Concave Earth Thesis Part 2 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)

[ConcaveEarth.net]

Material originally sourced from the oldWildHeretic website which no longer in operation

This page is part of a 3 part series
Concave Earth Thesis Part 1 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)
Concave Earth Thesis Part 2 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)
Concave Earth Thesis Part 3 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)

All material below is credit to WildHeretic and has been recovered to share with the world. The data below is the opinion and research of an individual which may or may not be in agreement with the common concave earth understanding.

Holes near the poles

There are three main pieces of third-party evidence for relatively small holes fairly near where the geographical poles are located, especially the north pole. I haven’t included Admiral Byrd’s testimony of both his south and north pole hole fly-through because of its military source. It could be that US navy intelligence weren’t as sophisticated in their propaganda techniques as they are today and the account is accurate enough; but I still view it as inadmissible because of who he was. Also worth mentioning that the only evidence for the south pole hole is the book The Smokey God and Byrd’s testimony above.

• Video of the north pole hole
• Hearsay accounts
• Findings and observations at the north pole
• Exact Location of the North Pole Hole
• Summary

Video of the north pole hole

You probably already know the video showing the hole in the north pole from the view of what seems to be a hovering helicopter. It has obvious questions of authenticity, but could just as easily be real as it could be fake.

(Click to animate). The air current is moving into the north pole. This clockwise movement is really anti-clockwise when viewed side-on in a concave Earth which corroborates with the East to West anti-clockwise direction of the Sun.
The north pole hole is rotating anti-clockwise when viewed from the side in a concave Earth, which is the same as the Sun.

There are of course plenty of other suggestive videos of the north pole hole.

Hearsay accounts

1. The Smokey God
The book The Smokey God is one of the weaker pieces of evidence. The author was the survivor of a trip through the north pole with his fisherman father. Both Norwegians had heard of the story of a warm land beyond the north pole and decided to attempt the very perilous voyage in their small fishing vessel. Lucky to survive the trip, the two 19th century fishermen were eventually picked up by another wooden vessel with Caucasian giant men (+/-12 ft) on board who had only heard about our land inside the Earth through their own legends. The giants were supposed to have some rail system of unknown propulsion and so in some instances their technology was “ahead” and a bit different to ours, certainly for the 19th century. The Sun was a dull red colour and looked “smokey” hence the title of the book. There was no night, only daytime and they believed in a God in the sky. There is possible video evidence of this dull-red sun revealed in the documentary below (thanks Trigun):

(Click to animate). Between 03:19 to 03:52 there are two sun reflections on the ship – one small yellow one on the front left side and another much larger red glare on the back. Refraction?

In the book, nature itself is ginormous on the other “side” with everything being of giant size from trees to the wildlife which was in abundance. After staying two years, they followed the river system back to our world which turned out to be via a perilous journey through the south pole. The father died and the son was supposed to have been flung off the boat during a storm and on to a large iceberg, which seems a little far-fetched. He told his story after returning home and was put in a mental asylum where he stayed for many years until he was released and emigrated to America where he cautiously wrote down his story for someone else who then published it in 1907.

Is his account true or not? The last part seems a bit dubious and I would have been fairly skeptical were it not for another source from a completely different region of the world – the amazon jungle.

2. The Macuxi tribe
According to various websites which have cut and pasted the same story (source unknown), the Macuxi tribe of northern Brazil routinely visited the “other side” of the Earth through a windy cave which changed its direction of air flow every few days. The passage through to the other side became increasingly quicker the deeper they went, until halfway through there was no more gravity. Then gravity started to increase again until they were on the other side. The race of the people on this new side was unspecified, but were said to be giants 10 to 12 feet in height. The vegetation and animals were said to be huge also and plentiful, both points corroborating The Smokey God. Telling the secret to three English explorers who also visited the other side in 1907 put an end to the passageway, with the giants traveling in the reverse direction to the jungle in order to tell the Indians the bad news. The Indians who stayed on the other side grew in size to between giant and normal.

3. Windy caves
Also interesting is the fact that this cave alternated its air current direction which may suggest that the holes in the poles also do the same. Lots of other caves have this “breeze” phenomenon, such as Wind cave in the US which, funnily enough, is also linked to the underworld in native American lore. There is also Blowing Cave in which, drum roll… was also allegedly linked to the underworld (but not any more due to cave-ins), particularly the Shaver mysteries.

4. Etidorpha
There is yet another tie-in with the Amazon jungle account. The low-to-zero gravity condition far beneath the Earth was also reported in the 1897 book Etidorpha. Categorized as fiction but coming across as fact, it is the story of the ex-mason William Morgan who betrays his brotherhood’s secrets and is sent to the other side of the world. This other side turns out to be “spirit” rather then 12 foot giants in paradise.

The journey of ‘I-am-the-man’ is a not-so-subtle allegory of spiritual progression to being a disembodied adept. Along the way he loses his youth, loses sunlight, becomes weightless, stops breathing, can hear without ears, then his heart stops, … and still he lives. Each of this steps is symbolic of a progression to a more ethereal plane of existence.

Whether truth, fiction or something in between, it is still an interesting tie-in. The third piece of evidence is much better and involves observations and findings around the north pole found in countless books by and of explorers.

Findings and observations at the north pole

1. Abundance of temperate climate species
(Source: TerreCreuse). In the book The Open Polar Sea, p. 413, explorer Hays at 78.28° north observed “a yellow-winged butterfly, and–who would believe it–a mosquito…ten moths, three spiders, two bees and two flies.” In his book Three years of Arctic Service, explorer Greely at 81.82° north reported birds of an unknown species, butterflies, bumblebees, so many flies they couldn’t sleep at night, and temperatures between 8 and 10°C. He also found plenty willow to make fire, and much driftwood. A Swedish expedition under Otto Torell found trees floating with green buds on them and among them was found the seed of the tropical Entada Bean which measured 2.25 inches across… and all this near Trurenberg Bay in the Arctic Sea. At 81° north, explorer Sverdrup found so many hares that they named one inlet, Hare Fiord. Also nearly all expedition parties found enough game to keep their exploring parties well fed with meat. These included herds of musk-oxen and reindeer. Captain Beechey saw so many birds on the west coast of Spitzbergen that sometimes a single shot killed thirty of them.

2. Migratory patterns
Then there are the observations of birds and animals migrating north in the Spring and Autumn (Fall):

Explorer Kane reported seeing several groups of Brent Geese, which is an American migratory bird, flying north-east in their wedge-shaped line of flight at 80 degrees 50′ north at Cape Jackson, near Grinnelland in late June 1854.

Explorer Greely makes this statement of the northward migration of bears, “Lieutenant Lockwood, in May, 1882, noticed bear tracks (going north-east) on the north coast of Greenland, near Cape Benet in 83 degrees 3′ N.,” and commented, “…I cannot understand why the bear ever leaves the rich hunting-field of the ‘North Water’ for the desolate shores of the northward.” (THREE YEARS, p. 366)

Greely also wrote about the Ross Gull, “…the observations of Murdoch at Point Barrow show that this bird, in thousands, passes over that point to the north-east in October, none of which were seen to return.” (THREE YEARS, p. 383)

Explorer Adolf Erick Nordenskiold, leader of a Swedish expedition, recorded in The Arctic voyage of 1858-1878, that on May 23, they saw north of Amsterdam Island (by Spitzbergen), “great numbers of barnacle geese…flying towards the north-west, perhaps to some land more northerly than Spitzbergen. (There is no such land on our present-day maps) The existence of such a land,” wrote Nordenskiold, “is considered quite certain by the walrus-hunters, who state that at the most northerly point hitherto reached, such flocks of birds are seen steering their course in rapid flight yet farther toward the north.” (Gardner, p. 160)

3. Higher temperatures further north
There are many more of these reports on the source website as well as numerous findings of higher temperatures at the north pole than expected:

On Jan. 18, 1894 at 79 degrees N. Nansen wrote, “It is curious that there is almost always a rise of thermometer with these stronger winds… A south wind of less velocity generally lowers the temperature, and a moderate north wind RAISES it.” (FARTHEST NORTH, Vol. I, p. 197) Two months later on March 4th, Nansen also wrote, “It is curious that now the northerly winds bring cold and the southerly warmth. Earlier in the winter it was just the opposite.”

In Roald Amundsen’s First Crossing of the Polar Sea, by dirigible, May 12, 1926, this rise in temperature toward the pole was also recorded. Upon leaving Spitzbergen the temperature was -8° centigrade. Then the temperature at the altitude of flight sank steadily from 5° below freezing over King’s Bay to 12° below zero on 88° north on the European side of the pole. from this place it began to rise slowly. The temperature at the pole was 2° below zero. That is an increase of 10°! (FIRST CROSSING, p. 230)

In the soviet flight of Mikhail Gromov, of the Soviet Air Force, in an article titled, Across the North Pole to America, he recorded a similar increase of temperature at the pole. Flying above Franz Josef Land at 13,000 feet, the temperature was minus 16 degrees Centigrade. But at the pole at 8,850 feet the temperature was recorded at minus 8 degrees C–an 8 degree increase in temperature.

4. Animal graveyard
Then there are the carcasses of wooly mammoths in an unending supply along the New Siberian islands. There are so many of these carcasses that there are thousands of professional mammoth tusk hunters who make their living off the ivory. In Marshall B. Gardner’s book A Journey to the Earth’s Interior 1920, there are islands whose supply had yet to be diminished after 100s of years of quarrying tusks which is continually replenished after every storm.

New Siberia and the Isle of Lachon are for the most part only a mass of sand, of ice, and of elephant’s teeth. At every tempest the sea casts ashore new quantities of mammoth’s tusks, and the inhabitants of Siberia carry on a profitable trade in this fossil ivory. Every year during the summer innumerable fishermen’s barks direct their course towards this isle of bones, and during winter immense caravans take the same route, all the convoys drawn by dogs, returning laden with the tusks of the mammoth, weighing each from 150 to 200 pounds. The isle of bones has served as a quarry of this valuable material for export to China for five hundred years, and it has been exported to Europe for upwards of a hundred. But the supply from these strange mines remains undiminished.

A tusk hunter displays a huge tusk found on the Siberian islands.

The quantity of these animal remains increases the further north the hunters travel.

Every year in the season of thawing (in Northern Asiatic Russia) the vast rivers, which descend to the Frozen Ocean in the north of Siberia, sweep down with their waters innumerable portions of the banks and expose to view the bones buried in the soil and excavations left by the rushing waters. It is curious that the more we advance toward the north of Russia, the more numerous do the bone depositories become.

These animals are not suited to polar climes at all, such as the African rhinoceroses:

The tundra has been formed under climatical conditions very similar to the present, which is further confirmed by the geognostic formation of the strata. It has, therefore, long been difficult of explanation for the geologist that just in those sandy strata is found a large number of remains of mammoths, rhinoceroses, etc., that is to say, of animal types which for the present live only in tropical or sub-tropical climates.

These bodies are occasionally fully intact, sometimes with grass and other vegetation still undigested in their mouths. One hunter found a mammoth body twice the size of an elephant in the ice so well preserved that it was used as meat to feed his dogs. A few recently found carcasses can be readily seen on the internet. One fully grown female mammoth was found to have flowing blood!

Scientists say they have managed to find mammoth blood during the excavation of a grown female animal on the Lyakhovsky Islands, the southernmost group of the New Siberian Islands in the Arctic seas of northeastern Russia. The dark blood was found in ice cavities below the belly of the animal. When researchers broke the cavities with a poll pick, the blood came flowing out. The fact surprised them because the temperature was 10°C below zero… The muscle tissue of the animal was also well-preserved and had a natural red color of fresh meat, added the scientist.

A very well preserved baby mammoth found in Siberia.

There are even several second-hand accounts of Siberian natives coming across living mammoths. There’s one captured on film supposedly.

A living mammoth taken by a German camera man in 1943 while being transported to Siberia… allegedly. Fake or real? You decide.

If you think this sighting of a living mammoth is impossible, Siberia is a huge mostly inhospitable area of land, very sparsely populated with very large tracts never set foot upon by mankind at all. It took 60 years to find the first living panda and another 30 to find the second one!

In the latter part of the 1800s, everyone thought that the Great Panda was a joke, a hoax and a grand tale that hunters brought back to augment their tales of adventure. Proving the existence of the Panda is a perfect example of how a good sized animal can remain elusive for a long period of time in a given region… It took over 60 years, from when the first expedition was launched in 1869, to find and capture the first panda. Then it was 30+ more years until someone accidentally came across a second one and shot it, thus proving their existence once and for all in 1935.

Pole shift or Pangea?
A warmer land further north on the other side of the world beyond Siberia looks to be a lot more plausible than the physical pole shift idea as an explanation for these carcasses. The fossilized temperate climate tundra underneath the Antarctic ice sheet as evidence of this pole shift can be perhaps better explained by Pangea. When the continents were closer together, Antarctica was much further north in the sub tropics. Pangea also explains why there are many of the same species on continents that would have previously been joined together.

When all the continents are pulled apart Antarctica moves to the south pole.

5. Origin of the polar ice caps
There is also the problem of origin of the huge fresh water ice cap about 1 meter thick in the salty Arctic Sea. The conventional explanation of the huge icebergs sounds reasonable – that they are broken off pieces of glaciers which fall in the ocean.

True icebergs are glacier fragments that have fallen into the sea. Glaciers are made of compacted snow, which is fresh water… Icebergs are huge pieces of ice calved (broken off of) from glaciers (common in Alaska) or another, land-based, continental ice sheet (Antarctica, Greenland, etc.). These are fresh water, as the ice from which they come accumulated on land as snowfall piled on year after year.

This is fine for Antarctica which has a landmass underneath the ice, but not for the polar arctic sea which has no landmass at all… zero, zilch, nada; and yet is entirely covered in about 1m thick ice during the winter months. Oh what about the next nearest landmasses, say Greenland, Siberia, northern Canada etc.? Do the glaciers form in winter on these landmasses and due to melting break off in summer and congregate in the large area radially around the north pole?

Most of the ice cap at the north pole is under one year old and all of that is on the Russian Siberian side, but not over the Siberian land mass.
The graph denoting the ages of the ice in two of the above images (2012 and 2013).

As we can see above, only a small part of the north pole ice sheet near Greenland is more than one year old. This means that all that “purple-colored” ice in the above diagram was formed over a landmass that winter if conventional theory is believed; and that landmass is Siberia. But there is no or little ice over the Siberian landmass in winter according to those images. Where has all the ice come from?

The conventional reason given for the fresh water ice at the north pole is that when saltwater freezes the salt isn’t frozen with the ice.

Additionally, “sea ice” that forms from the freezing of sea water is also basically fresh water as well. This is because when saltwater freezes, it excludes salt from the ice crystal lattice. You can test this out yourself in your freezer. Put some saltwater in a pan and place it in your freezer. When some of the water is frozen, skim it out, rinse it with cold water to remove any liquid saltwater on it, and let it melt. Taste both the melted ice and the remaining unfrozen saltwater, and see if one is saltier than the other.

Frozen saltwater may be less salty than unfrozen, but it is not 100% freshwater; and it doesn’t explain that they often contain driftwood, clay and rocks which can only come from a landmass.

The north polar sea is covered by ice which is frozen from fresh water and floats on a salty sea. The origin of so much ice that it covers thousands of square miles, has been a long-time puzzle to scientists. The ice that covers the Arctic Ocean is salt-less. Explorer Nansen noticed that the icebergs in the Arctic Ocean are stratified and that they often contain driftwood, clay and rocks. This obviously indicates that these icebergs originate in rivers which have slowly frozen over causing the stratification layers of water freezing as it flowed over ice wedged between it’s banks, where rocks and clay were scraped off when the bergs eventually were pushed out to sea. However, there are not enough rivers or even glaciers around the polar sea to give origin to so much ice. So where do the icebergs come from?

It is interesting that all the new ice comes from the Russian side where all the animal remains come from. If the hole is anywhere it will be around this area towards Siberia.

Exact Location of the North Pole Hole

The fact that it is northern Siberia experiencing all these animal remains and nowhere else strongly suggests that the north pole hole is not situated exactly on the geographic north pole but further towards Russia. In his book World Top Secret: Our Earth Is Hollow, Rodney M. Cluff has worked out where the north pole hole should be when taking all the evidence into account.

So I just drew a few lines on a map in the direction the mirage of land was observed: northeast of Franz Josef Land in the direction Olaf Jansen sailed, northwest of Axel Heiberg Island near Ellesmere Island, Northern Canada from where Peary observed Crockerland to be located, as well as Cook’s Bradley land that he took a photo of northwest of his trek to the pole in 1906 from Ellsemere Island Canada, north of the New Siberian Islands from where the Russians had seen their Sannikov land, and north of Alaska from where Captain Keenan had seen a mirage of land to the north. These lines all seemed to cross at 84.4 N Lat, 141 E Lon.

Page 17 of the book World Top Secret: Our Earth Is Hollow shows the estimated location of the north pole hole at 84.4 N Lat, 141 E.

He goes one step further invoking the help of a supposed retired military officer (which sounds a bit dodgy to me) to narrow it down to 87.7 N Lat, 142.2 E Lon.

Summary

• There are three categories of evidence known to the author of holes near the poles, especially, the north one. The first piece is a video of the north pole hole, which may or may not be real. The rotation is anti-clockwise when viewed from the side of a concave Earth.
• There are four “known-to-the-author” second-hand accounts of another “side” to the Earth which have coincidental correlations: 1. The smokey God – giants on the other side; 2. The Macuxi tribe – also giants, windy caves and low to zero gravity in between worlds; 3. Other windy caves and their connection with the underworld; 4. Etidorpha – low to zero gravity, but spirit not giants on the “other side”.
• There are 5 categories of observations at the north pole which strongly indicate at hole near Russia: 1. An abundance of temperate climate species; 2. Odd migratory patterns; 3. Higher temperatures further north; 4. A near unending supply of temperate climate animal carcasses along the New Siberian Islands ranging from old to very fresh; 5. The origin of north polar ice cap’s 100% fresh water content cannot be adequately explained.
• Using the above information and more, Rodney M. Cluff estimates the exact location of the north pole hole to be 84.4 N Lat, 141 E.

These accounts of the holes near the poles (albeit, almost exclusively the north pole hole) also shed some light on their magnetic orientation which in turn tells us about another type of magnetic field inside the Earth cavity – the electric field. This in turn reveals how the Sun is powered and why it moves as it does.

Electric Sun – mechanics

So far we have come to the reasonable conclusion that there are holes near both poles, with quite a bit of evidence for one in the north pole. The magnetic flow through these holes is the “only movement source in town” and so it is very likely the mechanism behind the Sun’s tilt, its movement up and down, its precession (rotation around the central axis of the Earth cavity) and its power.

• Earth cavity’s H-field
• Primer fields, meteoroids and the Sun
• Sun’s induction
• Lenz’s law and Sun tilt
• December orbs
• Sun’s plasmasphere rotation
• Summary

Earth cavity’s H-field

The video showing the north pole hole sucking water/air/aether into it denotes this hole as a magnetic south as the magnetic field is supposed to go out of the north pole and into the south according to school-level magnetic theory. We have the Smokey God survivor coming back through the south pole hole into the Earth denoting this pole as the magnetic north.

This is further verified by the holes’ spin. The north pole hole has shown to be spinning clockwise in the video. But when changing our perspective by looking at the Earth from the side, the north pole hole is now upside down and so the orientation is reversed – the spin is now anti-clockwise. If we look at the science of magnetohydrodynamics we see that an anticlockwise spinning south pole is the bottom end of a “bar magnet”. Magnetohydrodynamics is when an electric current is added to a magnet (a touching wire), a helix is seen over the entire face which rotates in the same direction for both poles (and then in the opposite direction when the magnet is upside down). This direction is anti-clockwise when the north pole is face up, and clockwise when the south pole is facing upwards. It is a “built-in” phenomenon, as even electric current isn’t needed.

(Click to animate). When an electric current is applied to a magnet with its north pole side facing up, the magnetic helix spins counter-clockwise around the entire magnet.
(Click to animate). This phenomenon does not need electricity, as seen above when two back-to-back magnets are brought in the vicinity of a black and white television.

Here is more evidence of this, demonstrated by Ken L. Wheeler (Theoria Apophasis); although he doesn’t clarify which colour is which pole.

(Click to animate). The green (south) pole face of the tiny magnet rotates clockwise off the bismuth. The black (north) pole face rotates anti-clockwise.

The only conclusion to make is that the north pole hole is like the end of a “bar magnet” with its magnetic south pole sticking out the hole. The Smokey God survivor coming out of the south pole hole denotes that this is the magnetic north. Also, the Sun rotates East to West or anti-clockwise when viewed from the side, which likely means the hole at the south pole is also spinning anti-clockwise (when viewed from the side) like its geographic north pole counterpart. This puts a “bar magnet” below the south pole hole with its magnetic north pole flowing out upwards into the Earth cavity. Logically then, the Earth cavity is the space between two “bar magnets” which are attracting each other. This is called the magnetic H-field.

The Earth cavity’s magnetic field is created by “magnets” at either end of the pole holes.
The magnetic H-field is the field between two opposite poles or charges.

This attraction creates a globe, demonstrated by iron filings.

Notice that the iron filings between two attracting magnets create a “globe”.
The globe is even more pronounced in this image using another technique.

The fact that the geographic north pole is magnetic south and vice verse for the south pole is already well-known and doesn’t require the north pole hole video or The Smokey God testimony as evidence.

For historical reasons, the “end” of a magnet that points (roughly) north is itself called the “north pole” of the magnet, and the other end, pointing south, is called the magnet’s “south pole”. Because opposite poles attract, the Earth’s South Magnetic Pole is physically actually a magnetic north pole.

Ordinary compasses not only prove the Earth’s magnetic field polarity, but also its permanence. Compasses don’t show the north pole to suddenly switch to magnetic north and then back to south every few months. The last geomagnetic reversal was during the last glacial period, aka the last cycle, and may well be responsible for the great earth upheavals told in various creation myths from indigenous cultures. Whether these reversals are part of a natural magnetic flow cycle or caused by the “gods” is up for interpretation.

This is also supported by the time of year of the video of the north pole hole and the south pole hole emergence of the Smokey God survivor, which seem to have taken place at opposite times of the year. The north pole hole was worked out to be at either 84.4°N or 87.7°N. This is very near the north pole itself, which experiences 6 months of 24-hour darkness either side of December 21st. Strictly speaking, for some of that 6-month time period it isn’t absolute darkness, as the Sun can illuminate the sky up to 18° below the horizon. We can safely say that at least 5 months either side of December 21st – mid-October to mid-March – this latitude experiences twilight or complete darkness. Therefore the video must have been filmed outside of these 5 months, probably in the summer when the weather is best.

The Smokey God survivor emerged from the south pole hole some time between October and December as on page 37, it reads “I found it was Scotch whaler, “The Arlington.” She had cleared from Dundee in September, and started immediately for the Antarctic, in search of whales. It supposedly takes 9 to 10 weeks to sail to Australia from Scotland by boat and Antarctica is nearer than Australia. I’d estimate the time of year to be November.

Earth crust’s magnetic field
Hang on a minute. Aren’t the Earth’s magnetic poles elsewhere? And they move about, albeit very slowly year after year (10 to 40km). These are the magnetic poles of the Earth’s crust which is said to be made of 90% silicates which are 28% silicon). These are normally materials of semi-conductors, not ferrites. However, silicon with a 1% impurity of manganese added can become permanently magnetic.

The research conducted by CNSE Professor Vincent LaBella and Martin Bolduc, CNSE post-doctorate fellow, shows for the first time that silicon can be made “ferromagnetic” or permanently magnetic up to 127 C, well above where conventional devices operate. The researchers achieved this by implanting Mn into silicon up to a concentration of 1% per atom.

The Earth crust’s magnetic field is about 200 times weaker than an ordinary ferrite bar magnet according to this video (at 1min). This may be understandable as strictly speaking, although silicon and silicon oxide on their own aren’t magnetic, there are very minor quantities of magnetite (magnetic iron ore) present in the crust, and other metals; and when silicon is combined with a metal it becomes magnetic.

Perhaps the silicon crust is reacting to the continuously moving magnetic field of the Sun? There are more revealing facts about the Earth cavity’s h-field when comparing new laboratory discoveries of plasma with radar images of asteroids/comets/meteoroids.

Primer fields, meteoroids and the Sun

The iron filing representation of an attracting magnetic field (h-field) is correct in how that field arranges magnetic physical objects (iron filings). However, the accomplished plasma physicist David LaPoint has a new model based on discoveries made with plasma. He claims the actual magnetic field really consists of two back-to back “bowls”. It would at least explain the Bloch wall. He has replicated the model by putting 70,000 volts though two back-to-back specially constructed bowl-shaped magnetic field emitters in a vacuum chamber. The result is a ball of plasma between the two emitters.

David says two back-to-back bowls are the true representation of the magnetic field.
Replicating this model in practice creates a ball of plasma in the middle of the north and south field when 70,000 volts is applied.

The Earth cavity is held together by an attraction between two poles of a magnet (h-field). Let’s put two of David’s magnets together and see what they look like.

The Earth cavity magnetic field looks like a double torus squashed together in David’s primer field model. Notice the back-to-back cone in the middle.

The flattening between the two toroids looks to be because of their attraction to each other. The result of this flattening also seems to transform the previous cone shape to one more resembling an octahedron if we look at graphics representing Nassim Haramein’s model. His model is a little different as my image above represents a magnetic field of attraction, but the center is the same.

Nassim Haramein’s double torus wedged together at 0:37 secs. I don’t know why he has put an extra all-encompassing torus around the two – maybe to demonstrate how magnetic physical objects align themselves with it?
A flattened double torus illustration by Goa Lobaugh shows the octahedron in the center.

You may be thinking, what is the importance of this extra detail into the magnetic h-field? Below is an accumulation (composite) of all radar images taken of meteoroids between 2002 and 2008 by the Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar (CMOR). The south toroidal field is lacking because CMOR is in the northern hemisphere. (A big thanks to LSC for this information.)

“Most sporadic meteors come from the six sporadic sources, which are radiant concentrations at constant positions in sun-centered coordinates.” Note the back-to-back double torus and the octahedron in the centre.
Hawking’s book shows a representation of the Earth cavity’s magnetic field on the front cover and compares it to a nutshell.

They even call the two sporadic meteoroid sources concentrated nearer the geographic north and south poles as the “South and North Toroidal”; and the two sources near the center as “North and South Apex” – aka the apex (top) of the octahedron. The last two are are called “helion and anti-helion” with concentrations at the ecliptic (or Bloch wall), but only about 30° solar longitude length. These six areas are associated with cometary material with the very top of the south and north toroidal being associated with asteroids; which may be the real reason the best meteorites are found in Antarctica.

No octahedron this time. All these sources are sporadic meteoroids which form comets and/or asteroids.

The four north/south toroidal and apex sources fit the half-double-torus h-field model very well. The helion/anti-helion sources could possibly be explained by the Sun’s magnetic field which points towards the ecliptic in my concave Earth model. Remember the article “is the Sun a light-bulb?” – comets/asteroids and meteoroids are all the same objects (bits of iron/nickel/cobalt alloy) which originate from power surge ejaculations from the Sun. The graph above and below is based on Sun-centered coordinates – “The location of these different sources is described in a Sun-centered coordinate system.” All these objects are centered around the Sun, i.e. the Sun is in the center of the graph.

These meteoroid concentrations are said to orbit, with each source orbiting at different speeds and having narrower or wider orbital paths and angles. The north toroidal has some very steep inclinations (angles); for example three of the concentrations in the north toroidal source incline at 78° (90° is vertical, 0° is horizontal).

Eccentricity means how far the orbital path is away from the center. Inclination is the orbital angle. Semi-major axis is the shorter diameter of the elliptical orbit. Note the very steep inclinations for the north toroidal sources.

Why is this? Because the meteoroids are following the top half of the south magnetic (geographic north) pole vortex into the north pole hole which gets narrower and steeper like water down a plug hole. The closer to the elliptic plane, the more horizontal is the orbiting angle; so the helion and anti-helion cluster would orbit near horizontal (0°).

An elliptical orbit occurs in a diagonal cross-section of a cone.
Look at the drain lines inside this vortex. They are very steep nearer to the drain. The north toroidal orbital path is no different.

Interestingly, these concentrations don’t change from year to year, but the clusters migrate during the year, i.e. there are seasonal changes only.

…the number of toroidal orbits changes little from year to year, implying that there were no major losses of data in any year, and that the activity of the north toroidal source is not highly variable from one year to the next.

It is more interesting to look at how the radiant distribution of the north toroidal source changes with season. The position and number of radiants in the north toroidal source varies with time. The first peak in north toroidal rates (from 0 to 70 degrees solar longitude, which covers the end of March to the end of May) consists of four separate radiant concentrations. The concentration marked A in Fig. 4 we have called the Helion arc, since it moves down in latitude and over in longitude toward the helion source over time. It is strongest between 20 and 30 degrees solar longitude, and moves toward the helion source as it fades. It disappears into the background somewhere around 90 degrees solar longitude. This radiant concentration is not associated with any known shower.

Seasonal changes prove that neither the toroid, nor the octahedron is an actual solid permanent object; rather it is just the shape of the magnetic field in the cavity which influences the shape and position of the meteoroid clusters. As we can see below, for a part of the year, the south apex (pyramid) meteoroid cluster wasn’t detected by radar at all.

The south apex cluster is missing or in the process of going missing for 3 months of the first half of the year.
The south apex cluster is missing or in the process of going missing for the last 3 months of the second half of the year.

In CEM, these seasonal changes can only point to the Sun as the cause. Why is the south apex appearing and then disappearing? Notice it is missing or in the process of going missing for 6 consecutive months. This is because the Sun has moved up (or down) in these 6 months which “pushes” these meteoroids elsewhere (or attracts them to that spot). The north apex is more prevalent because the observatory was in the northern hemisphere and/or the geographic north pole magnetic field is slightly weaker than its southern counterpart (see 8 days of the winter solstice compared to 3 days of the summer one later in the article).

Lastly, you may be asking what the orbital mechanism is. I don’t know. The meteoroids aren’t magnetic like iron filings because they are white hot due to them being a Sun ejection and the thermosphere being at least 1500 °C. This temperature is way above the curie point of iron. If anything, they are more akin to plasma.

So why is the cavity’s magnetic H-field relevant at all? This magnetic field is half the reason for the Sun’s power.

Sun’s induction

If a conductor is sitting next to the strongest magnet in the world, no current will flow through the conductor. (Strictly speaking, not exactly true as micro currents can light up LED lights if a circuit is in contact with a strong magnet). Current generation needs a variation over time in the magnetic field, not just the magnetic field itself. This is Faraday’s law of induction:

The induced electromotive force in any closed circuit is equal to the negative of the time rate of change of the magnetic flux enclosed by the circuit.

Electric generators use movement to create this change of the magnetic flux. Either a magnet is moving in the vicinity of the wire (conductor) or the other way round.

Electric generators use movement to create a change in the magnetic flux. “When the coil is rotated, an alternating voltage is produced at the output”.

Of course, movement isn’t the only way to create this variation over time (modern electrical engineers faint in shock). You could use resistors to continually weaken and strengthen primary electromagnets to create a current in the secondary coil, which was Clemente Figuera‘s method of choice. In 1902 this electrical engineer from the Canary islands used a cylinder with rotating brushes to create the variable resistance between two primaries of opposite polarity, and was said to provide 20 horsepower indefinitely. A modern version has been set up to see if it could work, with some success. There is also a simple explanation on YouTube of his later 1908 patent using electromagnets of the same polarity instead (repulsion).

The Sun gets its change over time in the Earth’s H-field from movement, so it is much more traditional in that sense. Therefore, strictly speaking, it is not the holes near the poles and their H-field which powers the Sun alone – movement is needed, and supplied. That looks to be how the Sun is powered. So does this electric current induction have an effect on the Sun’s movement inside the Earth cavity?

Lenz’s law and Sun tilt

Let’s start with the Spring equinox in March. The Sun is perfectly perpendicular to the H-field with its face pointing at the equator. It is on its way downwards on the vertical axis from the December solstice position, and it is just beginning to tilt upwards. As the Sun moves downwards, it is getting closer to the geographic south pole hole, which is magnetic north. The Sun is being inducted as it moves downwards which creates a resistance to this magnetic north pole. Why? Because of Lenz’s law:

An electric current induced by a changing magnetic field will flow such that it will create its own magnetic field that opposes the magnetic field that created it.

1. Lenz’s law applies to a typical transformer. Electric current flowing through one coil creates an electric current in the other. An opposing magnetic field is created in the secondary which resists the primary magnetic field and causes heat. This opposing magnetic field is said to be created by swirling eddy currents.
2. (Click to animate). A coil of wire in a circuit slows down when moving around a permanent magnet due to Lenz’s law (eddy currents).

3. (Click to animate). The same effect is seen in reverse with a greatly slowed magnet dropped down the conducting copper tube.
4. (Click to animate). A metallic disk held over an electromagnet creates the same opposing magnetic polarity on the side facing the magnet and is thrown into the air.

The fourth example of Lenz’ law above, applies to the Sun disk perfectly – When a metal disk moves closer to the magnetic north of an external magnetic field, the side of the disk facing the external field’s magnetic north also becomes magnetic north. The other side becomes magnetic south. This creates the resistance to the magnetic north of the external field.

Obviously Lenz’s law can only apply to metals whose magnetic field can easily be induced (changed). A permanent magnet is no good. The more magnetically “soft” the material is, the easier it can be induced. The softer the material, the more it can be “coerced”. Iron is a soft ferrite. Its magnetic field can be easily induced. It has a magnetic coercivity of 2 oersteds. Due to the composition of meteorites, the Sun has been theorized to be made of an iron/nickel alloy with a smidgen of cobalt thrown in, i.e. Invar (36% nickel, 0.5% cobalt) or perhaps Inovco or even a 42-45% nickel alloy which also has a low thermal expansion. All iron-nickel alloys, or permalloys (30 to 80% nickel content), are soft magnets. For example a 45% nickel alloy has a magnetic coercivity of only 0.05 oersteds! They are also highly permeable (high magnetic field strength) with the low nickel content alloys (40% nickel) having the highest permeability (strength) of all soft ferrites.

This means that the Sun disk has no magnetic loyalty whatsoever and is induced by whatever external magnetic field is stronger. Therefore, according to Lenz’s law, as the Sun moves closer to the Earth’s magnetic north from March 20th to June 21st, the back of the Sun becomes magnetic north and the face magnetic south. The further it moves downwards and tilts upwards, the closer it gets to the geographic south pole hole, which enhances the Sun’s magnetic field further and therefore its resistance.

Lenz’s law causes the Sun to flip back upwards as it precesses.

The back of the Sun eventually resists the magnetic north pole enough to be pushed back upwards. The front of the Sun is magnetic south which resists the magnetic south pole, whereby the back of the Sun is obviously resistant to the magnetic north pole. The Sun therefore flips or rights itself as well as moving upwards. By September it has righted itself so much that it is now perpendicular to the equator.

Moving from September 20th to December 21st, the Sun is still traveling upwards, but meets more resistance. The back of the Sun is also still tilting away from the magnetic north pole, but both the vertical movement upwards and the Sun’s tilt start to slow down. This is because the Sun is now getting closer to the magnetic south pole causing the back of the Sun to become magnetic south.

Lenz’s law causes the Sun to flip back downwards as it precesses.

The back of the Sun eventually resists the magnetic south pole enough to be pushed back downwards from around December 21st to March 20th. Again, because the back of the Sun is magnetic south it continues to resist the magnetic south pole and begins to tilt back to an upright position on March 20th. The cycle is now complete.

Rate of Sun angle change
The mechanism of the Sun’s tilt is supported by the rate of difference in the noon Sun angle throughout the year. The rate of change is very slow at the solstices and fast at the equinoxes. This is because the solstices are the areas in the Earth cavity which offer the resistance and change the direction of the Sun.

Pontianak at the equator on March 20/21st 2013, the Sun at noon difference between the two dates is 0.2°, but the days either side have a 0.4° difference per day.
On September 20/21st 2013, the difference is also 0.4° per day around those dates.

Pontianak at the equator, December 2013 – The rate of change of the Sun’s angle in the sky at noon around December 21st is very low (non-existent to one decimal place).
The same principle applies to June.

We can see that around June 21st 2013 the angle to one decimal place doesn’t change for 3 days (66.5°). Around December 21st 2013, the angle doesn’t change for 8 days (66.6°). The December Sun taking longer to reverse its direction suggests that the north pole magnetic field at the geographic south pole is slightly stronger than its opposite polarity at the geographic north pole. This extra strength should tilt the Sun a fraction more at the December solstice causing it to spin at a touch wider angle and therefore perhaps cause it to precess a touch slower than June – 17 seconds slower in fact. The Sun should also have more force pushing it upwards towards the geographic north pole, making the Sun at the September equinox slightly quicker than March and therefore speed up its precession – 3 seconds faster it seems.

Funnily enough, December is the month of the year when the orbs in the sky seem to be the brightest and generally the largest size. Could there be a connection between this fact and the extra magnetic resistance on December 21st? Maybe, or maybe not. Let’s have a look at December and the visibility of the orbs in the sky.

December orbs

The Sun
The apparent size of the Sun in the sky varies throughout the year by 0.02°. At the latter half of December and beginning of January it is the largest at 0.54°, around the equinoxes it is 0.53°, and the latter half of June and first half of July it is the smallest size at 0.52°. More detailed measurements can be found here in minutes and seconds (not decimal). This observation is made in both the northern and southern hemisphere as photographers show us below.

Tom Harradine captures the smallest and largest size of the Sun in one year from Brisbane, Australia, which of course is in the southern hemisphere.
These two shots were taken in Athens, Greece by Anthony Ayiomamitis in 2005

This observation is not dependent on location, only the time of the year.

Stars, moon and planets
Stars are brighter in winter (northern hemisphere). The official reasons given are twofold: firstly that the warmer hazy weather in summer dampens visibility. And yet one New Zealand astronomy website states “Summer brings clear skies and warm air, great conditions for stargazing.” and another New Zealand site even says “Stargazing is a year round activity but New Zealand’s summer months and autumn (December to April) are when skies are clearest.” Therefore there is no hazy weather in the summer evenings of the southern hemisphere which is why summer (December onwards) is when the stars are clearest over New Zealand.

This leads to their second official reason that it is the higher number of visible stars in the sky around June compared to December which also creates the hazy effect:

And that’s why, while the combined light of so many distant stars visible on June, July and August evenings gives the sky a hazy quality, the evening sky in December, January and February looks clearer and sharper.

The whole “too many stars whitewashing my view” theory sounds very dodgy to me, especially as the moon and other planets are also very bright during December. An American asked the question “Why Does the Full Moon Seem Brighter in Winter? “(link is now dead). Is the moon in summer dimmed because of nearby stars? Hardly. In fact, the brightest “star” next to the moon is Jupiter and that occurs in December as Don Sarty has noticed. Jupiter’s clockwise rotation around the moon is unique to that month and is a brilliant fixture in December. Even Mars is at its brightest in late December around Christmas.

The moon is not only brighter, but bigger during winter, just like the Sun.

This lady claims the moon looks bigger in winter because of an optical illusion. OK missus, if you say so.

Or… maybe the electrical field of the Earth cavity is a touch stronger around December than June; or maybe not. It’s guesswork at this stage. It is certainly very suspicious that the sky orbs are bright and/or bigger in December in tandem.

There is another fact about the Sun that is more easily explained with concave Earth theory, and that is the varied angle of sunspot (plasmasphere) rotation throughout the year.

Sun’s plasmasphere rotation

(Source: Our Sun By Tony Broxton). The Sun’s plasmasphere (electric field) is supposed to rotate due to the loose pattern of observed sunspots over four centuries (page 58). How they did this four centuries ago I am not sure, as to see sunspots you usually need a filter which blocks all wavelengths of light except one extreme narrow bandwidth, such as the h-Alpha Solar filter centering on the 656.281 nanometer wavelength of light. Apparently, to see sunspots with the naked eye is very rare. Also, these observations are not an exact science but a “statistical significant precision” (page 65). However, taken at face value, the observations show three patterns:

Firstly, the sunspots and sunspot groupings always appear to move East to West (counter-clockwise rotation), which is the same direction the Sun rotates around the center of the Earth cavity (page 59). Secondly, this speed is fastest at the Sun’s equator and slowest at its poles, which sounds very vortexian. The fastest speed takes 26.24° sidereal days (a sidereal day is 4 minutes short of 24 hours) to move fully across the Sun’s face and theoretically around its backside to make a full 360° rotation back to the starting point again. The sunspots at the poles were calculated to take 36 days, but not observed, because there are few sunspots above 40° latitude, which by the way points to the electrode and filament being centrally located (page 61). Thirdly, and most importantly, the sunspots were observed to rotate upwards and then downwards by 26.28° (another website says +/-26.31°) throughout the year as seen below:

Observed sunspot direction throughout the year.

The sunspots move to its maximum of 26.28° upwards in October and then downwards in April. It is a straight 0° in January and July (page 61). These are the months immediately after the solstices and equinoxes. Just before July, the Sun’s magnetic field is repelling the magnetic north pole, with the actual Sun moving neither up nor down – thus making the Sunspot traversal “flat”. Just before October, the Sun is moving upwards at its fastest speed, thereby so too is its plasmasphere which also is pointing upwards. The reverse of course is true for January and April with the Sun traveling downwards. Just before January, the Sun’s magnetic field is at its maximum repulsion from the magnetic south pole, with the actual Sun “hovering” on the vertical axis – thus the plasmasphere rotates neither up nor down. Just before April, the Sun is moving downwards and so too are the sunspots. The cycle is now complete. There seems to be a couple of weeks delay for the sunspots to catch up with the physical movement of the actual Sun for reasons unknown.

Sunspot tilt?
The sunspots are also supposed to tilt 7.25° away from the observer in March and 7.25° towards us in September (page 60). However, it isn’t 100% clear to me if this is an observed phenomenon or a heliocentric fudge. Were the sunspots seen to move a little faster further below the equator in September making the observer suppose that the plasmasphere had tilted? On page 60 of the book Our Sun, the author writes:

The Sun tilts away from us in March when the displacement in the alignment of the Sun’s equator, B0, reaches the -7.25° maximum. The Sun’s lines of latitude therefore are all displaced upwards by this angle. The opposite occurs in December when the Sun is titled towards us. In June and December, the Sun’s equator is normal to that of the Earth and B0 is zero. However, as can be seen, the Sun’s polar axis still cants to the West in June and to the East in December. we have seen from the previous chapter that the Earth has a 23.5° tilt in its pole of rotation relative to the place of the ecliptic, which is responsible for our seasons. Now, these two axial tilts, taken in combination, result in the previously mentioned maximum observed axial swing of 26.28°.

It looks like the 7.25° plasmasphere tilt hasn’t been observed at all. It only “exists” because they have assumed the Earth tilts in their heliocentric model. Because the sunspots aren’t 100% “straight” on the solstices and the Earth is “straight” across the ecliptic in relation to the Sun at this time, they have added the required amount of tilt to the Sun to make up the difference. Nice. Yet another fudge in a long list for the heliocentric model. In fact, that entire model itself is a pure supposition. In our concave Earth model, this plasmasphere tilt does not exist.

Summary

• The video of the hole near the north pole shows it to be absorbing air/water/current and spinning clockwise. When viewing the Earth cavity from the side, this spin in anti-clockwise. This denotes the north pole hole to be the magnetic south of an abstract “bar magnet” sticking up out of the hole.
• The Smokey God survivor emerging from the south pole hole and the Sun to be spinning anti-clockwise, denotes this hole to be magnetic north.
• The mainstream already say that the Earth’s geographic north pole is the magnetic south, and the geographic south pole is the magnetic north.
• This field is the attraction between two magnets, also known as an H-field, or an electric field.
• It has also not reversed itself in modern history and so is permanent, at least within our timescale.
• The official magnetic poles are speculatively theorized to be just the very weak magnetic alignment of the silicon/metallic crust, perhaps as it reacts to the varied tilt of the sun’s electric field.
• Both plasma physicist David David LaPoint and theoretician Nassim Haramein’s magnetic model consists of two toroids (or bowls) squashed together. An attracting magnetic field uses the bottom half of these toroids.
• This shape is the exact same geometry as to the location of meteoroid clusters positioned around the Sun. These clusters stay the same from year to year, but change seasonally. In CEM, the seasonal variation is due to the Sun, which also explains the 6 consecutive months of the disappearing and appearing south apex cluster.
• The steep inclinations of the north toroidal cluster’s orbital path also support the double vortex (torus) magnetic field theory as this cluster is very near the north pole hole.
• The Sun seems to obtain its electrical power from its movement within this H-field – Faraday’s law of induction.
• The Sun is made of a low iron/nickel alloy which is highly magnetic and extremely soft, i.e. can be very easily induced.
• The Sun’s tilt and vertical movement are explained by magnetically induced resistance, or Lenz’s law. The Sun’s magnetic alignment resists that magnetic pole of the Earth to which it is nearest, thereby causing it to oscillate and tilt up and down.
• This acceleration and slow down around the vertical directional change agrees with the rate of change of the angle of the noon Sun in the sky throughout the year.
• The Sun, Mars, Jupiter, moon, and stars are all bigger and/or brighter in December in both hemispheres suggesting that the cause of this phenomenon encompasses the entire electromagnetic Earth cavity.
• The Sun’s vertical movement explains the 26.28° up/down angle of rotation of sunspots throughout the year.
• The Sun’s apparent 7.25° tilt away/towards the observer is a heliocentric fudge and does not exist in a concave Earth.

Despite this model of the Sun in the concave Earth agreeing with the mathematics and being supported by solid electrical engineering principles, it is not necessarily the truth. There could be another model which does the same, or one which requires the future invention of supporting engineering devices. Nevertheless, this model is a strong contender and worth some serious consideration.

The mechanism of the Sun as an electric device has been dealt with to the best of my ability. Now let’s look at some of these effects, namely, the Van Allen Belts, atmospheric charge, and gravity.

Electric Sun – effects

Let’s take this artificial Electric Sun theory one step further and see if anything else jumps out at us. I’ll be using mainstream paradigms of “charge”, “electrons” and “protons” etc. You may have alternative theories on how electric circuits work, but this is just a collation of the info available on the web to see how it fits with the induction of the sulfur-lamp Sun in a vacuum. Also note that when taking about charges in “deep” space, these haven’t necessarily been directly tested or observed (except by satellites, mmmmm) but often seem to rely on computer modeling and replication in the lab which isn’t science in its strictest sense, i.e. direct experimentation and observation.

For instance, this concave Earth thesis is an amateur attempt at a possible explanation of our every day observations within the framework of the rectilineator and Wilhelm Martin’s bendy light experiments. Those two experiments are the science part of this blog; the rest is educated speculation within that framework that the Earth is concave and light bends upwards. The same applies to those “scientists” who input the data and apply it to their computer models based on heliocentric theory and a globe Sun. It is very important to differentiate between models (theory) and experiments (science) – the two are not the same.

• Atmospheric charge
• Solar wind
• Earth’s electromagnetic circuit
• Earthquakes and tremors
• Summary

Atmospheric charge

The theory of this blog is that the Sun is an inductor which resides in a vacuum. A vacuum is a very, very poor electrical conductor, which means the inductor is essentially short-circuited, and yet it is still moving in Earth’s magnetic H-field. The electrons are moving within the Sun with nowhere to go creating an opposing magnetic field. The strength of this field will depend on the strength of the H-field, the magnetic saturation of the iron/nickel alloy (which is very high) and how fast the Sun moves (depends on the last two factors).

When the current through an inductor is increased, it drops a voltage opposing the direction of electron flow, acting as a power load. In this condition the inductor is said to be charging, because there is an increasing amount of energy being stored in its magnetic field.

The more the charge, the bigger the opposing magnetic field. It would seem then that the Sun has a strong magnetic field which very quickly flips polarity around the equinoxes. However, there are three ways electrons could be “discharged” by the Sun despite the vacuum (two of which are mentioned here). Firstly, the Sun is converting those super-highly energized electrons into light and heat through its carbon electrode and into the sulfur filament as discussed in a previous article. Secondly, electrons can travel through a vacuum by thermionic emission – when an electrode is heated it still emits electrons even if surrounded by a vacuum. This is the principle behind the cathode ray tube used in old box TVs and computer monitors, and especially the old vacuum light bulbs.

Cathode rays (also called an electron beam or e-beam) are streams of electrons observed in vacuum tubes.

Does the Sun emit electron beams? Funnily enough, it does.

The sun emits light, but it also emits particle beams that generate radio waves… Electron beams emitted from the sun are the start of a multi-stage process generating these radio waves. The electron beams travel out into the solar wind and generate a type of wave that cannot travel very far (electrostatic Langmuir waves).

Protons are also emitted, not as a continuous stream, but periodically as coronal mass ejections. These ejections also include iron, which is a solid material. Coronal mass ejections are also commonly associated with solar flares which I have theorized to be caused by electrical surges. These surges cause the sulfur filament to break off and melt through the Sun sometimes crashing to Earth as meteorites. So in theory, these protons are part of the Sun, rather than part of its electric circuit.

The third way electrons can conduct through a vacuum is by electron/positron pairs. Despite there being no conductor in a vacuum, the positive ions on one side and the electrons on the other still find a way to come together through the vacuum and form a circuit. Supposedly, a very high electrical field strength is needed before this can happen – theoretically 2.1E17 V/m.

Are electron/positron pairs seen between the Sun and the Earth? Yes. This phenomenon is seen in the Van Allen Belts.

Recently, the nonlinear propagation of electromagnetic waves in electron-positron plasma has attracted the interest of researchers. Due to the fact that the electron-positron plasma are found in Van Allen Belts, near polar cap of pulsar, in the active galactic nuclei, as well as in the early universe… In relativistic temperature the electrons (and positrons) energy Ee far exceeds the rest mass energy so that electrons and positrons behave kinematically similar to photons and come into equilibrium with nearly equal population.

It seems that perhaps not as much electrical energy is needed to form these pairs due to the heat of the plasma (thermosphere). But wait. What are the Van Allen Belts? And how do they fit in an inverted Earth?

Van Allen Belts
Around the Earth, centered around the equator, (-65° to +65° latitude) 200 Km and up, in the shape of two (possibly three) rings are a lot of fast moving charged particles. These rings are called the Van Allen Belts. The limit of these belts is said to be 60,000km, but in a concave Earth this is impossible as the maximum distance to the center of the Earth cavity is about 6,700km.

There is an inner and an outer belt consisting of electrons and protons with the outer having a higher proportion and higher energy charge of electrons. In a concave Earth, the outer ring is really the center of the Earth cavity and could be called the central ring. Interestingly, the belts can get as low as the glass or ionosphere (100km), although they dissipate quickly from the 200 to 100km altitude (courtesy of the capacitor nature of the glass most like).

The outer belt consists mainly of high energy (0.1–10 MeV) electrons trapped by the Earth’s magnetosphere… fluxes of energetic electrons can drop to the low interplanetary levels within about 100 km (62 mi), a decrease by a factor of 1,000… The inner belt contains high concentrations of electrons in the range of hundreds of keV and energetic protons with energies exceeding 100 MeV, trapped by the strong (relative to the outer belts) magnetic fields in the region.

What does the inner ring look like? In a convex Earth, these rings look like a toroid.

Toroid-shaped van Allen belts with the Earth at the center in the heliocentric model.
The higher energy electrons are located in the outer (central) belt.

In a concave Earth, we just switch over the fields so that the outer layer is in the center. So instead of the Earth being at the center of the toroid, it is the Sun.

Same shape, just that the outer layers are the central small ones, and the inner layers the near larger ones. The Sun is not to scale here. It is much smaller in reality.

Now, the Van Allen Belts are starting to make sense. There are super high energy electrons in the central belt surrounding the Sun because the Sun is constantly inducting electric current in a vacuum, which it is fairly easily emitting due to the heat the Sun creates. The high energy protons in the belt further out tells us there is a high potential difference between the two layers. Below that is the ionosphere, or glass, which is ionized by the ultraviolet radiation from the Sun causing free electrons. These electrons are said to rise, with the positive ions quickly following the electrons to which they are attracted. In essence we have another potential difference at the ionosphere. The atmosphere below it is said to be positively charged, with the Earth’s crust the opposite, i.e. negatively charged. This is yet another potential difference.

(Source: All About Lightning by Martin A Uman, Dover, 1986). The region beginning at about 30 miles and extending upward is called the electrosphere. The voltage between the earth and the electrosphere in regions of fine weather is about 300,000 volts. To maintain this voltage the earth has a negative charge of about a million coulombs on its surface and an equal net positive charge is distributed throughout the atmosphere. Measurements have shown that the negative charge on earth remains roughly constant with time. At first glance, this fact is difficult to understand since the charge on earth is continuously leaking off into the conducting atmosphere. In fact, calculations show that if the earth’s charge were not being continuously re-supplied, the charge on earth would disappear in less than an hour…

The earth is recharged by thunderstorms. Thunderstorms deliver a net negative charge to earth as a result of the sum of the effects of the following processes: (1) negative charge carried from cloud to earth by lightning, (2) positive charge carried from cloud to ground by rain and (3) positive charge carried upward (the equivalent of negative charge carried downward) through the air beneath and above a thunderstorm, the source of the positive charge being corona discharge off grass, trees and other objects with sharp points on the ground beneath thunderstorms. The total current flowing beneath all thunderstorms in progress throughout the world at any given time is thought to be about 2000 amps, and is in such a direction as to charge the earth negatively. An equal and opposite current flows in regions of fine weather. The result is that the net negative charge on earth and the equal and opposite net positive charge in the atmosphere remain approximately constant.

In terms of potential difference, what we have is something like this inside our earth cavity:

The potential differences from the center of the cavity have a strong negative charge around the Sun, a very weak negative charge along the crust and a weak to very strong positive charge in between.
The electrosphere depicts the crust as negative and space as positive.

You would expect the negative and positive charges to flow through each other in a kind of electrical circuit, with the electrons around the Sun finding their way to the crust, and the positive ions from the crust moving up to the Sun. There is some evidence for this. Firstly, every time there is a thunderstorm, very low frequency radio waves (whistler mode waves) are launched into the Van Allen Belts (magnetosphere). These waves interact with the electrons in the radiation belt and cause them to precipitate onto the ionosphere adding electrons to the D-region (60 to 90km altitude). This process is called “lightning-induced electron precipitation“.

Secondly, a very common phenomenon above thunderstorms are sprites. These start at the base of the ionosphere and develop very rapidly downwards at ultra fast speeds, only recently captured on camera.

(Click to animate). A downward moving sprite in slow motion.

According to the book Lightning: Physics and Effects By Vladimir A. Rakov, Martin A. Uman, sprites are primarily caused by runaway electrons or “electron beams”. This is supported by another source which states that non-luminous electron beams above thunderclouds have been detected by the low frequency (40–400 kHz) radio signals of which they radiate. They have also been detected without any sprites present. This “impulsive current” of electron beams above thunderclouds is directed downwards from the ionosphere and “needs to be considered as a novel element of the global atmospheric electric circuit.”

So far that explains the downward moving negative charge, but what about the positive charge that must move upwards? We have already mentioned the positive charge moving up to the cloud from objects on the ground with sharp points. Above the storm clouds, blue jets appear and move upwards to the ionosphere. Some sources state that their electric contact to the ionosphere has yet to be established. However, blue jets observed over a thunderstorm in Mexico in 2010 confirmed that these blue jets were positively charged and initiated by the electric field changes associated with cloud to ground lightning strikes. Another source states that in normal thunderstorms, upward moving blue jets are positively charged and originate at the top of the storm cloud.

A blue jet captured traveling upwards from cloud to ionosphere. (The colour blue was added later as the low-light camera took monochrome images)

The wiki article on atmospheric electricity mentions that scientists are still debating the root cause of this atmospheric charge whether it is pressure, wind, humidity, or “the impact of solar wind and accumulation of charged solar particles”. However, the wiki article on solar winds is convinced that they do play a role.

Some high energy cosmic rays produced by distant supernovas as well as solar particles from the solar wind, enter the atmosphere and electrify the air, creating pathways for lightning bolts.[103]

The latter article has further very recent evidence (2014) to support it. Lightning rates increase (by either 32% or 50%, depending on the source) with the solar wind stream:

The results suggest that the solar wind helps accelerate particles into our atmosphere rather than deflecting them, but the exact mechanism remains unknown… “We expected to see a decrease in lightning rates with the solar wind stream but what we actually saw was an enhancement (up to 50% increase according to this source). This caused us a bit of head-scratching,” said Chris Scott from the University of Reading

No, Mr. Scott. If you knew that the Earth was concave with an artificial inducting Sun in the center, then this would not come as a surprise at all. There is also a correlation (albeit not across the board) with ionosphere disturbances (which in my theory leads to lightning strikes):

I have also been looking at data on ionospheric disturbances here on earth as part of my own research (again, this data is publicly available via the Stanford University website http://sid.stanford.edu/database-browser/). I selected a day in which I knew there was significant solar activity (in this case, 18 February 2011) and plotted the solar activity for that day (top panel) against the corresponding changes in the upper atmosphere above Austria (bottom panel). This clearly shows that at least five of the flares that day (denoted by the vertical dashed red lines) had a direct impact on the ionosphere. Again, this suggests a causal relationship between solar activity and atmospheric disturbances…

If thunderstorms are directly caused by these radiation belts, surely there should be no thunderstorms above +65° (Arctic Circle) and below -65° latitude (Antarctica), as the Van Allen Belts only exist between these two latitudes. Neither Antartica, nor the Arctic ever experience thunderstorms, or at least are extremely rare (only over the the edges) apparently due to a lack of moisture. Coincidence? Highly unlikely.

Average number of lightning flashes per year (per square km) shows a lot of lightning, but none over the Arctic Circle or Antarctica. The Van Allen Belts also don’t exist at these latitudes. Coincidence?

There is no conducting material (liquid water) at very high and low latitudes to conduct the Sun’s electric current to the crust. Therefore, the electric charges around the Sun only exist where the electric Sun/Earth circuit is still intact, which is below these latitudes. In a nutshell, it looks like the Sun charges the Earth.

Solar wind

The following has already been discussed but is worth a recap. The holes near the poles produce a magnetic H-field, which is an attraction between two opposite magnetic poles. It would seem that it is no co-incidence that the super charged Van Allen Belt radiation particles follow the same field pattern as the iron filings, with the exception of the latitudes where the electric circuit is broken of course.

Iron filings produce a toroid shape around the space between the two attracting poles.
The Van Allen Belt particles follow the same toroid shape as the iron filings, except falling short at the latitudes where the electric circuit is broken.

In physics, this magnetic H-field is seen as synonymous with both magnetic attraction and the attraction between charges, i.e. the electric field.

The H-field, therefore, is analogous to the electric field E, which starts at a positive electric charge and ends at a negative electric charge.

So far so good. But the Sun is inducting. It is moving within this electric field creating its own moving electric charges (electric current) which creates a perpendicular magnetic field (Lenz’s law).

Electromagnetic fields are caused by electric charges at rest and in motion. Positive and negative electric charges are sources of the electric fields and moving electric charges yielding a current is the source of magnetic fields.

So the Sun has its own electric current and magnetic field. Some of its electrons are emitted and form the Van Allen Belts which align themselves with the Earth cavity’s electric H-field. The Sun’s own electric field (current) should have an effect on the Van Allen Belts though… and it does. The Sun’s own electric current is called the solar wind, or heliospheric current sheet and is calculated to be about 3 billion amps which feeds into the Earth’s magnetosphere (Van Allen Belts). Notice how the Sun’s electric current carries 3 billion amps compared to the Earth crust’s mere 2000 amps. This sounds like it is the Sun electrifying the Earth and not the other way round, but then again, the Earth has a far bigger surface area than the Sun.

The solar wind is a stream of plasma released from the upper atmosphere of the Sun. It consists of mostly electrons and protons with energies usually between 1.5 and 10 keV. The stream of particles varies in density, temperature, and speed over time and over solar longitude. These particles can escape the Sun’s gravity because of their high energy, from the high temperature of the corona and magnetic, electrical and electromagnetic phenomena in it.

The solar wind is said to be the cause of both the aurora borealis (northern lights) and the aurora australis (southern lights).

The aurora borealis is said to be caused by the solar wind hitting the ionosphere (glass).

This makes some sense, as electrons hitting a layer of glass and its ionized particles is the same principle as the old cathode ray tube televisions. This analogy is often stated in articles on the northern lights. But if that is true, then in a concave Earth, the solar wind must rotate against the geographic poles having the same plane as the face of the Sun, which points at the Earth’s equator during the equinoxes (not across the Sun’s equatorial plane which the mainstream model dictates). This is supported by the fact that bursts of high energy electrons have been detected in the solar wind at high latitudes. Also, the solar wind is said to emanate from the Sun’s equatorial region because this is “the point that separates north facing magnetic field lines from south facing magnetic field lines.” In the artificial Sun concave Earth model (CEM), the magnetic field lines are perpendicular to the heliocentric version of the Sun, with the Sun’s face and the backside being the magnetic poles, not the”top” and “bottom”. Therefore, the “point where the radial magnetic field is zero” is at the Sun disk’s rim, corroborating this location of the solar wind in the concave Earth. Also supporting CEM is that both the aurora borealis (northern lights ) and the aurora australis (southern lights) occur at the same time. This is hard to explain in the planetary heliocentric model because the Earth is supposed to tilt away or toward the Sun depending on the time of year. This puts one pole pointing into the solar wind, and another away from it – not so in a concave Earth.

There is said to be evidence that the heliospheric current sheet (solar wind), or the Sun’s electric current, is more akin to the picture on the right, rather than the “ballerina’s skirt” on the left.
The solar wind has its poles pointing over the face and backside of the Sun. It is as if there is a coil of wire wrapped around the Sun pointing at the equator on the equinoxes.

The solar wind perpendicular to the Sun’s equator also makes sense in the CEM because the Sun’s magnetic poles are on the face and backside, which they must be if there is a “coil of wire” wrapped around the Sun pointing at the equator. In the CEM, the solar wind has nothing to do with gravity and everything to do with thermionic emission and electric current rotation. The high speed of the solar wind is said to require an unknown additional acceleration mechanism apart from heat. The solar wind is the Sun’s electric current, rotating like a current in a “coil of wire”. The centrifugal force of this current is very likely the unknown mechanism.

The electrons in the solar wind collect in the Earth’s magnetic (electric) H-field, or the central Van Allen Belts, closest to the Sun. These electrons also slow down or stop as they get nearer to the Earth’s magnetic field. The charged particles bounce to and fro from one hemisphere to the next and back again in a toroid shape forming the Van Allen Belts already discussed. They say the repulsion is caused by the Earth’s magnetic field at the poles. This unfortunately doesn’t make sense as electrons are always a negative polarity, whereas the magnetic poles are either positive or negative; so one pole should attract, and the other repel.

Luckily, there is another possible solution in the CEM. According to simple electromagnetism, the Sun’s inducted current will spin clockwise if the face of the Sun is magnetic south, and counterclockwise if the face is magnetic north (viewing the face of the Sun from the front). In the CEM, the Sun flips its magnetic polarity every 6 months (lenz’s law), thereby its electric current must also alternate its spin direction twice a year as well. This causes the electrons to reverse their direction. So we have electrons (and protons) moving up and down the two hemispheres, each direction being strengthened (or weakened) over a 6-month period.

The Van Allen Belts have electrons (and protons) moving up and down the hemispheres. (Convex Earth diagram. Really it is the Sun in the center of the toroid)

There is a composite image (not an actual photo of the Earth) where it looks like there is no aurora in the center. This is because the Van Allen Belts generally don’t reach into the Arctic/Antarctic latitudes; although one part of the rim looks a little closer to the south pole than the other side. Having said that, Dr. Brooks Agnew claims that there are no genuine “satellite” pictures (even composite) above +60° and below -60° latitude available due to the Data Denial Act of 2006 (52 minutes into the video).

“Aurora australis (11 September 2005) as captured by NASA’s IMAGE satellite (???), digitally overlaid onto The Blue Marble composite image. An animation created using the same satellite data is also available.”

So, the solar wind and the Earth’s electric H-field are responsible for the shape of the Van Allen Belts. Mainstream theory also agrees with this (they call the H-field “Earth’s magnetic field”). However, unlike mainstream theory, the solar wind is entirely responsible for the back and forth movement of the charged particles. This has nothing to do with sunspot (plasmasphere) rotation which occurs across the Sun’s equator. If the Sun’s electric current isn’t the plasmasphere spinning around the Sun’s equator as heliocentric theory dictates, what is causing the sunspot rotation in CEM?

Sun’s plasmasphere
In the heliocentric model, the solar wind is rotating around the Sun’s equator as an extension of its plasmasphere or supposed electric current, which rotates at the Sun’s equator every 26 or so sidereal days. In the CEM, the plasmasphere and the Sun’s electric current (solar wind) are two completely separate effects, with the solar wind perpendicular to the rotation of the Sun’s plasmasphere (sunspot rotation) feeding into the Van Allen Belts, which in turn hits the glass (ionosphere). So what causes the plasmasphere rotation in the CEM?

I don’t honestly know; but the simplest answer is the Sun’s precession around the center. A gyroscope spinning in a counterclockwise direction will precess in a circle counterclockwise; so the counterclockwise precession of the Sun causes the Sun’s plasma (hot gas) to spin counterclockwise. In other words, the rotating plasmasphere would be a mechanical effect of the Sun inducting in the Earth’s electric H-field, rather than being its electric current.

A spinning gyroscope causes it to precess around the central point.

So far we have recognized four electromagnetic (EM) aspects inside the Earth cavity: 1. the Earth’s electric H-field, 2. the Sun’s electric current (solar wind), 3. the Sun’s alternating magnetic field (Lenz’s law) and 4. Earth’s electromagnetic circuit (atmospheric charge – includes Earth charging via the Sun which creates a continual upward moving negative field). It is this fourth aspect which seems to be responsible for bendy light.

Earth’s electromagnetic circuit

The Earth is largely made of silicon dioxide (quartz) and is weakly electrified thanks to the Sun’s induction creating an electric circuit with itself and the crust. Engineers have reproduced this in the lab by adding a very weak electric current to cavities of silicon. One of the effects caused light to bend inside the cavity as if it were an electron aligning itself around a magnetic field. This suggests that the electric current induced in the Earth’s crust, courtesy of the Sun, creates magnetic fields within the Earth itself. Electric circuits create electric and magnetic fields as can be seen below.

The electromagnetic fields of an electric circuit (current carrying wire).

How does electrified silicon create a magnetic field which bends light in the middle of the cavity? I don’t know. But there is a clue or two if we look at what happens to the negative charge on the Earth’s crust. The crust effectively becomes weakly negatively charged due to periodic thunderstorms. However, during the long periods between (and during) thunderstorms this negative charge is gradually and continually moving upwards towards the positive atmosphere/lower ionosphere, and probably even space itself (inner Van Allen Belts).

Measurements have shown that the negative charge on earth remains roughly constant with time. At first glance, this fact is difficult to understand since the charge on earth is continuously leaking off into the conducting atmosphere. In fact, calculations show that if the earth’s charge were not being continuously re-supplied, the charge on earth would disappear in less than an hour…

Perhaps the upward moving negative charge pushes light up with it in magnetic field paths? It’s pure speculation at this stage. Bendy light in electrified cavities of silicon certainly suggests that this constant electric circuit within the cavity is responsible for the Sun’s bendy light paths, not the Sun itself. Without this piece of engineering we could easily mistake the Sun’s bendy light as an effect produced by the Sun alone, despite there being no evidence of electromagnetism being able to bend light. This is because wherever the Sun points (varied 46.86° angle throughout the year), the magnetic path follows. There is no one magnetic field set in stone in one direction belonging to the Earth (except for its electric H-field of course). It is as if there is a magnetic path potential within the entirety of the Earth cavity, and when light is shone anywhere in the cavity, the light follows one of the magnetic paths.

No matter where the Sun shines, its light follows a magnetic field path created by the electrified crust of the Earth cavity.

Visualizing this with a possible mechanical explanation as to why light running parallel with the crust moves up is a bit beyond me at this stage (although I will probably add to this, so stay tuned). All we know is that it does.

Earthquakes and tremors

There is an interesting correlation between lightning strikes and tectonic plates. Notice how the the tectonic plates end at around 70° north and 65° south latitudes, i.e. the plates don’t exist in Antarctica or the Arctic Circle… and neither do lightning strikes.

As already seen, lightning strikes don’t exist in Antarctica or the Arctic.
The tectonic plates also don’t exist in Antarctica or the Arctic.

Correlation is not causation, but is this really just a massive coincidence? It isn’t only this correlation that raises eyebrows, but geomagnetic field variations and earthquakes directly. A geomagnetic field variations are usually caused by high-speed plasma streams ejection by the Sun which accompany solar flare activity. So they are saying there is a link between solar flares and earthquakes; although this article says there is no connection.

There are many papers demonstrating positive correlations between geomagnetic field variations and subsequent earthquake occurrence that allows to authors to talk about triggering impact on earthquake source provided by ionospheric disturbances.

The earthquakes analyzed during two grand solar minima, the Maunder (1645-1720) and the Dalton (1790-1820) showed a decrease in the number of earthquakes and the solar activity. It was observed during these minima a significant number of events at specific geological features. After the last minima (Dalton) the earthquakes pattern increased with solar maxima. The calculations showed that events increasing during solar maxima most in the Pacific, South America or Arabian until 1900. Since there were few records during these three centuries we needed additional analysis on modern data. We took the last four solar cycles events (1950-2010) and made similar calculations. The results agreed with the former calculations. It might be that the mechanism for the Sun-Earth connection relies on the solar wind speed. In both records (1600-1900) and (1950-2010) the results showed a significant increase in earthquakes events in some of the tectonic plates linked to solar maxima.

Another blogger Stace Tussel has also made a connection:

Spaceweather’s auroral oval graphic makes it easy to observe the gyrations of Earth’s fluxing magnetic fields and make connections between Sun and Earth activity. The northern auroral oval was both inflamed and lopsided around the time of the West Virginia and the Mexicali quakes. The bright orange stretching equatorward indicates that our planet’s magnetosphere is being pommeled with solar wind.

Russian scientists say there are normally positive correlations according to this 2002 article, but a few negative ones also exist.

Specialists from the Shmidt United Institute for Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Sciences, assume that magnetic storms are also powerful enough to quake the earths crust. To verify the hypothesis, the researchers compared more than 14,000 earths crust vibrations of sufficient power recorded since 1975 in Kazakhstan and Kirgizia, and approximately 350 sudden magnetic storms recorded within the same period by the world geomagnetic observations network… The calculations have proved that the greatest number of earthquakes in Kazakhstan and Kirghizia occurs within a several-day period after the beginning of the magnetic storm. Normally the number of earthquakes increases noticeably after a magnetic storm takes place. Nevertheless, in some areas the opposite regularity has been observed.

Interestingly, the Russian scientists said that even though the energy of both the magnetic storm and the earthquake are roughly the same, the “earth shock (lightning) consumes only the hundredth part of the involved resilient energy which triggers the process”. Translated that means these solar storms are a trigger rather than the actual cause because the lightning induced by the geomagnetic storm is only about 1% of the energy of the storm itself. They may be right as lightning is occurring all the time and so too are earthquakes regardless whether geomagnetic storms are happening or not. They think it could be perhaps due to an increase in pressure from the solar wind, but do they know what Chris Scott from the University of Reading knows – that there is a 50% increase in lightning strikes with the solar wind stream?

Earthquake and lightning energy
There is a approximate energy equivalent between earthquakes and lightning strikes themselves. The total seismic moment energy of a magnitude 1 earthquake has the energy equivalent of 7.8 average lightning flashes. Around the world there are approximately 20 cloud-to-ground lightning strikes occurring every second according to satellite data. That is 1,728000 per day. Earthquakes of around magnitude 1 occur several million times a year – 5 million?, or 13,700 a day. Therefore it takes about 126 lightning strikes for each magnitude 1 earthquake occurrence. That is about a 6% energy efficiency. If the number of M1 earthquakes was say half that at 2.5 million, then the efficiency would be 12%. These numbers are in the same ballpark as the Russian scientists’ estimates of a few percent efficiency.

Of course, the above is a very rough guide. The total number of lightning strikes needs to be divided by the total number of earthquakes, not just M1 types. But we only can compare the energy of an M1 earthquake to an average lightning strike. An earthquake around the M1 scale is very common and looks to be the most prevalent (although less powerful ones such as M0.5 may be even more common?), so I took this as the average earthquake energy to very roughly line up with the energy of the average lightning strike. How many of the 20 lightning strikes around the world are average I don’t know; most of them probably. This energy calculation exercise just shows that lightning is still a possible cause of earthquakes.

Earthquake mechanism
This is all very well, but what is the actual mechanism of earthquakes via lightning strikes in a concave Earth? The obvious answer, or at least one of the answers, would be the piezoelectric effect in reverse. We’ve already seen that the Earth is mostly quartz. When mechanical stress (hitting or twisting) is applied to quartz, an electric current is produced. The reverse is also true:

The effect also works in the opposite way, with the material deforming slightly when a small electric current is applied. Piezoelectricity was discovered more than one hundred years ago and has many applications today. It is used in electronic clocks, gas ovens, inkjet printers, and many other appliances. It is also used in scientific instruments that require extremely precise movements, like microscopes.

In the reverse piezoelectric effect, a crystal becomes mechanically stressed (deformed in shape) when a voltage is applied across its opposite faces.

This reverse piezoelectric effect creates expansion and contraction within the quartz crystal.

The quartz crystal expands when current is applied one way.
The quartz crystal is squeezed when the current direction is reversed.

In a concave Earth, instead of current coming from the outside face flowing to the opposite face and moving out, the current would come from the center to the inside face and travel around the crust and back to the center from the opposite inside face; same principle really. Lightning mostly hits the landmasses, and these landmasses are all around the cavity. There are 20 lightning flashes a second happening in all directions up to about 65° latitude north and south. This is creating expansion and contraction all the time in different parts of the Earth cavity, which could create serious fracture lines over time, especially if a few lightning strikes were powerful enough. Considering that a typical very thin quartz disk fractures with more than a few volts, this isn’t unimaginable at all. These fracture lines are of course the tectonic plates.

I know there are a few bible reading Christians who read this blog so I will end this section with this quote from Revelation 16:18 (KJV).

And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.

Summary

• The Sun inducts in a vacuum releasing electrons in three ways: 1. converting electrons to light, 2. thermionic emission (like a cathode ray tube) and 3. electron/positron pairs.
• The Sun’s electrons are emitted into its solar wind which feeds electrons into the Van Allen Belts.
• In the concave Earth model (CEM), the Van Allen Belts are centered around the Sun in the middle of the Earth cavity, not around a convex Earth.
• The Van Allen Belt around the Sun consists of mostly electrons, which are very highly charged. The other belt until the ionosphere (glass layer) mostly consists of extremely high energy protons and a few low energy electrons.
• There are a few potential differences from crust to Sun, but the main general one is the negatively charged Sun emitting electrons to the Earth’s crust.
• There are five pieces of evidence that the Sun charges the Earth: 1. Lightning induced electron precipitation from the Van Allen Belts to the ionosphere during a thunderstorm. 2. Sprites (electron beams) traveling from the ionosphere to cloud. 3. Positive charge is emitted from sharp objects (blades of grass) on the crust to the cloud during thunderstorms. 4. Positively charged blue jets moving from cloud to ionosphere during a thunderstorm. 5. The solar wind is said to electrify the atmosphere; and when the solar wind hits the Earth’s atmosphere, it increases lightning strikes by 50%.
• The Van Allen Belts don’t exist beyond + and -65° latitude. Neither do lightning strikes. Coincidence?
• The Van Allen Belts form the same toroid shape as the Earth’s electric H-field except for those latitudes where the electric circuit is broken due to a lack of moisture in the atmosphere.
• The Sun has an electric current (solar wind or heliospheric current sheet) and a magnetic field with its poles emanating from the Sun’s face and rear side.
• These two fields are perpendicular to each other with the solar wind’s plane the same as the Sun’s face.
• The evidence for which is: 1. Bursts of high energy electrons have been detected in the solar wind at high latitudes. 2. The solar wind is said to exist at the “point that separates north facing magnetic field lines from south facing magnetic field lines”, which is at the Sun’s rim. 3. The northern and southern lights, which are said to be caused by the solar wind, occur at the same time. This is hard to explain in the mainstream heliocentric model (due to Earth’s supposed tilt away and towards the solar wind).
• The alternate rotational direction of the Sun’s electric current due to Lenz’s law can explain why electrons move back and forth between the hemispheres.
• In the CEM, the plasmasphere (sunspot) rotation across the Sun’s equator is a completely separate effect to the solar wind.
• This sunspot rotation could be a mechanical effect caused by the Sun’s counterclockwise precession around the center, like a gyroscope’s precession and axial spin.
• Earth has an electromagnetic circuit caused by the Sun’s induction charging the Earth’s crust. Negative charge is constantly leaving the crust moving upwards towards space.
• This circuit is the likely cause of bendy light due to engineers weakly electrifying cavities of silicon to produce bendy light in the cavities.
• This electric circuit allows the Sun’s light to follow a “magnetic path” regardless of where the Sun points. The reasons for which are unknown to the author.
• Neither tectonic plates, not lighting strikes occur in the Arctic Circle or Antarctica.
• There is a link between earthquakes and the solar wind as well as between the solar wind and a higher number of lightning strikes.
• The energy efficiency of an average lighting strike creating an earthquake is a few percent.
• The piezoelectric effect seems to be the best known electric mechanism to describe how lightning causes earthquakes and the tectonic plates.

It’s time to leave the Concave Earth model for a second and concentrate on something real, i.e. an experiment, with a little bit of engineering to boot. Let’s look at the hard evidence for bendy light.