Watch This Movie! Birkeland Curents Verified

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: bboyer, MGmirkin

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by Solar » Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:09 pm

rcglinsk wrote: Not if it reconnects! Whatever that's supposed to mean. Does EU theory have anything like magnetic reconnection? I've been told that magnetic reconnection allows ions to exit the nozzle of the VASIMR engine, but that may just be a proposed explanation.
Did you read this?
"VASIMR is a plasma-based propulsion system. An electric power source is used to ionize fuel into plasma. Electric fields heat and accelerate the plasma while the magnetic fields direct the plasma in the proper direction as it is ejected from the engine, creating thrust for the spacecraft." Propulsion Systems of the Future
That is not "magnetic reconnection". The magnetic fields of VASIMR "direct" the accelerated plasma, as in 'guides' it. But be sure to note the "electric power source" required for the production of magnetic field and the electric fields necessary to accelerate the plasma.

So, the NASA (engineers) are using the same principles to build a "plasma based propulsion system" for a space vehicle, but when the EU/Plasma Cosmology posits that these principles work in the universe, galactic jets for example, astrophysical theoreticians turn the other cheek. Oh that's ripe.

It's the theoreticians that have put forth "magnetic reconnection" and it would serve them good to look at what the NASA engineers are doing right under their noses. Without "magnetic reconnection", but fully as a result of the dynamics of electricity, the magnetic, and electric fields, and plasma.
"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

rcglinsk
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by rcglinsk » Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:29 pm

MGmirkin wrote:But, in science we also want to understand the ACTUAL processes involved, and how they interact. Trying to get as close to "reality" as possible. If we trace the causes back to "second cause" but fail to trace it back a step further to "first cause," can we really say that we've understood the process that's going on? I think that science really does want to get back to "first cause" in order to understand the underlying process and to have an understanding down to the lowest level so that we can use the understanding to get as refined models / predictions as possible. So, why leave out a major force of nature that may be "first cause" of a number of processes?
Then how do you explain the relentless search for a magnetic field that doesn't come from a magnet or a current? I mean, all I knew about dynamos before I read about them last week was my high school physics professor had said if a dynamo did not lose its E/M fields after the permanent magnet was taken away that you had a free energy machine and that a few years back there had been some fad in academia about making one. Solar modelers invented a "self-sustaining dynamo" and made a computer program to calculate its magnetic moment. Then they took solar/helioseismology data and fit parameters using the dipole term of the expansion of the completely imaginary moment to approximate the sun's magnetic field. Then they say that because their models aren't nearly as bad as the previous generation's that they've somehow proven there really is a self-sustaining dynamo in the sun. They might as well be talking about magic leprechauns. It's one thing to want to smooth over first causes with approximations, I'm happy using the ideal gas law to calculate how long I need to run the air machine to get my tire back up to 35psi, I don't really care if making a non-linear model of the heat, momentum and mass transfer equations and solving with a workstation and numerical methods will get me a more accurate answer. I can't shut the machine off a thousandth of a second earlier. But this is not ignoring or smoothing over a first cause, this is making one up out of whole cloth with not an iota of experimental evidence to base it on.
MGmirkin wrote:But, has "magnetic reconnection" made physically accurate statements? Especially where it states that magnetic field lines can merge, twist, break, coil up, act like springs, etc. Don Scott's paper appears to bring a bit of realism back to the science of it all. Field lines are not "real" entities any more than the lines on a weather map or the lines of latitude and longitude are "real" objects. They're only a conceptual tool and can no more be "broken" or "coiled up" than a few unbound atoms in the air that happen to line up in a similar direction.

When they ascribe to the magnetic fields characteristics or behaviors that are not supported by observations of ACTUAL currents and magnetic fields, then it seems like there's a problem...

I think you've nailed it on the head. Astronomers often don't want to call an organized net flux of charge a current. They don't want to have to deal with electrodynamics unless they're forced to. But if they ignore the electrodynamics, then it seems they're ignoring the root CAUSE of many of the things they're trying to figure out.

In some ways it may be semantics. In some ways not. If astronomers refuse to acknowledge underlying electric currents, and attempt to divorce magnetic fields from them, it can't help but lead to confusion.
I think that if the astronomers had to actually make something work, and there are more ways to create that requirement than cold profit, then you'd have people resorting to currents pretty quickly. Like Orwell said, "The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield." Academia is a place where the "bump frequency" is pretty low.

Speaking of impudently twisting the facts, you all should do a piece on the deep impact water soap opera. First the theory was hydroxil radicals were really water, but when the impact happened the hydroxil radical count stayed the same. And boy did all those X-rays embarrass them. Now, obviously the X-rays came from electrons interacting with ions from the solar wind, so maybe it's possible to kill two birds with one stone here. Queue laboratory experiment. Create an ion stream with electron stripping and slam it into water vapor at high enough speeds to make X-rays. The next step is hard, because it requires ignoring that the X-rays are all coming from the site of the impact and dropping the lack of new hydroxil radical lines down the memory hole, but all that was overcome. After chalking a good deal of the X-rays up to standard interactions with the solar wind, one can conclude [sic] that the remainder must have come from "ion stripping" off of water when solar wind impacted small ice covered granules kicked off by deep impact, because you know, there's no other possible cause. And viola! We've found our missing water. A circle is such a nice shape, it always makes me think of a :)
MGmirkin wrote:So, there does really seem to be a bit of a conceptual gap, as opposed to necessarily just a "semantic" gap. IE, they seem to literally only think in terms of the "magnetic field," doing things and NOT in terms of the flows of charged particles (and the various configurations that might take in a plasma).

Just my opinion, of course.
See, It's just most of those people are practically super geniuses, or at least quite talented in many ways. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt but I can't escape the conclusion that they actually think in terms of the magnetic field lines doing things. But that's ... just ... so ... wrong ... in every way imaginable.
Solar wrote:That is not "magnetic reconnection". The magnetic fields of VASIMR "direct" the accelerated plasma, as in 'guides' it. But be sure to note the "electric power source" required for the production of magnetic field and the electric fields necessary to accelerate the plasma.

So, the NASA (engineers) are using the same principles to build a "plasma based propulsion system" for a space vehicle, but when the EU/Plasma Cosmology posits that these principles work in the universe, galactic jets for example, astrophysical theoreticians turn the other cheek. Oh that's ripe.

It's the theoreticians that have put forth "magnetic reconnection" and it would serve them good to look at what the NASA engineers are doing right under their noses. Without "magnetic reconnection", but fully as a result of the dynamics of electricity, the magnetic, and electric fields, and plasma.
No no no, the magnetic field lines in the plasma are not diffusing very quickly and so you have to have a reconnection event in order for them to pass through the nozzle otherwise the plasma could not escape the acceleration chamber. And if you don't agree it's because you need to get a PhD in plasma physics, then you'll understand what's really going on.

Well, I hope everyone enjoyed reading the sarcasm as much as I enjoyed writing it. I'm going to go make a blogger account called HicRhodusHicSalta and spam message boards saying "put the computer down and let the research money go."

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by MGmirkin » Fri Jun 06, 2008 6:59 pm

rcglinsk wrote:Then how do you explain the relentless search for a magnetic field that doesn't come from a magnet or a current?


The emperors have no clothes? :D

Just because someone's looking for a source of magnetic fields other than net flows of charged particles (whether electrons in roughly lock-step around atomic nuclei, or particles flowing in electrical circuits), doesn't mean they'll find one.
rcglinsk wrote:No no no, the magnetic field lines in the plasma are not diffusing very quickly and so you have to have a reconnection event in order for them to pass through the nozzle otherwise the plasma could not escape the acceleration chamber. And if you don't agree it's because you need to get a PhD in plasma physics, then you'll understand what's really going on."
Now, weren't we just talking about the fact that "frozen-in" field lines are (according to Alfvén) bunkum not in accord with lab results? Likewise, "reconnection" of field lines. IE, you can't just snip up magnetic field lines (Not real entities! Only a mental tool. Much like the lines on a weather map, etc.) and diffuse them any which way but loose in a plasma. "Field lines" are just a tool to represent vectors, field strengths, etc. Reifying them is faulty. They're not physical things. You can't heat 'em, snip 'em, diffuse 'em, snap 'em, reconnect 'em, etc.

(Real Properties of Electromagnetic Fields and Plasma in the Cosmos)
http://members.cox.net/dascott3/IEEE-Tr ... ug2007.pdf

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
bboyer
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:50 pm
Location: Upland, CA, USA

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by bboyer » Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:54 am

X-reference this recovered thread from the old forums. http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=3&t=157 Recovered: Debunking "magnetic reconnection"
There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the supreme mystery beyond thought. Let one's mind and one's subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else. [---][/---] Maitri Upanishad

freedomrox
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by freedomrox » Sat Jun 07, 2008 2:57 pm

Wow! Did I open up a can of worms or what?

Actually, the snaky tendrils to me doesn't seem to suggest reconnection so much as it does an increasing electrical power influx and spiking that sought resonance. Now, granted these are artist's we are dealing with here, but I do not see the dissonance, or even a disconnect to the standard electrical model of magnetic field line configurations which of course are highly complex and intricate due to the most basic and simple rules, (which by the way, just so happens to confirm a plasmic conduit), and that is that just as electricity seeks the paths of least resistance, so it seems the magnetic fields generated behave likewise in the void, ether, vacuum, or what ever medium one wishes to call the plasmic conductive field which we see as the fabric of space, (what some boobs call "dark matter").

This is all just very interesting to bandy about and maybe I should have toned down the title a bit, but if you really think about the implications of the scientific observations of magnetic fields that follow the same basic rules as electricity and even water, i.e. path of least resistance, then Birkeland Currents are completely a natrual outcropping of such an observation.

Please take into account that I am not a Physicist, nor a mathematical genius. I am just a simple man with a 133 IQ and years of common sense and practicality. I could be wrong, but that doesn't mean I won't share my simplistic observations in the future. I have truly enjoyed the contributors to this thread, because I now have so many diferent views to contemplate now. But...my original statement stands, albeit only from a common sense standpoint.

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: WATCH THIS MOVIE! BIRKELAND CURRENTS VERIFIED

Unread post by Solar » Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:07 pm

freedomrox wrote:... because I now have so many diferent views to contemplate now.
That is the greater benefit imho. In certain forums this thread would not have been allowed to see the light of day and perhaps the poster banned. Which is denying the benefit of contrasting different views other than that of dogma.

Yeah. It's refreshing that way 'round here.
"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
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

On the other hand...

Unread post by MGmirkin » Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:43 pm

Watch THIS movie for a VISUALIZATION of Birkeland currents! Granted they've got their "magnetic reconnection" foil hats on. But we'll forgive them their trespasses 'cause these really are cool videos!

(IMAGE and Cluster View Magnetic Reconnection)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... gClstl.mpg

(Proton Aurora)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... econD1.mov

(Proton Aurora Forms from Reconnection Event)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... /Image.mpg

(Substorms)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... 04_seq.mpg

(A CME Generates Reconnection in Earth's Magnetic Field)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... a_cme1.mpg

(Magnetic Reconnection 2)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... ionAng.mov

(Earth's Magnetic Field to Aurora)
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... index.html
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... urora1.mpg

For shits and giggles, here's a still image that screams "Birkeland current!"

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... still6.tif

Now, this stuff is what I've been talking about!@

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Watch This Movie! Birkeland Curents Verified

Unread post by MGmirkin » Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:42 am

See also this timely post over on the Visualizing the "Magnetic Flux Ropes" and "Reconnection" thread.

Seems Los Alamos is studying "flux ropes." They seem to explicitly call it a current and talk in terms of kink instabilities in plasma, etc. Gotta' give it up for the EE's and plasma physicists. They don't pull any punches! Though they do curiously still talk about "energy locked up in magnetic fields..." That bit seemed a bit out of place.

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

freedomrox
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Watch This Movie! Birkeland Currents Verified

Unread post by freedomrox » Mon Jun 23, 2008 5:34 pm

rThank you very much, kind Sir! I now have a greater understanding of the underlying physics of Birkeland Currents or Flux Ropes?

What I cannot seem to wrap my puny brain around is this idea all over the scientific community of reconnection. As always I look at things from a common sense and some would say, overly pragmatic view. Back in the 70's as a teenager, I took place in a science project to prove or disprove whether lightning could strike twice in the same place. Using an arc welder for the 240 volt current and a home made Tesla coil, (believe it or not, there used to be one in every good science class here in the South), and used a piece of sheet metal suspended in a glass tube. The result was phenominal as not only did the rotating,(seemingly), currents strike the sheet metal square in the same place numerous times, but we observed that once struck there was a change in the the metal that made it more conducive to strikes initially, but after 10 or a few more strikes, the current refused to hit that spot again. I take it that the charge had changed at this one point, but in retrospect, the experiment yielded the desired results of proof, but raised far more questions as to the atmospheric conditions, ground charges as opposed to atmosheric charges, whether + or -, in a thunderstorm. What prompted those questions was the fact that at the exact point of the multiple strikes on the sheet metal started to shoot a smaller charge of current out the focal point on the other side of the sheet metal against the glass tube no matter where the generated current struck on the front side of the plate.

I am now not sure what to conclude other than that a charge is generated from a focal point of absolute zero point and seems to verify what we suspected then but only confirmed in the late 80's, and that was sprites and jets, for indeed that is what was observed in the lab and in nature. Unfortunately, having written this account, I find I have more questions now than we had thought of then, but no need to elucidate as I am sure it is obvious what those questions now are and will probably be quite embarrassed by a simple reply easily explaining said "new" questions just now occurring to me.

Either way, the strange notion of reconnection still eludes me since I have never seen, nor experienced any lab test that gives an iota of credence to this theory or notion. Is this just one of those mathematically arrived at conclusions? If you look in the IR and other ranges especially the magnetograms real-time data from SOHO clearly makes such a theory an impossibility. It seems to me someone is trying to separate the inseparable. Lines of force indeed.

By the way MG, I absolutely loved the photos from above. Too bad we can't see these in the same manner as shown in the pics, because if we could, many more people would be outraged at what nonsense their tax dollars are being spent for.

Sincerely,
Daniel

P.S. Truth to be told, I worry over my children's future if the Sun does not fire back up. The absence of sunspots bodes ill for the planet. Look at the solar record of when the last time this happened and you will shiver....literally.
Nothing we can do about it, but still of concern to me.

User avatar
biknewb
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:27 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: On the other hand...

Unread post by biknewb » Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:14 am

MGmirkin wrote:
For shits and giggles, here's a still image that screams "Birkeland current!"

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a0 ... still6.tif

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
Wonderful Michael, just wonderful
[sarcasm] I really like the copper coloured lines where the reconnection occurs and the way the particles follow this path. The field lines are spaced about 0.1 Gauss apart by the looks of it. What if the field line spacing would have been different, 0.07 or 0.165 Gauss? Then maybe the reconnection would not have happened and the particles would have missed their junction: no aurora today. See how important it is to choose your units carefully. [/sarcasm]
regards

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Watch This Movie! Birkeland Currents Verified

Unread post by MGmirkin » Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:13 pm

freedomrox wrote:Either way, the strange notion of reconnection still eludes me since I have never seen, nor experienced any lab test that gives an iota of credence to this theory or notion. Is this just one of those mathematically arrived at conclusions? If you look in the IR and other ranges especially the magnetograms real-time data from SOHO clearly makes such a theory an impossibility. It seems to me someone is trying to separate the inseparable. Lines of force indeed.
Well, I think that Don Scott's paper, cited previously shows that "reconnection" is erroneous. It's simply foisted upon astronomers by other astronomers 'cause they on;y want to model the magnetic fields and have some dead-set agenda against calling a current a current. That's all I've got. I don't know what their issue is.

I mean, currents flow through space plasma. It's that simple. The notion of electricall sterile or electrically neutral space is a fiction based upon outdated concepts from a time before plasma physics had really even been invented yet. Now we know with much more reliability that space is not a "perfect vacuum" but permeated by plasma, which is extremely but not perfectly conductive. As such, "instant neutralization of charges" doesn't necessarily work either. There can be local pockets of differing charge that interact strongly electrically. Double layers can "make it so."

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests