Plasma Cosmology - Woo or not

[tusenfem]

Electrons in a filed aligned current is an electric current though

I guess filed should be field.

In that case the sentence:

Electrons in a field aligned current is an electric current though

is utter and totally bull, cow manure, bird droppings

electrons are never a current, electrons in motion can be thought of as a current in many cases. Maybe the sentence should be:

field aligned current is an electric current (and electrons may be the charge carriers)

 

[Tubbythin]

oh nothing

<looks at the Lyman-alpha blobS and cosmic filamentary structure links again>

And for his next trick, Sol88 will use cosmic ray muons to show that Newtonian mechanics is correct and SR is wrong .

 

[Sol88]

Neutronium, is that not what Wolverine's skeleton is made of? Ah, nah, that is adamantium (just like Galadriel's ring). From Wiki:

Originally Posted by wiki
Neutronium is a term originally used in science fiction and in popular literature to refer to an extremely dense phase of matter composed primarily of neutrons. The word was coined by scientist Andreas von Antropoff in 1926 (i.e. before the discovery of the neutron itself) for the conjectured 'element of atomic number zero' that he placed at the head of the periodic table. However, the meaning of the term has changed over time, and from the last half of the 20th century onward it has been used legitimately to refer to extremely dense phases of matter resembling the neutron-degenerate matter postulated to exist in the cores of neutron stars.

Wowee!!

Magnetic Monsters
​

May 22, 2009
Extreme magnetic fields in space are said to be caused by the high-speed rotation of neutron stars. One of many cases where a theory is built on the incorrect assumptions of another theory.

However, when the rotation rates of some pulsars were measured at once per second or less (even with many times the mass of our Sun), "neutron stars" were fabricated. Only a super dense material like neutronium was thought able to withstand those rotational speeds. Neutronium is a hypothetical material that has had all of its electrons smashed down into the nuclei, where the protons and electrons combine into neutrons.



"Magnetars" are anomalous stars identified as x-ray pulsars (AXP) or soft gamma repeaters (SGR). They are said to be created by neutron stars with magnetic fields measuring over 10^15 Gauss. For comparison, the Earth's magnetic field is about one-half Gauss, so these "magnetic pulsars" are surprisingly powerful sources. It must be stressed, though, that the evidence is indirect and no neutron star has ever been observed.

Is that correct? none have been observed?

The Electric Universe hypothesis requires no collapsed stars or rotational speeds so great that ordinary matter could never take the strain. The oscillations in magnetars (or pulsars, in general) are caused by resonant effects in electric circuits. The sudden release of stored electrical energy in a “double layer” is responsible for the occasional outburst of gamma rays. The outburst begins with a sudden peak of energy, and then declines gradually, like a stroke of lightning.

That word again, lightning!

 

[Sol88]

I guess filed should be field.

In that case the sentence:

Electrons in a field aligned current is an electric current though

is utter and totally bull, cow manure, bird droppings

electrons are never a current, electrons in motion can be thought of as a current in many cases. Maybe the sentence should be:

field aligned current is an electric current (and electrons may be the charge carriers)

Whatever

Either way it an electric current!

 

[tusenfem]

That word again, lightning!

Indeed. once more only words from Thundercrap of the Gods.

 

[tusenfem]

Whatever
Either way it an electric current!

Well duh, it's like saying an apple is an apple, stating the obvious.

Was there anything significant meant this statement of your feeble mind?

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Suggestion for Sol88

Sol88, I can't see what you post, except when others quote it.

However, based on what I have seen through quoted posts darkly, I have two suggestions for you.

First, take a leaf from Michael Mozina's book: start a new thread with the narrow and specific scope of demonstrating that the 2007 THEMIS results "reconfirm Birkeland's model of solar-terrestrial electrical interaction". In this thread you will present primary source material (starting with Birkeland's own published works, and including the relevant THEMIS team paper(s) published in relevant peer-reviewed journals), present clear definitions, and walk readers through the relevant physics.

Second, in this thread, provide a specific citation to Birkeland's first use of the term 'plasma cosmology'; if, as is likely, you cannot find any such, then summarise what you understand to be Birkeland's views on cosmology and back your summary up with specific references to his published work.

OK, I have a third suggestion: why not use your precious time to advance the totality of human knowledge and understanding of the universe? Being a mindless shill for a cult is demeaning, isn't it, so why not tell us all what you'd do if you had complete freedom to use, over a full decade, not only the newly refurbished Hubble Space Telescope, not only the newly launched Herschel and Planck missions, not only the premier x-ray facilities (XMM-Newton and Chandra), not only Fermi, but also both Gemini North and Gemini South? All hail the über-astronomer Sol88! Tell us, great astronomy guru, where to point these fantastic machines? what to do with the data they collect when pointed there?

 

[Reality Check]

Magnetic Monsters

"Magnetars" are anomalous stars identified as x-ray pulsars (AXP) or soft gamma repeaters (SGR). They are said to be created by neutron stars with magnetic fields measuring over 10^15 Gauss. For comparison, the Earth's magnetic field is about one-half Gauss, so these "magnetic pulsars" are surprisingly powerful sources. It must be stressed, though, that the evidence is indirect and no neutron star has ever been observed.

Is that correct? none have been observed?

That is a thunderbolts.info misdirection for stupid people who do not read the next paragraph. That paragraph states that neutron stars (or maybe just magnetars) have been indirectly observed.

The direct observation of RX J1856.5-3754 in visible light by the HST (composite image here) makes this misdirection a lie.

 

[Reality Check]

Magnetic Monstershttp://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090522monsters.htm​

Sol88:
Do you really expect anyone to take you seriously if you link to a web site advertising a book?
Lets have a look at this page and notice

• the lack of citations to scientific papers, even in non-peer reviewed journals.
• the ignorance of the author (Stephen Smith) in thinking that neutronium is anything except a term used in science fiction.
• the stupidity of Stephen Smith who thinks that is is the strength of a nonexistent material that keeps neutron stars together (it is gravity).

This quote encapsulates the stupidity:

The Electric Universe hypothesis requires no collapsed stars or rotational speeds so great that ordinary matter could never take the strain.

The neutron stars have been observed to be "collapsed".
A Revised Parallax and its Implications for RX J185635-3754 calculates a radius of ~15 km for the star.

 

[Vermonter]

Sol88,

Neutron stars have been observed in astronomy, while I was a physics major in college I took a seminar with an actual radio astronomer and the entire class was about pulsars. While many properties are unknown, many others are known. It was a few years ago, so I don't recall a lot of details on the class. However, pulsars are frequently the targets of radio telescopes because they are so fascinating to observe. Pulsars are thought to be the remains of supernova, and are comprised of highly compacted matter. They are also thought to be the densest objects in the universe. If the original star was much larger it would probably have collapsed into a black hole.

Never once has a neutron star been referred to as being comprised of "neutronium". They have been directly observed using radio telescopes, and their existence has been known since the 60s. It wasn't so much predicted as technicians were picking up some very strange signals from a newly constructed antenna receiver array and decided to investigate further. Observations were made and verified, and calculations ensued. Not too long after that, astronomers realized they were observing something quite different from what they were previously looking at.

I speak with real live astronomers on a regular basis at college, and astronomy is something of greater interest to me than my actual major (computer science). So, what I say is not simply "armchair astronomy" that can be simply brushed aside.

 

[Sol88]

They have been directly observed using radio telescopes, and their existence has been known since the 60s. It wasn't so much predicted as technicians were picking up some very strange signals from a newly constructed antenna receiver array and decided to investigate further. Observations were made and verified, and calculations ensued. Not too long after that, astronomers realized they were observing something quite different from what they were previously looking at.

That's a common misconception, Vermonter.

Yes they did observe highly energetic compact objects and as electricity is taboo in astronomy, they fell back on the only known energy source at the time gravity! The rest has all been theoretical mathematical nonsensical rubbish.

To parse from wiki on the X ray pulsar page

The magnetic field strength at the surface of the neutron star is typically about 1012 gauss, over a trillion times stronger than the strength of the magnetic field measured at the surface of the Earth (0.6 gauss). Gas is accreted from the stellar companion and is channeled by the neutron star's magnetic field on to the magnetic poles producing two or more localized X-ray hot spots similar to the two auroral zones on the Earth but far hotter. At these hotspots the infalling gas can reach half the speed of light before it impacts the neutron star surface.

That'd be a plasma not a gas! Plasma is a good electrical conductor.

The gas that supplies the X-ray pulsar can reach the neutron star by a variety of ways that depend on the size and shape of the neutron star's orbital path and the nature of the companion star. Some companion stars of X-ray pulsars are very massive young stars, usually OB supergiants (see stellar classification), that emit a radiation driven stellar wind from their surface. The neutron star is immersed in the wind and continuously captures gas that flows nearby.

That gas is a plasma, a stream of CHARGED particles!

Radio pulsars (rotation-powered pulsars) and X-ray pulsars exhibit very different spin behaviors and have different mechanisms producing their characteristic pulses although it is accepted that both kinds of pulsar are manifestations of a rotating magnetized neutron star. The rotation cycle of the neutron star in both cases is identified with the pulse period. The major differences are that radio pulsars have periods on the order of milliseconds to seconds, and all radio pulsars are losing angular momentum and slowing down. In contrast, the X-ray pulsars exhibit a variety of spin behaviors. Some X-ray pulsars are observed to be continuously spinning faster or slower (with occasional reversals in these trends) while others show either little change in pulse period or display erratic spin-down and spin-up behavior. The explanation of this difference can be found in the physical nature of the two pulsar classes. Over 99% of radio pulsars are single objects that radiate away their rotational energy in the form of relativistic particles and magnetic dipole radiation, lighting up any nearby nebulae that surround them. In contrast, X-ray pulsars are members of binary star systems and accrete matter from either stellar winds or accretion disks. The accreted matter transfers angular momentum to (or from) the neutron star causing the spin rate to increase or decrease at rates that are often hundreds of times faster than the typical spin down rate in radio pulsars. Exactly why the X-ray pulsars show such varied spin behavior is still not clearly understood.

A highly magnetized rotating body immersed in a plasma???? Mmmm.....

Pulses of EM energy from Gamma to radio?? Mmmmm.....

Let's have a look at them real fast buggers eh?

However, there has been recent evidence that the standard evolutionary model fails to explain the evolution of all millisecond pulsars, especially young millisecond pulsars with relatively high magnetic fields, e.g. PSR B1937+21 . Kızıltan & Thorsett showed [1] that different millisecond pulsars must form by at least two distinct processes. But the nature of the other process remains a mystery.[2]

And how bout Magnetars

Little is known about the physical structure of a magnetar because none are close to Earth.

but our maths tell us all the properties we need to know? Correct?

 

[Sol88]

A neutron star is a type of remnant that can result from the gravitational collapse of a massive star

Gravitational collapse or Magnetic pinch?

Gravitational collapse in astronomy is the inward fall of a massive body under the influence of the force of gravity. It occurs when all other forces fail to supply a sufficiently high pressure to counterbalance gravity and keep the massive body in hydrostatic equilibrium.

A pinch is the compression of an electrically conducting filament by magnetic forces. The conductor is usually a plasma, but could also be a solid or liquid metal. In a z-pinch, the current is axial (in the z direction in a cylindrical coordinate system) and the magnetic field azimuthal; in a theta-pinch, the current is azimuthal (in the theta direction in cylindrical coordinates) and the magnetic field is axial. The phenomenon may also be referred to as a "Bennett pinch"[1] (after Willard Harrison Bennett), "electromagnetic pinch",[2] "magnetic pinch",[3] "pinch effect"[4] or "plasma pinch".[5]

Pinches occur naturally in electrical discharges such as lightning bolts,[6] the aurora,[7] current sheets,[8] and solar flares.[9] They are also produced in the laboratory, primarily for research into fusion power, but also by hobbyists[citation needed].

One explanation, gravity, needs a lota assumptions about stuff we can never test, the other, plasma, is well known and modeled in the lab!

eg

Pinches are created in the laboratory in equipment related to nuclear fusion, such as the Z-pinch machine and high-energy physics, such as the dense plasma focus. Pinches may also become unstable,[11] and generate radiation across the electromagnetic spectrum, including radio waves, x-rays[12] and gamma rays,[13] and also neutrons[14] and synchrotron radiation.[15]

Why would the Universe use any other method for Em radiation production? Ohh I forgot, electric currents DO NOT and CAN NOT exist in space!

 

[Vermonter]

Who's misconception? Yours? It's well modeled that pulsars are the result of gravitational collapse, unless you can provide the model and numbers that can predict and explain the existance of a 15-km squat sphere. Under the Electric Universe model, how does this come to be? How is it held together? What explains the "blips" that are shown in the rotation of the pulsar? What causes the pulsar to rotate so quickly?

New pulsars rotate very quickly, and slow down over time. How does the Electric Universe model explain this? Spouting off "no, your model is wrong" won't fly. If you're going to challenge something, show your work. And no, I won't "look at the picture". The pictures, while interesting, are not a substitute for actual data and models.

Plasma consists of ionized gases. Because some of the electrons are free, it is partially, read, partially conductive. However, in order to have this ionized gas, it needs to be superheated.

Plasma is the most common phase of matter because stellar objects are comprised of ionized gas. In other words, plasma. There's no mystical or weird electrical association with it.

Pulsars, however, are not immersed in a plasma. Perhaps the remnants of the shell that it once had, but in most cases that sphere of matter was either blown away or sucked back in.

 

[Sol88]

Vermonter wrote;

Because some of the electrons are free, it is partially, read, partially conductive

my bold

Wiki says:

Comparison of plasma and gas phases

Properties Gas Plasma
Electrical Conductivity

GAS Very low
Air is an excellent insulator until it breaks down into plasma at electric field strengths above 30 kilovolts per centimeter.[15]

Plasma Usually very high
For many purposes the conductivity of a plasma may be treated as infinite.

Care to change your thinking, Vermontor?

Pulsars, however, are not immersed in a plasma

Ummm......ever heard of the IGM or the ISM or even the IPM? That's plasma your soaking in!

also

plasma is kinda funky! e.g

Non-neutral plasma

The strength and range of the electric force and the good conductivity of plasmas usually ensure that the density of positive and negative charges in any sizeable region are equal ("quasineutrality"). A plasma which has a significant excess of charge density or which is, in the extreme case, composed of only 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.

 

[Sol88]

RC wrote

A cloud of electrons is not a plasma as anyone with a basic knowledge of physics knows.
A plasma is an ionized gas - it has positive ions as well as electron. .

Put your troll back on it's leash, RC!! Your knowledge of plasma is showing!!!

A cloud of electrons can also be called a non-neutral plasma!!

please have a little knowledge of what you speak!

 

[Reality Check]

RC wrote

Put your troll back on it's leash, RC!! Your knowledge of plasma is showing!!!

A cloud of electrons can also be called a non-neutral plasma!!

please have a little knowledge of what you speak!

Put your troll back on it's leash, Sol88.
You are right - we can create "pure electron plasmsa" in labs.
please have a little knowledge of what you speak!

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Vermonter had some good points which you have ignored in favour of your usual obsession about plasma.
Scientists have heard of the IGM and the ISM and even the IPM. That's plasma we are soaking in! So what?


What does the EU model as published in peer-reviewed journals explain the following questions

• How do the small bodies that produce the observed radiation from pulsars form?
• Are they rotating and if so how are they kept together?
• Why are there "blips" in the rotation?
• Why are they rotating so fast?
• Why does the rate of rotation slow exactly as predicted by General Relativity?

Who's misconception? Yours? It's well modeled that pulsars are the result of gravitational collapse, unless you can provide the model and numbers that can predict and explain the existance of a 15-km squat sphere. Under the Electric Universe model, how does this come to be? How is it held together? What explains the "blips" that are shown in the rotation of the pulsar? What causes the pulsar to rotate so quickly?

New pulsars rotate very quickly, and slow down over time. How does the Electric Universe model explain this? Spouting off "no, your model is wrong" won't fly. If you're going to challenge something, show your work. And no, I won't "look at the picture". The pictures, while interesting, are not a substitute for actual data and models.

Plasma consists of ionized gases. Because some of the electrons are free, it is partially, read, partially conductive. However, in order to have this ionized gas, it needs to be superheated.

Plasma is the most common phase of matter because stellar objects are comprised of ionized gas. In other words, plasma. There's no mystical or weird electrical association with it.

Pulsars, however, are not immersed in a plasma. Perhaps the remnants of the shell that it once had, but in most cases that sphere of matter was either blown away or sucked back in.

 

[tusenfem]

... as electricity is taboo in astronomy, ..

That'd be a plasma not a gas! Plasma is a good electrical conductor.

That gas is a plasma, a stream of CHARGED particles!

Oh oh oh oh, on an early sunday afternoon, having to read the nonsense that Sol88 writes down again and again and again.

For the well informed readers of this bulleting board, who still think that Sol88 is on to something (if not on something), though the number may be vanishing small (Zeuzzz, Michael Mozina, brent c, ...):

Sol88 is most likely a self-edumacated plasma-astrophysicist, with just enough knowledge of the field to read what is presented on the web with respect to main and woo theories, and is totally convinced of innumerous misconceptions, fed by the people from Thundercrap of the Gods.

If electricity would be taboo in astronomy, I wonder why I studied for my PhD electrostatic double layers in astrophysical plasmas. Really weird that a mainstream university would award me a degree on a taboo topic.

Sol88 still does not get that a plasma is a gas. Somehow he thinks that when a gas gets ionized, it stops being a gas and starts being a plasma. Both are wrong. An ionized gas, is a gas, that happens to consist of charged particles, but still adheres to the gas laws (quite possibly with another adiabetic constant). So, to be clear on this a plasma is a gas.

Now, is every ionized gas a plasma? NO, there are some conditions that an ionized gas has to fulfil in order to be a plasma. The has to be collective behaviour, that means that the electron plasma frequency needs to be larger than the (ion/electron)-neutral collision frequency (which means that a gas does not need to be ionized 100% to be a plasma), the number of particles of in the DeBye sphere need to much greater than 1 to get so called "plasma screening" (whichs shows that 100% ionized gasses need not be plasmas). It would be wise for Sol88 (and some others here) to actually read some of the basics of plasma physics. This can EVEN be done in an old book like Alfven's Cosmic Plasmas, although for a bit more modern approach there are numerous books on the topic, for all I care you take Peratt's book, where you will find the same frakking thing.

And "that gas is a stream of charged particles" SO WHAT? Vermonter was talking about accretion. If there happens to be an electric field (rather likely) at the pole of the neutron star that accretes, then the energy of (half of) the particles will be increased a bit, but then again, SO WHAT?

This discussion has taken on a rediculous turn. Not only has this above already been discussed three times by me, explaining several members on the board what a plasma is (yes it is a gas, yes it is ionized, no not every ionized gas is a plasma), but it goes round and round and round, when one PU/PC/EU/EC/ES proponent leaves or starts to hibernat, another pops up or wakes up. All the time we are getting NO, and then absolutely NO justification for any of the assumptions in their pet theories (we just have to take them at face value) whereas well developed theories (with the abilitiy to make predictions) from mainstream get trashed because they "ignore or taboo-ize" electricity in astrophysics. The fact that there is a whole large field of plasma-astrophysics and space physics (being the planetary counterpart) seems to be not registered by the PU/PC/EU/EC/ES peeps.

• I would like to see a well developed model of the electric sun.
• I would like to see a well developed model of the sputtering of comets and the successive production of water with solar wind protons.
• I would like to see evidence for the large current filaments that are supposedly creating galaxies through Peratt's model.
• I would like to see ...

But I know that none of the wishes above will ever be fulfilled, because the theories of the PU/PC/EU/EC/ES suck when put under scrutiny.

I would advise all participants here, to stop doing all this nonsense.

 

[tusenfem]

RC wrote

Put your troll back on it's leash, RC!! Your knowledge of plasma is showing!!!

A cloud of electrons can also be called a non-neutral plasma!!

please have a little knowledge of what you speak!

Whooooohahahahahahahahaha
(okay I know that I am going against my own advise here)

It seems that you still have not read the full press release that you linked to yourself about these "electron clouds" and simply refuse to understand that these CMEs are called electron clouds because the camera that measures these clouds is only measuring the light of the sun that is reflected by the electrons in the CME.

Otherwise, in nature, the creation of non-neutral plasmas is virtually impossible, not even your beloved plasma pinch will be able to keep an "pure electron cloud" together because of the electrostatic repulsion of the electrons. One has to use very complicated machinery to harnass an electron plasma.

 

[Dancing David]

Who's misconception? Yours? It's well modeled that pulsars are the result of gravitational collapse, unless you can provide the model and numbers that can predict and explain the existance of a 15-km squat sphere. Under the Electric Universe model, how does this come to be? How is it held together? What explains the "blips" that are shown in the rotation of the pulsar? What causes the pulsar to rotate so quickly?

New pulsars rotate very quickly, and slow down over time. How does the Electric Universe model explain this? Spouting off "no, your model is wrong" won't fly. If you're going to challenge something, show your work. And no, I won't "look at the picture". The pictures, while interesting, are not a substitute for actual data and models.

Plasma consists of ionized gases. Because some of the electrons are free, it is partially, read, partially conductive. However, in order to have this ionized gas, it needs to be superheated.

Plasma is the most common phase of matter because stellar objects are comprised of ionized gas. In other words, plasma. There's no mystical or weird electrical association with it.

Pulsars, however, are not immersed in a plasma. Perhaps the remnants of the shell that it once had, but in most cases that sphere of matter was either blown away or sucked back in.

Welcome Vermonter, watch out for the giant straw men and shifting goal posts.

You do get a free word salad with every meal!