Gravitational Expulsion Of Plasma - Antigravity?

Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
A quote from your link



Plasma is the fourth state of matter.
It can be created by sufficiently energetic particles colliding with the residual gas in an evacuated chamber or in the case you mention gas being generated in the chamber by atoms and ions being (thermally)stripped off the solid parts. Specially fabricated electrodes facilitate this. Thorium is a common doping element for this purpose.
But then there is not a perfect vacuum in the chamber.
Of course electrons will come off first as they are much lighter and so require less thermal energy to achieve the necessary kinetic energy to leave the solid.
Ok, but the crucial information is given right at the beginning:
"A vacuum arc can arise when the surfaces of metal electrodes in contact with a good vacuum begin to emit electrons either through heating (thermionic emission) or in an electric field that is sufficient to cause field electron emission."

Well, either this or I don't know - magic?
 
Apr 2015
1,081
247
Somerset, England
Yes, as I said, thes equence of events is

In a vacuum solid is heated

The evaporated material enters the vacuum, whcih can no longer justifiably be called a vacuum, only a partial vacuum.

At some point there is enough ion density to commence a glowing discharge.

So this discharge never occurs in an actual vacuum and the term vacuum plasma is a misnomer.

Nature has a way of emitting plasma into a vacuum. The Sun does it all the time with alpha particle emission.

And escaping the Sun's gravity is a much more formidable task, but the thermal energy of a plasma ejection jet is up to that job, without any hidden magic Physics.

Conventional Science handles this very well.

Oh and by the way, please check the link I added to my previous post, while you were responding.

Sorry about that crossover.
 
Oct 2017
598
306
Glasgow
We should remind ourselves that stars are giant balls of plasma. The closest one to us, the sun, has been heavily studied. Stars maintain their shape because of an equilibrium between the gravitational force and the gas + radiation pressure. We know a lot about the behaviour of plasmas because of solar experiments (as well as lab experiments).

Plasmas are heavily influenced by electromagnetic fields, but often the electromagnetic fields are weak relative to other ones, like gravity. In most systems with a plasma, the overall shape and behaviour of the fluid is governed by gravity and the electromagnetic fields act to perturb the system and give rise to local phenomena. For example, in the sun, the overall shape is governed entirely by gravity, gas pressure and radiation pressure, but there are local structures like solar arcades, sunspots and flares, all of which are phenomena arising from electromagnetic fields perturbing the local environment. The exception to this is the solar wind, which can be considered to be a very, very low density plasma (probably just best described as a stream of charged particles), whose consequential motion is influenced heavily by the Earth's magnetosphere as well as its gravity well. The consequence of that is the aurora.
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
Of course, that there won't be never a perfect vacuum in the plasma chamber. Perfect vacuum is like a virgin riding a unicorn - you know, that you can't find such things in real life, so you just take, what you can get. What matters for this particular subject, is the fact, that density of gas in the chamber gets to such a small degree, that you can't no longer explain the upward lift of plasma using the force of buoyancy. It means, that at certain energy level, matter starts to experience a force, which is opposite to gravitational attraction - and it hasn't too much to do with the density of medium.

Notice, that the smaller is the density of gas in a chamber, the STRONGER the plasma is being lifted up. If there's any proper term, to describe the source of this force, it's most likely NEGATIVE WEIGHT of matter.
If you want to speak about behavior of plasma of Sun, then the thread about magnetohydrodynamics would be much better...
 
Apr 2015
1,081
247
Somerset, England
Notice, that the smaller is the density of gas in a chamber, the STRONGER the plasma is being lifted up. If there's any proper term, to describe the source of this force, it's most likely NEGATIVE WEIGHT of matter
Rubbish.

Take a piece of card by two edges and hold it out in front of you.
Now press the edges together.
What happens?
The card buckles perhaps upwards.

Now replace that card with a sheet of rubber and precompress the rubber, whilst supporting against the buckling.
Now let go the support.
The compressed rubber tries to spring back to its original length bows again perhaps upwardly.


In your experiment the stream of plasma is compressed, relative to the rest of the gas in the container.
You were correct that the applied electric field keeps it in a string
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
We should remind ourselves that stars are giant balls of plasma. The closest one to us, the sun, has been heavily studied. Stars maintain their shape because of an equilibrium between the gravitational force and the gas + radiation pressure. We know a lot about the behaviour of plasmas because of solar experiments (as well as lab experiments).

Plasmas are heavily influenced by electromagnetic fields, but often the electromagnetic fields are weak relative to other ones, like gravity. In most systems with a plasma, the overall shape and behaviour of the fluid is governed by gravity and the electromagnetic fields act to perturb the system and give rise to local phenomena. For example, in the sun, the overall shape is governed entirely by gravity, gas pressure and radiation pressure, but there are local structures like solar arcades, sunspots and flares, all of which are phenomena arising from electromagnetic fields perturbing the local environment. The exception to this is the solar wind, which can be considered to be a very, very low density plasma (probably just best described as a stream of charged particles), whose consequential motion is influenced heavily by the Earth's magnetosphere as well as its gravity well. The consequence of that is the aurora.
Thanks! I have to warn you: better don't touch in this thread such subjects, like solar activity, space weather or geomagnetic activity - this is that part of physics, which really turns me on :) If I would have to describe the essence of physics with a single word, it would be: MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS. It's one of those very rare cases, where a theoretical model seems to properly explain and predict observed processes. But then, when I look at some other parts of physics, I see how badly they are broken... I've spent 6 years researching plasma physics. After that it took me around 2 months to get a grasp on GRT. When it comes to SRT, I needed only 2 weeks, to understand it... It didn't took me too long, to realize that Einstein pushed the theoretical physics into a pretty ugly situation. Sooner or later, a day will come, in which science will have to face some unpleasant truths in order to progress. Luckily, when it comes to gravity in GRT things aren't so bad - everything, what is needed is a small upgrade...

Here's where I think science should start: from what I understand, it should be possible, to use a combination of hydrostatic equilibrium and GRT, to explain those two scenarios using a single model:



GRT explains properly (more or less) the potential aspect of gravity, while hydrostatic equilibrium deals with the kinetic part of gravitational field. All, what science has to do, is to stop to treat both those aspects as independent sections of spacetime. If rubber surface is a good analogy to spacetime curvature of the potential well, then cheerios effect is representing this well, when a distribution of matter is introduced

This alone would make a great change... Good for the beginning :)
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
Rubbish.

In your experiment the stream of plasma is compressed, relative to the rest of the gas in the container.
You were correct that the applied electric field keeps it in a string
Yes and this string is being "magically" lifted upward - no matter if density of gas in the chamber is high or low...

READ IT
: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3aa8/a4a6909d242340a06edbc783f27196ab1eac.pdf
"we will obtain t  1s ; 1 atm corresponds approximately to 1.3 3 kg / m , and for viscosity which value increases with a temperature, the specified minimum value is chosen (Babichev, Babushkina, & Bratkovskii, 1991). The specified value t significantly exceeds time of establishment of the arc discharge (about 10 ms). Therefore, buoyancy (Archimedes force) is not the main reason of a peculiar shape of an arch. Since in the presented experimental conditions the influence of slow convection streams of the rarefied air is insignificant, the given estimates provide the grounds to assume that the expulsion of plasma by a gravitational field of the Earth described by formula 1 is the main reason for a shape of an electric arch."

Don't you believe in science?
 
Apr 2015
1,081
247
Somerset, England
Science is not about belief systems.

And by the way, the rubber sheet analogy is an exceeding poor analogy for General Relativity.
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
Science is not about belief systems.

And by the way, the rubber sheet analogy is an exceeding poor analogy for General Relativity.
Then give me a better one... This is where science is currently and it seems that no one (except me apparently) doesn't bother to make things better
 
Apr 2015
1,081
247
Somerset, England
Then give me a better one... This is where science is currently and it seems that no one (except me apparently) doesn't bother to make things better
Since you ask so nicely here is more information.

The 'curvature' described by GR is intrinsic curvature.

The curvature described by the rubber sheet is extrinsic curvature and does not follow the GR eqautions