Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
On 7/30/05, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to David Jonsson's message of Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:17:16 +0200: Hi, [snip] Hi I wonder if ZPE can be involved in the distribution of thermal motion of low density plasmas. These distributions are found to be of Maxwellian type even when collisions are too few to maintain the distribution. This is called the Langmuir paradox. [snip] How can they be too few to maintain the distribution? Even a single particle alone in a container will collide with the walls (where there are lots of particles). God point. I think they mean magnetic bottle plasma confinement. Then of course you could argue if thermal heat can be attributed to the heat of the magnetic walls, their vibration. I have heard of temperature of magnetic field (cold magnetic fields) but never in any established contexts. Could this be the explanation? Someone? Maybe another clue is the inconsistency of talking of particle speed and temperature interchangeably. If particles have temperature, then waves should too. I should probably take a course in statistical mechanics before asking more. David
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
In reply to David Jonsson's message of Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:17:16 +0200: Hi, [snip] Hi I wonder if ZPE can be involved in the distribution of thermal motion of low density plasmas. These distributions are found to be of Maxwellian type even when collisions are too few to maintain the distribution. This is called the Langmuir paradox. [snip] How can they be too few to maintain the distribution? Even a single particle alone in a container will collide with the walls (where there are lots of particles). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk In a town full of candlestick makers, everyone lives in the light, In a town full of thieves, there is only one candle, and everyone lives in the night.
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
At 11:17 am 27/07/2005 +0200, you wrote: Hi I wonder if ZPE can be involved in the distribution of thermal motion of low density plasmas. These distributions are found to be of Maxwellian type even when collisions are too few to maintain the distribution. This is called the Langmuir paradox. I wonder if ZPE, or any other radiation, can be the cause for upholding Maxwell distribution in lack of collisions. (There aren't many other forces involved, except quantum phenomena, than electromagnetic.) I know this could take months to investigate but I am just interested in a hint to a solution. David MmmInteresting 8-) Sounds to me as though the distributions are being maintained by ZPE Brownian type motion. If so, it rather argues in favour of a particulate nature for the Beta-atmosphere. Which means that there are collisions which we fail to recognise since we don't believe in the existence of neutral mass particles like the materon. Perhaps people will come the same conclusion as many of Brown's contemporaries and believe that particles of a low density plasma are alive, eh! 8^) Cheers, Frank Grimer
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative Mass particles boggles the mind. How would a particle with Neutral mass affect momentum? --- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 11:17 am 27/07/2005 +0200, you wrote: Hi I wonder if ZPE can be involved in the distribution of thermal motion of low density plasmas. These distributions are found to be of Maxwellian type even when collisions are too few to maintain the distribution. This is called the Langmuir paradox. I wonder if ZPE, or any other radiation, can be the cause for upholding Maxwell distribution in lack of collisions. (There aren't many other forces involved, except quantum phenomena, than electromagnetic.) I know this could take months to investigate but I am just interested in a hint to a solution. David MmmInteresting 8-) Sounds to me as though the distributions are being maintained by ZPE Brownian type motion. If so, it rather argues in favour of a particulate nature for the Beta-atmosphere. Which means that there are collisions which we fail to recognise since we don't believe in the existence of neutral mass particles like the materon. Perhaps people will come the same conclusion as many of Brown's contemporaries and believe that particles of a low density plasma are alive, eh! 8^) Cheers, Frank Grimer Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
- Original Message - From: "Merlyn" Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative Mass particles boggles the mind. Not if you accept the argument and mathematics of Randall Mills, and others,that the electron itselfis a negative-mass particle - not to be confused with Dirac's negative-energy electron - nor to be confused with the ant-particle, the positron. BTW does anyone know off-hand if Mills' positron is also negative mass? Langmuir's paradox - the broader version- of unexpectedly fast electrons showing upin any low energy plasma (not just Hg) is probably a *sound* related phenomenon (Alfven wave) in which the sound (kinetic) component accelerates the electrons to a surprising energy, well beyond normal kinetics. One of the reasons why the Alfven wave has been suspected to be involved in OU. Below is a site that you can't access without subscription, but all of the information mentioned in the abstractis available online elsewhere. It is almost unbelievable that the author did not mention Alfven waves in the abstract: "Wave-Particle-Electric Field Synergetic Auroral Electron Acceleration" AltairSouza de Assis Universidade Federal Fluminense, Caixa, Brazil AbstractWe discuss afresh the problem of the auroral electron acceleration based on the controversy reports of Bryant, D.A. etal.: 1992, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 37, and Borovsky, J.: 1992, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1054, related to which mechanism is more tenable to accelerate auroral electrons: dc electric field generated somehow in aurora or wave-particle interaction due to auroral wave turbulence? Here, we show that both mechanisms are important, and what is most likely to happen in aurora is that the turbulence and the dc electric field structure will assist each other so as to synergetically accelerate those electrons. http://www.springerlink.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=2628d84b06f443769427e7998abd9445referrer=parentbackto=issue,34,53;journal,18,65;linkingpublicationresults,1:102996,1
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
At 05:56 am 27/07/2005 -0700, you wrote: Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative Mass particles boggles the mind. How would a particle with Neutral mass affect momentum? Good question. It would send it spinning off at right angles, perhaps. In the ultimate, mass (and energy) is merely an aspect of momentum Quis non agit non existit (Leibniz); so neutral mass implies zero momentum. If a materon consists of two parts, ones spinning clockwise and one widdershins then because momentum is a vector the particle has zero momentum. However, I'm sure you can conjure up plenty of alternatives with the aid of your Metaphysical Magic. ;-) Cheers, Frank Grimer
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE snip Not if you accept the argument and mathematics of Randall Mills, and others, that the electron itself is a negative-mass particle - Jones, just where do you see anything in the argument and mathematics of Randell Mills that the electron itself is a negative-mass particle? Mike Carrell not to be confused with Dirac's negative-energy electron - nor to be confused with the ant-particle, the positron. BTW does anyone know off-hand if Mills' positron is also negative mass? Langmuir's paradox - the broader version - of unexpectedly fast electrons showing up in any low energy plasma (not just Hg) is probably a *sound* related phenomenon (Alfven wave) in which the sound (kinetic) component accelerates the electrons to a surprising energy, well beyond normal kinetics. One of the reasons why the Alfven wave has been suspected to be involved in OU. Below is a site that you can't access without subscription, but all of the information mentioned in the abstract is available online elsewhere. It is almost unbelievable that the author did not mention Alfven waves in the abstract: Wave-Particle-Electric Field Synergetic Auroral Electron Acceleration Altair Souza de Assis Universidade Federal Fluminense, Caixa, Brazil Abstract We discuss afresh the problem of the auroral electron acceleration based on the controversy reports of Bryant, D. A. et al.: 1992, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 37, and Borovsky, J.: 1992, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1054, related to which mechanism is more tenable to accelerate auroral electrons: dc electric field generated somehow in aurora or wave-particle interaction due to auroral wave turbulence? Here, we show that both mechanisms are important, and what is most likely to happen in aurora is that the turbulence and the dc electric field structure will assist each other so as to synergetically accelerate those electrons. http://www.springerlink.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=2628d84b06f443769427e7998abd9445referrer=parentbackto=issue,34,53;journal,18,65;linkingpubl icationresults,1:102996,1
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
Mike, Not if you accept the argument and mathematics of Randall Mills, and others, that the electron itself is a negative-mass particle - Jones, just where do you see anything in the argument and mathematics of Randell Mills that the electron itself is a negative-mass particle? I realized soon after hurrying that off, that the negative mass was incorrect and does not feel gravity is the Mills' contention. Some might argue the two are not as dissimilar as they seem. Is does not feel gravity not your understanding? Jones
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
What I meant was that if momentum is to be conserved, and the neutral mass particle has by definition zero momentum, then the collision cannot change the momentum of a normal positive mass particle. A particle with negative mass would, when impacted immediately proceed towards the impetus pushing on it rather than away as a positive mass particle would. --- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:56 am 27/07/2005 -0700, you wrote: Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative Mass particles boggles the mind. How would a particle with Neutral mass affect momentum? Good question. It would send it spinning off at right angles, perhaps. In the ultimate, mass (and energy) is merely an aspect of momentum Quis non agit non existit (Leibniz); so neutral mass implies zero momentum. If a materon consists of two parts, ones spinning clockwise and one widdershins then because momentum is a vector the particle has zero momentum. However, I'm sure you can conjure up plenty of alternatives with the aid of your Metaphysical Magic. ;-) Cheers, Frank Grimer Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
