Fat Electrons, And ALTERNATIVE half-assed and half-baked Models.

….. Meaning of course that the mainstream models are ALSO half-assed and half-baked.

Given that it looks like I’m not going to complete this one I’ll simply extrapolate an answer to a question in comments, to try and explain what I was driving at.  Perhaps further questions will help flesh this one out a little bit:

QUESTION

What exactly is a “fat electron?”

ANSWER

Well you see, the Rutherford model, and the current model, of the atom is clearly untenable. So if you look at the Rutherford experiments with super-thin sheets of gold and alpha-particles, you would have to come up with a different model of the atom. And particularly a different view of electrons. When we have a superfat, but still very light electron, we can then account for charge separation in the upper atmosphere of planets and stars. We can then see how fusion gets going in the outer atmosphere of stars, and gas giants. So this better model, which is also probably bullshit, but at least an improvement, leads to better explanations of what is going on around us, more or less right away.

I contend that stars are just further evolved planets. And also that the more-or-less baseless allegation that they are primarily made out of hydrogen is just nonsense. I would say that there is really no evidence that hydrogen is a large part of the make-up of stars, at least if we are talking about TOTAL MASS of each element therein.  I would say that the idea that stars are mostly hydrogen comes primarily as a result of people looking at the equivalent of our outer ionosphere, and assuming,  quite foolishly, that the rest of the star is roughly akin to the topmost levels of the outer ionosphere.

I would guess that the most plentiful element in the known universe, in terms of mass, would be iron.  So I would differ in this respect to the electric universe guys, at least in terms of the non-McCanney wing.  Because the electric universe people, tend to talk about the Universe being 99% plasma. I’d very much doubt that. I think they are doing what the mainstream is doing, and looking at the outer-atmosphere of objects (in this case mostly stars) and making straight-line inferences from that.

Another idea that I want to float, and its a sort of McCanney-esque idea. I think people have been looking down the wrong road when it comes to fusion. They think fusion is all about heat, smashing particles, high pressure and so forth. Well it can be about that. But I would suggest that fusion is more about high electrical charge.  I think there is a lot of evidence for this.