Brigit wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:55 pm
Michael Mozina » Mon Aug 02, 2021 6:16 am
quotes LS:
"Of course Sol88's just asking questions is part of his years long refusal to answer how his theory would account for the fact that electrons and positive ions are known to move in the same direction, whereas in an electric universe they'd move in opposite directions."
Michael, your point is that "It's worth noting that Birkeland actually *predicted* (and physically demonstrated) that *both* types of charged particles would flow away from the sun, not *just* electrons, etc," which of course everyone fully gets and takes on board.
But that's just it, they *don't* "get" it, nor do they understand it. Worse yet, they *refuse* to even read about it for themselves. Instead they parrot each other over and over again, in a never ending parade of complete ignorance.
Typical ISF Dumbass wrote:I see your post was picked up on by one of the unqualified, Dunderdolts, Dunning-Kruger sufferers. Probably no need to name which particular one it was;
It's absolutely hilarious that that he mentioned "Dunning Kruger sufferers" while completely botching *everything* related to Birkeland's cathode solar model, while simultaneously peddling a cosmology model that is 95 percent "dark magic". Wow. Irony overload.
Here's the problem Bridget:
Of course, the ignorant poster only mentions Birkeland, who had no idea how the solar wind actually worked, back in the day.
Not only did he have an "idea" how it worked, he created a *working simulation* of the process, something the mainstream has *never* been able to accomplish with the concept that Alfven referred to as "pseudoscience" till the day he died.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind
The idea that the ejected material consisted of both ions and electrons was first suggested by Norwegian scientist Kristian Birkeland.[8] His geomagnetic surveys showed that auroral activity was almost uninterrupted. As these displays and other geomagnetic activity were being produced by particles from the Sun, he concluded that the Earth was being continually bombarded by "rays of electric corpuscles emitted by the Sun".[6] He proposed in 1916 that, "From a physical point of view it is most probable that solar rays are neither exclusively negative nor positive rays, but of both kinds"; in other words, the solar wind consists of both negative electrons and positive ions.[9] Three years later, in 1919, British physicist Frederick Lindemann also suggested that the sun ejects particles of both polarities: protons as well as electrons.[10]
In short, it was Birkeland who *first* proposed that the sun emitted *both* ions and electrons toward the planets, which was something he *learned* as a result of laboratory experimentation. It wasn't simply a "guess" on his part because he found 'soot" on the sides of the walls of his experiments and realized it was part of his cathode being flung out from the sphere. You'd "think" a so called "professional" would bother to take the time to *learn* a bit about the topic he's choosing to 'debate' in cyberspace, but alas, all the "skeptics" of EU/PC theory debate from a place of utter ignorance. It's simply pathetic.
He fails to mention what LS was addressing in his post. Namely, that the electric idiots want a radial electric field emanating from the Sun.
I love how the "idiots" were the ones who came up with working simulations of aurora and full sphere coronas, while the so called "experts" have been completely inept in the lab to date. They're a full century behind and counting when it comes to tangible lab results.
Which will indeed send ions and electrons in opposite directions.
Here's their problem in a nutshell Bridget. They don't even bother to read Birkeland's work for themselves, they dont' understand it, and they *blatantly misrepresent it* in cyberspace to an unsuspecting audience.
The amusing part is that the ion and electrons *do* flow in opposite directions at the *highest velocities*, whereas the solar wind particles all travel away from the sun, mostly because the electrons are slamming into and pushing the ions away from the sun. Their charge also "pulls" on the ions.
And he then makes a dumb point about cosmic rays, which are nothing to do with the electric idiocy.
And here was the most ridiculously stupid comment of his entire post. *Of course* they have *everything* to do with Birkeland's model of a "positively" charged space that the sun interacts with. Doh! What a bonehead comment.
The only reason they get past the heliopause is due to their high energy.
They're also *drawn* to the surface, but indeed their *high velocity* and the low density of the ISM does allow them to pass into the solar system.
The loons of EU require a current of electrons heading in at half-rat power. Scientifically impossible, of course. They would be picked up by the magnetic field that moves outward with the solar wind, and taken right back to where they impossibly came from.
Pure and utter nonsense from a guy who hasn't spent even an hour reading Birkeland's material for themselves.
In this posters case, he thinks the Sun is a cathode! Lol. And that there is a current of ions coming in to power it. Which is impossible for the same reasons. The only charged particles getting in are very energetic ones, as well as energetic neutrals. So, what is the cosmic ray flux? Can that power the Sun? I think we all know the answer to that. And it would be rather obvious, not to mention likely fatal to life on Earth, if it were happening with the necessary flux. For obvious reasons. Tom Bridgman did a calculation some time ago on this;
The pathetic part is that neither of them read Birkeland's work for themselves because Birkeland didn't claim that the sun was *externally* powered in the first place, rather he surmised that it was powered by an internal "transmutation of elements". What a bunch of unprofessional dipshits.
It's amazing how ignorant they are, and how *willfully* ignorant they are. It took me a few weeks to slog through Birkeland's couple of volumes of work, but it only took a couple of light evenings of reading to understand his solar model. Only a completely irrational person continue to debate these topics based on willful ignorance, but alas, that's *exactly* what they do, and they parrot each other's ignorance and treat it as 'fact', just as the poster in question tried to use Bridgman's estimates on an *external* power source to attempt to 'debunk' Birkeland's *internally* powered cathode solar model. EU/PC "skeptics" aren't even real "skeptics" to begin with. They're all ignorant idiots, and ignorant *by choice* no less, while fancying themselves as 'experts" on these topics. Sheesh.
