• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Electric universe theories here.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can't really catch up with the electric universe story, but methinks this little well documented fact has been overlooked: A vacuum conducts electricity.

If you doubt this, read up on vacuum tubes.

Hans
 
100% Vacuum?

I think that's your first misunderstanding...

Obviously, there has to be come charge carriers: Electrons, protons, ions.

But otherwise, yes vacuum as hard as you can get it.

Hans
 
100% Vacuum?

I think that's your first misunderstanding...

No place in the universe is 100% vacuum, if you want to nitpick.

But space presents no barrier to the conduction of electricity. It has no resistance. And MRC_Hans is right, this is a major problem for EU folks, because it means that you cannot maintain large charge separation in space. Charges will flow to neutralize them, because there's nothing to stop charges from flowing. The strength of the electric force is precisely why it cannot dominate large scale dynamics: it's so strong that it necessarily moves charge to cancel itself out.
 
So, a PLASMA? tenuous, yes.

Not that it matters, but plasma is defined as a highly ionized gas. Which obviously cannot be a vaccuum. Nevertheless, the point is that objects in space are not able to maintain any significant charge because such a charge will, given time, drain away.

Hans
 
So, a PLASMA? tenuous, yes.

Plasma, indeed. And a useful definition of a plasma is that it is;

• a gas1 containing charged particles (together with neutral ones), which

• is quasi-neutral

• and exhibits collective behaviour

1This restrictive definition is adequate for space plasmas. We do not consider plasma crystals.

Basics of the Solar Wind
Nicole Meyer-Vernet
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/basics-of-the-solar-wind/ADCBCC93380674E3A5A0B586C54629C7

Of course, the solar wind plasma is going to be overwhelmingly (perhaps 100%*) ionised, due to the coronal temperature. On the other hand, the interstellar medium is mostly neutral. It will still behave as a plasma though, as the ionisation fraction is ~ 20-30%.

Your problem is - what prevents a separation of charges in a plasma from creating an ambipolar field that brings it back into quasi-neutrality beyond the Debye length? No use asking the likes of Scott or Thornhill, as they haven't got a clue about the subject.

ETA:

* Of course, interstellar neutrals can enter the heliosphere, as seen by IBEX, for instance. However, they can only get so far before becoming ionised, mostly due to photoionisation. At which point they will be picked up by the solar wind, and the magnetic field it carries, and end up back at the heliopause. Which is a huge problem for Don Scott's idiotic claims of drift electrons heading in to power the Sun. He needs them to ignore that solar wind, and its magnetic field. And therefore ignore the laws of physics. As such a big fan of plasma physics, Sol, one would have thought that this would have been bleedin' obvious, even to you, long since.
 
Last edited:
Plasma, indeed. And a useful definition of a plasma is that it is;







Your problem is - what prevents a separation of charges in a plasma from creating an ambipolar field that brings it back into quasi-neutrality beyond the Debye length? No use asking the likes of Scott or Thornhill, as they haven't got a clue about the subject.

Your ambipolar field JD116 is represented = (E∥), is this correct?
 
Sorry? The question was, what is preventing it from arising and therefore maintaining quasi-neutrality?

:confused:


Ummm...There is nothing that prevents DOUBLE LAYERS from forming in a plasma.

aaaaaannddd....:rolleyes:

Here we go again confabulating SPACE plasma's actual properties for the properties that make the MATH easier!

I mean you, jd116, cant even explain the OBSERVED and EMPIRICALLY measured cometary tails...

eg Take your dogma and chuck some critical thinking in, if possible, and explain to YOURSELF why your beloved but very vague ambipolar field does just not charge equalize across the boundary between positive (the ions inc positively charged dust) and the directly adjacent negative charge (the electrons inc negatively charged dust).

Maybe, just maybe, you would then have a sliver of hope understanding plasma.

or

What is preventing this "ambipolar field" (Ambipolar electrostatic field in dusty plasma) from just dissipating?

Whats driving the CHARGE SEPARATION in this instance?

:whistling


I'll wait...
:popcorn1
 
*snip*

:whistling I'll wait... :popcorn1

No, you won't. Let me introduce you to a universal rule of all scientific discourse:

Burden of proof.

YOU are claiming that the current paradigm is faulty and that you have a theory that provides a better explanation.

You have the burden of proof.

It is YOUR duty to:

1) Explain just how the current paradigm fails to explain observation.

2) Explain just how your theory explains it better.

Note that I am charitable here, calling your ideas a 'theory' since it seems to be just unsupported musings. So do yourself a favor and live up to that and show that it merits the term 'theory'.

WE are waiting.

Hans
 
:confused:


Ummm...There is nothing that prevents DOUBLE LAYERS from forming in a plasma.

We are not talking about double layers, which are also restricted to a few times the Debye length.

aaaaaannddd....:rolleyes:

Here we go again confabulating SPACE plasma's actual properties for the properties that make the MATH easier!

Nope, we are talking about the in-situ observations of real plasmas, as opposed to the complete ignorance of plasmas shown by you and your unqualified Velikovskian high priests.

I mean you, jd116, cant even explain the OBSERVED and EMPIRICALLY measured cometary tails...

Yes we can. We have had in-situ spacecraft in the tails of comets. And the observations match theory.

eg Take your dogma and chuck some critical thinking in, if possible, and explain to YOURSELF why your beloved but very vague ambipolar field does just not charge equalize across the boundary between positive (the ions inc positively charged dust) and the directly adjacent negative charge (the electrons inc negatively charged dust).

Take your complete ignorance of plasma physics, and leave it to those that understand it, due to being qualified in it. Unlike you and your Velikovskian high priests.

Maybe, just maybe, you would then have a sliver of hope understanding plasma.

Which you have no understanding of. As is obvious. Anyone that thinks the solar wind is a current of solely ions is, by definition, scientifically illiterate. And that is what the impossible electric sun woo you believe in calls for.

or

What is preventing this "ambipolar field" (Ambipolar electrostatic field in dusty plasma) from just dissipating?


Errrrm, why would it dissipate? Learn to read. Unless the mechanism causing the charges to attempt to separate disappears then the field will always be there to ensure quasi-neutrality. Are you sure you know what an electric field is? I have my doubts.

Whats driving the CHARGE SEPARATION in this instance?

Learn to read;

In the rapidly corotating magnetosphere of Saturn (Sittler et al. 2006), the gravitational and centrifugal forces play a major role in the distribution of the charged particles along the magnetic field lines, particularly in the presence of heavy ions such as oxygen ions (such as O+ 2 and O+). Along the field lines, the effect of the centrifugal force increases outward from Saturn, and confines the ions near the equatorial plane creating a plasma sheet-like structure, whereas the effect of the gravitational force increases inwards and pulls them back into Saturn (Northrop & Hill 1982, 1983). Due to a large mass difference between the electrons and ions, the centrifugal force causes a slight charge separation between them. This creates a polarisation electrostatic field along the magnetic field lines (hereafter, parallel electrostatic field, E) that acts to preserve quasi-neutrality on a larger scale (Persson 1963). As a consequence, under the effect of E, the ions and the electrons remain coupled to each other and diffuse together as a single fluid.

So, as I've already explained in terms a bright high school science student could understand, anything that causes the ions and electrons to start to become separated, will create an electric field which will cause the oppositely charged particles to come back together to maintain quasi-neutrality, beyond the Debye length. Just as happens at the Sun with the solar wind. The thermal acceleration given to the electrons in the corona will make them start to separate from the ions, as the ions feel a much greater gravitational force than the electrons, due to being more massive. That's kind of how gravity works. So, we can have a solar wind made entirely of electrons, which will leave the Sun with a massive positive charge, which will cause it to explode due to Coulomb repulson in very short order - or, the plasma will react as per the laws of physics, and an electric field will arise that is directed such that it accelerates the ions and retards the electrons. Thus ensuring that equal numbers of both leave, and remain. As must be the case. As is measured to be the case.
In your fantasy, only the heavier ions are leaving! How are you managing that? That will leave the Sun with a massive negative charge. How are you getting a drift current of electrons into the Sun, past a magnetic field heading outward at ~ 400 km/s? (which will make the Sun even more negatively charged. Isn't the Sun supposed to be an anode in your fantasy?). More physics defying Velikovskian woo, perchance? Your nonsense violates basic laws of physics, and has never had a single plasma physicist anywhere near it. Or any other sort of physicist, for that matter. That is why it only exists on mythology-based crackpot websites and YT channels, and only believed in by scientifically illiterate laymen.
 
Last edited:
2) Explain just how your theory explains it better.

EU folks have absolutely no idea how to do this step.

