The Deep

[Justatruthseeker]

In your world is it not necessary to know something about a topic before you make accusations of limited knowledge by otherss?

Yet without knowing anything of EU/Plasma theory, you seem to be able think you can.

And, again, what does this have to do with a polymorph of the mineral olivine?

(apart from just any reason to espouse your pet topic?)

The fact that maybe it is found in comets when your dirty snowball models of comets precludes it? It's that belief in dirty snowballs that came out of the falsified models of the solar system, which then led to your theories of the earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34wtt2EUToo&list=PLwOAYhBuU3UfvhvcT1lZA6KbSdh0K2EpH

Well, "my theories" are usually more around how coating chemistry works. Not sure how magical electric currents through the universe will alter that.

You mean like so?

Physical vapor deposition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Or do you mean coating as in how dust builds up on surfaces to later become substrates??

electrostatics - Calculating dust attraction to a charged surface - Physics Stack Exchange

This is seriously off topic. I suggest you try to stick with the topic of the OP. You may be able to contact the guy who posted it.

I am the OP. And this does apply to the original post. It goes to show all the things you ignore in order to keep your Fairie Dust theories alive and well.

I mean, didn't the astronomers use your geology to calculate the heat at the poles of Saturn's moons?? Too bad they were off by 10x the amount of heat actually observed on that frozen planet. Because they too ignore those electrical connections.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/cassini/2005-07-29/pia06432-browse.jpg

NASA - Cassini Sees Saturn Electric Link With Enceladus

I mean why did NASA even bother mentioning those electrical currents they find everywhere, you and mainstream are just going to ignore them.

 

[MikeCarra]

Yet without knowing anything of EU/Plasma theory, you seem to be able think you can.

You are wrong. I almost always avoid the fringe science end of cosmology. I know very little about cosmology so I tend to keep my comments limited on that.

As I said: about the only thing I know about it is that it carries so little weight with actual cosmologists and astronomers that it has almost no scientific support.

Other than that I don't know...and....don't care.

The fact that maybe it is found in comets when your dirty snowball models of comets precludes it? It's that belief in dirty snowballs that came out of the falsified models of the solar system, which then led to your theories of the earth.

Are comets real? Ummm, yeah. Do comets contain water? Does water exist in the universe? Yup and yup.

So that pretty much works for this discussion even without saying anything about "electric universe".

I am the OP. And this does apply to the original post.

For shame! You shouldn't derail your OWN THREADS. You haven't said anything meaningful about ringwoodite, the mineral phase, and you show vanishingly little understanding of mineral chemistry or even the structure of the earth.

It goes to show all the things you ignore in order to keep your Fairie Dust theories alive and well.

It shows what a one-track minded zealot you are. Sorry but none of this relies on the EU hypothesis.

But it would surely help if you had even a HINT of an idea how the earth is structured or mineral chemistry.

I mean why did NASA even bother mentioning those electrical currents they find everywhere, you and mainstream are just going to ignore them.

-yawn-

When someone comes to the party and demands that EVERYTHING be brought into their pet hypothesis it becomes quite boring.

You are boring me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here you go justa, one of these minerals has water very loosely tied into its crystalline structure. Can you tell by the pictures:

By number of atoms one of those is 50% water.

Heat can drive off the water at low pressures. Just like ringwoodite will. Though the pressure that that happens at is very different for the two.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Here you go justa, one of these minerals has water very loosely tied into its crystalline structure. Can you tell by the pictures:

By number of atoms one of those is 50% water.

Heat can drive off the water at low pressures. Just like ringwoodite will. Though the pressure that that happens at is very different for the two.

But that so-called heat from the core "isn't" driving off the water, is it. In fact there is more water the closer to that heat source than there is away from it according to the data.

Kinda like your solar model. The data shows the highest heat in the corona, the surface millions of degrees lower, and sunspots thousands of degrees lower than the surface.

 

[MikeCarra]

But that so-called heat from the core "isn't" driving off the water, is it. In fact there is more water the closer to that heat source than there is away from it according to the data.

Kinda like your solar model. The data shows the highest heat in the corona, the surface millions of degrees lower, and sunspots thousands of degrees lower than the surface.

Justatruthseeker: can you answer the original question? Can you tell WHICH mineral contains water in its structure?

 

[Subduction Zone]

But that so-called heat from the core "isn't" driving off the water, is it. In fact there is more water the closer to that heat source than there is away from it according to the data.

Kinda like your solar model. The data shows the highest heat in the corona, the surface millions of degrees lower, and sunspots thousands of degrees lower than the surface.

Of course. As you get closer to the source of heat what goes up even more than temperature? As you get closer to the surface what drops more than temperature? If you can answer this you would have a good idea why the deeps are "wetter".

And why did you dodge my question? Which crystal is made up of 50% water as a percentage of its atoms?

 

[RickG]

Yet without knowing anything of EU/Plasma theory, you seem to be able think you can.

That comment was directed to Mike Carra, not me, but I am rather curious. You seem to claim to know a lot about it. May I ask where you studied EU/Plasma theory and what credentials you possess to be such a profound expert?

 

[RealityCheck]

But that so-called heat from the core "isn't" driving off the water, is it. In fact there is more water the closer to that heat source than there is away from it according to the data.

Kinda like your solar model. The data shows the highest heat in the corona, the surface millions of degrees lower, and sunspots thousands of degrees lower than the surface.

And your problem with the solar model is......

 

[Justatruthseeker]

That comment was directed to Mike Carra, not me, but I am rather curious. You seem to claim to know a lot about it. May I ask where you studied EU/Plasma theory and what credentials you possess to be such a profound expert?

Had you read any EU material available, you would know what sources. Had you read the papers by your own astronomers and applied plasma physics to it you would know. Also if you read any papers by plasma physicists about a universe 99% plasma you would know.

We could start with the basics like centripetal or centrifugal forces if you like. Since I'm sure they are well defined, being such basic laws of physics. Oh, my bad, I guess they are not, are they.


Well, actually they are.

Ampère's Law
The Lorentz Force
Charged Particle in a Magnetic Field

But mainstream cosmology is in it's current period of denial about magnetic fields and their true cause, instead dreaming of reconnection in an attempt to explain the electric currents. Sadly they have it backwards.

Gauss' Law for Magnetic Fields

Sadly because we have known about magnetic fields from laboratory experiments for over 200 years. They don't even have the basics down, and mainstream cosmology thinks they can explain the creation of the universe?

They don't have the basics down because they believed (and still seem to) that electric currents cannot cross space. But Chapman's model is not valid any longer, and hasn't been since 1967 when Birkeland's theory was proved correct.

Mainstream said the same thing and ridiculed Birkeland's theory back then that they are still saying today about EU theory. They were wrong then too, as the first probe ever launched showed.

http://techdigest.jhuapl.edu/td/td1901/williams.pdf
"Although reported as “transverse magnetic disturbances,” there was early speculation that the observed disturbances were the magnetic signatures of electrical currents flowing along the magnetic field lines in the vicinity of the auroral oval. A particularly striking observation that occurred on 1 November 1968 is shown in Fig. 4.

Zmuda’s discovery was soon confirmed to be the field-aligned currents that had been postulated by Kristian Birkeland in the early 1900s. The large body of observations from 5E-1 led to the flight of improved magnetometers on TRIAD, the first satellite in the Transit Improvement Program, and later on a number of other polar orbiting satellites"

But to this day you still ignore them. Are still ridiculing Birkeland's theory when the basics had already been proven long ago. Spent years searching for Fairie Dust instead of trying to improve upon the correct theory.

And then over and over are surprised that what you were taught is not what is observed.

Scientists discover surprise in Earth's upper atmosphere | UCLA

Because they are still ignoring Birkeland's theory to this day.

 

[MikeCarra]

I'm still curious why Justatruthseeker is dodging the simple question posed earlier as to which crystal has a lot of water in its structure.

Hmmmm, could it be that this EU Plasma Cosmology stuff can't actually help him with a basic, simple mineralogy question????

And to think this whole thread is about a mineral.

Hm.

 

[RealityCheck]

I'm still curious why Justatruthseeker is dodging the simple question posed earlier as to which crystal has a lot of water in its structure.

Hmmmm, could it be that this EU Plasma Cosmology stuff can't actually help him with a basic, simple mineralogy question????

And to think this whole thread is about a mineral.

Hm.

Oh come on, you're not curious at all. You know why.

He'll never answer because he knows he can't, and because he knows that no matter whether he guesses right or not, it's still a guess and he has no way of knowing. He knows it's a trap. He therefore will never honestly answer the question and admit that he's actually wrong about something. Because, of course, fundamentalists cannot admit to being wrong - it's a fundamental trait.

 

[Subduction Zone]

To be honest it was not a trap, but it looks like I chose very well.

He can't tell, and he has no clue what the two different crystals are, though I am fairly sure that MikeCarra knows.

Mike PM me with an answer an I will say whether or not you are right. Of course you now whether you are right or not by my clue.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And MikeCarra PM'ed me overnight and he had not only the right answer as to what the two minerals were he correctly said which one was which.

How about justa?

 

[Subduction Zone]

A bump for jsuta.

This is the only bump I will do.

Of course I will be more than happy to remind justa of his unacknowledged failure here from time to time.

 

[freezerman2000]

.(just for curiosity sake)

 

[Mainframes]

Justa also failed to provide me with the workings of his 'space' invertor that converts a flow of current from the sun into AC so that his induction heating of the earths mantle could happen.....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Justa also failed to provide me with the workings of his 'space' invertor that converts a flow of current from the sun into AC so that his induction heating of the earths mantle could happen.....

You got three double layers surrounding the earth, what else do you want???

NASA even has a pretty video of it for you, before we discovered the third one, and therefore I predict eventually at a minimum a fourth, but possibly more.

NASA - The Electric Atmosphere: Plasma Is Next NASA Science Target

Such was a common occurrence in the days of vacuum tubes (filled with ionized gasses - plasma). Just how do you think we converted DC to AC before the advent of solid state circuitry?????????

Why we used vacuum tubes filled with plasma.

How Vacuum Tubes Work


Not to mention that we don't even need the AC current, just those surrounding double layers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FoWYvp3SW0

 

[Subduction Zone]

Still ducking. Quack.

Quack quack.

.

.

Quack!!!

 

[lesliedellow]

You got three double layers surrounding the earth, what else do you want???

Seeing as you are a self proclaimed expert on electromagnetism, he wants to know how Faraday's Law has come to slip your mind.

 

[Mainframes]

You got three double layers surrounding the earth, what else do you want???

How Vacuum Tubes Work

Can I suggest you actually read the articles you post. Yes there is plasma present around the earth. However, vacuum tubes and the circuit to create an inverter requires a few more components and some specific structure.