Astrophysics and Cosmology - Discuss the Universe here

[area51drone]

Agent, check this out..


What's In A Candle Flame?

EU - Suns are giant candles?

[area51drone]

Then, watch this one...



How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work

I know these videos are very simple, but it kind of demonstrates how one might begin to believe in at least parts of the EU theory.

[Agent : Orange]

Agent, check this out..


What's In A Candle Flame?

EU - Suns are giant candles?

I don't understand how this relates to the Sun. You claim the sun is powered by electric currents outside of it? Or that nuclear fusion is not the power source of the Sun? Both of these claims are incorrect. The candle flame is a chemical reaction that occurs in the presence of oxygen to fuel it, and is not in a true plasma state since the ion density is low but is conductive nonetheless. I fail to see how a flame in an electric field is an analogy for the Sun, which is powered by fusion via the strong nuclear force.

[Agent : Orange]

Then, watch this one...



How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work

I know these videos are very simple, but it kind of demonstrates how one might begin to believe in at least parts of the EU theory.

I don't really have any problems with this video, but I fail to see how it connects to the previous one. Are you attributing the Sun's magnetic field to some giant electric current that is flowing through it?

The Sun is not electrically charged. If it were positively charged, it would attract electrons and repel protons, producing a solar wind that is made of entirely positively charged particles. If the Sun had a net negative charge, it would repel electrons, producing a solar wind made of negatively charged particles. The real solar wind is made of both protons and electrons (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/index.html). How do you account for the make up of the solar wind if the Sun is charged? All of these ideas propose alternatives to the standard theory of stellar structure and interiors which make bad predictions and are not held up by observation. 

[Agent : Orange]

Guilty here too.  I wasted so much time on that thread that I try not to look at it anymore.   Falkie dragged me in with the video evidence of the money order I sent him, but that was the last time I think I looked at that thread.    Looking forward to your responses though.  I have a zillion questions, dark matter or otherwise that I'd like to run by you....  and I do realize that it's easy to ask a question and takes time and energy to respond, so I along with onan and Foodlion appreciate your being involved in the conversation.

I have one giant post on the set of observations that lead to dark matter that I'm getting ready to put up all in one gush. But sadly my work tonight went late and it will have to take until tomorrow or later in the weekend. My goal is to set up the foundations that lead to DM, or which require a modification of general relativity, which will be a tough road to travel indeed, based on the success of Einstein's ideas.

[area51drone]

You make good points, quashing any hopes I had of a gigantic circuit amongst the stars.  LOL.   I was kind of thinking in that direction that the sun's plasma helps facilitate an electric current, which is also helped along by the large relativistic moving bodies of the solar system which produce the fields as described in the second video.   But maybe there is something that moves through like electricity but is not based on electrons or protons, and perhaps that is what dark matter is.  If the particles exist in another dimension, we'd never see them.

How can you say that the flame of a candle is not a plasma though?   I thought it was pretty common knowledge that any flame is a form of plasma.




"Flames" is right on this graph from wikipedia.   Look up Flames on wikipedia and it says right there: "Some flames, such as the flame of a burning candle, are hot enough to have ionized gaseous components and can be considered plasma.[2]"

Also, isn't there a collider near the LHC that is is looking for particles that are outside of our dimension?   If you're aware of that study, have you heard if they've succeeded in proving particles do go out of our dimensional reality?

[area51drone]

I have one giant post on the set of observations that lead to dark matter that I'm getting ready to put up all in one gush. But sadly my work tonight went late and it will have to take until tomorrow or later in the weekend. My goal is to set up the foundations that lead to DM, or which require a modification of general relativity, which will be a tough road to travel indeed, based on the success of Einstein's ideas.

Looking forward to it!

[Agent : Orange]

You make good points, quashing any hopes I had of a gigantic circuit amongst the stars.  LOL.   I was kind of thinking in that direction that the sun's plasma helps facilitate an electric current, which is also helped along by the large relativistic moving bodies of the solar system which produce the fields as described in the second video.   

An electric current between the stars is ruled out by observation. All electric currents produce magnetic fields around them, the rule is that if you curl your right hand around a wire, for instance, with your thumb pointed along the direction of the current then your fingers point in the direction the magnetic field is curling around the wire. That's why it deflects compass needles perpendicular to the wire like you show in the second video you posted about special relativity. So if there were giant currents flowing around in circuits between the stars then you would have a magnetic field in the solar system that is completely wrong for what we observe. The structure of the global field of the Sun through the solar system would be completely different. It's goes against all observations and is nonsense. It just can't be.

I'm not saying that electric fields don't play any role in solar physics because they do act to help heat the corona of the Sun. But these are dynamic electric fields and not static ones like the EU might have you believe. Maxwell's third equation tells us that the change in a magnetic field with respect to time generates an electric field, which is where the relativity bit from your second vid comes in again. But this is not the same as saying the Sun has a global charge or that large scale currents are flowing into or out of it. 

But maybe there is something that moves through like electricity but is not based on electrons or protons, and perhaps that is what dark matter is.  If the particles exist in another dimension, we'd never see them.

Your argument to explain away dark matter has now involved it, and other highly speculative topics like extra dimensions, which are not observed. So I would say this is a more convoluted explanation than dark matter on it's own!

Like I say I'm fine if the explanation is that dark matter doesn't exist and the answer is that gravity needs to be modified in some way. But there are more than one line of inquiry that leads to it and this is why some people feel it's inescapable. We need it on large scales and we need it on galaxy scales for everything to work right, so any modification to existing theory has to explain all those observations. Some of these are very subtle, and it's not easy to get the whole web of physics to hang together in a satisfying way without some finesse. Theories like the EU have to do backflips and give convoluted answers to questions that are simple with dark matter and that's the reason why they're not satisfying at all. You could argue this is a parsimonious argument based on some idea of "beauty" or "economy" and you'd partly be right, but it's really just more about sloppy theory that doesn't actually work properly.

How can you say that the flame of a candle is not a plasma though?   I thought it was pretty common knowledge that any flame is a form of plasma.


"Flames" is right on this graph from wikipedia.   Look up Flames on wikipedia and it says right there: "Some flames, such as the flame of a burning candle, are hot enough to have ionized gaseous components and can be considered plasma.[2]"

The very next sentence in that wikipedia article is, "However, this is still debated by experts.[3]".

A flame is made from bits of burning material that get hot enough to glow, which later form the smoke from the flame. Hot and solid materials glow producing the light, and the color of the flame can give you some indication of it's temperature.

In order to make a plasma, you need to kick electrons clean out of the energy levels of atoms, and keep them out. The electrons and positive ions need to be in equilibrium with one another. In order to do this and maintain such a state you need a very high temperature (like 2000 or 3000 K). This isn't the kind of temperature you find in the flame of a candle. So if depends on the kind of flame you're talking about.

I imagine we're talking about a candle's flame like in the video you posted but if you're talking about a torch or cutter flame, then yeah it is a plasma and probably also hot enough to turn the surrounding air into a plasma too!

Also, isn't there a collider near the LHC that is is looking for particles that are outside of our dimension?   If you're aware of that study, have you heard if they've succeeded in proving particles do go out of our dimensional reality?

I'm not familiar with the specific experiment you mean. But there are many experiments that are being done that might be signs that higher dimensions (like in string theory) are at work. I'm assuming that we're talking about extra dimensions in the sense of spatial dimensions. It's necessary to treat time as another dimension in Einstein's theory. So as you can see the definition of "other dimension" by physicists and the popular conception are two different things. Anyway it's not like these particles which can sense any potentially higher dimension would blink into or out of the universe. Along with moving in our familiar three dimensions of up/down, left/right, forward/backward these guys would be able to move in another direction perpendicular to all others. However these dimensions would have to be small, even for subatomic particles, so their influence might have an effect on the particles interactions or how they behave. So there might be signatures that these tiny additional directions are there but you have to look carefully for them in the data and it would be a subtle thing to detect at all. At large scales we would not notice them because the dimensions are small and curled around on themselves, so when you wave your arms around in the air you actually circumnavigate these extra dimensions many times and would not notice them. Or so the thinking goes. Such extra dimensions have never been observed in any experiment and remain highly speculative. Like, more speculative than dark matter.

[Agent : Orange]

You make good points, quashing any hopes I had of a gigantic circuit amongst the stars.  LOL.   

By the way I also have to say that I'm really glad that we can exchange ideas in a free way in this thread. A lot of times on the internet people have a passionate opinion of something or a favorite idea and won't let it go even in the face of opposing evidence. So I'm happy to chat with someone who is so open minded. And I love gabbing about this stuff anyway. I'm trying to be as diplomatic as I can in my responses, so I hope I don't come off as a dick when I post about this stuff. It's sometimes too easy for me to be terse.

Also, maybe we should get the name of this thread changed. It's not really about the LUX experiment anymore and has led to some very interesting places.

[onan]

By the way I also have to say that I'm really glad that we can exchange ideas in a free way in this thread. A lot of times on the internet people have a passionate opinion of something or a favorite idea and won't let it go even in the face of opposing evidence. So I'm happy to chat with someone who is so open minded. And I love gabbing about this stuff anyway

I quite enjoy this thread... and as much as I am embarrassed to tell anyone... I watched the videos that you posted by Feynman... too much for me.

[Agent : Orange]

I quite enjoy this thread... and as much as I am embarrassed to tell anyone... I watched the videos that you posted by Feynman... too much for me.

Nothing to be embarrassed about there, Feynman is awesome all around.


http://youtu.be/HKTSaezB4p8

[onan]

Nothing to be embarrassed about there, Feynman is awesome all around.


http://youtu.be/HKTSaezB4p8

New drink... Agent : Orange Juice.

[Agent : Orange]

New drink... Agent : Orange Juice.

Win, but It's gotta be a bitter.

[area51drone]

Nothing to be embarrassed about there, Feynman is awesome all around.

Surely you're joking is a masterpiece.  If you haven't read that onan, make sure you do. 

Don't worry Agent, you're not coming off as a dick at all.   I sometimes forget stuff, which can easily be explained by things I already knew - like the right hand rule and the fact that we have probably done these measurements in space.  But, one thing is certain, I have a million more questions for you.   I feel bad for you that you are compelled to respond to me, but as a person who thirsts for knowledge, I'm glad you're here to answer.  If you are ever in Western Washington dude, I'm buying you dinner.

[area51drone]

So if there were giant currents flowing around in circuits between the stars then you would have a magnetic field in the solar system that is completely wrong for what we observe.

Okay.  Maybe it's flowing around our solar system, and the stars and their systems are just knots in the tree.    Didn't IBEX show there is a magnetic field outside the heliosphere?   What is causing this magnetic field?   http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ibex/news/ribbon-explained.html#.Un8-ESfCmZI

Your argument to explain away dark matter has now involved it, and other highly speculative topics like extra dimensions, which are not observed. So I would say this is a more convoluted explanation than dark matter on it's own!

Yes, I know.   I just like to throw ideas into the wind and see if they go anywhere.   

The very next sentence in that wikipedia article is, "However, this is still debated by experts.[3]".

Hey man, I have to back up my arguments carefully!  LOL  I don't think it really matters if a candle flame is plasma or not, but it is interesting to think about how something so simple as a candle flame can be so complex and still debated on by experts.   Surely though, the sun has plamsa surrounding it, and that was the basis of what I was talking about previously.  I just thought it was an interesting side note since you mentioned the candle flame not being a plasma.   I had heard before that it was considered a plasma, so you can't blame me for trying.

I'm not familiar with the specific experiment you mean.

It's called CMS.     I found where I had heard about it from... goto 22:52 and watch from there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=N-KIUqvujSI#t=1372

So there might be signatures that these tiny additional directions are there but you have to look carefully for them in the data and it would be a subtle thing to detect at all. At large scales we would not notice them because the dimensions are small and curled around on themselves, so when you wave your arms around in the air you actually circumnavigate these extra dimensions many times and would not notice them. Or so the thinking goes. Such extra dimensions have never been observed in any experiment and remain highly speculative. Like, more speculative than dark matter.

Yes, that's what the video above states, pretty much, but it does say particles from a collision would escape into the extra dimensions.   I was just curious if you had heard if they were successful.  Nothing in the wikipedia article about it says they have been.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Muon_Solenoid

[Agent : Orange]

Okay.  Maybe it's flowing around our solar system, and the stars and their systems are just knots in the tree.    Didn't IBEX show there is a magnetic field outside the heliosphere?   What is causing this magnetic field?   http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ibex/news/ribbon-explained.html#.Un8-ESfCmZI
Yes, I know.   I just like to throw ideas into the wind and see if they go anywhere.   

There is an interstellar magnetic field, and material between the stars called the interstellar medium (ISM), and there are astronomers who devote their careers to studying it. Magnetic fields are attached to plasmas very closely ("frozen in"), as they are locked into the field structure and there is a significant amount of feedback between them. That's why you'll notice the IBEX stuff talks about neutral particle density because of course plasmas are electrically neutral. So the galactic magnetic field is related to the plasma in the ISM. But the origin of the galactic field is still very mysterious and not well understood at all from what I know. Anyway the standard picture is that the Sun's wind basically blows a little bubble in this ISM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliosphere) and that's where our solar system lives. Note again that this does not involve any large currents, if the IBEX folks were talking about a current then it would study charged particle flow. Magnetic fields on large scales like this are extremely important in astronomy but the current idea just doesn't fit with what's observed, and it will be tough to make it fit.

Hey man, I have to back up my arguments carefully!  LOL  I don't think it really matters if a candle flame is plasma or not, but it is interesting to think about how something so simple as a candle flame can be so complex and still debated on by experts.   Surely though, the sun has plamsa surrounding it, and that was the basis of what I was talking about previously.  I just thought it was an interesting side note since you mentioned the candle flame not being a plasma.   I had heard before that it was considered a plasma, so you can't blame me for trying.

Hey no harm no foul. The plasma thing is still a debate only due to definitions, like arguing for or against Pluto as a planet. The chemistry and physics of the reaction in candle flames and how that works is understood.

It's called CMS.     I found where I had heard about it from... goto 22:52 and watch from there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=N-KIUqvujSI#t=1372

Yes, that's what the video above states, pretty much, but it does say particles from a collision would escape into the extra dimensions.   I was just curious if you had heard if they were successful.  Nothing in the wikipedia article about it says they have been.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Muon_Solenoid

I haven't yet had a chance to watch the video but I'm interested and will come back to it.

Anyway this all depends on how big the extra dimensions are, of course. The usual take is that they are "compactified" or curled up and very small. If they are large enough that a particle could fit into them then it does change things. We have only been able to constrain the size of extra dimensions down to something like a millimeter (or about 0.04 inches in the ugliest system of units ever) through direct experiments using extremely sensitive instruments that are basically torsion balances to test for deviations of newton's laws. But that's still very large in terms of particle physics.

One interesting cosmology that is based on string theory is called Braneworld gravity has our universe as a low dimensional structure in a higher dimensional space, and that in the big picture gravity is actually the same strength as all the other forces, but we see gravity as weak because some of it leaks out into these higher dimensions. Then it's also neat that not only can they answer the question of why the gravitational force is so weak compared to the other forces but they can also make other predictions about the universe so that in principle we can go out and see if their predictions are true. Now that is very speculative but has gotten a bit of attention in the media lately. Here's an interesting article on it that I just found (http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/december-2005january-2006/the-search-for-extra-dimensions). Thought I'd throw it out there since you brought up extra dimensions.

Edited to add: The article I linked to gives the upper limit on the size of extra dimensions as more like 1/10 of a millimeter, so I was off by a whole order of magnitude

[area51drone]

Sorry for my lack of reply.  I want to read what you say when I am at my clearest of mind and I've been ultra busy the last couple days...   

[Agent : Orange]

Sorry for my lack of reply.  I want to read what you say when I am at my clearest of mind and I've been ultra busy the last couple days...

Take your time!

