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

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

Unread postby nick c » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:48 am

hi aetherevarising,
I see that Talbott and Thornhill propose that magnetism relies on electricity therefore electricity being proposed as a primary force. I question this. No electric energy has every been transferred without inducing some measurable magnetic field. Yet a magnet on magnet interaction does not result in an induced electric field. I have only ever found one paper on this subject and having found it I then lost it. Can you guys comment?
I agree with Talbott and Thornhill's statements. Magnetic fields are created by electric currents, actually this statement is quite conventional and mainstream, see wikipedia:
Electrical currents and moving electrical charges produce magnetic fields. Even the magnetic field of a magnetic material can be modeled as being due to moving electrical charges
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_f ... ote-ex02-2


So a lodestone or permanent magnet gets its' magnetic qualities from electric currents on a subatomic level. But wait there is more. Lodestones are created, in the first place, by electrical discharges. See this paper, Lodestone: Natures Only Permanent Magnet-What it is and how it gets charged:
Identification of the large REM values for the lodestones is the crucial piece of physical evidence for the lightning mechanism of lodestone charging described by Wasilewski (1977) who explained that lightning, or some presently unknown and exotic mechanism, would be responsible for the strong lodestone magnetization.

http://lep694.gsfc.nasa.gov/gunther/gun ... ki1999.pdf
The article also notes that lodestones are at or near the surface of the Earth and are often found on high points, such as hills. So a lodestone or permanent magnet has a sort of remnant magnetic field, which was created initially by an electrical discharge (lightning.) The statement "electric currents create magnetic fields" is valid.

Nick
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

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

Unread postby remelic » Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:33 am

nick c wrote:The statement "electric currents create magnetic fields" is valid.


I disagree completely... in fact its impossible for electricity to exist without magnetism first.
plain and simple.

or maybe there is a direct example of a stand alone electric source not being generated by magnetism? Maybe you know of one?

I would normally agree with you on most topics since you are down to Earth in your discussions but I'm afraid you are incorrect about electricity creating magnetism. I can show you a model that is a far better description of "electricity". Mainstream is not always correct as we all know.

electric currents is just a confined stream of moving magnetism... simple.
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby solrey » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:06 pm

in fact its impossible for electricity to exist without magnetism first.


That's not true at all. There are static electric fields and electrostatic potential energy but they will not produce a magnetic field unless there is a flow of charged particles/current. Direct current does not produce a magnetic field unless the current is time variable/pulsed, which is why only alternating/pulsed current can be used for inductive transformers. In a charged battery there is a persistent electric voltage potential between the plates, which are insulated from each other within the battery, but until a circuit/path of charged particle flow is established between the poles around the insulators there is no current/flow of charge carriers and no magnetic field. Batteries are not magnetized yet they store electricity. The field of an electrostatic dipole is identical to a magnetic field, yet it's not magnetic. Non-magnetic, electric insulators like wool and vinyl will accumulate and maintain static charge without producing a magnetic field.

In addition, there are no magnetic fields without some sort of electric current inducing an atomic dipole moment. This is known experimentally. Materials that are "permanent magnets" have a molecular matrix that allows for the atoms/molecules in the matrix to line up and lock as mini electrostatic dipoles. Those materials become magnetized when a strong electric field forces the dipole condition or when "stroked" with another magnet to initiate the alignment. Solenoids work because the coil induces a dipole moment in the core while the current is flowing. The lower voltages and materials used in solenoids don't produce a permanent dipole in the core however. When a magnet sticks to metal the dipole moment in the magnet is induced in the nearby layers of the metal where they too become "locked" into the dipole matrix. A PMH is just a contiguous solenoid with a keeper that maintains the dipole until the keeper is removed. That's why it only works with certain materials and low voltage, otherwise it would just be a horseshoe magnet.

