Wal Thornhill: No Islands in Our Electric Universe | Space News

Welcome to Space News from
the Electric Universe, brought to you by The
Thunderbolts Project™ at Thunderbolts.info So, continuing our discussion
on the so-called crisis in cosmology, let’s talk more about
this latest announcement from the Keck Observatory which
describes the latest verification of the anomalous accelerating
expansion rate of the universe. For the first time, scientists
have attempted to estimate the expansion rate using a new method
involving gravitational lensing. Now, the concepts behind
the standard ideas about gravitational lensing is
something that’s been discussed at some of the annual
Thunderbolts conferences. For example, Dr. Edward
Dowdye is a laser optics engineer and, in fact, he was a
NASA physicist and he’s presented his case on the importance of plasma in
understanding the phenomena that scientists attribute to so-called
lensing in space. So Wal, fundamentally, why don’t you
explain the Electric Universe interpretation of the effects
that astronomers do observe and which they describe as
“gravitational lensing?” The concept of gravitational
lensing is faulty at the very beginning because it assumes that
gravity has an effect on space. It doesn’t; it’s an electric force,
it’s a dipolar force just like magnetism, and if that dipole electric
force were able to warp space or, with the powerful magnets we have
today you should be able to see distinct lensing effects
using magnets, we don’t. Gravity doesn’t affect light directly but it
can, by modifying the density of the ether; the ether is all-pervasive,
it’s the substrate of the universe, it’s the medium through which light travels,
it’s the medium through which the gravitational and magnetic forces
and the electric force travel. It behaves like any medium in the presence
of the gravitational field because it’s a material medium and has to be
material, of vanishingly small mass, which indicates there is possibly
neutrinos involved–they will respond to gravity just like any other material
medium, and in this case like a gas, and form an atmosphere about a celestial
object, and that atmosphere can refract light, so that you will get lensing but
it’s got nothing to do with gravity per se, it’s the effect of gravity on
the environment of that body. So yes, you can get gravitational lensing, but
the concept that they’re using is invalid. And principally, because of this idea
that redshift indicates that these objects that they’re seeing near a low
redshifted galaxy, are far away, is incorrect. All it means is that they’re younger than the
object that’s in that center of that view. And what do we find most often
close to galaxies? Quasars, redshifted quasars, and they are, in
Halton Arp’s research, the offspring of an active galaxy, galaxies beget baby
galaxies, and they form initially as a quasar of low mass and high redshift and
low brightness, and their brightness, their mass and their redshift, all change,
become closer to their parent over time, and as a result, they become
companion galaxies of various kinds. So he gives a genealogy,
he shows almost biological aspect to galactic
formation and so, when we see these objects in distant, or
so-called lensed objects, what we must be looking at is an active galaxy surrounded
by some of its redshifted offspring. Because they’re fired off
in episodes, they often have different, slightly
different, quantized redshifts. If they’ve misinterpreted, which they’re
being done here by these people, they can be interpreted in a way which may appear
to give some credence to the distance scales but the distance scales,
as Halton Arp has shown, are completely haywire in
modern cosmology, right, the redshift–distance
relationship is mythical. Arp wrote on the subject of gravitational
lensing, he said, “…you must remember that it was invented
for extra galactic objects because that was the only
escape from observations which required the physical association
of objects of much different redshift. The low mass particle
masses…, which I’ve talked about,… give rise to a lower
luminosity. That gives a rough, higher redshift–fainter apparent magnitude
relation for galaxies of different age at the same distance. And he notes here
also and this is something that I picked up. “This should also apply to the
supernovae within the galaxies. Of course, this fainter than expected
supernova discovery gave rise to the idea that the universe is expanding
more rapidly, it’s accelerating! But that’s sheer nonsense,
it means that you don’t understand supernova explosions
either, which is not a surprise when you think they don’t
understand gravity. Wal, speaking of Halton Arp
and our earlier discussion about the nature of quasars,
let’s talk now about one of the more remarkable discoveries in the
space sciences in recent months. In September of this year, in a paper
published in the Astrophysical Journal, a team of scientists reported their
observation of “six quiet galaxies shifting into quasars” in a period of
time that is literally thousands of times more rapid than standard
cosmology can explain. I’ll read to you briefly
from a Science Alert report, “In a spectacular fashion, six galaxies
have just undergone a huge transformation in a matter of mere months. They’ve gone
from relatively peaceful galaxies to active quasars-the brightest
of all galaxies, blasting vast amounts of radiation
out into the Universe. …such changing-look transitions
are usually observed occurring between different types of
Seyfert galaxies… These Seyfert transitions were what the
team set out to study.” Now, one of the authors of the study
states, “Instead, we found a whole new class of active
galactic nucleus capable of transforming a wimpy
galaxy to a luminous quasar. Theory suggests that a
quasar should take thousands of years to turn on, but
these observations suggest that it could happen very quickly. It
tells us that the theory is all wrong. We thought that Seyfert
transformation was the major puzzle. But now we have a
bigger issue to solve…” And of course, as we reported
previously, this isn’t the first time that scientists have observed
“impossibly rapid changes in quasars.” So Wal, why don’t you tell us,
generally speaking, why these kinds of incredibly rapid cosmic
scale transformations are actually expected in
the Electric Universe? I point to the research of
plasma cosmologists, which shows that the active galactic nucleus
that ejects the quasar, are in fact plasmoids, the most compact form
of high-energy storage known. The electrical energy
poured into the plasmoid from the spiral arms, forms a
tiny doughnut-shaped object. At some point, the energy
density closest to the axis of the plasmoid forces the electrons and
protons to collide and form neutrons. Having no charge allows the
neutrons to escape from the electromagnetic galactic
nucleus in axial jets. It seems the neutrons
are nature’s Houdini’s. They only exist as a dance
between an electron and a proton for the short time
required to escape from the electromagnetic prison of the nucleus of
an atom or the nucleus of the galaxy. But in doing so, they give birth to either
a new element or a new galaxy, respectively. Nature never does
things the hard way. When the neutrons do decay, the freed
electrons are held back by the galactic magnetic field more strongly than the
heavier protons, which now form a quasar. I proposed that an initially
positively charged quasar is therefore followed by a beam
of electrons from its parent galaxy, which would explain
both the observed quantized redshifts and the increase
in mass of the quasar, as a result of increasing
charge polarization within the matter in the quasar,
as the electrons arrive. Of course, the bursty
nature of these outbursts from active galactic nuclei
suggests that the electrons may also arrive in bursts, just like the ejections
themselves, which would predict and explain seemingly impossibly
sudden changes in quasars. Sudden changes on the galactic
scale, and even on the stellar scale, are expected in the
Electric Universe, simply because we are dealing with a
coherent, connected, electrical system operating in real time, in the case
of a galaxy–across the entire galaxy. And this is because the
electric force is instantaneous and the release of stored
electrical energy takes place like a sudden lightning bolt
followed by an exponential decay, as that energy
dissipates into space. And this is behind all sorts
of phenomena that are puzzling researchers at present, where they’re
getting gamma-ray bursts and fast radio bursts and all sorts of things from
seemingly nowhere, and this is another point that Hannes Alfven made; plasma
currents that are flowing through space will produce double layers and these
double layers can, if the current density gets too high, actually shut the current
off, and the result is that the energy is suddenly concentrated at that point, and
there’s a sudden burst like a lightning bolt and it can happen in apparently
empty space, because these double layers are often in dark mode
discharge as it’s called. In the case of galaxies,
the plasmoid itself in the laboratory, it’s known that
the plasmoid forms and the energy that it concentrates,
when it gets to a certain point at very high density, the electrons
and the protons which are held in that plasmoid, when they’re
traveling down this core of the doughnut, is where they’re closest together, and
that’s where the breakdown will first occur. And that breakdown forms a beam of
neutrons. In the laboratory, plasmoids are known to be the most copious source of
neutrons when they break down. So all of this can be
tested in the laboratory, which is one of the
big advantages of the Electric Universe cosmology
over Standard cosmology. Well indeed, and when it comes
to cosmological phenomena, I’ve always felt that the most significant type of
discovery is the evidence for physical connections and interactions of
objects over unfathomable distances. I’ve said before that
the model of the Electric Universe might be: “There
are no islands in space” and we see this verified
more and more frequently. A few months ago, we reported
on the discovery of a vast radio-emitting filament which
is connecting two galaxy clusters across 10 million
light-years and this seems like a dramatic confirmation of a prediction
that Anthony Peratt made decades ago, that cosmic scale currents exist in deep
space connecting these types of objects. And now, just in the last few weeks, we’ve
seen the report that distant galaxies, which are separated by tens of millions
of light years, have been found rotating in synchronicity with one another; a
Science Alert report on that discovery states, “The discoveries could force us to
rethink our understanding of the Universe.” An elite author of a paper on
this discovery says, “The observed coherence must have some relationship
with large-scale structures, because it is impossible that the
galaxies separated by six mega- parsecs directly interact
with each other.” But I think what the
scientists should have said is that the phenomenon
is “impossible” under the assumption of an inert
and disconnected universe. So Wal, why don’t you shed some
light on why, like countless other discoveries, this is not impossible, nor
surprising in the Electric Universe? The Electric Universe has no
problem with the synchronization of galaxies over colossal
distances simply because they are all being driven electrically
by the same Birkeland current filaments, and the spiral galaxies tend to be strung
along them like Catherine wheels on a wire. Both the rotation and the
form of a spiral galaxy is explained experimentally and
theoretically by plasma cosmologists, and the fact that has been discovered
recently, that the rotation of galaxies seems to be somehow strangely similar, is
all tied up to the fact that they’re all being driven electrically by these
circuits, and it’s just like electric motors in the home, if they’re connected
to the same circuit, they will all tend to be synchronized in some fashion, either
by the number of cycles per second of the power supply, but in
the case of galaxies, all this can be tested and
proven in the laboratory. A critical failure
of modern cosmology is to assume that gravity is the only
force operating on a cosmic scale. Plasma cosmologists, for the last 50 years,
have shown that this is incorrect. Electromagnetic forces dominate
on the cosmic scale. Supercomputer simulations
have shown that introducing gravity into their electromagnetic
models has no effect. This should be no surprise
given that, compared to the electric force, the force of
gravity is effectively zero. This should have been obvious
to theorists given that spiral galaxies rotate like
the solid disk of a Faraday motor and not a gravitational
system where the outer satellites rotate more
slowly than the inner. Once again, our Earth-centric
view has held back science. Plasma cosmologists showed that spiral
galaxies form like Catherine wheels along spiraling intergalactic
Birkeland current filaments. It explains both their axial
alignments and their rotation. Of course, these recent
discoveries should force a rethink of the fundamental
understanding of the universe. It should have done
so, decades ago, but those doing the research have not been
trained to see the alternatives, which have been available
since late last century. Cosmologists are taught
that yes, there is electricity in space but
it doesn’t do anything. They are also taught a basic form of
plasma physics, which the Nobel prize-winning plasma cosmologist Hannes
Alfven showed, is invalid in space, and the tunnel-vision, induced by
their training, prevents modern cosmologists from attending
plasma cosmology lectures.

100 thoughts on “Wal Thornhill: No Islands in Our Electric Universe | Space News

  1. I have always wrestled with the idea that plasma is a state of matter. So lets start by challenging that thought.
    When Langmuir coined the phrase "Plasma" for this electrical phenomena, his team mates asked why he called it so. He replied after getting a good nights rest that it reminded him of blood plasma. That it was a medium that carried ions like a stream carries impurities along with it or like our plasma in our blood carries our blood cells.
    Plasma is not a state of matter but it is a good damn way to tell the state by the density of the plasma around matter. The more matter is out of balance the more plasma that surrounds it and the more conductive that space around matter becomes. The conductivity of space is the proof that plasma exists and that it sits between all matter that we can see. Plasma allows induction and conduction through space. It is highly dynamic and auto changes it's density based on the matter that floats in it.
    Weather plasma is matter should be obvious by these words. It's not matter as we know it and it is very undetectable for whatever reason. After all it is a spacial conductor and perfect conductors would have zero resistance and zero radiance. My leaning is that it is liquid crystalline in nature.

  2. Alignment is beautifully explained by C.F. Krafft's viscid ether concept. So much of this work was presaged from Krafft and Hilgenberg. I find it puzzling how their work gets little to no notice by EU theorists. None that I know of from the Thunderbolts team. Mores the pity. If I could get Thornhill's address, I'd mail him a copy of Ether and Matter and A New Concept of the Atom.

  3. If electricity is a hybrid of the dielectric and magnetism, why isn't Field Theory hybrid with the Electric Universe?

  4. Awesome! Thanks Thunderbolts! Wal, you are the man, lol! Joking aside, thanks Wal, love you man! But, remember, "The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sheweth His handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. Just saying……….!

  5. Every form of propulsion needs a medium to press against to move forward weather it be hand of a swimmer in water, a tire on a car to the ground, a propeller in a boat to water, a propeller on an aircraft in oxygen, ion lifter in oxygen, to a rocket ship exhaust in space.

  6. Yeah, wheels within wheels, natures fundamental patterns are scalable, from a DNA molecules spiral neatly packed inside a cells nucleus up to the cosmic length of dual layered birkeland currents reaching across billions of light years within the universe….awesome!

  7. Electromagnetism is 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 times stronger than gravity! No exaggeration. We see it everywhere as we look deep into the universe at a huge range of wavelengths and energies. It seems common sense to start observing the properties of this obviously complex
    force energy in experiments here on earth and then compare our observations to what we see in space. Gravity worked well in explaining planetary motion in our solar system only! Gravity fails totally as an explanation for explaining all the phenomena outside our solar system. Dark energy, dark matter and strange inflationary forces are needed to explain observations… why not consider an Electric Universe? Because the concept is too revolutionary and it means sacred ideas about the nature of the universe are wrong, and trillions of dollars have been wasted on theorizing with the wrong central force.

  8. It's all a dance.
    From the electron/proton dance to the dance of the galaxies.
    How beautiful. How simple. How sublime.

  9. Electric Universe (Plasma Universe)
    Energetic MATTER:
    (Electric Planets/Sun/Stars/Galaxies/etc)
    (Electric Atom / Electric Sub-Atom Particles)
    (Electric Gravity = a mild low net-near neutral charge dipole effect of electromagnetic-force itself)

    NOTE: (here, i suggest an objection to "Aether" (neutrino) as advocated by some EU proponents)
    Aether "medium" for EMR (Electromagnetic Radiation (LIGHT ENERGY) to traverse is NOT itself any kind of MATTER (NOR made of NEUTRINOS) as a basis for some kind of "matrix" which facilitates "light travel".

    ZPE (Zero-Point-Energy) is by far a greater COSMIC ULTRA-HIGH-DENSITY "complex information driving" SOURCE underlying ALL MATTER+ENERGY Patterns of Oscillations (including the patterns of any observed subatomic "particles")

    Our COSMOS is made up of MOSTLY ZPE (we perceive it as "merely empty vacuum of space") but we do not realize that in fact, WE are ourselves, are made up of MERE oscillating bubbles of MATTER+ENERGY, as if WE are "pockets of electrically active" ATOMIC-VOIDS that BUZZ within the SUPER-DENSE HIGH 10^108 (a lot of) big-bangs worth of mass-energy equivalent content (covering our entire "current" observable universe)

    Physicists know:

    ▪the immensity of ZPE (and rarely blurt out its implications)

    ZPE = 10^70 Joules per cubic nanometres (nm^3) of "space" (empty vacuum of space = void of all active matter "bubbles/pockets")
    ZPE = 10^79 Joules per cubic micrometres: (um^3)
    ZPE = 10^88 Joules per cubic millimetres (mm^3)
    ZPE = 10^91 Joules per cc (cubic centimetres: cm^3)
    ZPE = 10^97 Joules per cubic metre (m^3)

    and they estimate our hypothetical supposed (imagined) gravitational-based big-bang universe model, in its current mathematically "obervable size"
    has ONLY 4 x 10^69 Joules of mass-energy equivalent of ENERGY = 1 whole serving of "big-bang" (per 1 cosmos)
    with the assumed "current spatial volume" of 4 x 10^80 cubic metres (they ASSUME an average of about 6 protons per cubic metre of space) = as if only 6 protons, serving as a standardized mass-energy unit of measure, is all the "energy" in every cubic metre, COMPLETELY IGNORING ZPE entirely! they use E=mc^2 to sum up "total energy" of any "1 big-bang"! (this is a massive INEQUATION!)

    Total PROTONS (mass-energy equivalent) is only just = 6 x 4 x 10^80 = 2.4 x 10^81 protons worth of "mass-energy" per minuscule 4×10^69 Joules per BB
    Standardized = 2.4 x 10^81 protons / 4 x 10^69 Joules per 1 BB = ONLY 6 x 10^11 worth of protons in 1 BB-Joules


    ZPE 10^97 J/m^3 divided by 1 teeny-tiny puny Big-Bang Universe 4x 10^69 J/BB

    = 2.5 x 10^27 big-bangs per 1 cubic metre of ZPE "space" (where each WHOLE "ONE" big-bang only has 4×10^69 Joules)

    GIVEN consensus pseudo-science believe our "current" universe occupies 4 x 10^80 cubic metres (avg 6 protons per cubic metre)

    our ONE supposed "BB" UNIVERSE (1 "regular" big-bang) has LOTS of ZPE SPACE (= IGNORED!)
    = 2.5 x 10^27 x 4 x 10^80 = 10^108 big-bangs worth of mass-energy equivalent of ZPE completely UNACCOUNTED for in their BB Model!

    thus, the ACTUAL total protons (mass-energy equivalent) MISSING (within ZPE completely IGNORED) is:
    10^108 big-bangs x 10^69 Joules/BB
    = 10^177 Joules occupying all ZPE SPACE the size of ONE UNIVERSE 4×10^80 in TOTAL VOLUME SIZE

    10^177 Joules (ZPE for 1 Universe) divided by 6 x 10^11 worth of protons in 1 puny matter-only BB-Joules
    = 1.666 x 10^165 worth of MISSING mass-energy equivalent of protons in 1 UNIVERSE of EMPTY ZPE SPACE (COMPLETELY IGNORED)

    this is a discrepancy magnitude RATIO of:

    = 1.666 x 10^165 "ignored" ZPE "space" protons to 6 x 10^11 "big-bang" protons only

    = RATIO of ERROR of a factor of 2.777 x 10^153 to ONE (big-bang cosmological model ERROR = BIG CRISIS INDEED!)

    let me know if you're getting my point here or not!!!

    if i am losing anyone here …
    look at this …
    ZPE = 10^70 Joules per cubic nanometres (nm^3) of "space" (empty vacuum of space = void of all active matter "bubbles/pockets")
    ZPE = 10 x 10^69 Joules per cubic nanometres (nm^3) of "space" (empty vacuum of space = void of all active matter "bubbles/pockets")

    Given: 4 x 10^69 Joules per 1 big-bang (pseudo-science of 1 universe "origin")

    Energy of ZPE in 1 mere tiny cubic nanometer of SPACE divided by Energy of 1 big-bang …
    = 2.5 big-bangs worth of mass-energy equivalent per teeny-tiny 1 cubic NANOMETER of ZPE SPACE !!!

    if you aren't impressed that GOD in GENESIS 1:1 created "heavens" (ZPE Space) FIRST, then "earth" ("matter", then "light") … then you'll likely IGNORE ZPE forever!

  10. No islands in our Electric Universe, but still too many islands on earth in the mainstream science community. Thank you Mr. Thornhill, your work is so important today!

  11. Thought: one of the "problems" to address with ion drives is that if developed wrong, the engine develops a charge and takes increasing energy to accelerate the ions. This in turn could charge the whole ship. If it gains a positive charge, we could turn it off and be repelled from the sun and get a boost out of the solar system and connects to the galactic birkeland currents. We could ride these like highways to the stars by leaving the solar system at different angles, even to other galaxies at constant acceleration for free. We would turn into sailors of cosmic currents.

  12. An excellent podcast from Wal and the thunderbolts team. Wal makes things s easy to understand and knows his stuff. I also want to say thanks to Michael Goodspeed for his calm way of interviewing. All of these folks deserve our thanks for bringing us out of the horse and buggy thinking and into a new age of understanding.

  13. The aether was the favourite back in the day because of the erroneous belief that outer space was void of all matter. Maxwell, Einstein, et al believed extraterrestrial space to be a pure vacuum devoid of all matter. It is not. Even interstellar space has a density of 0.1 atoms /cm^3, which is lower than the density of any man made vacuums. Therefor, since observations reveal matter exists everywhere in the universe to varying densities there is no need for an aether.

    As for the notion of the speed of light in a vacuum. It is irrational as a vacuum is a potential, just like charge is and there is no such thing as a pure vacuum. And if light slows down in a denser atmosphere such as water, then it likely speeds up in less dense environments such as interstellar space. Or does it?

  14. Electrons? Are they really a thing? Are we misnaming electric fields by calling them by the name of non existent particles? Fields and frequencies show more promise. Even water is being seen as more of a lattice work web, sounds like more of a field to me.

  15. Of course you don't see gravitational lensing with super powerful magnets, because magnets don't create gravity. Lmao.

    His rational for disproving gravitational lensing is entirely incoherent, it's so wrong it's hard to properly criticize. Lol

  16. Wal is wrong about the aether. It has nothing to do with neutrinos other than that neutrinos are made of the aether. But the aether is NOT a material substance. Material substances, like protons, are nothing more than resonances in the aether, light folded in upon itself according to the right hand rule. There are no particles separate from the aether or that make up the aether.
    Atoms are pure energy, just like light, acting upon the medium, but rather than propagating outward as in light, the propagation is inward as in a plasmoid torus ring. Immaterial structure.

  17. The TRUTH about our universe being electric is rapidly approaching to be undeniable and fact. The lies of all these made up theories of imaginary particles, invisible matter and energy has reached its limit of fooling mankind with their lies. The evidence is clear and the untold billions of dollars that have been wasted because the egos of these old stubborn scientists refuse to allow the advancement of civilized society to move forward because they can't admit they were wrong and give up the millions of dollars funded to them so they can build machines that will NEVER produce their fantasy results. Imagine the progress our world and society would be thriving in if the TRUTH was allowed to flourish.

  18. The Uni-Verse is part of a Beautiful Song, which seemingly forever resonates in vibratory magnificence.
    United as one do the individual tones within the song entertain Humankind.
    What an amazing experience this turned out to be.

    Thanks for standing for Truth, in defence of Logics and Common Sence!

  19. https://phys.org/news/2019-11-galaxy-magnetic-field.amp
    The Electric Universe theory is fascinating and it seems like progressively observations from scientists and peer reviewers are backing up your claims.
    Although, at times I dislike how hypercritical of general relativity you make out to be in you videos, I hope that in time all factions will join heads and ideas and further human understanding.
    Thank you though for voicing your opinions and opening up our minds

  20. "A critical failure of modern cosmology is to assume that gravity is the only force operating on a cosmic scale. Plasma cosmologists for the last 50 years have shown that this is incorrect. Electromagnetic forces dominate on the cosmic scale. Supercomputer simulations have shown that introducing gravity into their electromagnetic models has no effect. This should be no surprise given that compared to the electric force, the force of gravity is effectively zero." Wal Thornhill, 'No Islands in Our Electric Universe'.

  21. "Of course these recent discoveries should force a rethink of the fundamental understanding of the universe. It should have done so decades ago. But those doing the research have not been trained to see the alternatives which have been available since late last century. Cosmologists are taught that, 'Yes, there is electricity in space, but it doesn't DO anything'. They are also taught a basic form of plasma physics which the Nobel-prize winning plasma cosmologist Hannes Alfven showed is invalid in space. And the tunnel-vision induced by their training prevents modern cosmologists from attending plasma cosmology lectures."

  22. Anybody ever wonder why science lies to itself?.. They say gravity condenses gas into accretion disks to form stars and planetary systems, right?.. Mainstream science also says gravity as a force is too weak to overcome gas pressure.. Gas always retreats to the area of equal or less pressure, and requires containment like a can, bottle, gas tank etc etc to contain it, and said containment comes with high pressure warning because of extreme pressures.. They know and admit gravity is too weak a force to overcome gas pressure so gravity can't make stars.. Not without pressurized gas tanks in space, and have not solved this.. Also every exo-planetary system debunks the accretion disk model… The Great Wal is right about everything.

  23. The Big bang theory was invented by a Jesuit priest called Lemaitre,
    I think here lies the problem because the Electric universe explains where the"god's" are coming from, people fall from there beliefs,and that's no good news for the church

  24. Let’s think about what if “agencies “ were too admit to a electric universe would do. First all those Apollo moon missions and their talking back and forth from space and the moon with them giving all the vacuum readings are this and that etc would prove that didn’t happen. Second what would this earth do with all this free energy?

  25. The only thing really matters is Space to allow dynamics. Space has the strongest potential – 0, and no
    other properties exept Resonance. Spooky at a distance and pitch black, the place where "dark physiks"
    can be found – in any Plasmoid even in the Photon. The reason we can "imagine…" the missing force as simply
    Sound – the information of the Universe. We are electro cymatics, fractalised NOT Pixelated! OM

  26. Nikola Tesla's quote on gravity and density of the ether:

    "What is the ether and why is it so difficult to detect it? I reflected on this matter for a seriously long time and here are the outcomes I have been led to: I think that all the contradictions about whether the ether exists or not are the result of wrong interpretation of ether's properties. The ether has always been presented as an aero – form environment (gaseous). That was the essential mistake. The ether has a very strong density. It is known that the more dense a substance, the higher is the speed of wave propagation within it. When comparing acoustic speed in the air and the light speed I have drawn a conclusion that ether density is several thousand times higher than air density. It is not the ether that is aero – form (gaseous) but the material world is an aero – form to the ether!

    A good example for such an interaction becomes apparent in gravitation, which should rather be named, universal compression. I think the material bodies do not gravitate between each other but it is the ether that makes one material body to press to another. We wrongly call this phenomenon gravitation. We can also feel ether's reaction when sudden acceleration or braking (inertia). The stars, planets and all the universe appeared from the ether when some part of it, due to certain reasons, became less dense.

    It can be compared with formation of blebs (air bubbles) in boiling water although such a comparison is only rough. The ether tries to return itself to its initial state by compressing our world, but intrinsic electric charge within the material world substance obstructs this. It is similar to that when the water compresses blebs (air bubbles) filled with hot water steam. Until the steam does get cold the water is unable to compress the bleb (air bubbles). With time, having lost the intrinsic electric charge, our world will be compressed with the ether and is going to turn into ether. Having come out of the ether once – so it will go back in to the ether." – Nikola Tesla.

