Cause of Aurora Borealis Confirmed 172
An anonymous reader writes "There are reports that satellites have aided scientists in confirming why the Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights) exists. 'New data from NASA's Themis mission, a quintet of satellites launched this winter, found the energy comes from a stream of charged particles from the sun flowing like a current through twisted bundles of magnetic fields connecting Earth's upper atmosphere to the sun. The energy is then abruptly released in the form of a shimmering display of lights.'"
The More Important Discovery (Score:5, Interesting)
What happens within the laboratory with *electrical* plasmas is that the plasma will tend to form filaments of charged particles. It is a natural state of the plasma. Furthermore, multiple filaments will tend to possess long-range attraction and short-range repulsion with one another. In other words, they will twist around one another without fully combining. This can be observed by any layperson by looking closely at the point where your novelty plasma globe's filaments touch the glass. What appears as one filament from a distance is in fact two filaments twisting around one another like a rope that unwind with contact to glass. This roped structure within the laboratory constitutes a flow of charged particles, and as those charged particles move across the rope in response to voltage potentials, this flow of charged particles will in turn create helical magnetic fields around the filaments. Maxwell's Equations demand it.
The observation of a roped magnetic structure connecting the Sun and Earth is extremely important because we know from our laboratory experiences with plasmas that rope-like structures occur when the plasma is electrical. I'm very curious what the response will be from the astrophysical community about this *structure*. Will they argue that the similarity in morphologies is actually coincidental?
If so, somebody should share the talking points with NASA, because they appear to be off-message
From http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/auroras/northern_lights.html [nasa.gov]:
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The More Important Discovery (Score:4, Funny)
Why yes, I suppose it would be.
Re: (Score:1)
Shocking, indeed! Very amusing! 8^)
Cheers, ~Michael Gmirkin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
universe is incredibly fascinating.
It's hard to believe all of this stuff
could possibly be made of of chance.
A magnetic rope, wow.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Heck of a light show! Might burn out the bulb, tho'.
Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"millions" of years to figure this
out. Hmmm, if you figure that
the earth has been around for
6,000 years, that actually puts
us in a better "light" -- we must
be pretty stupid. I wonder how
much longer it will take to figure
out that it's impossible to throw
a boat-load of random plane
parts on a tarmark, come back
5 billion years later and find out
"It's A Plane!!!!!!" Om my goodness!
Even video gamers realize you have
to program a game before you can
have fun playing it.
Re: (Score:2)
"We're so smart, it took us, oh...
"millions" of years to figure this
out."
Humans haven't been here on the planet for millions of years. If you believe that we evolved, it's been a couple of hundred thousand years at best. There is evidence we are still examining however, of creatures that did exist millions of years ago. Large, reptilian/avian creat
Re: (Score:2)
seem to utilize
more that 20%
of your screen width?
It is a little
annoying to read.
Re:The More Important Discovery (Score:4, Interesting)
"So to sum up your entire post for those that come after me, you are saying "electric universe rules"." -Kagura
No, I think that what he's saying is something to the effect that this shouldn't be news to anybody, but the fact that it is happens to be disheartening.
Specifically, Kristian Birkeland predicted this in his book Norwegian Aurora Polaris Expedition [live.com] (section 2, I believe).
Specifically, if one references the images contained in the book, things become clear quite quickly:
Chapter VI: On Possible Electric Phenomena in Solar Systems and Nebulae [plasma-universe.com]
Take, for instance, an extreme case of his terella in operation:
Figure 259 [plasma-universe.com]
How do you like them "flux ropes?"
This image hows the terella operating in a mode that exposes the electrical currents for what they are. In this shot, the currents are in "arc mode" (akin to sparks or lightning). Whereas the auroras around Earth are akin to a "glow mode" discharge. Birkeland currents in interplanetary space are a "dark mode" discharge (IE, not glowing, but still slowly transferring electric charges in a "dark" current, much like an electrical wire, but in this case a plasma filament). Look it up. Standard plasma physics.
In essence, the solar system can be likened to a virtual "plasma globe." In the "plasma globe" model of the solar system, the sun is the central electrode. The planets are akin to people pressing their fingers to the outer glass because it's cool to watch the filaments connect to the spot you touch. The "magnetic flux ropes" are akin to the plasma filaments connecting the central electrode to the outer glass where fingers touch. The "magnetic flux ropes" are a byproduct of the electrical current (flow of charged particles) connecting the sun to the Earth.
Here's a colorized version of a plasma globe I made for reference:
Plasma globe "sun" [google.com]
So, yeah, it's something like that [google.com].
I really wish it would let me put images in this thing. Ohh well, I said it better over on BAUT anyway (assuming they don't immediately MOD it out of existence, for being presumptuous enough to mention astronomers' apparent blindspot regarding electricity in space).
Did I forget to mention NASA's own rather candid admission that there's an electrical link between the sun and the Earth? "Flux rope" pumps 650,000 Amp current into the arctic! (30 kV battery in space) [google.com] (Noted on this page: Multimedia for the Press Event for THEMIS [nasa.gov].)
In all, what Pln2bz says is quite sage, and I suggest that we listen to him... Rather carefully. He may not be quite as "insane" as some think. It's quite necessary to review the argument based on its merits, and see where it leads. Might just turn science on its ear.
After all, we've just re-learned that Birkeland currents power the magnetosphere. This was confirmed in t he 60s / 70s when we started shooting satellites into space, and it was predicted in the 1900s (appx 1902-1903 was when Birkeland went north; 1908 was when he published Norewgian Aurora Polaris Expedition, to great acclaim pretty much everywhere, except England and America, where an electrically neutral/sterile cosmology had already taken hold, unfortunately, setting us back a
Crazies warninig! Watch out for the crazies!! (Score:2)
For example, the crazies are saying that "all problems" and "all everything" is caused by electrical nature. That our solar system is more electrical than any
Galactic charge into the sun? How? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, out of curiosity, what do you believe is the mechanism for the acceleration of the solar wind? Why does it continue to accelerate even as it passes the planets?
Re: (Score:2)
"these are Birkeland Currents?" Which are? I don't know exactly what Dr. Sibeck's quote is referencing, so I'm not going to comment on that. But as I've said, field aligned currents are hardly a controversial matter. Two [harvard.edu] recent [harvard.edu] JGR publications. And here's a review paper [harvard.edu].
Re: (Score:2)
Any observation of a rope-like magnetic plasma structure, based upon laboratory plasma physics, is a legitimate candidate for a Birkeland Current. But this is somewhat semantical. I think the thing that a lot of EU Theory advocates would like to hear explained (and that somebody else on the forum hinted at), are the following questions:
If it is now normal to refer to structures within our solar system as electrical currents, then where does the charge differential
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I can identify some fundamental problems within astrophysics without having to get a degree. Can you explain, for instance, the root cause of the two flashes in the Deep Impact Mission? From what I've read -- and this is not a particularly complicated issue -- Wallace Th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.nofc.forestry.ca/fire/faq_lightning_e.php [forestry.ca]
They appear to have the *absurd* idea that the Earth can become electrically charged and that the Earth's surface can be described as a leaky capacitor. They must have misunderstood the literature they cite, huh?
I can't believe that they would try to understand the weather like that. I mean, they probably don't even understand quantum mechanics.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a question for the astrophsycists, if they know of "things electric" (such as the Birkeland currents powering the auroras), has anyone drawn out the solar electric circuit(s)? If so, where are they diagrammed (can you point me to them, I'd love to see them, as they're never discussed in public; so far as I know)?
If not, why not. If astrophysicists realize this is essentially an electrical engineering problem, why has it not been diagrammed as such and "solved," so to speak? Why do s
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Because it isn't essentially an electrical engineering problem. Fluid dynamics plays a major role. "Winds," "rains," and "shocks" are all fundamentally fluid dynamics concepts. BTW, this isn't an astrophysics field...we're space physicists. The lines are blurry--one space physicist in our department is doing heliospheric research, and one astrophysicist does a lot of work on magnetic proc
Climate Implications? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Do they figure in the giant "battery in space [google.com]," when talking about climate forcings?
They probably just missed the memo...? It's a bad habit, skipping the staff meetings where they talk about how the solar system is like a giant plasma globe [google.com], I know.
C'est la vie!
Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
wind plasma, which will stretch out the magnetic field as seen. A nice
confirmation of the standard theory. However, if the sun is the focus
of an electrical discharge, then the solar wind should be in-bound
instead of out-bound. Or, more precisely, an electric current should be
in-bound. But such is not the case; protons and electrons both flee the
sun rapidly in all directions, consistent with a thermally driven wind,
and inconsistent with an
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Homophobic much?
Re: (Score:2)
Did I huwt ooo feewings? (Score:2)
thats what you think dumbass... some people are so full of themselves. you must be his bitch.
Awwww, Poow AC, did I huwt ooo wittew feewings? You should have kept your fool mouth shut, boy. I got a rise out of you. Now you've just confirmed what a desperate powerless child you really are. Besides that, I'm bi. I've had cock, and more pussy than you'll get in your entire life. I've been in three ways and orgies. Insuinating that I'm gay does jack shit to my sense of my own manhood. I could suck a dozen cocks today and still be ten times the man you are, you pathetic worm. Do us all a favor and slit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
See my other post for a more thorough discussion:
Here [slashdot.org]
Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
You humorless mods can lick my balls (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can quit any time.
Dumbed down until you don't see anything new (Score:1)
Maybe they could learn a lesson from Wikipedia on that point? Their article on the subject (Aurora_borealis) is pretty readable, has collected some nice images, but it includes plenty of links to more tedious (but informative) reading material at the bottom. The CNN blurb is so dumbed down that it's impossible to figure out what exactly
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Obviously (Score:4, Funny)
Sincerely,
Billy Widget, Age 8, Cleveland Ohio
P.S. I bet you're going to tell me next that there is no Easter Bunny, storks don't deliver babies, and Microsoft sells flawless software. I'm not THAT dumb.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
As for your other assertions, I'll leave you with this: weiners make more than just pee-pee; Microsoft, on the other hand, doesn't.
Not offtopic. Pop-culture humor. (Score:3, Informative)
The first book of the trilogy -- known as "The Golden Compass" in the U.S. and "The Northern Lights" in Britain -- opened in theaters last week.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
From wikipedia.org
Dust (His Dark Materials)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Dust in Philip Pullman's trilogy of novels His Dark Materials is a fictional form of dark matter, an elementary particle that is of fundamental importance to the novels. Dust is invisible to the human eye and cannot be seen without the use of special instruments such as the The Amber Spyglass or a special film. However, while humans cannot see dust without the use of outside devices, creatures such as the mulefa are able to see dust with their own eyes.
Unlike ordinary particles, Dust is conscious. It falls from the sky and is attracted to people (especially adults) and objects made by people. This makes it of great interest to the Church, which believes that it may be the physical manifestation of Original Sin. We later learn that Dust actually confers consciousness, knowledge and wisdom, and that Dust is formed when matter becomes conscious. This allows creatures who have the ability to see dust to identify other sentient and intelligent creatures. An example of this is when the mulefa are able to distinguish Mary Malone as an intelligent being, because of the dust surrounding her, when compared to the other animals in the mulefa's world.
It is Dust that provides the answers given by the alethiometer, the I Ching system of divination and also the computer that Dr Mary Malone creates in order to communicate directly with these particles.
Dust has various names among the various different worlds within the trilogy. Dust was previously known (in Lyra Belacqua's universe) as Rusakov particles after their discoverer, Boris Mikhailovitch Rusakov. It is known also as Shadows in our world (Pullman relates Dust to Dark Matter), and the mulefa's word sraf accompanied by a leftward flick of the trunk (or arm for humans).
Angels, including The Authority, are formed when Dust condenses, but they are not in reality the human-like figures they appear to be.
Re: (Score:2)
And if your IQ is over 60, for the love of God don't go and see it.
:: POTENTIAL VERY SLIGHT SPOILERS ::
(I will avoid saying anything at all specific about the plot, but in case you're utterly paranoid about spoilerism, I thought I'd give you a warning anyway)
Hollywood at its patronising, intelligence-insulting worst. Endless needless exposition (charac
It's TWUE! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's TWUE! (Score:4, Funny)
I'd say they will have a magnetic field day with this one.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the main problem there is that, well... 'electric universe' attracts an awful lot of loonies, who then give the whole concept a very bad reputation. Maybe there are some electromagnetic interactions being overlooked, but the 'electric universe' crowd are pushing for the complete rewriting of the entirety of astronomy based on not very much.
Re: (Score:2)
No true scientist is afraid of being proved wrong, they embrace it and use it to improve their work. Electric Universe proponents rarely provide ways for their theories to be falsified, and when what should be there according to their theories isn
What? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What? (Score:5, Funny)
Oblig. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
at this time of year? (Score:2, Funny)
That's not true at all. It happens when you're cooking steamed hams, and your kitchen catches on fire.
Yes, but what about the alternatives? (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Tagging (Score:1)
Okay... (Score:1, Redundant)
Next...?
Global climate change?
Evolution?
Silent but deadly versus loud and fruity?
Move on folks, nothing to see here.
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
Way to understate the importance of confirming theories. Heh.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, of course no "proven" theory has later been found to wrong either has it? Such as spontaneous generation, perhaps? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis [wikipedia.org]
I'm not sure the importance of this "confirmation" ranks as front page news. Honestly, I'd much rather see some, any theory of our current climate changes proven. At least then we might be able to start effectively making some changes. For that matter, proving the theory of cold fus
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, that's fine. But the guys working on the aurora aren't the same guys working on cold fusion. It's like throwing aerospace engineers into cancer research. We don't focus our
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Strike two, equate science and proof again and your outta here!
Climate change: Did you fall for the "science has nothing to do with consenus" meme?
Cold fusion: Rejected as a worthwhile inquiry since after a lot of attempts nobody has been able to confirm the original finding.
OT: Climate Change (Score:3, Insightful)
Either way, it is now extremely difficult to separate the good science from the bad, especially for lay people, as the consensus in that field was tainted. E
Re: (Score:2)
I urge you to use skepticisim to figure out
Re: (Score:2)
The "profit" is in not having to significantly change your lifestyle. In some cases it means inconvenience, or doing without some fun things in order to pay for needful things, but in other cases it means reducing the effective
Re: (Score:2)
Sure we have spent billions in the last decade confirming the science but why does the US still find itself isolated at Bali? We now know (in gigatons/yr roughly what has to be done by when), the first time I hear
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't fallen for anything. My biggest concern is the CO2 saturation of the oceans reaching the point where organisms can't create the shells and other exoskeletons they need for survival. I expect that to cause an almost complete collapse of ocean ecosystems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
fail. it isn't that our theories are "perfect" or even "correct" as they are accurate in explaining what we are actually seeing. most of the real science deals with actually doing experiments and seeing if they do or do not confirm what your theories predict. If by experiment we find something that doesn't match up with current theory, we have two choices: first, modify said theory incorporating any new data- which is what ha
Just borealis? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
(Seriously, if it is a counterpart then it should be the same, or at least a cheap knockoff
Summary: (Score:2)
Nonsense. (Score:4, Funny)
Where's MY Panserbjørne?
So let me get this straight (Score:3, Interesting)
Or am I misinterpreting it here?
(I was about to tag this as being very old news before this).
Re: (Score:2)
Zonk - WTF-Over? (Score:2)
Uhmmm i think I learned that in like 6th grade science class and that was like in 1969!
You call this news!?
Re:Zonk - WTF-Over? (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah, I know, bummer.
Would it make you feel better to know that, once a week, we show the kids our HD-DVDs of "Smarter Than A 5th Grader - Season 1"? We feel that seeing another child succeed on television helps develop a child's positive self-imag
Re: (Score:2)
Damn this is one of those rare occasions when I want to be able to MOD the thread I am participating in. Oh hell its not that rare, but I would MOD your post funny as hell, if it were not so sadly true.
Thankfully most of my brain cells survived my misspent youth and I can teach my kid science, since that does not seem to be a priority of our educational system these days. But then again /sarcasm=on we Do need to spend more money on football and cultural sensitivity. /sarcasm=off
Fucking Dr. Spock anyway
Happy Birthday (Score:2, Interesting)
lyrics (Score:3, Funny)
Aren't those the lyrics to some 90s trance song?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone knows (Score:1)
This is the way it's supposed to work (Score:5, Insightful)
An excellent example of how science is supposed to get done.
We think we know. We're pretty sure we know. We're damned sure we know and nobody's even close to providing a better explanation. Alright.....this is how it is; take it to the bank. (But we'll still give you a hearing if you have convincing proof something else is happening. You'd better have a testable hypothesis, though).
The method isn't perfect, but it spits out right answers more often than anything else.
HAARP, UhHuh, What Is It Good For (Score:2)
IIRC, the story was on WIRED, possibly a WIRED blog page.
You can take your tin foil hats off now. HAARP is harmless. If you don't believe this, please email targeting@OMCL.mil. We'll fix things for you.
Signed,
Your p
Re: (Score:1)