btw, permanent magnet is a misnomer. All magnets slowly loose their atomic dipole alignment and the strength of their magnetic fields decreases accordingly. That's the conundrum with magnetic "free energy motors". Between the power required to magnetize the magnets, the more rapid decay of the dipole when used in that configuration requiring frequent replacement/remagnetization and their low power output/torque, there is likely more energy put into creating the magnets than the motor can produce over the usable life of those same magnets. Also, the shock of impact, like a hammer blow, can disrupt the atomic dipole thereby "demagnetizing" the magnet. Drop a fridge magnet too many times and it won't stick so good. Heat also destroys that alignment. Look up Curie temperature.


cheers
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

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

Unread postby nick c » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:56 pm

solrey,
Thanks for that explanation.

remelic,
I think you are putting the carriage before the horse. Both mainstream and the Electric Universe theorists agree that magnetic fields are created by electric currents and need electric current to maintain existence. The case of, so called, permanent magnets or lodestones was dealt with earlier and shown not to be an exception.
Here is a text book on plasma physics, highly recommended:
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/plasma/380.pdf
While we would disagree on their assertions that the Earth and other celestial bodies must have an internal dynamo which creates their magnetic field (the EU postulates external electric currents in place of an internal source) the point is that they acknowledge that electric currents are necessary to maintain magnetic fields. Furthermore, magnetic fields decay when the electric current is removed:
The problem is that, in the absence of an internal
source of electric currents, magnetic fields contained in a conducting body decay
ohmically on a time-scale
τohm = μ0 σ L2,
where σ is the typical electrical conductivity, and L is the typical length-scale of
the body, and this decay time-scale is generally very small compared to the inferred
lifetimes of astronomical magnetic fields.


I would ask you to show an example of a magnetic field without any electric current (to either create or maintain the magnetic field.)

Nick
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

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

Unread postby jjohnson » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:56 pm

good answers, Nick and solrey.
Here is another way of looking at it. There are electric fields and there are magnetic fields. There are charged particles( with mass) like electrons and protons and ions, and neutral particles such as atoms, molecules and neutrons.

Well, neutrons don't last long outside the nuclei of atoms, but still, they are not charged or polarized. Because neutral particles aren't charged or polarized, they react to a gravity field, but not to a magnetic or an electric field. We are therefore talking charged particles when we are talking about electric currents. An electric current by definition is moving charged particles.

Let's posit that your lab is at the center of an arbitrary coordinate system, so if you have some charged particles moving through or past a given fixed position in your lab coordinate system you will have a current. If you can hold an electron say, for simplicity, in one place, or a 'cloud of electrons' in one area so that there is no net flow in or out of the contained area, you do not have a current. Random thermal movements—Brownian motion—do not constitute a current flow. Something has to get your quisecent, non-moving electron moving, or better, a bunch of them moving, to get a current started. Can a magnetic field do that?

Short answer, no. A magnetic field operates on an electron by changing its direction, not its speed. If an electron moves into a magnetic field, or moves within a magnetic field, the direction of its velocity vector (i.e.its direction and speed scalars) is changed but its speed vector remains constant to conserve kinetic energy. If the electron has no net velocity to begin with, a direction change cannot be imposed on a zero vector. If the electron is moving along and enters a magnetic field, the pointing direction of its velocity vector starts changing direction. If the entry path is at right angles to the orientation of the magnetic field, the electron (if the field is large enough) will just go into a circular loop whose radius of gyration is a product of its initial speed, its mass, and the strength of the magnetic field. If it is a charged thing with more than one basic electron charge, its total charge is used.

If the moving or drifting electron enters the magnetic field obliquely across the lines of magnetic force, instead of just looping in one plane normal to the lines, its vector components normal to the field and parallel to the field will cause its looping to move sideways, resulting in a helical path around an imaginary cylinder whose axis is parallel to the magnetic lies of force. This is a current, but remember, the electron had to enter the field with a scalar speed component first. It already "was a current" by moving and being charged.

So what can start an electron moving that is not a random collision process or a like-charged particle approaching it? An electric field.

If you put two plates in an electrical circuit so that there is a voltage potential between them, you have created a capacitor of one type. Other types include the dielectric cylindrical capacitors soldered into circuits and double layers or "sheaths" in cosmic plasmas. In this case, there is a surplus of charged particles in one location, and a deficit in another (the two plates, or two sides of a double layer. Between these two separated charges an electric field is set up. HOW it is set up is not too germane here - we just want to set up an experiment in this lab with a generic electric field.

Now take your thumb and forefinger and carefully move the electron into the electric field; stop, and let it go. What will it do? It will have a force exerted upon it in a straight line by the E field. It will accelerate toward the positive side of the separated charges. It will have that same force impressed upon it throughout its flight (until it bonks the positive plate and disappears into the circuit wiring) so that it is constantly accelerated. A large-mass charged particle acted upon by a weak electric field may have to be accelerated for some time before it achieves a significant fraction of the speed of light. A strong field, and a low-mass charged particle may become relativistic in microseconds or less.

So long as a charged particle is in an electric field, the field will try to add to its speed along the direction lines of the field. If the electron is in the company of other electrons which are also being accelerated, they will tend to fend each other off (like charges repel each other as they get close) so the electrons all become more and more aligned with the electric field lines, and keep going faster and faster. A field aligned current like this may be thermally very cool relative to neutral particles which may be bouncing around in there with them, because the neutrals are unaffected by the field. They, too, through actual collisions with the charged particles, can get themselves moving with the stream of charged particles, too.

In an old CRT TV the electrons are accelerated by an electric field and steered by controllable electromagnets to hit certain spots on the screen's phosphors, which give off various colors of light and show you Dancing With The Stars or something.

Electric fields in space can be extremely powerful, accelerating particles and creating fast moving protons that we call cosmic rays, good at creating micronucleation particles in the lower atmosphere upon which water vapor condenses and creates our clouds; and that controls long-term climate. —as a little aside there; I'm reading The Chilling Stars by Svensmark. Highly recommended.

Electric fields are what mainstream scientists use to accelerate their charged particles in their accelerators (hardly being dummies, they know not to try to accelerate neutral particles, but use them as the targets, instead), like the Large Hadron Collider when it is actually working. If the accelerator is straight like the linear accelerator at Stanford it doesn't take much in the way of magnetic fields to keep the particles moving where they want them. In a circular or racetrack accelerator it takes extremely powerful electromagnets to impart the required curve to the charged particles' trajectories and keep them inside the curving evacuated tube. If the electromagnets fail or get magnetically yanked off their supports (like at the LHC) it is "an engineering design error" and nobody looks good, and the electron beam plows into the walls of the curving tube and leave ugly, long electron scrape marks. Scree-e-e-eech!!!*#?##!!??????? !

So if you are wondering which kind of field gets electrons moving so as to create a current, it's an electric field somewhere, created by a charge differential. Electric fields are the engines of the plane, and make it go; magnetic fields are the elevators, ailerons and rudder. They can't do anything unless the plane is moving first.

Jim
jjohnson
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Thurston County WA

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

Unread postby remelic » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:49 pm

Phew give me a moment to read all this and I'll get back to you. I didn't put the carriage first, mainstream did. I can show you but I need a little time. Thanks for your defense guys!!
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby remelic » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:06 pm

solrey wrote:



Thanks for your post Solrey but I could have saved you the time and told you I am very familiar with Electricity and Magnetism and how it works according to Maxwell. That doesn't make it 100% FACT! it is nearly perfect mathematically so I have no argument there but physically there is something everyone misses. And yes static electricity does create a magnetic field they are extremely small. Anyway I'm working on a model to show you that agrees with Maxwell's equations but changes the physical model to a more appropriate one.
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby remelic » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:09 pm

nick c wrote:solrey,
Thanks for that explanation.

remelic,
I think you are putting the carriage before the horse. Both mainstream and the Electric Universe theorists agree that magnetic fields are created by electric currents and need electric current to maintain existence. The case of, so called, permanent magnets or lodestones was dealt with earlier and shown not to be an exception.
Here is a text book on plasma physics, highly recommended:
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/plasma/380.pdf
While we would disagree on their assertions that the Earth and other celestial bodies must have an internal dynamo which creates their magnetic field (the EU postulates external electric currents in place of an internal source) the point is that they acknowledge that electric currents are necessary to maintain magnetic fields. Furthermore, magnetic fields decay when the electric current is removed:
The problem is that, in the absence of an internal
source of electric currents, magnetic fields contained in a conducting body decay
ohmically on a time-scale
τohm = μ0 σ L2,
where σ is the typical electrical conductivity, and L is the typical length-scale of
the body, and this decay time-scale is generally very small compared to the inferred
lifetimes of astronomical magnetic fields.


I would ask you to show an example of a magnetic field without any electric current (to either create or maintain the magnetic field.)

Nick


I can show you a better physical model that only has magnetism and it can explain both phenomenon but the base of it is magnetic... I'll post it in about two or three hours.
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby remelic » Sat Jun 19, 2010 5:57 pm

Sorry for the delay, it's taking me a little longer then I thought to try to explain this... heh
there is a lot to cover and I may just start a new thread with it. So I haven't forgot about you. That would not be nice :D

cheers.
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby remelic » Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:50 pm

here is the link to the new topic where I describe this model.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449

Thanks.
Secrets of Edward Leedskalnin
“Like a flash of lightning and in an instant the truth was revealed.” - Nikola Tesla
Electricity = Magnetism x Speed of Light Squared... Thats what he really meant.
User avatar
remelic
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Canada

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

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:20 am

Electricity and plasma at the galactic scale?

Giant Ultraviolet Rings Found in Resurrected Galaxies
Astronomers have found mysterious, giant loops of ultraviolet light in aged, massive galaxies, which seem to have a second lease on life. Somehow these "over-the-hill galaxies" have been infused with fresh gas to form new stars that power these truly gargantuan rings, some of which could encircle several Milky Way galaxies.


Image

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/pia13318.html

Ressurected Galaxies. :roll:
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

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

Unread postby jjohnson » Thu Aug 19, 2010 7:41 am

"ripples" of ultraviolet light??
It's all about fluids and fluid motions in NASA press releases. It would be interesting to see if radio telescopes could map the magnetic fields in these images to similar scale, and see where the greatest current activity is occurring. Of course, that implies a mental connection between galactic current flow and UV generation.

Jim
jjohnson
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Thurston County WA

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

Unread postby Jarvamundo » Thu Aug 19, 2010 6:16 pm

hmmm... feelin the pinch?... Although it's a low resolution image from nasa, I can't help but notice slight "rings of pearls" like property to these emissions, as opposed to consistent 'angel' halo.... sure it could in part be point spread from low resolution imaging...
?
Image
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=74fgmwne
...and the 'witness plate' resulting from the inter-galactic Birkeland current filaments in that cylinder striking the matter in the disk expelled from the star at the focus of supernova 1987A. The bright beads are like the effect of a ring of searchlights punching through a thin cloud. The tendency for pairing of the bright circular spots and the extremely slow expansion rate of the equatorial ring suggest the Z-pinch model is correct.

blue italics inserted for this Nasa Halo story? just jawin...

JJ wrote:"ripples" of ultraviolet light??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density_wave_theory
Ahh yes... the ever popular mainstream ripple theories stemming from density waves, which flat out ignore electrical properties and circuit theory, as they are gravity dominated charge-neutral... unfortunately these density waves are proving to be extremely difficult to model beyond perfect spirals, let alone a re-birth style event as this...? :?

Question: So you have a seemingly dosile looking galaxy... then a ring-of-pearls halo appears... Does this come from a density wave backflip? or... intergalactic current?.... seems like another cause and effect dilemma, no?

http://www.jmr.dk/Hubble_Gallery_files/ ... lhaltx.htm
Image
? same thing again?
User avatar
Jarvamundo
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:26 pm
Location: Australia

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

Unread postby Harry Costas » Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:12 pm

G'day

If you reseach the power of the central AGN you will find they can eject large amounts of matter, eg M87 in the form of a dipolar jet with knots and new form stars, that can go to the outer parts of the galaxy. these jets in time form spiral arms or even form a remnant ring on the outer galaxy.
Harry Costas
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 12:36 am

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

Unread postby mharratsc » Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:37 am

For once I agree with you completely, Harry! :o

Here's how it is explained from the EU perspective:

Seeing Circuits (2)

Image
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest