Nature seems to have a novel approach to nuclear fusion. Her stars bring forth energy from within their central cores from where any plasma (all the rage in JET and ITER) would be displaced by an arrangement of protons and any other stuff found inside of atoms, mostly of the hydrogen variety. Severe global traction would have removed any electrons long ago, and if that were not enough, positrons would ferret them out anyhow if they did have any hiding places down there in the middle of the stars up there.
Nature's trick of doing fusion without electrons (an essential ingredient of plasma) precludes electrical parity in the process: positrons decline such suttee for erstwhile electron counterparts. There is no way. Your informant skipped school to slop the hogs and missed out on a lot of bum dope in the process.
Now that is why the universe has a negative charge today, but the plot thickens as we go, for if positrons can quit out and leave energy behind in their place, thus adding cosmic negative charge, then how can we be so sure that energy never converts back to positrons?
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
FAIR WEATHER CURRENT (FWC)
Someday, that right book written by the right people at the right time and at the right place might revise its present estimates of electric current between earth and sky; upwards by several orders of magnitude. A little truth here and there makes for a better science.
Some solar energy following various endothermic paths becomes stored as electrical energy by displacement of electrons from the electrosphere onto the the earth's solid and liquid surfaces. Much of that electrical charging occurs during rainstorms with the fall of negatively charged precipitation and lightning discharges throughout the globe. Those surface electrons are joined by others from below in what this blog describes as a repolarization process. These electrons are detained along the surface by gravity, and become distributed to the atmosphere by their mutual repulsion into apportionment favoring high ground AKA distance from the electrostatic center of the earth. Therefore, we may contemplate various intensities of negative ion populations along the global surface, running from almost nothing atop the oceans, especially near the poles or at low tide in troughs between the waves; to maximums atop great mountain ranges.
Release of electrons from those populations to the atmosphere would surely vary according to electrical intensity and other surface factors such as temperature and texture of the terrain. Fair Weather Current, considered as the negative flow of such particle release, entails the migration of electrons from where they had been to where they are going. For any amount of electrons to have been where they were in the first place, they would have had to tarry. Electrons tarry halfway up a mountain or in a pit about as well as water tarries halfway down or at the peak. Hence there might be sufficient FWC to poach an egg atop Mount Kilimanjaro but nary a picoamp per square meter at the North Pole once we melt the ice away.
Sadly, a revered tome proffered to advanced scholars of meteorology appraises global FWC at a total current of some one thousand Amperes. That figure would be taken from fallacious measurements taken from the ocean-going sailboats Maude and Carnegie. Their typical peak FWCs of some 2 picoamps measured per square meter of ocean surface taken as the global average for the 0.51 billion square kilometers of Earth's surface brought them to estimate total FWC as some one thousand Amperes. Ask an electroplater how easy it is to plate the inside of a ring!
A century-old blunder haunts and corrupts the lore of our scientific doctrine.
Corrected estimates of FWC could offer useful insight on how we might abate the ferocity of hurricanes. If we could encourage lightning on the open seas, we would be dispersing energy from monstrous storms and thereby pulling its punches.
Some solar energy following various endothermic paths becomes stored as electrical energy by displacement of electrons from the electrosphere onto the the earth's solid and liquid surfaces. Much of that electrical charging occurs during rainstorms with the fall of negatively charged precipitation and lightning discharges throughout the globe. Those surface electrons are joined by others from below in what this blog describes as a repolarization process. These electrons are detained along the surface by gravity, and become distributed to the atmosphere by their mutual repulsion into apportionment favoring high ground AKA distance from the electrostatic center of the earth. Therefore, we may contemplate various intensities of negative ion populations along the global surface, running from almost nothing atop the oceans, especially near the poles or at low tide in troughs between the waves; to maximums atop great mountain ranges.
Release of electrons from those populations to the atmosphere would surely vary according to electrical intensity and other surface factors such as temperature and texture of the terrain. Fair Weather Current, considered as the negative flow of such particle release, entails the migration of electrons from where they had been to where they are going. For any amount of electrons to have been where they were in the first place, they would have had to tarry. Electrons tarry halfway up a mountain or in a pit about as well as water tarries halfway down or at the peak. Hence there might be sufficient FWC to poach an egg atop Mount Kilimanjaro but nary a picoamp per square meter at the North Pole once we melt the ice away.
Sadly, a revered tome proffered to advanced scholars of meteorology appraises global FWC at a total current of some one thousand Amperes. That figure would be taken from fallacious measurements taken from the ocean-going sailboats Maude and Carnegie. Their typical peak FWCs of some 2 picoamps measured per square meter of ocean surface taken as the global average for the 0.51 billion square kilometers of Earth's surface brought them to estimate total FWC as some one thousand Amperes. Ask an electroplater how easy it is to plate the inside of a ring!
A century-old blunder haunts and corrupts the lore of our scientific doctrine.
Corrected estimates of FWC could offer useful insight on how we might abate the ferocity of hurricanes. If we could encourage lightning on the open seas, we would be dispersing energy from monstrous storms and thereby pulling its punches.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
SNOWFLAKES
The pronounced negative bias of Earth's atmosphere contributes to the formation of snowflakes. Typically. beginning with the six corner points of an initial ice crystal, those points constitute a symmetrical pattern of negative ion concentrations that beckon to relatively positive atmosphere to draw flow of moist air upon the central hub of the crystal.
As natural electrical phenomena equalize distribution of moisture and electrons from the hub, primarily to the six vertexes, extreme ion density is developed upon tips of condensed moisture that are drawn to fine points by electrostatic repulsion. Those pointed strands remain liquid until further condensation covers them, thereby lifting away the ionic congestion that prevents solidification, and so the snowflake grows.
Those sharp tips on snowflakes encourage corona discharge to such extent that lightning is rarely encountered within a snowfall.
As natural electrical phenomena equalize distribution of moisture and electrons from the hub, primarily to the six vertexes, extreme ion density is developed upon tips of condensed moisture that are drawn to fine points by electrostatic repulsion. Those pointed strands remain liquid until further condensation covers them, thereby lifting away the ionic congestion that prevents solidification, and so the snowflake grows.
Those sharp tips on snowflakes encourage corona discharge to such extent that lightning is rarely encountered within a snowfall.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
PLEASE CONSULT OLDEST POST FIRST
The March 2 posting: ANOTHER FORCE establishes an essential premise.
A. Dale Miller
A. Dale Miller
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
HOW NOT TO SPIN A BLACK HOLE
Since it isn't easy to keep astrophysics right down to Earth, the layman needn't hang his hat on all of its lore. Taking a little latitude right now, your informant proposes that black holes don't spin as much as some folks might suppose.
As far as magnetism goes, it should suffice that a slowly rotating accretion disk would do that job just fine. It makes up for low rotation by its generous radius of who knows how many light years, cranking googol after googol of protons around a galaxy's axis.
Suspicions arose upon contemplation of the inner dimensions to the disk of protons involved. All loose protons located below the rim would represent commensurate endothermic displacement for the distance involved, all the way down to the event horizon. The electrical charging in terms of such displacement would seem to have been derived from energy of the original orbital velocity of the particles. At one extreme, all such kinetic energy would have been extracted once a charged particle halts above the event horizon amidst the deadlocked tug of war between the black hole and the rim of its accretion disk. A momentary neutralization from an electron tips the scale, affording acceleration into the singularity, reacquiring a kinetic form of energy untainted by tangential momentum. Short of such an extreme, all protons, to the extent that they are depressed from the rim of the accretion disk, manifest electrical storage of energy taken from kinetic energy of orbital revolution.
Calling the initial premise of these blogs "electroconcentric macropolarization", "Myrtle Effect", or whatever; the forsaken electrical effects on cosmic architecture should work wonders for any dedicated scholars humble and generous enough to heed these clumsy explanations.
As far as magnetism goes, it should suffice that a slowly rotating accretion disk would do that job just fine. It makes up for low rotation by its generous radius of who knows how many light years, cranking googol after googol of protons around a galaxy's axis.
Suspicions arose upon contemplation of the inner dimensions to the disk of protons involved. All loose protons located below the rim would represent commensurate endothermic displacement for the distance involved, all the way down to the event horizon. The electrical charging in terms of such displacement would seem to have been derived from energy of the original orbital velocity of the particles. At one extreme, all such kinetic energy would have been extracted once a charged particle halts above the event horizon amidst the deadlocked tug of war between the black hole and the rim of its accretion disk. A momentary neutralization from an electron tips the scale, affording acceleration into the singularity, reacquiring a kinetic form of energy untainted by tangential momentum. Short of such an extreme, all protons, to the extent that they are depressed from the rim of the accretion disk, manifest electrical storage of energy taken from kinetic energy of orbital revolution.
Calling the initial premise of these blogs "electroconcentric macropolarization", "Myrtle Effect", or whatever; the forsaken electrical effects on cosmic architecture should work wonders for any dedicated scholars humble and generous enough to heed these clumsy explanations.
Friday, March 27, 2009
GALACTIC HEIR TO UNSPENT HYDROGEN
Hydrogen is still the cosmic default flavor of the day because its atoms so outnumber everything else. A consequential phenomenon as hydrogen orbits a black hole is that obstructs the orbits of the denser particles of other, neutron bearing atoms that travel at speeds above that default velocity.
The profoundly positive charge of central accretion disks brings us to an extreme. As it expands to encroach upon a stellar system, it dispatches negative surface charge in a jiffy and dismantles molecular structure by the same means. The nuclear remains become lofted above the point of capture due to additional lift by galactic traction, but neutron bearing particles to a lesser degree, and those pieces feel the proton drag. Outer protons attain their elevation above the black hole from tangential velocity native to the captured matter augmented by newfound electrostatic repulsion. Imediately below such strata would be protons traveling at a reduced increment of velocity and endowed with endothermic displacement from the outer rim. A proton at that level would have momentarily lost galactic repulsion by neutralizing effect from passing proximity of an electron being snatched from yet higher up as the disk relentlessly expands. Such a step-down represents sacrifice of some tangential velocity in exchange for endothermic displacement (virtual electrical charge) manifested by its reduced altitude. And so it goes along the radius to the galactic rotational axis. But such smearing would be irrevalent jitter, with electrical charge responding with its own exothermic bounce to liberate the proton back to the higher strata. The catch is in the geometry of convergence of electron patterns imploding toward the rotational axis. A dynamic smearing effect on proton locations procedes with increased electrical tension toward the center being offset by increased incidence of electron interference at such positions.
The gradient of energy distribution thus runs from maximum tangential velocity at outer limits with minimal virtual electrical charge there; to maximum virtual electrical charge at the center with minimal velocity as a proton approaches the event horizon. This might tell us that black holes do not get as dizzy as one might expect.
At some time far beyond our future, that distant accretion disk amidst the Milky Way will have gobbled its way out to our sun or whatever remains of it. It will trash it; sending most of our electrons to real outer space, keeping nearly all of the ionic hydrogen, and stuffing everything else into our supermassive black hole, even the internet. The good news is that when the Milky Way goes dark, it will no longer be under acceleration.
The profoundly positive charge of central accretion disks brings us to an extreme. As it expands to encroach upon a stellar system, it dispatches negative surface charge in a jiffy and dismantles molecular structure by the same means. The nuclear remains become lofted above the point of capture due to additional lift by galactic traction, but neutron bearing particles to a lesser degree, and those pieces feel the proton drag. Outer protons attain their elevation above the black hole from tangential velocity native to the captured matter augmented by newfound electrostatic repulsion. Imediately below such strata would be protons traveling at a reduced increment of velocity and endowed with endothermic displacement from the outer rim. A proton at that level would have momentarily lost galactic repulsion by neutralizing effect from passing proximity of an electron being snatched from yet higher up as the disk relentlessly expands. Such a step-down represents sacrifice of some tangential velocity in exchange for endothermic displacement (virtual electrical charge) manifested by its reduced altitude. And so it goes along the radius to the galactic rotational axis. But such smearing would be irrevalent jitter, with electrical charge responding with its own exothermic bounce to liberate the proton back to the higher strata. The catch is in the geometry of convergence of electron patterns imploding toward the rotational axis. A dynamic smearing effect on proton locations procedes with increased electrical tension toward the center being offset by increased incidence of electron interference at such positions.
The gradient of energy distribution thus runs from maximum tangential velocity at outer limits with minimal virtual electrical charge there; to maximum virtual electrical charge at the center with minimal velocity as a proton approaches the event horizon. This might tell us that black holes do not get as dizzy as one might expect.
At some time far beyond our future, that distant accretion disk amidst the Milky Way will have gobbled its way out to our sun or whatever remains of it. It will trash it; sending most of our electrons to real outer space, keeping nearly all of the ionic hydrogen, and stuffing everything else into our supermassive black hole, even the internet. The good news is that when the Milky Way goes dark, it will no longer be under acceleration.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
WHY THERE IS LIGHTNING
It is unknown here that findings disclosed in any of these posts can be found anywhere else. That is why they are being presented here. Therefore, any students obliged to please a teacher should treat this information as contraband heresy.
Several characteristics of water brings that substance to the forefront in the natural making of lightning. These charactristics combine with a significant ambient ion density to enable water to host exchanges of atmospheric energy. Water is plentiful, it possesses the highest specific heat of any common substance in our environment, it enters and departs from the atmospheric mixture under common fluctuation of conditions that influence its changes of state, and it involves a significant amount of latent energy.
This is easy when you know that the atmosphere is loaded with negative ions. The default explainers of our world are still bogged down with scratching up electrons or ions as though they represent energy. They are just matter and they come with the house so to speak. Water vapor freshly rejoining the atmosphere undergoes a process of adaptation under appropriate circumstances before it acquires the normal atmospheric ionic density. Electrons rising due to Fair Weather Current tend to nullify the virtual positive electrical charge imposed by fresh vapor, but such emission varies widely according to surface elevation, texture and temperature, etc. Thus, meager electron emissions of a pico amp or so per square meter occur from ocean surfaces, even at high tide, and an unsuspected bounty of electrons flows from high or pointy surfaces. (That would seem to explain the meager lightning at sea compared to that occurring inland.)
Saddled with a vast population of negative ions, our atmosphere spaces them out for stratified equidistant ionic juxtaposition around the globe. Electrical energy is stored within this medium by encroaching upon such equidistance, whereby ions subjected to further crowding would represent a virtual negative charge, and ions afforded additional spacing would represent a virtual positive charge.
We hereby review a scenario demonstrating natural development of high negative voltages. Some 540 Calories of heat energy are invested in the change of state for each liter of water evaporating into the atmosphere. Upon normalization of ionic density for such vapor, much of that latent energy is subject to conversion into storage as electrical energy upon condensation of the vapor as in the formation of rain. This is because the condensation process brings the water molecules and ions closer to each other. Mutual repulsion of the ions resisting increased proximity demands absorption of latent energy for the endothermic process of crowding negative ions together. Thus, heat energy introduced from sunshine becomes electrical energy stored upon surfaces of forming raindrops. (The little things perform as Faraday Cages: ions being confined to outer surface, excluded from inner content.) As raindrops grow, whether by merging with each other or by additional condensation upon existing droplets, the ionic density has doubled when the volume has increased by a factor of eight. (That is because total ion count follows the volume factor, and it would be distributed upon a surface increase of only four.)
Condensation and freezing of water occur under cooling conditions whereby chilled vapor molecules fall below escape velocity from each other and liquid molecules fall below mutual orbital velocity. There is an interesting side effect upon raindrops with increasing electric charges. Electrostatic repulsion of the negative ions diminishes the effects of intermolecular gravity so that vapor molecules remain at escape velocities at the usual dew point and they maintain orbital speeds at the usual freezing point. This confronts our meteorologists with issues concerning supersaturation and supercooled liquid water. Remember, that these ions restrict themselves to the skin of the raindrops until they let go. When a rainstorm has charged up tantamount to producing thunderbolts, a raindrop's outer layer can remain liquid down to temperatures around minus forty degrees Celsius, although ice would have been forming inside as soon as droplet temperatures fall below zero degrees (Updrafts incidental to such storms account for such routine chilling.) Cause and effect gets turned around a lot when experts take up on these matters.
Several characteristics of water brings that substance to the forefront in the natural making of lightning. These charactristics combine with a significant ambient ion density to enable water to host exchanges of atmospheric energy. Water is plentiful, it possesses the highest specific heat of any common substance in our environment, it enters and departs from the atmospheric mixture under common fluctuation of conditions that influence its changes of state, and it involves a significant amount of latent energy.
This is easy when you know that the atmosphere is loaded with negative ions. The default explainers of our world are still bogged down with scratching up electrons or ions as though they represent energy. They are just matter and they come with the house so to speak. Water vapor freshly rejoining the atmosphere undergoes a process of adaptation under appropriate circumstances before it acquires the normal atmospheric ionic density. Electrons rising due to Fair Weather Current tend to nullify the virtual positive electrical charge imposed by fresh vapor, but such emission varies widely according to surface elevation, texture and temperature, etc. Thus, meager electron emissions of a pico amp or so per square meter occur from ocean surfaces, even at high tide, and an unsuspected bounty of electrons flows from high or pointy surfaces. (That would seem to explain the meager lightning at sea compared to that occurring inland.)
Saddled with a vast population of negative ions, our atmosphere spaces them out for stratified equidistant ionic juxtaposition around the globe. Electrical energy is stored within this medium by encroaching upon such equidistance, whereby ions subjected to further crowding would represent a virtual negative charge, and ions afforded additional spacing would represent a virtual positive charge.
We hereby review a scenario demonstrating natural development of high negative voltages. Some 540 Calories of heat energy are invested in the change of state for each liter of water evaporating into the atmosphere. Upon normalization of ionic density for such vapor, much of that latent energy is subject to conversion into storage as electrical energy upon condensation of the vapor as in the formation of rain. This is because the condensation process brings the water molecules and ions closer to each other. Mutual repulsion of the ions resisting increased proximity demands absorption of latent energy for the endothermic process of crowding negative ions together. Thus, heat energy introduced from sunshine becomes electrical energy stored upon surfaces of forming raindrops. (The little things perform as Faraday Cages: ions being confined to outer surface, excluded from inner content.) As raindrops grow, whether by merging with each other or by additional condensation upon existing droplets, the ionic density has doubled when the volume has increased by a factor of eight. (That is because total ion count follows the volume factor, and it would be distributed upon a surface increase of only four.)
Condensation and freezing of water occur under cooling conditions whereby chilled vapor molecules fall below escape velocity from each other and liquid molecules fall below mutual orbital velocity. There is an interesting side effect upon raindrops with increasing electric charges. Electrostatic repulsion of the negative ions diminishes the effects of intermolecular gravity so that vapor molecules remain at escape velocities at the usual dew point and they maintain orbital speeds at the usual freezing point. This confronts our meteorologists with issues concerning supersaturation and supercooled liquid water. Remember, that these ions restrict themselves to the skin of the raindrops until they let go. When a rainstorm has charged up tantamount to producing thunderbolts, a raindrop's outer layer can remain liquid down to temperatures around minus forty degrees Celsius, although ice would have been forming inside as soon as droplet temperatures fall below zero degrees (Updrafts incidental to such storms account for such routine chilling.) Cause and effect gets turned around a lot when experts take up on these matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)