Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
Huh ?
I could've sworn I saw a reply from Alex here before I signed off last night!?? I was tired, so I thought I might tackle it this morning.
(Maybe I was already asleep ?)
Something about current densities, synchrotron radiation, lightbulbs, currents going through walls and why they don't glow like a lightbulb … and science's inability to detect such low current densities. A bit of a hornet's nest this one, as any reasonable current through space, having any gas present will produce spectra, regardless of the density. This should be detectable, particularly as if they can detect nanoTesla magnetic fields, the currents associated with these should also be either; calculable or directly detectable.
Need to consider the scales involved in this statement, also.
Perhaps this was why the post was deleted ? Good idea to think this one through, before proceeding. Maybe Peratt has made statements about this ?
I know you have,Carl .. multiple times … 
What I was going to ask was if the current density is so small, how can it generate sufficient torque to rotate galaxies (induced from the outside) ?
He also gave a bunch of references/publications by Lerner, Peratt etc. I was actually going to follow up and have a read of some of them.
He pointed out that I was indeed incorrect .. Alven is dead .. so how could he publish ? (I meant to type 'Lerner' in my post below .. but Alven came out .. I think I need a vacation !)
Oh well .. maybe we'll get another visit sometime later.
Cheers |
Alex up to his tricks again...probably deleted them so that Steven or I couldn't get to read them and explain why it doesn't add up. The only lightbulb that Alex has is the broken one sitting above his head
In any case, what has lightbulbs and currents traveling through walls got anything to do with astrophysics
More like a bit of a furphy.
Current densities unable to be detected by science...they can detect the charge polarity on individual molecules so a current density would have to be almost non existent to not be detected using modern equipment.
Peratt's models deal with large current densities, or large current flows and charge separation, at least. An undetectable current density would mean bugger all flow as the density is proportional to the flow, which means stuff all (if any) magnetic field. You can bet Alex will use this to explain the low intensities of the galactic EM fields. Problem is that won't cut the mustard because such a low current density won't support the Birkeland currents needed to make the spiral arms (or any of their other claims) and keep the galaxies rotating as the EU crowd proclaim. As a matter of fact, you won't get any current at all...at such low energies, the electrons would barely be able to undergo ionisation from the atoms the orbited. It'd be like tickling them with a feather!!!
I wouldn't bother with his references...it's just a rehash of all the old tripe from Lerner and Peratt (at least Peratt has the qualifications to be a genuine research plasma physicist, Lerner hasn't). Given where these references are published they bear no relevance on astrophysics to begin with, otherwise they'd be published in the appropriate journals and studied by the faculty concerned.
He is right about Alfven being dead, though (Geez, that's a first!!!). 1995 I believe.