury spinning in hypersaline mineral rich structured water .we are under the surface inside our own ball lense..the mercury is creating a arago spot of omega wavelength cathode ray of turoidal vorteces that become colors pulses at us and the structured water its spinning in is vibrating creating waves that mimic the fresnel lensing effect toward the turoidal beam as it pools electrons towards the mercury due to its frequency in its lower wave fuction "dip's "of the structured water..this is how thr nucleation , the elevtric field and photosynthesis omega creates reality. Honest..research carefully what i have describes .the white light's are culminated by cryststal ball lenses that culminate and mirror as well as refract if positioned to each other in specific geometries to each combine their light into a single source ..the lights they gather is sunlight that has already been seperated into 3 cstegories of waveleghts by 3 specific crystals..the first ball lense to receive sunlight is calcite quartz as its splits the lower and higher levels due to its bire' qualities..one beam goes into blue sapphire/obsidian as it covers ultraviolet,xrays up to gamma...the other beam goes to ruby that covers all lower spectrum including color and infra..quartz lets all pass in seperate directions ..now all wavelenghts are available in 2 seperate single beams from blue and red that have astherism in their crystal matrix.this is the trinity..the other crystal spheres are quartz calcite and are merely used to culminate and transfer like geometric nodes into atomic structure to gather each beam into a single sphere the shines omega laser dot..this dot is them split into vortices of light which give angular momentum to a gold sphere below which creates spin and a arago spot effect as its the spherical apature in the path of omega..upon spin , its center creates a magnetic field due to nucleation and the arago spot because 8 vorteces of omega in a single beam .this is the beam that shines on the mercury that is vibrating on the surface of the structured mineral rich water....the rest i have already discribed .....this nature photosynthesis of creation...your welcome 🤫
Sorry Doc, your wrong. The sun is a solid, rocky body under great electrical stress. There are only 2 things in the universe that can produce a continuous, spectrum of white light. Tungsten, and an electric arc. Metallic hydrogen ain't neither.
You have no idea what you are talking about. First, tungsten does not produce a blackbody spectrum - even if it produces a continuous spectrum it is not blackbody as anybody who bothers to check will know. Second, the spectrum of an electric arc is also not blackbody, but in any case is usually produced using graphite electrodes.Other electric arc lamps like the xenon arc lamp is far from blackbody - it has lots of peaks. None of the electric arc lamps are even close to blackbody. The best blackbody spectrum ever measured is from the alleged CMB and it was not produced by an electric arc or tungsten. Other than that, graphite and soot are the best natural blackbodies known to science. It's clear that you do not know anything about blackbody radiation.
It's amazing how Dr. R makes his case, step by step. IDK how anyone can argue with his research! Thank you, Doctor!
You can argue with Eddington's original model being impossible (he used ideal gas laws for a plasma!) and thus the assumptions underlying this approach wrt thermonuclear reactions are wrong.
They don't argue...they demand you believe them.
@@SamMackrill Indeed . Look up the " ideal gas " definition .
THANK YOU DR. YOUR THE ONLY DOCTOR I TRUST
I trust two doctors 1st & 2nd Dr Pepper😂
Your work is an inspiration to those struggling to understand the mechanisms of Earth and Cosmos. I can only hope we will soon have a million ( 1000000 ) man march through the capital cities of the world [ 1000000 / city ] demanding that " the signal be reassigned " for all our sakes.
Thank you Doctor.
Best youtube channel, ty.
I no longer hold my breath between presentations, but I never miss one and don't pass out like before! Thanks for your amazing work.
Good
Ben sent me. Sus Observer. Cannot wait to show my kids this channel who have a deep interest in space.
this makes my more sense to to me but who am I to challenge the faith based physics that mainstream physicists adhere to in order to be accepted by the science community. Keep up the good work
👌
@@reefsroost696 👋
Good thing that no faith is required when you have multiple verifiable lines of evidence to prove mainstream physics is mostly correct. This guy is spouting nonsense, and y'all suckers just eat it up.
The closed mind 'knows' but, the open mind considers. This distinction contemplated 'the standard model. and enquiry as to its veracity. Certain things get set in stone which is guarded and protected by its supporters to the extent that any other enquiry is savagely attacked.We need people like Dr, Robitaille to rustle feathers in the persuit of a better model giving due respect to proven scientific principles.
Always a pleasure, Dr.Robitaille, and it's good to see you. Yeah, I've seen that peeling off effect a great many times. That and the ripple across the surface behaving like liquid. So cool:)
I dont know how you do it, they just do not care. It was never about science or reality or the universe it was about a narrative and that is it
This presentation, greatly improved my understanding of key concepts, pertaining to your fantastic work.
I too feel this way
It is always a pleasure to witness an excellent mind at work.
Thank you for your principles and ethics Dr. R.
If the Sun was a gas, then its "surface" would experience very large buoyancy oscillations. So the video of the layer ejected during a CME shown here would result in large and apparent deformation of the underlying "gas". But we see no such deformation and it looks like a solid. The gas model is a joke. Somehow we have a rigid surface as if there is a density discontinuity in this alleged gas. But according to the standard model (dogma) there is no such density discontinuity. Gases in gravitational wells do not have surfaces and other discontinuities in density.
Any basic image of the Sun confirms the gas model. This guy is just lying about easily illustrated facts.
Telling ya this guy is freaking smart, and thats why they ignore him, you cant deny his arguments, its not like a crackpot theory, its the kind of theory that when you hear it you go, ohhhh thats the way it really is.
No, it's just a crackpot theory, and it makes more sense to you because reality scares you.
@@beethaniel What is crackpot about it
@@adairjanney7109 We have direct evidence that the sun and stars are, in fact, large balls of gas undergoing nuclear fusion. Anyone claiming that this is untrue would be a crackpot. So Robitaille is crackpot.
Being scared.... that's mirror talk.... look.@@beethaniel
Or stars are a pinch in a Birkland current, a ball of plasma connected to numerous other stars.
@@ZygonesBzygones : Tell us just how large a free cloud of gas in space must get before it magically compresses itself and thereby raise its own temperature, decrease its own entropy and change its heat capacity from positive to negative?
@@user-ph2ql2vg1d : " It can be any size really, if you can get the cloud cold enough and are prepared to wait long enough." user-ph2ql2vg1d (Harry Hab)
No free cloud of gas in space can magically compresses itself and thereby raise its own temperature, decrease its own entropy and change its heat capacity from positive to negative. Your claim is nonsense.
(1) Self-compression to raise own temperature: violation of the 1st law of thermodynamics.
(2) Self-compression to reduce own entropy: violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
An interesting analysis would be to extend Dr. Robitaille's model onto red and brown dwarf stars.
Also, an interesting candidate for research would be Jupiter known for its exothermic properties.
This^
I always love it when Dr. R drops a video!
Be thou the first true merit to befriend; His praise is lost, who stays till all commend. - Alexander Pope
"The Sun is powered by fusion..." Another assumption. Fusion is occurring in the outer regions but what is at the core of the Sun is unknown. Most likely extreme energy gamma radiation, creating matter and charge.
I believe wal thornhill had the right idea, the sun is hollow, as you can observe with iron spheres formed from plasma discharge on earth. I think there is good evidence for an iron core, it being hollow would also explain the seemingly low density. so the final structure is a hollow iron sphere with a layer of liquid metallic hydrogen on top. the interaction between the solid surface and the flowing metallic hydrogen may be the cause of solar flares
Don’t you see your ”most likely” and ”creating matter” also makes an assumption? But you are very correct that we don’t know, yet. We will actually never know unless the Sun model is corrected.
Another excellent production 👏.... cheers Dr R 👍
The main sequence, all of the giants, and all of the dwarfs in the entire Herzspring-Russell chart have a star core fragment (from prior generations of larger stellar objects). That star core fragment is a supercompacted, superconductive material made up of gravitons, providing the gravitational force ... and all ensuing larger sub-quantum particulates and their stellar evolution into matter particles, atoms, elements, .... Outside of the graviton core is the gas to liquid to metallic hydrogen sphere, then surrounded by the gas to liquid fused helium sphere. Outside of these are the actual multiple-levels of graviton, electrino, and electron (tensor bosino and photino bosino) force carriers that are the actual agents of fusion in the photosphere for Hydrogen to Helium up to Iron. The electro-static (ES) and electro-gravitic (EG) model of the corrected Solar Model, the Black Hole, subquantum particulates, and greater understanding of the whole stellar engine disproves all of the direct correlations of thernonuclear activity, radiactive fusion agents, and Kelvins.
The superconductive graviton core manifests a Meissner force field in the surrounding layers of the stellar engine out to the corona region. This force field also applies its own tension field to the fusion process.
4 layers of graviton construction, 2 (+?) layers of electrino construction, and 2 (+?) layers of electron consturctions lie within the photosphere. Each of the above additional layers above the original graviton, electrino, and electron particulates creates its own tension, as they have their own gravity field and gravity waves. The same chromosphere tension of electrons, muon electrons, and tau electrons have their own gravity field and gravity waves. Anybody making generic "universal" gravity constants and gravity wave constants will find nothing matching their criteria with these sub-quantum and quantum fields and waves.
With each of these additional layers of constructed particulates and particles, the photinos (having variable light, less-than-light speed) are gravitationally captured in the photosphere, while the larger photon particles have full light speed (and escape velocity). These photons also as force carriers supply the electrical field keeping the outward tension of the multiple layers and spheres from collapsing.
My favorite (actual) scientist is back! Thank you Pierre!!!
"...further compression would lead to a diamond-like structure, which is completely transparent..." sounds very intriguing! I'm wondering if the cores of some stars could be this diamond-like lattice structure, if pressure and density increase towards the center of the structure.
On the other hand, because the hexagonal planar lattice structure is layered, and goes all the way around the star, the tension within the lattice layers could be enough to support the layers against gravitational collapse; and so because each layer isn't weighing down upon the next, the pressure and density actually goes down, or at least doesn't increase towards the center. As far as I know current geological and stellar models assume that the bulk of astronomical bodies are too fluid to have this kind of 'globular arch' structural support, but maybe that's just a paradigm.
Liquids and solids can't undergo gravitational collapse to begin with.
@@Dan-gs3kg Neither can gases. No gas can compress itself and thereby raise its own temperature and decrease its own entropy. Gravitational collapse of an unenclosed gas in space is just self-compression nonsense. But that does not register with astronomers, astrophysicists and cosmologists.
27 more viewings and I think I can get it. 😅 Love your work professor
Seriously, he's condensed so many complicated ideas and rabbit trails into this 20 minute video. Such complicated stuff, but super interesting.
Had to watch it twice. Thank you sir.
We’ll done sir.
🌎🌏🌍☯️⚡️
Much ❤ Love
Paradigm shifts are required if we are to advance our understanding of this reality.
I will be making a custom t-shirt that says
REASSIGN THE
MONOPOLE
@@ZygonesBzygones : Provide your evidence that the alleged CMB monopole has been detected beyond the orbit of COBE. It is a scientific fact that no CMB monopole was detected at L2.
@@ZygonesBzygones "that's a lovely idea, but a little bird tells me you are not actually going to do this" So what. A little bird tells me you might be Ian or Midlander.
Thank you Robitaille and all that helped
Love the tie.
I am most interested in the structures of Red/Brown dwarf stars and what that would mean concerning their stability, i.e., plasma type ejections ect.
This^
Thanks doc, always a pleasure to see and hear you.
Big support from Unzicker!
