/sci/ - Science and Mathematics

>>2665

>is there any merit to the electric universe theory?

Fellow layman here, was literally about to post this and ask if someone can refute (or link to a refutation) in regards to the "work" done by the Thunderbolts Project and it's members such as Stephen Crowder that claim to debunk Quantum Theory (or more accurately, the current understanding of Quantum Theory and the misinterpretations that are attributed to Einstein's allegedly disingenuous presentation of the underlying mathematics, and the blending of Newtonian theory when needed in order to "patch the holes/flaws"). I understand the overall theories provided, but the pure mathematics that is quoted is something I haven't dedicated the time to fully understanding.

I know some Biologists who agree with Electric Universe theory, but Physicists seem to be intent on calling it crackpot. Any links would be greatly appreciated.

In physics an electric field applied to charged particles cause them to accelerate. The

Electric universe theory says that the solar wind is the result of such a field, and the Sun is electric, not fusion based.

Maxwell’s theory of acceleration, however, talks about a time variable field, not a fixed one, and what’s more the solar wind contains both positive and negatively charged ions (protons and electrons mainly). An electric sun would be positively charged and all the negatively charged electrons would be attached to it – not be pushed out from the Sun on a solar wind. This fact proves the Sun is not electric.