The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby seasmith » Wed Oct 03, 2018 3:58 pm

seasmith wrote:
seasmith wrote:
~
jimmcgin wrote:

(Consult an H2O phase diagram for details.)
...
I'm the #1 expert in the world on water


Have you ever studied phase diagrams, or just looked at the pictures ?
Do you know what a sublimation line is
?


Phase Diagrams made simple:

Gas, liquid and solid are standard terms. When pressure decreases and/or heat increases, the molecules of a liquid or solid substance may disassociate (evaporation/sublimation) and form what is called gas. Conversely when those conditions are reversed, so also is the organization of those molecules. [Extreme conditions may form what are called supercritical fluids, a different thread].

I have previously provided images of combinations of H2O molecules which, given the asymmetric polarity of the water molecule, might be conducive to a ‘stable’ aggregation of H20 molecules. For example dimers through hexamers, which would then be favorable configurations to join with similar stable H2O oligamers. These *organized* molecular associations (i.e. clusters and nano-droplets) can become a ‘vapor’ or mist.
The presence of an electric field can very greatly accelerate these processes.

It has also been pointed out previously for Mcginn, instances when he has become a bit lost in semantics, and perhaps a deficient understanding of what is commonly termed “bonding”; but apparently you can’t talk common sense to “the #1 expert in the world on water”.
Oh well.
`


Mcginn wrote:
Hmm. I think I get your point. You are saying that if we act like children and close our eyes the monster goes away.
So, . . . I agree that if we gloss over the details we can continue to pretend that H2O magically turns to gaseous at temperatures far below/above the temperatures/pressures indicated in the phase diagram.
I have decided not to abide with this convention. But if it makes you feel any better I want you to know that I fully support your right to believe whatever you choose to believe.
Most people when presented with a choice between what is easiest to believe and what is true will always choose the former. I always choose the latter.

I'm funny that way.


`
A bit funny perhaps, but not in that way.
I will leave you now to your fantasies....
;)
seasmith
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby jimmcginn » Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:51 am

seasmith wrote:Gas, liquid and solid are standard terms.

Meaningless. This kind of vapid rhetoric has no place in a scientific discussion. Find a new hobby.
seasmith wrote:When pressure decreases and/or heat increases, the molecules of a liquid or solid substance may disassociate (evaporation/sublimation) and form what is called gas.

Wrong. Only boiling produces gas. You've conflated evaporation/sublimation with boiling. Evaporation/sublimation produces vapor, not gas. (Consult the H2O phase diagram for details.)
seasmith wrote:I have previously provided images of combinations of H2O molecules which, given the asymmetric polarity of the water molecule, might be conducive to a ‘stable’ aggregation of H20 molecules.

Meaningless. You don't get it at all. Like a lot of bad science, your position is not based on evidence but on a combination of bad logic and lack of evidence to the contrary.

You really should leave this topic to somebody that understands the subject.

Read this for more detail:
We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air is gaseous
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/php ... 10&t=16471

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby MotionTheory » Thu Oct 04, 2018 5:52 pm

I re-watched part of your 'convection vs plasma' video, this time I ignored some terminologies and structures.

Agreed, plasma is one of a missing links. :thumbs up: on yours advanced thoughts!

As heat related to convection, this plasma induced by electromagnetic? plasma-water buoyancy how?

Your used of term 'droplets' led to many objections because liquid water density is 2 magnitude higher than air density. Also down right impossible to float via electrostatic. H2O droplet/spheroidal object will acts almost as a faraday cage and insignificant diamagnetic. Similar issue with ice (just bringing up for viewer clarity, since you did mentioned ice will fall).

As for plasma-water links up into linear polymer/filament. Density issue persists for this structure.

Perhaps tackle electromagnetic then onto shape/geometry, motion after that.

Of course std convection, latent heat, wind, pressure, temperature, etc... are important variables in weather matrix.

*** btw = read-only ***
7 months ago, in about 2 months span, I conducted many thought weather simulations. Weather matrix consists of objects, pressures, density, structures, volumes, shapes and motions. Matrix sans most conventional concepts/labels/variables - such as: bond, polarity, electron-blah, heat, convection, latent heat, plasma, magnetic. Current/conventional atmospheric dynamic paradigm is so complicated; convoluted and mythical... no thanks ;)
GOES-16 & GOES-17 are awesome! (hopefully NOAA able to resolve most of GOES-17 issues)
***
MotionTheory
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:26 pm
Location: Goleta, CA

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby jimmcginn » Fri Oct 05, 2018 9:55 am

MotionTheory wrote:I re-watched part of your 'convection vs plasma' video, this time I ignored some terminologies and structures.

Agreed, plasma is one of a missing links. :thumbs up: on yours advanced thoughts!


Thank you.

MotionTheory wrote:As heat related to convection, this plasma induced by electromagnetic? plasma-water buoyancy how?


The best way to understand this plasma and how it emerges in the atmosphere is to first understand surface tension of H2O. But understanding surface tension in H2O is very, very difficult. It involves an advanced understanding of water and hydrogen bonding. This advanced understanding has been obscured by an overwhelming amount of popularistic pseudoscience, starting with a huge error made my Linus Pauling way back in the 1930s.

Surface tension of H2O seems like such a subtle thing that it is hard to imagine how it becomes amplified to produce the plasma of atmospheric vortices.

For more go to Youtube and do a search on the following: James McGinn Pauling's Omission Incidental Symmetry

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby MotionTheory » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:23 am

um... double post :roll:
Last edited by MotionTheory on Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
MotionTheory
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:26 pm
Location: Goleta, CA

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby MotionTheory » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:23 am

Yes, atomic surface tension is a missing link in conventional atmospheric science.

Surface tension, as to me = minimizing surface of a volume aka minima potential energy structure. OK, to avoid blah back/forth, here is my approach. Shape(max packing efficiency) of Oxygen nucleus at energy state, controls location of 2 hydrogen. In turn, shape/build inter-h2o structure. Once structure collapsed or nucleated, it became condensed state (ice or liquid). Condensed surface tension is integral in hydro+aero dynamics, around 50% overlapped with conventional process/paradigm.
MotionTheory
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:26 pm
Location: Goleta, CA

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms

Unread postby jimmcginn » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:22 pm

MotionTheory wrote:Yes, atomic surface tension is a missing link in conventional atmospheric science.

Surface tension, as to me = minimizing surface of a volume aka minima potential energy structure.


No. You are completely overthinking it.

I'm talking about the tensional forces that exist between the molecules on the surface of liquid water relative to the almost complete lack of tensional forces between the water molecules below the surface of liquid water.

Why do the H2O molecules on the surface have tensional forces but those below the surface have little or zero tensional forces?

Only if and when you can answer this question do you have any chance of understanding the origins of the plasma in the atmosphere.

The most thoroughly misunderstood thing in all of science is H2O. Only when you comprehend the how and why thereof do you have any chance of understanding the origins of the plasma that underlies vortices. Unfortunately there are many myths standing between you and the breakthrough understanding that will allow you to comprehend the origins of this plasma. There are no shortcuts.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Previous

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests