MOST THOROUGH MODEL-7
ELECTRICITY, FIELDS, WAVES, PHOTONS, MAGNETS, CLUSTERS, E.T., SURVIVAL, GALAXIES, GEOLOGY, CEU/ESU, ATOMIC, MAINSTREAM, WIND, INFLOWS, DENSITY, FUSION, IMPACTS, SPEED, IONIZATION, SUPERCRITICAL
…………………………………………………………(SpaceAustralia.com)
CONTENTS
PLASMA, VACUUM, WIRE, ELECTRICITY — ELECTRIC FIELDS — SOLAR WAVES — PHOTONS — MAGNETS INTERACTION — GLOBULAR STAR CLUSTERS — E.T. PLANETS — GALACTIC IMPLOSIONS & SURVIVAL — STAR CLUSTERS V. GALAXIES — CEU OR ESU MODEL GEOLOGY — CEU/ESU SOLAR MODEL OVERVIEW — ATOMIC MODEL — EU V. ESU ON CME’S, CORONAL MASS EJECTIONS — PHOTONS, ELECTRIC FIELD — MAINSTREAM SOLAR MODEL ERROR — SOLAR WIND CAUSE — INFLOWS TO THE SUN — SOLAR DENSITY — SOLAR SURFACE FUSION — IMPACTS FUSION — SOLAR WIND SPEED — SOLAR FUSION — COMPRESSIVE IONIZATION — SUPERCRITICAL HYDROGEN PHOTOSPHERE
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:41 am
PLASMA, VACUUM, WIRE, ELECTRICITY
Lloyd wrote: current would flow better in positive charged matter than in vacuum.
Positively charged matter would tend to grab ahold of the electrons, and not want to let go, so that matter would present a lot of resistance to the flow of electrons. Neutral matter is a good conductor only if the outer-most electron shells are weakly bound to the atom, such as in the heavier elements, which are all conductors. In the lighter elements, the electrons are closer to the nucleus, and thus have a stronger attraction to the nucleus (i.e., with a stronger binding potential, requiring more force to tear the electrons away from the atom). So those are resistors. Negatively charged plasma wouldn't attract free electrons, and thus no time would be lost to electron/atom collisions or captures, and the electrons would flow rapidly. So negatively charged plasma would be the best conductor, second only to a pure vacuum (if that were possible).
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Sat Sep 02, 2017 3:26 pm
johnm33 wrote: Charles, whilst it's fairly easy to imagine a current flowing down a wire it's difficult to imagine what the current does when it goes into a vacuum.
Electric currents are just the flow of electrons. The electrons can either hop-skip-and-jump from one atom to the next in the crystal lattice of a wire, spending most of their time traveling through the free space between the atoms, or they can get to the last atom in line and just keep going, venturing off into the free space of a vacuum tube to get to the other electrode.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Sat Sep 02, 2017 8:48 pm
Lloyd wrote: So do you have an idea how the electromagnetic waves travel close to light speed in wire, while the electrons travel slowly if at all?
When one charged particle moves relative to another, it exerts a force on the other immediately. So a force can be transmitted very quickly, even with very little net movement. For example, in the game of pool, if you do a tight rack of 15 balls, and then smack the one in front with the cue ball, instantaneously the balls at the other side of the rack are accelerated, even if the balls in the middle barely moved.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:51 am
ELECTRIC FIELDS
Lloyd wrote: _It seems that the atoms making up a wire aren't solidly touching each other, nor are the electrons. Are they?
_So how would the force be transmitted? Would it be by their electric fields?
_And why would the electric force transmit at light speed?
Yes, it's by their electric fields. To work the analogy a bit here, imagine that the pool balls aren't touching each other, but rather, that they're connected by tight rubber bands. Now hit one of them with the cue ball. It moves. And as soon as it does, the tensile force that it is exerting on the next ball in line, through the rubber band, is instantly changed. So the next ball starts moving, even before it has been impacted. And when it moves, the tensile force on the next rubber band is affected. Thus the movement can propagate through the whole rack, not at the speed at which the balls are moving, but rather, at the speed at which tensile force can be transmitted through the rubber bands.
SOLAR WAVES
This explains a well known, but poorly understood phenomenon observed on the solar surface on a regular basis. Solar flares create shock waves in the surrounding plasma. That's easy to understand. What's hard to understand is that they start out traveling at a supersonic speed, and then they accelerate. Shock waves are 'posed to propagate at the speed of sound, and that's pretty much by definition. So the supersonic speed is problematic for the Newtonian regime. And by the 2nd law of thermodynamics, energy is 'posed to dissipate with distance from the source of the energy. So waves aren't 'posed to accelerate moving away from whatever initiated them. This can only be evidence that the plasma has a net charge. The motion of a charged particle alters the electric force that it is exerting on neighboring charges, as soon as the motion starts. So the speed of propagation is limited to the speed of light, not the speed of sound.
PHOTONS
Lloyd wrote: _Is the electric field related to photons?
Photons are fluctuations in the electric field.
MAGNETS INTERACTION
Lloyd wrote: _If there were a line of magnets in place of the pool balls, and if they're confined, like ring magnets on a horizontal non-magnetic shaft with like polarity between magnets, they would space themselves apart, kind of like atoms in a wire, I guess.
Yes.
Lloyd wrote: _If a like-pole magnet were propelled and hit one of the end magnets, would the force transmit through the line of magnets as fast as the force transmitted through the pool balls?
The speed of propagation is a function of the strength of the field between the objects, minus the inertial forces in the objects that have to be overcome to get them moving. The elasticity of solid objects (such as pool balls) transmits force very rapidly, because the atoms are packed tightly together in the crystal lattice. So they don't have very far to go before they affect the next atom in line, and the electric force is very powerful as close range. The propagation of motion through the ring magnets would be the same, if the magnetic force between them was as strong, compared to their mass, as the electric force between atoms in a crystal lattice.
Lloyd wrote: _And how does the force transmit through the line of magnets, when they don't even touch each other?
Action at a distance.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Mon Sep 04, 2017 1:14 pm
GLOBULAR STAR CLUSTERS
Lloyd wrote: I was asking if you have an idea how globular star clusters could form while a galaxy is going through numerous implosions and explosions to form a spiral galaxy and why they would inhabit mostly the galactic halo.
Maybe the halo is the only place that something could survive a galactic explosion. Or maybe the globular clusters were debris from a far earlier explosion, and were later captured by the mature galaxy, though they won't survive the next explosion. We don't have enough data to narrow down the possibilities, but you're right that globular clusters appear to be very ancient -- some of them seem to pre-date the {galactic} Big Bang.
E.T. PLANETS
Lloyd wrote: Stephen Smith suggests that what are thought to be observations of exoplanets may actually be merely … oscillations in the plasma sheaths of stars. It seems that his reasoning is wrong though, due to electrodynamic modeling.
He isn't necessarily wrong -- the data on exoplanets are extremely sparse as well, so it's hard to say. But there is no dismissing the planets in our solar system as mere oscillations in plasma double layers.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:39 pm
GALACTIC IMPLOSIONS & SURVIVAL
Lloyd wrote: GALACTIC IMPLOSION. I just had a thought and wanted to record it here, so it won't be lost. I think you've said that galactic filament or gas cloud implosions probably take hundreds of thousands of years to complete. I suppose then that implosions of entire galaxies would take much longer. So, if there were civilized societies in an imploding galaxy, they would have thousands of years to observe the progress of the implosion. Do you suppose they could develop means to escape from an imploding galaxy? Or would all of the occupants there be trapped?
I don't have a timeframe for galactic implosions, but yes, it would probably take a really long time. The Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxies are expected to collide in 4.5 billion years. I don't have an idea for how long the subsequent implosion would take. I also don't have such a clear & distinct concept of how violent the implosion would be. Would everything get remelted? Vaporized? Or would it just be some stuff that would be reduced to monoatomic matter, while other stuff might not be terribly perturbed? Certainly stuff at the outer reaches of the galaxy (such as our solar system) would be safer than stuff in the galactic nucleus. But "escaping" a galaxy that is 200,000 light years across would take lotsa light years. They would have to be able to survive (& reproduce) in space, and they'd need a really fast spaceship. They'd also need some place else to go. Somewhere in there, it starts getting difficult to imagine life as we know it. Let's just hope that our part of the Milky Way won't get vaporized.
Lloyd wrote: You've suggested that supernovas or colliding gas clouds may trigger implosions within the gas clouds or galactic filaments. Do you have ideas how an entire galactic implosion could be triggered?
Galaxies implode under the same kinds of circumstances as dusty plasmas -- it takes the collision of two different bodies of gas & dust. The only difference is that in galactic implosions, the dust particles are a lot bigger. But either way, the charged halos around charged nuclei get stretched into comas, which sets up an electrostatic attraction that pulls everything inward.
STAR CLUSTERS V. GALAXIES
Lloyd wrote: Maybe advanced civilizations move themselves to safe places, like globular star clusters outside of galaxies. But how do such star clusters form? Are they mini-galaxies that gradually combine with other clusters and become first-stage galaxies, i.e. peculiar galaxies?
It's possible that the only difference between globular clusters & galaxies is size -- perhaps they form the same way. It's also possible that globular clusters formed at the same time as nearby galaxies, and were stray fragments that were far enough away that they didn't get assimilated into the galactic form. Likewise, I don't have a specific model for the formation of planets as opposed to stars -- I'm just saying that if there is just a little spatter out of the star formation process, there will be some debris nearby, which will be made of the same stuff, by the same means, as the star, just on a smaller scale. …
CEU OR ESU MODEL GEOLOGY
Lloyd wrote: What would you say are ESU's claims about the 5 Earth features:
F: Earth Formation, C: Crust, S: Sedimentation, O: Orogenesis, GL: Glaciation?
F: What you said was fine ("Stars and planets form by implosions of galactic electrostatic filaments, which produce current-free electric double layers within the bodies, which produce radiation, earthquakes, volcanism etc."). I would have just said that planets are just hot spatter out of the star formation process.
C: The crust, IMO, was a meteoritic contribution from the break-up of Ceres.
S: Sedimentation hasn't gotten any special treatment in my model.
O: I favor Fischer's "Shock Dynamics" for mountain building.
GL: Glaciation hasn't gotten any special treatment in my model.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:30 pm
CharlesChandler wrote: C: The crust, IMO, was a meteoritic contribution from the break-up of Ceres.
I should be more specific -- the granitic crust, and the oceans, were contributions from Ceres. The basaltic crust under the oceans was native to the Earth.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:50 pm
CEU/ESU SOLAR MODEL OVERVIEW
comingfrom wrote: My living organism has now acquired all the oxygen it needed for a lifetime at birth, stored up within his heart.
Hi Paul, To save you having to research previous posts and/or my website to find out what this actually means, I can give you a brief overview, and you can decide what you want to make of it.
The evidence of electrical activity on the surface of the Sun is abundant, while currents up to the task further out are hard to find. So the conclusion is that all of the action is proximal to the Sun itself. How can this happen? When a solar flare ejects matter from the Sun, it's creating a charge imbalance. The reason is that the surface of the Sun is positively charged. So there's a net loss of positive charge inside the Sun due to the CME. This drives an equal-but-opposite drift of electrons out of the Sun and into the interplanetary medium, where all of the positive ions have gone. And that "drift" of electrons, from deeper inside the Sun, creates ohmic heating, and that's the source of the heat & light that we get from the surface.
Eventually, the electrons catch up to the positive ions in the interplanetary medium, where they combine to form neutrally charged atoms. These then can eventually rain back down onto the Sun, recycling the matter, where it will be subjected to the Sun's electric field, and split back into positive & negative layers. When the positive charges get expelled again, the cycle repeats. This is consistent with the fact that the sustained solar output is directly proportional to the number of solar flares during the active phase, even though the heat produced by the flares themselves is nothing compared to the total solar output, and should have nothing at all to do with solar output during the quiescent phase. But if those flares are expelling positive ions, and the heat is being produced by the electrons leaving the Sun due to the charge imbalance, then of course the solar output will be directly proportional to the number of flares. The CMEs are the charge separation mechanism that drives the current throughout the entire cycle.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:05 pm
ATOMIC MODEL
… I favor Bill Lucas' atomic model, but there are others out there that solve problems that the mainstream model doesn't touch. …
EU V. ESU ON CME’S, CORONAL MASS EJECTIONS
comingfrom wrote: CMEs are caused by Birkeland current touchdowns.
If the current is coming from outside of the Sun, wouldn't we see the discharge in the chromosphere before the CME? …
PHOTONS, ELECTRIC FIELD
comingfrom wrote: To me, an electric field is a photonic wind. Particles appear to attract or repulse due to potentials in their electric fields, and the way these potentials work within larger electric fields. Photons of course are tiny, but they still have radius and mass, which enables them to push ions around in electric circuits.
And do you have a mechanical explanation for how photons came into existence?
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:28 pm
MAINSTREAM SOLAR MODEL ERROR
comingfrom wrote: One has to remember how dense the core must be in their model, for the fusion to occur. (1.622 x 105 kg/m3)
Yes, but I can't get there -- I don't think that the core is that dense, even though I have much heavier elements in the core, and I don't think that there is any nuclear fusion going on there. The heavy elements have settled to the bottom, and while the pressure is sufficient for hydrogen fusion, it isn't even close to the pressure needed to fuse heavier elements. So I reject the "fusion furnace" model.
SOLAR WIND CAUSE
comingfrom wrote:
The IPM has a slight net positive charge.
And that's enough to rip electrons away from the Sun?
I'm saying that the Sun has a net negative charge, while the IPM has a net positive charge. There is little electrical resistance in plasmas at that temperature, so the only thing holding the electrons down is gravity, and gravity is no match for the electric force.
INFLOWS TO THE SUN
comingfrom wrote: All the papers I read are talking about [inflows].
Inflows, coming from less than 5 solar radii, and typically occurring within just a couple of days of a CME, don't surprise me. There are some rather dramatic videos of "coronal rain" immediately after CMEs that I take as further evidence that the Sun has a net negative charge, since the "rain" is clearly +ions (especially highly ionized iron), which is unmistakable given the absorption frequencies. But that doesn't make it an interstellar electric current. In the near perfect vacuum of the IPM, I'd expect charged particles responding to an electric field to get accelerated to a substantial percentage of the speed of light. At such speeds, the magnetic pinch effect would be robust, and the currents would get pinched into discrete discharge channels, which would be highly visible, like lightning, or like the discrete discharge channels in a plasma ball lamp. And we don't see anything of the sort. That model also has a big problem establishing a current regulator, to prevent all of the potential from being eliminated instantaneously.
comingfrom wrote: Not much of the inflows can be observed, because the corona and chromosphere are so rarefied the inflows generally don't bring a lot of plasma with them.
What's flowing inward, if not plasma?
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:34 pm
…
SOLAR DENSITY
comingfrom wrote: As we go into the Sun, and the densities increase until electron shells begin to overlap, the result is ionization.
Yes.
comingfrom wrote:But when the densities increase above that, the protons fuse, having nowhere else they can go.
I don't think that the densities increase above that. Once the electrons are squeezed out, there is an electrostatic repulsion between the atoms that prevents further compression, and which is a respectable force -- gravity is no match for the electric force. So I don't think that the Sun has enough gravitational loading for nuclear fusion in the core. If it did, it would create a Type Ia supernova, because once the fusion started, there wouldn't be anything to stop it. So here we have to remember that Eddington's "fusion furnace" model was developed in the 1920s, before nuclear fusion was discovered. Now that we know the precise properties of it, we can say with certainty that there isn't any sustained nuclear fusion in the core of the Sun.
comingfrom wrote: Going to the center of the core, we have larger and larger elements present, as the pressure increases.
I don't think that those heavy elements were fused because of the pressure, because nuclear physics doesn't allow it. Rather, the heavy elements already existed, and now they're resting comfortably inside the Sun.
comingfrom wrote: I think they are guessing the reported densities.
They are absolutely guessing. I am too, except that I constrain the solution domain to what laboratory physics allows. Their model is based entirely on the ideal gas laws, and makes no mention of the Coulomb barrier, which laboratory physics requires.
SOLAR SURFACE FUSION
comingfrom wrote: The fusion is occurring were we observe it, on the surface.
I agree, but I also think that fusion occurs deeper within the convective zone -- not because of pressure, but because of the acceleration of electrons to near the speed of light in arc discharges. Where they slam into stationary matter at the ends of the channels, they instantaneously create the pressures & temperatures necessary for fusion. This has been verified, by the gamma rays that can only be produced by fusion, and by the sudden appearance of fusion by-products, such as carbon, nitrogen, & oxygen, all in proportions expected by nuclear physics.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:04 am
IMPACTS FUSION
Lloyd wrote: … You've also stated elsewhere that high velocity impacts of meteorites on planets causes thermonuclear explosions and I think that means they produce fusion products too. Is that correct? I'm having a discussion with someone on the CNPS forum who thinks impacts would not produce thermonuclear explosions, because he doesn't think there are fusion products, like radioactive elements. I told him about the Wolfe Creek impact crater in Australia, which is said to have excessive U, Th and K40. Have you found out what fusion products are likely produced by impacts? Would most of them be radioactive or not? Do you know of sources of relevant data?
Any thermonuclear explosion at the surface is going to vaporize everything involved, so I wouldn't expect any data. Radioactive elements in the ground wouldn't prove that the impact itself exploded, much less in nuke mode. I suppose that if you took a sledgehammer and beat on a rock long enough, you'd find some radioactive isotopes in the rock somewhere, just by jostling stuff around enough to get some random atomic events in there -- no nuke required. So I'm not sure that radioactive elements in the ground, or absence thereof, would constitute proof either way.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:20 pm
SOLAR WIND SPEED
comingfrom wrote: Thunderbolts & EU people say the solar wind does accelerate to substantial percentage of c.
I would need to see evidence of this -- it would be unmistakable. For example, the Doppler shift would be huge.
SOLAR FUSION
comingfrom wrote: Nuclear synthesis is occurring on the photosphere surface, where we observe the fusion occurring.
I agree.
comingfrom wrote: Wow. Accelerating to near light speed within the body of the Sun.
Yes. Lightning in the Earth's atmosphere, which is thicker than the plasma on the surface of the Sun, gets up to 1/10 the speed of light, and that's in less than 10 km of travel. Discharges on the Sun can be thousands of kilometers long, in more rarefied plasma.
COMPRESSIVE IONIZATION
comingfrom wrote: The atoms were so tight shoulder to shoulder that they squeezed their outer electrons off.
Then those electrons had the freedom of movement to accelerate to near c?
And then, as the density was decreasing, on their way to surface, they suddenly slammed into a wall?
The gravitational loading necessary for compressive ionization doesn't occur until you get down to 120,000 km below the surface of the Sun. The entire convective zone is 200,000 km deep, so that's more than halfway down into the convective zone. Below 120,000 km from the surface, the hydrogen & helium is an incompressible supercritical fluid. It's positively charged because of the extreme pressure, and it's incompressible because of the Coulomb force between the like-charged atoms. And I haven't identified any source of energy below that level. So it's all in the topmost 120,000 km.
Re: Most Thorough Model
by CharlesChandler » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:13 pm
SUPERCRITICAL HYDROGEN PHOTOSPHERE
johnm33 wrote: I have another probably stupid question for Charles, looking at the image on your page 7909 of the suns layers, is it possible that the inner layers are suffused with hydrogen ions packed into a matrix of the other elements?
I'd be beyond the limits of my understanding of supercritical fluids if I tried to answer to that. It probably isn't as simple as I'm making it sound. The basic idea that I'm using is that once compressed into the closest packed arrangement, yet above the critical temperature, all of it becomes fluid, and then the heavier atoms sink to the bottom. But that is surely naive. In the Earth's crust, below the Moho the matter is compacted to the point that the crystal lattices break down, and the matter loses its rigidity. We can see plenty of evidence of plasticity in the folded layers of rock that subsequently found their way to the surface. We can also see crystals that don't normally form at the surface. For example, graphite can get compressed into diamonds. If there is a mix of elements present, chemicals can form, which required extreme pressure. So what's the closest packed arrangement when a variety of elements are present? Is it all of one kind of element at one level, and then all of another at the next level? Or are there smaller elements nestled in the voids left by the closest packed arrangement of larger elements? In other words, imagine an orthogonal arrangement of iron atoms, in perfectly aligned rows & columns. Perhaps the Coulomb force between iron ions won't let the rows or columns get compacted anymore. But on the diagonal, there will be some empty space that could get filled in with hydrogen or helium. So once the iron gets compacted, there won't be any force to expel the hydrogen or helium from the mix, and it will just stay there.
What kind of "chemicals" might be present at such extreme pressures? What would the properties of those "chemicals" be (e.g., wave transmission speeds, thermal and electrical conductivities, etc.)? Would any of those crystal lattices persist if brought to the surface? All very interesting questions. Perhaps somebody knows the answers, but we don't have the lab data to confirm any of it, and QM certainly won't help -- only a physical model can predict physical properties. But I think that the extreme temperatures probably present inside the Sun will keep stirring up the mix, which will let gravity have more of an effect than it would at lower temperatures.