Earth - atmosphere

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:34 am

CharlesChandler wrote:
jtb wrote:Venus is rotating at ~4 mph with wind speeds of ~250 mph, which tends to indicate the atmosphere is not locked to its surface.
That all depends on what you mean by "locked". The force binding the atmosphere to the planet can only be the electric force.
When it comes to this topic I tend to believe more in mechanical/traditional science.
CharlesChandler wrote:The standard model states that atmospheres are gravitationally bound, and shielded from the solar wind by the planetary magnetic fields. Yet Venus has the weakest magnetic field of the 4 rocky planets, and the thickest atmosphere. It's also the 2nd closest to the Sun, where the solar wind is more robust. So the solar wind should have swept Venus clean of its atmosphere a long time ago.
As counterpoint, that is only an assumption. It may even be a red herring. Titan exhibits a very thick, dense, superroation of its atmosphere, too--a structure that scientists are convinced "should already have been stripped away" by now. But there it remains. This means that their theories for atmospheric origin and evolution are wrong.

Same can be said of Mars with its weak/nonexistent magnetic field and the notable methane and CO2 content in its atmosphere. Both Titan and Mars have "too much" methane for the decay rate of that molecule. So why is it there on both worlds, particularly on Titan in overabundance? For that matter why is an atmosphere there at all? (Titan apparently has no intrinsic mag field but borrows Saturn's).

Subsequently, atmospheres may be directly created by/endemic to the planet, originating within the planet, and replenished in perpetuity as material escapes or decays to space. Atmospheric material, being gaseous and diffuse, constitutes only a tiny fraction of any planet or moon's mass (inlcluding the so-called "gas giants" which are not gaseous but cryogenically frozen liquid ocean planets). Hence, atmospheric material is part of the planet itself and could be created by the multi-metric tons within planetary cores, mantles, and crusts for aeons. There is direct evidence for atmospheric replenishment on Mars and Titan--atmospheres that "should have" long been stripped away. Earth also loses atmosphere constantly but somehow manages to stay habitable and "Earth."

In other words, a planet's atmosphere is of the planet and did not "arrive from a comet" or from something exotic like mainstream theories imply. To the mainstream, oceans and atmospheres must have "arrived" or must have been "deposited" by some "impact event" or "collapsing nebula." It never dawns on them that if an atmosphere is around a planet that the planet itself created the atmosphere. The atmosphere is therefore bound to the planet as it originated in the planet.
CharlesChandler wrote:Interestingly, Venus' atmosphere is also highly electrified, with constant electrical storms, so yes, it's charged. I conclude that the electric force keeps the atmosphere bound to the planet.
Electrical activity doesn't automatically mean that electrical forces are absolutely binding an atmosphere to a planet. It does not prove nor disprove it. I personally do not absolutely hold all the answers but I don't think that an electrical force must be binding air to a planet. If such a thing is true then that must apply to all planets. If so, then as an example Saturn or Neptune shouldn't exist as gravitationally bound and rotating spheroids but are only electrical spheres, bound only by electricity. Are they? That would mean gravity has no influence and no meaning to planetary systems.
CharlesChandler wrote:Note that charged gases (i.e., plasmas) have a much lower viscosity than neutral gases. So Venus' high wind speeds do not rule out electrostatic attraction of the atmosphere to the planet -- they are further evidence that the atmosphere is charged. Regardless of what is binding the atmosphere to the planet, an extremely dense atmosphere such as Venus' would generate a lot of friction if forced to flow. The friction would be within the fluid, and at the solid surface (i.e., skin friction). Motivating the flow against that friction would take an energy source that Venus simply doesn't have. There are two possible answers to this riddle: 1) the friction isn't anywhere near as great as predicted by the normal viscosity of gases at that density, since they're actually frictionless plasmas, and 2) because they're charged, they are subjected to Lorentz forces as the solar system moves through the spiral arm magnetic field.
Yes I agree: "Regardless of what is binding the atmosphere to the planet, an extremely dense atmosphere such as Venus' would generate a lot of friction if forced to flow. The friction would be within the fluid, and at the solid surface (i.e., skin friction)...." ---this friction will tend to create charge separation in perpetuity.

Moreover, the Venusian atmosphere rotates about the planet in a definitive direction, acting as one entity. The Venusian atmosphere in superrotation is therefore a natural satellite of the planet. That it is gaseous and enveloping is irrelevant to it being a moon of Venus. As stated earlier, the same condition exists on Titan.

Mainstream article on possible reason for Venusian superrotation (they basically say it is because of convection): http://phys.org/news194504586.html
CharlesChandler wrote:This is consistent with the fact that both the solid surface of Venus, and its atmosphere, have retrograde rotations, but while the atmosphere rotates very rapidly, and the rotation of the solid body is slowing down. This can only be evidence of an external energy source that operates oppositely on the atmosphere versus the solid body. If they're oppositely charged, we get an explanation for what binds the atmosphere to the planet (i.e., electrostatic attraction), why the winds could be that fast in such a dense atmosphere (i.e., they're frictionless plasmas), and what is driving the atmosphere one way and the solid body the other (i.e., the Lorentz force acting on oppositely charged layers).
These statements contradict: "both the solid surface of Venus, and its atmosphere, have retrograde rotations..."

"the winds could be that fast in such a dense atmosphere (i.e., they're frictionless plasmas), and what is driving the atmosphere one way and the solid body the other..."

You're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the same direction in the first statement.

Then you're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the opposite direction in the second statement.

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 2:41 am

viscount aero wrote:The atmosphere is therefore bound to the planet as it originated in the planet.
But we still have to identify the forces keeping it bound to the planet. Gravity isn't it, because with any solar wind at all, the weakly bound upper atmosphere gets stripped, exposing the next layer down, and one layer at a time, molecules get whisked away until it's all gone. Magnetospheric shields aren't the answer, because sometimes they ain't there. And there is just one more force operative at the macroscopic level... ;) (i.e., the electric force).
viscount aero wrote:...I don't think that an electrical force must be binding air to a planet. If such a thing is true then that must apply to all planets. If so, then as an example Saturn or Neptune shouldn't exist as gravitationally bound and rotating spheroids but are only electrical spheres, bound only by electricity. Are they? That would mean gravity has no influence and no meaning to planetary systems.
Yes. :D Or rather, gravity has very little meaning. And yes, the Sun and the planets are electrically bound charged double-layers.
viscount aero wrote:These statements contradict: "both the solid surface of Venus, and its atmosphere, have retrograde rotations..."

"the winds could be that fast in such a dense atmosphere (i.e., they're frictionless plasmas), and what is driving the atmosphere one way and the solid body the other..."

You're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the same direction in the first statement.

Then you're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the opposite direction in the second statement.
Oops -- let me rephrase. I'm saying that there are forces acting on the solid body and on the atmosphere in different directions. That doesn't get them counter-rotating -- they both rotate in the same direction -- but they rotate at very different rates. The fact that the atmosphere is accelerating, while the solid body is decelerating, in spite of the friction that should bring thing into unison, can only mean that the force(s) that caused the differential rotation are still in action. I'm saying that the force in question is the Lorentz force from the spiral arm magnetic field, selectively acting on the solid body one way and the atmosphere the other, causing the difference in the rotation rate, because the solid body and the atmosphere are oppositely charged.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

Aardwolf
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by Aardwolf » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:35 am

viscount aero wrote:Moreover, the Venusian atmosphere rotates about the planet in a definitive direction, acting as one entity. The Venusian atmosphere in superrotation is therefore a natural satellite of the planet. That it is gaseous and enveloping is irrelevant to it being a moon of Venus. As stated earlier, the same condition exists on Titan.
Not quite. The wind speed on the surface of Titan is a gentle 2mph.
viscount aero wrote:These statements contradict: "both the solid surface of Venus, and its atmosphere, have retrograde rotations..."

"the winds could be that fast in such a dense atmosphere (i.e., they're frictionless plasmas), and what is driving the atmosphere one way and the solid body the other..."

You're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the same direction in the first statement.

Then you're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the opposite direction in the second statement.
Charles' point is that Venus and its atmosphere are accelerating in opposite directions. No mechanical/traditional scientific theory can explain that.

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by nick c » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:55 am

Has anyone considered the possibility that the planets have not been in their present positions uninterrupted for billions of years?
Given the Electric Universe position that the solar system achieved its' present order recently, then it would stand to reason that many of the solar system family of planets and moons are not in equilibrium with their environment.

