wedgebert and all,

You wrote:
"The author says that the electrical repulsion of the atoms is 35 orders of magnitude higher than the force of gravity. Not only is this going to keep the sun from collapsing, it's going to keep the sun from forming in the first place."

You raise a very good point here, because to my mind Prof. Scott on his website does not actually explain in any great detail, conceptually or otherwise, as to how stars actually formed in the first place, other than mentioning the z-pinch effect.

I too have often wondered about this concept and in reply to your post I shall endeavour to explain why stars can form in the electric universe model, bearing in mind the overwhelming force of electrical repulsion (upwards of 10 to the thirty-fifth power of magnitude) at the atomic level.

What Don Scott does write is the following:-

"The Sun is powered, not from within itself, but from outside, by the electric (Birkeland) currents that flow in our arm of our galaxy as they do in all galaxies. In the Plasma Universe model, these currents create the galaxies and the stars within those galaxies by the electromagnetic z-pinch effect. It is only a small extrapolation to propose that these currents also power those stars. Galactic currents are of low current density, but, because the size of the stars are large, the total current (Amperage) is high. The Sun's radiated power at any instant is due to the energy imparted by a combination of incoming cosmic electrons and outgoing +ions. As the Sun moves around the galactic center it may come into regions of higher or lower total current and so its output may vary both periodically and randomly."

My understanding, within the electric universe model, is that the entire universe, itself being comprised mostly of plasma, is also able to carry a net electrical charge (negative) due to the ionised properties of plasma and that the plasma is not in itself completely neutral.
Therefore, it is claimed that electric currents can and do flow within plasma.

Also, in this context, "space" has been described as being an infinite electrical medium.
It is electrical in that it is everywhere occupied by a charge, which, when it moves, assumes the character of electrons, that is, “negative” charge.
This movement energizes and carries material into "cavities" (see below) which become and are the stars.

Within this apparently disorganised plasma there are certain areas that are more electron deficient (containing far fewer electrons) and it is into these areas of "electron deficiency" (cavities) where the Birkeland currents tend to flow.
I say "disorganised plasma" because there are billions of stars in our galaxy, therefore billions of electron deficient areas or cavities.

Formations of galaxies seem to occur by the action of huge galactic Birkeland currents that "twist", as computer simulations have demonstrated (by Anthony Peratt).

It was the late Professor of Physics, Earl Milton, who called these areas of electron deficiency, albeit within galaxies, by the name "cavities", or areas of space plasma that contain a much lower negative electrical potential than the surrounding space.

However, I think the above statement by Don Scott essentially refers to an already formed galaxy (which being thus formed, behaves like something akin to the principal of a homopolar engine) and that the spiral arms of the galaxy are essentially huge Birkelian currents with their associated magnetic fields.

So taking this idea one step further, as Don Scott implies, the space within and around these giant Birkeland currents that pervade the spiral arms, also contain areas of "electron deficiences" (or cavities - Earl Milton), which are then subsequently "filled" by the z-pinch effect, thereby forming stars.

In other words, once a cavity is "detected", electrons, cosmic rays and other material rush in from all directions to electrically neutralize that area of electron deficient space.
Once in the cavity, the charge and density of the material increases, due to electrical accumulation and chemical binding etc.

As mentioned before, within the galaxy, there have been and no doubt still are, billions of cavities, thus billions of stars.

In respect of positive or negative "signs" Earl Milton et al concluded:

"For a time we, like others before us, considered the solar charge to be of positive sign, because of the gradual acceleration of the proton wind as it moves away from the Sun. However, this same phenomenon can be viewed as a flow of ions towards a surrounding region of negative electrical charge."

and further, Earl Milton wrote:

"Insofar as solar wind electrons have, if any, only trivial aniso-tropy in their motion and since detected cosmic-ray ions - which Juergens (1972) has described as the spent wind from the most luminous stars - outnumber cosmic-ray electrons by at least two orders of magnitude, it is logical to conclude that within the region of the Sun most electrons are occupied with sustaining the transaction tending to eliminate the solar cavity. These electrons are not free: they form a "transactive matrix" enveloping the Solar System."

This "transactive matrix" in my understanding, is the as yet undetected inward "flow" of cosmic electrons that are purported to actually power the sun.

The volume of the heliosphere is also described as being a virtual cathode, or the space in which a "cathodeless discharge" occurs within the "positive column".
The heliopause itself is the periphery of the "cavity".

Thus the sun takes on the role of being the anode (being much less negatively charged than its surrounding environment) and therefore continually attracts and absorbs electrons from space.

Positively charged protons (and accompanying electrons) leave the sun to complete the environmental "circuit" (so to speak) at the highly negatively-charged heliopause.

So the Sun, once formed in this manner, is constantly in the process of achieving an electrical equilibrium within its entire environment, which essentially extends right out to the limits of the heliosphere.
In a sense, space plasma contains "degrees of negativity" that allow Birkeland currents to flow.

Following formation of the Sun, Don Scott writes:

"Positive ions leave the Sun and cosmic electrons enter the Sun. Both of these flows add to form a net positive current leaving the Sun. This constitutes a plasma discharge analogous in every way (except size) to those that have been observed in electrical laboratories for decades."

To round off, Earl Milton wrote:
"The atom is modeled here as a plenum of charge enveloping a nucleus, which we regard as a massive, dense, compact electrical cavity. Like the cell, the atom exposes to the world a negatively charged perimeter. We therefore chose in this work to avoid speaking of negative and positive ions (say, for example, electrons and protons) being produced when an electron is removed from an atom. Rather we speak of electrons and electron-deficient atoms."

So a "cavity" within the plasma, or the focal point for the initial formation of a star, is described as being primarily "electron deficient".

This electron deficiency therefore takes on a positive role, as within an electrical circuit, thereby attracting incoming cosmic electrons and allowing the star to form.

However, conversely, in the book 'Just Six Numbers', by Martin Rees, he writes (pp 29):

"Gravity starts off on the atomic scale, with a handycap of thirty-six powers of ten; but it gains two powers of ten (in other words 100) for every three powers (factors of 1,000) on mass. So gravity will have caught up for the fifty-fourth object (54 = 36 x 3/2), which has about Jupiter's mass. In any still heavier lump more massive than Jupiter, gravity is so strong that it overwhelms the forces that hold solids together."

So it appears that the electrical force and the gravitational force equalize out at about the mass of Jupiter, afterwhich gravity takes over.

Any comments on this statement?

John T