Big Bang Busted in Science Classes for High Schools

In message , Robert McCurdy
writes
Sun's massive magnetic field that reaches well
beyond the orbit of Pluto!

The Sun has a paltry magnetic field, are you thinking of the Solar Wind?

If the fields of Earth and Jupiter were both approximately represented
by bar magnets at the planet's centre, then Jupiter's magnet
would be about 20,000 times stronger.


Its strength is irrelevant, because the Sun's field is defined by the
heliopause, which is somewhere beyond the orbit of Pluto - no probe has
yet got that far. I think Bill's right on this one.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.631 / Virus Database: 404 - Release Date: 17/03/2004


That's well out of date. Database 412 was released on 26/03/2004 and I
must try and get a newer one.
--
Save the Hubble Space Telescope!
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

"nightbat" wrote...
in message ...

nightbat wrote

Bill Sheppard wrote:

From Painius:

i sometimes find it difficult to envision
the strong nuclear force as being
ultimately accountable for the Sun's
massive magnetic field that reaches well beyond the orbit of Pluto!

There are certainly other mechanisms that generate magnetism, such as
the geo-dynamo within the Earth. An on the sun, those great looping
prominences are clearly spinning 'flux tubes' generated deep within the
sun. With the sun so robust magnetically, it's not surprizing its field
should reach 'way out thar, i would think.
Anything that'll impart a spin component to a spatial flow
will produce magnetism, not just the strong force within atomic nuclei.
oc

nightbat

Hello oc and Painius, thought you might like this link about
reference to renormalization group flow, spin, quantum class magnetism,
and universality classes.

See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization_group

Hope this helps in your discussion.


the nightbat

That stuff is *way* over my head, nightbat. Are you able to sort of
translate it? I have no idea what it all means.

And Bill, in my imagination, i do not see the strong force as the "cause"
of magnetism. While other things may cause magnetism, i see the
strong nuclear force as the "source" of magnetic force. The difference
is like the source of a river, which is quite different from what causes
the river to flow.

And i have a problem with gravity also being sourced by the strong
force in addition to magnetism...

You said...

Yet what is magnetism if not the spatial inflow into the _poles_ of the
proton into the seat of the strong nuclear force within? Seems sorta
like a no brainer. Magnetism's 'sign', i.e., its 'N' and 'S' polarity, is
determined by spin direction of the inflow.

and then you went on to say...

'Local' gravity, the kind we're familiar with, is the collective 'influence
at a distance' of the the strong force, minus the spin component of
magnetism. Thus gravity is monopolar.

I cannot see this because i do not understand how both gravity and
magnetism can be sourced from the same nuclear force without there
being some noticeable effect. Magnetism appears to be unaffected by
gravity and vice versa. You are saying that when there is no spin
component, you have local gravity. And when a spin component is
introduced, then you have *both* gravity and magnetism sourced by
the same nuclear force... the strong force. Then why don't they affect
each other dramatically on a macro-level?

This is one reason why i can more easily imagine gravity as being
sourced by the Weak Nuclear Force.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Delight in yourself...
for you are the stuff of stars!

Paine Ellsworth

"Robert McCurdy" wrote...
in message ...

Painius wrote...

Sun's massive magnetic field that reaches well
beyond the orbit of Pluto!

The Sun has a paltry magnetic field, are you thinking of the Solar Wind?

'Lo Robert --

No, i'm thinking of the Sun's magnetic field, which as i said reaches
out beyond the orbit of Pluto. It may be paltry as compared with
that of a larger star or perhaps a black hole, yet it is larger by far
than any planet's magnetic field.

Do you have a reference source for your view?

If the fields of Earth and Jupiter were both approximately represented by bar magnets at the planet's centre, then Jupiter's
magnet
would be about 20,000 times stronger.

The bright regions identify the regions where magnetic field lines from Jupiter are tangent with Io's surface, creating a 500,000
volt electric circuit that energize the molecules.
When Io reaches certain positions, an electric current of 5 million amps may flow between Jupiter's ionosphere and Io, which would
produce the tremendous radio bursts.

Just a few quotes above - scary stuff - no?


Regards Robert

As i do not believe in "magnetic lines of force" or "field lines" as you
call them (i believe in the magnetic field being a smooth force field),
the above does not seem scary to me. Could it be because the
voltage you describe in the quote is that of "static electricity?" As
you may know, hundreds of thousands of volts of static electricity
will give you an uncomfortable *zap*, but is only dangerous if it
occurs in a flammable environment.

And yet this is still a major concern for future exploration missions
to the outer planets!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Delight in yourself...
for you are the stuff of stars!

Paine Ellsworth

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message...
...

IIRC, some while back you questioned why some materials are magnetic and
others not. Under the spinning flow model, apparently the atomic
structure of most matter is 'transparent' to the spin component,
rendering it nonmagnetic, while magnetic material is 'opaque' to the
spin component. Zinni'll have a field day with that oneg if he hasn't
already used his 'Plonker'.
oc

Not quite sure what you mean by "transparent" and "opaque" here,
Bill, but i've always felt that some atoms are just more easily spun
than others. And some are very resistant to any spin and "lining up"
that would manifest itself as magnetism on the larger scale.

As for Zinni, John has never particularly struck me as much of a
wussie. He'll argue the mainstream until he's blue in the face, and i
respect his healthy skepticism. But he doesn't strike me as being so
afraid of a poster as to plonk him or her. The only thing people like
John are afraid of is missing something. They may ignor a poster, or
at the very least ignor responding to him, but plonk him? probably
not.

--
Sittin' on the porch stair holdin' your love,
A wonderin' how lucky you are,
A huggin' anda kissin' anda lookin' up above--
There went a Shootin' Star!

Indelibly yours,
Painius

I did try to find out.
I knew Jupiter has a massive magnetic field and dangerous radiation fields many times more lethal than our own Van Allen belts. But
the Internet only provided conflicting values.
Most of the suns energy is in other areas. The strength of Jupiter's radio output was a complete surprise when it was first
discovered. Because an object can get closer to the origin (inverse square law and all) I considered Jupiter's output stronger to
the suns in so far as where one could be in relation to the centre of it all.

Jupiter's radiation can kill an errant astronaut within a few minutes of exposure.


Regards Robert

"Painius" wrote in message ...
"Robert McCurdy" wrote...
in message ...

Painius wrote...

Sun's massive magnetic field that reaches well
beyond the orbit of Pluto!

The Sun has a paltry magnetic field, are you thinking of the Solar Wind?

'Lo Robert --

No, i'm thinking of the Sun's magnetic field, which as i said reaches
out beyond the orbit of Pluto. It may be paltry as compared with
that of a larger star or perhaps a black hole, yet it is larger by far
than any planet's magnetic field.

Do you have a reference source for your view?

If the fields of Earth and Jupiter were both approximately represented by bar magnets at the planet's centre, then Jupiter's
magnet
would be about 20,000 times stronger.

The bright regions identify the regions where magnetic field lines from Jupiter are tangent with Io's surface, creating a
500,000
volt electric circuit that energize the molecules.
When Io reaches certain positions, an electric current of 5 million amps may flow between Jupiter's ionosphere and Io, which
would
produce the tremendous radio bursts.

Just a few quotes above - scary stuff - no?


Regards Robert

As i do not believe in "magnetic lines of force" or "field lines" as you
call them (i believe in the magnetic field being a smooth force field),
the above does not seem scary to me. Could it be because the
voltage you describe in the quote is that of "static electricity?" As
you may know, hundreds of thousands of volts of static electricity
will give you an uncomfortable *zap*, but is only dangerous if it
occurs in a flammable environment.

And yet this is still a major concern for future exploration missions
to the outer planets!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Delight in yourself...
for you are the stuff of stars!

Paine Ellsworth




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.655 / Virus Database: 420 - Release Date: 08/04/2004

"Robert McCurdy" wrote...
in message ...

I did try to find out.
I knew Jupiter has a massive magnetic field and dangerous radiation fields many times more lethal than our own Van Allen belts.
But
the Internet only provided conflicting values.
Most of the suns energy is in other areas. The strength of Jupiter's radio output was a complete surprise when it was first
discovered. Because an object can get closer to the origin (inverse square law and all) I considered Jupiter's output stronger to
the suns in so far as where one could be in relation to the centre of it all.

Jupiter's radiation can kill an errant astronaut within a few minutes of exposure.


Regards Robert

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.655 / Virus Database: 420 - Release Date: 08/04/2004

Okay, the reality is that the Sun's magnetic field is *related* to the solar
wind in that the solar wind *carries* the magnetic field into interplanetary
space. Here are a couple of interesting links, interesting for several
reasons, and these will explain current thinking about the Sun's field...

http://pluto.space.swri.edu/IMAGE/glossary/IMF.html

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...rrentsheet.htm

The "current sheet" is something i find extremely fascinating!

--
Light without purpose is
World without Life...
Life without purpose is
World without Light.

Indelibly yours,
Painius

Painius wrote:

Not quite sure what you mean by "transparent" and "opaque" here,
Bill, but i've always felt that some atoms are just more easily spun
than others. And some are very resistant to any spin and "lining up"
that would manifest itself as magnetism on the larger scale.

It's not the spin of atoms themselves that produces magnetism, but
that of their electrons. Each element has a distinctive configuration
of electrons (which also produces the spectral lines that make its
'signature') so for each one the way the spins 'add up' or interefere
is different. The particular arrangement of electrons in such
elements as iron, cobalt, and nickel, in which the outermost ones
have unpaired spins allowing large-scale interaction between the
atoms, gives them the characteristics that we call ferromagnetism.

--
Odysseus

From Painius:

..i have a problem with gravity also being sourced by the strong force
in addition to magnetism...

Well Paine, once you can comfortably visualize both gravity and
magnetism as being flows of the spatial medium into mass, what is the
ultimate destination of the flow? Is it not into the seat of what is
called the 'strong force'? The term "force" as used here is a psuedoism
in the same sense as 'centrifugal force'. The only true force involved
is what Wolter called the 'supra-cosmic overpressure'(SCO) driving the
flow. The SCO is the true source, driving into the flow sump, or drain,
the seat of the 'strong force'. Thus gravity and magnetism are not
"attractions" but pressure-driven flows.
Odysseus mentioned electron spin as 'causing magnetism'.
While electron spin aligns equatorially to the proton's polar axis, it
does not "source" or "cause" magnetism, as in the old adage "correlation
does not prove causation".

Then why don't they (gravity and
magnetism) affect each other
dramatically on a macro-level?

What about a maglev train?

This is one reason why i can more easily imagine gravity as being
sourced by the
Weak Nuclear Force.

Well, since the weak force operates in the subnuclear domain and does
not participate in spatial flows 'out here', perhaps it could be
regarded as a subset of the "strong force".
But then, if space is pure void and 'nothing', none of the
above applies.

BTW, i wasn't insinuating Zinni is a wuss. He had complained of being
bored by reading this stuff, so in suggesting he use his plonker, i was
trying to spare him the discomfort of being bored. oc

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message...
...

From Painius:

...i have a problem with gravity also being
sourced by the strong force in addition to
magnetism...

Well Paine, once you can comfortably visualize both gravity and
magnetism as being flows of the spatial medium into mass, what is the
ultimate destination of the flow? Is it not into the seat of what is
called the 'strong force'?

Yes, this is what i'm challenging. I say that gravity and magnetism
are isolated enough in the macro level to be sourced separately.

The term "force" as used here is a psuedoism
in the same sense as 'centrifugal force'. The only true force involved
is what Wolter called the 'supra-cosmic overpressure'(SCO) driving the
flow. The SCO is the true source, driving into the flow sump, or drain,
the seat of the 'strong force'. Thus gravity and magnetism are not
"attractions" but pressure-driven flows.

Truthfully, this SCO goes well beyond my ken. Even if Wolter is
correct, gravity and magnetism would interact more, would, say,
behave in the same manner as electricity and magnetism, if they
were both sourced by the strong nuclear effect.

Odysseus mentioned electron spin as 'causing magnetism'.
While electron spin aligns equatorially to the proton's polar axis, it
does not "source" or "cause" magnetism, as in the old adage "correlation
does not prove causation".

And yet there is a strong enough correlation to give a lot of weight
to what Odysseus says. I agree that electron spin is a factor in
magnetism. And he mentions "ferromagnetism." This indicates that
there is more than one form of magnetism, and that there may be
several ways that electron/nucleus spins may affect the macro-level
force.