Maybe that could explain the slowing rotation of Venus or the diminishing magnetic field of Earth?
Furthermore we would expect at some time in the near future to discover:
that Venus is losing atmosphere to the solar wind and is cooling down.
see:
http://www.holoscience.com/wp/venus-isnt-our-twin/

I think surrounding magnetic fields keep an atmosphere bound to the celestial body. Gravity must play a role too. But the problem is that "gravity" is just a name for a phenomenon that is yet to be adequately explained.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:46 am

Aardwolf wrote:
viscount aero wrote:Moreover, the Venusian atmosphere rotates about the planet in a definitive direction, acting as one entity. The Venusian atmosphere in superrotation is therefore a natural satellite of the planet. That it is gaseous and enveloping is irrelevant to it being a moon of Venus. As stated earlier, the same condition exists on Titan.
Not quite. The wind speed on the surface of Titan is a gentle 2mph.
2mph is not superrotation. The Cassini craft found a wind speed of 30 meters per second at 60 kilometers above the surface of Titan. That is superrotation. It orbits the "planet" of Titan approximately every 6 Earth days versus a 16 Earth-day axial/planetary rotation. Titan is not "tidally locked" with the same face to Saturn.
viscount aero wrote:These statements contradict: "both the solid surface of Venus, and its atmosphere, have retrograde rotations..."

"the winds could be that fast in such a dense atmosphere (i.e., they're frictionless plasmas), and what is driving the atmosphere one way and the solid body the other..."

You're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the same direction in the first statement.

Then you're saying that the planet and the atmosphere rotate in the opposite direction in the second statement.
Aardwolf wrote:Charles' point is that Venus and its atmosphere are accelerating in opposite directions. No mechanical/traditional scientific theory can explain that.
For the record, both Venus' surface and atmosphere rotate in retrograde direction, i.e. clockwise seen from the north pole, the opposite direction to the rotation of the other planets. Hence, Venus and its atmosphere rotate in the same direction.

But you're talking about the slowing of the planet versus the acceleration of the winds. There are no explanations for these things. Likewise, I'm not advocating an absolute dominance of traditional physics concerning atmospheres. I believe the Sun, for example, is electrical and influences the entire solar system including planetary weather and climate. That Venus the planet is slowing down whilst its atmosphere is accelerating is entirely bizarre and mysterious. I don't think classical physics can explain it. If it could then it already would have.

What I don't find prudent is the near total abandonment of the influence of gravity. To have electricity account for everything and gravity account for nothing is, to me, highly specious of an assumption. Your desk and chair are not held to Earth by electricity--unless you believe that gravity itself is a form of electricity (which many people here do think). To me it reveals EU dogma. This is similar to the EU professing that water doesn't exist and has no influence in planetary surface erosion. Almost everything to the EU must be etched and machined away, with no other things ever allowed to do it. Wind, water, rain, rivers, fluids, lakes, oceans, and tectonics don't exist in the EU. Or they virtually don't.

I think that gravity and electricity can exist apart from each other as differentiated forces. Gravity is a geometry and is handled that way when designing trajectories of probes and craft to celestial bodies. I do not think it is rational to abandon the geometry of outer space. There is a such thing as geometric action and reaction, conservation of energy, conservation of momentum, 3-dimensional space, mass, volume, pressure, fluid dynamics, gyroscopic balance, buoyancy, etc... These are physical geometries.

So what would cause a body to lose angular momentum such as Venus? What would cause something to gain it such as its atmosphere? That is unknown. It seems to not make any sense.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005 ... 8titan.htm
http://sci.esa.int/venus-express/51937- ... -stronger/

I could say that climate change is happening solar system-wide, which it is, and thus we see the atmospheric environment on Venus changing. The Sun is doing it. But that would not account for Venus' loss of planetary angular momentum. If the Sun were also responsible for such a loss then it should be slowing down all of the planets, too. But to my knowledge it isn't.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 11:15 am

Interesting article about how the negative acceleration of Venus' rotation was discovered:

http://www.sott.net/article/265781-Scie ... owing-down

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by nick c » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:12 pm

What I don't find prudent is the near total abandonment of the influence of gravity. To have electricity account for everything and gravity account for nothing is, to me, highly specious of an assumption. Your desk and chair are not held to Earth by electricity--unless you believe that gravity itself is a form of electricity (which many people here do think). To me it reveals EU dogma.
Where does the EU say that my chair and desk are held to the Earth by something other than gravity? That statement is a strawman.

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:13 pm

viscount aero wrote:So what would cause a body to lose angular momentum such as Venus? What would cause something to gain it such as its atmosphere? That is unknown. It seems to not make any sense.
Indeed. Unless of course they're oppositely charged, and moving in an external magnetic field (i.e., the spiral arm field), in which case rotation will be induced due to the Lorentz force, and the force will act in opposite directions on opposite charges. ;) At least that's possible, which seems to put it head-n-shoulders above everything else.

BTW, I agree with just about everything else you said. I treat gravity and EM as separate forces, and yes, I came off a little dogmatic. In all of the calculations I have done so far, the electric force dominated gravity, by at least a factor of 5x. I don't know if the force keeping the planets in orbit is gravity, or the electric force. I "think" that it's gravity, while the anomalies are due to the electric force. But my study of tides showed that they do not obey the laws of gravity, and do obey the laws of electrostatics. Unfortunately, isolating the influences of gravity and electricity in the attraction between celestial bodies will be difficult, since they point in the same direction, and both obey the inverse square law. Still, the anomalies in the Newtonian regime are all surrendering to the electric force, so that's my focus.

For the record, (as you know) I think that the Universe is electric, and so does the EU community, but we agree on little concerning how. ;)
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:22 pm

nick c wrote:
What I don't find prudent is the near total abandonment of the influence of gravity. To have electricity account for everything and gravity account for nothing is, to me, highly specious of an assumption. Your desk and chair are not held to Earth by electricity--unless you believe that gravity itself is a form of electricity (which many people here do think). To me it reveals EU dogma.
Where does the EU say that my chair and desk are held to the Earth by something other than gravity? That statement is a strawman.
Since being on here for years it has been implied that gravity is possibly a form of electromagnetism. If I am in error then I retract my statement and apologize.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:33 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:
viscount aero wrote:So what would cause a body to lose angular momentum such as Venus? What would cause something to gain it such as its atmosphere? That is unknown. It seems to not make any sense.
Indeed. Unless of course they're oppositely charged, and moving in an external magnetic field (i.e., the spiral arm field), in which case rotation will be induced due to the Lorentz force, and the force will act in opposite directions on opposite charges. ;) At least that's possible, which seems to put it head-n-shoulders above everything else.
Ok point is taken. However you're invoking a massive scale phenomena, the right hand rule in relation to the entire spiral arm of the galaxy, to a tiny and highly localized location. Why is this not happening across the entire solar system?
CharlesChandler wrote:BTW, I agree with just about everything else you said. I treat gravity and EM as separate forces, and yes, I came off a little dogmatic. In all of the calculations I have done so far, the electric force dominated gravity, by at least a factor of 5x.
Sure that's ok. I realize the EM forces' strength dwarf that of gravity. But gravity is, to me, a separate force with its own laws.
CharlesChandler wrote:I don't know if the force keeping the planets in orbit is gravity, or the electric force. I "think" that it's gravity, while the anomalies are due to the electric force. But my study of tides showed that they do not obey the laws of gravity, and do obey the laws of electrostatics. Unfortunately, isolating the influences of gravity and electricity in the attraction between celestial bodies will be difficult, since they point in the same direction, and both obey the inverse square law. Still, the anomalies in the Newtonian regime are all surrendering to the electric force, so that's my focus.
I understand. I don't know how it actually works either. But I think some of it is understood if not only mathematically.

Much to the horror of EU proponents, with whom I generally agree with, I continue to believe gravity to be largely geometric. I think this is true because mathematical geometry is used to accurately design probe trajectories and entry, descent, and landing (EDL) regimes. No electricity or such forces are ever taken into account or need to be taken into account. For example, the Rosetta mission in its entirety, its EDL phases, are entirely geometric in calculation. Therefore gravity obeys inasmuch as it conveys geometry. That must be taken into account otherwise science isn't being discussed.
CharlesChandler wrote:For the record, (as you know) I think that the Universe is electric, and so does the EU community, but we agree on little concerning how. ;)
Yes I agree. I'm not posting on phys.org.

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 2:12 pm

viscount aero wrote:
CharlesChandler wrote:Indeed. Unless of course they're oppositely charged, and moving in an external magnetic field (i.e., the spiral arm field), in which case rotation will be induced due to the Lorentz force, and the force will act in opposite directions on opposite charges.
However you're invoking a massive scale phenomena, the right hand rule in relation to the entire spiral arm of the galaxy, to a tiny and highly localized location. Why is this not happening across the entire solar system?
Well, maybe it is. Something coerced everything into prograde orbital and axial rotations, with the exception of Venus, with its retrograde axial rotation, but which is slowing down. The accretion disc model "might" explain the prograde orbital rotations (while begging the question of what compressed the matter into a disc in the first place). But the accretion disc model cannot explain prograde axial rotations. In an accretion disc, the innermost stuff rotates faster than the outermost stuff. So if a band of the disc condenses into a planet, the net angular momentum is retrograde. (Facing in the direction of the orbital rotation, the stuff on your left shoulder is moving faster than the stuff on your right shoulder. If all of it collapses toward you, it will spin you to the right, which is retrograde.) So I think that there has to be an external force, which induced the orbital rotation in the original collapsing dusty plasma from which all of this formed in the first place, and which generated the prograde axial rotations. So it was basically a spherical dusty plasma that collapsed, but the Lorentz force induced a small amount of angular momentum (compared to the huge amount of radial momentum in the collapse). I think that the Sun and the planets condensed individually. In other words, there never was a disc per se. Rather, it was basically a radial implosion, but with a tad of angular momentum. And irregularities in the radial implosion resulted in multiple implosion points. This isn't hard to understand -- models of implosions don't show that they organize themselves into discs -- they show that all kind of complex swirly patterns occur at the "point" of implosion, and multiple points of condensation are not much of a reach. Then, I think that the orbital rotations were coerced into the ecliptic plane, and the axial rotations into prograde, by the Lorentz force.

The biggest problem with this is that the spiral arm magnetic field is very weak. I don't have a problem imagining that it induced a very small amount of total angular momentum in a huge collapsing dusty plasma. But is it strong enough to have such a noticeable effect on the axial rotation of Venus? That's a stretch. But at least it's possible. ;)
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by nick c » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:34 pm

Viscount Aero wrote:Since being on here for years it has been implied that gravity is possibly a form of electromagnetism.
Your initial statement was:
Viscount Aero wrote:What I don't find prudent is the near total abandonment of the influence of gravity. To have electricity account for everything and gravity account for nothing is, to me, highly specious of an assumption. Your desk and chair are not held to Earth by electricity--unless you believe that gravity itself is a form of electricity (which many people here do think). To me it reveals EU dogma.
This clearly states that the EU is discarding the notion of "gravity." Your words were a "near total abandonment of the influence of gravity" Yet that is not the case.

Gravity exists, and my chair and desk are being held to the Earth by that force. The EU is not abandoning that notion. The problem is we are using a word which is nothing more than a description of a physical phenomenon and there is no reasonable explanation as to what it is. Newton conceded as much in his Principia.

Thornhill has been a proponent of the work of physicist Ralph Sansbury. Gravity is explained as an electric dipole effect.
see:
http://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric- ... -universe/
Wal Thornhill wrote:Gravity is the most familiar force. We are subject to it every day of our lives.
That does not sound like one who is engaged in the "near total abandonment of the influence of gravity" to me.

The EU is not dispensing with the force of gravity. It is real, it exists. So in the EU, my desk is definitely held down by gravity but that begs the question - what is gravity?
The EU is dispensing with Einstein's explanation of gravity as being the result of mass warping space and offers an alternative theory.
Do you prefer Einstein's explanation?

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by viscount aero » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:52 pm

CharlesChandler wrote:
viscount aero wrote:
CharlesChandler wrote:Indeed. Unless of course they're oppositely charged, and moving in an external magnetic field (i.e., the spiral arm field), in which case rotation will be induced due to the Lorentz force, and the force will act in opposite directions on opposite charges.
However you're invoking a massive scale phenomena, the right hand rule in relation to the entire spiral arm of the galaxy, to a tiny and highly localized location. Why is this not happening across the entire solar system?
Well, maybe it is. Something coerced everything into prograde orbital and axial rotations, with the exception of Venus, with its retrograde axial rotation, but which is slowing down. The accretion disc model "might" explain the prograde orbital rotations (while begging the question of what compressed the matter into a disc in the first place). But the accretion disc model cannot explain prograde axial rotations.
Right. Something coerced/forced the planets into rotations. To add there is no such thing as an accretion disk. Moreover, prograde axial rotations are never explained and go largely unmentioned in press releases when, really, they are a giant factor arising in the solar system. Rotations may be a major key in the trove of mysteries surrounding our knowledge.

Something interesting to note that may lend credence to planetary youth is that Titan rotates on axis that is not tidally locked to Saturn. That and its having a robust and complex atmosphere and planetary "ecology" tells me that Titan is a captured planet. It is not a moon, per se.

Perhaps Venus is on its way to tidal lock with the Sun. But why are the other planets not exhibiting this? For example Jupiter flings around every 10 hours to my knowledge. What incredible angular momentum! And it's such a giant world. Why is it doing this? Is there a correlation to it's super robust radiation/electrical environment and its rotation? One could argue, perhaps, the the Venusian atmosphere is the "planet" and the terrestrial world is the "core."

There may be something actually true about magnetic fields and rotation rates. Venus = no mag field, slow rotation. Jupiter = insane magnetic field, lethal levels of radiation, a power station in space--fast rotation.
CharlesChandler wrote:In an accretion disc, the innermost stuff rotates faster than the outermost stuff. So if a band of the disc condenses into a planet, the net angular momentum is retrograde. (Facing in the direction of the orbital rotation, the stuff on your left shoulder is moving faster than the stuff on your right shoulder. If all of it collapses toward you, it will spin you to the right, which is retrograde.)
Unless I'm not really understanding what you're saying because I am not reading correctly, your statement reads as vague, ie, if what you described above happened then all the planets would tend to be retrograde and what we actually see is prograde. So why mention this? Our solar system is prograde.

Pro or retrograde is probably randomized from solar system to solar system. All things do not spin the same directions in space, even alleged accretion disks would vary in their penchant for right or left rotation.
CharlesChandler wrote:So I think that there has to be an external force, which induced the orbital rotation in the original collapsing dusty plasma from which all of this formed in the first place, and which generated the prograde axial rotations. So it was basically a spherical dusty plasma that collapsed, but the Lorentz force induced a small amount of angular momentum (compared to the huge amount of radial momentum in the collapse).
That assumes giant leaps of logic in my opinion and tends to deny Occam his obligatory seat in front :) I tend to believe whatever process created the solar system was a unified, simple, internal series of simultaneous events and forces acting as one creative movement. To me, then, Venus doesn't fit. It wasn't here always. In this way I agree with the EU opinion of regularly changing orbital arrangements and regularly changing casts of planetary characters. Although the timescales are still beyond human lifetimes by orders of magnitude.
CharlesChandler wrote:I think that the Sun and the planets condensed individually. In other words, there never was a disc per se. Rather, it was basically a radial implosion, but with a tad of angular momentum. And irregularities in the radial implosion resulted in multiple implosion points. This isn't hard to understand -- models of implosions don't show that they organize themselves into discs -- they show that all kind of complex swirly patterns occur at the "point" of implosion, and multiple points of condensation are not much of a reach. Then, I think that the orbital rotations were coerced into the ecliptic plane, and the axial rotations into prograde, by the Lorentz force.
You seem all apesh1t for the Lorentz force. A diagram to explain what you mean would help as you mention it as a vague addendum or thing that is "somehow" acting as a force. But I don't ever come away really understanding what you actually mean. That and define, explain, "radial implosion." Can you provide animations to such radial implosion models? I'd like to understand your language and jargon.

For example this statement is interesting but explains very little: "I think that the orbital rotations were coerced into the ecliptic plane, and the axial rotations into prograde, by the Lorentz force." What do you mean? The statement is too abstract and non-explanatory. I think you know what you mean in your own mind but a reader doesn't really have any idea what you mean. That or I'm simply stupid and don't get it. That is also possible ;)
CharlesChandler wrote:The biggest problem with this is that the spiral arm magnetic field is very weak. I don't have a problem imagining that it induced a very small amount of total angular momentum in a huge collapsing dusty plasma. But is it strong enough to have such a noticeable effect on the axial rotation of Venus? That's a stretch. But at least it's possible. ;)
Your own personal solar system creation idea notwithstanding (dusty plasma sphere--a plausible model), I think Venus was not part of this solar system. It may be a visitor or recent addition. My only qualm here is that its orbit is highly circular and stable and that it conforms the solar system to Titus/Bode's law--another mystery :shock:

Dotini
Posts: 315
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:44 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by Dotini » Wed Aug 20, 2014 7:06 am

Interesting, but getting off topic and speculative.

"Thunderstorms act as batteries to keep the earth negatively charged and the atmosphere positively charged."
- All About Lightning, Martin A. Uman, Fig 18.1, p152

User avatar
CharlesChandler
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Contact:

Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???

Unread post by CharlesChandler » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:04 am

nick c wrote:Thornhill has been a proponent of the work of physicist Ralph Sansbury.
Unified field theories, such as the unification of gravity and EM, are interesting, but not as useful as they appear. Nothing can change the fact that gravity and EM, at the macroscopic level, are independent forces. Maybe all forces are just different flavors of one primal force. But within the problem domain, they have separated into discrete forces, and need to be treated as such. Invoking unified theory in the discussion of macroscopic anomalies merely obfuscates the issues. For example, I'm saying that gravitational anomalies are evidence of another force, which at the macroscopic level can only be EM. Saying that such is understandable because those forces are just flavors of the unified G/EM force is a scope error. To establish the applicability, you have to show that G can be translated into EM and back again at the macroscopic level. Low-level unification math doesn't do that, be it from Einstein, Sansbury, Mathis, or whoever.
viscount aero wrote:...there is no such thing as an accretion disk.
Well, there are a few rare cases where they have been observed, such as around quasars. But I'll definitely agree that as a general model, they just don't work. The force necessary to compress a spherical dusty plasma into a pancake simply isn't there. If it was, the increase in hydrostatic pressure due to the compression would cause the "disc" to expand, like rolling dough on a bread board. So the accretion disc model didn't come with any model glue.
viscount aero wrote:...if what you described above happened then all the planets would tend to be retrograde and what we actually see is prograde. So why mention this? Our solar system is prograde.
Right -- the Newtonian expectation is retrograde axial rotations -- the reason for bringing it up is that it is proof that prograde rotations can only be caused by non-Newtonian forces.
viscount aero wrote:
CharlesChandler wrote:So I think that there has to be an external force, which induced the orbital rotation in the original collapsing dusty plasma from which all of this formed in the first place, and which generated the prograde axial rotations. So it was basically a spherical dusty plasma that collapsed, but the Lorentz force induced a small amount of angular momentum (compared to the huge amount of radial momentum in the collapse).
That assumes giant leaps of logic in my opinion and tends to deny Occam his obligatory seat in front.
I'm not assuming the existence of the spiral arm magnetic field -- we know that it's there. And I'm not assuming that a charged sphere will pick up a rotation if moving through a magnetic field -- that's simple induction. And I'm not assuming that planetary atmospheres (if present) are positively charged, while the solid bodies are negatively charged. The only thing that I'm hypothesizing is that the forces are powerful enough to do the job. Occam wouldn't complain.
viscount aero wrote:You seem all apesh1t for the Lorentz force.
:D Still, something induced the rotation, and you ain't gettin' there with Newtonian mechanics, which can preserve angular momentum, but can't create it. But you're right -- I could do more diagrams. On another thread, celeste & I got into a decent discussion about orbits, and we're working on a more substantial presentation of the facts & theories. But for the time being, by "radial implosion", I just mean that a spherical dusty plasma collapsed toward the centroid, and as such, shouldn't have had much in the way of angular momentum. If rotations were purely by chance, half of them would be in one direction, and the other half in the other. The fact that they're almost exclusively prograde is, for me, proof of an external force.
viscount aero wrote:I think Venus was not part of this solar system. It may be a visitor or recent addition. My only qualm here is that its orbit is highly circular and stable...
Right -- a captured planet would have a highly elliptical orbit, and only by chance would it happen to orbit on the same plane as the other planets. So there had to be a collision, and it had to be just right, for Venus to be captured, and to fall into a circular orbit. Or there are other forces that coerce orbits into the same plane, and toward perfect concentricity. Maybe it's the Lorentz force!!! :D
viscount aero wrote:...and that it conforms the solar system to Titus/Bode's law--another mystery :shock:
Bode's law is a whole nuther topic. ;)
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests