Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond...

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

questions re: micro to macro

Unread postby Scott MC » Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:08 am

... so would it be fair to say that there are dynamic 'clouds' of relatively denser plasma throughout space?

& there is increased electrical activity within those clouds?

and sometimes these clouds encompass lots of dust?

And star & planet forming via z-pinch occurs in the more energetic areas of these dusty clouds at any given time?


P.S. Would plasma effect the passage of light at all :?: ?
99.999+% of everything can't be that simple, can it?
User avatar
Scott MC
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Tweed Valley, NSW

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby mjv1121 » Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:03 am

Scott,

Seems like a reasonable summary.

Yes, free electrons (a constituent of plasma) are probably responsible for cosmic redshift - in the opinion of some people unhappy with general relativity induced universal spacetime expansion - and keep in mind that it is the mathematical solutions to the equations that is the direct cause of the expanding universe (rant).

Do make sure not to romanticise about "plasma". It is just atomic gas with a greater than "normal" amount of ionisation - more than usual proportion of "free" charge carriers.

Michael
mjv1121
Guest
 

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Scott MC » Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:33 pm

Uh guys, you know how it says from mirco to macro?

Well, think about how a universe or a star or even a planet is formed in the EU - via the good old a z-pinch right? in dusty plasma.

In terms of causation we suddenly have a very simple explanation for the Vedic aphorism "from the subtle comes the gross", and the clear sense that gross matter per se is an end-product of a process, not the beginning of it.
99.999+% of everything can't be that simple, can it?
User avatar
Scott MC
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Tweed Valley, NSW

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby hertz » Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:10 am

Do make sure not to romanticise about "plasma". It is just atomic gas with a greater than "normal" amount of ionisation


now that's exactly the kind of thinking that got us into this mess...plasma, the 4th state of matter.

nonsense!...plasma is the fundamental state of matter...gases, liquids and solids are all derived from plasma!

plasma is not some red-headed stepchild to be shunned and scorned...it should be romanticized into a bloody epic poem: classic in dimension, sweeping in its mastery, and finally magnanimus in its victory...from the subtle to the gross and beyond
hertz
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 12:29 pm

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby kiwi » Tue Nov 08, 2011 7:00 pm

kiwi
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby mjv1121 » Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:07 am

hertz,

mjv said: "Do make sure not to romanticise about "plasma". It is just atomic gas with a greater than "normal" amount of ionisation"

hertz mistakenly replied: "now that's exactly the kind of thinking that got us into this mess...plasma, the 4th state of matter.
nonsense!...plasma is the fundamental state of matter...gases, liquids and solids are all derived from plasma!
plasma is not some red-headed stepchild to be shunned and scorned...it should be romanticized into a bloody epic poem: classic in dimension, sweeping in its mastery, and finally magnanimus in its victory...from the subtle to the gross and beyond"


The fundamental state of "matter" is electrons and protons (not including quantum aetheric matter). In principal we may be able to conceive of a plasma cloud of electrons and protons. However, in such vicinity some of the electrons and protons will inevitably combine to form atoms. So a plasma, is by definition a mix of electrons, protons, atoms and ions.
If we consider electrons and protons as solid then all "matter" is by definition made of solids - the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or more state of matter is simply an outcome of degrees of relative movement.

Replacing one pseudo-scientific mess with another, whilst all the time dodging fundamental understanding of the bleeding obvious, is the kind of progress I would wish to avoid.

You stick to your poetry and I'll stick to my scientific endeavour.

Michael
mjv1121
Guest
 

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby webolife » Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:49 pm

Pseudo-scientific... plasma?
As opposed to, say, imaginary scientific quantums?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby hertz » Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:32 pm

twisting, twisting, twisting

solid, gas, and liquid all
tumble from the free-for-all

some are ions,
some are more,
but most are less
and less is more

a solid gas would
be nice to see
but is it gas?
no, not to me

from what i've learned and always heard
a solid gas is just a turd
hertz
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 12:29 pm

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby webolife » Wed Dec 14, 2011 7:09 pm

Solid or gas
the distinction's eroding --
a gas is exploding,
the solid's imploding

discharge implied,
the force is supplied
by systemic peristalsis
as nature calls us

to media surrounding
a sounding alerts,
collisions compounding
sometimes it just hertz.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

New plasma/solar flare idea?

Unread postby bdw000 » Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:09 pm

I post this article which seems like it might be of interest, even if just to see where the "mainstream" might be heading:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-plasmas-torn-physicists-discovery-hints.html

Of course, some here will be offended by the words "magnetic reconnection," but you can't have everything :)
bdw000
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:06 pm

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Michael V » Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:18 am

Charge is defined as e, the fundamental unit of charge which is equivalent to 1.6x10-19 Joules. Charge has actually been defined as energy (because energy is a definition of work). Yes, charge is measured as a property of the sub-particles that are the charge, but it is not mass, it is energy. At a velocity of c and via E=1/2mv2, 1.602...x10-19 Joules represents a mass of 3.565x10-36 kg per second.

This mass of "charge" is linked to electron and proton mass, and to electron radius, to the mass of a quantum via h and ultimately to alpha, the fine structure constant, which is the density of the electromagnetic quantum aether field.

The electron orbit of a hydrogen atom (i.e. the Bohr radius, a0) can be defined as: a0 = h / 2π me c α
(where h is Planck's constant, me is electron mass, c is the speed of light, α is alpha, the fine structure constant)

also, a0 = re / α2 (where re is electron radius), so the orbital distance is 2πa0, which is also 2πre / α2

A circular orbital period of α2 / π seconds and an orbital distance of 2πre / α2, then the orbits per second is π / α2

The "disc" area of an electron is πre2, so the volume described by an electron with an orbiting distance of 2πre / α2 at π / α2 orbits per second is 3re3 / α4 = 4.89x10-34 m3 per second

h = 6.626x10-34 J which at c represents a mass of 1.47x10-50 kg, the mass of a quantum aether particle.

A charge mass per second of 3.565x10-36 kg equates to 2.42x1014 quantums per second

The the number of quantum particles emitted as charge by an electron per second divided by the volume of space occupied by an orbiting electron per second is:

2.42x1014 / 4.89x10-34 m3 = 4.94x1047 quantum particles per cubic metre

Particle density x Particle mass = 4.94x1047 x 1.47x10-50 = 0.00729

Alpha (α), the electromagnetic fine structure constant is 0.0072973525376

α is the electromagnetic quantum aether field density, e is the kinetic energy of the quantum aether charge emitted by an electron.

The relationship between electromagnetic quantum aether field density, electron size and charge emitted per second is quite clear.

Also, a circular orbital period of α2 / π seconds, together with the masses of a single electron and a single proton, via the circular orbit equation, give a gravitational factor of 1.216x107. This defines the gravitational interaction between a single electron orbiting a single proton.
Furthermore the density of a proton divided by the density of an electron is rp/re / α2

(where rp is the radius of a proton and re is the radius of an electron)

The gravitational relationship between the single electron and proton is defined with a gravitational factor of 1.216x107, and not by coincidence:

1.216x107 . α2 / electron density = 1.216x107 . rp/re / proton density = 6.66x10-11

The presently given value for G0, the Newtonian gravitational "constant" is 6.67x10-11; I would suggest that it is not constant but depends entirely on the density of the masses involved.

Michael
Michael V
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:36 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Sparky » Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:46 am

1.47x10-50 kg, the mass of a quantum aether particle.
..... :shock:




:D
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire
Sparky
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Michael V » Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:04 pm

Sparky,

4.95 x 1047 m-3 is the particle density of the electromagnetic quantum aether field
0.0072973525376 kg m-3 is the mass density of the electromagnetic quantum aether field
0.0072973525376 is the value of alpha, the fine structure constant, or electromagnetic coupling constant

2.998 x 108 m s-1 is the velocity of an electromagnetic quantum aether particle
6.626 x10-34 Joules is the kinetic energy of an electromagnetic quantum aether particle
4.42 x 10-42 kg m s-1 is the momentum of an electromagnetic quantum aether particle
1.47 x 10-50 kg is the mass of an electromagnetic quantum aether particle
really really small is the radius of an electromagnetic quantum aether particle

Michael
Michael V
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:36 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Michael V » Sun Mar 04, 2012 3:38 am

The "charge" particles emitted by the electron and proton that enable them to present the appearance of an action at a distance are NOT positive and negative. The charge particles are simply kinetic - mass in motion - when they collide with something a force may be produced.

The effects of positive and negative, so beloved by those so near and dear to us, are a reactive property of the particles themselves. So:

- an electron "acts" negatively (i.e. it goes one way), but it does not convey any negative-ness to other objects - its charge is not negative, its charge is simply a kinetic emission.

- a proton "acts" positively (i.e. it goes the other way), but it does not convey any positive-ness to other objects - its charge is not positive, its charge is simply a kinetic emission.

"Charge" cannot be separated. Charge emitters, i.e. electrons and protons, can be separated from each other, but they cannot be segregated - you cannot have a big cloud of electrons over here and a big cloud of protons over there. How would you achieve such a feat? - the electrons will repel each other and the protons will repel each other. If you did succeed in building diffuse electron cloud and diffuse proton clouds, held loosely together by gravity, it would still be incorrect to attribute them to be negative and positive.

Protons have a significant gravitational effect and so they attract, but only to the point of proximity that repulsive charge emission will allow. In this respect they may be considered positive.

Electrons are less massive and so, produce a much smaller gravitational effect, but their charge is still significantly repulsive. In this respect they may be considered negative.


This is not quite the full explanation, but you should try to maintain a scientific attitude and do not be taken-in by the purveyors of "electric magic". There is simply objects in motion and collision, following the laws of motion. Pushed together "attractively" by gravity and pushed apart "repulsively" by charge.

Michael
Michael V
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:36 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Electricity and Plasma, from Micro to Macro and Beyond..

Unread postby Michael V » Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:24 am

Sparky,

But i was trying to determine how density or other properties of matter would affect gravity effect. I know it doesn't, but why not?

What properties does matter have? Mass, velocity, spin (which I am assuming/suggesting "causes" charge).

Have you ever wondered why it is that G is such a small number?

Density does affect the gravitational effect: If Earth were twice as dense, but with the same mass, it would have a radius of 5057km and g at the surface would be 15.6 ms-2. If Earth were twice as dense, but the same volume, then g at the surface would be 19.6 ms-2.

Gravity acts on mass, so density affects the gravitational effect - this profoundly obvious fact seems to have been overlooked at the sub-atomic level, where G is still used with the same value as at the level of atomic structures.

The Earth has a mass of 5.97x1024 kg and a volume of 1.09x1021 m3, but of that volume, 99.999999999982% is empty space, gravity acts on only the other 0.000000000018%, because that is the proportion of volume occupied by the mass. An interesting comparison G= 0.0000000000667 - Have you ever wondered why it is that G is such a small number?


Gravity acts on mass, gravity can ONLY act on mass.

Objects with mass are affected by force. Objects with mass can ONLY be affected by force.

Michael
Michael V
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:36 pm
Location: Wales

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests