Geospace scientists are already embracing the idea of an electric universe.

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Where exactly did I do such thing in your opinion? Be specific.

Examples from this thread alone:

"Your (and their) constant misuse of derogatory terms like "pseudoscientific" and "cult" applied to published and peer reviewed materials, and working laboratory models are irrational considering that the LCDM model is based on four different metaphysical claims which lack any cause/effect justification in any lab"

I realise now that didn't pull you up on that 'constant misuse' claim - I used that description once, and not in respect of peer-reviewed articles published in respected journals.

"Even if the role of electricity in space isn't exactly what is currently proposed by some (or even all) EU/PC supporters, so what? How is that any different than the possibility of LCMD supporters being wrong about the role of "dark" things in space?"

"At least EU/PC models work in the lab which is more than can be said for LCDM cause/effect claims."

The OP of the thread specifically referred you to a specific textbook on the topic of Geospace science which supports the core EU/PC concept:
...
That isn't an example "whataboutism", it's offering you evidence to support the EU/PC model.

I agree - that isn't 'whataboutism', nor did I say it was.

You were the one who first interjected belligerent terms into the conversation and thread, which I simply noted were very ironic statements all things considered. Is that what you're referring to?

No; I have not been belligerent. My comments about belligerent argument referred to previous occasions where, when your ideas were shown to be illogical, irrational, or unscientific, your responses became personal, insulting, and derogatory. IIRC, you even apologised for it.

Anyone can claim that supporters of any cosmology model act 'cultish' and/or contain pseudoscientific concepts. Even I reject some concepts associated with EU/PC theory. So what?

So it is my experience that EU/PC supporters are particularly well-represented that respect.

 

[SelfSim]

... EU/PC theory stands on it's own scientific merits, with or without any comparison to any other cosmology model.

'EU/PC theory' is a figment of your imagination. Every single time anyone has drilled into exactly what you mean by this term results in any, or either, of:

i) a catch-bag of conflicting, usually casual non-peer reviewed opinions of scientists who happen to have published papers on other specific topics (which you've then cherry-picked) or;

ii) demonstrably incorrect physics (or data handling errored) papers .. typically by non-astrophysically qualified people publishing in non-astrophysically (or poorly) reviewed journals and then;

iii) big sweeping 'Michael' statements.

If the above material is what you refer to as 'standing on its own scientific merits' then it should 'live and die by the same sword' .. And it dies by it.

The LCDM (and not 'LCMD') model is just that ... a model for performing future research. Scientists speaking on cosmological scale topics do not exclude electrophysics by some unilateral conspiratorial decision. Electrophysical models are used for explaining many astrophysical phenomena at other non-cosmological scales eg: solar atmosphere behaviors, AGN jets, charged black holes, etc.

The choice of models starts with observations and not observations to prove the model.
The 'EU' component of what you refer to as 'EU/PC theory' makes zero contributions to furthering knowledge of cosmological understanding. In fact all it appears to do is to act as a political weapon aimed at confusing, obfuscating and spreading untruths about already scientifically founded research.

 

[tas8831]

Ya, and don't forget the textbook listed in the OP, entire books by Birkeland, Alfven and Peratt that are full of mathematical explanations, not to mention over a hundred published papers on the topic, plus working models which are over a century old now and which the mainstream still cannot replicate a whole century later.

This is the kind of pointless commentary that leads to belligerence on the part of EU/PC proponents by the way.

Ok, bro. I get it - the old 'they laughed at Galileo' deal... Moving on.

 

[Michael]

Ok, bro. I get it - the old 'they laughed at Galileo' deal... Moving on.

Actually, it's more like they (mainstream astronomers) laughed at Aristarchus of Samos for many centuries, so it's not surprising to me personally that they also laughed at Kristian Birkeland and they laughed at Hannes Alfven even after handing him a Nobel Prize for the development of plasma physics. As history can attest, mainstream astronomers tend to do a lot of irrational things before finally embracing reality. It typically doesn't happen overnight either.

Alfven chose to describe the universe in terms of current flow, electric fields and circuits.

Universe's highest electric current found

Measurement of the Electric Current in a Kpc-Scale Jet

As the OP of this thread demonstrates, Geospace science embraces an electric universe.

Observations have been made of staggeringly high current flow patterns in space that traverse 150,000 light years of distance through space.

Somewhere between Geospace science related to Earth and those billions of light years of distance, astronomers seem to erroneously think that there's nothing more to know about current flows, circuits and electric fields in space.

Our universe is electrical in nature and it's wired together with Birkeland currents of various shapes and sizes.

Sooner or later the mainstream will recognize electric fields and Birkeland currents in space, and they'll accept the electrical circuit nature of space, and then claim that they accepted it all along too. They may even try to give someone else the credit for EU/PC theory and cut Birkeland and Alfven out of the deal like they cut Aristarchus out of the deal with respect to giving him any credit in the history books for heliocentric concepts of astronomy for fear of the public finding out that the mainstream has always been on the wrong side of scientific astronomical history.

http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-01.PDF

Dr. Scott even explained how and why galaxy rotation patterns can be explained without any need of dark matter, using ordinary electrical current.

The mainstream will come around eventually as it relates to cosmology, just like they came around to heliocentrism 1400 years after Aristarchus of Samos first tired to explain that to them. I may be long dead before the mainstream embraces EU/PC theory, but it's inevitable that they eventually will.

Resources and mathematical models describing the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology theory : plasmacosmology

 

[Erik Nelson]

Kind of a cool idea.

But. Bright easily observable stars can account for approximately. Say 10% of the observed velocity profile.

Given our current knowledge of the strength of the interstellar magnetic field. The interstellar magnetic field can account for at most one part in 200 of the observed velocity profile of stars in spiral galaxies like ours, 0.5% at most

our planet is right next to a star. The interplanetary medium around the earth and Earth Geospace. Is highly affected by interplanetary magnetic fields? What did Justin's is between stars in the Galaxy is so much more best? And the field so much weaker. That the effects are not nearly as pronounced.

Very creative. Yet, I'm not sure this particular version of the theory. Is capable of accounting for stellar motions?

 

[Michael]

Kind of a cool idea.

But. Bright easily observable stars can account for approximately. Say 10% of the observed velocity profile.

Astronomers find their missing baryons....again...and again...and again....

I wouldn't start by assuming that the baryonic mass estimates based on luminosity are 100 percent correct to begin with.

Given our current knowledge of the strength of the interstellar magnetic field. The interstellar magnetic field can account for at most one part in 200 of the observed velocity profile of stars in spiral galaxies like ours, 0.5% at most

I'm not sure we're capable of measuring the interstellar magnetic fields that exist inside of a complex, counter rotating Birkeland current with a great deal of accuracy either.

our planet is right next to a star. The interplanetary medium around the earth and Earth Geospace. Is highly affected by interplanetary magnetic fields? What did Justin's is between stars in the Galaxy is so much more best? And the field so much weaker. That the effects are not nearly as pronounced.

Magnetic ropes, AKA Birkeland currents have been shown to electromagnetically connect our planet, and the planet of Saturn to the sun.

Magnetic Rope Observed For The First Time Between Saturn And The Sun | Physics-Astronomy
Scientists prove existence of 'magnetic ropes' that cause solar storms

They've been observed on Venus too.

Atmosphere of Venus Has Strange Magnetic 'Ropes'

Very creative. Yet, I'm not sure this particular version of the theory. Is capable of accounting for stellar motions?

Healthy skepticism is warranted toward all models equally. I'm not sure that a model like dark matter, which is based on something other than the standard model of particle physics, is immune from scrutiny either.