Hot Plasma and Saturn

[CraigS]

Cassini seems to be getting into the interactions between plasma and Saturn's Magnetic field.

Hot Plasma Explosions Inflate Saturn’s Magnetic Field (http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/cassinifeatures/feature20101214/)



Very interesting. At last we are getting some quantitative data about planetary bound plasma, (other than Earth's), and its behaviours.

And one final one (just for Jarvamundo) ..



Chuckle, chuckle .. ;)
Cheers

[xelasnave]

I was reading about this yesterday on sciencedaily and admit it crossed my mind how such may be viewed by the EU folk:D
alex:):):)

[CraigS]

The environment around Saturn is very specific.

The interesting thing for me is that here we have the unique opportunity to gather some real data (because of Cassini's presence), about the behaviours of considerable volumes of both hot and cold, gravity bound plasmas in a big planetary magnetic field.

The comment about plasmas and rotation of pulsars (in the same breath) is quite surprising. I can see the possibility of plasmas having some kind of role to play in the 'glitches' emanating from pulsars … but the rotation ??

We may never be able to keep the other Alex calm about this one !!
:)
Cheers

[CraigS]

Just to add, the complete quote in question should read …



This doesn't imply that the plasma causes any rotation phenomenon .. its that they have now observed that it is possible that it can cause difficulty in measuring any the rotation phenomenon, (where present).

Cheers

[xelasnave]

Does the statement....we can tell that plasma flows and complex current systems can mask the real rotation period of the central body. offend logic?
How can we determine the real rotation if masked and therefore defy observation. I guess "real rotation" is what we expect from our sums.
Anyways everything in the article adds cred to a push universe rather than a EU dont you think Craig :rolleyes:
alex

[CraigS]

Just cause they can't measure it, doesn't mean that there's no 'real' rotation velocity.



I don't know Alex .. DOES IT ???
:)
Cheers

PS: And you reckon I keep getting you mixed up with the other Alex !!… Geez .. I dunno … :shrug: :)

[sjastro]

Alex you have given a great example of the "Dicto Simplicter" fallacy.:D

Regards

Steven

[xelasnave]

I had no idea:lol::lol::lol::thumbsup:
alex:):):)

[xelasnave]

Craig we cant argue with the observations in support of a push universe:lol::lol::lol:

On a serious note I am tempted to look at Thunderbolts as no doubt they will see it as support for EU.... and can imagine there will be a thread upon this exciting observation.

Have a great day:thumbsup:...got to now been invited for a xmas drink with the smartest fella around here which is ironic because he can not read or write but for my money he is exceptionally intelligent and exhibits a totally different approach to problem solving.

alex:):):)

[Jarvamundo]

Darn it... think i deled my post

[Jarvamundo]

did yours del too Craig? Something about Nereid?

[CraigS]

So did I.

Here it is again ..

Ahh Alex (Jarva);

Where have ya been, man ??

It was so long ago, I can't even remember what this one was all about !!

How did ya go with that spectrum/comet issue ?
Find anything out ?

If you'd read up on your Nereid & Physicist posts, I would have thought you'd be rethinking your comments about empiricism and 19th Century science, given that it seems to be the mainstay of present day EU ideas !

Merry Christmas and Happy New year to ya matey … (err 'brother') !!
:)
Cheers

[Jarvamundo]

:fishing: and paying my tax's so we can build another dark matter probe. You? :P


T-ing up a meeting with some chemists over the break... hopefully spark some interest


considering the amount of working *stuff* delivered from 19th century science, nah i'll stick with empiricism.

found a black hole or a worm-hole yet? Or are you still mesmorized by penrose's pre-big bang wmap doodles? I still havent got my hoverboard craig... not happy jan. ;)


right back at ya.. have a good one

cheers

[sjastro]

Craig,

The only inaccuracy in Physicist's otherwise precise commentary in the Thunderbolts forum is the claim that EU takes physics back to 1900.

In reality it is more like 1800. In 1800 before the advent of electrodynamics, the consensus was that everything could be explained by Newtonian physics, much like everything today in the EU sense can be explained by electrical currents, potentials and magnetic fields.

Alex,

Have you ever found an electron? Electrons have never been observed directly in nature or in the laboratory. Should we therefore adopt your standard as for black holes or neutron stars, that electrons are hypothetical entities.

Isn't ironical that for an "empirical" science like EU or PC, the fundamental building block, the electron, has never been directly observed. :shrug:

Gentlemen have a Merry Christmas.

Steven

[CraigS]

Alex;
I hope you don't make use of the Drift-Alfven model to explain hexagons and magnetic field rotation effects around Saturn …

Jeroen Bergmans makes a lot of use of Lagrangian descriptions, Hamiltonian structures and stress tensors for magnetised plasmas in his assumptions before moving forth with his description of the Alfven-Drift model.

All that stuff sounds highly un-empirical and very theoretically based, to me!! (Where did all that stuff come from ?? :shrug: )

Cheers

[Jarvamundo]

all too true Steven... speaking my language brother... the electron is an artifact of bert n co.

Lets keep going back to the pre 1900's descriptions shall we?

I'm glad you seem to appreciate the relevance Steven.

Merry xmas

[Jarvamundo]

hahah man seriously... go read Alfven's history... he and his work on exploding DC power transmission lines are far from theoretical! You do know why the man got the Nobel yeah?...

We're not still building hex's from plaits of mud are we? hehehe

merry xmas.

[sjastro]

Alex,

I'll ignore the play on words

So how you do define a plasma?
If electrons are an "artifact of bert n co", how does one define ionization?
What does a gas lose to become a plasma?

Regards

Steven

[Jarvamundo]

Just about all respect for gravitational influence?

[CraigS]

I wasn't questioning Alfven's mainstream work … just how you guys are likely to interpret it to explain Saturn observations …
… and the fact that most of the explanations involve theoretical modelling of the 'hardest core' and them being based around SR theory.


Cheers
PS:Lets avoid any 'mud-slinging' too, eh ?? :lol: