Fairie Dust

[Justatruthseeker]

I have yet to see an article where scientists claim "99% of the universe is plasma".

Your article about plasma and the Van Allen Belt does nothing to aid your cause. The Van Allen Belt is only a local concentration of mostly hydrogen nuclei. And this is not even interplanetary space. This is planetary space. It looks like my comments about what Justatruthseeker does not understand stands.

No one has denied the existence of plasma. We are simply pointing out that you are looking like a kook by taking an unsupported position.

I quoted you one from NASA, your own scientific research center, what else you need?


But here, at the bottom is an entire listing of textbooks and research papers, written by your very own scientists.

99.999% plasma - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)


But of course you'll just ignore those too, as that is what you are good at, ignoring the facts to believe in Fairie Dust instead.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Sigh. Can't read?

"the rest is blocked by dust grains"

Again, read plasma, not dust

And I'm the one with a reading problem?

 

[Lethe]

"Today it is recognized that 99.999% of all observable matter in the universe is in the plasma state

Key word: observable.

"Probably more than 99 percent of visible matter in the universe exist in the plasma state.

Key word: visible.

But maybe if you had a basic education in cosmology, you might know that.


Your source on this stuff is written by a crank that doesn't understand his sources.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I quoted you one from NASA, your own scientific research center, what else you need?


But here, at the bottom is an entire listing of textbooks and research papers, written by your very own scientists.

99.999% plasma - (The Plasma Universe Wikipedia-like Encyclopedia)


But of course you'll just ignore those too, as that is what you are good at, ignoring the facts to believe in Fairie Dust instead.

As others have pointed out the key word is observable. The sun could be said to be made up of plasma. It is in a dissociated state. The same goes for all other stars. The stars you see are plasma. Of the regular mass that makes up over 99% of the universe.

Nowhere have you found a link that states interstellar dust is plasma. Since the interstellar temperature is very roughly 3 K I don't think too much of the hydrogen observed is plasma. At those temperatures a proton will find a free electron and bind to it.

 

[Lethe]

Since the interstellar temperature is very roughly 3 K I don't think too much of the hydrogen observed is plasma. At those temperatures a proton will find a free electron and bind to it.

Exactly. And that direct observation is the basis for the fact we can see the big bang's surface of last scattering which is the time/place at which the universe cooled to the point interstellar dust was no longer plasma (excuse tenses, relatively doesn't really play well with english).

As the universe expanded, both the plasma and the radiation filling it grew cooler. When the universe cooled enough, protons and electrons combined to form neutral atoms. These atoms could no longer absorb the thermal radiation, and so the universe became transparent instead of being an opaque fog.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Key word: observable.



Key word: visible.

But maybe if you had a basic education in cosmology, you might know that.


Your source on this stuff is written by a crank that doesn't understand his sources.

So you believe in never before observed things, while ignoring what that 99% really is? Do you even have a clue as to what plasma is? Maybe you should study your Big Bang religion some more, as even it declares plasma was the very first state of matter in existence. And after 14 billion years only 1% has become solid, liquid or gas.

Are you really sure you want to base a cosmology on that tiny 1% of the universe we have measured (solids, liquids and gases,) while ignoring the other 99%?

That is true, that crank just happens to be one of the foremost experts in fusion research.

But you just ignore all those acedemic text book refrences so you can keep your fantasies alive. I understand how hard it is to give up one's religious belief in Fairie Dust. Ignore your own data, just don't be surprised when they ask for more of your tax dollars to search for more Fairie Dust, never find it, but then need more money to search for some more.

How many gravity waves you found from LIGO? How many WHIMPS you detected lately?

 

[Lethe]

.

 

[Lethe]

Do you even have a clue as to what plasma is?

Ionized gas.

Have you ever calculated the optical properties of materials from scratch? I have. Properties of materials final, senior year, while I was busy getting my physics degree.

But you just ignore all those acedemic text book refrences so you can keep your fantasies alive.

You mean the part where the anonymous, crank author, creates a wiki and misrepresents quotes from physics publications?

What exactly is the name of this guy? The "about" section is a bad page, and I can't find a name anywhere on the webpage.

Are you really sure you want to base a cosmology on that tiny 1% of the universe we have measured (solids, liquids and gases,) while ignoring the other 99%?

Visible universe doesn't mean unmeasureable. The university I did my undergrad at was involved in gravitational mapping of the local group using gravitational lensing, thereby mapping out both visible and non-visible matter.

Also, you are extremely delusional. This hyper-focusing on "99% PLASMA" like it is a meaningful argument which somehow rebuts the big bang? Seriously? 99.9% of our solar system is plasma, yet, lo and behold gravitational forces plus a small GR correction pretty much accounts for all the dynamics in it.

There might be some plasma physics with the solar wind, but they seem largely irrelevant to interstellar dynamics, since the large masses (you know, the stars) are charge neutral.

 

[Lethe]

Let us all now laugh at JustATruthSeeker

Electric Universe - RationalWiki

The "Electric Universe" (EU) is an umbrella term that covers various pseudo-scientific cosmological ideas built around the claim that the formation and existence of various features of the universe can be better explained by electromagnetism than by gravity. The exact claims are diverse and vary from crank author to author. A common motif is the insistence that all science should be done in a laboratory — an attempt to throw away gravity from the very beginning, because one can't put a solar system or a galaxy in a laboratory. Most Electric Universe proponents claim some kind of relation to the "plasma cosmology" of the Nobel Prize laureate Hannes Alfvén. Too bad his model was rendered obsolete by the missing observations of the radio emission predicted by his cosmology[2].
EU advocates can be roughly split into two groups: garden-variety physics cranks who are convinced that they have a legitimate revolutionary scientific theory, and various woo-peddlers who use EU claims to prop their main ideas (because mainstream physics would blow them apart). One subset of the latter comprises some of the more loony global warming deniers (such as Vault-Co), who try to use it to "prove" that climate change is being caused by some process outside human control.
Immanuel Velikovsky was an enthusiatic early adopter of electric universe ideas, seeing in them a possible mechanism to explain his scenario of planetary billiards, cosmic thunderbolts, and the notion that Earth was previously a satellite of Saturn.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

As others have pointed out the key word is observable. The sun could be said to be made up of plasma. It is in a dissociated state. The same goes for all other stars. The stars you see are plasma. Of the regular mass that makes up over 99% of the universe.

Nowhere have you found a link that states interstellar dust is plasma. Since the interstellar temperature is very roughly 3 K I don't think too much of the hydrogen observed is plasma. At those temperatures a proton will find a free electron and bind to it.

We will gladly discuss the 3K kelvin CMB if you can anser two questions correctly.

1) What do we observe when charged particles are accelerated or decelerated?

let me give you a hint

Braking radiation - definition of Braking radiation by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Bremsstrahlung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) What is plasma?

And here is your answer to how much of the universe is plasma, but you'll just ignore it as always, while claiming it is but dust, like every other idiot that doesn't know anything about astronomical science.

Google

http://www.youtube.com/embed/UDpkue6-sSE?feature=player_embedded

 

[Lethe]

And he just repeats his nonsense.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

And he just repeats his nonsense.

And you just say nothing at all.


When you can answer the two question, we will talk, until then you just spout gibberish, and not one factual reference to support the universe is not 99% plasma, even when shown reference that says it is.

Show me this reference that says plasma is not the most abundant form of matter in the universe. And Fairie Dust does not apply, this is a scientific discussion, not a discussion of how the math doesn't work, so we have to pretend that 96% of the universe is Fairie Dust, because we ignored 99% of it.

1) What is plasma?

2) What do we observe when charged particles are accelerated or decelerated?

Braking radiation - definition of Braking radiation by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Bremsstrahlung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you can't understand these two simple basic facts of science, there is no sense even talking to you any more. It's not a trick question, I just don't think you know, even though the answer is easily found.

 

[Lethe]

You want a scientific discussion? You want to know why electrodynamics are ignored in the Friedman equations?

Because there is no large scale charge separation. There are not huge groups of positive ions in one place and huge groups of electrons far away. The sun is electrically neutral. So there are some coronal ejections that occasionally send ions into the fields around earth or Jupiter, so what? It is a pittance the mass, that gets ejected and it has litle to no effect on the orbits of the planets. And as I have already explained to you we do not need anything more than simple GR to project the orbit of the planets DESPITE 99.8% PLASMA in our solar system. WHY IS THAT? I THOUGHT PLASMA WAS SO IMPORTANT!?

Do you not understand that? Do you not understand that simple GR is enough within the solar system to project the dynamics, so why, on larger scales, would plasma ever matter? Stars are electrically neutral so the forces acting between them are gravitational. Since the mass is primarily in stars and since stars are electrically neutral, you do not need plasma physics! At least not until you go back to well before the time of recombination (eg when interstellar space really was filled with hot plasma and the galaxies had yet to coalesce).

 

[Lethe]

When you can answer the two question, we will talk, until then you just spout gibberish,

How about you answer me what equation (1) in my graduate cosmology text is:
Section 1.2, Fundamentals of General Relativity (GR is a prerequisite for the book and like most textbooks the first chapter is just a brief review of the math before they get in to the heavy stuff).

The Minkoswki space-time metric. What is it? If you can't define it. How am I supposed to have a conversation with you?

This is literally concept number one, on page six of my primary cosmology text. And if you don't know anything about it, how can you possibly talk about cosmology (that terrible argument is of course your reasoning, not mine)?

 

[Lethe]

Hey, PLASMA 98.99999NINENINENINE% guy!

Are you going to expand the dipole moment of electrical charges in a plasma and then extrapolate to find the separation distance and charge required to overcome gravitational forces at an arbitrary scale (call it "D")?

No? Yeah, I didn't think you were actually capable of putting together your own argument.


All I'm asking you to do is demonstrate at what length scale plasma forces matter more than gravitational ones to describe the evolution of the universe. Hint: this is a solved problem

 

[EternalDragon]

Hey, PLASMA 98.99999NINENINENINE% guy!

Are you going to expand the dipole moment of electrical charges in a plasma and then extrapolate to find the separation distance and charge required to overcome gravitational forces at an arbitrary scale (call it "D")?

No? Yeah, I didn't think you were actually capable of putting together your own argument.


All I'm asking you to do is demonstrate at what length scale plasma forces matter more than gravitational ones to describe the evolution of the universe. Hint: this is a solved problem

Plasma is more strongly effected by electromagnetic forces than gravity is?

 

[Lethe]

The source of electric fields is charge separation. The source of magnetic fields is moving charge.

The point here is that everything in our solar system is charge neutral at any scale that matters. Establishing that scale, is literally an undergraduate physics exercise for a junior or senior who has taken electrodynamics.

 

[Lethe]

For reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_dipole_moment#Potential_and_field_of_an_electric_dipole

The electric field "felt" a distance R from two charges separated a distance d = p/q goes as 1/R cubed:

Gravitational forces go as 1/R squared.


eg: EM forces fall off R times faster. The question is, how big is the dipole separation? How far apart are objects in the universe with substantial mass? And then boom, you can just drop them in and figure out when we give a damn about electrodynamics.

 

[Lethe]

Justatruthseeker, articulate, USING MATH, why electrical forces matter when describing interactions BETWEEN galaxies.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Justatruthseeker, articulate, USING MATH, why electrical forces matter when describing interactions BETWEEN galaxies.

Since the electrical force is 10^36 powers stronger than gravity, then how would it not matter? The magnetic and electrical force is only balanced when matter is in close confines or electrons are bonded. This is why GR works perfectly well within the bounds of the solar system. But in the vast reaches of the galaxy matter is not in close confines, electrons are not bound, the math for bound electrons does not apply.

This is why those that try to apply GR to unbound matter require dark matter, black holes, neutron stars, dark energy, expanding space, all the Fairie Dust not needed when GR is applied to what it describes, bound matter or matter in close confines.

It is the only math you ever had. Your entire Lorentz Transformations are not based on gravity, but the balanced electric and magnetic fields of bound matter.

The Lorentz Force

Charged Particle in a Magnetic Field

But plasma is not the same as bound matter. It is composed of free electrons and ions, giving it a net positive or negative charge.

Plasma (physics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The presence of a non-negligible number of charge carriers makes the plasma electrically conductive so that it responds strongly to electromagnetic fields. Plasma, therefore, has properties quite unlike those of solids, liquids, or gases and is considered a distinct state of matter.

It has properties quite unlike those of solids, liquids or gasses, the 1% of the universe GR is valid for. This is why the math of GR does not work at the galactic scale, and requires patching with imaginary Fairie Dust to even come close, because that 99% does not behave like that 1%. It responds strongly to electromagnetic fields, not the gravitational field. This is why one does not need to put the coffee pot below the outlet, regardless of how high one were to place the outlet from the source.

The electric force (moving charged particles) care little about gravity. This is why the solar wind continues to accelerate out past the orbit of Jupiter, and when it reaches the heliopause, comes to a sudden and dramatic halt.

This is why NASA tells you that:

Our day-to-day lives exist in what physicists would call an electrically neutral environment. Desks, books, chairs and bodies don't generally carry electricity and they don't stick to magnets. But life on Earth is substantially different from, well, almost everywhere else. Beyond Earth's protective atmosphere and extending all the way through interplanetary space, electrified particles dominate the scene. Indeed, 99% of the universe is made of this electrified gas, known as plasma.
NASA - The Electric Atmosphere: Plasma Is Next NASA Science Target

So why would one attempt to use gravitational math (balanced electric and magnetic fields) on electrical particles that respond strongly to electromagnetic fields and obey the Electromagnetic Field Laws?

Show me the math where charged particles obey the gravitational laws? This is why there is no gravitational model for the atom, only electrical.

Although even this Earth is not electrically neutral and has a constant voltage passing through it, you, me, everything. Hence the Aurora Borealis which carries 100,000 amperes in a continuous circuit.

Birkeland current - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why the Earth constantly has electric currents running through it.

Telluric current - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is why they are constantly surprised about how the Earth recieves it's energy.

Scientists discover surprise in Earth's upper atmosphere / UCLA Newsroom

UCLA atmospheric scientists have discovered a previously unknown basic mode of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth's magnetosphere...

"It's like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down," said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences...

It's not unknown, we just finally got the technology to map the Birkeland Current connecting the Sun and Earth. Mainstream just likes to call them magnetic ropes, even though no magnetic field has ever formed without an electric current.

NASA - NASA Spacecraft Make New Discoveries About Northern Lights

Origin of Permanent Magnetism

So I see no reason to apply Fairie Dust when you still have yet to apply the correct math, electromagnetic force laws, not gravitational force laws.