Plasma Cosmology - Woo or not

[Reality Check]

You would be WRONG Tim!

The Generation of Lightning in the Solar Nebula

On the Possibility of Lightning in the Protosolar Nebula

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

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?

No since it has nothing to do with plasma cosmology.

Only a complete idiot would think that lightning is a plasma phenomena.

 

[GeeMack]

Only a complete idiot would think that lightning is a plasma phenomena.

Well, Michael Mozina does. Oh, wait, never mind.

 

[tusenfem]

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?

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the stupid Alexeff paper, but not that you would understand that. Alexeff did not have magnetized chondrules or stuff like that, he wanted to create a magnetic field by somehow using the same magnetic field etc. etc. read my thrashing of the paper once more.

Just because things sound similar, does not mean that they are the same, just like showing a picture of Birkeland's experiments and Saturn's rings (look sort of similar, are not the same though).

The protoplanetary nebula is a rather unfortnate name, they mean here the protoplanetary disk (the proplaneb is just before the planetary nebula is created a the death of a start, the propladi is for the creation of planets). The propladi surrounds a young star is consists of gas and dust and with the large amount of radiation from the young star there is lots of ionization going on, and thus a dusty plasma is created, so there are lots of electrons that can stick to the dust to charge them. Ahhhh such basic stuff ...

 

[Sol88]

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the stupid Alexeff paper, but not that you would understand that. Alexeff did not have magnetized chondrules or stuff like that, he wanted to create a magnetic field by somehow using the same magnetic field etc. etc. read my thrashing of the paper once more.

Just because things sound similar, does not mean that they are the same, just like showing a picture of Birkeland's experiments and Saturn's rings (look sort of similar, are not the same though).

The protoplanetary nebula is a rather unfortnate name, they mean here the protoplanetary disk (the proplaneb is just before the planetary nebula is created a the death of a start, the propladi is for the creation of planets). The propladi surrounds a young star is consists of gas and dust and with the large amount of radiation from the young star there is lots of ionization going on, and thus a dusty plasma is created, so there are lots of electrons that can stick to the dust to charge them. Ahhhh such basic stuff ...

ok, how large would that charge be over the entire surface area?

would the charge be evenly distrubuted, or areas of more positively charged dust and gas as well as negatively charged dust and gas?

would charge move between these areas? Mainly in dark current mode, but sometimes in glow mode and when it enters arc mode(lightning) the dust undergos changes that can eventually form rocky bodies using a combination of EM energy and gravity.

we see the evidence for electric arcs more and more often the better our intruments get as well as allways seeing it in the glow mode of operation, hell we even use the dark mode in everyday life!

as for your crtique of the alexeff paper the problem of your B field conumdrem is solved if that rotating bodie already has a magnetic component!

And theoreticaly how big could these elecric discharges be Tusenfem?

 

[Dancing David]

Sol88, I think you are arguing with yourself, no one denies that electrical charges and magnetic field have an impact and effect in astrophysics.

However cosmology (you know the subject of the thread) deals with effects and principles on a very large scale, like the scale of things in galaxy clusetrs, which seems to be a problem for you. Your things all link to very small areas in comparison.

And then i looked at the science direct article you linked to here:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=919243b152b8526774a96965a1e774dc

We calculate that electric fields large enough to trigger breakdown easily could have existed over regions large enough (100 km) to generate very large discharges of electrical energy (1016 erg), assuming a lightning bolt width 10 electron mean-free paths.

Now while they discuss the possible mechanism for generating an electrical discharge in the molecular could:

This does not discuss nor imply the formation of plasma in molecular clouds

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=d2c71b32243a7d79433268cb634bc128

says this

We find that development of a large-scale electric field strong enough to produce discharges does not occur under conditions characteristic of protostellar nebulae.

 

[tusenfem]

ok, how large would that charge be over the entire surface area?

No idea what you are talking about, what surface area?

would the charge be evenly distrubuted, or areas of more positively charged dust and gas as well as negatively charged dust and gas?

Charge gets evenly distributed over the surface of a conductor, this will not be the case with an insulator. There will be no large regions with mainly + and large regions with mainly -. The mobility of the plasma will take care of that.

What are we talking about here, by the way?

would charge move between these areas? Mainly in dark current mode, but sometimes in glow mode and when it enters arc mode(lightning) the dust undergos changes that can eventually form rocky bodies using a combination of EM energy and gravity.

see above I guess, why not read the real paper, instead of only looking at the abstract. I am sure lots of your "questions" will be answered in there, but I am sure you are not really interested in real answers.

we see the evidence for electric arcs more and more often the better our intruments get as well as allways seeing it in the glow mode of operation, hell we even use the dark mode in everyday life!

whaddevvah

as for your crtique of the alexeff paper the problem of your B field conumdrem is solved if that rotating bodie already has a magnetic component!

Yes, but that was not the starting point that Alexeff took, there was NO magnetized body to start with, heck, if I remember correctly, there was not even a body, only a gas/plasma (but I don't feel like searching for that poste, does anyone have a link?).

And theoreticaly how big could these elecric discharges be Tusenfem?

How would I know, read the frakking paper, Sol88, and I am sure you will get your answers. Don't ask other people to do the work that you can do for yourself.

 

[tusenfem]

Okay, here is the post about the Alexeff model. So I was not up to date anymore (I tend to forget nonsense quickly) no plasma but a charged rotating planet. So, there is completely, absolutely no correspondence between lightning in the protoplanetary disk (or was is protoplanetary nebula?) and Alexeef. Not that I expected there was, but just to be sure.

Of course, if the body was already magnetized from the beginning, it would make Alexeff's calculations obsolete, because he wants to generate the Earth's magnetic field (or a planetary magnetic field) by a large current system and NOT by internal permanent magnetization.

Again Sol88 showing that he just writes things down, just because he wants to derail discussions as soon as they start to show he is wrong or start to exceed his physics and math capabilities. Then he tries to just combine various electricities to obfuscate all his misunderstandings and cluelessness.

 

[Zeuzzz]

 

[Reality Check]

Watching Sol88 make a of plasma cosmology...

 

[Sol88]

No idea what you are talking about, what surface area?



Charge gets evenly distributed over the surface of a conductor, this will not be the case with an insulator. There will be no large regions with mainly + and large regions with mainly -. The mobility of the plasma will take care of that.

What are we talking about here, by the way?



see above I guess, why not read the real paper, instead of only looking at the abstract. I am sure lots of your "questions" will be answered in there, but I am sure you are not really interested in real answers.



whaddevvah



Yes, but that was not the starting point that Alexeff took, there was NO magnetized body to start with, heck, if I remember correctly, there was not even a body, only a gas/plasma (but I don't feel like searching for that poste, does anyone have a link?).



How would I know, read the frakking paper, Sol88, and I am sure you will get your answers. Don't ask other people to do the work that you can do for yourself.

Lets take

Giant molecular clouds (GMCs)

Vast assemblages of molecular gas with masses of 104–106 times the mass of the sun are called Giant molecular clouds (GMC). The clouds can reach tens of parsecs in diameter and have an average density of 10²–10³ particles per cubic centimetre (the average density in the solar vicinity is one particle per cubic centimetre). Substructure within these clouds is a complex pattern of filaments, sheets, bubbles, and irregular clumps.[4]

The densest parts of the filaments and clumps are called "molecular cores", whilst the densest molecular cores are, unsurprisingly, called "dense molecular cores" and have densities in excess of 104–106 particles per cubic centimeter. Observationally molecular cores are traced with carbon monoxide and dense cores are traced with ammonia. The concentration of dust within molecular cores is normally sufficient to block light from background stars such that they appear in silhouette as dark nebulae.[6]

GMCs are so large that "local" ones can cover a significant fraction of a constellation such that they are often referred to by the name of that constellation, e.g. the Orion Molecular Cloud (OMC) or the Taurus Molecular Cloud (TMC). These local GMCs are arrayed in a ring around the sun called the Gould Belt.[7] The most massive collection of molecular clouds in the galaxy, the Sagittarius B2 complex, forms a ring around the galactic centre at a radius of 120 parsec. The Sagittarius region is chemically rich and is often used as an exemplar by astronomers searching for new molecules in interstellar space.[8]

complex pattern of filaments, sheets, bubbles, and irregular clumps??? what could cause this I wonder?

How much charge could something that size attain?


And why would the charge be homogeneous? solar wind contain - & + in a quasi neutral plasma, what stops the - & + getting back together if they are so mobile?

Nebular lightning "changes" the dust into chondrules and onto progressively larger clumps so on and so on!

 

[Sol88]

Okay, here is the post about the Alexeff model. So I was not up to date anymore (I tend to forget nonsense quickly) no plasma but a charged rotating planet. So, there is completely, absolutely no correspondence between lightning in the protoplanetary disk (or was is protoplanetary nebula?) and Alexeef. Not that I expected there was, but just to be sure.

Of course, if the body was already magnetized from the beginning, it would make Alexeff's calculations obsolete, because he wants to generate the Earth's magnetic field (or a planetary magnetic field) by a large current system and NOT by internal permanent magnetization.

Again Sol88 showing that he just writes things down, just because he wants to derail discussions as soon as they start to show he is wrong or start to exceed his physics and math capabilities. Then he tries to just combine various electricities to obfuscate all his misunderstandings and cluelessness.

How did the planet become charged and begin rotating?

 

[tusenfem]

Lets take

Ahhhh, changing the topic again, are we?

complex pattern of filaments, sheets, bubbles, and irregular clumps??? what could cause this I wonder?

Gravity

How much charge could something that size attain?

All gas clouds (including plasmas) are quasi neutral

And why would the charge be homogeneous? solar wind contain - & + in a quasi neutral plasma, what stops the - & + getting back together if they are so mobile?

Charge equilization through mobility of the charge carriers driven by accidental fluctuations.

If you really have to ask why protons and electrons do not recombine in the solar wind, you are even stupider than I thought you were.

Nebular lightning "changes" the dust into chondrules and onto progressively larger clumps so on and so on!

Oh, now we are suddenly somewhere else, no molecular clouds, but the protplanetary disk/nebula (which one is it Solly, you have not answered that).

Wow, this morning I went to the supermarket and the rows with shelves were rather filamented, whatever caused that? Even the iceberg lettuce was clumpy.

 

[tusenfem]

How did the planet become charged and begin rotating?

Why not ask Alexeef about his stupid model, I don't believe in it so I do not have to defend it. Zeuzzz brought it up, maybe you can ask him.

 

[Sol88]

Ahhhh, changing the topic again, are we?



Gravity



All gas clouds (including plasmas) are quasi neutral



Charge equilization through mobility of the charge carriers driven by accidental fluctuations.

If you really have to ask why protons and electrons do not recombine in the solar wind, you are even stupider than I thought you were.



Oh, now we are suddenly somewhere else, no molecular clouds, but the protoplanetary disk/nebula (which one is it Solly, you have not answered that).

Wow, this morning I went to the supermarket and the rows with shelves were rather filamented, whatever caused that? Even the iceberg lettuce was clumpy.

Tusenfem, Tusenfem, Tusenfem

those paper's must be in the same basket as your papers then, is that what you are saying?

Are they wrong?

Can LIGHTNING happen inside a molecular cloud?

 

[Dancing David]

More important what about the velocity of the sausage?

 

[Reality Check]

Tusenfem, Tusenfem, Tusenfem

those paper's must be in the same basket as your papers then, is that what you are saying?

Are they wrong?

Can LIGHTNING happen inside a molecular cloud?

LIGHTNING (what is the difference between this and lightning?) cannot happen inside a cloud of molecular hydrogen (a "molecular cloud"?).

Lightning could happen inside a protoplanetary disk in an analogous manner to thunderstorms because protoplanetary disks contain molecular hydrogen, ice and dust grains. Lightning could also be induced in protoplanetary disks by gamma ray bursts.

Read these papers (you may have seen them before) on the electrostatic generation of lightning in protoplanetary disks from charged dust grains:

• The Generation of Lightning in the Solar Nebula

• On the Possibility of Lightning in the Protosolar Nebula
• Electric Discharges in the Protoplanetary Nebula as a Source of Impulse Magnetic Fields to Promote Dust Aggregation

Sol88, Sol88, Sol88: Why do you insist on making a mockery of plasma cosmology with these silly non-plasma non-cosmology questions?


Plasma cosmology is already laboring under the burden of being a non-scientific hypothesis with different defintions depending on who you talk to.

 

[Sol88]

LIGHTNING (what is the difference between this and lightning?) cannot happen inside a cloud of molecular hydrogen (a "molecular cloud"?).

Lightning could happen inside a protoplanetary disk in an analogous manner to thunderstorms because protoplanetary disks contain molecular hydrogen, ice and dust grains. Lightning could also be induced in protoplanetary disks by gamma ray bursts.

Read these papers (you may have seen them before) on the electrostatic generation of lightning in protoplanetary disks from charged dust grains:

• The Generation of Lightning in the Solar Nebula

• On the Possibility of Lightning in the Protosolar Nebula
• Electric Discharges in the Protoplanetary Nebula as a Source of Impulse Magnetic Fields to Promote Dust Aggregation

Sol88, Sol88, Sol88: Why do you insist on making a mockery of plasma cosmology with these silly non-plasma non-cosmology questions?


Plasma cosmology is already laboring under the burden of being a non-scientific hypothesis with different defintions depending on who you talk to.

Great papers thanks RC!




Seems every one here needs there hand held!


And you still hold onto gravity as the cause for the molecular cloud to collapse into a protoplanetry disk and to form rocky bodies and moons?

Seems ELECTRICITY is the culprit to dust to form aggregates not GRAVITY, which couldn't organize a root in a whorehouse, let alone collapse a molecular cloud into a solar system?

You do know we've found the same minerals from chrondites as that from comets, don't you?

now that's a problem for the mainstream model!

but hey, remember those surfing dust grains dude!!!

 

[Reality Check]

Great papers thanks RC!

Seems every one here needs there hand held!

And you still hold onto gravity as the cause for the molecular cloud to collapse into a protoplanetry disk and to form rocky bodies and moons?

Now you are just being ignorant.
The reason that the protoplanetary disks (dust clouds) form and create stars and planets is gravity.

Seems ELECTRICITY is the culprit to dust to form aggregates not GRAVITY, which couldn't organize a root in a whorehouse, let alone collapse a molecular cloud into a solar system?

Lightning (electricity) is the thing that melts dust particles. As far as I know, gravity is the thing that sticks the melted particles together and keeps them together to form chrondites.
But if you want static electricity discharges to be the mechanism for the formation of chrondites then it is.
So what?

You do know we've found the same minerals from chrondites as that from comets, don't you?

Yes I do.

now that's a problem for the mainstream model!

No it is not.

but hey, remember those surfing dust grains dude!!!

Surf on dude!!!!

So when are you going to get back to plasma cosmology instead of this standard stellar stuff?

 

[tusenfem]

Tusenfem, Tusenfem, Tusenfem

those paper's must be in the same basket as your papers then, is that what you are saying?

Are they wrong?

Can LIGHTNING happen inside a molecular cloud?

solly solly solly, you may be a basket case, whereas me I am just as gay as a picknickbasket.

Molecular clouds ≠ Protoplanetary disk

Oh, by the way, is it a protoplanetary disk or nebula you are talking about. Seems you have not yet cleared that up.

The question about the solar wind was probably just misdirection, giving you some time to come up with other stupidity (like not knowing the difference between a molecular cloud and a protoplanetary disk).

My thanks go to Reality Check to give the correct answers.
And the sausage, it was unstable and kinked!!! dude, that was weird!

 

[Typicallucas]

chug-a-chug-a-chug-a-chug-a