Plasma Cosmology - Woo or not

[Sol88]

I do. Don't you?

Last time I checked dust and ice did not have rocket motors on them like your satellites do!o

You tell me RC, what happens when your satellites run out of fuel? who wins, gravity or momentum?

 

[Reality Check]

Last time I checked dust and ice did not have rocket motors on them like your satellites do!o

You tell me RC, what happens when your satellites run out of fuel? who wins, gravity or momentum?

Are you under the impression that the rocket motors on satellites are reason that they keep in orbit?
That is only the case for orbits low enough so that the Earth's atmosphere causes drag on them that needs to be compensated for.

Perhaps you would like to point out where the rocket motor on the Moon is !

 

[Sol88]

Um, where did you get the idea that radiation pressure is a new idea, you are rather dense aren't you?

'Pillars of creations' (effects of radiation pressure in some spots)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080227.html

and my avatar are examples of the known radiation pressure
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060715.html

no, you would be mistaking there DD.

But it's the first time of heard of it being used for dust grains to go surf'n dude! cowabunga!

 

[Sol88]

Are you under the impression that the rocket motors on satellites are reason that they keep in orbit?
That is only the case for orbits low enough so that the Earth's atmosphere causes drag on them that needs to be compensated for.

Perhaps you would like to point out where the rocket motor on the Moon is !

Such as the ring particles of Saturn? The drag on some of those very small particles should be enough to drop them out of orbit.

or maybe DD's radiation pressure keeps them in place?

 

[Sol88]

Actually it is more fun for us.

Your ignorance of the fact that scientists know that plasma & electric currents can dominate in certain small scale situations means that you come up with some interesting facts in standard astronomy.
There is no general dominance of plasma or electric currents.

A pity that none of them hove nothing to do with the non-science of plasma cosmology.

And yes "bumping and rubbn" does happen in protostellar clouds and does cause lightning - just like in thunderstorms.

UE/PC proponents are nuts if they think that planetary mechanics et cetera are cosmology. Why not quantum mechanic as well?

ETA:
Further on the nuttiness of UE/PC proponents as expressed by Sol88.
Somebody states that because the Moon orbits the Earth through the domination of gravity and that is evidence for the the Big Bang Theory.
Do you agree Sol88?

In that case most if not all of the science that you have posted is "evidence" for BBT!

• Impact craters om Mercury.
• Impact craters on the Moon.
• Saturn's ring.
• Protostellar disks.

I'm very interested in your response to this question RC!

How does charge separation occur inside these molecular clouds?

You made like to read this paper first though, so you do not go on one of your little tangents again.

PAPER HERE PAGE 14

 

[Tim Thompson]

Plasma, Plasma, Everywhere ...

How does charge separation occur inside these molecular clouds?

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

The formation of plasma in molecular clouds is due mainly to the ionizing effect of ultraviolet emission from young stars still embedded in the cloud, or around the edges of the cloud from hot stars outside. So what?

 

[Reality Check]

I'm very interested in your response to this question RC!

How does charge separation occur inside these molecular clouds?

You made like to read this paper first though, so you do not go on one of your little tangents again.

PAPER HERE PAGE 14

Read Tim Thompson's reply.
It is you who is going on "little tangents" with your common garden variety plasma physics examples.

When are you going to get back to the non-science of plasma cosmology Sol88?
Or have you given up on that entirely?

 

[Reality Check]

Such as the ring particles of Saturn? The drag on some of those very small particles should be enough to drop them out of orbit.

or maybe DD's radiation pressure keeps them in place?

Please provide a citation to the "drag". What causes it? What is its magnitude compared to gravity?

But...
The fact is that the rings exist. They are also composed of mostly water ice as shown by their spectrum. Thus their existence shows that any "drag" from whatever cause is small enough so that the rings have existed for at least as long as we have observed them (a few hundred years)

What keeps then in place is good old Newtonian mechanics. Read up about it sometime.

 

[Reality Check]

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

The formation of plasma in molecular clouds is due mainly to the ionizing effect of ultraviolet emission from young stars still embedded in the cloud, or around the edges of the cloud from hot stars outside. So what?

There is a tiny bit of value to responding to Sol88's posts - he is emphasizing that plasma cosmology is non-science by coming up with these standard bits of (mostly non-plasma) astrophysical physics as "evidence" for it.

Or he may just be emphasizing his ignorance of science since we should not judge a hypothesis like plasma cosmology from the activities of its proponents.

 

[Sol88]

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

The formation of plasma in molecular clouds is due mainly to the ionizing effect of ultraviolet emission from young stars still embedded in the cloud, or around the edges of the cloud from hot stars outside. So what?

Laughable tim!

Shall we go dig the posts out, where you said charge separation does not occur in space on any significant scale? And there MUST be charge separation for an electric discharge to occur!

Tim Thompson can there be a cosmic electrical discharge (lightning (a thunderbolt from the gods))? a simple yes or no will do.

Careful not to be hypocritical, please Tim.

Tim make sure you read the paper before you answer, so as not to embarrass yourself!

 

[Sol88]

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

The formation of plasma in molecular clouds is due mainly to the ionizing effect of ultraviolet emission from young stars still embedded in the cloud, or around the edges of the cloud from hot stars outside. So what?

So what? Umm... nothing just like the rest of our mainstream party line scientist, that like to recite to each other to reinforce that plasma and electric currents play a very minor role in cosmology! now repeat after me

plasma and electricity play a minor, not critical role in space! repeat three times

not very intuitive are you Tim?

How much of that cloud is ionized Tim?

How big are the particles in such a cloud?

 

[Reality Check]

Laughable tim!

Shall we go dig the posts out, where you said charge separation does not occur in space on any significant scale? And there MUST be charge separation for an electric discharge to occur!

Tim Thompson can there be a cosmic electrical discharge (lightning (a thunderbolt from the gods))? a simple yes or no will do.

Careful not to be hypocritical, please Tim.

Tim make sure you read the paper before you answer, so as not to embarrass yourself!

I can answer this for Tim: No

There is "charge separation" in Saturn's rings, i.e. ice particles have gained charge by rubbing against gas (as in thunderstorms). The scale here is kilometres at the most. It is the electrical charging of ice particles.
This has nothing at all to do with charge separation in plasma. There is no plasma in Saturn's rings.

In addition "charge separation does not occur in space on any significant scale".
In cosmology significant is light years (billions or millions). Only an idiot would think that the scale of kilometres on Saturn's rings has any cosmological significance.

Onviously you did not read the article or even its abstract:

Chondrules represent a significant mass fraction of primitive meteorites. These millimeter-sized glassy droplets appear to be the products of intensive transient heating events. Their size distribution, chemical and mineral composition, texture, isotope composition suggest that chondrules were produced as a result of short-duration melting followed by rapid cooling of solid precursor particles. Gas-dynamics heating, magnetic reconnection, and electrostatic discharges are thought to be the leading candidates to explain chondrule formation. In this paper we summarize our recent theoretical progress on the effects of 'lightning' in the early solar system and also report on preliminary results from our laboratory experiments. Differential settling of various sized dust particles toward the midplane of the nebula is suspected to build large-scale charge separations that episodically relax via the electric breakdown of the nebular gas. The electrostatic discharge os analogous to lightning in the Earth's atmosphere.

Silly, silly Sol88!

 

[Reality Check]

So what? Umm... nothing just like the rest of our mainstream party line scientist, that like to recite to each other to reinforce that plasma and electric currents play a very minor role in cosmology! now repeat after me

plasma and electricity play a minor, not critical role in space! repeat three times

not very intuitive are you Tim?

How much of that cloud is ionized Tim?

How big are the particles in such a cloud?

Who cares about intuition?
This is a forum about science.

Physics tells us that plasma and electric currents play a significant role in some situations, especially when there external power sources like stars and black holes. These are all small scale cosmologically. The largest events that could be said to be EM dominated are galactic jets (powered by black holes) with scales of < a million light years - not even a blip on the cosmological radar.

Physics tells us that plasmas by themselves are electrically neutral at large scales.

As for the protoplanetary disk (your "cloud"?):
Some of it is ionized if there are external sources, e.g. nearby bright stars. The disk is a dense gas (and the temperatures are too low to form a plasma).
Or maybe you mean the solar nebula (a cloud of gas and dust) - in that case little ionization and particles of various sizes.

 

[Tubbythin]

Ok so be it.

Then why dose, gravity the all powerful force, not just pull those grains onto the surface of Saturn?

Because the grains have angular momentum. Same reason the Earth doesn't fall into the Sun and isn't going to be hit by the moon any time soon.

 

[Tubbythin]

Such as the ring particles of Saturn? The drag on some of those very small particles should be enough to drop them out of orbit.

or maybe DD's radiation pressure keeps them in place?

The drag from what?

 

[Tubbythin]

Why does this disc orbit around the equator?

Why are there not several discs at different angles like some of the moons in the solar system?

What was the source of the disc?

If I were to drop a particle into a polar orbit around an AIRLESS body, would you expect it to move into an equatorial orbit? Why?

If there was nothing for it to collide with then no.

if there was a random cloud of particles around an airless body, wouldnt you expect some of them to remain non collisional?? In their original orbit?

Non-collisional?

"In this image of the F ring, taken shortly after its ring particles encountered the shepherd moon Prometheus, the disruption to the ring caused by the moon is evident."
http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/sat_04_20/s11_12143_10.jpg

Why doesnt the moon destroy the F ring? That image looks like waves in a medium..... If it was strictly collisional averaging I would expect scattering by collision with the moon.. AND direct collisions....

Collisions with the moon? There are two moons of note for the F ring - Prometheus and Pandora. The biggest perturbations occur close to the two moons and hence these areas get swept clean (there's a bit of a caveat here which I can explain if you like). The F ring is basically the happy middle ground. Not only is it nicely between the two moons so the perturbations are small but it also picks up some of the perturbed ring particles from elsewhere. This makes this region denser meaning there is greater friction for perturbed dust passing through on its now (slightly) elliptical orbit. The collisions between the perturbed particle and the F ring region particles then act to circularize (is that a word?) the orbits of the perturbed dust. In other words, there is something of a positive feedback mechanism. The whole thing is rather complex though, but I can try to go through it in detail if you like (with some maths!).

 

[Dancing David]

Sol88, you are the weakest of our PC proponenets, even BAC did better than you:

1. Cosmology is the scale that is rather huge, not a single refernce you have made comes even close.
2. It does not help that you just throw out your silly little snippets of irrelevant information.

For example:
1. What plasma effects do you think are involved in Saturn's rings?
2. What size and numbers are involved?
3. How do they scale to the level of cosmology?


It doesn't help that you can't even understand science (IE hypothesis, model, data), you have yet to even construct your mechanism for the craters on Mercury. You are using the bunnt picture method to teh extere, and you fanatic polotics make you look about the same as the bigfoot people.

It is rather apparent you are just here to pretend you are making some sort of point.

 

[GeeMack]

[...] but remember what Tim Thompson said!

Yeah. Tim Thompson said...

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

And...

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

If I understand Tim correctly, what he said in effect is that plasma cosmology, taken from the position apparently held by Sol88, is indeed woo and should be relegated to the dominion of the cranks and crackpots.

 

[tusenfem]

If I understand Tim correctly, what he said in effect is that plasma cosmology, taken from the position apparently held by Sol88, is indeed woo and should be relegated to the dominion of the cranks and crackpots.

And Tim Thompson is totally correct. Sol88 has no clue whatsoever about cosmology or plasma-cosmology or plasmaphysics or the electric universe. The only way Sol88 "discusses" is by changing the topic at every point, putting in lots of "look at the picture evidence" and never answering any direct questions. That is why he was banned from BAUT long ago.

 

[Sol88]

This whole discussion is just plain stupid. Nobody ever said that plasma physics plays no role at all in either astrophysics or cosmology. In fact plasma physics is crucial throughout the astrophysical disciplines, and always has been. Yet Sol88 continues to act as if every mention of plasma is supposed to be a great surprise and contrary to all mainstream thought.

There is no value in responding to any of Sol88's posts, and any serious discussion of "plasma cosmology", whatever that is supposed to be, can take place only in a thread from which Sol88 is banned.

The formation of plasma in molecular clouds is due mainly to the ionizing effect of ultraviolet emission from young stars still embedded in the cloud, or around the edges of the cloud from hot stars outside. So what?

You would be WRONG Tim!

The Generation of Lightning in the Solar Nebula

We calculate that electric fields large enough to trigger breakdown easily could have existed over regions large enough (not, vert, similar100 km) to generate very large discharges of electrical energy (not, vert, similar1016 erg), assuming a lightning bolt width less, approximate10 electron mean-free paths. The discharges would have been sufficiently energetic to have formed the chondrules. We place constraints on the generation of lightning and conclude that it could not be generated if the abundance of 26Al in chondrules was as high as the level in the calcium–aluminum-rich inclusions (CAIs). This conclusion is consistent with isotopic analyses of chondrules. This possibly implies that 26Al was nonuniformly distributed in the solar nebula or that the chondrules formed several million years after the CAIs.

Also


On the Possibility of Lightning in the Protosolar Nebula

Chondrules constitute a significant fraction of primitive meteorites. Their thermal history includes rapid melting followed by cooling on timescales of minutes to hours. The mechanism underlying such extreme, short-lived thermal excursions away from the prevailing, much milder nebular equilibrium conditions has eluded understanding for many decades. Among the prime candidate mechanisms long thought to provide a possible explanation of chondrule formation is lightning—large-scale electrostatic discharges—in the protoplanetary nebula.

as well as...

Electric Discharges in the Protoplanetary Nebula as a Source of Impulse Magnetic Fields to Promote Dust Aggregation

Abstract Lightning discharge generated in the protoplanetary nebula is viewed as a temporally isolated surge in the flow of electrically charged particles, similar to that of terrestrial lightning. If the current is intense enough, a powerful circular impulse magnetic field is generated around the instantaneous virtual electric conductor. Such magnetic field is capable of magnetizing dust grains containing ferromagnetic components present in its vicinity to their saturation levels. As a result, dust grains attract one another, forming the aggregates. This magnetically driven attraction suggests an important process possibly operational at an early stage of the planetary accretion. Based on both a classical model for electric conductor, and the theory of Lienard–Wiechert electromagnetic potentials, our calculations show that the magnetic impulse due to a discharge channel of a few cm in diameter transferring a charge of about 104 electrons reaches as high as 10 T. At these magnetic fields, the ferromagnetic dust grains, and possibly the already-formed larger aggregates as well, are easily magnetized to the saturation levels, producing compact clusters exhibiting permanent magnetic moments.

Something about Tusenfem banging on about Alexeff's paper assuming prior charge/magnetism? Where could the grains that make up asteroids, moons, planets have got there charge from?

And if it happens in our part of the world, why would it not happen every where in the cosmos! ie it's a part of cosmology!

Anybody care to discuss the implication of Nebular lightning?