Electric universe theories here.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Not really

You should be. I mean really, after all these years, and you can’t even multiply. That’s sad.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Are you any good at maths, Ziggurat?

Better than you, though that’s not saying much.

Quote:

What is the electric field strength required to drive, this kinky jet in particular, over the distances involved?

What makes you think the jet is driven by an electric field?

Quote:

Couple volts? Few hundred? Just an OOM is fine for now.

You can’t even get the units right. Electric fields are not measured in volts. And no, this isn’t a minor technicality.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You should be. I mean really, after all these years, and you can’t even multiply. That’s sad.

What makes you think the jet is driven by an electric field?
.

It is a bit sad.

What’s makes me think it’s an electric field...

In the peer reviewed paper...

Quote:

We discuss the possible causes leading to the formation of the observed ‘kink’ feature for the GRG, which include precession of the jet axis, development of instabilities and magnetic reconnection.

Possible causes... I’d like to focus, being somewhat biased, on CURRENT DRIVEN INSTABILITIES.

Plasma at that, funnily enough...

Quote:

However, almost all of them are on smaller scales (∼ 10 kpc), and not scales of ∼ 100 kpc as in the case of ‘kink’ in the Barbell GRG. The ∼ 100 kpc omega shaped ‘kink’ structure seen on the western side of the ra- dio core is very unique, and a possible example of plasma instability on such a large scale.

Now as far as I can recall, tusenfem is a super duper space plasma physicist, bloody mad maths skills and all.

Is an electric field need more or less to drive a plasma instability? Namely, a kink instability, tusenfem?

[Sol88]

And would a “current” such as from the Barbell shaped giant radio galaxy with ∼ 100 kpc kink in the jet be considered, “large”?

In say relation the currents that flow within comet tails, the interaction between the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, the Earth and Sun (and the planets of the solar system).

Does this jet have more, not sure what the mathamagicians term for it is but “ooomph”?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Thanks for the calculation, but it will not help.
If you go back a few years you will find that I put in the same calculation.

Including the electric currents between the moons of Jupiter and Jupiters magnetosphere?

Actually, there quite a few surprises found at the poles of both Jupiter and Saturn...

Electric Jupiter Baffles Astronomers

Straight forward plasma physics? Or some kooky fringe, planets careering around the solar system, shooting lightning bolts tin foil hat pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo for the weak of mind?

[Ziggurat]

The jets are mostly neutral, you can't determine the amperage of any current in them from their length. And your source discusses the cause of a kink in the jets, not the source of the jets themselves. And that's primarily magnetic, not electrical. Go look up the strength of the magnetic field involved, and tell me if you think it's large.

[Sol88]

Mostly neutral?

Quote:

The radio jets produced near the central super-massive black holes are collimated by the magnetic field and their collimation requires external confinement (Tomimatsu 1994; Beskin et al. 1998). For the external confinement, the gas pressure profile plays a vital role and hence, influences the jet acceleration and collimation along with the magnetic field configuration.

Like that?

Gas pressure profile, ya reckon?

[Sol88]

Yeah, your problem is the jets!

Somehow using magnetic magik they are produced from BH, HH Oject, comets...

Lots of stuff.

So, an ELECTROMAGNETIC source, is driving a current causing plasma instabilities?

Is this interpretation too simplistic, for you Ziggurat? Or do we need math?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Mostly neutral?

Yes, mostly neutral. You seem to be confused about how magnetic confinement works.

[Sol88]

Not at all.

A Flux tube?

A

Birkeland current

A

Force free field aligned current

Which one in particular are you struggling with?

Mostly plasma, not neutral.

Anyhooo, back to the current driven instability into this jet.

Plasma physics or gas physics first, you pick.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yes, mostly neutral. You seem to be confused about how magnetic confinement works.

How strong is the current generating the magnetic field?

All bar magnets lined up are they?

[Ziggurat]

You keep throwing around term you don't even understand, without actually making a coherent point.

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Now as far as I can recall, tusenfem is a super duper space plasma physicist, bloody mad maths skills and all.

Is an electric field need more or less to drive a plasma instability? Namely, a kink instability, tusenfem?

Can you formulate that in a sensible question, please?

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

And would a “current” such as from the Barbell shaped giant radio galaxy with ∼ 100 kpc kink in the jet be considered, “large”?

In say relation the currents that flow within comet tails, the interaction between the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, the Earth and Sun (and the planets of the solar system).

Does this jet have more, not sure what the mathamagicians term for it is but “ooomph”?

Currents do not mean anything in phyiscs, currentdensities are important.

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Including the electric currents between the moons of Jupiter and Jupiters magnetosphere?

Actually, there quite a few surprises found at the poles of both Jupiter and Saturn...

Electric Jupiter Baffles Astronomers

Straight forward plasma physics? Or some kooky fringe, planets careering around the solar system, shooting lightning bolts tin foil hat pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo for the weak of mind?

care to enighten us what is in that boobtube, what the "surprises" are, etc.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Including the electric currents between the moons of Jupiter and Jupiters magnetosphere?

Actually, there quite a few surprises found at the poles of both Jupiter and Saturn...

Electric Jupiter Baffles Astronomers

Straight forward plasma physics? Or some kooky fringe, planets careering around the solar system, shooting lightning bolts tin foil hat pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo for the weak of mind?

Care to remind us which of your Velikovskian fruitloops are qualified to understand even basic plasma physics? Thought not. Stick to cave paintings and impossible thunderbolts, there's a good chap.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Currents do not mean anything in phyiscs, currentdensities are important.

Currents do not mean anything in space plasma’s? Only charge seperation?

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Currents do not mean anything in space plasma’s? Only charge seperation?

Showing again your ignorance of plasma physics.
Currents, as in Ampères, don't mean anything in plasma physics
You can have a bezillion Ampères, but if they run through a quazillion square meters they don't do diddly-squat.
Any description of plasmas (check with Alfvén or with Perratt) is done with current densities. So you can have millions of Ampères along Io's flux tube but for any real effects you will have to divide it through the cross section of the tube to get the density.

[Ziggurat]

I’d put it a bit differently. Context matters. Scale matters. A current which is large is a terrestrial context can be insignificant on a planetary or galactic scale. Which is how we end up with numbers for Io which look huge without proper context, but turn out to be minuscule in context of the scale of Io.

That’s why quantification matters. But that’s what Sol88 is incapable of doing.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Showing again your ignorance of plasma physics.
Currents, as in Ampères, don't mean anything in plasma physics
You can have a bezillion Ampères, but if they run through a quazillion square meters they don't do diddly-squat.
Any description of plasmas (check with Alfvén or with Perratt) is done with current densities. So you can have millions of Ampères along Io's flux tube but for any real effects you will have to divide it through the cross section of the tube to get the density.

Would you still need a potential difference to drive the current, regardless of density?

quazillion square meters? in a collimated (magnetically confined) plasma?

Such as a flux tube, Birkeland current, force free field aligned current etc etc

Not really fair to call ignorance but a will call confabulation on your behalf, as per usual.

[Sol88]

And if there is a current with a potential to drive it, does it not need to flow in a circuit?

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Would you still need a potential difference to drive the current, regardless of density?

In a vacuum, not necessarily.

[

Quote:

I]quazillion square meters?[/i] in a collimated (magnetically confined) plasma?

That was obviously a manner of speech, telling you that density matters, not nominal value.

Quote:

Such as a flux tube, Birkeland current, force free field aligned current etc etc

State your numbers, then maybe an answerable question will emerge.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Sol88

And if there is a current with a potential to drive it, does it not need to flow in a circuit?

In space, not necessarily.

Anyway, what is your point?

Hans

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Would you still need a potential difference to drive the current, regardless of density?

There always needs to be a driver for a current. Most of the time the current is induced by the motion of the magnetic field, seldomly by a charge separation.

Originally Posted by Sol88

quazillion square meters? in a collimated (magnetically confined) plasma?

Such as a flux tube, Birkeland current, force free field aligned current etc etc

Whatever suits your fancy

Originally Posted by Sol88

Not really fair to call ignorance but a will call confabulation on your behalf, as per usual.

Nope, size matters, like Ziggurat said (and I in other words).
If you have 100 l/s from a fire hose, you have great power, if, however, you have 100 l/s flowing through the Mississippi you have a drizzle.

Originally Posted by Sol88

And if there is a current with a potential to drive it, does it not need to flow in a circuit?

What is a circuit?
Are you talking about a circuit representation of plasma physical phenomena?
Or do you want to describe the whole plasma as a circuit, that will be mighty difficult, because there are no wires in a plasma and particles are not guided through wires, but can move around through collissions and other effects.

[Sol88]

Right, correct me if im wrong but in relation to the paper ......

The mentioned "kink" in the CURRENT DRIVEN INSTABILITY needs a source to drive the current, that is mostly likely induced by the motion of the magnetic field. Seems a fair call because it is a VERY well know effect of Electromagnetic induction which occurs whenever there is a relative motion between a magnetic field and a coil. What would act as a coil in plasma?

Anyhoo, this induced current that leads to a flow of charged particles is guided not by wires (copper conductor) but can move around through collissions and other effects. Including MAGNETIC FLUX TUBES, FORCE FREE FIELD ALIGNED CURRENTS, CURRENT SHEETS to name just a few.

Now, tusenfem is telling me because to describe the plasma circuits using the above mechanisms instead of using wires is to difficult or is impossible in a space environment we should revert to gas equations?

A circuit is as per the standard definition of an electrical circuit...

What Are Electric Circuits?
Chapter 1 - Basic Concepts Of Electricity

Quote:

What Is a Circuit?

The answer to this paradox is found in the concept of a circuit: a never-ending looped pathway for charge carriers. If we take a wire, or many wires, joined end-to-end, and loop it around so that it forms a continuous pathway, we have the means to support a uniform flow of charge without having to resort to infinite Sources and Destinations:

Quote:

Are you talking about a circuit representation of plasma physical phenomena?

YES.

You are able to substitute the wires in the above definition to include your definition of plasma "wires" (charged particles) move around through collissions and other effects.

Plasma circuits in space?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I’d put it a bit differently. Context matters. Scale matters. A current which is large is a terrestrial context can be insignificant on a planetary or galactic scale. Which is how we end up with numbers for Io which look huge without proper context, but turn out to be minuscule in context of the scale of Io.

That’s why quantification matters. But that’s what Sol88 is incapable of doing.

How scalable are plasma phenomena, Ziggurat?

Lets take your statement

Quote:

A current which is large is a terrestrial context can be insignificant on a planetary or galactic scale.

What happens when a GALACTIC scale (power and density) current is involved in planetary scale plasma interactions. Io and Jupiter for instance.

Would the 1 ton a second of removed material increase?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Sol88

How scalable are plasma phenomena, Ziggurat?

This is nonsensical. In a sense, everything is infinitely scalable, what’s relevant is how things scale.

Quote:

What happens when a GALACTIC scale (power and density) current is involved in planetary scale plasma interactions. Io and Jupiter for instance.

Would the 1 ton a second of removed material increase?

More nonsense. You are asking about doing two contradictory things at once. Galactic scale plasma densities are low, lower than what we see around Io. There is no way to concentrate galactic scale total power into a volume as small as Io. You are asking what would happen if the impossible happens, and the answer doesn’t matter because it’s impossible.

Stop trying to make Velikovsky a thing. It’s not going to work.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Sol88

*snip*

You are able to substitute the wires in the above definition to include your definition of plasma "wires" (charged particles) move around through collissions and other effects.

Plasma circuits in space?

Yes, charged particles moving in a magnet field are deflected. That is the reason Earth's magnetic field is important for our survival: It deflects dangerous particle radiation from space. This is well-known science.

What IS YOUR POINT? What has this to do with 'electric universe'?

Hans

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Right, correct me if im wrong but in relation to the paper ......

The mentioned "kink" in the CURRENT DRIVEN INSTABILITY needs a source to drive the current, that is mostly likely induced by the motion of the magnetic field. Seems a fair call because it is a VERY well know effect of Electromagnetic induction which occurs whenever there is a relative motion between a magnetic field and a coil. What would act as a coil in plasma?

Anyhoo, this induced current that leads to a flow of charged particles is guided not by wires (copper conductor) but can move around through collissions and other effects. Including MAGNETIC FLUX TUBES, FORCE FREE FIELD ALIGNED CURRENTS, CURRENT SHEETS to name just a few.

Well, clearly the look of an electrical engineer. Induction is a general thing, needs no coil. It just works with Maxwell's equations, curl(E) and curl(B). A time varying magnetic field creates an electric field.

