Electric universe theories here.

[steenkh]

It is really a laugh that it is so difficult to make him state what his own theory is.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by steenkh

It is really a laugh that it is so difficult to make him state what his own theory is.

No theory required. As long as an encounter with Big Billy Goat Gruff can be avoided the lair beneath the viaduct will remain secure.

[lauwenmark]

Originally Posted by steenkh

It is really a laugh that it is so difficult to make him state what his own theory is.

Very likely because his 'theory' is nothing more than a long collection of cases where 'mainstream' science fails to provide a perfectly accurate explanation, surrounded by some technobabble and a few "ELECTRIC UNIVERSE!!!" shouting.

It isn't really that he doesn't want to answer, it's simply that he cannot.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by lauwenmark

Very likely because his 'theory' is nothing more than a long collection of cases where 'mainstream' science fails to provide a perfectly accurate explanation, surrounded by some technobabble and a few "ELECTRIC UNIVERSE!!!" shouting.

It isn't really that he doesn't want to answer, it's simply that he cannot.

At this point, I doubt he would even know what an answer looks like.

[lauwenmark]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

At this point, I doubt he would even know what an answer looks like.

My bet is that his next "answer" will consist in a batch of posts that:

- Swipe those comments aside, with a few "champs", "dudes", or that awful laughing dog picture;
- A "now let's get back on serious business" kind of comment, asking an unrelated question to tusenfem;
- A few random quotes from a few randomly chosen papers that include keywords like 'plasma' or 'electric discharge' in their abstract;
- Keywords he perceives as decisive, hammered in all-caps: ELECTRIC UNIVERSE, PLASMA, GAS and a few similar ones;
-The word 'mainstream' being repeated ad nauseam.

[Sol88]

Look sport, I’m not sure you can quite put the right shapes in the right holes. Let me help.

Electric Universe Link

Quote:

Galaxies created from galactic‐scale field‐aligned Birkeland currents
In contrast, there is a coherent theory of how galaxies are created in the Electric Plasma Universe, thanks largely to American plasma and nuclear physicist Anthony Peratt at Los Alamos National Laboratory Santa Fe in New Mexico, who carried out laboratory experiments and computer simulations beginning in the late 1980s [4, 5].

Mainstream, peer reviewed link

Quote:

6.1. Towards a Working Model of AGN Jets

Relativistic jets are the conduits that connect supermassive, spinning black holes and their attendant disks to their host galaxies and the universe beyond. They were once seen as ex- hausts that, like their automotive counterparts, remove excess heat from powerful machines. However, the observations that we have reviewed suggest a rather different metaphor.

Black holes are turbines that are spun up by orbiting gas to generate high voltage electrical power and AGN jets are lossy and glowing, coaxial cables that ultimately heat their surroundings. This change of viewpoint is one that is supported by observations of selected local AGN, from which we tentatively generalize to AGN in general.

However it is not secure.

Nonetheless, this sketch does suggest causal and testable mechanisms through which the type of AGN that is produced is determined by the black hole mass, spin, gas supply rate, and the strength of the magnetic field, which, in turn may depend upon the manner by which gas is supplied to the nucleus at Rinf . In particular, it appears that only powerful jets, can escape the nucleus as supersonic, relativistic flows. It also indicates that AGN jets can accelerate protons to EeV energy and that they could be significant sources of high energy cosmic rays.

This further allows jet γ-ray emission to be mostly synchrotron instead of Compton radiation. In toto, AGN contribute to and are constrained by the γ-ray background (Di Mauro et. al. 2018).

Understanding the content, power, electrical current and duty cycles of AGN jets will help quantify their role in galaxy formation and evolution.

So both mob think electrcurrents have a role to play in cosmology.

You have to stop thinking plasma is a gas, it’s not sorry and it led you into the middle of the paddock.

[Sol88]

Ziggurat, do you think galactic‐scale field‐aligned Birkeland currents are possible?

Any role for an electric current in galaxy formation and evolution according to the mainstream paper by Blandford et al?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Steve

No theory required. As long as an encounter with Big Billy Goat Gruff can be avoided the lair beneath the viaduct will remain secure.

The Electric Universe

Give that a quick flick thru, see if you can use that immense brain of your to see if any “issues” that arise in this paper my be better understood if they read the above paper.

For you to recognise plasma is not a gas is a start.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

No, I said: The accretion disk is hot and turbulent and contains plasma, and through the turbulent motion magnetic fields are generated



I am not here for your bedtime stories, ask your mum to read you to sleep.



Why would I need an electric field?

Are you saying the mixing of plasma would not creat an electric field?

We are only just clearing up the gas is not plasma thing, though I still see you use plasma/gas.

Not much in the way of anything neutral in space plasma’s, including dust.

Something about amperes law or some such you’ve blabbed about before, would this give rise to electric fields in a turbulent mixing plasma?

Would the same happen for a turbulent mixing of GAS?

[Sol88]

An Electric Universe View of Stellar and Galactic Formation Don Scott

Quote:

Thus, a Birkeland current performs a scavenging effect, gath- ering and concentrating whatever (neutral or ionized) elements it passes near.

The result is analogous to a cosmic coaxial cable transmission line.

Blandford uses a metaphor instead of an analogy but Scott and Blandford agree.

Quote:

Black holes are turbines that are spun up by orbiting gas to generate high voltage electrical power and AGN jets are lossy and glowing, coaxial cables that ultimately heat their surroundings. This change of viewpoint is one that is supported by observations of selected local AGN, from which we tentatively generalize to AGN in general.

Can’t both be wrong, so who’s correct on the assumption of coaxial cables?

[steenkh]

Since you insist that plasma is not a gas, you could perhaps enlighten us with your definition of a gas?

[Sol88]

Played this game champ!

I can’t help it if you’ve used incorrect assumption, like tusenfem plasma/gas and mainstreams general interchangeable use of a term that means two COMPLETELY different states of matter.

Gas can’t be doing the following...from wiki

Quote:

The presence of charged particles makes plasma electrically conductive, with the dynamics of individual particles and macroscopic plasma motion governed by collective electromagnetic fields and very sensitive to externally applied fields.[7]

plasma can and we are talking plasma.

Unless like to delve into the world of one of favourite subjects...DUSTY PLASMA and DOUBLE LAYERS (plasma)?

With my hand over my heart say that GAS anything in a charged environment is probably not doing a whole heap.

What’s your fascination with space gas steenkh?

Looks like you’ve nailed gas maths down here on the surface of the Earth, putty it falls over in space plasma’s and the actual computation needed can not yet be done.

This is what I’ve picked up.


Plasma simple from a conceptual point of view shocking difficult for the mathamagicians of the mainstream.

[Sol88]

My bad, Astrophysical plasmaa

Quote:

Possible related phenomena[edit]
Scientists are interested in active galactic nuclei because such astrophysical plasmas could be directly related to the plasmas studied in laboratories.[13] Many of these phenomena seemingly exhibit an array of complex magnetohydrodynamic behaviors, such as turbulence and instabilities.[2] Although these phenomena may occur on astronomical scales as large as the galactic core, many astrophysicists suggest that they do not significantly involve plasma effects but are caused by matter consumed by super massive black holes.[citation needed]

In Big Bang cosmology, the entire universe was in a plasma state prior to recombination.[14] Afterwards, much of the universe reionized after the first quasars formed.[citation needed]

Studying astrophysical plasmas is part of mainstream academic astrophysics. Though plasma processes are part of the standard cosmological model, current theories indicate that they might have only a minor role to play in forming the very largest structures, such as voids, galaxy clusters and superclusters.[citation needed]

Seems the paper by Blandford et al my instigate a change to this wiki page.

Quote:

6.1. Towards a Working Model of AGN Jets
Relativistic jets are the conduits that connect supermassive, spinning black holes and their attendant disks to their host galaxies and the universe beyond. They were once seen as ex- hausts that, like their automotive counterparts, remove excess heat from powerful machines. However, the observations that we have reviewed suggest a rather different metaphor. Black holes are turbines that are spun up by orbiting gas to generate high voltage electrical power and AGN jets are lossy and glowing, coaxial cables that ultimately heat their surroundings. This change of viewpoint is one that is supported by observations of selected local AGN, from which we tentatively generalize to AGN in general.

Further

Quote:

Jets can have a major influence on their environments, stimulating and limiting the growth of galaxies.

And steenkh is trying to find out what a gas is....

[Sol88]

Touch more digg’n and I think I’ve found your error steenkh.

Astrophysical fluid dynamics wiki

Quote:

Astrophysical fluid dynamics is a modern branch of astronomy involving fluid mechanics which deals with the motion of fluids, like the gases which the stars are made up of, or any fluid which is found in outer space.[1]

The subject covers the fundamentals of mechanics of fluids using various equations, ranging from the continuity equation, Navier-Stokes to Euler's equations of collisional fluids and the like.[2] It is an extensive study of the physical realms of the astral bodies and their movements in space. A thorough understanding of this subject requires detailed knowledge of the equations governing fluid mechanics.[3] Most of the applications of astrophysical fluid dynamics include dynamics of stellar systems, accretion disks, Astrophysical jets,[4] Newtonian fluids, and the fluid dynamics of galaxies.

Stars

Quote:

A star is an astronomical object comprising a luminous spheroid of plasma held together by its gravity.

wiki


Gas or plasma steenkh?

[Sol88]

Your dogma is so full of inconsistency it’s embarrassing you have to go to university to learn rubbish.

I feel sorry for some.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Your dogma is so full of inconsistency it’s embarrassing you have to go to university to learn rubbish.

I feel sorry for some.

Says the poster who has proved totally incapable of providing a consistent theory of an electric universe

[steenkh]

Three posts, many quotes, and not a single one supporting your belief that plasma is not a gas …

And you think you are playing this “game” well?

Instead of concentrating on what a plasma is, you should settle on what a gas is, and point out what a plasma can that a gas cannot.

[Sol88]

Instead of concentrating on what a plasma is, you should settle on what a gas is.

GAS, you’re breathing it!

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Instead of concentrating on what a plasma is, you should settle on what a gas is.

GAS, you’re breathing it!

Was that supposed to be a witty reply? You certainly didn’t define what a gas is.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by steenkh

Was that supposed to be a witty reply? You certainly didn’t define what a gas is.

Quote:

Astrophysical fluid dynamics is a modern branch of astronomy involving fluid mechanics which deals with the motion of fluids, like the gases which the stars are made up of, or any fluid which is found in outer space.[1]

Now that’s a witty reply.

Plasma is a fluid in your definition, so...

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Now that’s a witty reply.

Plasma is a fluid in your definition, so...

Yes plasma is a fluid, as are all gases and liquids. The fact that you are boggled by this shows that you have much difficulty with really basic science.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Steve

Yes plasma is a fluid, as are all gases and liquids. The fact that you are boggled by this shows that you have much difficulty with really basic science.

Throw plasma “special” properties in the mix and model plasma as a fluid.

Yes, we agree, plasma can flow like a fluid.

Much like in astrophysical jets...

Quote:

6.1. Towards a Working Model of AGN Jets

Relativistic jets are the conduits that connect supermassive, spinning black holes and their attendant disks to their host galaxies and the universe beyond.

Conduits of a “fluid” in this case charged particles, a plasma not a gas, is an electric current.

Quote:

Understanding the content, power, electrical current and duty cycles of AGN jets will help quantify their role in galaxy formation and evolutio

[Sol88]

When you model said electric currents using fluid equations, you find surprises.

How does a current forming instability, Kink instability, form if there is no electric current?

What drives this electric current? What is the size of the curcuit this current flows in? Where does the energy come from to do this acceleration of charged particles?

Quote:

This is most important when the host galaxies reside in a rich galaxy cluster. Jets can have a more immediate effect by stimulating star formation as is sometimes seen in some galaxies and, more impressively, by triggering the formation of new galaxies as the jets can propagate several Mpc away from their hosts. Jets also accelerate high energy cosmic rays and quite plausibly may account for a large fraction of the universal spectrum above the “knee” in the spectrum. They may also be responsible for most of the intergalactic magnetic field.

Seems important, from a cosmological perspective...

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Steve

Yes plasma is a fluid, as are all gases and liquids. The fact that you are boggled by this shows that you have much difficulty with really basic science.

A brief explanation for you, Steve.

Quote:

Importance of kinetic effects[edit]
Another limitation of MHD (and fluid theories in general) is that they depend on the assumption that the plasma is strongly collisional (this is the first criterion listed above), so that the time scale of collisions is shorter than the other characteristic times in the system, and the particle distributions are Maxwellian.

This is usually not the case in fusion, space and astrophysical plasmas.

When this is not the case, or the interest is in smaller spatial scales, it may be necessary to use a kinetic model which properly accounts for the non-Maxwellian shape of the distribution function. However, because MHD is relatively simple and captures many of the important properties of plasma dynamics it is often qualitatively accurate and is therefore often the first model tried.

Effects which are essentially kinetic and not captured by fluid models include double layers, Landau damping, a wide range of instabilities, chemical separation in space plasmas and electron runaway.

In the case of ultra-high intensity laser interactions, the incredibly short timescales of energy deposition mean that hydrodynamic codes fail to capture the essential physics.

wiki.

Effects which are essentially kinetic and not captured by fluid models = Very important.

So, why are you still using your gas is a plasma fluid model?

Seems backward to me but I’m no mathamagician!

Really seems to be mathamagicians hate plasma. To complex to compute.

[Sol88]

For certain some one far more clever’r than I, knows quire a fair bit on all the flavours of MHD.

Do you think if Blandford has referenced Don Scott’s statement of Inclusion of plasma into simulations has yielded somewhat better results the mystery of jets n knots maybe one step closer?

[Sol88]

How the electric plasma universe creates galaxies and stars

Quote:

With the newly developed multidimensional particle‐in‐cell computer software which follows the evolution of hundreds of thousands to millions of particles and photons (see Box), Peratt was able to demonstrate that galaxies, or groups of galaxies, are created when two or more galactic‐scale field‐aligned Birkeland currents interact.

Currents moving in the same direction attract one another with an attractive force proportional to the inverse of their separation distance, (take note: it is much stronger than the usual inverse square of separation distance of gravitational attraction).

The two Birkeland currents are detected as radio lobes due to synchrotron radiation (electromagnetic radiation emitted by relativistic or ultra‐relativistic accelerated electrons gyrating in a magnetic field). A good summary of the simulations (and beyond) is given by Tom Wilson from the Electric Universe perspective [7], which is reproduced below.

Good insights for you Steve, steenkh...you can even check the math I guess newly developed multidimensional particle‐in‐cell computer software

Knock yourselves out!

[Sol88]

Quote:

1.1.1 Definition

Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) (magnetofluid dynamics or hydromagnetics) is the study of the dynamics of electrically conducting fluids. Examples of such fluids include plasmas, liquid metals, and salt water or electrolytes. The word magnetohydrodynamic is derived from magneto- meaning magnetic field, hydro- meaning liquid, and -dynamic meaning movement.

Not gas?

[Sol88]

Really boils down to the crux of the matter.

Do you believe in electric currents in space doing stuff?

[steenkh]

Still a lot of posts from Sol88 but not a single one showing that plasma is not a gas, though he seems reluctantly to admit that plasma is a fluid - like gas.

And there is no sign of him ever wanting to reply to Hans’ questions. Perhaps he also reluctantly accepts that he can’t, because there is no EU theory that is not easily discredited.

So all we are left with is Sol88’s perceived failings of real science.

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Not just your limited understanding, my friend. Mainstream seem to struggle with two things regarding “space gas”.

Charge seperation and current flow (a curcuit is required).

BH’s, with one assumes is molecular GAS, thru varies means produces, according to Roger Blandford1, David Meier2, and Anthony Readhead3 . (mainstream) a high voltage.

Jets appear from their observations to be glowing, lossy coaxial “power cables”.

Charge seperation always gets the thread going...

Sorry, been busy remolding our bathroom.

Also sorry but I am not your friend and the limited understanding displayed above appears to be simply yours. The mainstream understanding is based on observation which, as far as I know, is that such jets are generally neutral (contain both positive and negative charges to the same degree).

Originally Posted by Sol88

Story of basically the key difference from bigbangers (gravity centric) mob and the electromagnetic (plasma(not GAS)) mob.

We say it’s all about charge seperation and the flow of currents, you say NO.

Did you even read the paper?

Read what paper? No paper was linked in the post I responded to or even in your post here.

Again what I said was " the jets are electrically neutral (contain the same number of positive as well as negative charges overall). Since there is no net charge through a point, plane volume or whatever over time it wouldn't classify as a current. Perhaps within some very specific and limited constraints of time and space but only for that as the charge imbalance is not maintained.”

Originally Posted by Sol88

Blandford seems to have changed their viewpoint, maybe you mob should.

Or are you incapable of a discussion of a mainstream peer reviewed scientific paper?

Do you or Blandford even know how coaxial cables function?

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Sol88

I’ll see your intermolecular forces and raise you electric fields!

Just what do you think those intermolecular forces are? They include the electromagnetic interaction between atoms and molecules.

You can't "raise" by simply calling.

Originally Posted by Sol88

And it seems astrophysical jets!

Gas as fluids when we are actually talking a completely different state of matter, kiddie stuff. Plasma and non-neutral ones at that.

Fluid isn't a particular state of matter, as already explained and exemplified, so different states of matter can be fluid.

The definition of a plasma in no way specifies non-neutrality but simply a certain lack of some electromagnetically bound states between charges.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Are astrophysical jets gas containers governed by intermolecular forces or a plasma (charges seperated and current conducting)?

As per observations.

Again, that such intermolecular forces tend to be weak, under the conditions involved, is what makes a gas (including plasma) a gas.

What makes a plasma a subset of a gas is that in addition to intermolecular forces some intramolecular as well as atomic bonding forces are also weaker than other forces under the conditions involved. So not only are some molecules disassociated from each other but some atoms are as well and some electrons disassociated from their atoms. However, since positive ions showing spectral lines are observed in such jets, not all electrons are so disassociated from their atoms.

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Look sport, I’m not sure you can quite put the right shapes in the right holes. Let me help.

Electric Universe Link

Oh dear, a "paper" that uses Peratt's totally refuted numerical calculations about galaxy formation.
Tom Bridgeman ...

[The Man]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Do you actually understand what a METAPHORE is?

Yep, that's the only way "coaxial cables" works in what was quoted, as a metaphor.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by The Man

Yep, that's the only way "coaxial cables" works in what was quoted, as a metaphor.

Quote:

Coaxial cable is a type of transmission line, used to carry high-frequency electrical signals with low losses

wiki

Metaphor for ...

Quote:

Understanding the content, power, electrical current and duty cycles of AGN jets will help quantify their role in galaxy formation and evolution.

Electrical current.

Quote:

Coaxial cable, or coax (pronounced /ˈkoʊ.æks/) is a type of electrical cable consisting of an inner conductor surrounded by a concentric conducting shield, with the two separated by a dielectric (insulating material); many coaxial cables also have a protective outer sheath or jacket. The term coaxial refers to the inner conductor and the outer shield sharing a geometric axis.

wiki

From Don Scott on FAC’s

Quote:

. The angle of pitch of the helix variess moothly and con- tinuously with increasing radial distance, r, from the central axis of the current out as far as the plasma’s current-carrying charge density extends. This causes cyclical reversals of direction (counter-flows) in both the axial and azimuthal magnetic field and its collinear current density. The magnitude of both the B and j- fields may be greater than zero for r values far beyond the first zero of J0(αr) (which occurs at r = 2.4048/α). Figure 6 is shown to be correct but incomplete, and thus potentially misleading.

Analogous to a coaxial cable, current carrying.

And another way to say it would be in a metaphor, unless you thought Blandford was referencing an actual coaxial cable?

So regardless, you are faced with an electric current.

Needs a curcuit to make the show go...

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Oh dear, a "paper" that uses Peratt's totally refuted numerical calculations about galaxy formation.
Tom Bridgeman ...

Let’s drag the toilet paper that is the Bridgman “debunking” of galaxy formation due to Electromagnetic effects.

Blandford et al reckon...

Quote:

Jets can have a major influence on their environments, stimulating and limiting the growth of galaxies.

What would me ‘ol mate Tom reckon on Blandford think electric currents have a major influence on galaxies.

Should we give a go, tusenfem.

Run Tom’s bit of fluff past Blandford et al outrageous claims n electric currents n galaxies?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by The Man

Sorry, been busy remolding our bathroom.

Also sorry but I am not your friend and the limited understanding displayed above appears to be simply yours. The mainstream understanding is based on observation which, as far as I know, is that such jets are generally neutral (contain both positive and negative charges to the same degree).



Read what paper? No paper was linked in the post I responded to or even in your post here.

Again what I said was " the jets are electrically neutral (contain the same number of positive as well as negative charges overall). Since there is no net charge through a point, plane volume or whatever over time it wouldn't classify as a current. Perhaps within some very specific and limited constraints of time and space but only for that as the charge imbalance is not maintained.”



Do you or Blandford even know how coaxial cables function?

Did you miss the post where tusenfem set you straight? It’s not about the amps baby it’s all about the density of the electric current in astrophysical plasma’s.

The jet is an electric current and it requires a curcuit. You seem to struggle with this mainstream fact of plasma physics?

Puzzling to say the least.

Good luck with putting the mold back in your bathroom.

[Sol88]

Quote:

4.1. Particle Acceleration
4.1.1. General Principles. Jets, and the double radio sources that they supply, are observed throughout much of the entire seventy octave electromagnetic spectrum and, perhaps, be- yond. E

Quote:

A charged particle gains energy at a rate eEc when exposed to a electric field of strength


E. If the field varies slowly, the acceleration is called electrostatic. This is likely to occur in black hole magnetospheres where charged particles must be created continuously and electrostatic gaps are thought to be involved, though they are likely to be energetically insignificant as the potential difference needed is orders of magnitude smaller than the total available (Levinson & Segev 2017; Chen et al. 2018). Similar structures have been invoked in the black hole jet and may be mandated as the density of charge carriers continues to be inadequate to deliver the current density and space charged required by Maxwell’s equations.

Quote:

4.2.2.4. Plasma Waves.

Shocks and magnetic discontinuities can produce large current densities which may radiate large amplitude plasma modes which may, in turn, mode- convert into electromagnetic radio waves as seen in solar radio bursts.

Blandford

So jets are not an electric current?

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Sol88

wiki

Metaphor for ...

Electrical current.


wiki

From Don Scott on FAC’s



Analogous to a coaxial cable, current carrying.

And another way to say it would be in a metaphor, unless you thought Blandford was referencing an actual coaxial cable?

So regardless, you are faced with an electric current.

Needs a curcuit to make the show go...

No I didn't think "Blandford was referencing an actual coaxial cable" that's why I said the only way it works is as a metaphor. In an actual coaxial cable negative charges would move one direction while positive charges moved the opposite direction.

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Did you miss the post where tusenfem set you straight? It’s not about the amps baby it’s all about the density of the electric current in astrophysical plasma’s.

tusenfem didn't address anything I said or myself, but did address you specifically and repeatedly. Of course it is about the amps, because current density is amps per unit area. Again that such density is low means the jet is general neutral.

Did you miss where tusenfem had pointed out current density before?

Originally Posted by Sol88

The jet is an electric current and it requires a curcuit. You seem to struggle with this mainstream fact of plasma physics?

Puzzling to say the least.

I'm not struggling.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Good luck with putting the mold back in your bathroom.

No mold, only molding.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by The Man

No I didn't think "Blandford was referencing an actual coaxial cable" that's why I said the only it works is as a metaphor. In an actual coaxial cable negative charges would move one direction while positive charges moved the opposite direction.

You got it!

Quote:

We show that:

1) both the axial and azimuthal magnetic and current density components cyclically reverse their directions with radial distance from the central axis of the current;

2) the magnetic field extends farther from the central axis within a force-free field than it would if produced by a current in a long straight conductor. The total magnetic field magnitude and current density are shown to vary inversely as the square root of r. For large r, outside the plasma, the azimuthal magnetic field is shown to vary as 1/r. These results are shown to be consistent with laboratory and astronomical observations.

Don Scott

Possible in your physics?

A force free field aligned current... majic stuff for a neutral pressure jet to have.