dcclothesline.com

My concept conforms with laboratory experiments in the early 1900’s that proved that when a high voltage current is forced through a wire, it produces a swirling magnetic field around the wire, always clockwise when viewed with the direction of flow of the primary current flow through the wire that creates an eerie glow around the wire.

Edsel Chromie Global News Centre

(SAN DIEGO)  In a May 29, 2007 “History” TV program titled “Universe: The Sun”, after examining data and photos taken by the SOHO, IMAGE, and POLAR satellites, the scientists reported, “Thousands of explosions rock our Sun every tear.  You might expect this explosive force to come from nuclear explosions in the core, but in reality what drives all outbursts of solar violence is magnetism.  When a sunspot releases its magnetic energy, what results are the most colossal explosions in the solar system – solar flares.”  The collision of the magnetic fields on the Sun and the resulting explosions have been very clearly videotaped on the surface of the Sun by the satellites.

For information about volcanoes of Io please refer to http://salem-news.com/articles/may122012/volcano-Io-plus-ec.php

I developed my hypothesis long before any space probes were launched by NASA and I copyrighted it before any data was gathered by the Pioneer 1 spacecraft. In 1979 a local newspaper editor told me “the scientists already know everything about the universe.  The space probes are simply to confirm their theories.”  This prompted me to save reports by the science community. I have a drawer full of newspaper reports, 11 video cassettes and 3 DVD’s containing excerpts of science reports indicating many problems with science research. All of the data gathered by the space probes have substantiated my concept of electromagnetic or static electricity stimulating atoms of ordinary invisible atoms of gases to a glowing, visible state of excitement. By contrast, in a Dec. 16, 1997 news conference Dr. Torrence Johnson of Jet Propulsion Laboratory said: :Trying to update our textbooks is proving difficult.  We can’t just take our previous text and add a few lines.  We’re having to tear it up and literally re-write the textbooks.”

The following are only a few articles that contradict the belief that the scientists know all about the universe in 1979. Many of these remain unresolved and preposterous speculations like parallel universes, inflation and the suggestion that gravity could be repulsive.

In a November 5, 1997 NASA news conference Dr. Alan Title said: “We have finally solved a 55 tear old puzzle:  Why is it hundreds of times hotter outside the Sun than inside.  The Sun is surrounded by the equivalent of an electric blanket.  The blanket is heated by magnetism, however, not by electricity.”

In a January 13, 1999 newspaper article regarding the accelerated expansion of the universe, the NASA scientists report that “They have been thrown into a tizzy by developments in recent months that threaten much of what they thought they knew. The problem now is not only do we not have the right answer, we’re not even sure we have the right question.  This is all disarray. Despite the confusion, the discovery is hailed by some in possibly setting the stage for some kind of major breakthrough in our understanding of the universe.”

In a Dec. 17, 1997 NASA news conference titled “Final Blaze of Glory” a series of Hubble photos were shown.  Dr. Balick said: “Entirely new classes of conceptual ideas and models have been proposed by people who have been studying planets since the Hubble pictures began to appear a couple of years ago.  From here on out we can develop very detailed models.  That process of throwing out cherished ideas that really deserved to go and replacing them with what starts at first with a speculative suggestion and later develops into a full scale model which will change the textbooks 10 years from now.  Is there a revolution? We knew that stars ejected mass and did it in fairly interesting patterns 10 years ago.  But it’s the process which is the big scientific prize. It may be something like a magnetic field.”

Dr. Persis Drell of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center said, “The dark matter is made up of super symmetrical particles.  That is our best guess at this point.”

In a NASA program in Feb. 2001, Dr. Craig De Forest, of Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, Colorado, said: “We’ve found this jet stream on the Sun which nobody suspected before. We’re going to need further analysis to really understand some of these new features we’ve seen.  But hopefully we will have a new understanding not only about the Sun and stars in general but also how it directly affects the Earth.”

In a Dec. 16, 1999 program broadcast on UCSD channel 76, Dennis Mammana, an astronomer with the Reuben Fleet Space and Science Center said: “The laws which can explain most of our everyday experiences, things like Caprarian Motion and Newtonian gravity, can’t even apply here.  And that is why we look in these strange places, to discover what is beyond the physics we now understand to test that which has been theorized but not yet observed.”

In a NASA program titled “Ring of Fire” broadcast on Feb. 10, 1998 Dr. Richard McCray, of U. of Colorado, said: “The two questions that interest me most is why is the ring there at all?  And the second is what does the future hold? The honest answer is that we don’t know.  It’s still a mystery.”

In a 1999 UCSD-TV program, Professor Timothy Ferris, of Berkeley University, said: “When you have a paradox, it often is because you are using the wrong paradigm. My own guess is that a century from now the Big Bang theory will look rather different and hopefully be much more sophisticated and there will be a lot more going on.”  Another colleague, Charles Alcock, said: There is so much more not known about the universe than is known.” Then the narrator said: “We are only beginning to understand the astounding evolution of the universe and our own surprising journey through time and space.”

In an April 30, 1998 UCSD program titled, “Things that go Bang in the Night” Craig J. Hogan, a professor of physics at the University of Washington, said: “We think we have an overview of the world but it still is not very precise.  We’re still trying to gill in the details.”

In a 2002 NASA television broadcast, Professor Sandra Faber said: “What happens in a singularity is a complete mystery and solving it is going to require new physics that we just don’t have right now.”

With the knowledge that magnetic field forces of like polarity are repulsive, why are some scientists suggesting that it is gravity that could be repulsive instead of simply acknowledging that electromagnetic energy is involved in the phenomenon?

It should be obvious to anyone with common sense that after hundreds of years of trying to resolve these mysteries without success that it is necessary to utilize the known bizarre characteristics of electromagnetic energy that is common in the entire universe in all of the phenomena that have failed to be sensibly explained with the belief that they are created by particles of dust and water ice reflecting sunlight.  Unfortunately, it appears that many scientists are involved in trying to trump all of the other scientists in concocting the most complex and preposterous formula to explain every bizarre activity that occurs in a magnetic field while totally ignoring the magnetic field.

In your Dec. 6, 2014 e-mail you included the Lehnert B. article.  In item number 4 it states: “Effects from solar activity (also to Earth’s rotation speed) cannot be explained with electromagnetism.”

My concept conforms with laboratory experiments in the early 1900’s that proved that when a high voltage current is forced through a wire, it produces a swirling magnetic field around the wire, always clockwise when viewed with the direction of flow of the primary current flow through the wire that creates an eerie glow around the wire. If you apply this concept to rotational speed of the Earth, the South to North energy flow through the core of the Earth represents the primary current flow through a wire. The swirling magnetic field around the Earth would then produce the 300 mph jet stream wind around Earth which, in turn, spins the Earth’s surface with its flow.  This complies with the laws of physics and laboratory experiments. In explained this concept in my discussion with a professional meteorological consultant Virginia Bigler on Aug. 7, 1978.  She insisted that the jet stream wind is caused by the heat rising from the Earth “throws the air up and ahead of the Earth’s rotation.”  This violates the laws of physics because you cannot create a higher speed with a slower speed without a reduction gear mechanism. In addition, the Sun and the heat rise from the East and would thus create the rising hot air to flow even faster toward the West, not to the East.

It is these simple laboratory experiments and explanations that can apply to many of the unresolved phenomena. I realize that many scientists do not fully understand electromagnetic energy because nobody really understands all of the bizarre characteristics of electromagnetic energy and static electricity.  That does not mean that electromagnetic energy should be totally ignored or reduced in significance compared to gravity.

_________________________________

Edsel Chromie is a Detroit Michigan native who moved to San Diego in 1965. Edsel is a World War Two Navy veteran who served as a motor machinists mate on diesel electric systems where he learned about the magnetic field current swirling around the primary current flow through a wire as a part of Navy training to trace the direction of flow of the electricity in case of torpedo damage.

This led to Edsel’s unique explanations of many phenomena of the universe. He also has four approved patents on solar energy and Sun tracking systems. Today Edsel writes about this unique set of life experiences for Salem-News.com, conveying information that seems especially relevant as nuclear disaster, potential changes in the earth’s atmosphere, and what many view as an increasing level of natural disasters continue to dominate headlines. Perhaps many of the answers are on hand, yet unaccepted by the scientific community. You can write to Ed Chromie at this address: [email protected]