Ask a physicist anything. (8)

[essentialsaltes]

Then what breaks it up into the colors of the rainbow?

The index of refraction of a material is not an absolute constant. It varies with wavelength. Blue light is bent more than red light. This separation is what causes rainbows and spectra.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Light never slows down - it always travels at c. The snag is that it seems to slow down because, when it travels through a medium like glass, it has to navigate all the atoms, bouncing off them like a pinball. Though it travels a straight line on average, its actual path is longer, which makes it look like it's taking longer to travel.

It's like a truck driving from Scotland to Germany. We know the distance (as the crow flies), we know how long it took, divide one by the other, and we get speed - say, 30 mph. But the truck's speedometer records a constant 50 mph. Why? Because it didn't travel in a straight line - it meandered all over the place to follow the roads.

Ah. Makes sense. Thanks.

 

[AV1611VET]

So light doesn't go from A to B faster (or slower), it goes from A to B sooner (or later) ... correct?

 

[pgp_protector]

So light doesn't go from A to B faster (or slower), it goes from A to B sooner (or later) ... correct?

No, more like in a vacuum light goes from a ---b
In air,water,glass,crystals ect it goes a -c-d-w-g-s...--b

 

[AV1611VET]

No, more like in a vacuum light goes from a ---b
In air,water,glass,crystals ect it goes a -c-d-w-g-s...--b

Isn't that what I just said?

Shoot a beam of light from A to B through the air.

Now shoot a beam of light from A to B through a translucent pane.

Both beams move at a constant C, but the first beam will get from A to B sooner than the second beam; not because it moved faster, but because it didn't move as far.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Then what breaks it up into the colors of the rainbow?

Frequency of wavelength. You see, we like to describe light as both wave and particle, even though both are mutually exclusive of each other.

Sound travels as waves through a particulate medium, but if light is indeed a particle emission, it is the only particle itself that travels in a wave pattern without a need for a medium.

Sound like a contrived explanation? Don't feel alone. The nature of light is still debated to this day, despite the text books assuring you the matter is settled. Yes, our explanations work mathematically, but not together. In other words you can use math to describe light as a wave, or as a particle, but not as both at the same time, even though it is supposed to be both at the same time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Frequency of wavelength. You see, we like to describe light as both wave and particle, even though both are mutually exclusive of each other.

Sound travels as waves through a particulate medium, but if light is indeed a particle emission, it is the only particle itself that travels in a wave pattern without a need for a medium.

Sound like a contrived explanation? Don't feel alone. The nature of light is still debated to this day, despite the text books assuring you the matter is settled. Yes, our explanations work mathematically, but not together. In other words you can use math to describe light as a wave, or as a particle, but not as both at the same time, even though it is supposed to be both at the same time.

The two are not strictly exclusive of each other. The true nature of light is that it is both a particle and a wave. No one really is debating the nature of light today. Show me one serious scientists who does not accept the dual nature of light.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Yes, when the intensity of light is high, there are too many photons to count them individually.

Sounds to me like you are counting individual electrons traveling with the light beam.

Cathode ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since both a photomultiplier and a cathode ray tube work on the same principle, cathode and anode.

Of course we would never dream that individual electrons could be accelerated by the EM field, would we?

Just as we would never dream that the solar wind acceleration of charged particles is caused by an electric field centered on the sun.

Electric fields, the only known force capable of accelerating charged particles, but nah, that couldn't be the answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sounds to me like you are counting individual electrons traveling with the light beam.

Cathode ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since both a photomultiplier and a cathode ray tube work on the same principle, cathode and anode.

Of course we would never dream that individual electrons could be accelerated by the EM field, would we?

Just as we would never dream that the solar wind acceleration of charged particles is caused by an electric field centered on the sun.

Electric fields, the only known force capable of accelerating charged particles, but nah, that couldn't be the answer.

Wrong, there are a couple of more ways to accelerate the solar wind besides a nonexistent EM field. The fact that the solar wind does not accelerate in the mode that an EM field would accelerate it is evidence that are wrong again.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Sounds to me like...

What you hear is quite different from what I'm saying, due to your monomania.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And to clear things up, no one disputes the small scale events very near the Sun. Yes, plasma physics is involved there. That in no way proves nor supports the concept of an electric universe. There is a place for magnetohydrodynamics.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Wrong, there are a couple of more ways to accelerate the solar wind besides a nonexistent EM field. The fact that the solar wind does not accelerate in the mode that an EM field would accelerate it is evidence that are wrong again.

Really? Name one way we have observed the acceleration of charged particles not by an electric field? Since there are a couple as you claim, certainly you can name one.

You better go look up CERN so you understand how all charged particles are accelerated.

As for non-existant electric field, perhaps you need to keep up on science.

Phys. Rev. 37, 1129 (1931): The Electric Field, Atmosphere and Effective Temperature of the Sun

On the origin and maintenance of the Sun's electric field - Gunn - 2012 - Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity - Wiley Online Library

http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/personnel/russell/papers/solar_fields.pdf

Step out of the stone age SZ, this is the modern age.

Works just fine with the math.

A Brief History of Magnetospheric Physics Before the Spaceflight Era

Only in your limited world view does it not happen that way, because once again you are ignorant about electrical processes, and your ignorance is showing to everyone that reads your posts.

Pickup ion acceleration by turbulent electric fields in the slow solar wind - le Roux - 2012 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Acceleration of Solar Wind by Parallel Electric Fields

It's coming whether you like it or not SZ, it is an electric universe and you best get used to the idea now.

Acceleration of Solar Wind by Parallel Electric Fields

Solar cycle effects on parallel electric field acceleration of auroral electron

Lots more for you to study up on the modern age.

Similar Articles Query Results

Like I have told you many times, quit ignoring 99% of the universe, and you and your astronomers will not be constantly surprised all the time by the data.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Justa, there is not much debate about the acceleration of the solar wind near the Sun. That is widely known to be a case of flowing plasma reacting with the magnetic field of the Sun. I wasn't talking about that.


Solar Wind Energy Source Discovered - NASA Science


I am talking about your woo based ideas of an electric universe. The solar wind continues to accelerate after it leaves the Sun and the major factor for that seems to be adiabatic expansion and cooling. There are other possible factors too:

Solar Wind Heating by the Turbulent Energy Cascade

To date the only actual plasma physics that you can show support for is that activity observed on the Sun. The sort of plasma physics needed to account for Dark Matter has no support at all.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Isn't that what I just said?

Shoot a beam of light from A to B through the air.

Now shoot a beam of light from A to B through a translucent pane.

Both beams move at a constant C, but the first beam will get from A to B sooner than the second beam; not because it moved faster, but because it didn't move as far.

That's right.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Justa, there is not much debate about the acceleration of the solar wind near the Sun. That is widely known to be a case of flowing plasma reacting with the magnetic field of the Sun. I wasn't talking about that.


Solar Wind Energy Source Discovered - NASA Science


I am talking about your woo based ideas of an electric universe. The solar wind continues to accelerate after it leaves the Sun and the major factor for that seems to be adiabatic expansion and cooling. There are other possible factors too:

Solar Wind Heating by the Turbulent Energy Cascade

To date the only actual plasma physics that you can show support for is that activity observed on the Sun. The sort of plasma physics needed to account for Dark Matter has no support at all.

Oh please, no other gas continues to accelerate after it leaves the heat source. Just another Fairie Dust explanation by astronomers to avoid having to consider electromagnetism as the cause. The reason it continues to accelerate is because there is an electric field centered on the sun, and charged particles will continue to accelerate in an electric field as long as it is strong enough. Then it stops abruptly at the heliosphere beacuse of the double layer that exists there.

Apparently you did not read or understand the paper you posted.

"Rather than estimating the heating rate by typical solar wind fluctuations and the Kolmogorov constant, it is perhaps much more convenient to get a direct estimate of the energy dissipation rate by measurements of the turbulent energy cascade using the Yaglom’s law,"

Just another form of EM SZ.

Yaglom law for electrostatic turbulence in laboratory magnetized plasmas - Abstract - EPL (Europhysics Letters) - IOPscience

"It has recently been shown that a Yaglom law for electrostatic turbulence, that is, a relation for the third-order mixed moment involving the particle number density as a passive scalar and the E×B drift velocity, can be deduced from a simple model of electrostatic fluctuations, which describes bursty turbulence in plasmas."

Come out of the stone age into the modern age SZ.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh please, no other gas continues to accelerate after it leaves the heat source. Just another Fairie Dust explanation by astronomers to avoid having to consider electromagnetism as the cause. The reason it continues to accelerate is because there is an electric field centered on the sun, and charged particles will continue to accelerate in an electric field as long as it is strong enough. Then it stops abruptly at the heliosphere beacuse of the double layer that exists there.

Apparently you did not read or understand the paper you posted.

"Rather than estimating the heating rate by typical solar wind fluctuations and the Kolmogorov constant, it is perhaps much more convenient to get a direct estimate of the energy dissipation rate by measurements of the turbulent energy cascade using the Yaglom’s law,"

Just another form of EM SZ.

Yaglom law for electrostatic turbulence in laboratory magnetized plasmas - Abstract - EPL (Europhysics Letters) - IOPscience

"It has recently been shown that a Yaglom law for electrostatic turbulence, that is, a relation for the third-order mixed moment involving the particle number density as a passive scalar and the E×B drift velocity, can be deduced from a simple model of electrostatic fluctuations, which describes bursty turbulence in plasmas."

Come out of the stone age into the modern age SZ.

The ignorance of Justa is truly amazing.

Of course a gas will continue to accelerate after it leaves its heat source. Your problem is that you are comparing events in space to those on the Earth. On the surface of the Earth we do not have a vacuum. In a vacuum the slightest pressure will help a gas to accelerate, in fact pressure is a force.

And as always when Justa does not understand physics he relies on his own one form of physics that he thinks is magical.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The ignorance of Justa is truly amazing.

Of course a gas will continue to accelerate after it leaves its heat source. Your problem is that you are comparing events in space to those on the Earth. On the surface of the Earth we do not have a vacuum. In a vacuum the slightest pressure will help a gas to accelerate, in fact pressure is a force.

And as always when Justa does not understand physics he relies on his own one form of physics that he thinks is magical.

Your ignorance is even more amazing. Your paper, not mine says it is because of Yagloms Law, which is an electrostatic law. bet you never bothered to look that up did you, or i expect you would never have submitted that paper. Turns out your evidence backs my theory up better than it does yours, roflol.

Don't you just love that SZ?

Only you believe that SZ, no scientists believe the continued acceleration of the solar wind is caused from heat. Strawman.

Solar Wind Energy Source Discovered - NASA Science

"Researchers liken it to the steam from a pot of water boiling on a stove; the sun is literally boiling itself away.

“But,” says Adam Szabo of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, “solar wind does something that steam in your kitchen never does. As steam rises from a pot, it slows and cools. As solar wind leaves the sun, it accelerates, tripling in speed as it passes through the corona. Furthermore, something inside the solar wind continues to add heat even as it blows into the cold of space."

You on the other hand want to violate all the laws of thermodynamics by having the heat increase the further from the sun one gets.

Gas in space would only accelerate from the initial heat source, then immediately sustain its escape velocity, not continue to accelerate, and continue to heat up as it left the heat source behind.

Who you trying to fool with your sloppy pseudoscience? Yourself?

Man, you will claim anything to not have to accept the truth won't you, even if you have to violate every scientific law in the process.

Even NASA thinks it is due to ion cyclotron theory:

"The ion cyclotron theory explains it: Heavy ions resonate well with ion cyclotron waves. Compared to their lighter counterparts, they gain more energy and heat as they surf."

But, that is just another name for acceleration by electric fields.

Ion cyclotron resonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Ion cyclotron resonance is a phenomenon related to the movement of ions in a magnetic field. It is used for accelerating ions in a cyclotron, and for measuring the masses of an ionized analyte in mass spectrometry, particularly with Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometers. It can also be used to follow the kinetics of chemical reactions in a dilute gas mixture, provided these involve charged species....

On March 8, 2013, NASA released an article according to which ion cyclotron waves were identified by its solar probe spacecraft called WIND as the main cause for the heating of the solar wind as it rises from the sun's surface. Before this discovery, it was unclear why the solar wind particles would heat up, instead of cool down, when speeding away from the sun's surface."


Which if you understood anything about cyclotrons, you would know this.

Cyclotron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A cyclotron is a type of particle accelerator in which charged particles accelerate outwards from the center along a spiral path. The particles are held to a spiral trajectory by a static magnetic field and accelerated by a rapidly varying (radio frequency) electric field."


You are so mentally messed up with dogma you cant see the truth when it is staring you in the face.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your ignorance is even more amazing. Your paper, not mine says it is because of Yagloms Law, which is an electrostatic law. bet you never bothered to look that up did you, or i expect you would never have submitted that paper. Turns out your evidence backs my theory up better than it does yours, roflol.

Don't you just love that SZ?

And yet I was right about adiabatic expansion. An idea that is beyond your comprehension. I have not fully checked your claim. You only required one, my second example may have been incorrect.

Only you believe that SZ, no scientists believe the continued acceleration of the solar wind is caused from heat. Strawman.

And once again Justa proves he cannot read articles nor does he know what a strawman argument is. That article is only about material very close to the Sun. That is not what we were discussing. Please try to understand the difference.

"Researchers liken it to the steam from a pot of water boiling on a stove; the sun is literally boiling itself away.

“But,” says Adam Szabo of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, “solar wind does something that steam in your kitchen never does. As steam rises from a pot, it slows and cools. As solar wind leaves the sun, it accelerates, tripling in speed as it passes through the corona. Furthermore, something inside the solar wind continues to add heat even as it blows into the cold of space."

You on the other hand want to violate all the laws of thermodynamics by having the heat increase the further from the sun one gets.

Nope, you are using a poor analogy here. What did you forget, again? You forgot that the steam is in an atmosphere. Try the same experiment in a vacuum and you will see the steam continuing to accelerate due to adiabatic expansion.

Gas in space would only accelerate from the initial heat source, then immediately sustain its escape velocity, not continue to accelerate, and continue to heat up as it left the heat source behind.

This is so obviously wrong that I will just refer you to the Ideal Gas Law. Again, adiabatic expansion says that even after leaving the source a gas will continue to accelerate.

Who you trying to fool with your sloppy pseudoscience? Yourself?

This is just too hilarious coming from someone who thinks that "plasma" is a good enough explanation for anything.

Man, you will claim anything to not have to accept the truth won't you, even if you have to violate every scientific law in the process.

Even NASA thinks it is due to ion cyclotron theory:

"The ion cyclotron theory explains it: Heavy ions resonate well with ion cyclotron waves. Compared to their lighter counterparts, they gain more energy and heat as they surf."

But, that is just another name for acceleration by electric fields.

Ion cyclotron resonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


On March 8, 2013, NASA released an article according to which ion cyclotron waves were identified by its solar probe spacecraft called WIND as the main cause for the heating of the solar wind as it rises from the sun's surface. Before this discovery, it was unclear why the solar wind particles would heat up, instead of cool down, when speeding away from the sun's surface."


Which if you understood anything about cyclotrons, you would know this.

Cyclotron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spamming your replies with science that you do not understand fools no one. Once again, this only apply very close to the Sun. The Sun's magnetic field drops off much faster than its gravity does. But then you do not understand how dipoles work, do you?

You are so mentally messed up with dogma you cant see the truth when it is staring you in the face.

Oh, it burns, it truly does.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Wow. Just wow. Is there a single thread on here in which people can refrain from calling each other stupid?

 

[AV1611VET]

Wow. Just wow. Is there a single thread on here in which people can refrain from calling each other stupid?

So you can call them a troll?