If the collisions are negligible (most often in space plasmas) and the magnetic field is strong enough, then the magnetic field lines can act as wires and you can use ideal MHD to describe stuff. Then it is easy and Alfvén comes by and you can have an easy circuit representation of it all.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Now, tusenfem is telling me because to describe the plasma circuits using the above mechanisms instead of using wires is to difficult or is impossible in a space environment we should revert to gas equations?

I said that in realistic situations, e.g. at the sun, things become more complicated, because the currents can flow in many directions. These circuit representation is just the long-wavelength limit of the MHD equations. You just gather everything together: sum up all the resistivity in the system that you look at, the ponderomotive forces, the capacitances, the inductions, etc. and you drop that in a equivalent circuit representation, and if you do it correctly you can e.g. calculate the oscillations of prenumerances on the sun.

I did, however, not say "revert to the gas equations", because, what would be the use of that???? You know a plasma is a gas, with some extras. So, you should use the plasma equations.

Originally Posted by Sol88

YES.

Then you have to understand what a circuit representation IS.

Originally Posted by Sol88

You are able to substitute the wires in the above definition to include your definition of plasma "wires" (charged particles) move around through collissions and other effects.

Plasma circuits in space?

plasma "wires" can hardly be "charged particles". Charged particles would describe the currents. If anything, then the magnetic field would play the role of "wires".
And see, if you cannot even get this simple thing correct, then what is the use of discussing plasma instabilities?

[Sol88]

From tusenfem. I did, however, not say "revert to the gas equations", because, what would be the use of that???? You know a plasma is a gas, with some extras. So, you should use the plasma equations.

Quote:

The radio jets produced near the central super-massive black holes are collimated by the magnetic field and their collimation requires external confinement (Tomimatsu 1994; Beskin et al. 1998). For the external confinement, the gas pressure profile plays a vital role and hence, influences the jet acceleration and collimation along with the magnetic field configuration.

from the barbell kinky jet paper.

Gas pressure? Are you able to explain why it vital in a plasma? Especially how gas pressure in the context above, accelerates and colimates a If the collisions are negligible (most often in space plasmas) and the magnetic field is strong enough, then the magnetic field lines can act as wires and you can use ideal MHD to describe stuff. Then it is easy and Alfvén comes by and you can have an easy circuit representation of it all. < those plasma wire things.

[Sol88]

Does MHD include plasma instabilities?

Like in a CURRENT DRIVEN INSTABILITY?

Like the one mentioned as a possible cause to a massive kink in a massive jet? Possibly driven via this Induction is a general thing, needs no coil. a long these plasma wires.

You also mentioned I said that in realistic situations, e.g. at the sun, things become more complicated, because the currents can flow in many directions.

Many directions? Are you able to elaborate?

[Ziggurat]

You keep treating certain phrases like magic talismans. They are not. Saying the phrase doesn't actually constitute an argument or even a coherent position. If you have a point, actually explain it.

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Gas pressure? Are you able to explain why it vital in a plasma? Especially how gas pressure in the context above, accelerates and colimates a If the collisions are negligible (most often in space plasmas) and the magnetic field is strong enough, then the magnetic field lines can act as wires and you can use ideal MHD to describe stuff. Then it is easy and Alfvén comes by and you can have an easy circuit representation of it all. < those plasma wire things.

Plasma is a gas, so it has a gas pressure, you may not like it, but that is the way it is. In space plasma/gas pressure and magnetic pressure together work at pressure balance.

No idea why you quote my words in something that is probably supposed to be a question.

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Does MHD include plasma instabilities?

Like in a CURRENT DRIVEN INSTABILITY?

Like the one mentioned as a possible cause to a massive kink in a massive jet? Possibly driven via this Induction is a general thing, needs no coil. a long these plasma wires.

You also mentioned I said that in realistic situations, e.g. at the sun, things become more complicated, because the currents can flow in many directions.

Many directions? Are you able to elaborate?

Do you know anything at all about MHD and plasma physics?
Don't bother, we know the answer.

[Sol88]

Quote:

I did, however, not say "revert to the gas equations", because, what would be the use of that???? You know a plasma is a gas, with some extras. So, you should use the plasma equations.

...

Quote:

Plasma is a gas, so it has a gas pressure, you may not like it, but that is the way it is. In space plasma/gas pressure and magnetic pressure together work at pressure balance.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Do you know anything at all about MHD and plasma physics?
Don't bother, we know the answer.

Is ideal MHD able to model a Current Driven Instability? or do we need gas pressure to accelerate and collimate plasma?

Fairly contradictory, don't ya think?

You can use gas laws in a plasma but can you use plasma laws in a gas?

Quote:

The radio jets produced near the central super-massive black holes are collimated by the magnetic field and their collimation requires external confinement (Tomimatsu 1994; Beskin et al. 1998). For the external confinement, the gas pressure profile plays a vital role and hence, influences the jet acceleration and collimation along with the magnetic field configuration.

Kinky jet paper

Quote:

In space plasma/gas pressure and magnetic pressure together work at pressure balance.

plasma/gas? like totally interchangeable?

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Is ideal MHD able to model a Current Driven Instability? or do we need gas pressure to accelerate and collimate plasma?

Fairly contradictory, don't ya think?

Why don't you look in a friggin book? For example the books by Goedbloed (Principles of Magnetohydrodynamics and Advanced Magnetohydrodynamics)

And no, it is not a contradiction, the gas laws (e.g. Pgas = n k_B T) are part of plasma physics. What you will not have with only gas equations is for example Pmag = B²/2 μ₀, the magnetic pressure.

This has been explained to you for years already, but hey, you like trolling, don't you?

Originally Posted by Sol88

You can use gas laws in a plasma but can you use plasma laws in a gas?

why would I use plasma laws in a gas? but hey, you just like to ask stupid questions.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Kinky jet paper

Gas pressure plays a role if you want to have pressure balance in a plasma. If you are really interested, you can have a look at this paper of mine, where I show that there is pressure balance in the solar wind when we observe magnetic holes. The magnetic field decreases, magnetic pressure goes down, but the gas pressure increases, so in all the structures have the same total pressure as the surrounding solar wind.

Originally Posted by Sol88

plasma/gas? like totally interchangeable?

No, of course not, and you know (or should know) better than to ask such stupid questions.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Why don't you look in a friggin book?

Because actual textbooks on physics use math, and Sol88 doesn’t do math.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Why don't you look in a friggin book? For example the books by Goedbloed (Principles of Magnetohydrodynamics and Advanced Magnetohydrodynamics)

And no, it is not a contradiction, the gas laws (e.g. Pgas = n k_B T) are part of plasma physics. What you will not have with only gas equations is for example Pmag = B²/2 μ₀, the magnetic pressure.

This has been explained to you for years already, but hey, you like trolling, don't you?



why would I use plasma laws in a gas? but hey, you just like to ask stupid questions.



Gas pressure plays a role if you want to have pressure balance in a plasma. If you are really interested, you can have a look at this paper of mine, where I show that there is pressure balance in the solar wind when we observe magnetic holes. The magnetic field decreases, magnetic pressure goes down, but the gas pressure increases, so in all the structures have the same total pressure as the surrounding solar wind.



No, of course not, and you know (or should know) better than to ask such stupid questions.

Gas pressure?

Statistical study of linear magnetic hole structures near Earth

Quote:

4 Pressure balance
The decrease in magnetic pressure needs to be balanced by an increase in plasma pressure, which means a density or temperature increase.

Cant find any mention of gas pressure???

Plasma pressure, yes. Magnetic pressure, yes. Gas pressure, NO.

Where in your paper do use gas pressure equations? Are you able to explain how the external gas pressure collimates and accelerates "jets"., as per;

Quote:

For the external confinement the gas pressure profile plays a vital role, and hence influences the jet acceleration and collimation along with the magnetic field configuration.

You say no to gas when its a plasma but happy to state

Quote:

Plasma is a gas, so it has a gas pressure, you may not like it, but that is the way it is. In space plasma/gas pressure and magnetic pressure together work at pressure balance.

Plasma is not a gas! A gas in not a plasma.

Do you not know this tusenfem, the super duper space plasma physicist? Different states of matter completely.

Leaves you'se mob in a touch of trouble. regarding understanding gas and plasma.

Beginners stuff really.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Plasma is not a gas! A gas in not a plasma.

Squares are not rectangles! Rectangles are not squares!

Except squares are rectangles. They are a subset.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Gas pressure?

*Snipped, silly nitpicking of stuff you don't really understand anyway*

When are you going to explain how this supports the Electric Universe claim?

Science knows about plasma, electromagnetic fields, etc. All you do is quote conventional science, mostly cherry-picked. Where are the revolutionary new insights?

Hans