We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air is g

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: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Thu Feb 23, 2017 6:29 pm

Maol wrote:How do you purport the sublimation of H2O at -40 degrees?

This is a good question but it doesn't have a simple answer. It can be explained through my theory. Unfortunately I don't have time to answer this question for you. Sorry. Moreover, until you understood my theory my explanation would be indecipherable to you anyway. And so, if you read and study "Lookout for Bill" you may eventually be able to answer this question for yourself.

Here are some guidelines that might help:
First, understand what ice is and how/why ice crystals form and persist.
Secondly, understand why/how being below the surface tends to block factors that prevent or undo formation of ice crystals.
Lastly, understand how being on the surface these factors are not blocked.

More than anything else, you need to first understand that pendulumic aspect of liquid H2O that is associated with H2O's high heat capacity. This is thoroughly explicated in "lookout For Bill." Frankly, until you understand H2O's high heat capacity and the quantum mechanical factors that underlie it you won't really understand my theory. And until you understand my theory you won't be able to explain any of H2O's numerous anomalies, including sublimation.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:55 am

Thank you, Jim.

the microdroplets have a diameter smaller than the length of a photon.
Mainstream says photons are point particles, or waves.
I believe they do have a radius, many orders of magnitude smaller than electrons.

Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Feb 24, 2017 4:41 am

Thank you, MerLynn, for your interest.

You posted at the same time as me, and I saw your post after I posted my response to Jim, but I had to shoot out and do things. I'm back to answer your questions.

Not wishing to take it off topic, but it would appear that your understandings of the earths magnetic fields is limited to it effecting only a compass needle.
You should read my first post in this thread again.

There I say the magnetic field is what draws in ions from the Solar wind.
The magnetic field also serves as a shield from cosmic rays.

Not all planets have magnetic fields. Really can you prove that?
I'm going by what I have read.
Venus doesn't have a magnetic field.
Mercury's magnetic field is very weak (1.1% the strength of Earth's).

Just google it.

And what is gravity if not the attractive side of magnetism?
As I understand physics, magnetism is a side effect of electric fields.

Electric fields are repulsive.
Magnetic fields are orthogonal to the electric field, sending negatives one way, and positives the opposite way.
Gravity is an attractive force, or acceleration.

So tell me, this HUGE magnetic Field we live on, just what properties does it have in relation to the Sun's even HUGER magnetic Field?
I think the Earth's magnetic field is weak, but it does extend out to the full extent of Earth's electric field.
The Earth's electric field is like a little bubble within in the Sun's electric field (the heliosphere), as are all the planets electric fields.
I'm not sure of the full extent of the Sun's magnetic field.

What evidence is there of the attractiveness and repulsion of earths magnetic field to other heavenly bodies?
I would say it would be negligible.
But it's effect on ionic particles is significant.

And Finally, like iron filings around a magnet , how do these "Lines of Force" interact with the Earths Atmosphere?
Auroras are clearly visible at the polar cusps.
The structure the Aurora lights exhibit, show the filament shapes of currents coming in from outer space.

It appears Jim and his tornadoes fail to address this point as well.
In my model storms are created by discharges of ions from the ionosphere into the lower atmospheric regions, and tornadoes are winds generated by electric currents.

Have a nice day
Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby john666 » Fri Feb 24, 2017 7:32 am

john666 wrote:I was not talking about calculation of humidity, but about what my own lungs tell me.


jimmcginn wrote:How much of what your lungs are telling you is actually due to temperature, pressure, wind speed, and other situational factors?


ZERO

Because as I said
john666 wrote:Namely I have, while being on the beach, many times personally experienced SCORCHING HEAT , and yet at the same time there was virtually zero humidity in this very hot air.


john666 wrote:They would experience suffocating humidity, because the surface area of the mass of water situated near the coast, is much greater than the masses of water further inland.


jimmcginn wrote:This is very speculative


It is not speculative to say that during summer, temperature at the certain location at the sea, which is lets say 10 miles from the coast(location A), is approximately the same temperature as the temperature at a location which is situated 10 miles inland(location B).

And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do.
john666
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:59 am

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby fosborn_ » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:44 am

And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do. So less humid area could exist next to a body of water if humid air rises because it's lighter.
john666

Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:59 am

But if humid air is heavier it would fill in less humid areas. So you would be falsifying the said notion. Because the lighter humid air would rise above the denser dry air.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov
fosborn_
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby john666 » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:23 am

fosborn_ wrote:
And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do. So less humid area could exist next to a body of water if humid air rises because it's lighter.
john666

Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:59 am


But if humid air is heavier it would fill in less humid areas. So you would be falsifying the said notion. Because the lighter humid air would rise above the denser dry air.


So less humid area could exist next to a body of water if humid air rises because it's lighter.

I never said the sentence above.

What I said was the following

john666 wrote:It is not speculative to say that during summer, temperature at the certain location at the sea, which is lets say 10 miles from the coast(location A), is approximately the same temperature as the temperature at a location which is situated 10 miles inland(location B).

And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do.


Do you have any logical objection to that?
john666
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:59 am

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby fosborn_ » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:32 am

Do you have any logical objection to that?
john666

Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:59 am

.
No, but gave a reason why. And it would serve as a falsification for the notion humid air is heavier than dry air. Just hitching a free ride is all. ;)
Thanks.
fosborn_
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov
fosborn_
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:40 am

john666 wrote:
john666 wrote:I was not talking about calculation of humidity, but about what my own lungs tell me.


jimmcginn wrote:How much of what your lungs are telling you is actually due to temperature, pressure, wind speed, and other situational factors?



You know this how?
john666 wrote:
Because as I said
john666 wrote:Namely I have, while being on the beach, many times personally experienced SCORCHING HEAT , and yet at the same time there was virtually zero humidity in this very hot air.


john666 wrote:They would experience suffocating humidity, because the surface area of the mass of water situated near the coast, is much greater than the masses of water further inland.


jimmcginn wrote:This is very speculative


It is not speculative to say that during summer, temperature at the certain location at the sea, which is lets say 10 miles from the coast(location A), is approximately the same temperature as the temperature at a location which is situated 10 miles inland(location B).

And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do.


I don't see how. And, btw, me an meteorology greatly disagree on the nature of evaporation. (Also, this is a taboo subject for meteorology. They will not discuss any of this.)
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:54 am

fosborn_ wrote:
And it is also not speculative to say that considering that location A is surrounded by far more water surface then the location B, it should have higher humidity, if the seas really evaporate as both you and conventional meteorology claim they do. So less humid area could exist next to a body of water if humid air rises because it's lighter.
john666

Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:59 am

But if humid air is heavier it would fill in less humid areas. So you would be falsifying the said notion. Because the lighter humid air would rise above the denser dry air.


The notion that moist air is lighter is easily falsified by the simple observation is that most of the moist stays near the surface. Convection is a dimwitted, consensus notion. It appeals to the lowest common denominator of science consumer. Meteorologists collude to stay silent on this issue. Their motive is political and fiscal and not scientific.

The heavy lifting in the atmosphere that brings heavier moist air from the lower altitudes in the troposphere to the higher altitudes is achieved by vortices--not convection.

So, Frank, what's your theory on why meteorology refuses to discuss this issue?
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:09 am

fosborn_ wrote:
Do you have any logical objection to that?
john666

Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:59 am

.
No, but gave a reason why. And it would serve as a falsification for the notion humid air is heavier than dry air. Just hitching a free ride is all. ;)
Thanks.
fosborn_


My supposition that moist air is heavier than dry air is concisely defined and, therefore, falsifiable. Meteorology's dimwitted notion that moist air is lighter is intentionally obscure and the subject is deliberately avoided by meteorologists in order to preserve the illusion that it is correct.

Honest science has no reason to hide.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:59 am

Image

Water- based Electrostatic Generator

Water, a membrane with a tiny hole and a small metal plate:
that's all that is required to generate a voltage of 20,000 volts. Researchers from the University of Twente MESA+ research institute have developed a completely new type of electrostatic generator that is able to directly convert the kinetic energy from small ejected droplets into electrical energy. At almost fifty per cent, the conversion efficiency of the system is extremely high. The leading scientific journal Nature Communications publishes the research today.

The electrostatic generator developed by researchers from the University of Twente has an extremely simple design. The system consists of a water container with a membrane containing a micro-hole at the bottom. The water pressure ensures that tiny water droplets are forced through the hole in the membrane and then ejected. Because the membrane is negatively charged, the droplets are given a positive charge.

The charged droplets land on a small metal plate that is increasingly positively charged. Finally, the droplets are brought almost to a complete halt due to the repulsive force of the metal plate. In the process, the kinetic energy of the droplets is converted almost entirely into electrical energy. With the generator, the researchers were able to generate a difference in voltage of 20,000 volts. By fixing an extra negatively charged metal plate under the membrane, it proved possible to reduce the difference in voltage to the much more practical value of 500 volts.


Electrostatic generators
Electrostatic generators have existed for many centuries. The Van de Graaff generator from the early twentieth century is probably the most famous one. The generator that has now been developed at the University of Twente, however, works in a completely different manner from existing electrostatic generators. The latter invariably move the charge by mechanical means, such as with a rubber belt, while the new generator does this by ejecting the charge at speed. The conversion efficiency of the system, at almost fifty per cent, is as a result extremely high, and the design is very simple. The system is also easy to scale up by using a membrane with a lot more holes.
The generator does not yet have any specific applications, but could be used, for example, to separate chemical or biological components in a mixture on a lab-on-a-chip, a tiny laboratory on a chip.

24volts1 / 5 (2) Apr 11, 2014
Seen the idea before... those guys should have done a little bit of research in the so called 'free energy' sites on the net. This idea has been around for a long time.



More information: "High-efficiency ballistic electrostatic generator using microdroplets." Yanbo Xie, et al. Nature Communications 5, Article number: 3575 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4575. Received 26 November 2013 Accepted 06 March 2014 Published 07 April 2014
Journal reference: Nature Communications
Provided by: University of Twente


https://phys.org/news/2014-04-electrostatic.html#jCp
seasmith
 
Posts: 2710
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:36 pm

seasmith wrote:
Water- based Electrostatic Generator

Do you have a point?

When people post evidence then fail/refuse to explain its significance it is ALWAYS a tactic to draw attention away from something they deeply disagree with but cannot contradict/dispute.

Admit it Seaside. If what I am saying is wrong it should be brain-dead easy to find evidence that contradicts it. Undoubtedly you did research to dispute my position and failed. Frustrated, you found something that would obscure the issue.

Tell us how/why this is relevant or admit that it isn't, you evasive twit.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby comingfrom » Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:13 pm

Thanks for that, Seasmith.
Interesting.

But there are a couple of statements in that description I don't comprehend.

Because the membrane is negatively charged, the droplets are given a positive charge.
I don't understand the charge transference.
Shouldn't the membrane strip the droplet of positive charge, if it is negative?

Also. they don't say how many microns the diameter of their hole is.

Finally, the droplets are brought almost to a complete halt due to the repulsive force of the metal plate.
Do the droplets pull up in mid-air?
Or does the electrical pressure overcome the pressure by the plunger at top, preventing droplets from being squeezed out the hole?
Would a stronger plunger increase the voltage obtainable?

~~~~
Jim.

When people post evidence then fail/refuse to explain its significance it is ALWAYS a tactic to draw attention away from something they deeply disagree with but cannot contradict/dispute.
Why always only presume something negative?... except if it is you who doesn't want any additional information.

Tell us how/why this is relevant or admit that it isn't, you evasive twit.
You have a theory about H20 micro droplets, and someone offers some info about something done with H2O micro droplets, and so you insult them for it.

Anything related to your pet theory in any way should be of great interest to you.
And if you are the expert on micro droplets of H20, then you of all people should be able to speak to such an offering, and answer questions about it.

With respect
Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:01 pm

comingfrom wrote:Thanks for that, Seasmith.
Interesting.

But there are a couple of statements in that description I don't comprehend.

Because the membrane is negatively charged, the droplets are given a positive charge.
I don't understand the charge transference.
Shouldn't the membrane strip the droplet of positive charge, if it is negative?

Also. they don't say how many microns the diameter of their hole is.

Finally, the droplets are brought almost to a complete halt due to the repulsive force of the metal plate.
Do the droplets pull up in mid-air?
Or does the electrical pressure overcome the pressure by the plunger at top, preventing droplets from being squeezed out the hole?
Would a stronger plunger increase the voltage obtainable?

~~~~
Jim.

When people post evidence then fail/refuse to explain its significance it is ALWAYS a tactic to draw attention away from something they deeply disagree with but cannot contradict/dispute.
Why always only presume something negative?... except if it is you who doesn't want any additional information.

Tell us how/why this is relevant or admit that it isn't, you evasive twit.
You have a theory about H20 micro droplets, and someone offers some info about something done with H2O micro droplets, and so you insult them for it.

Anything related to your pet theory in any way should be of great interest to you.
And if you are the expert on micro droplets of H20, then you of all people should be able to speak to such an offering, and answer questions about it.

With respect
Paul


Seaside's intention is to create obfuscation. He will not attempt to explain its relevance because he knows there is none. If you think I am mistaken then feel free to speak for him.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:07 pm

~
Comingfrom,
I haven't seen an actual schematic, but i think it is basically an effect related to the phenomena of "space charge".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_charge

which is related to the function of a capacitor, where in this case the opposing capacitor surface presented to the water is the inner circumference of the membrane hole; thus the membrane pushes the positive charge onto the water droplets.

http://tutor4physics.com/tutorialcapacitors.htm

Not capacitor 'plates', but rather an annular surface ~charge transference, so a stronger plunger might increase voltage, i don't know. The folks on the energy forums could probably answer the questions:

http://www.energeticforum.com/eric-doll ... ial-forum/

http://4hv.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum.php


Also look at the wiki page on Tubes (as in 'vacuum' tubes) for insights on charge generation, transfer, acceleration and direction. There was a lot of genius work done on those forerunner-to-transistors electronic marvels. Analog and understandable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_tube
seasmith
 
Posts: 2710
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron