Juergens' Electric Sun model?

I'm not sure as to the specific hypothesis that you are referring too, but
I've often had a problem with the redshift theory. I would like to preface
the following with the fact that I'm neither a physicist nor am I ever
likely to become one. Some things just don't make logical sense to me.
Here is why the redshift theory does not.

I fully understand the concept that as light travels, its frequency can be
shifted as an object moves either towards or away from the observer just as
sound does terrestrially. In the case of the former, the light would shift
blue, in the case of the latter, red. My understanding is that nearly every
self-luminous object in space exhibits a redshift indicating an expanding
universe because everything is moving away from us. This does not seem to
match observation though.

In the first case, we are part of a spiral galaxy that spins around a center
(most likely a black hole). General consensus has it that spiral galaxies
are not so much a type of galaxy, but a phase on a continuum representing
the evolution of a galaxy similar to normal stars vs. red giants vs. white
dwarfs, etc, each representing a point in a stars evolution. The galaxy
evolves, in part, because objects are not all orbiting the center at the
same rate. The planetary system would be an analogy albeit a not a perfect
one. Within that analogy, Mars is sometimes coming closer to us and
sometimes speeding away from us. We use this cycle to plan probes, etc.
The same holds true for all the other planets. Applying this analogy to the
galaxy, some stars within the galaxy should be coming towards us and others
should be traveling away from us thereby representing a mix of blue and red
shifts. Perhaps I am mistaken (please correct me if I am), but to my
knowledge, this is not the case. The only rational explanation that I feel
might explain this would be if the universe is expanding at such a rate that
the expansion within the galaxy is so great the distance two objects within
the galaxy are moving apart from each other is greater than the distance
that is being closed by an object passing us by. Still, even if this were
so, there should be a redshift differential meaning that all objects within
the galaxy would display a varied redshift depending on there relative
position to us within the orbit. If they were approaching us orbitally
speaking, even if they would display less of a redshift than if they were
speeding away from us.

In the second case, galaxies have been observed "gobbling up" other
galaxies. Please forgive my lack of a scientific term there. Again, this
would indicate that galaxies approach each other, in which case a blue shift
should occur. Again, even with the caveat listed above, at best,
differential redshifts should occur.

If I am missing something fundamental here, or there is a fatal flaw in my
logic, please let me know. I don't tend to subscribe to conspiracy
theories. Neither do I feel that the redshift phenomenon is one. But like
all theories, until proven into law (and then still sometimes not even
then), are subject to revision based on observation.

DBJ

Em Sex 27 Fev 2004 21:42, Paul D. Fernhout escreveu:
> Anybody know anything about this Electric Sun or related Redshift
> controversy?

I remember vaguely about a friend saying that there was a guy on the
Internet
who claimed that the redshift is a collective hallucination of the
scientific
establishment. On the other hand, I have never heard about the "Electric
Sun"
stuff.

> Could the Sun be powered electrically?

I have not read his arguments (yet), and my reflex reaction so far is to
think
that it is an utterly crazy hypothesis.

BTW, that is not the only wacky hypothesis about how the Sun works. There is

another guy who claims that the Sun is an iron ball remant of a red giant,
and is mainly powered by a neutronium core
(http://www.spacedaily.com/news/solarscience-03zl.html). AFAIR, the
"graceful
decay" of the red giant would produce planets in nicely circular orbits, gas

planets far away and rock-metal planets closer; and the Sun would be an
exception - he thinks that most stars (which are metal-poor) work using
fusion alone. And I think that this hypothesis of the "Iron Sun" is less
wacky than the "Electric Sun". :-)

> What impact would this have on space settlement?

None, I guess. One could claim that the Sun is powered by a god chained
inside
a spherical shell of fire, and the Sun would continue to irradiate energy
nevertheless; and no matter how the Sun works, we know that it works over
geological timescales (i.e., eternity, in Human terms). In short, space
settlements could be powered by the Sun even if the settlers thought of the
Sun as a god-powered lamp...