The Plasmoid Paradigm

and Economics and Physics Periodicity Edward Lewis

1 Sciencejunk.org, USA, onyshua@gmail.com

Abstract-- The cold fusion field is a part of the plasmoid

paradigm. Cratering and anomalous tracks evidence

plasmoid activity. Physics paradigms change every 80 years

or so. Why this happened is explained, and what researchers

may expect both in terms of phenomena and future

economic development is explained.

Index TermsKondratiev wave, low temperature

sloshing, plasmoid paradigm, physics revolution.

I. INTRODUCTION

In 1989, this author developed a theory about why

scientific paradigms in the field of physics change every

80 years, and how this leads to economic depressions

along a 40 or 50 year pattern. Looking at the early cold

fusion results, it was clear that a revolution was in the

works. What were needed were new key principles to

identify seemingly different kinds of anomalies. Natural

ball lightning is a wonderfully interesting phenomenon

with a lot of characteristics of anomalous cold fusion

results. Here is a summary of two decades of modeling,

predictions, and results in the two fields.

In early 1992, T. Matsumoto started announcing that

he found highly unusual ring traces in nuclear emulsions

he used for particle detection. This is a common research

technique now, but at the beginning of the field, it was

innovative. I guessed he was probably looking at ball

lightning tracks since I knew that ball lightning and

tornadoes leave this type of track. See Figure 1.

Fig. 1. Tornado-ball lightning-like tracks found on nuclear emulsion by

Matsumoto in 1994 [2]. He found several tracks like these. Like

tornadoes, they show a hopping and skimming behavior. See earlier

articles relating tornadoes to ball lightning and this type of plasmoid.

Even before I saw a picture of any track that he started

to publish in Fusion Technology in 1992, I assumed that

tiny ball lightning were probably being formed in the

electrodes or someplace in the apparatus, and this is

what was causing transmutation and excess heat effects.

Then I started to read about Ken Shoulders discoveries about experimentally produced plasmoids.

Though he rarely uses the term in his writings, he

understands that this is what he is researching, following

on the work of W. Bostick.

Most people in the field probably dont know about W. Bostick or his importance in the history of science.

Further reading about his 1950s experimental and

theoretical research on galaxy shape modeling and how

this led to Alfvens MHD theory and plasma cosmology can be found in Lerners The Big Bang Never Happened and in my writings including a long book[2] I wrote

mainly in the 1990s and is now on my website.

I started to try to understand everything, including the

Universe and matter as plasmoids. The difference

between my theoretical work and others is that I base my

thinking on observed natural anomalies such as ball

lightning and tornadoes and their energetic or strange

effects, cold fusion research anomalies, and Ken

Shoulders experimental results as far as I know about them.

Here is a list of the predictions based on the two

models I am presenting, and you can verify that in the

past twenty years, the predictions were historically

proved out for the science-economic theory and

experimentally proved out for the plasmoid physics

theory. The physics model I work with is fundamental but

rudimentary. This is because few researchers have

published experimental results explaining the

characteristics or activities of the plasmoids.

II. SCIENCE THEORY MODELING

The science-economic theory was developed in 1989.

Why did it seem that physics revolutions happened at 80

year intervals, but Kondratiev economic waves were

about 50 or 40 years apart? A key for bridging

productivity growth acceleration near the beginning of an

industrial revolution and economic depression was a book

called Technological Acceleration and the Great

Depression by JP Waters that was written in the 1970s.

It was clear that the industrial revolutions themselves

when old industries die and are replaced by new but

labor-intensive industry and many small startup

companies were occasions for economic depression. The

time of technological acceleration in the middle of the

industrial cycle was another occasion.

So this explained why high productivity and low

productivity growth economic depression periods

alternated at about 40 or 50 year intervals.

Back in the 1990s, maybe nobody believed this model

could be true. But it is producing accurate predictions

as time goes by. This is described below.

There have been seven scientific revolutions in

physics:

The Copernican, about 1506. When he believed the solar system was sun centered, he also innovated a new

physical model to explain to people how things are.

The Galilean, about 1593. Around this time in response to the anomalies detected in the decades prior,

Gilbert, Galileo, and Kepler formulated similar physical

paradigms. We know that they thought that their models

were similar because Galileo and Kepler corresponded

and wrote about each other. It is clear that they had

knowledge of Gilberts book about geology, the solar system, and various scientific topics.

The Newtonian, 1664. In his early 20s, in response to various anomalies of the prior paradigm, he formulated

an influential theory about corpuscular atoms, aethers,

and action at a distance (gravity).

The Fluid paradigm originally formulated by Franklin, about 1745. Others such as Aepinus and

Coulomb helped to develop the basic theory about

material fluids of electricity, heat and magnetism. This

paradigm was quickly adopted almost universally in

advanced countries. The quick adoption of the paradigm

enabled the development of heat, chemical, and electric

technology that enabled the First Industrial to occur

relatively quickly after the paradigms inception. This in turn caused the long lull at the end of the 1800s and the

50 year Kondtratiev wave timing of the 1800s since

Faradays paradigm was accepted comparatively slowly. The Classical Field theory paradigm, rudimentarily

formulated by Faraday in 1820 and developed by

Maxwell;

The Quantum Mechanics (Q.M.) and Relativity theory paradigm formulated by Einstein, about 1905.

Modern industry of the 21st century is based on the

theoretical advances in Quantum Mechanics and

experimental research based on the theory and technology

based on QM precepts.

The Plasmoid paradigm, 1992, is apparently only described by me. Obviously there have been numerous

discoveries in our field and the related ball lightning and

plasmoid fields. Many are described in this paper, and my

model is described below. The new phenomena are

fundamentally important. In order to speed up research

and spread understanding, Id like to encourage cold fusion researchers to work and collaborate more with ball

lightning and plasmoid researchers. There could be joint

international conferences on these topics.

In 1992, I corresponded with Matsumoto, and he

accepted the idea of micro ball lightning. His work in this

field is very important to understand. I think perhaps lack

of access to his many early papers in Fusion Technology

is preventing is results from being analyzed and

understood by researchers now.

I also learned a lot from Ken Shoulders early patents and statements in 1992. We corresponded also. I think it

may have been a reference in Ken Shoulders patent to W.

Bosticks articles that introduced me to earlier plasmoid research. Understanding the galaxy as a plasmoid helped

me to understand that atoms are plasmoids, the stars are

plasmoids, and that electrical clumping can explain

atomic existence and behavior. As shown below,

Bosticks study of the plasmoid markings on his witness plates is still useful for comparison to similar plasmoid markings produced more recently such as those of

Energetics Technologies in the last few years.

A. Science-Economic Theory Model

There are major changes in the basic postulates of

physics during the scientific revolutions. Science doesnt develop by incremental modification of theory, but by

replacement of fundamental theory by new theory based

on different principles. Major changes of physics enable

major revolutions of technology. The revolutions

happened about every 80 years. In fact, the period 15061905 is 399 years, or about 5 x 80 years. See Figure 2.

Fig. 2. Chart of the 7 paradigm revolutions over time.

What causes the paradigms to space like this? Clues

were in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Kuhn.

He himself never described that physics paradigm

changed happen at 80 year intervals. But it is interesting

that he did declare a length of time for the crisis periods leading up to paradigm change of 10 to 20 years. As

explained below, the crisis periods happen through the

experimental and technical work of the third generation.

B. Three Generations to Create and Destroy 1 Paradigm

Thomas Kuhn described the causes that make

paradigm change a three generation process in his

writings. He wrote about the inhibition of apprehension

(sort of like the Planck principle: scientists are never

convinced of new ideas; new theories triumph because

they die.) He also wrote about how theorists and

technicians (experimentalists) are different.

(I) Older, more experienced people learn new ideas

slowly or not at all, especially when the ideas are very

different from their own. I call this constraint the

inhibition of apprehension.

(II) Theoreticians are not usually the best

experimenters or technicians, and vice versa. I call this

constraint the difference between theoreticians and

technicians.

Kuhn wrote: Almost always the men who achieve

these fundamental inventions of a new paradigm have

been either very young or very new to the field whose

paradigm they change.

He also wrote: what scientists never do when

confronted by even several and prolonged anomalies.

Though they may begin to lose faith and then to consider

alternatives, they do not renounce the paradigm that has

led them into crisis anomalies are seldom just an

increment to what is already known. [Their] assimilation

requires the reconstruction of prior theory and the re-

evaluation of prior fact. This explains why no one in the

cold fusion field except maybe Ken Shoulders as far as I

know has stopped believing in QM or can understand

what I am writing about well.

Principle 1 keeps no one but the young or newcomers

from formulating a new paradigm. They do this

historically between the age of 23 and 45, the usual

productive years for starting new things. Since almost no

one else in his generation may believe him, it is the

younger people (the next generation) who accept and

develop his ideas.

They generally develop their ideas when they reach

their thirties and forties. But due to Principle 2, the

theoretical developers of the paradigm are not good

inventors. Especially, they dont invent the seminal technologies for industrial revolution, and they dont discover the anomalies (contradictions) of their own ideas.

This happens in the next generation.

A 3rd

generation of young people who grew up being

taught the paradigm began to invent the major new

technologies and new scientific devices, and some

discover fundamental anomalies. Of necessity, they begin

to do this about 20 to 30 years after the theory was well

developed by the 2nd

generation. This is necessary

because children below the age of 10 or teenagers can not

do this type of laboratory work. Work of this caliber

requires about 30 or 40 years of training and experience.

This is why the early cold fusion researchers were

mostly middle-aged when this field started, and why they

are old men now. This is why the field is mainly the

province of old men which makes it difficult for my ideas

to be understood or accepted.

A crisis period starts and continues with 10 or 20 years

(Kuhns stated length of time) until a newcomer formulates new principles based not on older theoretical

axioms and hypotheses but directly based on the nature

of the anomalies themselves as I describe in my book.

However, our field is facing a different situation than

the prior formulators faced after Newton. Now, the very

anomalies themselves are still generally believed by most

scientists as not to be true. (Many say we are a bunch of

liars and freaks). However, Copernicus and Galileo faced

a similar situation during their times. Scientists have

faced similar times before. Maybe we can learn some tips

from them about how to carry on this debate for public

opinion.

C. Industrial Revolutions and Kondratiev Waves

Fig. 3. Chart showing the spacing of technological acceleration periods when the productivity growth accelerates. That depressionary

times arise when productivity is rapidly rising is initially counter-intuitive. But the rising productivity (as now) is a mirror of the

increasing unemployment or disemployment and the lowering incomes

in the most technologically advanced economies.

Industrial revolutions begin at about the time of the

crisis periods in physics. A group of major new industries

form at the same time. Both the new industries and the

finding of fundamental anomalies happen due to the

development of new technology at these times. The last

crisis period and industrial revolution happened during

the period 1960-1992. See my earlier articles on this topic

to see how industrial revolution leads to the two kinds of

economic depressions and how the Kondratiev long wave

arises.

So far, there have been three industrial revolutions.

The first one can be said to have started in 1790. The

second one can be said to have started about 1890. The

third one can be said to have started about 1973. Do you

know what happened industrially in the US at these

times? You might remember the semiconductor, PC, laser,

and electronics revolutions of the 1970s if you were alive

then. All of these industries were based on QM

technology.

In the 1890s, there was a revolution of automobile

manufacture, electrical appliances, and steel and

petroleum.

In the 1790s, the technological revolution had to do

with perfecting workable steam engines, "caloric"

chemical industries, and electric batteries and their

applications. All of these industries were developed by

people who believed in the new fluid paradigm of physics.

Youll notice that Franklins fluid ideas spread and were

developed unusually quickly. He was a publisher, famous

and influential for many reasons, had leading scientists

for friends who assisted him, and his theoretical

framework was simple and intuitive.

Industrial revolutions have arisen about 45 to 73 years

after the scientific revolutions for the reasons described

above. When major new industries arise in a paradigm,

there are many small companies who invest in inventing

better products and features.

But about 30 years after the industries start, for various

reasons, products standardize. For example, there were

lots of automobile companies about 1910 or so, but by

1930 or so, the shape and functions of cars were

standardized, and the companies invested in automation

to compete on prices for basically the same product. This

is called the "switch from product innovation to process

innovation in the industrial life cycle." The same

oligopoly and automation process is happening nowadays.

Since many big industries start in each industrial

revolution, when all these industries hit this stage of

development at the same time, unemployment rises a lot

as human labor productivity rises substantially. People

learn to make the same things faster and cheaper without

so much human labor, and prices on products may go

down, though unemployment goes up as companies have

layoffs, merge, go bankrupt, and a few companies emerge

as the survivors in each industry. This is why US

unemployment probably really is about 18 or 23 percent

if measured how it was measured in the US before the

Clinton administration.

Another kind of depression happens during the

industrial revolutions because old industries die off and

new ones start. Remember the 1970s? A lot of "rust-belt,"

"smokestack" industries closed in the US, and the new

industries stated. See Figure 3. At those times the US has

had depressions or deep recessions when productivity

growth is historically low. It dipped to about .5% per year

in the 2nd and 3rd Industrial Revolutions.

As you can see, the timing of economic depression

periods are a little more irregular than the timing of

scientific revolutions. They average about 40 years apart.

See Figure 4.

Fig. 4. Chart showing the relationship of the productivity growth curve

and the economic depressionary times. The depressions or deep

recessions happen at the points of lowest productivity growth and at the points when the productivity growth curve has the highest slope. The

grey areas show the times of depressionary periods: 1780s-1790s,

1830s-1840s, 1890s, 1930s, 1970s-early 1980s, late 2000s-2010s.

III. PHYSICS: PLASMOID PARADIGM MODELING

The Plasmoid paradigm can be said to have begun

in 1992. From about 1973 to 1992, there was a crisis

period. After reading about ball lightning and cold fusion

experiments, it was clear that ball lightning had some

superconductive effects, that ball lightning was similar to

cold fusion in many ways (excess heat, explosions,

radioactivity, evidence of transmutation, transitory

existence), and that cold fusion, ball lightning, and HTSC

were fundamental anomalies. What was the natural key

that ties these phenomena together? Ball lightning-like

material forms in experiments in the right conditions.

This suggests that atoms change to a plasmoid state.

Atoms in the plasmoid state may behave like ball

lightning.

Electricity clumps. Ball lightnings are clumps of

electricity. Experimental research on plasmoids shows us

some of their characteristics. They are highly energetic,

can change state from an active and to an inactive state,

vary greatly in size, and produce atoms transmutations

and make atoms disappear where they travel.

It is clear that electricity clumps of itself. There is no

reason to believe that regular atoms are anything other

than plasmoids in the inactive state. Stress of various

kinds including compression, electrical stimulation, or

heating can cause atoms to change state. A region of

atoms in this state may emerge as objects that travel like

ball lightning. This would leave voids, tunnels, holes, pits

and craters. These spots of plasmoid activity would

evidence atomic transmutation and strange behavior.

What keen researchers with good equipment, insight, and

patience find in their experiments.

Lipson and Celani started researching the

superconductivity associated with transmutation and cold

fusion experiments around 1990. I wrote about

superconductivity as a plasmoid phenomena in the middle

of the 1990s. In the early to middle 2000s, Lipson and

Miley published their research at the U of I of evidence of

superconductivity in environments associated with cold

fusion effects.

There is no direct evidence of nuclei in atoms. But

there is direct evidence in the form of tracks, plasmoid

craters and markings, bore holes, and electrode structures

such as Dashs filaments (that kept growing and transmuting after experiments were over) of plasmoid

formation and activity in electrodes or other sites in

various experiments. The atoms are converting to a

previously unknown state that can be likened to ball

lightning or the anomalous plasmoids researched by

Shoulders.

Since 1992, Ive written and published many articles about these ideas in the publications in the the fields of

cold fusion and ball lightning. The most comprehensive articles are a long descriptive article written in 1992

called Description of Phenomena According to My Theory and Experiments to Test It, my papers in

ICCF10 and ICCF11, and the 2009 articles in Infinite

Energy and The Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear

Science.

My model is based on certain assumptions.

(I) Plasmoids exist that evidence superconductivity,

ability to bore through materials and make tunnels, the

ability to travel through materials without making tunnels,

produce time and gravity change (heuristic hypothesis

needing confirmation), cause atoms to transmute, explode

and do the activities that ball lightning and anomalous

plasmoids are known to do. They clump and divide and

tend to form geometrical formations. Since these

phenomena have been so little researched experimentally,

much is unknown about them. But understanding their

characteristics will develop the paradigm.

(II) Regular atoms are plasmoids in an inactive state.

But they may convert to the state where they evidence the

above anomalies.

(III) A heuristic hypothesis is that everything is a

plasmoid. There has been good research in this direction

of modeling the universe by others though they usually

dont use the term plasmoid. In the past, the field was

called plasma cosmology (including Alfven who won the

Nobel Prize for MHD theory), and more recently the term

electric universe is used. The plasma cosmology

developed from Bosticks 1950s research on

experimental plasmoids and their galactic shapes.

(IV) Electricity clumps. This is why matter exists

(atoms, ball lightning, stars, particles, maybe even

electrons).

(V) Gravity is the clumping of material, and time is the

rate of change of a characteristic process. Ive wanted the

idea tested that time and gravity effects occur in

anomalous plasmoid sites. In 1992, I proposed that

people try to detect time change in cf experiments. A

good technique would be to detect light phase shifts (red

shifts/ blue shifts). Another way would be to use various

kinds of clocks. Radioactive atoms are a natural clock.

The problem with understanding what is happening when

radioactive change is reported as has happened in the past

in our field is that it is uncertain what exactly is causing

the radioactivity change. Is it due to isotopic or elemental

transmutation of atoms or is it due to what can be

characterized as a change of time?

IV. SCIENCE CHANGE AND ECONOMIC PREDICTIONS

AND VERIFICATIONS

There has never been a paradigm for the field of

economics. This is why economists can rarely predict

events even a few years into the future. What were

needed were fundamental principles of human activity

that remained true over hundreds of years. The

Kondratiev wave was an interesting feature of advanced

capitalist economies, but Schumpeter and others couldnt identify the cause.

The cause is the two principles of physics learning

and technology development that cause paradigm

changes in physics to follow a 3 generation (80 year)

periodicity. The Kondratiev wave had a 50 year

periodicity before 1900 and a 40 year periodicity after

1900 due to the rapid acceptance and development of the

Fluid paradigm.

Based on this model, from 1989 onwards I predicted

the following events. It is easy to verify that I was

predicting all this two decades ago.

1. A physics revolution was imminent unless it already

had happened. 1905+80=1985. I believed that someone

was going to formulate a new physics paradigm based on

the obvious anomalies of the crisis period or that

someone had recently done so.

It is clear the cold fusion field didnt die off though it has been popularly declared a hoax. Most of the

researchers focus on technical applications, but there is

much evidence that the phenomena falls outside the old

paradigms box. I believe my basic model serves as a new paradigm.

2. Technological acceleration would begin about the

year 2000 with productivity growth rates suddenly

doubling as happened in 1820 in Britain and 1920 in the

US. This happened in 1999 or so and surprised many

economists. But I understood this is what happens in

industry about 20 years after the end of an industrial

revolution depression.

3. Economic boom times similar to the 1920s in the

US in the 2000s. This happened. Harry Dent predicted

this also based on demographic principles. His work is

instructive, but doesnt explain the paradigm change periodicity.

4. Predicted a financial crash about 2009 like the 1929

crash in the US and the similar crash in Great Britain

about 1830. This would be followed by a decade long

depression period in this decade. This is happening. The

financial crash happened in 2008. However, there has

been unprecedented peace time deficit stimulus spending

and bank lending since 2008. In the US, this is thought to

amount to 1 or 2 trillion dollars per year, a substantial

fraction of the GNP. This is keeping the stock market

high temporarily. However, real unemployment in the US

as measured in the way it was measured before Clinton is

still about 15 to 22 percent. The model predicts the rest of

the decade will experience a depression like the 1930s

(US) and the 1820s-1840s (Britain and the US) associated

with high and increasing labor productivity. See the

economics charts here. Labor productivity growth rates

will peak and start to decrease long after the depression

period is over if the past cycles continue.

5. The major industries of the Plasmoid paradigm

wont start to form until after 2045 or 2052. (1992 + 60). And the next crisis period will start about 2050. Ive been surprised there is yet no industry arising in this paradigm

at all. If the timing holds, the theory of this paradigm

should be well developed by 2032 (1992+40).

To encourage people, relatively small industries in a

paradigm have been developed within a few decades after

a paradigms inception. The telegraph industry of the 1840s that was developed by people who believed in the

fluid paradigm and the interaction of magnetic and

electric fluids and the early nuclear power industries of

the 1950s are examples.

Any good theory for economics and scientific

development will allow for predictions that can be

verified historically. Thus far, this theory has proved

correct in its major predictions. No other economic

theory as far as far I know has this record. In the 1990s,

long-wave theorists predicted a K-wave dip at the end of

the century. People I interacted with in the 1990s

generally dismissed my idea of a Kondratiev trough in the

2010s.

V. PHYSICS PREDICTIONS AND VERIFICATIONS

In my early articles in the early and middle 1990s, I

was suggesting that people search for plasmoid markings,

time and gravity change, and superconductivity in their

experiments. In 1992, I formulated a theory about how

the formation of plasmoids in electrodes would be

associated with transmutation phenomena and gravitation

production.

1. I predicted approximately micrometer-size ball

lightning would be commonly found by CF researchers in

various kinds of devices. Matsumoto was the first to

produce evidence of plasmoid tracks in nuclear emulsions

in the 1990s. He described how cells with evidence of

transmutation also produced such tracks. (Figure 1 and

many others in Fusion Technology). Then Ken Shoulders

started to research transmutation (cold fusion

phenomena). He described that plasmoid strike marks

evidence transmutation of atomic species[3]. I have tried

many times to point out how closely many of the

anomalous markings found by Urutskoev, Savvatimova,

Adamenko, the SPAWAR group, and the Energetics

Technologies group look like plasmoid strike marks on

metals or plasmoid tracks on detection films and witness

plates as shown by Bostick, Shoulders and Matsumoto.

However, using such detection films or plates still isnt generally done. But they have been found often enough

by those who try to detect these markings that I think the

prediction is verified.

Ive written about markings on more than ten groups of experiments in picture articles for more than a decade.

Recently, the Energetics Technologies have published

some photographs of some craters. I would like to point

out that the sloshing lips around some of the craters look much like Fig 19. of Ref. 3 by Shoulders where he

also records the elemental change detected by X-ray

analysis. I dont understand why his work is relatively unknown or unmentioned.

2. I predicted that people working with the usual

electrodes of various metals would find that micrometer-

sized areas of their electrodes were missing or melted and

associated with transmutation. This idea originally arose

from seeing SEM microscope pictures shown by

Matsumoto, and the detail of apparent melting and

transmutation species he recorded around the inside of

the voids. This looks much like the sloshing seen in

Energetics Technologies recent crater photographs and the sides of Dashs plasmoid trench mark on an electrode that I described many times. I predicted these areas would

be associated both with superconductivity and time and

gravity change.

In the field, it became a common assumption by many

that micrometer size active areas (as described by Storms) were the loci of the unusual cold fusion-type

activity. Later, the idea that these areas are Bose Einstein

Condensates (BECs) (Kim and Miley) with

superconducting properties was accepted by some. So I

think this prediction of the early 1990s was verified too.

From other work, including natural ball lightning

research and the electrical discharge experiment of

Zhukov and Egorov[4], I understood that plasmoid

activity was associated with anomalous activity in this

regards at lower temperatures than would be expected.

Ball lightning apparently doesnt bore through materials and make a tunnel by heating it and melting it in the

conventional sense.

Only a plasmoid-type theory can probably well explain

why the plasmoids tend to form geometrical shapes lines, rings, and quadrilateral patterns. For example,

photo 5 (micro-crater in palladium in SEM images from

Energetics Technologies, Ltd.) in Duncans ICCF 15 presentation[5] is clear enough to show that the pits were

formed in a circle: a round plasmoid ring necklace with a central pit. This is a typical plasmoid track pattern seen

also in Shoulders (Figure 5), Mileys (2 rings in Figure 6 photographed by me), and W. Bosticks experiments as was described in past papers.

Fig. 5. SEM microscope picture of a ring plasmoid track (pits arranged in a circle). The scale here is 25 micrometers. By Ken Shoulders.

Fig. 6. Optical microscope picture taken by me in 1996 of two plasmoid

ring tracks of pits arranged in a circle. The one on the left shows an inner central pit like the one described above by Energetics

Technologies. If there is a central pit on the right one, it isnt clear. The markings were pictured and described by me in other articles in the past. They were on microspheres of Ni on Plastic Cell #8, a light water

electrolysis cell of George Mileys Fusion Studies Laboratory of the U of I.

3. Any model that is a general physical paradigm has

to have astronomical predictions. In the early 1990s, I

predicted that people would increasingly find evidence of

plasmoid activity in space and on the earth. In particular,

I predicted toroidal stars matching the shape of toroidal

ball lightning. That wasnt discovered as far as I know, but what were discovered were solar tornadoes and other

astronomical anomalies reminding me of plasmoids.

Some recent astrophysical discoveries about solar tornadoes and sunspots are further confirmation of the plasmoid universe idea. In a paper by Zhukov and

Egorov[4], they showed a picture of an approximately

micrometer-size area of an electrode in the process of

being used for electrical discharge. The ring that appeared

on the surface of the electrode at below the materials melting point I think was a plasmoid. The ring looks

much like a sunspot which I think are also plasmoids.

Would people detect light red shifting or lowering of

radioactivity rates (signifying time change) or gravity

production at the points of sunspot, solar tornado, and

plasmoids found on experiments? Gravity-like effects of tornadoes are natural evidences of gravity production

in plasmoids. It is known that the solar tornadoes are

associated with solar flares, and there was some evidence

of spacecraft radio telemetry light frequency shifting

occurring during solar flares.

Another interesting recently discovered natural

plasmoid phenomena are the balls of light that lead

lightning strokes as shown in super slow motion videos

recently taken Tom Warner using new technology. Ken

Shoulders pointed out to me that these are like the EVs leading electrical discharges in his experiments. Ball

lightning was leading the natural lightning.

In general, as far as things have been tested so far, the

plasmoid model is proving correct in its predictions.

VI. CONCLUSIONS

This author hoped to show that predictions based on

the two models presented herein have been verified as

far as the passage of history can verify or the

experimental technique of researchers in the field have

tried to thus far verify. The two models have remained

the same for two decades and may serve as the paradigms

for physics and economics.

This last point is important to consider, since the

author is not aware of any models so fundamental and far

reaching in either field proving to be accurate.

For more detailed explanations about the models, the

reader is referred to past papers and my book[2] on my

website: sciencejunk.org.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to acknowledge using photographs by

Matsumoto and Shoulders and of one of Mileys

experiments in this paper.

REFERENCES

[1] T. Matsumoto, Observation of Tiny Ball Lightning During Electrical Discharge in Water, manuscript article, 1994. [2] E. Lewis, The Periodic Production of Rationalized and the

Past Periodic Depressions, manuscript book, 1990-2012.

[3] K. Shoulders and S. Shoulders, Observations on the Role of Charge Clusters in Nuclear Cluster Reactions, Journal of New Energy, Vol. 1, No. 3, 1996.

[4] V. M. Zhukov and N.V. Egorov, Study of the Appearing Rings in the Emission Image of a Field Emission Cathode Prior

to Explosion, Soviet Phys. Tech. Phys., 36, 353, 1991.

[5] R. Duncan, An Outsiders View of the Fleischmann-Pons Effect, ICCF15 powerpoint, Italy, 2009.