The Electric Sky – A Challenge to the Myths of Modern Astronomy
Donald E. Scott
Mikamar Publishing, 2006
It seems like every time we send a new probe into space, the discoveries leave astronomers scratching their heads and modifying their theories to account for the new data. In fact, it is admitted that about 96% of the matter/energy that must exist in the universe in order for it to maintain its structure cannot be detected. Instead of questioning the foundations of current theories, new entities must be conjured up such as black holes, dark matter and dark energy.
This book attempts to explain what we see in space using known electromagnetic properties of plasma, instead of the current gravity-dominated theories of today’s astrophysics. What emerges is a different understanding of the universe as a place filled with plasma reacting to electric currents and magnetic forces.
Donald Scott is an electrical engineer who started to suspect that astrophysicists had a fundamental misunderstanding of the universe when some of their theories contradicted what he knew to be true of electromagnetic forces. His interest in astronomy led him to come up with a different way of understanding the universe using plasma as the primary component that fills all space and forms the stars and galaxies.
Mr. Scott’s ideas have earned him the ire of the astrophysicists. Their cherished notions and government-sponsored research are threatened by what they consider to be a meddler in their affairs. This is very similar to what creationists or intelligent design advocates have experienced in academia. Mr. Scott identifies astronomy, geology, and archaeology as three disciplines that are dominated by ideas which cannot be supported by evidence, but are nevertheless firmly entrenched and resistant to alternate theories.
The Catholic Church is criticized in this book for its dealings with Galileo, who was promoting an idea that was contrary to the accepted understanding of the universe of his time. Geocentrists of today might argue that Mr. Scott is being unfair since it has never been experimentally proven that the earth is moving. In any case it is clear that motives other than the unadulterated pursuit of truth drive many scientists and academians to disregard alternate theories.
An interesting tidbit of information came out on a discussion of the size of the universe. It was noted that if the distance between the earth and the sun was scaled down to one inch, the sun would be a tiny dot and the length of a light-year would be one mile. The nearest star to our sun is 4.5 light-years away, which is close on a cosmic scale. So in the scaled-down model, our sun and its nearest neighbor are two tiny specks separated by 4.5 miles. This was used to demonstrate that gravity has little to no effect at galactic distances.
Another interesting tidbit is that stars are relatively unstable. They frequently appear in binary pairs that probably started out as single stars which then exploded. Gamma-ray bursts have been linked to supernovae explosions of stars. The earth is hit by two or three such bursts per day. The assumption that the sun will always come up tomorrow may not be so certain.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone who wants a reasonable, alternate explanation of the working of the universe. It is also somewhat comforting to know that creationists are not the only ones in academia who are persecuted for their beliefs. One day the truth will out!