SAFIRE

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:39 am

electricgravity1 wrote:I watched Monty's 2015 presentation of SAFIRE and was most excited by the detection of atomic mass 3 from an air of molecular hydrogen.
Image
Was it fusion? Monty suggested it could be.

But... then I noticed the amount. Its a large amount of the total mass detected. If this was from a fusion reaction, wouldn't SAFIRE have detected an anomalous amount of heat?

surely Monty wouldn't have been misleading with the atomic mass 3 result. He could have checked for tri-hydrogen by switching the terrella off, and keeping the mass spectometer on, any tri-hydrogen would disintegrate and not register as atomic mass 3.

It does strike me now that he didn't rule out tri-hydrogen in his 2015 presentation. That doesn't make sense.


Trihydrogen is just an unstable molecule of three hydrogen atoms and doesn't require fusion, nor does it indicate fusion. It's known to occur in electrically active environments.

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

H3+ ions can be made in a duoplasmatron where an electric discharge passed through low pressure molecular hydrogen.


If they found *helium* and only had hydrogen to start with, that might indicate fusion, but fusion isn't indicated simply by the presence of trihydrogen.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum.

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:17 pm

Since the sun's corona looks to be mostly stable, and it covers the full spherical atmosphere of the sun, I'm curious about the progress of SAFIRE in it's attempt to replicate that feature of solar physics? I have a few questions about the experiments that they've performed and results that I've personally seen to date. Specifically I"m primarily interested in knowing if Safire is able to generate a full sphere, stable and sustained corona around the whole spherical electrode, as we observe in Birkeland's cathode model:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m58-CfVrsN4

In the admittedly very few videos that I've watched of the anode electrode model being tested by Safire, the coronal discharge patterns that I've observed around the electrode seemed to be sporadic, highly localized, and moving around the sphere. The current flow pattern did not "seem" to be producing a full sphere, pretty equally distributed and sustained corona in the same way that Birkekland's cathode arrangement did/does. This could be an optical illusion of the few videos I've seen, or more likely it's a a limit that is related to the very few number of images that I've seen to date, but that was my impression from the limited videos that I've seen so far.

Is it actually the case that the coronal discharges around a circular anode electrode tend to be more concentrated, more mobile, and less stable or is that simply a function of my limited viewing of only a very few experiments?

I'm also trying to find out if they've put an electromagnet inside the anode and/or if they have inserted inert gases like helium and neon into the chamber to see if they end up separated into various double layers, or if they stay mixed together? I'm curious if they've been able to try these types of things yet on their shoestring budget?

It seems to me that even Birkeland didn't try inserting helium and neon into the vacuum chamber. I'd really like to know if adding helium and neon results in concentric spherical double layers around the electrode or if the elements stay mixed together.

I'm also wondering if and when Safire might try a cathode surface configuration?

I think the best way to test and decide which surface arranged is best supported by satellite evidence would be by comparing the behavior of the corona and the the plasma particle flow patterns in that region. I'd definitely like to see them replicate the full range of Birkeland's original experiments, particularly adding an electromagnet inside the electrode and reversing the polarity of the electrode. I'm also personally very interested in the inert gas experiments in both electrode configurations.

It seems to me that the more that we can produce processes in the lab that mirror, replicate and match what we observe in solar satellite images, the faster we'll gain acceptance in mainstream circles.

My 'fear' is that due to it's limited budget, Safire won't be able to afford to test the full range of Birkeland's experiments and we'll be limited by that.

Adding an electromagnet inside the electrode, and adding inert gases into the system seem like natural extensions to their current experiments.

If our community can replicate a working solar model in the lab before the mainstream can do it, we'll drive the change in solar physics and that will open the floodgates to EU/PC cosmology theories. If we wait around for the mainstream to get it done, it's probably never going to happen in our lifetimes.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum

Unread postby D_Archer » Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:00 am

Hi Michael,

Yes they produced a full sphere that looks like the Sun, even yellowish hue, i saw it ( i think in video form even) from the latest EU conference.

I never saw something that looked like the corona, but they did show concentric double layers forming.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum

Unread postby jacmac » Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:37 am

I have suggested, in other posts, that there is a third alternative to an anode or cathode sun.
I think the sun(the internal sun under the photosphere) is acting as a Psuedo electrode; its charge(?)
comes from the totality of electrical activity outside the core.
I see it as a massive GROUND that is otherwise not connected separately like an electrode in a circuit would be.

I do agree,the Safire project should be run both as an anode and as a cathode to see which might be more similar to the sun.

Jack.
jacmac
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:45 am

D_Archer wrote:Hi Michael,

Yes they produced a full sphere that looks like the Sun, even yellowish hue, i saw it ( i think in video form even) from the latest EU conference.

I never saw something that looked like the corona, but they did show concentric double layers forming.

Regards,
Daniel


I don't believe that I could fully explain solar satellite imagery without discussing concentric double layers in the solar atmosphere. That double layering process explains the temperature/density layering observed between the hot corona and the cooler chromosphere, the chromosphere and the cooler, more dense photosphere, and potentially other double layers that might be located underneath of the glowing white photosphere. That concentric double layer observation is a very important observation IMO, and a feather in the cap of EU solar models. I'd be curious to see if they can duplicate that double layering effect around a cathode as well.

It's quite literally impossible for me to look at satellite images of the sun, and not see the electrical discharge processes and current flow processes involved in the image. Double layers emit a glow mode emission pattern which are observed in white light and helium ion emissions, and in the corona, at different temperatures and distances which are consistent with a multiple double layering process with the double layers becoming cooler as they approach the electrode.

The heat source of the outer layering system is the current that is traveling through the double layers, and heat from the coronal loop/discharge loops all along the surface of the electrode.

The iron ion filters of SDO (94A, 131A, 171A, etc pickup the high temperature coronal loops at various high temperatures and energy states. The Helium ion filter (305A) picks up emissions from a mostly helium chromosphere.

If we look at the umbra of a sunspot, it suggests that the bright part (top) of the photopshere is about 500-700km thick, and there is another, darker layer that is not emitting as much white light which is beneath that layer.

I think it would be extremely helpful to compare real time helioviewer solar images and movies to images made in the lab.

I'm also very curious to see what occurs in the emission patterns and plasma formation patterns by adding a magnetic field inside the electrode, and when switching the polarity of the electrode.

I think by comparing these various current flow patterns in laboratory experiments with the actual solar images, we can see which model(s) fits the in situ measurements the best. As it stands now, I'm inclined to trust Birkeland's experience since he's the only one who's ever tried all the various configuration options, including different textured electrodes, magnetic field configurations and polarity options.

I think the key difference will be in the corona process in all probability. I'd expect them both to produce concentric double layers around the electrode, but the current (high speed electron) flow patterns into/away from the electrode will probably look a bit different in each configuration.

I think only by a totally exhaustive study of the various configurations could we be sure we're on the right track.

One thing that I find very attractive about the cathode electrode configuration is that it produces cathode beams which are consistent with 'strahl' electron flow from the sun, and produces a full sphere, corona that is stable and reasonably consistent around the whole sphere.

If I recall correctly, the addition of the magnetic field inside the electrode made significantly different current flow patterns near the poles and in the atmosphere around the electrode. The images I see from his work suggest that an anode globe generates concentrated beams around the poles, whereas a cathode globe tends to concentrate surface to surface electrical discharges into two distinct bands in both hemispheres, above and below the equator. These are the kinds of tests that must be done IMO to decide which model is the best fit to SDO and other solar images.

FYI, one of the *really* cool (reasonably newer) features of Helioviewer is it's ability to generate running difference images in various wavelengths. If you use an iron ion wavelengths (preferably 131A/171A) and create a "running difference" image, with a spacing of around 25 minutes between images, you'll notice *very* consistent features that rotate pretty evenly over time. These types of images tend to show where the discharges along the surface of the electrode are concentrated. They certainly suggest a pattern of a relatively 'rigid/solid" surface electrode sits one or more double layers underneath of the surface of the photosphere.

The discharging loops also leave their heat and magnetic field signatures on the surface of the photosphere in 1600A and magnetogram images, but only the largest of the loops are tall enough to rise though that surface. Most of the smaller discharge loops are concentrated near the electrode. The consistency of discharge concentrations suggest that the electrode is either a solid surface, or a cooler, more dense layer of plasma IMO.

I would have to say that the only way to end the debates between the standard solar model and even various EU/PC models is to run a full series of expensive tests in the lab.

It's really a pity IMO that the mainstream wastes so much money on dark matter research when only a 1/4 of that budget devoted to solar physics research would revolutionize our way of looking at stars and looking at the universe.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum

Unread postby BeAChooser » Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:53 am

Michael Mozina wrote:It's really a pity IMO that the mainstream wastes so much money on dark matter research when only a 1/4 of that budget devoted to solar physics research would revolutionize our way of looking at stars and looking at the universe.


It's not a pity, Michael. It's a CRIME.
BeAChooser
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: SAFIRE, Birkeland, coronas and inert gases in the vacuum

Unread postby Solar » Mon Jan 01, 2018 12:15 pm

In so far as researching this topic via Goggle applicable naming conventions to search for would be "Spherical Glow Discharge" and/or "Aspherical Glow discharge" coupled with attention to "stratification". For example:

Spherical Striations

Plasma structures of single and multiple double layers (Fireballs)

Plasma-Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition of Amorphous Fluorocarbon Polymer Films ( -C:F) on Spherical Surfaces

Physical model of spherical glow discharge stratification

Kinetics of the Electrons in Striations of Spherical Glow Discharges

Spherical stratification of a glow discharge

Its not that this kind of experiment hasn't been done before. It simply *appears* that no analogs of the dynamics possibly being applicable to Solar Physics have been made. I'm not sure if any of the information that might be available through other experiments of this type involved magnetizing the spherical tip, using different materials for same, changing anode-cathode configurations, stabilizing the appearance of "tufts", etc.

Specifically regarding Safire:

Larger Electric Structures Around Earth and Sun - Michael Clarage's Blog

Montgomery Childs: SAFIRE Project Update | EU2015: Between 7:00 - 9:35 minutes not only were aspherical striations and "tufting" of hydrogen ("granulation") revealed he also showed how a dense layer of cooler ions "blew off into the chamber". In my humble opinion he was basically showing how Safire ALREADY had the capacity of demonstrating a scaled version of a "coronal mass ejection" via "explosive double layer". Did no one catch this?

Lastly:
Lowell Morgan: The Physics of Plasmas | EU2015: Careful attention needs to be paid to this presentation as Dr. Morgan briefly delves into how the sphere responds to the DC input via the production of hydrogen which allows the anode to handle more current. When applied to the sun its possible that "solar granulation" could be performing a similar function. Other important topics are covered of course.

As far as I can tell from those presentations, several aspects seemed to have been demonstrated as being available to later focus on, fine tune, and finesse as these preliminary phases are being worked through. Whatever comparisons might be made between Safire and Birkeland's Terella remains to be seen until specific areas of focus can be isolated, accentuated, and assessed.

At least that's my take on what I've seen thus far.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Mjolnir » Sun Mar 04, 2018 1:24 pm

New video on the SAFIRE Project's own youtube channel (not TB). It appears to mainly consist of the presentation from EU2017, so many of you will have seen most of this before. But there's some new information added at the end.

"Shortly after the 2017 Phoenix conference, the SAFIRE team discovered a unique process that initiates and sustains the plasma double layers. This was a major discovery. Because it is these plasma double layers that produce both the extraordinarily high energy densities and the electric field that contains these energies within the plasma.
This new advancement in plasma science demonstrates a process that consistently creates, contains and controls the plasma double layers in stable exothermic plasma reactions. Although the energy and densities are comparable to the sun's photosphere and nuclear bombs,the data shows no harmful side effects such as radioacivity. But he science of what is actually happening at the molecular and atomic levels is not yet fully understood."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeVdzSjPx0g&t=2s

Mjolnir
Mjolnir
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:09 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sun Mar 04, 2018 4:00 pm

Mjolnir wrote:New video on the SAFIRE Project's own youtube channel (not TB). It appears to mainly consist of the presentation from EU2017, so many of you will have seen most of this before. But there's some new information added at the end.

"Shortly after the 2017 Phoenix conference, the SAFIRE team discovered a unique process that initiates and sustains the plasma double layers. This was a major discovery. Because it is these plasma double layers that produce both the extraordinarily high energy densities and the electric field that contains these energies within the plasma.
This new advancement in plasma science demonstrates a process that consistently creates, contains and controls the plasma double layers in stable exothermic plasma reactions. Although the energy and densities are comparable to the sun's photosphere and nuclear bombs,the data shows no harmful side effects such as radioacivity. But he science of what is actually happening at the molecular and atomic levels is not yet fully understood."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeVdzSjPx0g&t=2s

Mjolnir


Thanks for that link. Obviously SAFIRE is involved in some very intriguing and unexplored regions of plasma physics research and experimentation. I loved the concentric double layering effects in particular, and I was quite intrigued by the elemental impurities that were seen on the anode surface after the probe discharge events. I realize that these new elements could simply be impurities in the materials that are being used, but even the possibility that they might be observing a transmutation of heavy elements is very intriguing.

I'm sure that watching the first eight thousand dollar Langmuir probe evaporate in a big puff of smoke must have been both discouraging and fascinating. It only demonstrates why public funding is a necessary element in these types of experiments. I look forward to the day when SAFIRE, and next generation experiments like it are actually publicly funded to the level of an average "dark matter" experiment.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdu ... story.html

Just imagine what the SAFIRE team might accomplish with a budget that is similar to the next generation LUX-LZ experiment of between 50 and 60 million dollars. After all the billions spent on exotic matter experiments at LHC, it's just sad to think how much money is being continuously wasted on invisible matter snipe hunts while working experiments like SAFIRE are hamstrung with a relative shoestring budget.

Nice work. Congrats to the SAFIRE team for what they've already accomplished. I look forward to hearing about their future research.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby kiwi » Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:32 pm

Hi Mjolner :)

This new advancement in plasma science demonstrates a process that consistently creates, contains and controls the plasma double layers in [color=#0000BF][color=#0000BF][/color]stable exothermic plasma reactions[color=#000000].


I think that "first" would go to Robataille? ... about 2013 from this paper. http://ptep-online.com/2013/PP-35-16.PDF


Here are his two recent videos dealing with the subject and showing the reality of chemical reactions as a "proof of dconcept" in the case of two Silver clusters bought together to form an activated "system" , and the ejection of a single Silver Atom that then release a photon as it settles back to ground state ... It fascinates me the offered explanation of Spicules as a "reverse harvesting" condensation process, ... it reminds me of the Lichtenburg process in a way that it actually operates contrary to the visual perception . I mean its considered NOT expiulsing outward but pulling the condensed material INWARD ... Its all as I saw was mentioned by Michael? an EXO-THERMIC reaction, which is a fit in that way people are now looking at the process's. Alsio I guess controversial from an ES point of view is the comment he makes regarding the abscence? of Mag fields around Spicules he see.s as a proof it is not a Plasma ejection .... Plenty to chew over here :idea: :idea:

There are two videos (short) that present the scheme that includes of course the Spectra anlysis from this region ... Irrespective of anything else its a fantastic lesson in Chemistry and the reactions therein pursuant to to Solar Modelling :arrow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHD06X51o-k&t=381s


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km9gDB8gRYY&t=5s
kiwi
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:49 am

`
Mjoiner wrote:
"Shortly after the 2017 Phoenix conference, the SAFIRE team discovered a unique process that initiates and sustains the plasma double layers. This was a major discovery. Because it is these plasma double layers that produce both the extraordinarily high energy densities and the electric field that contains these energies within the plasma..."-SAFIRE video


As one of the presenters said, a "field" is a measure of (charge) emission. The act of containment is an additional process.
If magnetic confinement is not being utilized, as in in a Tokamak, and the containing double-layers are between the anode and the vessel walls; then apparently the emission field is interacting with something in that intervening space.

Electric field emissions and/or thermionic emissions do not by their intrinsic nature curl back on themselves. Just as light radiations do not curl back on themselves. To produce 'rings' or envelopes of distinct charge differentials, we need to look at the medium(s) being traversed by the emission.
The hot ionized hydrogen plasma provides a conductive medium, with a variable ohmic resistance, as their probe data clearly show; but does Not adequately account for the double-layers which contain the charge in steps or stages,
almost like interference patterns.

This is why EU science must incorporate into their basic theorizing, a comprehensive concept of a pervasive and dynamic spatial substrate, or aetheric matrix .
For the SAFIRE group, the inclusion would help them not having to say, "we just don't know" at every turn;
and be a well-deserved feather in their cap.


Image
seasmith
 
Posts: 2723
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm


Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby D_Archer » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:42 am



Cool, thanks.

For anyone interested, on page 2 of the Genesis PDF, is the sun like mode of SAFIRE.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby allynh » Sun Mar 18, 2018 3:00 pm

I watched the video and read the Safire Project report.

The SAFIRE Project 2017 - 2018 Update
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keJAQIWEyzY

Safire Project Report
http://www.safireproject.com/science/ew ... Report.pdf

Safire - hompage
http://www.safireproject.com/index.html

The long tungsten probe vaporizing makes sense. It's like the space tethers that vaporize. You had a long metal rod that crossed multiple double layers. That induced a current, that interacted even more with the double layers, and bang it's gone.

Watching the video I kept wondering about the production of X-Rays, and the Report mentions that they have not tested for X-Rays yet.

Wiki - Digital radiography

Over time, they should be able to rent a digital X-Ray camera to see if there are X-Rays. YouTube has a number of videos of the Sun in X-Ray, so I suspect that they will be able to image them.

Frankly, the video presentation scared the hell out of me. I need to watch it again. HA!

Well done.
allynh
 
Posts: 867
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: SAFIRE

Unread postby Webbman » Mon Mar 19, 2018 5:07 pm

i found the tungsten rod to be neat considering it burned from the inside.... just like our planet does!
The secret to the universe is a rubber band.
Webbman
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests