Electric universe theories here.

[Sol88]

Let’s just ask a plasma expert.

Can there be charge seperation and a flow of current in space plasma, not gas but PLASMA, tusenfem

Are astrophysical jets “electric currents”, tusenfem?

What would be the best analogy or metaphor to describe to the layman and astrophysical jet?

 

[Sol88]

High light added. I a gas "intermolecular forces" don't "dominate" that's exactly why in can "fill the volume of it container" unlike say a lesser volume of a liquid. There intermolecular forces still allow a liquid to flow but not to freely expand to fill a container.

Hope that helps.

I’ll see your intermolecular forces and raise you electric fields!

A plasma with a significant excess of charge density, or, in the extreme case, is composed of a single species, is called a non-neutral plasma. In such a plasma, electric fields play a dominant role. Examples are charged particle beams, an electron cloud in a Penning trap and positron plasmas.[30]

And it seems astrophysical jets!

Gas as fluids when we are actually talking a completely different state of matter, kiddie stuff. Plasma and non-neutral ones at that.

Are astrophysical jets gas containers governed by intermolecular forces or a plasma (charges seperated and current conducting)?

As per observations.

 

[Ziggurat]

1) What ARE "mainstream electric universe ideas"?

2) How do they differ from the current paradigm?

3) What observations do they explain better than the current paradigm?

4) What evidence exists to support them?

If you can't provide sensible and relevant answers for this, there is nothing to discuss.

Hans

Stop avoiding this, Sol88.

 

[Sol88]

4.3.4. Knots in M87. Important clues concerning general jet dynamics and radiation prop- erties have have been drawn from a few well-resolved X-ray and optical jets (Sec. 2.4). The six M87 knots have been interpreted as strong, particle-accelerating shocks which would in- dicate that β �� 1 (Biretta et al. 1999). They have also been interpreted as places where the jet velocity turns towards us (Bicknell & Begelman 1996). Given the successful observing campaign involving HST-1 it may be possible to extend this to the innermost knots.

How does gas accelerate particles?

Mainstream stuff,brus,

 

[Sol88]

Stop avoiding this, Sol88.

Well...there's one.

We call them double layers but you seem confused and call the, 4.3.4. Knots in M87.

Important clues concerning general jet dynamics and radiation prop- erties have have been drawn from a few well-resolved X-ray and optical jets (Sec. 2.4). The six M87 knots have been interpreted as strong, particle-accelerating

Important clues?

Ummmm... it’s a plasma not a gas most definitely not quasi neutral!

Mainstream electric universe stuff and important clue that the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE mob have been onto for some time now.

 

[Ziggurat]

That isn't actually an answer.

 

[lauwenmark]

Well...there's one.

We call them double layers but you seem confused and call the, 4.3.4. Knots in M87.

Important clues?

Ummmm... it’s a plasma not a gas most definitely not quasi neutral!

Mainstream electric universe stuff and important clue that the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE mob have been onto for some time now.

How is this gibberish any kind of answer to Hans's questions? All you did above was typing a few random words, quoted parts of a paper that's not related to EU theory, and then say it is an 'important clue'.

Why do you keep not answering those questions?

1) What ARE "mainstream electric universe ideas"?

2) How do they differ from the current paradigm?

3) What observations do they explain better than the current paradigm?

4) What evidence exists to support them?

If you can't provide sensible and relevant answers for this, there is nothing to discuss.

Hans

Is that because you actually don't know what EU is or says? People here should really stop answering your questions until you - for once - answer ours!

 

[Sol88]

Is that because you actually don't know what EU is or says? People here should really stop answering your questions until you - for once - answer ours!

Mainstream EU nonsense right in front of your eyes!

nderstand if the sustenance of magnetic field near a black hole, which determines whether an AGN is radio-loud or radio-quiet is due to physical processes near the black hole or is controlled by the infalling gas

Space GAS!

 

[Sol88]

Is that the best you have? Will yo start calling me names as well? or are you willing to discuss a mainstream paper that will challenge your paradigm? https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.06025.pdf

Is that because you actually don't know what EU is or says? People here should really stop answering your questions until you - for once - answer ours!

Mainstream EU nonsense right in front of your eyes!

FUTURE ISSUES

Understand if the sustenance of magnetic field near a black hole, which determines whether an AGN is radio-loud or radio-quiet is due to physical processes near the black hole or is controlled by the infalling gas

Infalling Space GAS!

Seems you cant even begin to understand PLASMA if you still PLASMA a GAS.

If it's a GAS you'll be consistently surprised by these unusual behavior if it's a plasma...electric fields, charge separation, instabilities, filamentation, bubbles and cells, double layers....on and on.