Occasionally they identify an area where current measurements and theories identify a problem, often a small discrepancy between a calculation and a measurement. They claim that this discrepancy discredits the entire theory, and that their theory can fix everything. But they can't actually do any calculations with their theory, so they can never actually demonstrate that they can fix the problem.

But it's worse than that. To be better than existing theory, not only do you need to be able to do what current theory cannot, you also have to be able to do everything that current theory can do. And this is where their profound ignorance and dishonest shines most brightly, because they can never do this part. They don't even understand current theory and so have no idea how much stuff it works on, and no idea how to get their own ideas to do any of that.

But we've been over this countless times before, nothing will change now. As the saying goes, you cannot reason a person out of a position he wasn't reasoned into.
 
Errrrm, why would it dissipate? Learn to read. Unless the mechanism causing the charges to attempt to separate disappears then the field will always be there to ensure quasi-neutrality. Are you sure you know what an electric field is? I have my doubts.


BOOM!

Just like an obstacle in the solar wind!

But we've been over this countless times before, nothing will change now. As the saying goes, you cannot reason a person out of a position he wasn't reasoned into.

Nope, totally agree with your premise mechanism causing the charges to attempt to separate

Do you have any mechanism in mind?

Sounds like your understanding has advanced, somewhat, since our last debate.

Not sure why you still clinging to the incorrect notion that all plasma's are quasi-neutral on a large enough scale, along of course with this little False Dilemma that double layer can not form in space plasma's (Charge seperation, the 'ol chestnut)

Do you agree, now, charge separation can and does happen in space plasma's, jd116?
 
So, as I've already explained in terms a bright high school science student could understand, anything that causes the ions and electrons to start to become separated, will create an electric field which will cause the oppositely charged particles to come back together to maintain quasi-neutrality, beyond the Debye length. Just as happens at the Sun with the solar wind. The thermal acceleration given to the electrons in the corona will make them start to separate from the ions, as the ions feel a much greater gravitational force than the electrons, due to being more massive. That's kind of how gravity works.

thermal acceleration? Shown to be wrong. Electron temperature of the solar wind

Hint..the above also greatly affect your "quasi-neutrality"

next nOOb mistake...ions feel a much greater gravitational force than the electrons

Really? Since we are dealing with PLASMA the gravitational force can be thought of as negligible, unless you'd like to really talk PLASMA?

DUSTY COMPLEX PLASMA...:) Then MASS starts to play a role.
 
next nOOb mistake...ions feel a much greater gravitational force than the electrons

Really? Since we are dealing with PLASMA the gravitational force can be thought of as negligible, unless you'd like to really talk PLASMA?

And as usual you would be wrong there.

I am sure you have read all those papers you link to with their "simplified models to have easier math" and understood them to the fullest.
 
thermal acceleration? Shown to be wrong. Electron temperature of the solar wind

Hint..the above also greatly affect your "quasi-neutrality"

next nOOb mistake...ions feel a much greater gravitational force than the electrons

Really? Since we are dealing with PLASMA the gravitational force can be thought of as negligible, unless you'd like to really talk PLASMA?

DUSTY COMPLEX PLASMA...:) Then MASS starts to play a role.

Trivially wrong. Learn plasma physics. And start linking to actual plasma physicists who are telling you this bunkum. Not unqualified Velikovskian statements of non-facts. Read and learn, woo boy;

the medium is made essentially of electrons and protons, of very different masses. Whereas the protons’ thermal speed is smaller than their speed of escape from the solar gravitational attraction, the reverse is true for the electrons, which are much lighter. Electrons therefore tend to escape and leave ions behind, producing an outward electric field which adjusts itself in order to ensure electric quasi-neutrality (see Section 4.6). This produces an outward electric force on the protons, which outweighs the gravitational attraction at some distance from the Sun, producing a supersonic wind.

From;

5. How does the solar wind blow?

Basics of the Solar Wind
Meyer-Vernet, N. (2007)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/basics-of-the-solar-wind/ADCBCC93380674E3A5A0B586C54629C7

And you are not getting dust in the solar corona. It is too hot. It will evaporate to its constituent atoms long before it gets there. Learn physics.
And the charged dust in the Saturnian system is dealt with by the paper you linked, but obviously either didn't read or didn't understand. That is why it is entitled; 'Ambipolar electrostatic field in dusty plasma'. Or perhaps you never got as far as the title, let alone the abstract?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom