It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The following introduction to some technical terms should provide a reasonable insight into Plasma Physics. An underlying simplicity seems to beckon, even while many questions remain, and a picture drastically different from the traditional view of the universe begins to emerge.
In 1984 Farhad Yusef-Azdeh, Don Chance, and Mark Morris discovered Birkeland currents on a galactic scale. Working with the Very Large Array radio telescope, they found an arc of radio emission some 120 light-years long near the centre of the Milky Way! The structure is made up of narrow filaments typically 3 light-years wide and running the full length of the arc. The strength of the associated magnetic field is 100 times greater than previously thought possible on such a large scale, but the field is nearly identical in geometry and strength to computer simulations of galaxy formation.
Plasma sheathes were discovered by Langmuir in his laboratory, and are now called double layers.
DLs refer to one of the most important properties of any electrical plasma -- its ability to form electrically isolated sections or cells. Because Plasma is an outstanding conductor and cannot sustain a high electric field, it self-organizes to form a protective sheath (Double Layer) across which most of the electric field is concentrated and where most of the electrical energy is stored (They can act very much like capacitors).
When a foreign object is inserted into a plasma, a DL will form around it, shielding it from the main plasma. This effect makes it difficult to insert voltage sensing probes into a plasma in order to measure any electric potential at a specific location.
Double layers may break down with an explosive release of electrical energy. Hannes Alfvén first suggested that billions of volts could exist across a typical solar flare DL.
Camera lens filters are typically used specifically to create distortion for special effects. Why in the world would NASA be using such filters in typical operations? This is a ludicrous theory.
But hey, do you have any proof that such a lens filter is used on NASA cameras?
If lens filters were being used regularly, you would think there would be a NASA study on their effects, and the reasons for using them. There is no mention of them in the NASA study on objects observed in cameras recording space events that we have a link to, so no reason to believe they are being used.
Originally posted by poet1b
You continuously display misconceptions of what a theory is, and a complete lack of understanding of science. Try looking up the definition, and while you are at it, the scientific method as well.
Originally posted by JScytale
science is an approach to understanding phenomenon, where repeatable, reliable evidence is required before something is accepted. in other words, something is not scientific unless it can be demonstrated reliably.
Scientific method refers to bodies of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.
The question is quite clear, what is the standard for determining instrumentation accuracy? Hint, it is based on one of the most important principles of science developed in the twentieth century.
Originally posted by poet1b
Your complete dismissal without logic or reason of the ideas put out be the people, which includes numerous scientists and engineers, displays how unwilling you are to entertain any concept beyond what you have been conditioned to believe.
Originally posted by poet1b
In 1984 Farhad Yusef-Azdeh, Don Chance, and Mark Morris discovered Birkeland currents on a galactic scale. Working with the Very Large Array radio telescope, they found an arc of radio emission some 120 light-years long near the centre of the Milky Way! The structure is made up of narrow filaments typically 3 light-years wide and running the full length of the arc. The strength of the associated magnetic field is 100 times greater than previously thought possible on such a large scale, but the field is nearly identical in geometry and strength to computer simulations of galaxy formation.
Plasma sheathes were discovered by Langmuir in his laboratory, and are now called double layers.
DLs refer to one of the most important properties of any electrical plasma -- its ability to form electrically isolated sections or cells. Because Plasma is an outstanding conductor and cannot sustain a high electric field, it self-organizes to form a protective sheath (Double Layer) across which most of the electric field is concentrated and where most of the electrical energy is stored (They can act very much like capacitors).
When a foreign object is inserted into a plasma, a DL will form around it, shielding it from the main plasma. This effect makes it difficult to insert voltage sensing probes into a plasma in order to measure any electric potential at a specific location.
Double layers may break down with an explosive release of electrical energy. Hannes Alfvén first suggested that billions of volts could exist across a typical solar flare DL.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Lazyninja
You are the one who came up with the theory, where is your proof that these baffles were used in the tether video, and create the effects that you claim they produce? All you are doing is throwing things up against the wall and hoping they stick. None of this is backed by any evidence, just your claims.
Originally posted by zorgon
NASA says...
EARLY FINDINGS FROM TETHERED SATELLITE MISSION POINT TO REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES
Well now how about that eh? What could have been so important about this piddly little broken satellite debris that was so earth shattering as to need REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Lazyninja
You are the one who came up with the theory, where is your proof that these baffles were used in the tether video, and create the effects that you claim they produce? All you are doing is throwing things up against the wall and hoping they stick. None of this is backed by any evidence, just your claims.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by JScytale
Hint, the scientific method starts by developing a theory, which is a guess about how things work. How many times did I ask you what a theory is that you could not answer?
Essential criteria
The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions. The relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no predictions that can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term "theory" is inapplicable.
In practice a body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory once it has a minimum empirical basis, according to certain criteria:
* It is consistent with pre-existing theory, to the extent the pre-existing theory was experimentally verified, though it will often show pre-existing theory to be wrong in an exact sense.
* It is supported by many strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation, ensuring it is probably a good approximation, if not totally correct.
Standards for determining accuracy are, STANDARDS, and everyone uses them, or they have no credibility. They don't vary from country to country. A world body exists to make sure this doesn't happen. You are so in over your head it is ridiculous.
Originally posted by poet1b
Plasma exists in the Earths outer atmosphere, links have already been provided proving this.
Plasma exhibits characteristics of life forms, links have already been provided proving this.
Originally posted by poet1b
Wiki? Try looking for a source that isn't made up nonsense from some poster. There are a number online dictionaries, you could start there. The Wiki definition isn't even close. Did you post that yourself?
Originally posted by JScytale
Originally posted by zorgon
Lets go have a look at NASA's own press release regarding the tether involved in this thread
NASA says...
EARLY FINDINGS FROM TETHERED SATELLITE MISSION POINT TO REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES
Well now how about that eh? What could have been so important about this piddly little broken satellite debris that was so earth shattering as to need REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIES
[snip]
Why am I not surprised that a scientific study led to scientific discoveries? They were studying something they knew little about. Guess what, they learned things (which they were spending millions of dollars to hopefully do in the first place).
Theory
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.
Originally posted by poet1b
Did you post that yourself?
Originally posted by JScytale
feel free to edit a high traffic page and put false information in the first paragraph. watch how long it takes to get corrected. I actually preformed that experiment once, took all of 4 minutes.
Originally posted by poet1b
Theory
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.
These is a starting point. Just about any science course will teach you this.
Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.
In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.
In fact, some laws, such as the law of gravity, can also be theories when taken more generally. The law of gravity is expressed as a single mathematical expression and is presumed to be true all over the universe and all through time. Without such an assumption, we can do no science based on gravity's effects. But from the law, we derived Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in which gravity plays a crucial role. The basic law is intact, but the theory expands it to include various and complex situations involving space and time.
The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.
Development of a Simple Theory by the Scientific Method:
* Observation: Every swan I've ever seen is white.
* Hypothesis: All swans must be white.
* Test: A random sampling of swans from each continent where swans are indigenous produces only white swans.
* Publication: "My global research has indicated that swans are always white, wherever they are observed."
* Verification: Every swan any other scientist has ever observed in any country has always been white.
* Theory: All swans are white.
Originally posted by zorgon
A skeptic attempting to edit Wiki to add false info Now doesn't that take the cake...