Plasma Double Layer = Local Fluff in Cosmology Lingo!

[junglelord]

The new catch phase for a plasma double layer is Local Fluff.....
read on dear EU member, read on.....
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009 ... oyager.htm

[earls]

So could the cloud be cutting off power to the sun?

[mharratsc]

Lots and lots of pneumatic references, but notice that not once- not even just a little bit!- did they attempt to explain the magnetic field containing the 'fluff' surrounding our solar system...

Yet... somewhere, out in the darkness... somewhere in the fine print... the tiny voice of a scientist was heard to ring out, saying "Yayz! Our model was wrong again! Now we can get even more grant money to come up with a new one!!"

Sigh.

Mike H.

[Pianoman]

This is an astonishing discovery and an astonishingly tame press release in its descriptive language i.e. don't bother to speak of the elephant in the room that being the electrical properties of the 'fluff'!

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck....lets just say it's a duck (but not if your working at NASA)

[jjohnson]

It's highly astonishing that they admitted it at all. Let's see, a thin "cloud" of H and He at about 6000K (sort of a sparsely populated partially ionized plasma with a temperature near that at the surface of the sun) and a mysterious magnetic field. Wait; wait, there's more! Moving ions, and their buddies, moving electrons, in a low density plasma undergo neutralizing collisions only rarely, especially if magnetically field aligned, and their relative motions eventually set up currents with their constant companion, magnetic fields. But zounds, that means that this huge cloud must be a giant current or current sheet or perhaps a current filament when its radius is estimated. Danger, danger, Will Robinson! 41% probability of stellar electrocution and death of stellar system!

Bet someone in NASA is hoping hoping these pesky Voyagers hit a dark rock out there soon and turn this weird nonsense off!

Earls - could the cloud be the power feed to the sun? Maybe it's Dark Fluff...no, then they couldn't have observed it. What a conundrum!

MikeH - No New Models! Read my lips! Maybe a tweaked up Old Model, but no pesky starting over with shiny new models!! Thanks JL. Love to see these things reported, even in such vague terms and cute nicknames.

Happy Christmas and Solstice, all!

[tolenio]

Hello,

I am no expert but rather than this local cloud (fluff) powering up the sun I would suspect it powers down the sun (moderates it downward).

As we all know magnetic bubbles are protective of outside magnetic fields. It is the heliosphere that protects the planets and the magnetosphere that protects the earth.

If we were to look at the last 20 galactic years of history as recorded in earth's crust most of the time this planet was a lush, warm jungle with dinosaurs thriving in Canada during the last galactic year.

The planet then experiences an ice age,which we are only shortly out of.

This indicates to me that the local cloud puts a dampner on things and reduces the normal inputs to the sun.



As per the experts...

The Solar System entered the Local Interstellar Cloud at some time between 44,000 and 150,000 years ago and is expected to remain within it for another 10,000 to 20,000 years. The cloud has a temperature of about 6000 °C,[1] about the same temperature as the surface of the Sun. It is very thin, with 0.1 atoms per cubic centimeter; approximately one-fifth the density of the galactic interstellar medium (0.5 atoms/cc) and twice that of the gas in the Local Bubble (0.05 atoms/cc), the Local Bubble being an area of low-density in the interstellar medium

Since the cloud and the bubble are less dense than average interstellar medium you get a moderated sun. Yes?

I am more interested in what happens when we leave the local cloud. The idea of a tropical Canada is interesting and somebody in marketing somewhere will be able to make tons of money over the panic of human induced tropical lushness as earth moves out of the local cloud.

Tom

[tolenio]

Hello,

Has anybody noticed that the global temperatures seem to correlate to when we entered the local cloud?

Greenland temperatures over the last 130,000 years


Local Cloud

The Solar System entered the Local Interstellar Cloud at some time between 44,000 and 150,000 years ago and is expected to remain within it for another 10,000 to 20,000 years.

Coincidence?

Tom

[Pianoman]

Tom,

Your observation is interesting. What we would also be interesting to pursue is a cause and effect hypothesis i.e. how could this 'fluff' be interacting with the sun to lower its ability to heat the earth? Perhaps it induces an impedance along the true line of current between the sun and its nearest pinch point within the our galaxy?

Pianoman

[junglelord]

NASA, Disinformation machine rides again.

SOLAR POWER, UNABATED: The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar minimum in a century. For the past two years, sunspots have been rare and solar flares almost nonexistant. Fortunately, the warmth of the sun does not come from sunspots. While sunspot numbers have dropped to record lows, the total luminosity of the sun has barely changed at all, dropping less than about 0.1%.

Luminosity is not magnetic field strength, which is a bigger precursor of climate change, then luminosity....as indicated by the members of our thread. Magnetic field strength is probably the best indicator (which is done with sunspots, as one method) to understand climate change, because its quite possible that the cosmic ray theory for cloud formation is induced not only from the Earths magnetosphere, but also the Stellar Plasma Double Layer, the "Local Fluff"....
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... f=4&t=2642

[tolenio]

Hello,

Maybe it is an issue of scale and brining it down to earth may help... Maybe an urelated process with similar dynamics...

How is fair weather current [atmospheric charge] affected by cloud?

How does fair weather current change when fog rolls in?

Evidence for global circuit current flow through water droplet layers
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
A.J. Bennett, a, and R.G. Harrisona
aDepartment of Meteorology, University of Reading, P.O. Box 243, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6BB, UK
Received 18 November 2008; revised 30 March 2009; accepted 16 April 2009. Available online 4 May 2009.

Abstract
Foggy air and clear air have appreciably different electrical conductivities. The conductivity gradient at horizontal droplet boundaries causes droplet charging, as a result of vertical current flow in the global atmospheric electrical circuit. The charging is poorly known, as both the current flow through atmospheric water droplet layers and the air conductivity are poorly characterised experimentally. Surface measurements during three days of continuous fog using new instrument techniques show that a shallow (of order 100 m deep) fog layer still permits the vertical conduction current to pass. Further, the conductivity in the fog is estimated to be approximately 20% lower than in clear air. Assuming a fog transition thickness of one metre, this implies a vertical conductivity gradient of order 10 fS m−2 at the boundary. The actual vertical conductivity gradient at a cloud boundary would probably be greater, due to the presence of larger droplets in clouds compared to fog, and cleaner, more conductive clear air aloft.

Maybe this helps, maybe it doesn't.

Tom

[earls]

I'm just saying, we're at a solar minimum, and we're in the cloud... It's certainly not increasing activity. :p

They did mention the size of the heliosphere and the number of cosmic rays being controlled by the cloud...

What's odd is they think the solar wind "inflates" or as someone put it, has a "pneumatic" analog... That's more attractive than a current powered sun, that current which dictates the size of the solar magnetic field?

I mean what the?

[tolenio]

Hello,

The more power you pump into an electromagnet the stronger the magnnet field. Hence "inflate" the magnetic field.

Enoch put it most poetically; "I saw the four winds which bear [the earth and] the firmament of the heaven." Flowery language for Birkland currents.

Those four winds best depicted by Princeton;

The Large Scale Magnetic Field of the Milky Way

Princeton, NJ, USA
April 30th - May 2nd 2007

[redeye]

Great Thread. Great posts.

Merry Christmas one and all.

Cheers!

[Pianoman]

Hi All,

Over at the climate site wattsupwiththat.com (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/26/v ... /#comments) they posted the NASA press release for discussion. A couple of commentor posed some EU related questions that I wonder if someone could verify the answers given. For example someone asks:-

"But more important is what causes the magnetic field in the first place and what determines its strength?"

One commentor answers this by saying:-

"The magnetic fields in space are caused by dynamo processes where electrically neutral [but conducting] plasma moves across existing magnetic fields, creating currents that amplify the magnetic field and keeps them from dissipating. All this is amply demonstrated by laboratory experiments and from Maxwell’s equations combined with Newton’s laws"


Is this correct?

Also, another guy asks:-

"And what has been observed & measured in the plasma laboratory by repeated experiments is that Electric Double Layers develops between plasma bodies with different physical properties such as density, temperature, magnetic field strength, relative motion and velocity."

Guy answers:-

"And precisely those double layers carry no current. They are known as ‘current-free double layers’. Even wikipedia has this correct: “Current-free double layers occur at the boundary between plasma regions with different plasma properties”

and another adds :-

"There’s no current flowing around a permanent magnet either. But that doesn’t mean it has no magnetic field, or no electric field. And that magnetic field would have effects on GCR’s trajectory, and their different electric charge would intereact with the plasma’s electric field too."

Are these answers above correct or are they missing something fundemental?

Thanks,

Pianoman

[earls]

I move them keys
They call me the pianoman
Classically trained
Nobody do it better man
Call me the pianoman