What is ambiplasma?

Ambiplasma, also known as the “electric universe”, is an unconventional cosmological theory, generally attributed to Hannes Alfvén in the 1960s. This theory attempts to explain the development of the visible universe through the interaction of electromagnetic forces in astrophysical plasma. His most famous cosmological proposition was that the Universe was a fair mix of matter and antimatter in the form called ambiplasma that would have naturally separated when annihilation reactions occurred accompanied by a tremendous release of energy. In this concept, the Universe has always existed (pre-exists) and does not have a common point of origin.



Ambiplasma contradicts the current consensus in astrophysics that Einstein’s general relativity explains the origin and evolution of the Universe on its larger scales, relying instead on later developments in classical mechanics and classical electrodynamics as applications to plasmas. Astrophysicists.

Alfvén remained firm in a few ideas that have not been accepted by the scientific community. Among these ideas, the main one is the claim that electromagnetic forces are equal in importance to gravity on large scales. Alfvén came to this conclusion simply by extrapolating the phenomenon of small-scale plasma to large-scale, while magnetic fields are considered of interest in modern astrophysics in many conventional models of small-scale astrophysical structures with eddy currents accelerating gravitational collapse by transferring the angular momentum from contracted objects, conventional large-scale structure models do not normally consider magnetic fields large enough to aid in the transfer of angular momentum by virial processes in clusters. Some of Alfvén’s most provocative proposals are qualitative explanations of star formation using Birkeland currents. These plasma currents were considered by Alfvén and his followers to be responsible for many filamentary structures seen in astrophysical observations.

Alfvén’s ambiplasma theory

The conceptual origins of plasma cosmology were developed in 1965 by Alfvén in his book Mundos-Antimundos, based part of his work on ideas by Kristian Birkeland described at the beginning of the century and an earlier proposal by Oskar Klein in which astrophysical plasma played an important role in the formation and evolution of galaxies. Their cosmology is based on giant astrophysical explosions resulting from a hypothetical mixture of matter and antimatter that created the Universe or meta-galaxy as they preferred to speculate. This hypothetical substance that engendered the Universe was called ambiplasm and took the forms of protons-antiprotons (heavy ambiplasm) and electrons-positrons (light ambiplasm). Ambiplasma divides into cell regions of matter and antimatter. In Alfvén’s cosmology, the Universe contained heavy symmetric ambiplasma with protective light ambiplasma, separated by double layers. According to Alfvén, such ambiplasma would have a relatively long life since the component of the particles and the antiparticles would be too hot and would have too low a density to annihilate each other quickly. This annihilation can cause a rapid expansion of the universe. The radiation of annihilation would emanate from the double layers of plasma and anti-plasma. The double layer explosion was also suggested by Alfvén as a possible mechanism for the generation of cosmic rays, X-ray bursts and GRB. Alfvén postulated that the Universe has always existed due to causal arguments and the rejection of ex nihilo models as a stealth form of creationism. Cell regions exclusively of matter or antimatter would appear to expand into local regions of annihilation, which Alfvén considered as a possible explanation. For the apparently observed expansion of the Universe as a simple local phase of a much longer history. The model does not need exotic physics but models the universe using the well-known electromagnetic forces together with gravity. In fact, Alfvén based his ideas on experimental work on plasma physics here on Earth.

Comparison with the dominant cosmology.

Plasma cosmology has been developed in much less detail than mainstream cosmology and lacks many of the predictions of current models. In conventional cosmology, detailed simulations of the correlation function of the Universe, primordial nucleosynthesis, and fluctuations in microwave background radiation, based on the principles of conventional cosmology and a handful of free parameters, have been performed and compared. With observations, including non-trivial consistency checks. Plasma cosmology generally provides qualitative descriptions and unsystematic explanations for the standard features of the dominant cosmological theories.

For example, conventional hierarchical models of structural formations rely on dark matter stored in superclusters, clusters, and galaxies seen in today’s Universe. The size and nature of the structures are based on an initial condition of the original anisotropies seen in the power spectrum of the microwave background radiation. The recent simulations show the coincidence between the observations of the expeditions and the cosmological simulations of bodies of degree N << number >> of the Lambda-CDM model << Cosmological Constant Λ of the Cosmic Radiation of the Microwave Background >> Many astrophysicists accept the dark matter as a real phenomenon and a vital ingredient in the formation of structures, which cannot be explained by appealing to electromagnetic processes. The estimated mass of the galactic clusters using gravitational lensing also indicates that there is a large amount of dark matter present, an observation not explained by plasma cosmological models. The production of light elements without the Big Bang nucleosynthesis (as required by plasma cosmology) has been discussed in the generalist literature and was decisive for producing excessive X-rays and gamma rays beyond what was observed. This question has not been fully addressed by proponents of plasma cosmology. Additionally, from an observational point of view, gamma rays emitted by even small amounts of matter / antimatter annihilation should be easily visible using gamma ray telescopes. However, such gamma rays have not been observed. This could be solved by proposing, as Alfvén did, that the bubble of matter we are in is larger than the observable universe.



Criticism of Alfvén’s model.


Alfvén proposed that the bubble of matter we are in is larger than the observable universe, which led to questions about how someone could verify the model if the large structures it predicts cannot be observed. However, many structures are observable, such as the intergalactic Birkeland currents. Unfortunately, from a theoretical point of view, there are still problems with Alfvén’s model. Alfvén did not formalize his model to the extent that it is possible to perform numerical simulations similar to those that are now commonly performed to model the behavior of young galaxies in standard cosmology and that were used to predict the correlation function of the universe. Instead, Alfvén aimed a very generic view of how galaxies are disk generators. Alfvén was a bit indifferent about adjusting his model so that it could make the same predictions as the Big Bang. Another problem is, ironically, that plasma cosmology depends on the physics that is, although not completely well understood, if well documented through laboratory experiments. Since the standard model of the Big Bang involves the least understood physics, one can adjust the Big Bang model to fit observations just by appealing to variable laboratory parameters and exotic physics, such as the existence of particles not yet observed. Because of its empirical foundation (Alfvén was a pro laboratory physicist, developing power transmission systems and the like), it is much more difficult to modify Alfvén’s model to suit cosmological observations. From an observational point of view, the gamma rays emitted from even small amounts of matter / antimatter annihilations should be easily visible using gamma ray telescopes. However, such gamma rays have not been observed. The model could be recovered by proposing, as Alfvén does, that the bubble of matter we are in is larger than the observable universe, which led to questions about how someone could verify the model if the structures so large that it predicts cannot be observed. To verify the model, some trace of the model would have to be found in the current observations, and this requires that the model be formalized taking into account that detailed and quantitative predictions can be made, which causes the aforementioned theoretical problem discussed in the previous paragraph. 

By: Alejandro Sebastián von Heguer, National University of Lomas de Zamora Buenos Aires. Source: Helge S. Kragh, Cosmology and Controversy: The Historical Development of Two Theories of the Universe, 1996 Princeton University Press, 488 pages.