ATMOSPHERES LOCKED ON PLANETS
Electric Atmospheres & Electric Planets
Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by jtb » Sun Aug 03, 2014 6:41 pm
Is the atmosphere electrically locked to Earth? I don't believe gravity is the means.
Can anyone reference a scientific experiment showing evidence that the atmosphere can be electrically locked to a rotating, orbiting, spherical object?
Earth is a sphere within a sphere (atmosphere, atmo sphere). The atmosphere is a sphere separating Earth from the vacuum of space. There should be a way of testing how Earth is connected to the atmosphere.
Earth rotates ~1,000 mph west to east at the equator with easterly prevailing winds of ~11 mph. Therefore, the total velocity of the atmosphere at the equator is ~989 mph west to east; ~11 mph slower than Earth's rotation.
If Earth is stationary (not rotating or orbiting), the atmosphere is rotating about Earth's equator at ~11 mph east to west.
Is there a flaw in my reasoning?
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by Aardwolf » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:23 am
No experiment as far as I am aware but we do observe Mars rotating at ~540 mph with average wind speeds of 10-15 mph so it appears that something rotates the atmosphere at roughly the same speed as the planet. I suspect it's electrostatic rather than gravitational as gravity should seperate the atmosphere into layers according to atomic weight.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:24 pm
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.
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.
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.
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 {galaxy’s} spiral arm magnetic field.
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).
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:35 pm
jtb wrote: Electrostatic attraction and external force on Venus' atmosphere makes sense. If Earth is rotating, is that electrostatic force strong enough to lock the atmosphere to the rotating surface?
I don't think that rotation is the key factor -- I think that it is the surface charge. If it happens to be negative, +ions will cling to it, making an atmosphere. If the surface is positive, it will attract free electrons, but they don't constitute an atmosphere.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:41 am
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 {galaxy’s} 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.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 2:13 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.
… 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.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:12 pm
viscount aero wrote:
CharlesChandler wrote: … 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.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:04 pm
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 {& disperse}.
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.
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!!!
viscount aero wrote: ...and that it conforms the solar system to Titus/Bode's law --another mystery
Bode's law is a whole nuther topic.
Re: Atmosphere Locked to Electric Earth???
by CharlesChandler » Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:20 pm
viscount aero wrote: I'm still not following why you insist that retrograde is the absolute preferred state and it must be reversed by another force
Here's an animation (that somebody else did) of the expected angular velocities at different radii, where the inner stuff is moving faster than the outer stuff:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/IrrotationalVortexFlow-anim.gif
fsda
There are 4 layers shown. So let's suppose that you're trotting along in orbit around the system center, trying to keep up with the other stuff, somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd layers, and let's suppose that you become the nucleus of condensation, such that everything starts sticking to you, and you're forming the core of a planet. You'd find that anything that accreted on your left shoulder would be moving faster than stuff attaching itself to your right shoulder. As such, the continued accretion process should get you spinning to the right (CW in plan view), even while you orbit in CCW mode. Thus your axial rotation should always be the reverse of your orbital rotation (i.e., retrograde).
So I conclude that prograde axial rotations are not a prediction of the accretion disc model, and something else had to have been responsible.