Higgsy wrote:
Oh - the ubiquitous helical winding of filaments, which you claim exists based on eye-balling a tiny random set of astronomical images, mostly in false colour?
LOL! I finally got a response. But seriously, Higgsy? THIS is going to be your tactic? To deny that everywhere we turn out there we encounter helically wound plasma filaments? Seriously? LOL! You really are *old school*. I thought that tactic went out the window after the Herschel Observatory went up and found them literally everywhere.
Higgsy wrote:
Of completely different things at completely different scales, including things that are patently not filaments like the shock boundary of planetary nebulae?
And how does “shock” create such perfectly wound helical filaments? Can you point us to any modeling that you *physics degreed* chaps have done of these planetary nebulae to show shock and turbulence produces the sort of structures that are commonly seen in those photos? Hmmmmmm?
Higgsy wrote:
Without any other support than looking at a pretty pictures? For example, no consideration of line of sight particle velocities in the different strands of the putative helix? Temperatures and densities? Sources of electrical potential?
No, no, no, Higgsy. The ball is in your court. You claim to be the expert … “The PHYSICIST”. I asked you to explain how YOUR physics produce such helically wound filaments. You don’t get to complain about my reasons for suggesting Birkeland currents are responsible and then wave your hands to explain how gravity and “shock” does it.
Higgsy wrote:
I'm not saying that cases of plasma flowing in helical structures are never seen.
Please, you came very close to saying just that. Be bold. Stand up for your convictions.
Higgsy wrote:But I am saying that your examples of helical structures are not all actually helical structures.
The links I provided all indicate the presence of helical structures and where there are no linked articles, my eyes readily tell me there are helical structures. Do you and Bob have trouble discerning spirals?
Higgsy wrote:
I am saying that they are not ubiquitous.
Then I suggest you argue that with mainstream physicists … especially those who ran the Herschel Space Observatory program because they concluded that filaments are ubiquitous. Here, start with this mainstream source:
http://phys.org/news/2013-11-stars-born ... weigh.html , which states that
“the Herschel Space Observatory has revealed that the star forming sites across the Milky Way are riddled with filaments: tube-like structures of gas and dust that span tens of parsecs [1 parsec = 3.26 light-years] within molecular clouds. Although the existence of such structures has been known for quite a few years, this is the first time that we can resolve them and start exploring their nature and properties, thanks to this ESA satellite.” RIDDLED, sir, in my book, is another word for “ubiquitous.” But here’s an even better mainstream article about Herschel results:
http://phys.org/news/2015-05-herschel-f ... milky.html
Herschel's hunt for filaments in the Milky Way
Observations with ESA's Herschel space observatory have revealed that our Galaxy is threaded with filamentary structures on every length scale. From nearby clouds hosting tangles of filaments a few light-years long to gigantic structures stretching hundreds of light-years across the Milky Way's spiral arms, they appear to be truly ubiquitous. The Herschel data have rekindled the interest of astronomers in studying filaments, emphasising the crucial role of these structures in the process of star formation. (BAC - which is EXACTLY what plasma cosmologists predicted would be observed if mainstream astronomers took the time to look.)
Gee ... did THEY use the term UBIQUITOUS? Or are my eyes deceiving me, Higgsy?
The article goes on to say this:
In the search for answers, astronomers observe giant molecular clouds, the cosmic incubators where gas and dust are transformed into stars. While these studies are performed using a variety of techniques, one crucial approach is the observation of infrared light, since the interstellar material shines brightly at these long wavelengths.
In this context, ESA's Herschel space observatory has been a true game changer. Probing the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that ranges from the far-infrared to sub-millimetre wavelengths, it has collected unprecedented data during its three and a half years of observing. One of the key aspects that emerged from these observations is the presence of a filamentary network nearly everywhere in our Galaxy's interstellar medium. The picture that is emerging is that these structures are closely linked to the formation of stars. (BAC - Which is EXACTLY what plasma cosmologists have been saying for 30 years to the sound of crickets from mainstream astrophysicists.)
Prior to Herschel, astronomers had already identified several filaments in interstellar clouds and recognized their potential importance for star formation. However, only with the increased sensitivity and spatial resolution granted by this observatory, combined with its large-scale surveys, could they reveal the full extent of filamentary patterns in the Milky Way.
One of the surveys performed with Herschel – the Gould Belt Survey – focussed on a giant ring of star-forming regions, all located no more than 1500 light-years away from the Sun. The vicinity of these clouds allowed astronomers to obtain exceptionally detailed images using Herschel, unearthing intricate webs of filaments in each region that they examined.
"The greatest surprise was the ubiquity of filaments in these nearby clouds and their intimate connection with star formation," explains Philippe André from CEA/IRFU, France, Principal Investigator for the Herschel Gould Belt Survey. (BAC - it shouldn't have been a surprise since plasma cosmologists had been trying to tell mainstream astrophysicists for 30 years that is what they'd find if they only looked.)
Oh my goodness ...
... "the UBIQUITY of filaments". Those aren't my words, Higgsy, they are the words of the PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR for the Herschel Gould Belt Survey. Say it isn't so? Could he be a "degreed physicist"?
"But there is more: these observations revealed that filaments, which may extend to several light-years in length, appear to have a universal width of about one third of a light year. This suggests that something fundamental is lurking underneath." (BAC - yeah, what do you suppose that might be, folks? Perhaps something to do with electromagnetic effects?)
The astronomers are still trying to understand the details of the star formation processes taking place in these clouds, aided by the abundance and variety of data collected with Herschel.
While most filaments are dotted with compact cores, suggesting that stars are readily taking shape in these dense 'fibres' of the interstellar medium, there are also regions that exhibit complex tangles of filaments but no signs of on-going star formation. A study of the most spectacular example of this phenomenon, the Polaris Flare, indicates that filaments must somehow precede the onset of star formation. (BAC - just as plasma cosmologists said.)
The scenario that has emerged from the new Herschel data suggests that star formation proceeds in two steps: first, turbulent motions of the interstellar gas and dust create an intricate web of filamentary structures; then, gravity takes over, causing only the densest filaments to contract and fragment, eventually leading to the formation of stars. (BAC - "gas, dust, turbulence, gravity ... but the biggest force of all ... electromagnetism ... and the effect that has on plasma is not mentioned. It's almost like these scientists have horse blinders on.)
Indeed, the universal width of filaments seems to correspond, at least in the nearby clouds of the Gould Belt Survey, to the scale at which interstellar material undergoes the transition from supersonic to subsonic state.
In addition, the material along filaments is not at all static: astronomers have detected what appear to be accretion flows, with the most prominent filaments drawing matter from their surroundings through a network of smaller filaments. A striking example of such processes is seen in the Taurus Molecular Cloud, where the B211/B213 filament exhibits a series of so-called 'striations' perpendicular to the main filament.
This pattern is very similar to that predicted from numerical simulations that model the process of star formation in molecular clouds. According to these simulations, interstellar material flows towards dense filaments along routes that are parallel to the direction of the local magnetic field, as was observed, so the new data indicate the importance of interstellar magnetic fields in shaping these structures. (BAC - well gosh, folks, aren't magnetic fields a product of electromagnetic effects? Gee ... don't you think there might be a clue for these *scientists* to grab on to?)
However, star formation does not appear to take place only in filaments. While these structures seem to be the preferred sites for stellar birth, the extraordinary data from Herschel confirmed that a small fraction of stars may also form far away from dense filaments.
In particular, a detailed study of the L1641 molecular clouds in the Orion A complex suggests that star formation along filaments is the preferential channel to produce typical solar-type stars, while stars that are born away from these dense, elongated structures tend to have lower masses. This dichotomy could be a result of the greater availability of raw material to protostars that are forming on a filament compared to those that take shape in less dense environments.
Another of Herschel's key findings is that the presence and abundance of filaments are not limited to our immediate neighbourhood. In fact, these structures appear everywhere also in the Herschel infrared Galactic Plane Survey (Hi-GAL), which scanned the distribution of the interstellar medium in the huge disc – about 100 000 light-years across – where most of the Milky Way's stars form and reside.
"We detected a wealth of huge filaments, with lengths ranging from a few to a hundred light-years, revealing what seems to be the 'skeleton' of our Galaxy," explains Sergio Molinari from IAPS/INAF, Italy, Principal Investigator for the Hi-GAL Project.
"While it is possible that these structures arose from different physical processes than those giving rise to the small-scale filaments observed in the Sun's vicinity, the omnipresent aspect of filamentary structures in the Milky Way is beyond doubt."
In the post-Herschel era, one thing is certain: filaments play a leading role in the build-up of galactic material, creating favourable hubs for the formation of stars. This is likely a hierarchical process, starting on very large scales and propagating onwards, to smaller and smaller scales, funnelling interstellar gas and dust into increasingly denser concentrations and thus fostering stellar birth across the Galaxy.
Large-scale filaments fragmenting into compact cores that later evolve into stars have been detected all across the Galactic Plane, even in its outermost, peripheral regions. As filaments grow more massive, the material within them contracts and forms smaller structures, preserving the filamentary pattern on all length scales.
Further investigation of the Hi-GAL survey has revealed new and even more prominent filaments, extending over hundreds of light-years and weaving their way through the spiral arms of the Milky Way. The study revealed nine filaments in some very dense, inner regions of the Galactic Plane, detecting these for the first time through the direct emission of dust within them, allowing an accurate determination of their mass, size and physical characteristics. Astronomers believe that almost a hundred similar, gigantic structures are still hiding in the data.
"The intricate distribution of filaments in the interstellar medium revealed by Herschel has definitely revolutionised our view of how stars form in the Milky Way and, presumably, also in other similar galaxies," comments Göran Pilbratt, ESA Herschel Project Scientist.
In case you haven't guess by now, Higgsy, the above proves that you are TOTALLY WRONG. You don’t know what you are talking about. The above proves that filaments are indeed “ubiquitous” and even the mainstream’s top astrophysicists have been forced to admit it. I’m surprised you didn’t know this, Mr “Physicist.” I’m surprised you were completely unaware of the Herschel programs findings. I’m surprised that you haven’t seen presentations like this (
http://herschel.esac.esa.int/SFaxz2014/ ... HacarA.pdf ) where someone from the Herschel organization stated that filaments are directly involved in the star formation process and that filaments are present in “ALL” star forming clouds. Given those two claims, how can filaments not be ubiquitous, Higgsy? Hmmmmmmm? That presentation goes on to note, like the article I quoted above, the presence of filaments within filaments. In fact, it concludes that fibers (filaments) are “
FUNDAMENTAL BUILDING BLOCKS” which are “present in all kinds of environments”. How can a fundamental building block in all environments not be ubiquitous?
Now, you want to go on claiming that filaments are not ubiquitous? Or will you finally set yourself to the task of explaining their tendency to be helically wound at all scales and in all circumstances with just gravity and shock to work with? Hmmmmmmm?