It may even be possible that, say, diamagnetism is sourced by the
WNF.

Then why don't they (gravity and
magnetism) affect each other
dramatically on a macro-level?

What about a maglev train?

Naahhht! This is little more amazing than an airplane, Bill. The
Japanese use superconductivity which adds to the fascination,
and the US is cautiously looking into room-temp superconductive
models, but in the end, it's aerodynamics helped by massive
magnetic attractions and repulsions that provide the antigravity
effect. It's the same thing with the Dutch frogs, and probably so
even with the controversial "anti-gravity machine" of Dr. Eugene
Podkletnov.

Bottom line is that none of this indicates an interaction between
magnetism and gravity. At least not the kind we see between
magnetism and electricity, where you "can't have one without the
other."

Gravity and magnetism are isolated and appear to be sourced
by isolated forces or "effects."

This is one reason why i can more easily
imagine gravity as being sourced by the
Weak Nuclear Force.

Well, since the weak force operates in the subnuclear domain and does
not participate in spatial flows 'out here', perhaps it could be
regarded as a subset of the "strong force".

Good possibility of this, yes, however, we apparently disagree in
the same manner as you disagree with the mainstream...

Mainstream: Neither the SNF nor the WNF have any effect
beyond the boundaries of the nucleus.

Bill and Wolter: The SNF *does* have an effect beyond the
nucleus that manifests itself in the macro realm as magnetism
*and* as gravity. The WNF has *no* effect beyond the nucleus.

Paine: Both the SNF *and* the WNF have an effect beyond
the confines of the nucleus. The SNF manifests itself as
magnetism, and the WNF, additively with the WNF's of other
atoms, "reaches out" and appears to us as...

gravity.

But then, if space is pure void and 'nothing', none of the
above applies.

BTW, i wasn't insinuating Zinni is a wuss. He had complained of being
bored by reading this stuff, so in suggesting he use his plonker, i was
trying to spare him the discomfort of being bored. oc

He was just tryin' to **** you off, you ol' coot!

At least i haven't seen him yawn like a baboon, yet. g

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Fire... fire in the sky,
'Round we dance till dawn is nigh,
Fire... fire in the sky,
Death is so surreal!

Fire... fire in the sky,
Lovers laugh and lovers cry,
Fire... fire in the sky,
Life is how you feel!

Indelibly yours,
Painius

"Odysseus" wrote...
in message ...

Painius wrote:

Not quite sure what you mean by "transparent" and "opaque" here,
Bill, but i've always felt that some atoms are just more easily spun
than others. And some are very resistant to any spin and "lining up"
that would manifest itself as magnetism on the larger scale.

It's not the spin of atoms themselves that produces magnetism, but
that of their electrons. Each element has a distinctive configuration
of electrons (which also produces the spectral lines that make its
'signature') so for each one the way the spins 'add up' or interefere
is different. The particular arrangement of electrons in such
elements as iron, cobalt, and nickel, in which the outermost ones
have unpaired spins allowing large-scale interaction between the
atoms, gives them the characteristics that we call ferromagnetism.

--
Odysseus

'Lo O. --

The first part of your first statement is, of course, controversial in this
discussion. However, i respect your skepticism and agree that
electron spin plays a major role in magnetism. Since science is still
only scratching the surface of quantum magnetism, gravity, etc.,
hopefully you will accept that, at this point, almost anything is still
possible?

Science presently teaches that there are four fundamental or universal
"forces" in nature. In order of strongest to weakest they are...

Strong Nuclear Force = 1
Electromagnetism = 0.001
Weak Nuclear Force = 0.0000000000000001
Gravity = 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001

....and the figures represent *calculated* relative strengths.

("calculated" as opposed to "measured")

What if Bill is right? Suppose there is really only *one* universal
force, and that the above "forces" are only manifestations or "effects"
of this one universal force? This might explain why our greatest minds
have yet to unify these so-called forces? Maybe the one universal
force is something we haven't yet observed?

Is it less than logical to formulate such an hypothesis?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Fire... fire in the sky,
'Round we dance till dawn is nigh,
Fire... fire in the sky,
Death is so surreal!

Fire... fire in the sky,
Lovers laugh and lovers cry,
Fire... fire in the sky,
Life is how you feel!

Indelibly yours,
Painius