FOR COSMOS
I asked Tutu and she had no problems with it, she loved it to share :D

So here you go Cosmos :



Thought I'd better catch up @BESERK before writing you - I see the pace has picked up there, and more folks are participating - I had 3 pages to catch up! Mercy!
[snip]
Good work, darlin'!


The thing that piqued my interest @BESERK, however, was Cosmos' post about stars being ignited by electromagnetic fields. Now, I'm wondering if these dormant stars are physical (within that frequency range covered by our 5 senses), or if they become physical (through harmonic resonance) at ignition, or increased proximity to our EM field. Guess I'll have to go look at the Science Daily article. That whole plasma physics/electrical universe thingy really opens up new doors - and don't we love that! At any rate, I'm looking forward to Cosmos' subsequent posts on the subject. In the mean time, it might be good to watch Thunderbolts of the Gods to better understand the plasma universe:


[link to video.google.com]


I will definitely be lurking more @BESERK to keep up with these new "cosmotic" discussions. Thank you, Cosmos - you ROCK.
Quoting: TutuWuwu



heh heh heh - knew I was forgetting something. RE: this from Cosmos:


"Here is an unfolding knot, this time consisting of neutral atoms. Can stars be made of neutral atoms? Could these atoms be polarised when hitting our solar system's magnetic fields, thus initiating plasma production?"


Y'know, all things 3D are polarised, meaning they have positive and negative aspects. Without polarity, there would be no movement of anything. I guess that is why I was questioning the physicality of these dormant stars, pre-ignition.


Is that sufficiently confusing? And I haven't even been to sciencedaily yet!


love & Gratitude,
p
Quoting: TutuWuwu



xxx K

Thanx Krispy and Tutu.

I have to admit I had wondered about the cohesiveness of neutral atoms, so this needs to be looked at for sure.
There would have to be some sort of field within the star to draw it towards our solar system otherwise we would just fly by.
Conventional science would obviously not recognise such a scenario simply because it does not fit their model.
Thunderbolts imo is much nearer the truth.
My understanding is that magnetic fields are at the base of everything...a regular Pandora's box in fact, while electro-magnetism is a product of/within creation, and ultimately a wave form like all others.
Primordial space has all magnetic fields and full potential, but these fields are at rest...non-vibrating, while in creation all fields have a vibration...everything having its own frequency. I believe this is an important point to make because of considerations of how solar systems and galaxies are created. Needless to say I don't adhere to the conventional wisdom of how our solar system was created.
Anyway I'm rambling...as far as I understand intuitively (so this is not proof in any way,)this unlit star begins to spin upon entry to solar system fields, (think it must spin beforehand really, but this is how I've seen it),or as some refer to it, electric fluid. When it begins to spin, it develops fields and currents around itself, and ignition begins. Such a star after a time would show only a dull red colour to start with, only gradually brightening over time and as its orbital path started to bring it closer to the centre of our system. This scenario would involve several orbits of our system, and in its early ignition phase would probably spit out fire and much else besides before becomming incandescent and taking up its position at the centre of our system, where our Sun and this new one would dance around each other for the second half of this systems lifespan.
We know the higher energies coming at us are preparing the planets for shift and alignment to higher frequency living, but are they also preparing this system for another star?
Well intuition and dreams can only go so far and is subjective...so we need to look at this more critically and see whether at least the possibility of such an outcome actually holds any water, so any help with this would be very much appreciated.
Have been looking at this site to get an idea of relationship between neutral atoms and plasma production.
"From Plasma To Neutral Atoms" gives an idea that neutral atoms can indeed become ionised again and produce plasma...this piece refering to the need for heat to re-activate the neutral atoms.

[link to www.setterfield.org]