[area51drone]

One interesting cosmology that is based on string theory is called Braneworld gravity has our universe as a low dimensional structure in a higher dimensional space, and that in the big picture gravity is actually the same strength as all the other forces, but we see gravity as weak because some of it leaks out into these higher dimensions. Then it's also neat that not only can they answer the question of why the gravitational force is so weak compared to the other forces but they can also make other predictions about the universe so that in principle we can go out and see if their predictions are true. Now that is very speculative but has gotten a bit of attention in the media lately. Here's an interesting article on it that I just found (http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/december-2005january-2006/the-search-for-extra-dimensions). Thought I'd throw it out there since you brought up extra dimensions.

Edited to add: The article I linked to gives the upper limit on the size of extra dimensions as more like 1/10 of a millimeter, so I was off by a whole order of magnitude

Okay, again sorry it took so long for me to sit down and read this through.     Great stuff as always.  So that's very interesting that extra dimensions could be that big - you would think they would be detectable all the time if in reality that they expanded out that much on even an occasional basis - I could imagine a quantum vacuum that would sell better than any Dyson! 

I'm watching this talk from Sean Carroll ( youtube .. RwdY7Eqyguo ) and it prompted me to dig into this message and then ask you some more stuff.  Okay here it goes.

So after listening to the first 20 minutes of the talk, I am immediately bothered by the fact that physicists talk about particles at all.  It seems to me that we could discovering particles until the sun explodes.   If everything is just a type of wave in a field, then what's to say that there can't be millions, trillions or infinite amount of different frequencies/amplitudes that produce particles?   Is it that possibly in our reality we are only seeing the ones we have seen so far (and may never see more) because in our dimenional reality only those particular waveforms/frequencies/amplitudes manifest as particles - and in other dimensions other waves manifest other particles?  That would make more sense to me that gravity just happens to be this way, instead of "leaking out" of another dimension. 

I have to wrap my brain around this concept, it is something I have never thought about and I suppose never really introduced to until just recently when I saw that documentary on the higgs field.

It seems to me that ISM's magnetic field cause and dark matter and dark energy are just the undetectable energies in various fields.. waveforms that never manifest themselves as anything, yet still have a net effect.    Does that argument make any sense?

I'll keep watching this lecture, it's amazing.  I highly recommend you watch it too onan!

[area51drone]

Finishing up the talk now, I wish I had watched this years ago if it had been available.  There is so much I don't know of the basics, it's staggering, and this talk just kind of wraps it all up in a neat little bow.  Of course there is still much I don't know.    (Yes, I admit, I am a fool in multiple ways)  I still am not sure what to think about one of your first posts..  I'll go back to it now.

If this announcement turns out to be nothing and fizzles, that would be disppointing. If it's the announcement of non-detection of the dark matter particle below 10 GeV, going against the recent CoGeNT and DAMA results then people will start looking to modified gravity schemes. Which all have their own problems.

I'm hoping it's a particle outside of the standard model, which might point to supersymmetry. That would be really interesting especially with the constraints on it from the Higgs mass.

So the Higgs boson particle is at 126 GeV, and a proton particle is 0.938 GeV, which are just high levels of energy in their respective fields.   So are you saying that you think there is a dark matter field, and that the particle should manifest itself somewhere at an energy level below 10 GeV?   What is the significance of 10 GeV in this statement?   What are the constraints on it, and by "from the Higgs mass" are you talking about the theories of how the energy level of the "dark matter field" would interact with the Higgs field?

I'm going to look for some more from this Sean Carroll guy, I have a lot to learn.  I fear that my dismissing "dark matter" is more due to the fact that it is put out there to non quantum physicists and 100 level physics college guys like me as if it is something completely different.  Shit, everything is completely different to me now.  This guy rocked my world.   How come you didn't point me to something like this earlier Agent?  I'm blaming you.

I'm being too nice to myself,  I'm a fucking idiot.   And Agent, I'm being too nice to you too.  Fuck you for not sending me links to watch and read.   

I still think that the redshift problem is a problem though!   :

[area51drone]

Here's something that should be interesting..  Art interviews Sean Carroll.


Our Universe with Sean Carroll

[Agent : Orange]

Noooooooo! I spent 45 mins drafting up a big reply to you and accidentally closed the wrong browser window before I could send it. Gah!!
So now I've got to get ready for work... Goddammit :\

Fuck you for not sending me links to watch and read.   

Then read this link to Sean Carroll's blog! http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/
His second post is all about dark matter and the LUX experiment so he can probably answer better than me anyway.
Also, this guy writes ridiculously good and interesting posts and my explanation would be a dim reflection of this anyway so let me say you will find this interesting:
"The whole story on dark matter"
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2012/04/19/the-whole-story-on-dark-matter/
A few years out of date but not too much has changed since then, except for the Abell520 cluster which no longer seems to pose a problem:
http://scitechdaily.com/new-observation-of-dark-matter-in-abell-520/

I still think that the redshift problem is a problem though!   :

Well let's get to that then. What is your problem with it? It's definitely the least controversial topic we've discussed here!!

[area51drone]

I'll have to read this stuff when I have time (Wednesday is always my busiest) but I just wanted to make a quick note that I'm listening to all of the old Sean Carroll interviews and Art interviewed him first twice - I just got to the first SC interview by GN and holy shit, it is an instant change.  The interviewee stays just as sharp but the questions are absolute shit.   GN's questions are disjointed and although some of them are ok they are such separate thoughts from each other they come out poorly.   If feels like GN has a list of questions that he just randomly asks from.  Art takes you on a journey, asking questions that follow each other.    This is a perfect example of why Art is so amazing at what he does.  BTW, my world is still rocked.  I keep questioning everything I know now that I think about everything in terms of a bunch of fields interacting together.   It is a very hard concept to grasp that these fields create you, me, the desks and computers in front of us, etc.  This means it is all truly connected, doesn't it?   What happens when we purposefully ripple the field?  Is that all radio waves are - ripples in the field that we experience?   And I have to consider extremes like WTF is a black hole in this sense.   And how and why are all the fields interacting with each other.   This sucks.

[onan]

I'll have to read this stuff when I have time (Wednesday is always my busiest) but I just wanted to make a quick note that I'm listening to all of the old Sean Carroll interviews and Art interviewed him first twice -

The Sean Carroll interviews are fucking awesome. Better than Kaku by a mile. I listen to them often.

[area51drone]

The only thing I don't like about Sean is he sounds exactly like my tax accountant.   Onan, have you watched that lecture I wrote about above?

[onan]

The only thing I don't like about Sean is he sounds exactly like my tax accountant.   Onan, have you watched that lecture I wrote about above?

not yet, I have quite a bit of work to do... I am hoping for some free time this weekend.

[area51drone]

not yet, I have quite a bit of work to do... I am hoping for some free time this weekend.

I hear you.. this is my busy season so I am pressed for time but I fortunately get do to mindless work in front of a computer for hours on end.  Hopefully it has some stuff in the talk that you don't already know.    I either wasn't aware of some of this stuff or chose to gloss over it, and with this talk something clicked in my brain.   Anyway, its very exciting to me...

[Agent : Orange]

area51, watch this when you have some free time and think about what is discussed here. What we call particles are neither particles nor waves but some combination of both. Instead of another big wall of text from me, let Dr. Feynman explain it.
The relevant part starts at 3:35 to jump right in if you're impatient, but it's all interesting. If you're now interested in this stuff, this will blow your mind man!


http://youtu.be/hUJfjRoxCbk

[area51drone]

I'll try to watch it later today while I'm working.    Thanks for posting it.   I just got home from my second job a bit ago, I'm really tired, but I will also try to get back to you on some of the other comments.   I am really bummed that you lost your 45 minute post, I really look forward to reading your stuff.

[Agent : Orange]

I'll try to watch it later today while I'm working.    Thanks for posting it.   I just got home from my second job a bit ago, I'm really tired, but I will also try to get back to you on some of the other comments.   I am really bummed that you lost your 45 minute post, I really look forward to reading your stuff.

That's the second or third time I lost a lot of text, and each time it's damn irritating!