Yesss always good to see your videos ...makes for a great day
#you're performing real science and doing an amazing job of it. I've been an enthusiast of the Plasma physics and the Electric Universe hypothesis for sixteen years, and have followed your channel four years.
Stellar capacities sounds like magnetic images in space. Congratulations you live in a magnetic universe!
The other non-hexagonal structures are too "structured". Hexagonal structuring allows for more variables being viable.
Not only just translational dislocations, but rotational ones as well.
Glad you are back!
Brilliant, as always!
Once again Dr R...thanks for the brain stretcher.
I’m excited about the possible structures in the non-main sequence stars! Perhaps what we see as pulsars and white dwarfs might be more metallic or diamond-like latices of hydrogen?
Could be . Find out .
I hope you'll address all the nonsense videos about the James Webb discoveries, which talk endlessly about things like red shift, black holes, cosmic microwave background and gravitational lensing.
Imo, it's just mainstream rhetoricians selling something.
None of the things you called nonsense are nonsense. They're components of a larger scale we're just figuring out. Man-made climate change is non-sense, dark-matter is non-sense.
I know James Webb... guys a pos.
@triedproven9908 conflating the person w/the device is childish. I mean Obama got a f**king Nobel peace prize FFS.
@@ZygonesBzygoneswhat makes you think they aren't?
Escelllent!
Thanks for these videos!
outstanding!
I'm sure with a little tweaking, we could see our reflection in the _background_ 🥸
Never in 5780 years would i have expected to live long enough to see the climate change heresy fall, the standard solar model collapse, the "spontaneous emergence of biological life emerging from chemistry" notion mathematically dissolved, and the CMB evicerated.
What a time to be alive!
@@ZygonesBzygones : Instead of whining about orthography, try a scientific argument.
@@ZygonesBzygones "none of these things happened - but what did happen is that eviscerated was misspelled." If you are going to call someone out on the spelling, how about getting your punctuation right.
Climate change, in terms of manmade CO2 burning the earth to a crisp, is nonsense. "Science" has 40 years of climate predictions absolutely wrong. So you fault the guy for not being more specific? How about making a decent point on something. And yes, the standard model is total crap and has already fallen. Astrophysics is too stunned and corrupt to admit it.
@@ZygonesBzygones "and it is a good social skill to have to know when "jokes" are happening" You need more practice telling jokes.
that plot of flux vs WL (1:22) suggests it's not the nature of the stars but what happens to the light emitted. It's more likely it accounts for IS matter rather than the actual temperature or condition of the star.
very impressed and in awe of how u always seem genuine and dont bend to general consensus in your studies.
wishing u all the luck and energy for your future ❤️ i really appreciate u.
Another banger Doc!! Another kick in the nuts for mainstream quackademia!
thank you.
👍🏼
PMR is throwing down and following up with a ground-pounding
@@ZygonesBzygones Which part?
These videos are such a good learning experience. This cloud of information is slowly condensing in to a vast sea of knowledge. Thanks again Dr. P.M. of the sun Robitaille
Excellent presentation. If the stars are liquid, does that have a bearing on the required mass to account for orbital rotation of galaxies?
Good question .
It depends on the balance of rotation . And vibration . And No .
Rotation is in the Sub-atomic world as well as the macro world .
Brilliant video as usual
remember the UV Catastrophy of black body radiation?, That's the same process, UV absorbing matter is somewhere in the line of sight. In the BB, it was on itself, the graphite that was in the BB substance.
I have an issue in accepting that fusion of lighter elements can be exothermic. Not only don't we see any positive evidences in terms of the Q factor which cannot be also accounted to secondary effects, but when I speak to people they always hint at the Sun as the perfect example. Or to the hydrogen bomb, which also only exists on paper as a pure fusion weapon since every working model was always coated in fissile materials. Do we really have empirical evidence for this claim?
@@ZygonesBzygones can you point me towards the evidence? See, I've set up this question very simple on purpose. It is actually a highly complex question which requires knowledge of how fusion research utilizes the Q factor of the plasma and the total input energy. Although organizations like the DoE, LLNL or the MPI try to sell you the idea that we're close to break even, I can tell you that in fact the highest achived total Q was one of 0.0075. Which basically means they've burned 99.25% of the input energy and the thermic output is rather due to reactions of impurities than through the fusion process itself.
To make it clear, it is all based on mathematical models, there are no proven evidences.
You and Ben Davidson's videos are my two favorite mind candy.
Another good selling point of this idea is that the sun is more spherical than it should be if it were merely a spinning ball of gas. Why is it not oblate from rotation? If you are familiar with research on air bubbles, you know that it is the charged double LAYERS at the surface that keep so spherical. The layer itself tends towards be planar. Over a volume like the bubble, the closest is spherical. So, using this model for the sun, we see a reason for the sun to be as spherical as it is.
Actually, there has not been a star observed directly to be oblate. Correct me if im wrong. The oblateness is calculated only, and that from the spread of redshifts, and the wrong idea that it is Doppler Shift only. Most stars too distant to be visually resolved, but if they see a lot of light out at the blue and redshifted extremes, that appears as an oblate star. The problem is there is so much spreading and splitting and smearing of lines from Zeeman, Stark,Doppler, etc, that too much is seeing what they expect to see. Truth is, by all calculations the sun should be more oblate than it is, even with its low spin rate
Great video
Well done 👏
11:39 into video . What causes compression ?
Compression of a gas requires the presence of real surfaces and the action of an external agent. Think for example about a bicycle pump. The astronomers however, advance the absurdity that a gas can self-compress to form a star. Since they can't even get compression right they have no chance of getting the Sun and stars right.
@@stevecrothers6585 Real surfaces . And the rest of course . Great stuff 😁
who constitutes the bonds of this proposed lattice?
History keeps repeating itself......I'm sure Dr. R you know how Galileo felted when he invented the telescope 🔭!!!!!
Please do not give up !
meanwhile the other science channels are busy debunking the flat earthers.
Great overview.
Sunspots also have strong magnetic fields. Which is evidence of strong electric currents. And we can see such currents in the plasma as they form solar ropes.
These currents will affect the ion composition, and probably any lattice. You already pointed out the abundance of +2 and -2 ions in the solar spectrum.
There should be a thorough investigation in how these currents are formed and how much they affect nuclear and chemical reactions.
Unlike mainstream astronomers I know how electromagnetism works, and that magnet reconnection is just bullshit. We can see both the magnetic fields (with Zeeman effect) AND the currents that cause these fields. The original astronomers were confused and rotated the magnetic fields in sunspots 90 degrees. They turned sunspots into weird particle accelerators. And invented a fantasy world mixed with maths to make it all work. Like: astronomers made eddy currents increase the magnetic field, while these currents always reduce it. They switched the left and right hand rules. Maybe they had two left hands?
Yet, we can clearly see electrical currents in all solar ropes. They behave exactly like currents moving in a plasma ball. They always connect a "positive" sunspot to a "negative" sunspot (electric polarity still unknown). We can sometimes see plasma moving into both directions, which means that there are both positive and negative ions. If there is a "shortcut" the plasma-current changes accordingly. If a new plasma-current forms, the other currents get weaker. This all very visible.
Hexagonal planar lattice layers. Is that why Light travels Helically?
And, Lights rate of induction is perpendicularly through these hexagonal metallic structure layers?
Would it be possible to construct, on earth, an hexagonal carbon lattice with an interchelatic plane underneath. I am guessing the pressure may pose an issue.
Graphene
Hydrogen not carbon.
I am with this model except for one aspect.
Fusion has never been shown to provide the amount of energy needed to give off energy on par with the Sun.
Fusion only gives off energy on par with plasma recombination, not e=mc^2.
Annihilation of the proton does give off energy on par with e=mc^2 in super-collisions.
Fusion has never been shown to give off neutrinos and there is a discrepancy of the neutrino count of the Sun under the Hans Bethe fusion models.
Neutrinos have only been shown by experiment to be given off in fission reactions and proton annihilation, not fusion.
Annihilation, or Fission, of the proton has been shown to give off energy on par with e=mc^2 as well as neutrinos
Protons have been broken down into smaller particles and neutrinos by super-collision and do give off the amount of energy needed to power the Sun.
How could the photosphere (at a near vacuum in the standard model ~10^-9g/cm^3) uphold an atmosphere of ~6000 km? In the standard model how could an imaginary surface like the photosphere act as a barrier between gas under pressure and a vacuum, preventing the chromosphere from collapsing into the sun? All this while maintaining its own integrity, opacity, etc. Also isn't the atmosphere of the sun visible during an eclipse - does it shine? does it exhibit characteristics of a real atmosphere w pressure gradient or those of a near vacuum?
@@weekendtradesman102 :"I cannot understand his model either. Any liquid in the sun must be under a very high pressure. A very thick atmosphere is needed to make high pressures." weekendtradesman
Indeed - you don't understand. I suggest that you do some study. I suggest you begin here:
Robitaille P.-M., Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter - The Sun on Trial: Liquid Metallic Hydrogen as a Solar Building Block, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.90-142, 2013,vixra.org/pdf/1310.0110v1.pdf
If the sun is rotating does is it's almost spherical shape consistent with the gaseous model? Should it not be more disk like if it is a rotating plasma?
Great to see "settled" science being properly challenged. Personally I prefer Donald Scott's Electric Sun model, it is much more predictive and elegant.
You are not correct. The electric sun model cannot even properly explain the thermal spectrum of the Sun let alone the different star types. There is not one shred of evidence that the surface of the Sun acts as an anode. The atoms at the photosphere are overwhelmingly neutral and the voltages required by Mr Scott have never been measured. Also, there is no evidence that the Sun is connected by an electrical circuit to another star.
4:20
I hope someday P.M. Robitaille gains a competent peer. Science demands adequate peer counterance. I am certain he would prefer to be validly challenged, as that leads to best thought...but thusfar, he is pre-eminent and not intellectually challenged.
@@ZygonesBzygones : Why don't you advance a scientific argument as to any aspect of Dr. Robitaille's presentation instead of scribbling inane graffiti all over this page?
Food for the algorithm.
4 minute mark.
Let that sink in
Dear Dr Robitaille,
Your work is absolutely amazing.
What are your views on neutron stars?
TIA
I'm thinking that the micronova will put to bed any idea or notion that there will be enough peeps left in the any scientific community to go through any paradigme shift. Those who do survive it will be way too busy just finding food/shelter to really care about what the sun is made of. I do agree with your general analysis.. regarding the details.
Hey now, don’t be telling to much truth here. Lol God is going to do God and humans don’t have a choice. The sun will do the sun and a consensus isn’t required. Humanity has been knocked back many times and it will happen again.
IT'S OBVIOUS ! With these High Resolution Suface Photos,,, the Sun is a "BOILING LUQUID" ! And I'm,,, "Uneducated"...
The sun is obviously made of pizza ... or am I just hungry ?
Id like some more eh ! @@user-ph2ql2vg1d
LET'S DO THIS!!!
comment for the algorithm
if there is a 'most' likely it would involve the golden ratio and sacred geometry.
Dr. Robitaille, what do you think of the Big Bang Theory in light of the data from the JWST?
😇😎😇
Ha electric universe. Conspiracy Theory
red giants do not exist.