  27. The plasmoid acts as a transformer gathering its energy and matter from counterspace? This is what in actuality is the "black hole" you insist is fantasy. 2 terms describing the same phenomena. Both are gateways between the aether and counterspace. Correct?

  28. you crazy mad scientists were warned not to mess with GOD. Of course we are in an electric universe, we live in a simulated environment, one of many. We're disease riddled, ambitious and insane, clearly, we trying to self destruct our program. Good thing safe guards are in place, and yes, this world has gone through this crap before, and we'll get through it again. With the grace of the creator, now… carry on with your dogmas and boxed in beliefs you beat over human minds as fact.

  29. Would like to draw your attention to this experiment. What shape does this remind you off ?
    Making Monopoles – Synthetic Magnetic Monopole Finally Observed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSDoIf5FY2s

  30. Keep up good work 🙂 Fairy dust is not needed to explain universe

    For those who want to read the articles contained in the film:

  31. Interesting, but scientific history is replete with big ideas that turn out to be as flawed as any other. I will keep an open mind, and see where this goes, but don't be surprised if all of this is considered nonsense in fifty years.

  32. You can all have direct contact with the Earths electro-magnetic Birkland Current by simply taking off your shoes and socks and grounding your bare feet in the grass….take a look at this, EUT

  33. More and more the EU makes more and more sense, makes all space and matter interconnected and interwoven, and further realize that if we are the organisms born of this EU then … the whole of everything is indeed the one organism just shown as different aspects of the whole. Quasars born of galaxies, worlds born of quasars, people born of worlds … from the macro to the micro there has to be a singular common point. Electric activity is that thing. From the universe, to galaxy, to solar systems, to planets, and into our bodies (brains) we are all one. I can die knowing that now as less a spiritual thing but a real all encompassing reality. Thank you all for this.
    PS : no I'm not about to die, it is what us Earth men call "an expression thingy"!

  34. Astonishingly, we keep repeating 'discoveries' because the taught 'science' is determined to ignore the true conditions and one has to assume the economic grasp of 'capitalism' is intent on choking the world until we all breath the gravity air.

  35. It's possible that scientists are stuck in the paradigm of copper wires being the primary medium for the flow of electricity. This would keep them from seeing electric circuits & systems in space. Is there a set of solutions to Maxwell's equations that describe the movement of electric charge in space?

  36. I find it interesting that electricity in volts and amps is in the likeness of water. The Bible actually refers to the aether as waters! Could it be that the plasma of the universe is in the likeness of the plasma that runs through our veins!? Could the universe as we know it really be the body of the Creator? It's an exciting time to be alive!
    God Bless!

  37. i did read the paper about the connections between galaxy's and had a hard laugh because they still had it wrong, its clear to me that they don't even think about the past theories are wrong they just make some new sh*t up as long they don't have to admit they were wrong.

  38. Pumping out the garbage as if it were facts. Just a bunch of guesses to sway the masses away from the #1 and only truth.

  39. So… can anyone tell me something, anything, that is a point that electric universe fails at that standard model gets right?

  40. if light bends, as seen with the optical aspects of buildings like the Parthenon, how far will light travel before it curves in on itself like that of DNA coils? I think answering this will be an important aspect when calculating the size of the universe itself as it relates to the center of the universe.

  41. the danger this model represents to the enforcers of ignorance is that humans could figure out how to harness these electrical forces to get off this prison planet and explore the universe. the idea of space as empty vacuum is convenient to keep people from leaving their cells. thats why this theory represents such a threat. mainstream scientists have sadly not suspected their benefactors as their own intellectual and physical jailers. after all if you go against the grain you dont get your $$$.

  42. There was no explicit mention of it in the video, but since we are dealing with galaxy wide phenomena, are we not therefore also talking about faster than light phenomena?Do not these phenomena also contradict relativity theory?

  43. N.Y.C. Freddy: Comment: Thank you – W. Thornhill! This is rationally comprehended based upon the evidence as observed and measured. One question? From whence does the INPUT energy come from based upon the *expansion principle (50%+?) as detailed in recent decades? It seems like an **eddy* effect is displayed and at work! (Spiral vortex that is widening?) [ As most Galaxies are vortex in shape and in motion! ] Let 'us' know? SOON! **PEACE**…

  44. Help!! Help get Wal Thornhill as a guest on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast. Joe Rogan is open minded, interested in science, has had famous "mainstream" physicists on his show, has also had scientists and others who have challenged mainstream established science on the show, and has 6 million subscribers. It's the perfect venue for the EU theory to reach a broader audience. Go to the JRE website and request Wal Thornhill as a guest.

  45. If that thumb nail wasn't made to look that way I would have to say it looks incredibly like a hand.



    Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. INDEED, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!!


    VERY IMPORTANTLY, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.

    By Frank DiMeglio

  47. They should hook up mainstream cosmologists to electrical sockets and throw a switch to show how easily it can accelerate there lazy butts to the ground over gravity.

  48. So quasars are to galaxies as asteroids are to comets. Second why would it be a surprise to see synchronous galaxy's since spooky action at a distance is a thing?

  49. Thanks Wal Thornhill for once again bringing truth to observable facts and as you have stated "can be tested in a laboratory". I like that you covered the electron acceleration from quasars and the cosmic jets. More and more evidence is confirming the electric universe and to me and many others there is no doubt about this anymore. This evidence is glaringly obvious. It is also scalable down to the very observations in our own solar system which experiences reactions to the earths magnetic field when CME (coronal mass ejections) happen on our sun. These bursts reach the earth in an electrical phenomenon interact with the earths magnetic field and the acceleration electrons are then observed in the outer and inner regions of the Van Allen belts as well as the earths entire electromagnetic field. Which is also not surprising as the Birkeland currents are indeed a circuit between the sun and earth as well as the rest of the bodies in the solar system. I really dont understand why CME havent been associate with iterations with our galaxy itself and its connection (through interstellar birkeland currents) and our sun by the main stream cosmology society. It is well known by NASA etc… that this electron acceleration occurs with the CME's and the Van Allen belts. However, what is not discussed is what it actually confirms. Just as a reference i have listed a link to a talk about the CME and the earths van allen belts and its magnetic field from NASA. You can skip to 37.16 seconds through to 40+ seconds …


  50. Ever checked how the new understanding of the universe in pictures, so closely resembles our new close up of cells? Is the universe alive? I think/predict it is, but as yet we can't comprehend it, as our understanding of life is too limited, yet.

  51. Some notes, that might be helpful:

    The GPS-Satellite is orbiting the Earth at 20000 kilometer (20000000 meter) distance from the surface. General relativity theory predicts that the orbiting clock advances faster than the clock on the surface "gravitational time dilatation". During the day (86400 seconds) the clock advances 45 microseconds (0.000045 seconds) faster. "Time dilatation" is rounded in this example, so following example uses rounded values.

    Relation = 86400.000045 / 86400 = 1.0000000005208333333333333333
    Light speed for satellite at 20000km altitude is 299792458 m/s * Relation = 299792458.15614190520833333332 m/s.
    Mass for satellite at 20000km altitude is 1 kg / Relation = 0.9999999994791666669379340277 kg.
    Rest energy for satellite at 20000km altitude is 89875517920491929 J.
    Rest energy for satellite at 0km altitude is 89875517873681764 J.
    Free fall energy = 89875517920491929 J – 89875517873681764 J = 46810165 J.

    So E=mc^2 in different altitudes can be used to calculate free fall energy. This proves that rest mass is not constant and it depends on density of the aether.

    Relation = (c0^2 – KineticEnergy/mass) / c0^2 = sqrt(c0^2 – v^2) / c0 = "Lorentz factor"

  52. How dense can aether be, does it lessen in some areas more than in others and can a 'charge' be considered aether, or visa versa? I haven't heard of any 'scrubbing' effects for either, my thoughts are of the scrubbing effects of mass traveling through higher or lower areas of charge densities in space, gravitational densities even, that cause the aether to react as something not visible, to something lighting up such as a plasma or forms of lightning or even light itself. The mention of entire galaxies 'lighting up' brought this line of thinking into my view, they may be moving through areas of different density, of some sort…

  53. Who would have thought Nikolai Tesla was correct around 100 years ago! Thank you Tesla for giving are country a great head start!!

  54. https://astronomy.com/magazine/weirdest-objects/2015/03/40-double-quasar-0957561?utm_source=asytwitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=asytwitter

  55. I want to invent an electric telescope to visualize the electric currents. Maybe our ideas of what electricity is needs redefining to be able to see it with our eyes

  56. Sir Issac Newton was oblivious to the electromagnetic forces surrounding him. Being a more honest man however, I suspect if Sir Issac Newton were here today, he would accept the elegant simplicity of the New Electric Universe Paradigm , its discoveries and he would be a huge EU proponent; and I quote: Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things . ~ Sir Issac Newton I've posted this comment recently and will continue to do so, because it needs to be said, often.

  57. I love math, show me the math. Idk anything about this. Math, measurements, simulation, explanation, verification. Go do it, i wanna see.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *