According to my understanding, all structures in the Universe, including the largest one, are magnetically ordered and centrally powered. The Milky Way follows this standard cosmic model. The astronomical objects and celestial bodies of our galaxy are connected to each other and ultimately to the extremely powerful magnetic field at its center. This is the reason why stars, star systems and star clusters orbits each other and also around the central magnetic field, which is considered in mainstream physics to be a super-massive black hole. The Sun is also part of this galactic magnetic order and cannot be an exception among at least 100 billion stars. Those stars are not scattered randomly, but they are ordered into different groups that are orbiting each other. Thus, without a doubt, the Sun is a member of star system which orbits a larger star cluster. In fact, calculations and observations show that the solar system is linked to another star system. However, realizing the complete physical reality of our star is the biggest scientific task. The Sun is the cosmological candle that allows us to visualize the whole Universe. But, only when we can light it up on the surface of the Earth, we will be able to visualize the Universe and truly understand the force that powers it.
The true motion of the Sun in the galaxy is not a circular motion, but exactly like the motion of an electron in the hydrogen atom. The electron is not moving on a circular orbit or with a random motion around the proton- as quantum mechanics claims-, but on a helical orbit. It is also oscillating up and down (spiral oscillation) while orbiting the proton. Both, quantum and classical mechanics are wrong about the true path and velocity of subatomic particles in general. Moreover, the position and momentum of the electron in the atom are deterministic, not probabilistic. Recent experiments have shown the electron to be a perfect sphere. That means, the electron occupies a well-defined position in space and has well-defined momentum. Although, the electron is the building block of our current technologies, and one of the most important particles, all its internal properties and some of the external ones are misunderstood. Only its shape has been confirmed with a high degree of certainty. See the results of the experimental research that found the electron to be even more rounded than in the previous experiment that was conducted in the UK a few years earlier.
Order of Magnitude Smaller Limit on the Electric Dipole Moment of the Electron (link)
Note that, the experimental finding which showed the electron to be a perfect sphere is not just a very serious violation of the standard model of particle physics, but a death blow. In general, the model is deeply flawed and should have been discarded a long time ago. Some of the unrealistic concepts of the standard model of particle physics can be read in the following article. THE EMERGING NEW PHYSICS MYTH OF QUARK FUSION (link)
It is worth mentioning that the sun was also found in 2012 to be almost a perfect sphere. If the sun would be scaled to the size of a beach ball, its equatorial bulge would be less than the width of a human hair. And, the sun remains well-rounded even during intense activity. We were totally wrong about the Sun's shape until yesterday. (link) In 2016 researchers detected more rounded star than the Sun. It is a distant star called Kepler 11145123 (or KIC 11145123). (link) The above finding, about the shape of the Sun, is one of the clearest evidence that shows the real force which rules over the Sun, which is exactly the same one which rules over the electron. At the same time, the finding is a clear contradiction to one of the basic assumptions of the standard solar model. But, it is not the only one. The current model cannot explain any basic features of the Sun as they can be observed.
However, the other infinitely important fact, about the electron is the extremely intense magnetic field at the center of its mass. The strength is comparable to the intensity of the magnetic fields of the so-called neutron stars. This is what prevents it from collapsing into the atomic nucleus. Furthermore, the strength of the magnetic field at the center of mass of the proton is far higher. The values of the magnetic fields of the two particles can easily be calculated. The enormous strength of the two fields is also the reason why they orbit each other at a great distance. If we model the hydrogen atom based on the solar system, where the proton will take the place of the sun and the electron the place of a planet, then rough calculation would show the electron orbiting at a distance of more than10 times the average distance to Pluto.
So, the reason why the electron does not collapse into the proton is because its magnetic field and that of the proton will repel each other at a certain distance. In other words, at a certain point between the two particles, the strength of their magnetic fields will be equal to each other and they will repel each other as a result. The electron at that point no longer advances towards the proton, the attractive state of its magnetic field will change to a repulsive state. This is a Universal arrangement and is not only restricted to subatomic particles, but also to all astronomical objects. The lack of understanding this Universal fact is the cause that led to the invention of quantum mechanics and all the pseudo-physics notions and dark myths. In physical reality, the distribution of matter in the Universe is highly ordered and exclusively based on magnetic fields arrangement. More important, one can see that there are no missing matter or energy in the Universe when the exclusive role of magnetic fields are taking into account. The issues mentioned above, and all the deep flaws within the standard models will be presented in a comprehensive research paper.
The Universal Model of the Magnetic Structure of Matter, explains all phenomena and interactions at any scale and state of matter, and without the need for any hypothesis of invisible matter, energy or holes.
Nevertheless, in an identical manner to the electron, the Sun is also spiraling up and down while rotating around the galactic core with companion system of stars. The cycle of spiraling up and down takes thousands of years to be completed, not millions. It is the transformation cycle of our entire solar system including the sun itself. See the images below. The images are only an approximation. The real motion of the Sun is helical in nature and influenced by the magnetic fields of other stars.
There is a well known observed fact-although, current physics does not acknowledge it- that many galactic events impact the magnetic fields of the sun and its planets. The impact of the energetic events, especially those that take place close to the galactic center increase as the sun rises up. But still, the impacts of those events are negligible, unless they are huge energetic events, such as an extremely intense gamma-ray burst. See the Observed Influence of Gamma-Ray Bursts on Earth’s Magnetic Field (link)
Moreover, according to my understanding and contrary to the standard solar model the Sun is powered externally. I believe there are sufficient data from the beginning of the space age that show an externally powered sun. See my research paper that was published last year. The external energy supply to the sun is overwhelmingly obvious and has recently been detected by space probes. (link)
Like all stars, the sun is powered externally and its energetic behavior and magnetic properties depend on its location in the galaxy. The radiant energy of the Sun is determined by the state of its internal and external magnetic fields. Keeping in mind that the two fields are correlated and working in coordination. As the Sun spirals up and down in the galaxy, the intensity of its magnetic field fluctuates greatly. When it spirals up to its highest point above the galactic plane, the intensity of its magnetic field reaches its ultimate strength and the exact opposite is true when it reaches its lowest point below it. See the figure below:
Credit: Jamal Shrair © Helical Universe
To complete one cycle of going above-and-below the galactic plane, it takes the sun thousands of years, but the exact duration of the cycle is unknown due to different interactions and variable factors. Some of them are local in the sun's neighborhood while others are galactic ones. It is a well known and indisputable fact that the rate and intensity of cosmic rays which reach the solar system depend exclusively on the state of the Heliosphere. But, in spite of the fact, the strength of the Heliosphere increases as the sun spiraling up, the number and intensity of high energy particles that penetrate this magnetic bubble increases even more. This is due to the reason that the Interstellar Medium (ISM) Surrounding the Sun gets denser and denser as the Sun rises up. And, when it reaches its highest point in the galaxy, it will be surrounded by the highest possible dense region. At that point, the rate of cosmic rays in the solar system would reach its optimum level.
Different studies and observations, in the last two decades from well known institutes, prove beyond doubt, the physical truth about our star illustrated in the above diagram. In the late 1990s, Alexey N. Dmitriev, who is a professor of geology and member of the Siberian department of Russian Academy of Science, pointed out in his research that the plasma density on the edge of the solar system started to increase in the middle of the 20th century. According to his study the plasma density was around 10 astronomical units in the early 1960s, but by the middle of the 1990s it became 100 astronomical units. This is a massive increase in the overall brightness of the energy at the edge of the solar system. That means the solar system as whole has moved into a region in space where the Sun itself became highly charged. This is a fact, and it is obvious from the brightness of the Sun and the saturation of the interplanetary space. The speed of solar emissions in the interplanetary region is becoming faster and faster. Furthermore, and more important, the brightness of the Sun itself has increased. A research study, published in 2004 and carried out by Swiss and German scientists, showed that the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1 000 years. Dr. Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures."The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently - in the last 100 to 150 years." When this observed fact was acknowledged by those honest scientists, Die-hard conservatives and defenders of the standard solar dogma became completely silent and the mass media ignored it altogether. On the other hand, the blind followers, of the dogmatic science debunked it as usual. (link)
However, very recently institutional scientists came up with new fiction theory about the Sun. They claimed that it has entered a Local Interstellar Cloud, between 44 000 and 150 000 years ago and is expected to remain within it for another 10 000 to 20 000 years. This is of course a complete nonsense, but the most ridiculous part of this fiction theory is the claim that this cloud has a very low density. Around 0.3 atoms per CC (4.9/cu in), which is a total contradiction to the data of Voyager 2 that was obtained in 2009. Voyager 2, found the magnetic field strength of the local interstellar medium to be very strong. It is the exact opposite of all the expectations of theoretical notions. Very strong magnetic field means that region has a high energy density. According to the Theory of the Magnetic Structure of Matter, the finding of Voyager 2 makes a complete sense. The energy density of the region outside the Heliosphere has to be denser and the density must increase steadily as the distance from the Heliosphere increases. For the technical details about the data obtained by Voyager 2, please see my research paper mentioned previously. The external energy supply to the sun is overwhelmingly obvious and has recently been detected by space probes. (link)
Nonetheless, what has been mentioned above, are not the only observations supporting my arguments and pointing to the fact that the Sun is approaching its highest point above the galactic plane. There is a long list of observations from the last one hundred years (especially in the last three decades). For instance, the magnetic field of the Sun has increased in strength by more than 230% during the 20th century alone. See the following. A Doubling of the Sun's Coronal Magnetic Field during the Last 100 Years (link) The change in the Sun‘s magnetic field is also obvious from solar cycle activities (solar minimums and solar maximums). Solar physicists are no longer able to explain or predict the timing and duration of solar cycle activities. In the current and previous two solar cycles, they were totally wrong regarding the characteristics, timing and duration of the cycles. The model that was developed from observations of previous cycles, rather than from the standard solar model, is becoming obsolete. The solar system‘s shift into a dense energy region and the increase in the Sun‘s magnetic field is also evident from the changes in the planets and their moons. Recently the atmosphere and brightness of all the planets have changed considerably. With regard to our own planet, in the last two decades, it has gone through a rapid polarity migration accompanied by severe climate change. In addition to, the changes in the weather pattern, there is also a huge increase in geological activity. It is increased by several hundred percent in the 20th century alone. And since the beginning of this century earthquakes have increased dramatically in number and intensity – this is huge increase even compared to the already amplified occurrences of the 20th century.
In fact, not only earthquakes have increased in the past 20 years, but all natural disasters in general, like super cyclones, intense hurricanes, tornadoes and flooding. Records of snowstorms, heat waves, hurricanes, cyclones and floods have been broken every year in the last two decades and continue to do so, with each year surpassing the year before. The main cause for the rise in geological activity, natural disasters and climate change in general is the rapid increase of the energy at the Earth‘s core, which seems to be approaching its optimum level. This increase of energy is also speeding up the magnetic reversal process. All kinds of geological activities depend on the movement of tectonic plates and these movements are linked to the process of magnetic reversal. In other words, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, changes in sea level, seafloor spreading and mountain growth would all be sped up whenever the process of magnetic reversal increases. The question, one might ask, is the reason for the energy increase inside the Earth? It is because of the increase in magnetic radiations (solar-cosmic radiations). And the reason for the increase of magnetic radiations is the changing position of our star or more accurately, the continuous rise of our star above the galactic plane. The optimum rate of magnetic radiation will be obtained when the Sun reaches the highest point in the galaxy. Our solar system is part of a dynamic and changing cosmos. Our star is misunderstood, not only with regard to the process responsible for generating its radiated energy, but also with regard to its motion and relation with other stars. In fact, all the unsolved problems of celestial mechanics can be solved, if the true motion of the Sun and its planets can be recognized. So, if one visualizes a bicycle wheel in motion where the Sun is the center (hub) of the wheel and the Earth is the circular outer part (rim), then the helical motion of the Earth and all the planets can be understood. More important, the real cause for the changing of the seasons cannot be understood unless the Earth’s helical orbit around the Sun is taking into consideration.
Our textbooks show Earth‘s orbit as a near-circular ellipse, but this view does not take into account that the Sun is also moving and based on my understanding, around a star system which is orbiting massive star cluster. (link) Thus, we have to realize that the motion of the Sun and the planets is more complex than what is currently taught in our educational institutions. In addition to that, there is no consideration of the motion of our galaxy with the Local Group, which in itself is in motion. Thus, without a doubt, the Sun is not a single system that only orbits the galactic core. It is worth mentioning some cosmology and astronomical facts that would give clues for the above statement. Most of these facts have been observed only during the space age and mostly in the last three decades. First of all, there is no way that we can know the exact number of stars in the Milky Way. The estimation varies widely. The most common opinions estimate that there are 100 billion stars in the Milky Way on the low-end and 400 billion on the high end. Some of those stars are hotter and brighter than our Sun, while others are cooler and fainter. Within a distance of a few hundred light-years from the Sun, where star motions can be accurately observed, one can see that stars do not move independently. Despite this fact, current astrophysics claims that stars move independently and orbit in the general gravity of our galaxy with nearly circular paths. In reality, all stars rotate around themselves, and also rotate in groups around the galactic center, with different periods. But, not only stars rotate around a central axis, perpendicular to the galactic plane, but also all forms of matter. Since all structures and forms of matter are connected with one another it is quite obvious to observe the solar system orbiting the center of the galaxy. But the rotation of the Sun around another star, or group of stars, cannot be observed, because those stars are in motion as well. Additionally, the path of the Sun cannot be distinguished from the solar system since the system is carrying the observer through the cycle of sunrise and sunset, obscuring the motion of the Sun against the background of stars. It is therefore important to note that the Sun‘s motion relative to its local stellar region should not be confused with its movement around the center of the galaxy. In fact, the distribution of stars is identical to the distribution of galaxies. Observations show that galaxies are not distributed randomly but are structured in groups, just like stars. Galaxies do not exist without other galaxies nearby and some of them are in close pairs or in small groups. But, the majority of them are found in large clusters or "super large cluster" that contains thousands of galaxies. Our Galaxy is a part of the local group of galaxies called the Local Group. The two biggest galaxies in this local group are ours (the Milky Way) and Andromeda. The Magellanic Clouds are companions to our galaxy. The Milky Way revolves around the center of the Local Group. And the Local Group orbits some point within the Virgo Supercluster. The Local Group is one of many groups of galaxies called a "galaxy cluster", and it is also part of a larger group called the "Local Super-cluster" which consists of many smaller galaxy clusters. Quasars which are the brightest objects in the Universe also tend to assemble in huge groups that make one of the largest known structures in the Universe. It is called Large Quasar Group (LQG). Astronomers have been observing LQGs for the last 50 years and they have found some to be more than 600 million light-years in size. The record-breaking LQG was spotted by an international team of astronomers, led by academics from the University of Central Lancashire (UCLan) using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. At the beginning of 2013 the astronomers spotted an enormous group composed of 73 quasars, spanning about 1.6 billion light-years in most directions! At its widest point it measures about 4 billion light-years across, or 1200 Megaparsecs (Mpc) and is the largest structure seen in the cosmos to date. In comparison, our Milky Way galaxy is separated from its nearest neighbour, the Andromeda galaxy, by about 2.5 million light-years or 0.75 Megaparsecs (Mpc). Clusters of galaxies can be 2-3 Mpc across, while LQGs in general can be 200 Mpc or more. The newly discovered LQG has an average dimension of 500 Mpc, but due to its elongated shape it is 1200 Mpc at its extremes, or 1600 times the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda. According to the assumptions of the cosmological principle and the modern theory of cosmology, structures larger than about 1.2 billion light years (370Mpc) should not and cannot exist. The Cosmological principle assumes that the Universe, when viewed at a sufficiently large scale, looks the same (essentially homogenous) no matter where you are observing it from.
Above: Map of the Huge-LQG noted by black circles, adjacent to the Clowes–Campusano LQG in red crosses. Map is by Roger Clowes of the University of Central Lancashire. Bottom: Image of the bright quasar 3C 273. Each black circle and red cross on the map is a quasar similar to this one.
Roger Clowes from UCLan's Jeremiah Horrocks Institute said: "While it is difficult to fathom the scale of this LQG, we can say quite definitely it is the largest structure ever seen in the entire universe. This is hugely exciting – not least because it runs counter to our current understanding of the scale of the universe. Even traveling at the speed of light, it would take 4 billion years to cross. This is significant not just because of its size but also because it challenges the Cosmological Principle, which has been widely accepted since the time of Einstein. Our team has been looking at similar cases which add further weight to this challenge and we will be continuing to investigate these fascinating phenomena." The details of this discovery and the full study of the international team were published March.11, 2013 in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. The whole paper can be read at the link below. A structure in the early Universe at z ∼ 1.3 that exceeds the homogeneity scale of the R-W concordance cosmology (link). But, the above structure held the record for only a short period of time. In the same year, 2013 it was superseded by the so-called Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall at 10 billion light-years. It is considered now, to be the largest known formation in the Universe, exceeding the size of the prior Huge-LQG by about two times.
"The Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall (Her–CrB GW) is an immense superstructure of galaxies, or a galaxy filament, that measures over 10 billion light-years across. As of March 27, 2015, it is the largest and most massive known structure in the observable universe. It was discovered in November 2013 by a mapping of gamma-ray bursts that occur in the distant universe. The astronomers used data from the Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Mission, Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, Compton Gamma Ray Observatory, and the BeppoSAX and INTEGRAL satellites. The Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall is also the first structure, other than large quasar groups, to hold the title of largest known structure in the universe since 1991. In addition, it is the first structure known to exceed 5 billion light years in 'size', and is well over twice as large as the previous record holder." (Sources: Wikipedia, Discovery)
It is important to emphasize, however, that these record distances mentioned above are based on the current understanding of the redshift. Yet, the redshift is not an indicator of distance. Late Halton Arp is certainly correct in saying that the recessional velocity is not the only thing that can produce a redshift. His observations and arguments are absolutely outstanding. Without extended elaboration, he exposed entirely the deep flaws in the standard cosmological model which is associated with all the fundamental theories of cosmology, including the notion of expanding Universe. But, in spite of the fact, his observations and arguments are accurate and revolutionaries, the great Halton Arp did not provide the real reasons for the redshifts.
There are astronomical observations that mainstream scientists cannot deny, since hey cannot come up with theoretical notions to manipulate them. Some of these facts have already been mentioned. Namely, that all galaxy group, clusters of galaxies and even large structures including the largest structure ever seen in the visible Universe are made up of sub-structures that are orbiting one another. Moreover, all these kinds of cosmological structures are ruled from their center of masses. In fact, not only galaxies and larger structures are orbiting each other, but also the stars. They orbit each other in different ways, like in close pairs, wide pairs, in star systems and in star clusters. Most of the light we see in the night sky is actually the result of close pairs of stars that are orbiting each other. Yet, in spite of all these observations, current physics is assuming that our sun is a unique exception to these commonly observed structures in the Universe.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Many observations show that the Sun is also moving on a defined orbit around a companion system of stars. In fact, all the current unsolved problems of celestial mechanics regarding the solar system can be solved with a helical solar system linked with another star system. And there would be no need to introduce the concept of wobbling in the Earth's axis. There is an astrophysical phenomenon which ancient astronomers had observed for thousands of years; the shift of the night sky as the Earth orbits around the Sun. If one takes a fixed point in time and observes the sky on that day every year, one finds that the sky slowly shifts backwards with each passing year. This shift is equivalent to around 50.29 arc seconds per year (or one degree for every 71.5-72 years). This slow and small change does not have an impact on the changing of the seasons on a short timescale, but on a long timescale (thousands of years) it is the cause of the seasonal shifts throughout Earth‘s history. This well-known phenomenon is called the precession of the equinoxes. It takes between 25 800 - 26 000 years to complete a full cycle. The completion of one cycle is known as the great year. The change in Earth‘s rotational angle is what transformed the Green Sahara into what is now the largest desert on the planet. The Sahara was once fertile grassland and different researches have shown that the eastern region of the Sahara desert, particularly the area near Lake Yoa in Chad, dried up slowly and progressively since the mid-Holocene period - gradually over the last six thousand years. Around 8 000 years ago, the Earth‘s orbit was slightly different from the current orbit. The inclination of the orbit changed from around 24.1° to the present-day 23.5°. During that period Earth had its closest approach to the Sun in the northern hemisphere in the month of August. According to present day physics, the reason behind the precession of the equinoxes is the result of the wobbly motion of the Earth‘s axis. In other words, it is due to the gravitational tidal forces that are exerted on the Earth by the Moon and the Sun. This theory which was initially formulated by Sir Isaac Newton, contradicts not only its own gravitational principle, but also a certain number of astronomical observations. To begin with, if the above concept was correct, then we would lose a little time on a daily basis and this would cause deviations in astronomical data. But no such shifts have ever been found in the calculations of eclipses or planetary transits. Walter Cruttenden, a researcher of the so-called binary star systems stated in his paper that none of the planets or objects within the solar system seems to follow the precession with respect to Earth. The only objects that follow the precession movement are those outside of our solar system.
The current theory is outdated. It was formulated centuries ago during the time when astrophysicists were thinking that the Sun is fixed in space. So, how can the observed phenomenon of the precession of the equinox be correct, since it is based only on the movement of the Earth? Besides that, physicists had no idea at that time that dwarf stars exits and could exert an influence on the motion of our star or nearby stars. Thus, one can understand why the current theory cannot provide true scientific explanation to the well known solar system anomalies. For instance, why the big four planets or what is known as the Jovian planets have most of the angular momentum, in spite of the fact the Sun has the biggest mass? (Caroll and Ostlie 1996)
Also, the sheer edge problem (Allen et al. 2001), cannot be explained by the current model that assumes the Sun to be at the center of an isolated system. The other issue is connected with sidereal time and solar time. Why the time difference between a sidereal day and solar day is considered to be the result of the curvature of the Earth’s orbit around the Sun? While the difference between a sidereal year and solar year is due to the precession? The other observed anomaly is the Comet paths. "Why are many comet paths concentrated in a non-random pattern?" (Matese et al. 1999) The other important observation that exposes the current theory is the acceleration of precession. The annual precession rate over the last one 120 years has increased. What is causing it to increase? There are other issues that are well-addressed by the Binary Research Institute. See their website.
Credit Binary Research Institute
All these issues mentioned above have some kinds of theoretical solutions that are based on assumptions and hypotheses that have nothing to do with the physical reality of our solar system. The precession of the equinoxes is simply observational evidence that show the helical motion of our star around another star or group of stars with a mass much larger than its own. In fact not only the solar system as a whole travels on a helical orbit, but also all the planets move on a helical path around the Sun itself. The orbital circumference of each planet is much shorter than its helical length. On the other hand, the length of each planet‘s helical orbit is slightly longer than the length of the Sun‘s axis of travel. The radial velocities do not represent the real velocities of the planets. The velocities of the planets are much higher than the current values and the difference between the velocity of the planet nearest the sun and the planet farthest away is very small. The planets of the solar system can be best understood as charged particles moving under the influence of different but coordinated magnetic fields. The degree of inclination of the orbit of each planet depends on the strength of its magnetic field and the level of influence of the Sun‘s magnetic field on it. The further the planet is from the Sun, the smaller is the influence of the Sun‘s magnetic field. Furthermore, our star is definitely a part of star system, which is a subsystem of an open star cluster. Along with a number of other stars such as Aldebaran (the Arabic name for ―The Follower‖), the Sun seems to be linked with a star system which is a subsystem of the Pleiades star cluster. Those subsystems of stars are orbiting one another and at the same time linked with the Pleiades star cluster. The Sun, of course, cannot orbit the Pleiades directly, since they are more than 400-440 light-years away in the Taurus Constellation. But, it orbits a much closer star system, or group of stars with a smaller mass than the Pleiades star cluster.
Uploaded by: Wikivisual License: Creative Commons
The Pleiades are the brightest and one of the nearest star clusters to Earth. The intensity of their magnetic fields must be thousands of times stronger than that of the Sun. In my opinion, there are two basic reasons why the Pleiades have very strong magnetic fields. The first reason is that the main stars of the Pleiades - except Maia - rotate very fast. Alcyone (the brightest star of the Pleiades) has a radius almost ten times that of the Sun and completes one rotation in about two days. The other reason is their luminosity, which is more than 2 400 times the Sun. Luminosity is the amount of magnetic energy a celestial body radiates per unit of time. As it can be seen in the figure below, the brighter Pleiades are surrounded by a delicate web of nebulosity. That of course has nothing to do with the formation process, as was previously thought (it was formerly assumed that the dust was left over from the formation period of the cluster).
The dust is simply the result of the interstellar medium (ISM) that the Pleiades are presently passing through. The image below shows the Pleiades nebulosity to be quite blue. The reason is not just that the stars illuminating the dust are bluish - the grains of dust tend to be smaller than the wavelength of light and therefore scatter mostly blue light. This process is similar to Rayleigh scattering. It can also be seen that the dust is not uniformly distributed, but is concentrated mainly in layers along the line of sight to the cluster. In other words, the nebulosity is streaked in long filaments, almost like cirrus clouds. Some of the filaments appear only a few arc seconds in width while many are arc minutes long. The intensity of the magnetic field is the reason for aligning the dust.
Image: Pleiades star cluster with names of the main stars Atlas, Pleione, Alcyone, Merope, Sterope I, Sterope II, Maya, Taygete, Calaeno and Electra
There is an argument, however, that can be used against the notion of our star being a subpart of the Pleiades star cluster. It is believed that the Pleiades are mainly a cluster of young stars and for this reason, the Sun cannot be part of this system since it is much older. But, this argument cannot be considered as a scientific argument. The estimated age of the Universe as a whole is the outcome of the theory which is the "Mother of all physics myths". The age of our Galaxy - the place where the Pleiades and the Sun are located – departs by a huge factor from the estimated age of the Universe. For over seventy years radio astronomers searched for the so-called supernova remnants and found only 200 - 250 of them, instead of 200 000 000 - 250 000 000 that should be present in the Milky Way, if the Big Bang theory is correct. There are of course, other observations that contradict the estimated age of the Universe, but they will not be included in this article. In addition to the above, the current stellar models cannot really measure the age of a star, even the nearest stars. The age can only be estimated by using model-dependent or empirical analysis. There is no single method or law which is valid for a broad range of star types. As it has been mentioned already, the current theory assumes that, Stars have to be formed from a giant molecular cloud, because very large mass is required, much larger than the mass of a single star. A typical mass for the gravitational instability is about a million solar masses. After the instability, the molecular cloud starts to fragment into smaller parts, which are the star clusters, and then those star clusters break further into smaller parts which are the stars. The theory states that there are two basic types of clusters, globular and open clusters. The globular ones are supposed to be globule-shaped balls of hundreds of thousands of stars packed into a relatively small area. Those stars are present around spherical regions surrounding the galaxy and they are supposed to be very old, between 12 to 13 billion years. On the other hand, open star clusters are located in the spiral arms of the galaxy and they are supposed to be very young stars, the youngest ones are just several million years old. On the other hand, globular clusters are considered to be very tightly bound by gravity, while the open clusters are weakly or loosely gravitationally bound. But, our star is not even considered to be part of a weakly bound open star cluster. It is wandering away in the galaxy on its own. Moreover, the age of the Sun is believed to be 4.6 billion years making it far older than all the stars of the nearby star clusters and also, the nearest star group, the so-called moving group (Big Dipper). There is an obvious fact that clearly contradicts the estimated age of the Sun. Like all stars, the Sun is supposed to be formed from a cloud of interstellar gas by the process of the gravitational collapse, and its magnetic field is a remnant of the ancient field acquired by at the time of its formation. But, there is no way that the current magnetic field of the Sun, which is the strongest magnetic field compared to any other body in the solar system, can be a remnant of an ancient magnetic field. If this is the case then the primordial surface field must have diffused back out into space in just a few million years. In other words, the vestigial magnetic field should have been carried off by the solar wind and by the ejected plasma (Coronal Mass Ejections). See my previous article. The origin and mechanism of the Sun’s magnetic field still an unsolved mystery using the current model. (link)
The formation theories of astronomical and celestial objects are based on the fundamental theory of gravity-dominated cosmos. If one examines this theory in details, one can detect the large number of contradictions and the pseudo-physics notions that are present in it. More and more mainstream astrophysicists have acknowledged that the existing theories of star and galaxy formation are wrong. These acknowledgments are based on many astronomical data using new and more powerful telescopes which enable observations at greater depth into the Universe.
Read the following papers:
Open problems in star formation by Ralf Klessen, Zentrum für Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg Institut für Theoretische Astrophysik (link)
Models of star and galaxy cluster formation incorrect. (link)
New understanding of the origin of galaxies advanced. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (link)
And not only the theories of star and galaxy formations, are based on pseudo physics notions, but also the planet formation theory. Planet formation theory debunked (link)
I have been fighting aggressively for over a decade and I will continue to fight even if the world’s top theoretical physicists lined up against me. The fight is for the physics truth of our star, which makes our life possible. And I understand that my battle and struggle are harder than the battle and struggles of Galileo when he declared that the Earth rotates around the Sun, not vice versa. The reason is due to different factors. The economic, political and social interests in current solar physics theory are so enormous. But there should not be an economic interest, the prestige of individual scientist or even an interest of a nation that can be higher and more important than the scientific truth about our star. The correct physics of the Sun is not only the cornerstone for understanding our own planet and its history but also, for understanding the Universe as a whole. In addition to that, the most ideal energy source can only be produced if we can truly understand how the Sun generates its radiant energy.
The physics truth that I am fighting for can be confirmed in most plasma physics laboratories in all developed countries. The confirmation and the experimental results of my proposed solar model would make it abundantly clear to all physicists and engineers, that this model is the correct one to follow for the production of fusion power on a large scale. This source of energy is exactly what we need to advance on all fronts; socially, economically and politically. In addition, it is a practical solution to protect our planet from the dangerous of pollution created by the fossil fuel. More importantly, the confirmation of the real physics of the Sun would restore cosmology and theoretical physics in general to its rightful place, after more than a century of mathematical fiction and pseudo-physics myths.
Thermonuclear reactions that are supposed to take place at the core of the Sun are a very complicated pseudo physics myth and any fusion research based on this notion can never lead to fusion power - no matter what type of facilities would be built. All fusion research centers around the world (including ITER: https://www.iter.org/ - currently under construction), are following an elegant mathematical idea that does not represent the physical reality of our star. The thermonuclear reaction is a quasi-fusion reaction that can never be sustained and reach the final stage. The type of fusion reaction that takes place in the Sun is completely different than the hypothetically thermonuclear fusion. Moreover, it is easy to replicate.
I am in a permanent disbelief, how can physicists still accept the current solar model, in spite of overwhelming evidence that have been accumulating for decades? A fraction of the collected data should already have been sufficient to convince even the most conservative scientist. Theoretical physicists in the second half of the last century were concentrating on the Neutrino issue (the so-called missing Neutrino) and they believe that now the problem has been solved. But, in fact, it is not solved. The Solar Neutrino Problem Has Not Been Solved https://cirworld.com/index.php/jap/article/view/5950 Even if one assumes for the sake of argument, that the problem has been solved, our observations and calculations of the sun still contradict the notion of a thermonuclear fusion.
Nonetheless, one can understand why fusion researchers do not question the validity of the theory of thermonuclear fusion. First of all, if this process does not take place in the core of the Sun, then the building blocks of all theories of cosmology and astrophysics - including the Big Bang - would be wrong. At the same time, theoretical physicists would not have an alternative solar model to replace the current one. So, one can understand that theoretical physics would be turned upside-down if the current solar model turned out to be wrong. In this regard, I have to quote the great astronomer, late Halton Arp, who once said: "After all, to get the whole Universe totally wrong in the face of clear evidence for over 75 years merits monumental embarrassment and should induce a modicum of humility." -What has Science come to?- Journal of Scientific Exploration, (Vol. 14, No. 3).
I am absolutely certain there is an alternative model which is not only the correct one for replicating the energy production of the Sun, but also the one that explains all the features of the Sun consistently and without any contradiction. It would additionally explain all features of the Sun that are considered mysteries under the current model. Furthermore, and more important, I can provide a practical fusion model with blueprint showing how to induce sustainable fusion reaction, not quasi fusion reactions, like the thermonuclear ones. This type of fusion reaction is exactly like the one that takes place in the Sun. The proposed model can be confirmed with small scale laboratory devices.
The increasing need for energy is the greatest threat facing our world from a social, economic, political and environmental point of view. In the next three decades, the population of the world will be close to 10 billion and the need for energy will be a question of survival for many nations. At the present time, we are witnessing a rise of geopolitical tension among superpower nations over fossil fuel resources and developing countries are not benefiting from these natural resources while they are paying dearly for the global conflict. The situation could change and lead to direct confrontation among powerful countries. Oil, the commodity that could lead to nuclear war, has and continues to have a devastating impact on the ecological and environmental conditions of our planet. I am talking, of course, about the impact of pollution and not the issue of climate change; I believe the cause of global warming and climate change is not due to human activity, but rather due to our changing Sun. At a fundamental level, the reasons for the confusion about the cause of climate change, global warming and the failure to produce fusion power are the same.
Featured image credit: Jamal Shrair, PhD