Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
- Solar
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am
Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
Seems like this has been covered on the forum before; but just in case:
Growth of Dust as the Initial Step Toward Planet Formation: Carsten Dominik, Jurgen Blum, Jeffrey N. Cuzzi, Gerhard Wurm
Google Results for: Planet formation electrostatic dust
Growth of Dust as the Initial Step Toward Planet Formation: Carsten Dominik, Jurgen Blum, Jeffrey N. Cuzzi, Gerhard Wurm
Google Results for: Planet formation electrostatic dust
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
- JP Michael
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
Why is electrostatic or gravitational accretion required at all when electroplasma arcs can create an entire spheroid mass, from non-accreted dust particles or plasma ions, in one event?
Increase that to an interplanetary scale (especially sourced from gas giants like Saturn and Jupiter) and you have the instantaneous creation of moon or planet-sized 'spherules' by high energy-density electroplasma arcs. The problem is that modern science rejects the notion that planet-sized 'spherules' can or have been formed in the past from incredibly high intensity events, and this in spite of human eyewitness testimony of the 'birth' of various planets in the past from precisely such events.
http://www.everythingselectric.com/planet-formation/
See also Morlock, Sutton, Braithwaite et.al, "Chondrules born in plasma? Simulation of gas–grain interaction using plasma arcs with applications to chondrule and cosmic spherule formation." Meteoritics & Planetary Science 47(12): 2269–2280 (2012)
Note especially the comment on p. 2279:
"dust aggregates are not necessarily required as chondrule precursors."
That is, electrostatic dust aggregation is not necessary (but can occur so it is not altogether ruled out) as the prior state before chondrule formation in electroplasma arc discharge. I suspect that not only are chondrules produced in the same manner as electroplasma arc spherules, but also that if the scale of both matter (plasma/dust density) and discharge intensity is increased, larger chondrules than micrometeor scale can be formed. The major difference between chondrules and spherules seems to be that the former form amidst aggregates of a larger, dusty-rocky whole, I surmise in-situ, whereas spherules seem to be solitary items (as opposed to a composite-aggregate). The question in my mind is how big can high energy-density electroplasma discharge make them?
Increase that to an interplanetary scale (especially sourced from gas giants like Saturn and Jupiter) and you have the instantaneous creation of moon or planet-sized 'spherules' by high energy-density electroplasma arcs. The problem is that modern science rejects the notion that planet-sized 'spherules' can or have been formed in the past from incredibly high intensity events, and this in spite of human eyewitness testimony of the 'birth' of various planets in the past from precisely such events.
http://www.everythingselectric.com/planet-formation/
See also Morlock, Sutton, Braithwaite et.al, "Chondrules born in plasma? Simulation of gas–grain interaction using plasma arcs with applications to chondrule and cosmic spherule formation." Meteoritics & Planetary Science 47(12): 2269–2280 (2012)
Note especially the comment on p. 2279:
"dust aggregates are not necessarily required as chondrule precursors."
That is, electrostatic dust aggregation is not necessary (but can occur so it is not altogether ruled out) as the prior state before chondrule formation in electroplasma arc discharge. I suspect that not only are chondrules produced in the same manner as electroplasma arc spherules, but also that if the scale of both matter (plasma/dust density) and discharge intensity is increased, larger chondrules than micrometeor scale can be formed. The major difference between chondrules and spherules seems to be that the former form amidst aggregates of a larger, dusty-rocky whole, I surmise in-situ, whereas spherules seem to be solitary items (as opposed to a composite-aggregate). The question in my mind is how big can high energy-density electroplasma discharge make them?
- nick c
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2483
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
- Location: connecticut
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
...and what about electrostatic repulsion?
-
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 8:41 am
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
Please forgive my ignorance but, what is electroplasm? What are electroplasm arcs?
- Solar
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
It's the part highlighted in red that is relevant. It is a contradiction to say that "electrostatic dust aggregation is not necessary as the prior state..." - but then simultaneously point out that "it can occur so it is not altogether ruled out". Consider the theory linked in the OP as simply looking at those possible cases where "...it is not all together ruled out."JP Michael wrote: That is, electrostatic dust aggregation is not necessary (but can occur so it is not altogether ruled out) as the prior state before chondrule formation in electroplasma arc discharge. I suspect that not only are chondrules produced in the same manner as electroplasma arc spherules, but also that if the scale of both matter (plasma/dust density) and discharge intensity is increased, larger chondrules than micrometeor scale can be formed. The major difference between chondrules and spherules seems to be that the former form amidst aggregates of a larger, dusty-rocky whole, I surmise in-situ, whereas spherules seem to be solitary items (as opposed to a composite-aggregate). The question in my mind is how big can high energy-density electroplasma discharge make them?
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
- JP Michael
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
The point of that paper was that dust particles do not need to aggregate in order to form chondrules or spherules via plasma discharge.
Can cosmic dust still accrete via electrostatic attraction? Yes. Can some such accretion then pass through some localised plasma discharge phenomenon to form an aggregate of chondrules/spherules? Of course. Does this contradict the findings above that it is an unneccessary step in the formation of chondrules/spherules, given that dust does not need to accrete prior to forming a chondrule via electroplasma discharge? Not at all.
The point is it doesn't take millions of years of electrostatic or gravitational accretion in order for cosmic dust to become an aggregate whole. One high-energy-density electroplasma arc event taking a fraction of a second is enough to create the rocky/metallic forms that astronomers call asteroids, comets, and, on a larger scale, entire planets.
Can cosmic dust still accrete via electrostatic attraction? Yes. Can some such accretion then pass through some localised plasma discharge phenomenon to form an aggregate of chondrules/spherules? Of course. Does this contradict the findings above that it is an unneccessary step in the formation of chondrules/spherules, given that dust does not need to accrete prior to forming a chondrule via electroplasma discharge? Not at all.
The point is it doesn't take millions of years of electrostatic or gravitational accretion in order for cosmic dust to become an aggregate whole. One high-energy-density electroplasma arc event taking a fraction of a second is enough to create the rocky/metallic forms that astronomers call asteroids, comets, and, on a larger scale, entire planets.
- Solar
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
I won't say that is impossible. There are theories of the planets eventually 'jostling' themselves into the comfortable orbits now observed and I do find global terrestrial patterns that might indicate that the planets and/or their moons have interacted while under more high intensity situations interesting. How quickly something like that occurs, or endures, is unknown. Gas giants could've also formed in this solar system and might yet be in some critical phase of their evolution. I like to keep the door open.JP Michael wrote: The point is it doesn't take millions of years of electrostatic or gravitational accretion in order for cosmic dust to become an aggregate whole. One high-energy-density electroplasma arc event taking a fraction of a second is enough to create the rocky/metallic forms that astronomers call asteroids, comets, and, on a larger scale, entire planets.
I'll share this thought residing in the back of my mind though: One of my favorite images is of Jupiter's moon Callisto (here).
When comparison is made to the overall pattern of Saturn's polar storms and the way they 'ring' it's pole as seen (here)
It 'looks like' Callisto was 'flash frozen' - as if all of a sudden it simply cooled and/or whatever atmosphere it may have had simply evaporated leaving an imprint of previous storm patterns similar to those seen on Saturn. However, I have no idea how long The Cosmos takes to 'flash freeze' what is now a moon of Jupiter; but it looks like it might have been a pretty fast process.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
- JP Michael
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
Those are some fascinating images and comparisons, Solar. Will tuck those away in my 'diagrams' folder!
I wrote 'electroplasma'. It may not be standard physics nomenclature, but I like to keep those two phenomena together where they belong.
- The Great Dog
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Electrostatic Dust and Planet Formation
Not electrostatics, electrodynamics.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2019/1 ... cosmogony/
TGD
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2019/1 ... cosmogony/
TGD
It seems like you are one of the only advocates for electric cosmology and cosmogony in this forum. Why is that?
Anonymous correspondent
There are no other dogs but The Great Dog
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 0 guests