Message from the Dawn of time...

[RealityCheck01]

...'kludging' rant ...!

What is the point about a lie about 'kludging' when I cite and often quote the actual text, Michael?
The English is simple for any rational thinker to understand:
18th October 2011: Dungey's 'electric discharge' = high current density in magnetic reconnection

Peratt never defines any electrical discharges in cosmic plasma (the section title contains "Cosmic Plasma"!).
Peratt never defines any electrical discharges in plasma.
Peratt never gives any example of electrical discharges in plasma.
Peratt never gives any description (e.g. the mathematics and properties) electrical discharges in plasma.

You have not been able to cite any other textbook that defines any electrical discharges in plasma.
You have not been able to cite any other textbook that gives any example of electrical discharges in plasma.

Somov never mentions any plasma in connection with his example (the section ends with a bridging paragraph to the section on reconnection in plasma)

 

[RealityCheck01]

...usual rant snipped...

Writing "actual" is not a lie, Michael, no matter how many tines that you repeat this ignorance about English.
It is an emphasis about the idiocy of thinking that lightning ("actual electrical discharges") can happen in plasma.
Michael is still in denial that plasmas conduct thus lightning cannot happen in them - I may drop "actual electrical discharges" since Michael still cannot understand this means Peratt's example of lightning !

5 November 2014 Michael: The denial of what Dungey wrote continues after 3 years

 

[RealityCheck01]

According to Peratt, electrical discharges *are possible* in plasma - by definition!

Now you are lying about what Peratt wrote, Michael !
But that is forgivable since you have been fantasizing about that page in his book for many years! You still do not know there is no definition of electrical discharge in plasma in Peratt's book.

11th January 2011 (JREF), 12th November 2012 here: Peratt and Electrical Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

Readers of this thread may think that I am being unduely harsh when pointing out Michael's inability to understand (and quote mining) of Peratt's book.
The full text of the "Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma" section was posted on JREF:
11th January 2011: Peratt and Electrical Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

Originally Posted by Peratt
1 .5 Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

...
As you can see there is no mention of electrical discharges in plasma in the section other than in the title (which is not a definition whatever Michael thinks!).

If someone were to be ignorant enough to take the title literally then one wonders what happens in Terrestrial Plasma ! Or for that matter "terrestrial plasma".

 

[RealityCheck01]

Hi Justatruthseeker, did you understand this?

Magnetic reconnection in a vacuum is actually extremely easy to understand, Justatruthseeker.
Magnetic field lines do not exist where there is no magnetic field.
If you have two parallel currents as in Somov's textbook then there is a point where there is no magnetic field (the neutral point). Any magnetic field line drawn though the point will break. This is not a violation of Gauss's Law since any volume containing that point will have equal numbers of field lines entering end exiting (zero magnetic flux).
Now change the magnetic field, e.g. by moving the currents closer together. The magnetic fields lines will sweep across that neutral point. They will break and reconnect on the other side. Thus "magnetic reconnection"

This is a trivial and boring process in vacuum. The interesting stuff happens when you add a plasma.

There is a mathematical proof that magnetic field lines can begin/end at a neutral point (unfortunately the equation images are broken).

Or even simpler: Tutorial Derivation of Magnetic Reconnection by W.D. Clinger

(You may have heard that magnetic field lines never begin or end. That's mostly true, but it's an over-simplification. Magnetic field lines can begin or end at neutral points, as shown in the figure above. There is no need to worry about Gauss's law for magnetism. It's trivial to confirm that the mathematically correct statement of Gauss's law for magnetism (div B = 0) holds for the magnetic field generated by a single rod. By linearity, Gauss's law for magnetism also holds for the linear superposition of four such rods that we are examining here.)

W.D Clingers opinion about Deniers of Magnetic Reconnection

As Alfvén said above, and as I have shown in detail, magnetic reconnection is a simple consequence of Maxwell's equations. Magnetic reconnection has also been observed both in space and in controlled laboratory experiments.

Disregarding that evidence, many promoters of Electric Universe pseudoscience continue to deny the reality of magnetic reconnection. One of those deniers responded to my demonstration of magnetic reconnection by (surprise!) repeatedly denying magnetic reconnection. Although he himself does not "bark math" (as he puts it), he felt qualified to dismiss the vector calculus, freshman physics, and calculations that went into my demonstration of magnetic reconnection.

ETA: That poster who cannot "bark math" is Michael. At JREF he started in 2009 totally denying MR existed at all. He kept the belief that the posts that make up Tutorial Derivation of Magnetic Reconnection by W.D. Clinger were wrong despite no actual mathematical error being pointed out by Michael. However that belief seems to have changed to that Michael thinks that magic happens in plasma to allow MR but that MR cannot happen in vacuum. Michael never states what that magic is (monopoles? ) or how it works but he knows better than any one else in the world (e.g. Somov) that the magic does not happen in vacuum.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Wow - I should really not look back at old JREF posts
8th March 2012: Magnetic Reconnection: In Plasma and In Vacuo by Tim Thompson

I have in fact supported my claim with several published references to magnetic reconnection in a vacuum. Here is a list of my posts on the topic, which the industrious reader may wish to peruse for the various references therein.

• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VIII (10 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VII (9 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VI: Mozina's Links (4) (8 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VI: Mozina's Links (3) (7 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VI: Mozina's Links (2) (7 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo VI: Mozina's Links (6 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo V (4 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo IV (1 Dec 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo III (22 Nov 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo II (22 Oct 2011)
• Magnetic Reconnection in Vacuo (20 May 2011)

 

[RealityCheck01]

9th January 2011: Tim Thompson states that electrical discharges that require a breakdown of a potential barrier (my "actual electrical discharges") are impossible in plasma.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Back to the OP:
CMB Part 2: The “Smoking Gun” of the Big Bang

If you’ve been wondering what B-mode polarization is, or how it tells us about gravitational waves from inflation, wonder no more!

 

[Michael]

Writing "actual" is not a lie

It's a ridiculous and childish rationalization to avoid providing me with a *published* reference as I asked for, not just a link to your EU hater bud on some other unpublished website!

Holy cow! Do you even understand how a "scientific" debate actually works? Both sides are obligated to use *published* standards, not their *own personal* standards. Even Tim acknowledged it was his own *personal* standard in the link you provided to a *website*, not a published paper or textbook.

Wow!

 

[Michael]

Peratt never defines any electrical discharges in cosmic plasma (the section title contains "Cosmic Plasma"!).

Pure denial.

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:

1 .5 Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

An electrical discharge is a sudden release of electric or magnetic stored energy. This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually determined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium. As such, discharges are local phenomena and are usually accompanied by violent prαesses such as rapid heating, ionization, the creation of pinched and filamentary conduction channels, particle acceleration, and the generation of prodigious amounts of electromagnetic radiation. As an example, multi-terawatt pulsed-power generators on earth rely on strong electrical discharges to produce intense particle beams, Χrays, and microωανes . Megajoules of energy are electrically stored in capacitor banks, whose volume may encompass 250 m^3 . This energy is then transferred to a discharge regίοn, located many meters from the source, viα a transmission line.
The discharge region, or load, encompαsses at most a few cubic centimeters of space, and is the site of high-variability, intense, electromagnetic radiatιοη (Figure 1 .2) .On earth, lightning is another example of the discharge mechanism at work where electr-o-static energy is stored in clouds whose volume may be of the order of 3,000 km3. This energy is released in a few cubic meters of the discharge channel.
The aurora is a discharge caused by the bombardment of atoms in the upper atmosphere by 1–20 keV electrons and 200 keV ions spirιlling down the earth's magnetic field lines at high latitudes . Here, the electric field accelerating the charged particles derιves from plasma moving across the earth's dipole magnetic field lines many earth radii into the magnetosphere.

​

When you simply perpetuate the same false statements, there's really nothing much to discuss with you. Peratt's book explains very clearly that electrical discharges are *possible* in space plasmas. He doesn't define it as *requiring* a breakdown of a dielectric, but even if you claim that he did for some irrational reason, he's still claiming *by definition* that electrical discharges occur in Cosmic Plasmas! Your rationalizations for simply misstating fact are not only ridiculous, they are down right *childish*!

 

[Michael]

Wow - I should really not look back at old JREF posts

Why? Because apparently you don't have any actual *published or peer reviewed* work to support anything you've said. Instead, you're reduced to citing another website (like this one) as some sort of 'authority' on all topics related to physics!

You have *never* cited a single published work related to the topic of "reconnection" that A) excludes plasma, or B) excludes plasma particle movement. All the first few examples I looked at *include* both A) and B) (as always).

When are you going to read a real textbook on MHD theory RC? Your behaviors are simply absurd. You'll spend your days playing Michael hater, yet you won't lift a finger to educate yourself to the topics you profess to 'understand'.

 

[Michael]

Now you are lying about what Peratt wrote, Michael !
But that is forgivable since you have been fantasizing about that page in his book for many years! You still do not know there is no definition of electrical discharge in plasma in Peratt's book.

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:

1 .5 Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

An electrical discharge is a sudden release of electric or magnetic stored energy. This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually determined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium. As such, discharges are local phenomena and are usually accompanied by violent prαesses such as rapid heating, ionization, the creation of pinched and filamentary conduction channels, particle acceleration, and the generation of prodigious amounts of electromagnetic radiation. As an example, multi-terawatt pulsed-power generators on earth rely on strong electrical discharges to produce intense particle beams, Χrays, and microωανes . Megajoules of energy are electrically stored in capacitor banks, whose volume may encompass 250 m^3 . This energy is then transferred to a discharge regίοn, located many meters from the source, viα a transmission line.
The discharge region, or load, encompαsses at most a few cubic centimeters of space, and is the site of high-variability, intense, electromagnetic radiatιοη (Figure 1 .2) .On earth, lightning is another example of the discharge mechanism at work where electr-o-static energy is stored in clouds whose volume may be of the order of 3,000 km3. This energy is released in a few cubic meters of the discharge channel.
The aurora is a discharge caused by the bombardment of atoms in the upper atmosphere by 1–20 keV electrons and 200 keV ions spirιlling down the earth's magnetic field lines at high latitudes . Here, the electric field accelerating the charged particles derιves from plasma moving across the earth's dipole magnetic field lines many earth radii into the magnetosphere.

​

Regardless of how you claim that Peratt defines it, he clearly defines it. Your denial routine, along with all the personal attacks and childish 'liar liar pants on fire" nonsense are simply absurd. Peratt wrote an entire textbook that I have read and that you refuse to read. Alfven has also written an entire textbook on space plasmas which I have read and you refuse to read. Somov has written many textbooks on MHD theory, one of which I've read, and all of which you refuse to read. Ignorance is not bliss RC. When are you actually going to read a real textbook on this topic?

 

[Michael]

Now you are lying about what Peratt wrote, Michael !
But that is forgivable since you have been fantasizing about that page in his book for many years! You still do not know there is no definition of electrical discharge in plasma in Peratt's book.

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:

1 .5 Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

An electrical discharge is a sudden release of electric or magnetic stored energy. This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually determined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium. As such, discharges are local phenomena and are usually accompanied by violent prαesses such as rapid heating, ionization, the creation of pinched and filamentary conduction channels, particle acceleration, and the generation of prodigious amounts of electromagnetic radiation. As an example, multi-terawatt pulsed-power generators on earth rely on strong electrical discharges to produce intense particle beams, Χrays, and microωανes . Megajoules of energy are electrically stored in capacitor banks, whose volume may encompass 250 m^3 . This energy is then transferred to a discharge regίοn, located many meters from the source, viα a transmission line.
The discharge region, or load, encompαsses at most a few cubic centimeters of space, and is the site of high-variability, intense, electromagnetic radiatιοη (Figure 1 .2) .On earth, lightning is another example of the discharge mechanism at work where electr-o-static energy is stored in clouds whose volume may be of the order of 3,000 km3. This energy is released in a few cubic meters of the discharge channel.
The aurora is a discharge caused by the bombardment of atoms in the upper atmosphere by 1–20 keV electrons and 200 keV ions spirιlling down the earth's magnetic field lines at high latitudes . Here, the electric field accelerating the charged particles derιves from plasma moving across the earth's dipole magnetic field lines many earth radii into the magnetosphere.

​

Regardless of how you claim that Peratt defines it, he clearly defines an electrical discharge in plasma. Your denial routine, along with all the personal attacks and childish 'liar liar pants on fire" nonsense are simply absurd. Peratt wrote an entire textbook on space plasmas that I have read and that you refuse to read. Alfven has also written an entire textbook on space plasmas which I have read and you refuse to read. Somov has written many textbooks on MHD theory, one of which I've read, and all of which you refuse to read. Ignorance is not bliss RC. When are you actually going to read a real textbook on this topic?

 

[RealityCheck01]

..usual rant snipped...

Michael still cannot understand after a couple of years that "actual electrical discharges" = lightning etc. !

 

[RealityCheck01]

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:

Which remains an ignorant statement, Michael - that is Anthony Peratt's section "1 .5 Electrical Discharges in Cosmic Plasma" which has no definition or examples of electrical discharges in terrestrial or cosmic plasma. It is all about the generation of plasma from electrical discharges.
(emphasis added)

What turns this ignorance into a delusion though is the obsession with this one textbook. Other textbooks on plasma physics exist

 

[RealityCheck01]

I will list the reasons why Peratt's section is not electrical discharges in plasma again (with some new stuff!).
Based on 11th January 2011: Do you know the difference between a title and a definition?
I"m know that's a classic case of pure denial and the inability to understand what you read on your part.
The only mention of *IN* is in the title.
The whole paragraph is a *DEFINITION* of electrical discharge. Cherry picking the first sentence is basically lying.
Thinking that the entire section is a definition of ""electrical discharges in plasma" leads to the idiocy of air being plasma since one example is lightning.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:
...On earth, lightning is another example of the discharge mechanism at work where electr-o-static energy is stored in clouds whose volume may be of the order of 3,000 km3....

6 November 2014 Michael: Is air a plasma as in Peratt's example of lightning that you quote?

 

[RealityCheck01]

Based on 5th February 2011: Why does Peratt's page talk about aurora and lightning?
I will repeat that Peratt used the phrase *IN COSMIC PLASMA* in the title. The title is not a definition.
Cosmic Plasma is the title of a book by Hannes Alfven (a scientist who Peratt admires)!
Cosmic Plasma is not terrestrial plasma!
Electrical discharges cannot happen in plasma because their definition generally requires a "breakdown" as stated by Peratt.

This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually determined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium.

A pity that he does not list the exceptions though (capacitors maybe?).

But the real question is:
5th February 2011 Michael: Why does Peratt's page talk about aurora and lightning?
Do you really think that Peratt is so ignorant that he thinks that air is plasma?

 

[RealityCheck01]

Based on 7th December 2010: Where are Peratt's many pages of the physics and mathematics of electrical discharges?
Anthony Peratt seems to be describing the role of electrical discharges in plasma physics, i.e. to generate plasma.

The confirmation of this is the fact that this section is only one page in his book Physics of the Plasma Universe. The table of contents has no other reference to electrical discharges.
So Michael: First Asked 7 December 2010
Where are Anthony Peratt's many pages of the physics and mathematics of electrical discharges (e.g. lightning) within plasma?

 

[RealityCheck01]

I think Anthony Peratt is still alive - why have you not contacted him to ask him (first suggested on 7th December 2010 )

• to confirm that he meant electric discharges in plasma,
• why his book ignores then except on that one page
• and why he ignored such an Nobel Prize winning discovery .

7 December 2010 Michael: Why have you not contacted Anthony Peratt to clear up this issue?

 

[RealityCheck01]

7 December 2010 Michael: Why have you not contacted Anthony Peratt to clear up this issue?
suggests a follow-up question:
6 November 2014 Michael: Why have you not asked a plasma physicist whether lightning (Peratt's example) is possible in plasma?