Revision as of 05:05, 23 November 2005 editජපස (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,473 edits still waiting for a response in talk.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:04, 5 September 2024 edit undoHeadbomb (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors454,470 editsm →top: clean up, replaced: lanl.arxiv.org → www.arxiv.orgTag: AWB | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Non-standard model of the universe; emphasizes the role of ionized gases}} | |||
{{ActiveDiscuss}} | |||
].<ref name=Alfven1990 >{{cite journal | |||
{{POV}} | |||
|last1=Alfven | first1=H.O.G. | |||
|year=1990 | |||
|title= Cosmology in the plasma universe – an introductory exposition | |||
|journal=IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science | |||
|volume=18 | |||
|pages=5–10 | |||
|doi=10.1109/27.45495 | |||
|bibcode=1990ITPS...18....5A }}</ref>]] | |||
'''Plasma cosmology''' is a ] whose central postulate is that the dynamics of ionized gases and ] play important, if not dominant, roles in the physics of the universe at ] and ] scales.<ref name="Peratt1992">{{cite journal | |||
] urged the application of laboratory and magnetospheric data, and ] of large-scale particle-in-cell simulations, to non-''in-situ'' space regions. Together with direct observation of interstellar and intergalactic plasma phenomenon, this leads them to predict a ''knowledge expansion'' about the universe, and a ''backflow of information'' about laboratory plasmas. (Click image to enlarge)]] | |||
|last1 = Peratt | |||
|first1 = Anthony | |||
'''Plasma cosmology''' is a ] model based on the electromagnetic properties of ]s. Plasma cosmology explains the ] and evolution of the universe, from ] formation to the ] by invoking ] phenomena associated with laboratory plasmas. | |||
|title = Plasma Cosmology | |||
|journal = Sky & Telescope | |||
|volume = 83 | |||
|issue = 2 | |||
|pages = 136–141 | |||
|date = February 1992 | |||
|url = http://plasmauniverse.info/downloads/CosmologyPeratt.pdf | |||
|access-date = 26 May 2012 | |||
}} recount: It was described as this in the February 1992 issue of ''Sky & Telescope'' ("Plasma Cosmology"), and by Anthony Peratt in the 1980s, who describes it as a "nonstandard picture". The ] big bang picture is typically described as the "concordance model", "standard ]" or "standard ]" of cosmology {{dead link|date=January 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, and .</ref><ref name=Alfven1990 /> In contrast, the current ] and ] of ] and ] explain the formation, development, and evolution of large-scale structures as dominated by ] (including its formulation in ]'s ]). | |||
The original form of the theory, '''Alfvén–Klein cosmology''', was developed by ] and ] in the 1960s and 1970s,<ref name="Parker1993">{{cite book | |||
], electrically conducting gas in which ]s are stripped away from ]s and can move freely, makes up the ]s and the ]. ] agree that electromagnetic effects are important in stars, ] discs, ]s and ] but in the standard ] model the formation of structure is dominated by ] effects. Plasma cosmology asserts that the universe has no beginning, whereas in the big bang model the universe, as we know it, has existed for only a finite time. Plasma cosmology is considered by both opponents and supporters as a ].{{ref|nonstandard}} | |||
|last=Parker | |||
|first=Barry | |||
|date=1993 | |||
|title=The Vindication of the Big Bang | |||
|chapter=Plasma Cosmology | |||
|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-5980-5_15 | |||
|publisher=Springer | |||
|location=Boston, MA | |||
|isbn=978-1-4899-5980-5 | |||
|doi=10.1007/978-1-4899-5980-5_15 | |||
|page=325 | |||
}}</ref> and holds that matter and ] exist in equal quantities at very large scales, that the universe is eternal rather than bounded in time by the ], and that the ] is caused by annihilation between matter and antimatter rather than a mechanism like ].<ref name=Alfven1990 /> | |||
Cosmologists and astrophysicists who have evaluated plasma cosmology reject it because it does not match the observations of astrophysical phenomena as well as the currently accepted ].{{sfn|Parker|1993|pp=335–336}} Very few papers supporting plasma cosmology have appeared in the literature since the mid-1990s. | |||
==Overview== | |||
The term '''plasma universe'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> is sometimes used as a synonym for plasma cosmology,<ref name="Peratt1992"/> as an alternative description of the plasma in the universe.<ref name=Alfven1990 /> Plasma cosmology is distinct from ] ideas collectively called the ''Electric Universe,'' though proponents of each are known to be sympathetic to each other''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Hogan and Velikovsky |url=https://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/velikovsky.htm |access-date=2023-08-24 |website=www.jerrypournelle.com}}</ref>''<ref name="sa-eu">{{Cite news |last=Shermer |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Shermer |date=2015-10-01 |title=The Difference between Science and Pseudoscience |work=] |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-difference-between-science-and-pseudoscience/ |access-date=2022-03-28}}</ref> These pseudoscientific ideas vary widely<ref>Bridgman, William T., Stuart Robbins, and C. Alex Young. "Crank Astronomy As A Teaching Tool." ''American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts# 215''. Vol. 215. 2010.</ref> but generally claim that electric currents flow into stars and power them like light bulbs, contradicting well-established ] and observations showing that stars are powered by ].<ref> | |||
The basic assumptions of plasma cosmology are, | |||
{{cite web | |||
#since the universe is nearly all plasma, ]s are equal in importance with ] on all scales. | |||
| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/nz7neg/electric-universe-theory-thunderbolts-project-wallace-thornhill | |||
#since we never see effects without ], we have no reason to assume an origin in ] for the universe—an effect without a cause. Thus this approach, in contrast to certain interpretations of the ], does not permit any ]. | |||
| title = The People Who Believe Electricity Rules the Universe | |||
#unlike the ], the universe is not changeless. Rather, since every part of the universe we observe is evolving, it assumes that the universe itself is evolving as well. | |||
| last = Scoles | |||
Plasma cosmology also differs from ] ]. Its advocates emphasize the links between physical ] on ] and those that govern the cosmos. Plasma cosmology is explained as much as possible in terms of known physics, using the theoretical and experimental results of laboratory ] in cosmological applications. Proponents contrast this with the ] which has over the course of its existence required the introduction of such features as ], ] and ] that have not been detectable yet in laboratory experiments. | |||
| first = Sarah | |||
| date = 18 February 2016 | |||
| website = Motherboard | |||
| publisher = Vice | |||
| access-date = 1 November 2022 | |||
| quote = }}</ref> | |||
==Alfvén–Klein cosmology<!--'Alfvén–Klein cosmology', 'Alfvén–Klein model', 'Klein–Alfvén cosmology', and 'Ambiplasma' redirect here-->== | |||
Plasma cosmology was first developed by Swedish physicist ] in a book published in 1965. Alfvén is well-respected in the ] as the founder of modern ] together with ], ] and ].{{ref|early}} for which he received the ]. While plasma cosmology has never had the support of large numbers of ] or ], a small group of plasma physicists such as ] and ] have continued to promote and develop the approach. These physicists have been able to propose theories for the origin of ] (such as ]s, galaxies, and clusters and ]s of galaxies), for the synthesis of ], and for the origin of the ]. Although their theories are not generally accepted by the ], proponents argue that they could explain observations more easily, without introducing the "new physics" seen in the big bang theory. Critics of the plasma cosmology point out that detailed observational testing of big bang cosmology is not rivalled by plasma cosmology and that the big bang theory is supported by multiple complementary quantitative tests. | |||
] suggested that ] laboratory results can be extrapolated up to the scale of the universe. A scaling jump by a factor 10<sup>9</sup> was required to extrapolate to the ], a second jump to extrapolate to galactic conditions, and a third jump to extrapolate to the ].<ref name=scaling>{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Alfvén | |||
|first1=Hannes | |||
|date=1983 | |||
|title=On hierarchical cosmology | |||
|journal=Astrophysics and Space Science | |||
|volume=89 | |||
|issue=2 | |||
|pages=313–324 | |||
|bibcode=1983Ap&SS..89..313A|doi=10.1007/bf00655984 |s2cid=122396373 | |||
}}</ref>]] | |||
In the 1960s, the theory behind plasma cosmology was introduced by Alfvén,<ref name="Alfven1966" >{{cite book | |||
==Alfvén's model== | |||
|first=Alfvén |last=H. | |||
]s and their application to physics and astronomy]] | |||
|title=Worlds-antiworlds: antimatter in cosmology | |||
Alfvén's model of plasma cosmology can be divided into three distinct areas. | |||
|publisher=Freeman | |||
|date=1966 }}</ref> a plasma expert who won the 1970 ] for his work on ].<ref name="Kragh1996" /> He proposed the use of ] to extrapolate the results of laboratory experiments and ] observations and scale them over many ] up to the largest observable objects in the universe (see box<ref name=scaling/>).<ref name="Alfvenpu1987">{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Alfven | first1=H.O G | |||
|title=Plasma universe | |||
|journal=Physica Scripta | |||
|volume=T18 | |||
|pages=20–28 | |||
|url=http://plasmauniverse.info/downloads/AlfvenPlasmaUniverse.pdf | |||
|date= 1987 | |||
|doi=10.1088/0031-8949/1987/t18/002|bibcode = 1987PhST...18...20A | s2cid=250828260 | |||
}}</ref> In 1971, ], a Swedish theoretical physicist, extended the earlier proposals and developed the Alfvén–Klein model of the ],<ref>{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Klein|first1=O. | |||
|title=Arguments concerning relativity and cosmology | |||
|journal=Science | |||
|volume=171 | |||
|issue=3969 | |||
|pages=339–45 | |||
|doi=10.1126/science.171.3969.339 | |||
|bibcode=1971Sci...171..339K | |||
|pmid=17808634 | |||
|date=1971|s2cid=22308581 | |||
}}</ref> or "metagalaxy", an earlier term used to refer to the empirically accessible part of the universe, rather than the entire universe including parts beyond our ].<ref name="Alfven1963">{{cite book | |||
|last1=Alfvén|first1=H. | |||
|last2=Falthammar|first2=C.-G. | |||
|title=Cosmic electrodynamics | |||
|publisher=Clarendon Press | |||
|location=Oxford | |||
|date=1963}}</ref><ref name="Kragh1996">{{cite book | |||
|last=Kragh | |||
|first=H.S. | |||
|title=Cosmology and Controversy: The Historical Development of Two Theories of the Universe | |||
|volume=23 | |||
|pages=482–483 | |||
|isbn=978-0-691-00546-1 | |||
|publisher=Princeton University Press | |||
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f6p0AFgzeMsC&pg=PA384 | |||
|date=1996}}</ref> | |||
In this model, the universe is made up of equal amounts of matter and ] with the boundaries between the regions of matter and antimatter being delineated by cosmic ]s formed by ], thin regions comprising two parallel layers with opposite electrical charge. Interaction between these boundary regions would generate radiation, and this would form the plasma. Alfvén introduced the term '''ambiplasma'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> for a plasma made up of matter and antimatter and the double layers are thus formed of ambiplasma. According to Alfvén, such an ambiplasma would be relatively long-lived as the component particles and antiparticles would be too hot and too low-density to annihilate each other rapidly. The double layers will act to repel clouds of opposite type, but combine clouds of the same type, creating ever-larger regions of matter and antimatter. The idea of ambiplasma was developed further into the forms of heavy ambiplasma (protons-antiprotons) and light ambiplasma (electrons-positrons).<ref name="Alfven1966" /> | |||
#The ''']''', an empirical description of the Universe based on the results from laboratory experiments on plasmas | |||
#''']''', a proposed mechanism for the formation of ] in the ]. | |||
#''']''', based on a hypothetical matter/antimatter plasma. | |||
Alfvén–Klein cosmology was proposed in part to explain the observed ] in the universe, starting from an ] of exact ] between matter and antimatter. According to Alfvén and Klein, ambiplasma would naturally form pockets of matter and pockets of antimatter that would expand outwards as annihilation between matter and antimatter occurred in the double layer at the boundaries. They concluded that we must just happen to live in one of the pockets that was mostly ]s rather than antibaryons, explaining the baryon asymmetry. The pockets, or bubbles, of matter or antimatter would expand because of annihilations at the boundaries, which Alfvén considered as a possible explanation for the observed ], which would be merely a local phase of a much larger history. Alfvén postulated that the universe has always existed <ref name="Alfven1988">{{cite web | |||
===Cosmic Plasma=== | |||
|last1=Alfvén |first1=H. | |||
|title=Has the Universe an Origin? (Trita-EPP) | |||
|volume=7 | |||
|page=6 | |||
|url=http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/20/047/20047579.pdf | |||
|date=1988}}</ref><ref name=Peratt>{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Peratt|first1=A.L. | |||
|title=Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology | |||
|journal=Astrophysics and Space Science | |||
|volume=227 | |||
|issue=1–2 | |||
|pages=3–11 | |||
|bibcode=1995Ap&SS.227....3P | |||
|doi=10.1007/bf00678062 | |||
|url = http://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloads/PrincetonEditorial.1993.pdf | |||
|date=1995|isbn=978-94-010-4181-2 | |||
|s2cid=118452749 | |||
}}</ref> due to ] arguments and the rejection of '']'' models, such as the ], as a stealth form of ].<ref name="Alfven1992">{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Alfvén |first1=H. | |||
|title=Cosmology: Myth or Science? | |||
|journal=IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science | |||
|volume=20 | |||
|issue=6 | |||
|pages=590–600 | |||
|bibcode=1992ITPS...20..590A | |||
|doi=10.1109/27.199498 | |||
|year=1992 | |||
}}</ref><ref name="Alfven1984">{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Alfvén|first1=H. | |||
|title=Cosmology - Myth or science? | |||
|journal=Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy | |||
|volume=5 | |||
|issue=1 | |||
|pages=79–98 | |||
|issn=0250-6335 | |||
|bibcode = 1984JApA....5...79A | |||
|doi=10.1007/BF02714974 | |||
|date=1984|s2cid=122751100 | |||
}}</ref> The exploding double layer was also suggested by Alfvén as a possible mechanism for the generation of ], | |||
<ref name="Alfven1981">{{cite book | |||
|first=Alfvén |last=H. | |||
|title=Cosmic plasma | |||
|pages=IV.10.3.2, 109 | |||
|publisher=Taylor & Francis | |||
|date=1981}} recount: "Double layers may also produce extremely high energies. This is known to take place in solar flares, where they generate solar cosmic rays up to 10<sup>9</sup> to 10<sup>10</sup> eV."</ref> ] and ]s.<ref name="Alfven1986">{{cite journal | |||
|last1=Alfvén |first1=H. | |||
|title=Double layers and circuits in astrophysics | |||
|journal=IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science | |||
|volume=PS-14 | |||
|issue=6 | |||
|pages=779–793 | |||
|date=1986 | |||
|bibcode=1986ITPS...14..779A|doi = 10.1109/TPS.1986.4316626 |s2cid=11866813 | |||
|url=https://cds.cern.ch/record/169085 | |||
|hdl=2060/19870005703 | |||
|hdl-access=free | |||
}}</ref> | |||
In 1993, theoretical cosmologist ] criticized Alfvén–Klein cosmology, writing that "there is no way that the results can be consistent with the isotropy of the ] and ]s".<ref name="Peebles1993">{{cite book | |||
Building on the work of ], Alfvén's research on plasma led him to develop the field of ], a theory that ] plasma as magnetic ], and for which he won the ] in ]. Magnetohydrodynamics is used by astrophysicists and astronomers to describe many celestial phenomena and is the core theory of modern ]. However, Alfven pointed out that magnetohydrodynamics is an approximation which is accurate only in dense plasmas, like that of stars, where particles ] frequently. It is not valid in the much more dilute plasmas of the ] and ], where ]s and ]s ] around ] lines. Alfven devoted a large portion of his Nobel address to attacking this “pseudo plasma” error. | |||
|last=Pebbles|first=P.J.E. | |||
|title=Principles of Physical Cosmology | |||
|publisher=Princeton University Press | |||
|pages=207 | |||
|isbn=978-0-691-07428-3 | |||
|date=1993}}</ref> In his book he also showed that Alfvén's models do not predict ], ], or the existence of the ]. A further difficulty with the ambiplasma model is that matter–antimatter ] results in the production of high energy ]s, which are not observed in the amounts predicted. While it is possible that the local "matter-dominated" cell is simply larger than the ], this proposition does not lend itself to observational tests. | |||
== Plasma cosmology and the study of galaxies == | |||
Alfvén felt that many other characteristics of plasmas played a more significant role in cosmic plasmas. These include: | |||
Hannes Alfvén from the 1960s to 1980s argued that plasma played an important if not dominant role in the universe. He argued that ] are far more important than ] when acting on interplanetary and interstellar ]s.<ref>H. Alfvén and C.-G. Falthammar, ''Cosmic electrodynamics''(2nd edition, Clarendon press, Oxford, 1963). "The basic reason why electromagnetic phenomena are so important in cosmical physics is that there exist celestial magnetic fields which affect the motion of charged particles in space ... The strength of the interplanetary magnetic field is of the order of 10<sup>−4</sup> gauss (10 ]s), which gives the ≈ 10<sup>7</sup>. This illustrates the enormous importance of interplanetary and interstellar magnetic fields, compared with gravitation, as long as the matter is ionized." (p.2-3)</ref> He further hypothesized that they might promote the contraction of ]s and may even constitute the main mechanism for contraction, initiating ].<ref name="Alfven1978" >{{cite journal | last1 = Alfvén | first1 = H. | last2 = Carlqvist | first2 = P. | year = 1978 | title = Interstellar clouds and the formation of stars | journal = Astrophysics and Space Science | volume = 55 | issue = 2| pages = 487–509 | bibcode=1978Ap&SS..55..487A|doi = 10.1007/BF00642272 | s2cid = 122687137 | url = https://cds.cern.ch/record/118596 }}</ref> The current standard view is that magnetic fields can hinder collapse, that large-scale ]s have not been observed, and that the length scale for charge neutrality is predicted to be far smaller than the relevant cosmological scales.<ref name="Siegel2006" >{{Cite journal |author= Siegel, E. R. |author2= Fry, J. N. |title= Can Electric Charges and Currents Survive in an Inhomogeneous Universe? |date= Sep 2006 |arxiv= astro-ph/0609031 |bibcode= 2006astro.ph..9031S }}</ref> | |||
* ] | |||
* ]s, electric currents that form electric circuits in space | |||
* Plasma ]s | |||
* The cellular structure of plasma | |||
* ] | |||
Alfvén and his colleagues began to develop plasma cosmology in the 1960’s and 70’s as an extrapolation of their earlier highly successful theories of solar and solar-system phenomena.{{ref|Alf42}} They pointed out those extremely similar phenomena existed in plasmas at all scales because of inherent ], ultimately derived from ]. One scale invariant in plasmas is ], so that plasmas at scales from the laboratory up to ] exhibit similar phenomena in a range of velocities from tens to a thousand ]s per ]. In turn this invariance means that the duration of plasma phenomena scales as their size, so that galaxies a hundred thousand ]s across with characteristic evolution times of billions of years scale to transient laboratory-scale phenomena lasting a microsecond. | |||
In the 1980s and 1990s, Alfvén and ], a plasma physicist at ], outlined a program they called the "plasma universe".<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Alfvén | first1 = H. | year = 1986 | title = Model of the Plasma Universe | url = http://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloads/ModelOfTPU_Alfv%C3%A9n.pdf | journal = IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science | volume = PS-14 | issue = 6| pages = 629–638 | doi = 10.1109/tps.1986.4316614 | bibcode = 1986ITPS...14..629A | s2cid = 31617468 }}{{Dead link|date=August 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref name="WI1">A. L. Peratt, ''Plasma Cosmology: Part I, Interpretations of a Visible Universe'', World & I, vol. 8, pp. 294–301, August 1989. </ref><ref name="WI2">A. L. Peratt, ''Plasma Cosmology:Part II, The Universe is a Sea of Electrically Charged Particles'', World & I, vol. 9, pp. 306–317, September 1989 .</ref> In plasma universe proposals, various plasma physics phenomena were associated with astrophysical observations and were used to explain contemporary mysteries and problems outstanding in astrophysics in the 1980s and 1990s. In various venues, Peratt profiled what he characterized as an alternative viewpoint to the mainstream models applied in astrophysics and cosmology.<ref name=WI1 /><ref name=WI2 /><ref name=ST>{{Cite web|url=http://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloads/CosmologyPeratt.pdf|title=A.L. Peratt, ''Plasma Cosmology,'' Sky & Tel. Feb. 1992}}</ref><ref name=Peratt /> | |||
While gravity becomes more important at large scales, plasma cosmology advocates claim that electromagnetic forces are rarely negligible: indeed they are often said to dominate over gravitational forces in cosmological processes. Magnetic forces are particularly important since even in neutral plasma (such as almost all astrophysical plasmas) magnetic forces have infinite range, like gravity. | |||
For example, Peratt proposed that the mainstream approach to galactic dynamics which relied on gravitational modeling of stars and gas in galaxies with the addition of dark matter was overlooking a possibly major contribution from plasma physics. He mentions laboratory experiments of ] in the 1950s that created plasma discharges that looked like galaxies.<ref name="Peratt1986b">{{cite journal |author=A. Peratt |title=Evolution of the plasma universe. I – Double radio galaxies, quasars, and extragalactic jets |journal=IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science |issn=0093-3813 |volume=PS-14 |issue=6 |pages=639–660 |date=1986 |url=http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/downloadsCosmo/Peratt86TPS-I.pdf |bibcode = 1986ITPS...14..639P |doi = 10.1109/TPS.1986.4316615 |s2cid=30767626 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Bostick | first1 = W. H. | year = 1986 | title = What laboratory-produced plasma structures can contribute to the understanding of cosmic structures both large and small | journal = IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science | volume = PS-14 | issue = 6| pages = 703–717 | bibcode=1986ITPS...14..703B|doi = 10.1109/TPS.1986.4316621 | s2cid = 25575722 }}</ref> Perrat conducted computer simulations of colliding plasma clouds that he reported also mimicked the shape of galaxies.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=AL Peratt |author2=J Green |author3=D Nielson |title=Evolution of Colliding Plasmas |journal=Physical Review Letters |volume=44 |issue=26 |date=20 June 1980 |pages=1767–1770|bibcode = 1980PhRvL..44.1767P |doi = 10.1103/PhysRevLett.44.1767 }}</ref> Peratt proposed that galaxies formed due to plasma filaments joining in a ], the filaments starting 300,000 light years apart and carrying ]s of 10<sup>18</sup> amperes.<ref name="Lerner" /><ref name="Peratt1983">{{cite journal |author1=AL Peratt |author2=J Green |title=On the Evolution of Interacting, Magnetized, Galactic Plasmas |journal=Astrophysics and Space Science |volume=91 |issue=1 |date=1983 |pages=19–33|bibcode = 1983Ap&SS..91...19P |doi = 10.1007/BF00650210 |s2cid=121524786 }}</ref> Peratt also reported simulations he did showing emerging jets of material from the central buffer region that he compared to ] and ] occurring without ]s. Peratt proposed a sequence for ]: "the transition of double ] to ] to radioquiet QSO's to peculiar and ], finally ending in ]".<ref name="Peratt1986">{{cite journal |author=A. Peratt | |||
Alfvén and his collaborators pointed to two plasma phenomena that have figured prominently in subsequent developments of plasma cosmology: | |||
|title=Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II. The Formation of Systems of Galaxies |journal=IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science |issn=0093-3813 |volume=PS-14 |issue=6 |pages=763–778 |date=1986 |url=http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/downloadsCosmo/Peratt86TPS-II.pdf|bibcode = 1986ITPS...14..763P |doi = 10.1109/TPS.1986.4316625 |s2cid=25091690 }}</ref> He also reported that flat ] were simulated without ].<ref name= "Lerner">{{cite book | |||
|author=E. J. Lerner | |||
|title=The Big Bang Never Happened | |||
|publisher=Random House | |||
|location=New York and Toronto | |||
|date=1991 | |||
|isbn=978-0-8129-1853-3 | |||
|url=https://archive.org/details/bigbangneverhapp00lern | |||
}}</ref> At the same time ], an independent plasma researcher and supporter of Peratt's ideas, proposed a plasma model for quasars based on a ].<ref>{{cite journal |author=E.J. Lerner |title=Magnetic Self‑Compression in Laboratory Plasma, Quasars and Radio Galaxies |journal=Laser and Particle Beams |volume=4 part 2 |issue=2 |date=1986 |pages=193‑222 |bibcode = 1986LPB.....4..193L |doi = 10.1017/S0263034600001750 |doi-access=free }}</ref> | |||
==Comparison with mainstream astrophysics== | |||
# The formation of ]. (See ]) | |||
Standard astronomical modeling and theories attempt to incorporate all known ] into descriptions and explanations of observed phenomena, with ] playing a dominant role on the largest scales as well as in ] and ]. To that end, both ] orbits and ]'s ] are generally used as the underlying frameworks for modeling astrophysical systems and ], while ] and ] additionally appeal to ] processes including plasma physics and ] to explain relatively small scale energetic processes observed in the ]s and ]s. Due to overall ], ] does not provide for very long-range interactions in astrophysics even while much of the matter in the universe is ].<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QJ08AAAAIAAJ|title=Accretion Power in Astrophysics|last1=Frank|first1=Juhan|last2=Frank|first2=Carlos|last3=Frank|first3=J. R.|last4=King|first4=A. R.|last5=Raine|first5=Derek J.|date=1985-04-18|publisher=CUP Archive|isbn=9780521245302|language=en|page=25}}</ref> (See ] for more.) | |||
# The exploding ], where charge separation builds up in a current-carrying plasma, leading to the disruption of the current, the generation of high electric fields and the acceleration of energetic particles. This phenomenon, which was first observed in the laboratory, was suggested by Alfvén as a possible mechanism for the generation of ]. | |||
Proponents of plasma cosmology claim electrodynamics is as important as gravity in explaining the structure of the universe, and speculate that it provides an alternative explanation for the ]<ref name=Peratt1986 /> and the initial collapse of interstellar clouds.<ref name=Alfven1978 /> In particular plasma cosmology is claimed to provide an alternative explanation for the flat ] of spiral galaxies and to do away with the need for ] in galaxies and with the need for ]s in galaxy centres to power ]s and ].<ref name="Peratt1983"/><ref name=Peratt1986 /> However, theoretical analysis shows that "many scenarios for the generation of seed magnetic fields, which rely on the survival and sustainability of currents at early times ",<ref name=Siegel2006 /> i.e. Birkeland currents of the magnitude needed (10<sup>18</sup> amps over scales of megaparsecs) for galaxy formation do not exist.<ref name="Colafrancesco2006" >{{cite journal | last1 = Colafrancesco | first1 = S. | last2 = Giordano | first2 = F. | year = 2006 | title = The impact of magnetic field on the cluster M – T relation | journal = Astronomy and Astrophysics | volume = 454 | issue = 3| pages = L131–134 | bibcode=2006A&A...454L.131C | doi=10.1051/0004-6361:20065404|arxiv = astro-ph/0701852 | s2cid = 1477289 }} recount: "Numerical simulations have shown that the wide-scale magnetic fields in massive clusters produce variations of the cluster mass at the level of ~ 5 − 10% of their unmagnetized value ... Such variations are not expected to produce strong variations in the relative relation for massive clusters."</ref> Additionally, many of the issues that were mysterious in the 1980s and 1990s, including discrepancies relating to the ] and the nature of ]s, have been solved with more evidence that, in detail, provides a distance and time scale for the universe. | |||
===Force free filaments=== | |||
Some of the places where plasma cosmology supporters are most at odds with standard explanations include the need for their models to have light element production without ], which, in the context of Alfvén–Klein cosmology, has been shown to produce excessive ]s and ]s beyond that observed.<ref>{{cite journal | year = 1985 | title = Big Bang Photosynthesis and Pregalactic Nucleosynthesis of Light Elements | journal = Astrophysical Journal | volume = 293 | pages = L53–L57 | bibcode=1985ApJ...293L..53A|doi = 10.1086/184490 | last1 = Audouze | first1 = J. | last2 = Lindley | first2 = D. | last3 = Silk | first3 = J. }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Epstein | display-authors = etal | year = 1976 | title = The origin of deuterium | doi = 10.1038/263198a0 | journal = Nature | volume = 263 | issue = 5574 | pages = 198–202|bibcode = 1976Natur.263..198E | s2cid = 4213710 }} point out that if proton fluxes with energies greater than 500 MeV were intense enough to produce the observed levels of deuterium, they would also produce about 1000 times more gamma rays than are observed.</ref> Plasma cosmology proponents have made further proposals to explain light element abundances, but the attendant issues have not been fully addressed.<ref>Ref. 10 in "Galactic Model of Element Formation" (Lerner, ''IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science'' Vol. 17, No. 2, April 1989 {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061229074857/http://www.health-freedom.info/pdf/Galactic%20Model%20of%20Element%20Formation.pdf|date=2006-12-29}}) is J.Audouze and J.Silk, "Pregalactic Synthesis of Deuterium" in ''Proc. ESO Workshop on "Primordial Helium"'', 1983, pp. 71–75 Lerner includes a paragraph on "Gamma Rays from D Production" in which he claims that the expected gamma ray level is consistent with the observations. He cites neither Audouze nor Epstein in this context, and does not explain why his result contradicts theirs.</ref> In 1995 Eric Lerner published his alternative explanation for the ] (CMBR).<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Lerner | first1 = Eric | date = 1995 | title = Intergalactic Radio Absorption and the COBE Data | url = http://www.photonmatrix.com/pdf/Intergalactic%20Radio%20Absorption%20And%20The%20COBE%20Data.pdf | journal = Astrophysics and Space Science | volume = 227 | issue = 1–2| pages = 61–81 | doi = 10.1007/bf00678067 | bibcode = 1995Ap&SS.227...61L | s2cid = 121500864 | access-date = 2012-05-30 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110715083205/http://www.photonmatrix.com/pdf/Intergalactic%20Radio%20Absorption%20And%20The%20COBE%20Data.pdf | archive-date = 2011-07-15 | url-status = dead }}</ref> He argued that his model explained the fidelity of the CMB spectrum to that of a black body and the low level of anisotropies found, even while the level of isotropy at 1:10<sup>5</sup> is not accounted for to that precision by any alternative models. Additionally, the sensitivity and resolution of the measurement of the CMB anisotropies was greatly advanced by ] and the ] and the statistics of the signal were so in line with the predictions of the Big Bang model, that the CMB has been heralded as a major confirmation of the Big Bang model to the detriment of alternatives.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Spergel | first1 = D. N. | display-authors = etal | date = 2003 | title = (WMAP collaboration), "First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters | journal = Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series | volume = 148 | issue = 1| pages = 175–194 | doi=10.1086/377226|arxiv = astro-ph/0302209 |bibcode = 2003ApJS..148..175S | s2cid = 10794058 }}</ref> The ] in the early universe are fit with high accuracy by the predictions of the Big Bang model, and, to date, there has never been an attempt to explain the detailed spectrum of the anisotropies within the framework of plasma cosmology or any other alternative cosmological model. | |||
