[Continuation] Electric universe theories here (2)

[Sol88]

For your information, in Appendix A of this paper you can find out how to calculate the resistivity of a magnetized plasma (in the actual calculated situation, that of an accretion disk) in s/cm.

Nice paper M.Volwerk et al

However...

There are quite a few assumption i see.

The TOTAL RESISTIVITY of a conducting body (PLASMA) is inversely proportional to its dimension.

(paraphrasing as cant cant select text from the paper. Too lazy to type out verbatim)

This is a biggie! This is NOT what we observe in a LARGE (Dimensional) plasma, like the COSMIC WEB. Astrophysical Jets are implicated in this structure.


Lets NEGLECT the LONGITUDINAL CONDUCTIVITY, why?

It leads to equation (71) being mathamajikics!

'cos Mr Obvious asks "What would happen if the FORCE FREE conditions DID indeed BREAK DOWN?"

How would someone like tusenfem respond to that question?

While we are it, are you able to clarify what a "Force free magnetic link" is? Is the PLASMA flowing in these "LINKS"?

 

[Sol88]

You're bad at reading comprehension. What part of "This is possible if the hole's rotational energy is being extracted in the process" did you not understand? They aren't stumped, they already have the answer.

Black holes have a lot of angular momentum. That angular momentum produces something called frame dragging, a general relativistic effect that we have measured experimentally. And frame dragging can transfer angular momentum (and thus energy) from the black hole to material in the accretion disk. This hasn't stumped anyone but you. Because it involves math, and you're allergic.

Frame dragging what? The PLASMA?


There are more efficient ways in a PLASMA to lose ANGULAR MOMENTUM, than using mathamajicks.

 

[jonesdave116]

This is a biggie! This is NOT what we observe in a LARGE (Dimensional) plasma, like the COSMIC WEB. Astrophysical Jets are implicated in this structure.

No, they aren't. The bulk of the cosmic web is dark matter.

 

[Sol88]

No, they aren't. The bulk of the cosmic web is dark matter.

DARK MATTER

In astronomy, dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter that does not interact with light or other electromagnetic radiation. Dark matter is implied by gravitational effects which cannot be explained by general relativity unless more matter is present than can be observed. Such effects occur in the context of formation and evolution of galaxies, gravitational lensing, the observable universe's current structure, mass position in galactic collisions, the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters, and cosmic microwave background anisotropies.

Mr Obvious here again. Looks like this statement is incorrect gravitational effects which cannot be explained by general relativity.

What is GRAVITY, jd116?

gravity as a geometric property of space and time,

 

[jonesdave116]

DARK MATTER



Mr Obvious here again. Looks like this statement is incorrect gravitational effects which cannot be explained by general relativity.

What is GRAVITY, jd116?

And what is any of that gibberish meant to mean? The cosmic web is an observed prediction of the standard model. Without dark matter, its morphology would not be as we observe it to be.

 

[jonesdave116]

Mr Obvious here again. Looks like this statement is incorrect gravitational effects which cannot be explained by general relativity.

You might want to get on with explaining the evidence for dark matter mentioned in that quote. EM woo? That explains nothing. And MOND cannot explain the lensing observations either. So, how do the EU mythologists explain it?

 

[Sol88]

Mr Obvious says DARK matter/Energy is required to make GR work. Otherwise GR dosent work.

PLASMA physics on the other hand.... once you get past the

The TOTAL RESISTIVITY of a conducting body (PLASMA) is inversely proportional to its dimension.

If it gets big enough (the PLASMA) the resistivity drops to close enough to zero to be ignored. the magnetic field is "frozen in".

Well that statement is complete fugazi!


Not what PLASMA does in an astrophysical setting is it?

PLASMA is filamentary and cellular by its very nature. This what we observe in the COSMIC WEB, why invent mythical mathamajical entities to save a well and truly falsified theory (GR)?

 

[jonesdave116]

Mr Obvious says DARK matter/Energy is required to make GR work. Otherwise GR dosent work.

PLASMA physics on the other hand.... once you get past the



If it gets big enough (the PLASMA) the resistivity drops to close enough to zero to be ignored. the magnetic field is "frozen in".

Well that statement is complete fugazi!


Not what PLASMA does in an astrophysical setting is it?

PLASMA is filamentary and cellular by its very nature. This what we observe in the COSMIC WEB, why invent mythical mathamajical entities to save a well and truly falsified theory (GR)?

Mr Obvious says DARK matter/Energy is required to make GR work. Otherwise GR dosent work

And Mr. Word Salad fails to deal with all the experiments and observations that have never shown GR to be wrong,. And fails to deal with the evidence that dark matter and dark energy do exist. Not has anyone else in the Lightning Bolt cult.

Well that statement is complete fugazi!

Says a follower of a cult with no plasma physicists and with nobody with even a clue about the basics f it. And that has no publications on the subject.

PLASMA is filamentary and cellular by its very nature. This what we observe in the COSMIC WEB

According to precisely nobody with a clue about the subject.

 

[tusenfem]

The TOTAL RESISTIVITY of a conducting body (PLASMA) is inversely proportional to its dimension.

(paraphrasing as cant cant select text from the paper. Too lazy to type out verbatim)

This is a biggie! This is NOT what we observe in a LARGE (Dimensional) plasma, like the COSMIC WEB. Astrophysical Jets are implicated in this structure.

That is not a "biggie" that is just common sense, if you go through more matter then there is more resistivity.
And how is it "not what we observe"? How would you observe resistivity? Do you send a multimeter up into space?
I have no what a "(Dimensional) plasma" is.

 

[Ziggurat]

If it gets big enough (the PLASMA) the resistivity drops to close enough to zero to be ignored. the magnetic field is "frozen in".

That's true. But the "if" should tell you that it's a conditional truth.

Not what PLASMA does in an astrophysical setting is it?

It is, you just have to be aware that not all astrophysical plasmas are big enough for that to be a good assumption.

And clue for the clueless, astrophysicists know this, and don't use that assumption when it's not valid.

PLASMA is filamentary and cellular by its very nature.

Nope. That's not intrinsic to plasmas at all. That can happen to plasmas under various conditions, but it's not part of the nature of plasmas.

 

[Sol88]

And Mr. Word Salad fails to deal with all the experiments and observations that have never shown GR to be wrong,. And fails to deal with the evidence that dark matter and dark energy do exist. Not has anyone else in the Lightning Bolt cult.



Says a follower of a cult with no plasma physicists and with nobody with even a clue about the basics f it. And that has no publications on the subject.



According to precisely nobody with a clue about the subject.

Well, rules you out then I guess.

Filamentation​

Striations or string-like structures..snip.. They are sometimes associated with larger current densities, and the interaction with the magnetic field can form a magnetic rope structure. (See also Plasma pinch)

Dude, GR will NEVER be wrong, you have more equations and calculations left yet to prop it up for just a little longer. There is a lot of reputations and $$ riding on GR being correct.


Why was DARK MATTER required to keep GR's heart beat going, again?

Something something orbits of Stars didn't act like the clever maths that is used to calculate the orbits of satellites

Sound very made it up!

Logic can meet logic but DARK matter/Energy is illogical. Cant argue with illogical ideas.

 

[Sol88]

you go through more matter then there is more resistivity

If it gets big enough (the PLASMA) the resistivity drops to close enough to zero to be ignored. the magnetic field is "frozen in".

That's true. But the "if" should tell you that it's a conditional truth. Ziggurat

Wait, what?

More PLASMA more resistivity tusenfem?

Your PAPER assumptions are all over the shop! Makes no sense, obviously!

 

[Sol88]

Boooya! ​

​

Record-breaking run on Frontier sets new bar for simulating the universe in exascale era​

"There are two components in the universe: dark matter—which as far as we know, only interacts gravitationally—and conventional matter, or atomic matter," said project lead Salman Habib, division director for Computational Sciences at Argonne.


"So, if we want to know what the universe is up to, we need to simulate both of these things: gravity as well as all the other physics including hot gas, and the formation of stars, black holes and galaxies," he said. "The astrophysical 'kitchen sink' so to speak. These simulations are what we call cosmological hydrodynamics simulations."


Not surprisingly, the cosmological hydrodynamics simulations are significantly more computationally expensive and much more difficult to carry out compared to simulations of an expanding universe that only involve the effects of gravity.

"Until recently, we couldn't even imagine doing such a large simulation like that except in the gravity-only approximation."

The problem is not the PLASMA, the problem is your computer is not being big enough for your math to prove the EM force dominates Gravity!

 

[Sol88]

That's true. But the "if" should tell you that it's a conditional truth.

It is, you just have to be aware that not all astrophysical plasmas are big enough for that to be a good assumption.

And clue for the clueless, astrophysicists know this, and don't use that assumption when it's not valid.

Nope. That's not intrinsic to plasmas at all. That can happen to plasmas under various conditions, but it's not part of the nature of plasmas.

Lets take the biggest plasma structure we see!

Porphyrion

Would GR be the best theory to use here?

 

[Sol88]

Boooya! ​

​

Record-breaking run on Frontier sets new bar for simulating the universe in exascale era​

The problem is not the PLASMA, the problem is your computer is not being big enough for your math to prove the EM force dominates Gravity!

Not sure how your GR maths actually handles ELECTRIC CURRENTS thru a PLASMA?

The type we observe.

 

[Sol88]

Frontier is an HPE Cray EX system with more than 9,800 nodes, each equipped with a third-generation AMD EPYC CPU and four AMD Instinct MI250X GPUs. The OLCF is a DOE Office of Science user facility.

Only 1.35 exaflops??? Rookie numbers. Legend has it ziggurat's pretty good at calculation. Me on the other hand could tell the AI to tell Frontier to do the maths. Apparently, maths is truth/reality.

Reckon we can run the EU maths thru it? See what it comes up with? As long as the answer is not 42.

 

[Ziggurat]

Lets take the biggest plasma structure we see!

Porphyrion

Would GR be the best theory to use here?

For what? GR is the most accurate theory to describe the gravitational interactions in Porphyrion, including the gravitational effects on the jets. But gravity isn't the only force involved, and astronomers know that. GR alone can't describe non-gravitational forces, and nobody tries to make it.

So what's your point? This is just more gish gallop. You can't do any calculations, you can't do any science. No EUtard can do calculations. No EUtard can do science.

 

[Ziggurat]

Not sure how your GR maths actually handles ELECTRIC CURRENTS thru a PLASMA?

The type we observe.

What's funny about this is that you don't seem to realize that the math of electromagnetism is what led to the math of relativity. You treat them as if they're antagonistic, but electromagnetism doesn't even make sense without relativity.

But then, nothing involving math makes sense to you, so...

 

[Sol88]

Lets just bung this... Ion and Electron Acceleration in Fully Kinetic Plasma Turbulence

into this

the fastest supercomputer on the planet to run the largest astrophysical simulation of the universe ever conducted.

See what it spits out, ay?

 

[Sol88]

What's funny about this is that you don't seem to realize that the math of electromagnetism is what led to the math of relativity. You treat them as if they're antagonistic, but electromagnetism doesn't even make sense without relativity.

But then, nothing involving math makes sense to you, so...

You've got your cart before the horse there sport.

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE acknowledges GRAVITY. The EU just know when Gravity it important.

Hannes Alfven has some famous quote..."Gravity is the ashes of a prior electrical system"

No three body problem in the EU!

 

[Sol88]

And Mr. Word Salad fails to deal with all the experiments and observations that have never shown GR to be wrong,. And fails to deal with the evidence that dark matter and dark energy do exist. Not has anyone else in the Lightning Bolt cult.



Says a follower of a cult with no plasma physicists and with nobody with even a clue about the basics f it. And that has no publications on the subject.


PLASMA is filamentary and cellular by its very nature. This what we observe in the COSMIC WEB
According to precisely nobody with a clue about the subject.

Bubble in the dough of the universe​

This is because the standard model does not provide for such under-densities or "bubbles"—they should not actually exist. Instead, matter should be evenly distributed in space. If this were the case, however, it would be difficult to explain which forces propel the galaxies to their high speed.

So the standard models math says no but the universe says yes.

 

[Ziggurat]

You've got your cart before the horse there sport.

The ELECTRIC UNIVERSE acknowledges GRAVITY. The EU just know when Gravity it important.

No they don't. How can you know when it is or isn't important without calculations? You can't. And the EUtards never do calculations.

No three body problem in the EU!

That's the stupidest thing you have ever said, which is quite an accomplishment. How many bodies are there in a plasma? Only two? Or more than two? If it's more than two, you have a three body problem.

You don't actually understand what that term means, because it's mathematical, and you can't do math.

 

[Sol88]

Yup, it's a math problem.

Bodies in a plasma??? Are those bodies CHARGED?

YOUR math FAILS.

GR is dead n buried.

 

[Sol88]

Talking about MASS (gravity)...​

​

An improved quantification of the intergalactic medium and cosmic filaments​

Much of the mass in the universe lies not in stars or galaxies, but in the space between them, known as the intergalactic medium. It is warm and even hot, and is called the "warm-hot intergalactic medium," or WHIM. It holds about 50% of the normal mass (viz. baryonic, not including dark matter) of the universe but with a density of hydrogen ions less than 100 per cubic meter.

The void closest to us is the "Local Void." The cosmic filaments connect galaxies in a vast web; they are mostly full of gas, dust, stars, and a lot of dark matter. They are very hot, in a plasma state, but not as hot or as dense as the sun, consisting of ionized hydrogen atoms (a proton), and are detected by the absorption of light given off by quasars.

I'll give you a minute to let that sink in... PLASMA

 

[Sol88]

Cosmic filaments span almost the entire universe.

How's GR mathematically modeling these electric currents (filaments)?

 

[Ziggurat]

Bodies in a plasma??? Are those bodies CHARGED?

Electrons are charged, are they not?

And typically there are more than three, right?

Which means that plasmas have three body problems too. Not that you have any idea what that phrase even means. Because you can't do math.

 

[Sol88]

Electrons are charged, are they not?

And typically there are more than three, right?

Which means that plasmas have three body problems too. Not that you have any idea what that phrase even means. Because you can't do math.

Do think they are the same thing, gravitational three body problem and PLASMA?

WoW!

PLASMA has no three body problem GR does.

simple!

 

[Sol88]

Do think they are the same thing, gravitational three body problem and PLASMA?

WoW!

PLASMA has no three body problem GR does.

simple!

How do you get your gravitational bodies to REPEL each other? Like charges not often get together, so not a problem in a PLASMA.

 

[Ziggurat]

Do think they are the same thing, gravitational three body problem and PLASMA?

WoW!

PLASMA has no three body problem GR does.

simple!

Like I said, you have no clue what the term means. Electromagnetism has a three body problem too, nothing about gravity is peculiar in this respect.

 

[Sol88]

Seems quite a few "problems" with GR (standard model)

Like I said, you have no clue what the term means. Electromagnetism has a three body problem too, nothing about gravity is peculiar in this respect.

Stable orbits of multiple "bodies" (Planetary Systems orbiting a Star) are a quite easy to achieve. Same thing for angular momentum. Easy stuff.

 

[steenkh]

Seems quite a few "problems" with GR (standard model)


Stable orbits of multiple "bodies" (Planetary Systems orbiting a Star) are a quite easy to achieve. Same thing for angular momentum. Easy stuff.

I am sure you direct us to calculations of those easily achieved stable orbits multiple bodies in planetary systems using EU forces, right?

 

[MRC_Hans]

I am sure you direct us to calculations of those easily achieved stable orbits multiple bodies in planetary systems using EU forces, right?

Yes, like he always does. And the interaction problem, since with EM forces, planets must repel each other. Anytime now, Sol88 is going to present the easy math stuff, I'm sure.

Hans

 

[Ziggurat]

Stable orbits of multiple "bodies" (Planetary Systems orbiting a Star) are a quite easy to achieve. Same thing for angular momentum. Easy stuff.

Yet again, you prove you don't know what the term actually means. You're a joke.

 

[steenkh]

Yet again, you prove you don't know what the term actually means. You're a joke.

Now, now, give him a chance to show the easy stuff

 

[Ziggurat]

Now, now, give him a chance to show the easy stuff

I already gave him multiple chances. And he can't even count to three. Even the rabbits in Watership Down could count to four.

 

[Sol88]

How does PLASMA have a three body gravitational math problem?

EM force not much cares about gravity.

The some mob that say nonesense like this

Another quick question: what relevance has your lack of understanding physics concepts to the Electric Universe: the pseudo-scientific idea that cannot even predict the orbit of a satellite.

Um...that's all GR can do...

 

[Sol88]

Concepts Related to Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation​

To summarize the two views of gravity, Newton envisioned gravity as a tug of war along the line connecting any two objects in the universe. In contrast, Einstein envisioned gravity as a bending of space-time by mass.

In the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE...

electric dipole force between subatomic particles, as Wal Thornhill has proposed envisioned.

 

[Ziggurat]

How does PLASMA have a three body gravitational math problem?

God damn, but you're clueless.

The three body problem isn't unique to gravity. It applies to ALL forces. It is most commonly taught in relation to gravity (in part because historically, gravity was the first theory to have analytic solutions), but there's nothing special about gravity in relation to the three body problem.

In the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE...

Wal is a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ moron. Gravity isn't due to electric dipole attractions between matter. This is obvious. Dipole attractions don't have 1/r^2 dependence, and they do have directional dependence. You have to be dumber than a bag of bricks that huff mercury and eat lead to think that electric dipole interactions could produce gravity. Seriously, how many extra chromosomes does the man have?

 

[steenkh]

How does PLASMA have a three body gravitational math problem?

EM force not much cares about gravity.

EU magic suffices, you think?

Um...that's all GR can do...

Very funny. The real physics that can predicts orbits, ensure that probes can pick the right path through extremely complicated manoeuvres to arrive at the right places in the Solar system is poo-pooed on the basis of a magic fantasy that can do exactly nothing?

 

[Sol88]

God damn, but you're clueless.

The three body problem isn't unique to gravity. It applies to ALL forces. It is most commonly taught in relation to gravity (in part because historically, gravity was the first theory to have analytic solutions), but there's nothing special about gravity in relation to the three body problem.


Wal is a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ moron. Gravity isn't due to electric dipole attractions between matter. This is obvious. Dipole attractions don't have 1/r^2 dependence, and they do have directional dependence. You have to be dumber than a bag of bricks that huff mercury and eat lead to think that electric dipole interactions could produce gravity. Seriously, how many extra chromosomes does the man have?

Wal envisioned it. Same a old mate with the fuzzy hair.

One describing what gravity is, the others its effects. The electromagnetic force and gravity are real things. One is a very weak force. Barley perceptible and very difficult to experiment.

In a PLASMA universe one would use EM and gravity. Of course

Where would one introduce your three body problem into the maths for a FIELD ALIGNED FORCE FREE CURRENT?

Double layers (ELECTRIC FIELDS)
Z pincn

Actually, any PLASMA instability in a PLASMA UNIVERSE.

You are up to speed on how the EU gets planetary orbits to become stable?