Including, and get this, MAINSTREAM EU stuff like...

Understanding the content, power, electrical current and duty cycles of AGN jets will help quantify their role in galaxy formation and evolution.

LINK

Galaxy formation and evolution not dominated by gravity? Electromagnetic has a major role to play in the formation and evolution of galaxies?

Is this standard mainstream theory for galaxy formation and evolution?

What about infinite gravity? You know your classic math howler of division by ZERO!

Roger Blandford, a mainstream scientist, says jets are great bi electric currents!

Do yo agree or disagree?

 

[Sol88]

It is my, admittedly rather limited understanding that the jets are electrically neutral (contain the same number of positive as well as negative charges overall). Since there is no net charge through a point, plane volume or whatever over time it wouldn't classify as a current. Perhaps within some very specific and limited constraints of time and space but only for that as the charge imbalance is not maintained.

At least the Man was kind enough to engage.

Evidence is presented that:
• AGN jets are formed when the black hole spins and the accretion
disk is strongly magnetized, perhaps on account of gas accreting
at high latitude beyond the black hole sphere of influence.
• AGN jets are collimated close to the black hole by magnetic stress
associated with a disk wind.
• Higher power jets can emerge from their galactic nuclei in a
relativistic, supersonic and proton-dominated state and they
terminate in strong, hot spot shocks; lower power jets are degraded
to buoyant plumes and bubbles.
• Jets may accelerate protons to EeV energies which contribute to
the cosmic ray spectrum and which may initiate pair cascades
that can efficiently radiate synchrotron gamma rays.
• Jets were far more common when the universe was a few billion
years old and black holes and massive galaxies were growing rapidly.
• Jets can have a major influence on their environments, stimulating
and limiting the growth of galaxies.

Mainstream ELECTRIC UNIVERSE stuff

 

[tusenfem]

Ok ok, I’ll play.
Worth playing with ya reckon tusenfem?

I don't want to "play". I want a real discussion and this does not bode well.

If you would actually read and understand the paper by Blandford et al., then you would maybe get a bit of a grip on all this. But then you would have to understand plasma physics and what metaphores mean.

Just in quick words, very basically, how are jets generated:

1. Mass is added to an accretion disk around a black hole from some source
2. The accretion disk is hot and turbulent and contains plasma, and through the turbulent motion magnetic fields are generated
3. The gas/plasma is transported towards the innermost stable orbit and when it passes that location it will start to fall towards the black hole
4. Because of the presence of a magnetic field which would be connected to the plasma blob falling to the black hole and to the accretion disk, which leads to tension in the field
5. This makes that there will be a twisted magnetosphere around the black hole
6. The tension in the field and reconnection will lead to acceleration of plasma away from the black hole
7. The only direction in which this stuff can escape is along the rotation axis of the black hole, in other directions it is blocked
8. This will give a twisted bundle of magnetic field and plasma flowing out along the rotational axis of the black hole
9. And thus we have jets

In operation? Like plugged in and turned on? Like electrical power to make the whole shebang go?
Gas can also apparently according to mainstream, generate electrical energy.

You can read up on how a plasma lamp works on wiki.

Gas (where gas is plasma) can act like a generator, why would you be surprised about that? The Sun would be an excellent example of this.

Something black holes n membranes or some such drivel.

Just because you cannot grasp the beauty of the membrane paradigm does not mean it is drivel. But you will probably never understand it.

 

[Sol88]

Invoke the membrane paradigm?

Why not invoke standard plasma physics?

No need for any invocations.

Magnetic field lines connecting the event horizon and the division by zero error. You be in trouble with that thinking.

And thus you have yourself an ELECTRIC CURRENT.

So still happy with gas as a pretty useless approximation?

 

[tusenfem]

Did you even read the paper?

Do you actually understand what a METAPHORE is?

 

[tusenfem]

Can there be charge seperation and a flow of current in space plasma, not gas but PLASMA, tusenfem

Charge separation only occurs very very seldomly in natural plasmas.
Electric current can flow in a natural plasma but is basically never created by a charge separation.

Are astrophysical jets “electric currents”, tusenfem?

From observations of the toroidal magnetic field (see Blandford et al. 2019, and Wardle, 2018) there can be a current of 10¹⁷ to 10¹⁸ A. This sounds like a lot, but like I have explained before, what is really important is the current density, so we would have to divide that by the cross section of the jet. With an opening angle of 1 degrees (or 0.017 rad) and say a distance of 1 ly, the diameter is easy to calculate as 1 ly * sin(0.017) = 0.017 ly = 1.6e14 m, so the current density is minute, 18E18/10E28 = 0.1 nA/m².
You can try to calculate how many accelerated particles are creating something like this.

What would be the best analogy or metaphor to describe to the layman and astrophysical jet?

You don't need a metaphor, you just need a simple explanation, like I gave in a previous post.
See, that is the problem with EU proponents, doing "science" with press releases and not understanding how metaphors work and how simplifications (like MHD or circuit theory) work and when they are valid.

 

[tusenfem]

We call them double layers but you seem confused and call the, 4.3.4. Knots in M87.

Important clues concerning general jet dynamics and radiation prop- erties have have been drawn from a few well-resolved X-ray and optical jets (Sec. 2.4). The six M87 knots have been interpreted as strong, particle-accelerating SHOCKS

fixed that for you, you missed a word in your quote.

Another typical EU proponent behaviour.

Double layers not shocks are.

 

[Sol88]

The accretion disk is hot and turbulent and contains plasma, and through the turbulent motion magnetic fields are generated

Nonsensical gishgallop...

 

[Sol88]

Charge separation only occurs very very seldomly in natural plasmas.
Electric current can flow in a natural plasma but is basically never created by a charge separation.



From observations of the toroidal magnetic field (see Blandford et al. 2019, and Wardle, 2018) there can be a current of 10¹⁷ to 10¹⁸ A. This sounds like a lot, but like I have explained before, what is really important is the current density, so we would have to divide that by the cross section of the jet. With an opening angle of 1 degrees (or 0.017 rad) and say a distance of 1 ly, the diameter is easy to calculate as 1 ly * sin(0.017) = 0.017 ly = 1.6e14 m, so the current density is minute, 18E18/10E28 = 0.1 nA/m².
You can try to calculate how many accelerated particles are creating something like this.



You don't need a metaphor, you just need a simple explanation, like I gave in a previous post.
See, that is the problem with EU proponents, doing "science" with press releases and not understanding how metaphors work and how simplifications (like MHD or circuit theory) work and when they are valid.

What was the electric field strength did you say?

 

[lauwenmark]

Mainstream EU nonsense right in front of your eyes!
Space GAS!

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

Is that the best you have? Will yo start calling me names as well? or are you willing to discuss a mainstream paper that will challenge your paradigm?

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

Mainstream EU nonsense right in front of your eyes!
Infalling Space GAS!

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

Seems you cant even begin to understand PLASMA if you still PLASMA a GAS.

If it's a GAS you'll be consistently surprised by these unusual behavior if it's a plasma...electric fields, charge separation, instabilities, filamentation, bubbles and cells, double layers....on and on.

Including, and get this, MAINSTREAM EU stuff like...

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

Galaxy formation and evolution not dominated by gravity? Electromagnetic has a major role to play in the formation and evolution of galaxies?

Is this standard mainstream theory for galaxy formation and evolution?

What about infinite gravity? You know your classic math howler of division by ZERO!

Roger Blandford, a mainstream scientist, says jets are great bi electric currents!

Do yo agree or disagree?

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

At least the Man was kind enough to engage.
(...)
Mainstream ELECTRIC UNIVERSE stuff

The topic of this thread is "Electric Universe theories here". It isn't "Challenging the mainstream model".
None of that content answers any of the four questions asked by Hans.

Do I sound like a broken record? Yes, definitely. That's because you keep avoiding talking about the EU theory (which is the Title of this thread), and you also avoid answering any of the four fundamental questions asked by Hans, quoting them here again as a reminder:

1) What ARE "mainstream electric universe ideas"?

2) How do they differ from the current paradigm?

3) What observations do they explain better than the current paradigm?

4) What evidence exists to support them?

If you can't provide sensible and relevant answers for this, there is nothing to discuss.

Hans

 

[Sol88]

Umm...read the paper. It’s all there for you.

Not sure I’m really able to help you unfortunately. Plasma is a subset of gas....and charge seperation can not occur and electric fields exist in space but don’t do anything, kinda thinking.

 

[Sol88]

fixed that for you, you missed a word in your quote.

Another typical EU proponent behaviour.

Double layers not shocks are.

Shocks are particle accelerators though, same as electric fields.

As we all know all double layers are electric fields but not all electric fields are double layers...

Still, an electric filed you say? Electric currents of quite some power (electrical energy), you say?

Well that would require a curcuit and as Blandford states; Understanding the content, power, electrical current and duty cycles of AGN jets will help quantify their role in galaxy formation and evolution.

Seems import from a Big Bang black hole paradigm.