When currents move through any plasma, they create magnetic fields which in turn divert currents in such a way that parallel currents attract each other (the ]). Plasma thus naturally becomes inhomogeneous, with currents and plasmas organizing themselves into force-free filaments, in which the currents move in the same direction as the magnetic field. | |||
==References and notes== | |||
Such filaments act to pinch matter together in turn leads (for large enough filaments) to gravitational ] that cause clumps to form along the filaments like beads on a string. These gravitationally-bound clumps, spinning in the magnetic field of the filament, generate electric forces that create a new set of currents moving towards the center of the clump, as in a disk generator. This in turn creates a new set of spiral filaments that set the stage of the coalescence of smaller objects. A ] of structure is thus formed. | |||
{{reflist|colwidth=25em}} | |||
==Further reading== | |||
The so-called ] in these filaments, as Alfvén and colleagues showed, may be important for the process of ], because they serve as a mechanism to transfer ] from the contracting clump. Without a process to transfer angular momentum, the formation of galaxies and stars would be impossible as ]s would prevent contraction. Plasma cosmology advocates claim that such plasma processes can ultimately account for the ] of the universe and its filamentary organization of ]s, ]s, ], ]s and ]s. Subsequent to Alfven’s work, highly magnetized filaments were discovered at several scales in the cosmos, from ]-scales at the center of the galaxy to supercluster filaments that stretch across hundreds of ]s. | |||
* ]: | |||
:* "''Cosmic Plasma''" (Reidel, 1981) {{ISBN|90-277-1151-8}} | |||
:* {{cite journal | last1 = Alfvén | first1 = Hannes | date = 1983 | title = On hierarchical cosmology | journal = Astrophysics and Space Science | volume = 89 | issue = 2| pages = 313–324 | bibcode = 1983Ap&SS..89..313A|doi=10.1007/bf00655984 | s2cid = 122396373 }} | |||
:* , ''Laser and Particle Beams'' ({{ISSN|0263-0346}}), vol. 6, August 1988, pp. 389–398 | |||
:* , '']'' ({{ISSN|0093-3813}}), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 629–638 (PDF) | |||
:* , '']'' ({{ISSN|0031-9228}}), vol. 39, issue 9, September 1986, pp. 22 – 27 | |||
* ]: | |||
===Ambiplasma=== | |||
:* "''Physics of the Plasma Universe''", (Springer, 1992) {{ISBN|0-387-97575-6}} | |||
{{main|Ambiplasma}} | |||
:* , '']'' ({{ISSN|0037-6604}}), vol. 68, August 1984, pp. 118–122 | |||
:* "Are Black Holes Necessary?", ''Sky and Telescope'' ({{ISSN|0037-6604}}), vol. 66, July 1983, pp. 19–22 | |||
:* , ''IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science'' ({{ISSN|0093-3813}}), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 639–660 (PDF) | |||
:* , ''IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science'' ({{ISSN|0093-3813}}), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 763–778 (PDF) | |||
:* , ''Laser and Particle Beams'' ({{ISSN|0263-0346}}), vol. 6, August 1988, pp. 471–491 (PDF) | |||
* ] journal '']'': special issues on Space and Cosmic Plasma , , , , , , and | |||
* ] journal ''Laser and Particle Beams'': Particle Beams and Basic Phenomena in the Plasma Universe, a Special Issue in Honor of the 80th Birthday of Hannes Alfvén, vol. 6, issue 3, August 1988 | |||
* Various authors: , ''Astrophysics and Space Science'', v. 227 (1995) p. 3–11. ''Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop on Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology'', held from 10 to 12 May 1993 in Princeton, New Jersey | |||
==External links== | |||
As ] and ] from ] once suggested that ] and ] always come into existence in equal quantities, Alfvén and Klein in the early ] developed a theory of cosmological evolution based on the development of an "]" consisting of equal quantities of matter and antimatter. Alfvén theorized that if an ambiplasma was affected by both gravitational and magnetic fields, as could be expected in large-scale regions of space, matter and antimatter would naturally separate from each other. When small matter clouds collided with small antimatter clouds, the annihilation reactions on their border would cause them to repel each other, but matter clouds colliding with matter clouds would merge, leading to increasingly large regions of the universe consisting of almost exclusively matter or antimatter. Eventually the regions would become so vast that the ] produced by ] reactions at their borders would be almost unobservable. | |||
* Wright, E. L. . See also: Lerner, E. J. , Lerner's reply to the above. | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Plasma Cosmology}} | |||
This explanation of the dominance of matter in the local universe contrasts sharply with that proposed by big bang cosmology, which requires a ]. (If matter and antimatter had been produced in equal quantities in the extremely dense big bang, annihilation would have reduced the universal density to only a few trillionths of that observed.) Such ] has been observed in nature, but the known sources of asymmetry are insufficient to account for baryogenesis. | |||
] | |||
Alfvén and Klein then went on to use their ambiplasma theory to explain the ] between ] and distance. They hypothesized that a very large region of the universe, consisting of parts alternately containing matter and antimatter, gravitationally collapsed until the matter and antimatter regions were forced together, liberating huge amounts of energy and leading to an explosion. At no point in this model, however, does the density of our part of the universe become very high. This explanation was appealing, because if we were at the center of the explosion we would observe the Doppler shifts from receding particles as redshifts, and the most distant particles would be the fastest moving, and hence have the largest redshift. | |||
This explanation of the Hubble relationship did not withstand analysis, however. Carlqvist determined that there was no way that such a mechanism could lead to the very high redshifts, comparable to or greater than unity, that were observed. Moreover, it was difficult to see how the high degree of isotropy of the visible universe could be reproduced in this model. While Alfven’s separation process was sound, it seems almost impossible for the process to reverse and lead to a re-mixing of matter and antimatter. | |||
==Features and problems== | |||
In the past twenty-five years, plasma cosmology has expanded to develop models of the formation of large scale structure, ]s, the origin of the light elements, the cosmic microwave background and the redshift-distance relationship. | |||
===Formation of structure=== | |||
In the early 1980’s ], a former student of ], used supercomputer facilities at Maxwell Laboratories and later at ] to simulate Alfvén and Fälthammar’s concept of galaxies being formed by clouds of plasma spinning in a magnetic filament. The simulation began with two spherical clouds of plasma trapped in parallel magnetic filaments, each carrying a current of around 10<sup>18</sup> amperes. In a video created from the simulation, the clouds begin to rotate around each other, spin on their own axes and distort their shape until a perfectly formed spiral galaxy emerges{{ref|spiral}}. Peratt showed that the stages of formation closely corresponded to observed galaxy shapes. In addition, the rotation curves of the simulated galaxy showed the same plateau in velocity as do real galaxies. | |||
While the simulation did not contain gravitational forces, so could not be wholly realistic, it demonstrated that electromagnetic processes could lead to the forms observed at a galactic scale. The fact that electromagnetic processes are important for angular momentum transport in ] and ] is agreed upon by astrophysicists. In addition, Peratt has suggests that the flat ]s used by astrophysicists as evidence for dark matter in the outer reaches of galaxies are in fact due to galactic plasmas interacting with magnetic fields. This explanation was bolstered when, in 2005, observers found stars in the outer reaches of the Andromeda galaxy that were moving far slower than the plasma at the same radius.{{ref|Andromeda}} The stars experience a greater gravitational force than the plasma, relative to the magnetic force, so this observation is consistent with the idea that the observed flat rotation curves are due to magnetic forces, with less or perhaps no dark matter required. The observers, however, note that the stars likely joined the galaxy through a recent ] event, in which case they could not be considered part of the ] ]. Critics observe that mass estimates of clusters using ], which is an independent check from the rotation curves, also indicate that there is a large quantity of dark matter present.{{ref|lensing}} | |||
During the same period, Lerner developed a plasma model of quasars based on the ] fusion device. In this device, converging filaments of current form a tight, magnetically confined ball of plasma on the axis of cylindrical electrodes. As the magnetic field of the ball, or plasmoid, decays, it generates tremendous electric fields that accelerate a beam of ions in one direction and a beam of electrons in the other. In Lerner’s model, the electric currents generated by a galaxy spinning in a intergalactic magnetic field converge on the center, producing a giant plasmoid, or quasar. This metastable entity, confined by the magnetic field of the current flowing through it, generates both the beams and intense radiation observed with quasars and active galactic nuclei. Lerner compared in detail the predictions of this model with quasar observations. In addition the quantitative model of the plasma focus developed in this work was used in efforts aimed at developing the device as a fusion generator. | |||
In the mid-80’s Lerner used plasma filamentation theory to develop a general explanation of the large scale structure of the universe. While big bang cosmology has difficulty accommodating the formation of very large structures (such as voids 100 Mpc or more across) in the limited amount of time available since the hypothesized origin of the universe, plasma cosmology can easily accommodate large scale structures, and in fact firmly predicts a fractal distribution of matter with density being inversely proportional to the distance of separation of objects. Critics point out that a fractal distribution is ruled out by measurements of the large scale matter power spectrum, such as the ], which indicate a nearly scale-invariant ], rather than a fractal spectrum.{{ref|hzspect}} | |||
Plasma filamentation theory allows the mass of condensed objects formed to be predicted as a function of density. Magnetically confined filaments initially compress plasma, which is then condensed gravitationally. For this to happen, the plasma must be collisional. Otherwise, particles will just continue in orbits like the planets of the solar system. Given the characteristic ion velocity in the filament, calculated from instability theory, the collisional condition implies that objects of mass ''M'' = 1.8 ''n''<sup>-2</sup> form from plasma of initial density ''n'', where ''M'' is in solar masses and ''n'' in ions/cm<sup>3</sup>. This fractal scaling relationship (with fractal dimension equal to two) is been borne out by many studies on all observable scales of the universe.{{ref|fractal}} In addition, the numerical constant in the relation between mass and density, or equivalently, mass and separation of objects (''M'' = 9.7 x 10<sup>10</sup> ''R''<sup>2</sup>, where ''R'' is in ] and ''M'' is in solar masses) has been borne out by observation. In the plasma model, where superclusters, clusters and galaxies are formed from magnetically confined plasma vortex filaments, a break in the scaling relationship is only anticipated at scales greater than approximately 3 Gpc. Naturally, since the plasma approach does not hypothesize an origin in time for the universe, the large amounts of time needed to create large-scale structures present no problems for the theory. | |||
===Light elements abundance=== | |||
The structure formation theory allowed Lerner to calculate the size of stars formed in the formation of a galaxy and thus the amounts of ] and other light elements that will be generated during galaxy formation.{{ref|nucleosynthesis}} This led to the predictions that large numbers of intermediate mass stars (from 4-12 solar masses) would be generated during the formations of galaxies. These stars produce and emit to the environment large amounts of helium-4, but very little carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. | |||
The plasma calculations, which contained no free variables, lead to a broader range of predicted abundances than does ], because the plasma theory hypothesizes a process occurring in individual galaxies, so some variation is to be expected. The range of values predicted for <sup>4</sup>He is from 21.5 to 24.8%. However, the theory is still tested by the observations, since the minimum predicted value remains a firm lower limit (additional <sup>4</sup>He is of course produced in more mature galaxies). This minimum value is consistent with the minimum observed values of <sup>4</sup>He abundance, such as ], UM461, with an abundance of 21.9±0.8%. | |||
In addition cosmic rays from these stars can produce – by collisions with ambient hydrogen and helium – the observed amounts of ] and lithium-7. Deuterium production by the p + p → d+] reaction has been predicted by plasma theory to yield abundances of the order of 2.2×10<sup>-5</sup>. This prediction was made in 1989, at a time when no observations of D in low-metallicity systems were available and the consensus values for primordial D from big bang theory were 3–4 times higher. Yet this predicted value lies within the range of observed "primordial" D values, although somewhat below the average D values. | |||
In its present form, the absolute abundance of <sup>7</sup>Li has not been calculated in the plasma-stellar theory of light elements. However, the theory unambiguously predicted (as has the big bang theory) that the abundance depends on the C, N and O abundance from ] and subsequent observations have verified that prediction. Observations of the abundances of <sup>6</sup>Li – which is also generated by cosmic rays, but is destroyed much more readily in stars – are also consistent with a cosmic-ray origin for <sup>7</sup>Li. | |||
===Microwave background=== | |||
It has long been noted{{ref|hecmb}} that the amount of energy released in producing the observed amount of helium-4 is the same as the amount of energy in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). If such energy was released from intermediate-mass stars in the early stages of the formation of galaxies, the heavy dust in such galaxies would thermalize the radiation and re-emit it as far-IR. But what would convert this radiation into the extremely smooth and isotropic 2.7 K ] radiation of the CMB? In the later ‘80s Lerner, and Peratt and Peter independently hypothesized that the energy is thermalized and isotropized by a thicket of dense, magnetically confined plasma filaments that pervade the intergalactic medium.{{ref|cmb}} (Hoyle and Narlikar proposed a different mechanism to produce the same effect.{{ref|hn}}) Lerner was able to develop the model in some detail, accurately matching the spectrum of the CMB using the best-quality (high-galactic latitude) data set from ]. | |||
Since this theory hypothesizes filaments that efficiently scatter radiation longer than about 100 microns, it predicts that radiation longer than this from distant sources will be absorbed, or to be more precise, scattered, and thus will decrease more rapidly with distance than does radiation shorter than 100 microns. In the 1990’s such absorption or scattering was demonstrated by comparing radio and far-infrared radiation from galaxies at various distances--the more distant, the greater the absorption effect.{{ref|absscat}} This effect also explained the well-known fact that the number of radio sources decreased with increasing redshift more rapidly than the number of optical sources. | |||
In 2004-2005 additional evidence supported the existence of some medium that scattered and re-emitted the CMB. Richard Lieu and colleagues presented a study{{ref|lieu}} of the ] of 31 clusters of galaxies. In this effect, CMB from behind the clusters is slightly "shadowed" by hot electrons in the clusters. Lieu showed that the effect for these clusters was at most one quarter of that predicted, strongly implying that most of the CMB radiation originated closer to us than the clusters, as predicted by the plasma model, but in sharp contradiction to the big bang model, which assumes that all the CMB originates at extreme distances. | |||
Several observations have shown that the quadrupole and octopole ] of the CMB are not random, but have a strong preferred orientation in the sky.{{ref|quadoct}} The quadrupole and octopole power is concentrated on a ring around the sky and are essentially zero along a preferred axis. The direction of this axis is identical with the direction toward the ] and lies exactly along the axis of the ] filament of which our Galaxy is a part. | |||
This observation conflicts with the big bang assumption that the CMB originated far from the local supercluster and is, on the largest scale, isotropic without a preferred direction in space. However, the new observations support the plasma explanation. If the density of the absorbing filaments follows the overall density of matter, as assumed by this theory, then the degree of absorption should be higher locally in the direction along the axis of the (roughly cylindrical) local supercluster and lower at right angles to this axis, where less high-density matter is encountered. This in turn means that concentrations of the filaments, which slightly enhance CMB power, will be more obscured in the direction along the supercluster axis and less obscured at right angle to this axis, as observed. Critics observe that the alignment of the quadrupole and octopole is likely due to uncertainties in the removal of the foreground from the CMB: the quadrupole and octopole cannot be measured without some way of removing interference from the galactic plane from the all-sky map of the CMB. A careful analysis of the foregrounds indicates that there is little evidence for the alignment.{{ref|foreground}} | |||
Critics also point out that, unlike the big bang model, plasma cosmology has not yet calculated the full angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background and compared it to the WMAP data.{{ref|WMAP}} | |||
===Redshifts=== | |||
] are a ubiquitous phenomenon that is summarized by the ] in which more distant galaxies have greater redshifts. Advocates of plasma cosmology dispute the claim that this observation indicates an expanding universe. | |||
In 2005, Lerner used recent data on high-redshift galaxies from the ] to test the predictions of the expanding-universe explanation of the Hubble relation. The big bang expanding universe predicts that surface brightness, brightness divided by apparent surface area, decreases as (z+1)<sup>-3</sup>, where ''z'' is redshift. More distant objects actually should appear bigger. But observations show that in fact the surface brightness of galaxies up to a redshift of 6 are constant, as predicted by a non-expanding universe and in sharp contradiction to the big bang. Efforts to explain this difference by evolution – early galaxies are different than those today – led to predictions of galaxies that are impossibly bright and dense. The paper, having appeared quite recently, has yet to be published in a ] journal and has not yet persuaded the astrophysical community to reject the expanding universe. | |||
However, attempts to offer a plasma-based explanation of the Hubble relation have also not been successful. While many plasma effects, such as the ], can give rise to uniform redshifts across the spectrum, some of which may be relevant to explaining the anomalous redshifts that seem to appear in quasars, these effects tend to be too small to explain the Hubble relation, unless unrealistically high matter densities are assumed. Some plasma cosmologists, including Lerner, now believe that the Hubble relation may well be a result of new physical phenomena, like the ] postulated by ] in 1929, that causes light to lose energy as it travels. Many mechanisms, all involving in some way new physics, have been proposed to accomplish this. In theory, such phenomena could be observed with sufficiently sensitive equipment on earth, providing a definitive test as to the origin of the Hubble relation. | |||
Critics contend that the expanding universe has been extensively confirmed by a suite of observations and is a clear prediction of Einstein's theory of ], a theory which has been precisely ] by a suite of different experiments. | |||
===Future=== | |||
Plasma cosmology is not a widely-accepted ], and even its advocates agree the explanations provided are less detailed than those of conventional cosmology. Its development has been hampered, as have that of other alternatives to big bang cosmology, by the exclusive allocation of government funding to conventional cosmology. Most of these conventional cosmologists argue that this bias is due to the large amount of detailed observational evidence that validates the simple, six parameter ] of the big bang. | |||
==Figures in plasma cosmology== | |||
The following physicists and astronomers helped, either directly or indirectly, to develop this field: | |||
* ] - Along with Birkeland, fathered Plasma Cosmology and was a pioneer in laboratory based plasma physics. Received the only Nobel Prize ever awarded to a plasma physicist. | |||
* ] - First suggested that polar electric currents ]l ]s] are connected to a system of filaments (now called "Birkeland Currents") that flowed along geomagnetic field lines into and away from the polar region. Suggested that space is not a vacuum but is instead filled with plasma. Pioneered the technique of "laboratory astrophysics", which became directly responsible for our present understanding of the aurora. | |||
* ] - Claims that the intergalactic medium is a strong absorber of the ] with the absorption occurring in narrow filaments. Postulates that ]s are not related to ]s but are rather produced by a ] self-compression process similar to that occurring in the ]. | |||
* ] - Developed computer simulations of galaxy formation using Birkeland currents along with gravity. Along with Alfven, organized international conferences on Plasma Cosmology. | |||
* ] - Developed the ] model. | |||
* ] - Radio astronomer, writer of "''Interstellar matters : essays on curiosity and astronomical discovery''" and "''Cosmic catastrophes''". | |||
==Footnotes== | |||
#{{note|nonstandard}} It is described as such by advocates and critics alike. In the February 1992 issue of ''Sky & Telescope'' ("Plasma Cosmology"), Anthony Peratt describes it as a "nonstandard picture". The open letter at – which has been signed by Peratt and Lerner – notes that "today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies". The ] big bang picture is typically described as the "concordance model", "standard ]" or "standard ]" of cosmology ,. | |||
#{{note|early}} H. Alfvén, ''Worlds-antiworlds: antimatter in cosmology,'' (Freeman, 1966). O. Klein, "Arguments concerning relativity and cosmology," ''Science'' '''171''' (1971), 339. | |||
#{{note|Alf42}} Alfvén, Hannes, "On the cosmogony of the solar system", in ''Stockholms Observatoriums Annaler'' (1942) (, , ) | |||
#{{note|spiral}} ] | |||
#{{note|lensing}} There exists a considerable literature on using lensing to measure dark matter: . | |||
#{{note|Andromeda}} R. Ibata, S. Chapman, A. M. N. Ferguson, G. Lewis, M. Irwin, N. Tanvir, "On the accretion origin of a vast extended stellar disk around the Andromeda galaxy", . | |||
#{{note|hzspect}} These surveys rely on the interpretation of redshifts in terms of Hubble's law. Because plasma cosmology has no model for redshift, this interpretation may not be applicable. | |||
#{{note|fractal}} <!-- reference to fractal relationship for mass density needed--> | |||
#{{note|nucleosynthesis}} E. J. Lerner, "On the problem of Big-bang nucleosynthesis", ''Astrophys. Space Sci.'' '''227''', 145-149 (1995). | |||
#{{note|hecmb}} <!-- reference to energy released by Helium-4 formation --> | |||
#{{note|cmb}} E. J. Lerner, "Intergalactic radio absorption and the COBE data", ''Astrophys. Space Sci.'' '''227''', 61-81 (1995). A. L. Peratt, "Plasma and the universe: Large-scale dynamics, filamentation, and radiation", ''Astrophys. Space Sci.'' '''227''', 97-107 (1995) <!-- Peter reference --> | |||
#{{note|hn}} <!-- hoyle and narlikar reference -- is it the QSSO ref'n? --> | |||
#{{note|absscat}} <!--reference to absorbtion from wavelengths longer than 100 microns--> | |||
#{{note|lieu}} R. Lieu, J. P. D. Mittaz and S.-N. Zhang "Detailed WMAP/X-ray comparison of 31 randomly selected nearby clusters of galaxies - incomplete Sunyaev-Zel'dovich silhouette" | |||
#{{note|quadoct}} A. de Oliveira-Costa, M. Tegmark, M. Zaldarriga and A. Hamilton, "The significance of the largest scale CMB fluctuations in WMAP", ''Phys. Rev.'' '''D69''' (2004) 063516. D. J. Schwarz, G. D. Starkman, D. Huterer and C. J. Copi, "Is the low-''l'' microwave background cosmic?", ''Phys. Rev. Lett.'' '''93''' (2004) 221301. | |||
#{{note|foregrounds}} A. Slosar and U. Seljak, "Assessing the effects of foregrounds and sky removal in WMAP", ''Phys. Rev.'' '''D70''', 083002 (2004). | |||
#{{note|WMAP}} D. N. Spergel ''et al.'' (WMAP collaboration), "First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters", ''Astrophys. J. Suppl.'' '''148''' (2003) 175. | |||
==See also== | |||
* ''']''' : ], ] | |||
* ''']''' : ], ], ], ], ]s, ], ], ] | |||
* '''Other''': ], ] | |||
* The ] model, or the Alfvén-Klein model, is the original model of plasma cosmology. | |||
* ''']''', which is a collection of outside the mainstream views on astrophysics that includes advocacy of plasma cosmology in addition to incorporating ] catastrophism and a non-standard model of stellar physics called the "Electric Star hypothesis." It does not appear to be taken seriously by most plasma cosmologists. It is not mentioned in the books, websites, or journal publications of Alfven, Peratt, Lerner, et al. (With one exception: On page 4 of his book ''The Big Bang Never Happened'', Lerner stated "hat I describe here is not... a Velikovskian fantasy." This may serve as an indicator as to how plasma cosmologists view Velikovskians.) Plasma cosmologists have likewise ignored the electric star model, and have always accepted the standard (fusion) theory. | |||
==Links and references== | |||
* Alfven, H. "''''" (1984) | |||
* Alfven, H. "''''" (1983) | |||
* Wright, E. L. "''''". | |||
* Lerner, E. J. "''''". Lerner's reply to the above. | |||
* Peratt, Anthony, "''''". () | |||
* Wurden, Glen, "''''". Los Alamos National Laboratory. University of California (U.S. Department of Energy). (General Plasma Research) | |||
* Marmet, Paul, "''''". 21st Century, Science and Technology,Washington, D.C. | |||
* Eastman, Timothy E., "''''". Plasmas International. (References, Parameters, and Research Centers links.) | |||
* Goodman, J., "''''". | |||
* Goodman, J., "''''" | |||
*Heikkila, Walter J. "''''", from a ''''" Dedicated to Hannes Alfvén on 80th Birthday | |||
* IEEE Xplore, '''', '''18''' issue 1 (1990), Special Issue on Plasma Cosmology. | |||
* G. Arcidiacono, "Plasma physics and big-bang cosmology", ''Hadronic Journal'' '''18''', 306-318 (1995). | |||
* J. E. Brandenburg, "A model cosmology based on gravity-electromagnetism unification", ''Astrophysics and Space Science'' '''227''', 133-144 (1995). | |||
* J. Kanipe, "The pillars of cosmology: a short history and assessment". ''Astrophysics and Space Science'' '''227''', 109-118 (1995). | |||
* W. C. Kolb, "How can spirals persist?," ''Astrophysics and Space Science'' '''227''', 175-186 (1995). | |||
* B. E. Meierovich, "Limiting current in general relativity''" ''Gravitation and Cosmology'' '''3''', 29-37 (1997). | |||
* A. L. Peratt, "Plasma cosmology", ''IEEE T. Plasma Sci.'' '''18''', 1-4 (1990). | |||
* C. M. Snell and A. L. Peratt, "Rotation velocity and neutral hydrogen distribution dependency on magnetic-field strength in spiral galaxies", ''Astrophys. Space Sci.'' '''227''', 167-173 (1995). | |||
== Books == | |||
* H. Alfvén, ''Worlds-antiworlds: antimatter in cosmology,'' (Freeman, 1966). | |||
* H. Alfvén, ''Cosmic Plasma'' (Reidel, 1981) ISBN 9027711518 | |||
* E. J. Lerner, ''The Big Bang Never Happened'', (Vintage, 1992) ISBN 067974049X | |||
* A. L. Peratt, ''Physics of the Plasma Universe'', (Springer, 1992) ISBN 0387975756 | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 15:04, 5 September 2024
Non-standard model of the universe; emphasizes the role of ionized gasesPlasma cosmology is a non-standard cosmology whose central postulate is that the dynamics of ionized gases and plasmas play important, if not dominant, roles in the physics of the universe at interstellar and intergalactic scales. In contrast, the current observations and models of cosmologists and astrophysicists explain the formation, development, and evolution of large-scale structures as dominated by gravity (including its formulation in Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity).
The original form of the theory, Alfvén–Klein cosmology, was developed by Hannes Alfvén and Oskar Klein in the 1960s and 1970s, and holds that matter and antimatter exist in equal quantities at very large scales, that the universe is eternal rather than bounded in time by the Big Bang, and that the expansion of the observable universe is caused by annihilation between matter and antimatter rather than a mechanism like cosmic inflation.
Cosmologists and astrophysicists who have evaluated plasma cosmology reject it because it does not match the observations of astrophysical phenomena as well as the currently accepted Big Bang model. Very few papers supporting plasma cosmology have appeared in the literature since the mid-1990s.
The term plasma universe is sometimes used as a synonym for plasma cosmology, as an alternative description of the plasma in the universe. Plasma cosmology is distinct from pseudoscientific ideas collectively called the Electric Universe, though proponents of each are known to be sympathetic to each other. These pseudoscientific ideas vary widely but generally claim that electric currents flow into stars and power them like light bulbs, contradicting well-established scientific theories and observations showing that stars are powered by nuclear fusion.
Alfvén–Klein cosmology
In the 1960s, the theory behind plasma cosmology was introduced by Alfvén, a plasma expert who won the 1970 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on magnetohydrodynamics. He proposed the use of plasma scaling to extrapolate the results of laboratory experiments and plasma physics observations and scale them over many orders of magnitude up to the largest observable objects in the universe (see box). In 1971, Oskar Klein, a Swedish theoretical physicist, extended the earlier proposals and developed the Alfvén–Klein model of the universe, or "metagalaxy", an earlier term used to refer to the empirically accessible part of the universe, rather than the entire universe including parts beyond our particle horizon.
In this model, the universe is made up of equal amounts of matter and antimatter with the boundaries between the regions of matter and antimatter being delineated by cosmic electromagnetic fields formed by double layers, thin regions comprising two parallel layers with opposite electrical charge. Interaction between these boundary regions would generate radiation, and this would form the plasma. Alfvén introduced the term ambiplasma for a plasma made up of matter and antimatter and the double layers are thus formed of ambiplasma. According to Alfvén, such an ambiplasma would be relatively long-lived as the component particles and antiparticles would be too hot and too low-density to annihilate each other rapidly. The double layers will act to repel clouds of opposite type, but combine clouds of the same type, creating ever-larger regions of matter and antimatter. The idea of ambiplasma was developed further into the forms of heavy ambiplasma (protons-antiprotons) and light ambiplasma (electrons-positrons).
Alfvén–Klein cosmology was proposed in part to explain the observed baryon asymmetry in the universe, starting from an initial condition of exact symmetry between matter and antimatter. According to Alfvén and Klein, ambiplasma would naturally form pockets of matter and pockets of antimatter that would expand outwards as annihilation between matter and antimatter occurred in the double layer at the boundaries. They concluded that we must just happen to live in one of the pockets that was mostly baryons rather than antibaryons, explaining the baryon asymmetry. The pockets, or bubbles, of matter or antimatter would expand because of annihilations at the boundaries, which Alfvén considered as a possible explanation for the observed expansion of the universe, which would be merely a local phase of a much larger history. Alfvén postulated that the universe has always existed due to causality arguments and the rejection of ex nihilo models, such as the Big Bang, as a stealth form of creationism. The exploding double layer was also suggested by Alfvén as a possible mechanism for the generation of cosmic rays, X-ray bursts and gamma-ray bursts.
In 1993, theoretical cosmologist Jim Peebles criticized Alfvén–Klein cosmology, writing that "there is no way that the results can be consistent with the isotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation and X-ray backgrounds". In his book he also showed that Alfvén's models do not predict Hubble's law, the abundance of light elements, or the existence of the cosmic microwave background. A further difficulty with the ambiplasma model is that matter–antimatter annihilation results in the production of high energy photons, which are not observed in the amounts predicted. While it is possible that the local "matter-dominated" cell is simply larger than the observable universe, this proposition does not lend itself to observational tests.
Plasma cosmology and the study of galaxies
Hannes Alfvén from the 1960s to 1980s argued that plasma played an important if not dominant role in the universe. He argued that electromagnetic forces are far more important than gravity when acting on interplanetary and interstellar charged particles. He further hypothesized that they might promote the contraction of interstellar clouds and may even constitute the main mechanism for contraction, initiating star formation. The current standard view is that magnetic fields can hinder collapse, that large-scale Birkeland currents have not been observed, and that the length scale for charge neutrality is predicted to be far smaller than the relevant cosmological scales.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Alfvén and Anthony Peratt, a plasma physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, outlined a program they called the "plasma universe". In plasma universe proposals, various plasma physics phenomena were associated with astrophysical observations and were used to explain contemporary mysteries and problems outstanding in astrophysics in the 1980s and 1990s. In various venues, Peratt profiled what he characterized as an alternative viewpoint to the mainstream models applied in astrophysics and cosmology.
For example, Peratt proposed that the mainstream approach to galactic dynamics which relied on gravitational modeling of stars and gas in galaxies with the addition of dark matter was overlooking a possibly major contribution from plasma physics. He mentions laboratory experiments of Winston H. Bostick in the 1950s that created plasma discharges that looked like galaxies. Perrat conducted computer simulations of colliding plasma clouds that he reported also mimicked the shape of galaxies. Peratt proposed that galaxies formed due to plasma filaments joining in a z-pinch, the filaments starting 300,000 light years apart and carrying Birkeland currents of 10 amperes. Peratt also reported simulations he did showing emerging jets of material from the central buffer region that he compared to quasars and active galactic nuclei occurring without supermassive black holes. Peratt proposed a sequence for galaxy evolution: "the transition of double radio galaxies to radioquasars to radioquiet QSO's to peculiar and Seyfert galaxies, finally ending in spiral galaxies". He also reported that flat galaxy rotation curves were simulated without dark matter. At the same time Eric Lerner, an independent plasma researcher and supporter of Peratt's ideas, proposed a plasma model for quasars based on a dense plasma focus.
Comparison with mainstream astrophysics
Standard astronomical modeling and theories attempt to incorporate all known physics into descriptions and explanations of observed phenomena, with gravity playing a dominant role on the largest scales as well as in celestial mechanics and dynamics. To that end, both Keplerian orbits and Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity are generally used as the underlying frameworks for modeling astrophysical systems and structure formation, while high-energy astronomy and particle physics in cosmology additionally appeal to electromagnetic processes including plasma physics and radiative transfer to explain relatively small scale energetic processes observed in the x-rays and gamma rays. Due to overall charge neutrality, plasma physics does not provide for very long-range interactions in astrophysics even while much of the matter in the universe is plasma. (See astrophysical plasma for more.)
Proponents of plasma cosmology claim electrodynamics is as important as gravity in explaining the structure of the universe, and speculate that it provides an alternative explanation for the evolution of galaxies and the initial collapse of interstellar clouds. In particular plasma cosmology is claimed to provide an alternative explanation for the flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies and to do away with the need for dark matter in galaxies and with the need for supermassive black holes in galaxy centres to power quasars and active galactic nuclei. However, theoretical analysis shows that "many scenarios for the generation of seed magnetic fields, which rely on the survival and sustainability of currents at early times ", i.e. Birkeland currents of the magnitude needed (10 amps over scales of megaparsecs) for galaxy formation do not exist. Additionally, many of the issues that were mysterious in the 1980s and 1990s, including discrepancies relating to the cosmic microwave background and the nature of quasars, have been solved with more evidence that, in detail, provides a distance and time scale for the universe.
Some of the places where plasma cosmology supporters are most at odds with standard explanations include the need for their models to have light element production without Big Bang nucleosynthesis, which, in the context of Alfvén–Klein cosmology, has been shown to produce excessive X-rays and gamma rays beyond that observed. Plasma cosmology proponents have made further proposals to explain light element abundances, but the attendant issues have not been fully addressed. In 1995 Eric Lerner published his alternative explanation for the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). He argued that his model explained the fidelity of the CMB spectrum to that of a black body and the low level of anisotropies found, even while the level of isotropy at 1:10 is not accounted for to that precision by any alternative models. Additionally, the sensitivity and resolution of the measurement of the CMB anisotropies was greatly advanced by WMAP and the Planck satellite and the statistics of the signal were so in line with the predictions of the Big Bang model, that the CMB has been heralded as a major confirmation of the Big Bang model to the detriment of alternatives. The acoustic peaks in the early universe are fit with high accuracy by the predictions of the Big Bang model, and, to date, there has never been an attempt to explain the detailed spectrum of the anisotropies within the framework of plasma cosmology or any other alternative cosmological model.
References and notes
- ^ Alfven, H.O.G. (1990). "Cosmology in the plasma universe – an introductory exposition". IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. 18: 5–10. Bibcode:1990ITPS...18....5A. doi:10.1109/27.45495.
- ^ Peratt, Anthony (February 1992). "Plasma Cosmology" (PDF). Sky & Telescope. 83 (2): 136–141. Retrieved 26 May 2012. recount: It was described as this in the February 1992 issue of Sky & Telescope ("Plasma Cosmology"), and by Anthony Peratt in the 1980s, who describes it as a "nonstandard picture". The ΛCDM model big bang picture is typically described as the "concordance model", "standard model" or "standard paradigm" of cosmology here, and here.
- Parker, Barry (1993). "Plasma Cosmology". The Vindication of the Big Bang. Boston, MA: Springer. p. 325. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-5980-5_15. ISBN 978-1-4899-5980-5.
- Parker 1993, pp. 335–336.
- "Hogan and Velikovsky". www.jerrypournelle.com. Retrieved 2023-08-24.
- Shermer, Michael (2015-10-01). "The Difference between Science and Pseudoscience". Scientific American. Retrieved 2022-03-28.
- Bridgman, William T., Stuart Robbins, and C. Alex Young. "Crank Astronomy As A Teaching Tool." American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts# 215. Vol. 215. 2010.
- Scoles, Sarah (18 February 2016). "The People Who Believe Electricity Rules the Universe". Motherboard. Vice. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
- ^ Alfvén, Hannes (1983). "On hierarchical cosmology". Astrophysics and Space Science. 89 (2): 313–324. Bibcode:1983Ap&SS..89..313A. doi:10.1007/bf00655984. S2CID 122396373.
- ^ H., Alfvén (1966). Worlds-antiworlds: antimatter in cosmology. Freeman.
- ^ Kragh, H.S. (1996). Cosmology and Controversy: The Historical Development of Two Theories of the Universe. Vol. 23. Princeton University Press. pp. 482–483. ISBN 978-0-691-00546-1.
- Alfven, H.O G (1987). "Plasma universe" (PDF). Physica Scripta. T18: 20–28. Bibcode:1987PhST...18...20A. doi:10.1088/0031-8949/1987/t18/002. S2CID 250828260.
- Klein, O. (1971). "Arguments concerning relativity and cosmology". Science. 171 (3969): 339–45. Bibcode:1971Sci...171..339K. doi:10.1126/science.171.3969.339. PMID 17808634. S2CID 22308581.
- Alfvén, H.; Falthammar, C.-G. (1963). Cosmic electrodynamics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Alfvén, H. (1988). "Has the Universe an Origin? (Trita-EPP)" (PDF). p. 6.
- ^ Peratt, A.L. (1995). "Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology" (PDF). Astrophysics and Space Science. 227 (1–2): 3–11. Bibcode:1995Ap&SS.227....3P. doi:10.1007/bf00678062. ISBN 978-94-010-4181-2. S2CID 118452749.
- Alfvén, H. (1992). "Cosmology: Myth or Science?". IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. 20 (6): 590–600. Bibcode:1992ITPS...20..590A. doi:10.1109/27.199498.
- Alfvén, H. (1984). "Cosmology - Myth or science?". Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy. 5 (1): 79–98. Bibcode:1984JApA....5...79A. doi:10.1007/BF02714974. ISSN 0250-6335. S2CID 122751100.
- H., Alfvén (1981). Cosmic plasma. Taylor & Francis. pp. IV.10.3.2, 109. recount: "Double layers may also produce extremely high energies. This is known to take place in solar flares, where they generate solar cosmic rays up to 10 to 10 eV."
- Alfvén, H. (1986). "Double layers and circuits in astrophysics". IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. PS-14 (6): 779–793. Bibcode:1986ITPS...14..779A. doi:10.1109/TPS.1986.4316626. hdl:2060/19870005703. S2CID 11866813.
- Pebbles, P.J.E. (1993). Principles of Physical Cosmology. Princeton University Press. p. 207. ISBN 978-0-691-07428-3.
- H. Alfvén and C.-G. Falthammar, Cosmic electrodynamics(2nd edition, Clarendon press, Oxford, 1963). "The basic reason why electromagnetic phenomena are so important in cosmical physics is that there exist celestial magnetic fields which affect the motion of charged particles in space ... The strength of the interplanetary magnetic field is of the order of 10 gauss (10 nanoteslas), which gives the ≈ 10. This illustrates the enormous importance of interplanetary and interstellar magnetic fields, compared with gravitation, as long as the matter is ionized." (p.2-3)
- ^ Alfvén, H.; Carlqvist, P. (1978). "Interstellar clouds and the formation of stars". Astrophysics and Space Science. 55 (2): 487–509. Bibcode:1978Ap&SS..55..487A. doi:10.1007/BF00642272. S2CID 122687137.
- ^ Siegel, E. R.; Fry, J. N. (Sep 2006). "Can Electric Charges and Currents Survive in an Inhomogeneous Universe?". arXiv:astro-ph/0609031. Bibcode:2006astro.ph..9031S.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Alfvén, H. (1986). "Model of the Plasma Universe" (PDF). IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. PS-14 (6): 629–638. Bibcode:1986ITPS...14..629A. doi:10.1109/tps.1986.4316614. S2CID 31617468.
- ^ A. L. Peratt, Plasma Cosmology: Part I, Interpretations of a Visible Universe, World & I, vol. 8, pp. 294–301, August 1989.
- ^ A. L. Peratt, Plasma Cosmology:Part II, The Universe is a Sea of Electrically Charged Particles, World & I, vol. 9, pp. 306–317, September 1989 .
- "A.L. Peratt, Plasma Cosmology, Sky & Tel. Feb. 1992" (PDF).
- A. Peratt (1986). "Evolution of the plasma universe. I – Double radio galaxies, quasars, and extragalactic jets" (PDF). IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. PS-14 (6): 639–660. Bibcode:1986ITPS...14..639P. doi:10.1109/TPS.1986.4316615. ISSN 0093-3813. S2CID 30767626.
- Bostick, W. H. (1986). "What laboratory-produced plasma structures can contribute to the understanding of cosmic structures both large and small". IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. PS-14 (6): 703–717. Bibcode:1986ITPS...14..703B. doi:10.1109/TPS.1986.4316621. S2CID 25575722.
- AL Peratt; J Green; D Nielson (20 June 1980). "Evolution of Colliding Plasmas". Physical Review Letters. 44 (26): 1767–1770. Bibcode:1980PhRvL..44.1767P. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.44.1767.
- ^ E. J. Lerner (1991). The Big Bang Never Happened. New York and Toronto: Random House. ISBN 978-0-8129-1853-3.
- ^ AL Peratt; J Green (1983). "On the Evolution of Interacting, Magnetized, Galactic Plasmas". Astrophysics and Space Science. 91 (1): 19–33. Bibcode:1983Ap&SS..91...19P. doi:10.1007/BF00650210. S2CID 121524786.
- ^ A. Peratt (1986). "Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II. The Formation of Systems of Galaxies" (PDF). IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. PS-14 (6): 763–778. Bibcode:1986ITPS...14..763P. doi:10.1109/TPS.1986.4316625. ISSN 0093-3813. S2CID 25091690.
- E.J. Lerner (1986). "Magnetic Self‑Compression in Laboratory Plasma, Quasars and Radio Galaxies". Laser and Particle Beams. 4 part 2 (2): 193‑222. Bibcode:1986LPB.....4..193L. doi:10.1017/S0263034600001750.
- Frank, Juhan; Frank, Carlos; Frank, J. R.; King, A. R.; Raine, Derek J. (1985-04-18). Accretion Power in Astrophysics. CUP Archive. p. 25. ISBN 9780521245302.
- Colafrancesco, S.; Giordano, F. (2006). "The impact of magnetic field on the cluster M – T relation". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 454 (3): L131–134. arXiv:astro-ph/0701852. Bibcode:2006A&A...454L.131C. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065404. S2CID 1477289. recount: "Numerical simulations have shown that the wide-scale magnetic fields in massive clusters produce variations of the cluster mass at the level of ~ 5 − 10% of their unmagnetized value ... Such variations are not expected to produce strong variations in the relative relation for massive clusters."
- Audouze, J.; Lindley, D.; Silk, J. (1985). "Big Bang Photosynthesis and Pregalactic Nucleosynthesis of Light Elements". Astrophysical Journal. 293: L53 – L57. Bibcode:1985ApJ...293L..53A. doi:10.1086/184490.
- Epstein; et al. (1976). "The origin of deuterium". Nature. 263 (5574): 198–202. Bibcode:1976Natur.263..198E. doi:10.1038/263198a0. S2CID 4213710. point out that if proton fluxes with energies greater than 500 MeV were intense enough to produce the observed levels of deuterium, they would also produce about 1000 times more gamma rays than are observed.
- Ref. 10 in "Galactic Model of Element Formation" (Lerner, IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science Vol. 17, No. 2, April 1989 Archived 2006-12-29 at the Wayback Machine) is J.Audouze and J.Silk, "Pregalactic Synthesis of Deuterium" in Proc. ESO Workshop on "Primordial Helium", 1983, pp. 71–75 Lerner includes a paragraph on "Gamma Rays from D Production" in which he claims that the expected gamma ray level is consistent with the observations. He cites neither Audouze nor Epstein in this context, and does not explain why his result contradicts theirs.
- Lerner, Eric (1995). "Intergalactic Radio Absorption and the COBE Data" (PDF). Astrophysics and Space Science. 227 (1–2): 61–81. Bibcode:1995Ap&SS.227...61L. doi:10.1007/bf00678067. S2CID 121500864. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-15. Retrieved 2012-05-30.
- Spergel, D. N.; et al. (2003). "(WMAP collaboration), "First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters". Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series. 148 (1): 175–194. arXiv:astro-ph/0302209. Bibcode:2003ApJS..148..175S. doi:10.1086/377226. S2CID 10794058.
Further reading
- "Cosmic Plasma" (Reidel, 1981) ISBN 90-277-1151-8
- Alfvén, Hannes (1983). "On hierarchical cosmology". Astrophysics and Space Science. 89 (2): 313–324. Bibcode:1983Ap&SS..89..313A. doi:10.1007/bf00655984. S2CID 122396373.
- "Cosmology in the plasma universe", Laser and Particle Beams (ISSN 0263-0346), vol. 6, August 1988, pp. 389–398 Full text
- "Model of the plasma universe", IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science (ISSN 0093-3813), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 629–638 Full text (PDF)
- "The Plasma Universe", Physics Today (ISSN 0031-9228), vol. 39, issue 9, September 1986, pp. 22 – 27
- "Physics of the Plasma Universe", (Springer, 1992) ISBN 0-387-97575-6
- "Simulating spiral galaxies", Sky and Telescope (ISSN 0037-6604), vol. 68, August 1984, pp. 118–122
- "Are Black Holes Necessary?", Sky and Telescope (ISSN 0037-6604), vol. 66, July 1983, pp. 19–22
- "Evolution of the plasma universe. I – Double radio galaxies, quasars, and extragalactic jets", IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science (ISSN 0093-3813), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 639–660 Full text (PDF)
- "Evolution of the plasma universe. II – The formation of systems of galaxies", IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science (ISSN 0093-3813), vol. PS-14, December 1986, pp. 763–778 Full text (PDF)
- "The role of particle beams and electrical currents in the plasma universe", Laser and Particle Beams (ISSN 0263-0346), vol. 6, August 1988, pp. 471–491 Full text (PDF)
- IEEE journal Transactions on Plasma Science: special issues on Space and Cosmic Plasma 1986, 1989, 1990, 1992, 2000, 2003, and 2007
- Cambridge University Press journal Laser and Particle Beams: Particle Beams and Basic Phenomena in the Plasma Universe, a Special Issue in Honor of the 80th Birthday of Hannes Alfvén, vol. 6, issue 3, August 1988 Laser and Particle Beams: Volume 6 - Issue 3 | Cambridge Core
- Various authors: "Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology", Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 227 (1995) p. 3–11. Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop on Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology, held from 10 to 12 May 1993 in Princeton, New Jersey
External links
- Wright, E. L. "Errors in The Big Bang Never Happened". See also: Lerner, E. J. "Dr. Wright is Wrong", Lerner's reply to the above.