Here is another view of material accumulation adjacent to corona paths and against a vertical discharge path.
I get a lot of objections about these power levels being unrelated to the scaled-up versions, and to that i will
say, oh really !!! According to my electronics manual, electrostatic discharges are consider high voltage,, the
only difference i can imaging is 'sustainability'. However saturation and leakage-resistance seems to be key
in determining the potential to sustain a discharge.
It is here that we have to realize how much atmosphere plays a significant role.
On earth where electrical leakage is constant through the oxygen environment. Your common risks for
electrostatic discharge are in dry thin air, and what do ya know, planetary bodies are commonly surrounded by
dry thin air which raises their saturation potential (resistance to leakage). Now you toss in factors of size and
their constant exposure to the dark-current plasma mode of the solar wind and you are right back to a celestial
body having electrostatic discharge potential.. They don't have built in power supplies like a welder so they
cannot be categorized as a 'driven' current source, unless you want to call upon their flimsy connection with
galactic and solar currents,,, but i think that takes a back seat to the constant solar exposure and their
isolation from other bodies.
These experiments involve induced potential and capacitive discharge and the scale of the arc-potential,
compared to material mobility, means -to me- that an over-powering force is necessary to make these features.
There is much to compare -wrt- resulting appearance of features from the many results from CRT experiments.
And there are more ways to demonstrate the electrical processes behind 'some' planetary feature.
If you wish to attend the upcoming 2013 t-bolts conference at a reduced registration rate contact me soon.
d...z