In 1989, Hannes Alfvén had an article published in the Boston Globe, titled Alfvén's Electric Universe. As early as 1937, he had proposed that our galaxy contained a large-scale magnetic field and that charged particles moved in spiral orbits within it under the influence of electromagnetic forces. Electric currents flowing through plasma generate magnetic fields. Alfvén, of course, is widely regarded as the father of plasma physics and a pioneer of Plasma Cosmology.

In his 1970 Nobel lecture, Alfvén warned against relying too heavily on idealised mathematical models of plasma without sufficient reference to laboratory experiments and observed plasma behaviour. In his later work, he became increasingly critical of the way some of his own earlier ideas had been interpreted and applied, particularly the concept of “frozen-in” magnetic fields. See Technical I. His later criticism of conventional astrophysics was characteristically direct:

“Students using astrophysical textbooks remain essentially ignorant of even the existence of plasma concepts, despite the fact that some of them have been known for half a century. The conclusion is that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of astrophysicists who have gotten their main knowledge from these textbooks. Earthbound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory.”

“We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture.”
Hannes Alfvén

“It is an embarrassment that the dominant forms of matter in the universe remain hypothetical.”
Jim Peebles, Princeton cosmologist

It seems no small irony that the solar system has long been used as a visual metaphor for the atom, while the analogy is rarely reversed. Electromagnetic forces are fundamental at the atomic scale, yet on astronomical scales gravity is generally assumed to dominate, with large-scale electrical effects assigned a much more limited role.

Another unresolved problem concerns the Standard Model. Although extraordinarily successful within its domain, it does not incorporate gravity. The discovery of a Higgs-like particle at CERN in 2012 filled an important gap in the model, but it did not provide a quantum theory of gravity or resolve the deeper question of how gravity relates to the other fundamental interactions. See Was the Higgs really discovered in 2012?

The Standard Model. From the site:

“Gravity is not yet part of this framework, and a central question of 21st-century particle physics is the search for a quantum formulation of gravity that could be included in the Standard Model.”

Quantum theory and relativity are among the most successful theories in modern physics, yet they remain fundamentally difficult to reconcile. Quantum mechanics describes nature at atomic and subatomic scales, while general relativity describes gravity and the large-scale behaviour of the universe. Each works remarkably well within its own domain, but attempts to bring the two within a single coherent framework have yet to produce a generally accepted theory.

This is not to suggest that Plasma Cosmology has all the answers. It does, however, remind us that our present description of nature is incomplete, and that the door should remain open to alternative ideas where established theories leave important questions unresolved.

The relationship has sometimes been illustrated by comparing relativity with the ocean and quantum theory with its ripples. The analogy is imperfect, but the underlying problem remains: two extraordinarily successful descriptions of nature have yet to be reconciled at the deepest level.

“I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.”
Richard Feynman

In truth, this Fourth Equation is too obvious to be named after anybody. It works like a mirror image of the third equation, Gauss’ Law, which relates to electric charge. The fourth equation says that the sum total of a magnetic field crossing over the surface of any sphere must always be zero.

The trouble is, there is no known particle that generates magnetic field the same way an electron generates electric field. Physicists remain hopeful of finding one, and in anticipation they have named it the magnetic monopole. However, as yet they have found absolutely nothing.

If magnetic monopoles are ever found, then the fourth equation will have to be modified to include magnetic charge. Faraday’s Law will also have to be modified to include magnetic current (magnetic monopoles flowing), just as Ampere’s Law includes electric current (electrons flowing).

To visualise this problem, imagine a sphere with a magnet inside. This law says that for every bit of magnetic field going out of the sphere, there must be an equal amount of magnetic field going back into the sphere. This is the same thing as saying every magnet must have both a north and a south pole. If you could cut a magnet in half and have just a north pole, you'd have just found the first magnetic monopole!

This is one of the great mysteries of physics and cosmology. Why, when the universe was created, did we get trillions of electrons, but, as far as we know, not a single magnetic monopole?

Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist and author best known for his ideas on morphic resonance and morphic fields. He proposes that patterns in nature may be influenced by a kind of collective memory, leading to a vision of a living, developing universe in which the habits of nature themselves may evolve.

Here is a link to his thought-provoking talk Science Set Free — ten dogmas of modern science, presented at the 2013 EU conference. An earlier TEDx version of Sheldrake's talk became the centre of a major dispute after TED removed it from the TEDx YouTube channel following complaints about its scientific content. The resulting debate raised an important question: where should science draw the line between legitimate criticism and the exclusion of ideas that challenge established thinking?

Various explanations have been proposed for the mysterious lights observed in the Hessdalen valley in Norway, ranging from misidentified conventional phenomena to unusual atmospheric and electromagnetic processes. The luminous phenomena themselves are real enough and have been repeatedly observed, photographed and studied. See a typical image, right.

Electromagnetic explanations are particularly intriguing. The local geology contains crystalline and quartz-rich rocks capable of producing electrical effects when subjected to stress. Could charge generated within the geology help ionise the surrounding air? Another proposed mechanism involves ionised air and dust forming clusters of charged particles — in other words, a form of dusty plasma.

Whatever the precise mechanism, Hessdalen demonstrates that unusual luminous phenomena can occur naturally in the atmosphere and that electricity, geology and plasma may interact in ways that are still not fully understood.

Ball lightning is one of the more mysterious electrical phenomena associated with thunderstorms. Numerous eyewitness reports describe luminous, roughly spherical objects that can persist for several seconds, drift through the air and sometimes appear following an ordinary lightning strike.

For many years, some scientists dismissed such reports as optical after-images or misidentified conventional phenomena. Today, ball lightning is taken much more seriously as a genuine physical phenomenon, although there is still no generally accepted explanation for how it forms or persists. Plasma, electromagnetic, chemical and microwave mechanisms have all been investigated. Whatever the final explanation, electricity is clearly central to the phenomenon.

In September 1949, William Sanborn was standing near a marsh in Yellowstone National Park when he reported seeing a hazy patch of blue light sweep towards him. He estimated that it was more than one hundred feet wide and almost a thousand feet long. Sanborn could feel his scalp tingle and described the snapping of tiny sparks as he brushed his hair with his hand, yet received no shock when touching objects on the ground or outside his car.

Exactly what Sanborn experienced is unknown, but aspects of the account strongly resemble atmospheric electrical phenomena such as Saint Elmo's Fire — a luminous electrical discharge that can appear around the masts of ships, aircraft structures and other elevated or pointed objects when the surrounding electric field becomes sufficiently strong.

Electrical and luminous phenomena have also been reported in association with earthquakes and periods of geological stress. Yellowstone is one of the most geologically active regions on Earth, making Sanborn's account particularly interesting in considering the connections between geology, atmospheric electricity and luminous phenomena.