Your absolutely correct and must re design our total understanding of the old model.that being said, all your theories are correct in observation yet you have kept too many of the old model as understood reality to acheive truth. I suggest you erase all fundamentals of historical understandings of observations as well until you review even the earliest most common ones again for your self..this will show your developed models actual placement in reality ..let go of all space and cosmos as you know it and review from the beginning for your self.. humor the possibility that there is no old light.. humor the possibility that these are not even objects.. humor the all the possibilities..review paraselene's closely..in this natural phenomenon , there is simple obvious truths that destroy much of the current science model development stemming back around a hundred years.. even the lights coming directly to us from their source is in question..bells theorum is false
And there is no duality.. there is a hidden variable that had been overlooked..when u see those elements in the lights ,it doesn't mean that those elements make up the matter of that source.just thst the light has been in contact with them while in travel.. this is very important..another example is that we don't know if the moon effects our tides due to gravity..we assume .they are part of the great cycle and might just coincidentally have synchronicity in that cycle..paraselene are also In that cycle and not atmospheric phenomenon at all.. they only happen when the moon is full and midnight is close by..this demonstrates that there is no gravitational lensing and e=mc2 is the beginning of a pile of mathematical errors ..leading to quantum entanglement which also needs to be forgotten..the lattice is between us and the light of the sun.. the sun dot of light is converged omega wavelength poison spot of the laser been behind a spherical apature it penetrates the lattice of structured water that has lost its complete structure . This dot of structured light is converging turoidal vortice of omega laser arago spot.you don't see the source directly..the sun is liquid electrified liquid mercury spinning in hypersaline mineral rich structured water .we are under the surface inside our own ball lense..the mercury is creating a arago spot of omega wavelength cathode ray of turoidal vorteces that become colors pulses at us and the structured water its spinning in is vibrating creating waves that mimic the fresnel lensing effect toward the turoidal beam as it pools electrons towards the mercury due to its frequency in its lower wave fuction "dip's "of the structured water..this is how thr nucleation , the elevtric field and photosynthesis omega creates reality. Honest..research carefully what i have describes .the white light's are culminated by cryststal ball lenses that culminate and mirror as well as refract if positioned to each other in specific geometries to each combine their light into a single source ..the lights they gather is sunlight that has already been seperated into 3 cstegories of waveleghts by 3 specific crystals..the first ball lense to receive sunlight is calcite quartz as its splits the lower and higher levels due to its bire' qualities..one beam goes into blue sapphire/obsidian as it covers ultraviolet,xrays up to gamma...the other beam goes to ruby that covers all lower spectrum including color and infra..quartz lets all pass in seperate directions ..now all wavelenghts are available in 2 seperate single beams from blue and red that have astherism in their crystal matrix.this is the trinity..the other crystal spheres are quartz calcite and are merely used to culminate and transfer like geometric nodes into atomic structure to gather each beam into a single sphere the shines omega laser dot..this dot is them split into vortices of light which give angular momentum to a gold sphere below which creates spin and a arago spot effect as its the spherical apature in the path of omega..upon spin , its center creates a magnetic field due to nucleation and the arago spot because 8 vorteces of omega in a single beam .this is the beam that shines on the mercury that is vibrating on the surface of the structured mineral rich water....the rest i have already discribed .....this nature photosynthesis of creation...your welcome 🤫
first
Sorry Doc, your wrong. The sun is a solid, rocky body under great electrical stress. There are only 2 things in the universe that can produce a continuous, spectrum of white light. Tungsten, and an electric arc. Metallic hydrogen ain't neither.
You have no idea what you are talking about. First, tungsten does not produce a blackbody spectrum - even if it produces a continuous spectrum it is not blackbody as anybody who bothers to check will know. Second, the spectrum of an electric arc is also not blackbody, but in any case is usually produced using graphite electrodes.Other electric arc lamps like the xenon arc lamp is far from blackbody - it has lots of peaks. None of the electric arc lamps are even close to blackbody. The best blackbody spectrum ever measured is from the alleged CMB and it was not produced by an electric arc or tungsten. Other than that, graphite and soot are the best natural blackbodies known to science. It's clear that you do not know anything about blackbody radiation.
@@stevecrothers6585 Steve, don't waste your breath on these kinds of wild comments.