The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland currents.

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

The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland currents.

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:48 pm

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... count=3492

Selfsim:
That paper by Donald Scott and his similar (pre-print?) one here, effectively demonstrates Scott's ignorance of the Physics of Birkeland Current fields!
The second paper was reviewed here. After reviewing the paper at length, (in Mozina's chosen realm), it was difficult to escape the conclusion that the bulk of the core technical content was entirely Lundquist's and not Scott's. In fact, Scott then went on to completely misinterpret the original fundamental physical definitions/models, resulting in his subsequent analysis going rapidly downhill thereon.

RC's above reference to 'abysmal ignorance', therefore, is not limited to mere 'EU enthusiasts'! (Ie: it clearly covers the popular EU 'theorist' (Scott) reference as well).


Selfsim's link to the CF conversation can be found here:
https://www.christianforums.com/threads ... t-66096844

It's painfully clear when you read through that CF thread, and the various mainstream references to field aligned currents in space as "space slinkys", that the mainstream doesn't have a clue about Birkeland currents in plasma. They seem to think that Birkeland currents can only come in one size and in one location (around Earth). They constantly ignore the current that creates the filamentary processes in plasma. They try to model plasma exclusively with magnetism when in fact the magnetic field itself is empirically *caused by* the current flow in the first place. They continuously put the magnetic cart in front of the electric horse in their plasma models, and they can't figure out why it doesn't work out right.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/hu ... ce-slinky/

That's not a "space slinky", that's a "Birkeland current" NASA:

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Magnetic_rope.svg

It's rather discouraging that NASA can't use real or correct physics terms to describe the behaviors of plasma. They erroneously and unprofessional refer to a million degree plasma as a "hot gas", and they call a Birkeland current a "magnetic slinky". Hoy Vey.

It's really hard now to even listen to mainstream dogma. It's just so ignorant and ridiculous. Instead of fixing their own bonehead misconceptions about EU theory predicting "no neutrinos', or "no water" on comets, they continue to tilt at ignorant windmills of their own irrational creation while blaming our community for their *own* ignorance.

They can't see the forest for all of the trees with respect to electric fields and electric currents in space either. They only see the magnetic aspects of plasma, and they simply ignore the electrical aspects entirely. It's really no wonder *why* we're living in the "dark" ages of astronomy, where astronomy can't even be experimentally distinguished from astrology in terms of it's predictive usefulness in the lab. What a sad and very sorry state of cosmological affairs.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland curren

Unread postby Cargo » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:48 pm

"the jet's river of plasma travels in a spiral motion. This motion is considered strong evidence that the plasma may be traveling along a magnetic field, which the team thinks is coiled like a helix. The magnetic field is believed to arise from a spinning accretion disk of material around a black hole."

BWAHAhahahah. Hilarious. Who buys this crap anymore?
Cargo
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland curren

Unread postby Webbman » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:54 pm

theres more energy up there than they would have you believe. 400 mega watts my ass.

That wouldn't even light up the auroras.
The secret to the universe is a rubber band.
Webbman
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland curren

Unread postby celeste » Sun Jul 23, 2017 3:52 pm

Michael,
It's in this paragraph that an idiot makes himself known:
"Now, I assert that postulate (i) above is false to start with[sup]#1[/sup];
A charged plasma particle moving at constant velocity in a straight line, is in 'a minimum energy configuration' and yet this arrangement does not qualify as 'a force-free field', as postulate (i) asserts. Its circular magnetic field, which forms at right angles to its direction, can never re-orient itself to being parallel to its direction of travel!
A more formal definition of a 'force-free field' requires that a current density direction/vector ('j') and the magnetic field vector ('B') must be in alignment, (parallel or coincident with each other)."

First, Don is talking about the field of the filament (not the particle itself, traveling in the filament). So the minimum energy configuration is the force free configuration where a charged particle follows along the magnetic field of the filament. NOT IT'S OWN MAGNETIC FIELD.
By the argument here, that a charged particle always has a magnetic field around it, at a right angle to it's direction of travel; well maybe. But then by his interpretation of this definition, since a charged particle can never generate a magnetic field parallel to it's OWN direction of travel , there can NEVER be a "force-free field".His "force-free field" by definition can never exist. If you want to say that a force-free field is when a particle follows its OWN magnetic field, and that that magnetic field is always at a right angle to the particle's motion, then by definition, a force-free field can not exist.

To be clear, a force free configuration, is when a charged particle follows along the background magnetic field. It's own magnetic field will ALWAYS be orthogonal to this direction of travel. Again, minimum energy force free configuration is when a charged particle follows along the background magnetic field, NOT it's own magnetic field.
celeste
 
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Anything to avoid the obvious.......

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:36 pm

https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/news/2017-35

It's pretty obvious that the mainstream simply refuses to recognize the presence of Birkeland currents in space. :)

What are the odds that we require additional spacetime dimensions to explain such an observation and it's actually a multidimensional 'cosmic string"? Give me a break. The mainstream doesn't recognize a Birkeland current when it's staring them in the face. :) Instead, it's a "space slinky", "Steve", a Cosmic String, or anything but the obvious.

This Birkeland current nicely explains how and why Sagittarius A* gets so bright when it's sitting in the middle of massive current flow. At the very least they are likely to be overestimating the amount of mass present because all their mass calculations tend to be based on the brightness of the object in gamma rays, but their brightness calculations don't include any influence of electrical current on the object.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: The mainstream still doesn't understand Birkeland curren

Unread postby kodybatill » Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:19 pm

Muons and certain Near-infra-red gases strip electrons from heavy metals when passing through them. For Muonic Hydrogen - which actually has a Muon disk through it's center - the hydrogen reacts to the extra electrons that the Muon takes, and so throws the Muonic Hydrogen into a state of flux of the size of it's nucleus. Each time the size of the Muonic Hydrogen changes - the distance moved before the Muonic Hydrogen faces the greatest number of electron neutrinos again - changes - and this causes gravity most likely, or the hidden mass that scientists are looking for - and it would be where there is difference in size and distance per unit of Muonic Hydrogen, before orienting itself again in the direction of the most electron neutrinos.

This causes a spin of the heavy metals and primary elements related to those heavy metals that changed the Muonic Hydrogen's size - and then when ANY source of electron neutrinos meet the spinning matter at 90 degrees, it stops spinning because of there being a new location where the greatest number of electron neutrinos are (which is 90 degrees to the equator of ANY Muonic Hydrogen effected matter), and so the Muonic Hydrogen moves in the direction of those-most electron neutrinos - while also conducting charge into the original heavy metals that changed the Muonic Hydrogen - and I say conductance because the field created by Muonic Hydrogen and Electron Neutrinos creates lines that directly touch all of these, and so having a line of conductance.

From this conduction, and also some induction - I believe Birkeland currents get some of their field - but I am no expert at this.

A lot of this is based on stats about Muonic Hydrogen that most people don't know.

Does this help at all???
kodybatill
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:28 pm

It's not a Birkeland current, it's a magnetic coil spring

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:51 pm

https://phys.org/news/2018-01-magnetic- ... s-sun.html

"This is the first time that we have seen a twisted radiation outburst as the source of helium-3 and iron-rich particle flows," says Bučík. The radiation is caused by hot plasma moving along the constantly swirling and changing magnetic field lines in the Sun's atmosphere. When these field lines regroup, there may be a sudden release of energy. "The helical magnetic fields seem to efficiently provide helium-3 and iron in the solar atmosphere with energy - much like a spring coil that is suddenly released," said Bučík.

Gah! OMG.

And of course they didn't even answer their own "why" questions:

Some of these particle flows are accompanied by violent solar flares, a sudden and local increase of the Sun's brightness, and contain up to 10,000 times more helium-3 and up to 10 times more iron than the Sun's atmosphere. Why is this extremely rare helium isotope accelerated into space so efficiently? And why iron? How does the Sun supply these particles with the necessary energy to catapult them into space?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Back to Basics

Unread postby steve » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:28 am

Up to the end of the 1960’s it was easy to accept that the universe was infinite and eternal. This is not the same as seeing the universe as steady state, as it may be that within the universe, or in that part of it to which we have access, there are colossal changes going on.

The electric universe philosophy means we can start again, exploring the basic principles of how the universe works, the root of which seems to be the birkeland currents.

It is generally known that atoms and molecules are perpetually in motion, and that they are perfectly elastic. This is the root of the nature of existence.

What is not so commonly known is that electric current flows have a momentum, and will continue to flow unless they are stopped. This can be observed when a direct current flow is cut off, and there is a spark. This effect is well known to electrical engineers as ‘back emf’. This is the effect of the attempt by the electric current to continue to flow.

The current flows in deep space, where there is no gravity and no atmosphere will continue to travel across space sometimes for light years in distance and millions of years in time.

These flows, which have been called birkeland currents, can either be electrons [negative] or plasma [positive]. These flows are held in place by the magnetism circulating round the current flow like rotary tube.
.
So what happens if a [positive] plasma flow meets a negative electron flow?

For a start they will be attracted to each other. secondly there will be turbulence, and heat may be released. Then the nuclei will bond with the electrons and start creating matter.This could be how stars begin to form.

Big bangs, expansions and dark matter are unnecessary; the foundation of creation could all be electrical.
steve
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:45 am


Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest