At http://cosmo.nyu.edu/~rj486/files/RJansson_PhD_thesis.pdf … the magnetic field of the Milky Way. Each star in the Milky Way has its own magnetic field – like our Sun. Objects that orbit stars also have their own magnetic field – including the Earth. It is reasonable to assume each galaxy has its own magnetic field – but what is the strength of it?
I often find it difficult to understand why some champions of the consensus, in this instance the subject of cosmology, are so certain they and the mainstream are unquestionably right – and every dissenter is absolutely wrong. Radical theories are unwelcome in mainstream – although they pretend they stand and fall by the science. Whatever one thinks of the Electric Universe hypothesis – should it be dismissed out of hand? According to some of the gatekeepers it should not just be kicked into the long grass but deserves a good kicking in the nuptials too. It is after all a theory – not supported as yet by field research. It does offer a different view to what you are being told by mainstream. Maybe this is what some people find appealing. Donald Scott, in 'The Electric Sky' page 21, says the idea of little energy in space is erroneous. Wal Thornhill in 'The Electric Universe' mentions the discovery of magnetic fields in space on page 27, metnions it again on page 68, and on page 72 he says the Sun's magnetic field varies in strength with sun spot numbers. I don't know if the latter is true but the fact the magnetic field of the Sun varies, and we also know the magnetic field of the Earth likewise varies – why is it assumed the magnetic field of the Milky Way is a constant?
You can make your own mind up about that as there is a substantial literature out there – for and against. In the corner for we have www.thunderbolts.info and www.plasma-universe.com and www.electric-universe.info and www.plasmauniverse.info … and in the against grandstand we have a lot of internet articles. The link in which we began is a quite good – a PhD thesis which provides a good starting point. It begins, 'The magnetic field of the Milky Way is a significant component of our galaxy … It regulates star formations, accelerates cosmic rays, transports energy and momentum, acts as a source of pressure and affects ultra high energy cosmic rays.' In chapter one he outlines what is known about the galactic and extra galactic magnetic fields. Chapter two introduces a method to quantify data and observables sensitive to magnetic fields, and chapter three investigates the relationship between our galaxy and the nearby Centaurus A galaxy and concludes the common view is far from nailed down.
At www.cfa.harvard.edu/~reid/bfield.html … we are told the magnetic field of the Milky Way has largely been explained by modelling pulsar rotation and dispersion measures. The ratio of a rotation to dispersion measure gives the integral strength of the magnetic field along the line of sight to the pulsar, weighted by electron density. In contrast, the Electric Universe theory doesn't see pulsars in the same way as mainstream – which might produce a completely different result.
See also http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/RebeccaRudberg.shtml … where we have a nice list of strengths of the magnetic field as worked out by different methodologies and by modelling. Inb 'Computers of the Galaxy' it is weak, just 1/50,000 of the strength of the Earth's magnetic field, yet manages to influence charged particles in the galaxy. It is also able to bend the path of and even trap the high energy charged particles that we call cosmic rays. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says it is just 0.000001 'times' the strength of the Earth's magnetic field, a value much too low to have a dynamical effect on interstellar gas.
The piece then says there is strong evidence the Milky Way galaxy contains a large scale magnetic filed of the values 0.1 nT (which is more than the Britannica estimate). It has been measured by analysis of starligh polarization, modelling pulsar rotations, and by Zeeman splitting of hydroxyl masers in regions of star formation. So, can EU theory live with a weak galactic magnetic field? – or is the way the magnetic field has been measured in error, misinterpreting the nature of pulsars (for example). Might it be that the magnetic field of the Milky Way is stronger than alleged?
Might this be indicated at http://phys.org/print295692077.html … where it is claimed there is a strong magnetic field around the black hole at the centre of the galaxy.