Electricity in Martian dust storms helps to form perchlorates

October 24, 2018 by Talia Ogliore, Washington University in St. Louis
A Martian dust devil winding its way along the Amazonis Planitia region of northern Mars in March 2012. Credit: NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

The zip of electricity in Martian dust storms helps to form the huge amounts of perchlorate found in the planet's soils, according to new research from Washington University in St. Louis.

It's not lightning but another form of electrostatic discharge that packs the key punch in the planet-wide distribution of the reactive chemical, said Alian Wang, research professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences in Arts & Sciences.

"We found a new mechanism that can be stimulated by a type of atmospheric event that's unique to Mars and that occurs frequently, lasts a very long time and covers large areas of the planet—that is, dust storms and ," Wang said. "It explains the unique, high concentration of an important chemical in Martian soils and that is highly significant in the search for life on Mars."

The new work is an experimental study that simulates Martian conditions in a laboratory chamber on Earth.

Surprising amount of a reactive chemical

When NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander arrived on the planet in search for environments suitable for microbial life, researchers were surprised to find high concentrations of perchlorates in the soil—ranging from 0.5 to 1.0 percent.

A popular misconception at the time led some people to believe that perchlorates would kill all Martian microbes. In reality, some microbes are able to use perchlorates as an energy source, although perchlorates are toxic to humans.

Electricity in Martian dust storms helps to form perchlorates
Atacama Desert. Credit: Wikipedia

The ion—made of one chlorine atom and four oxygen atoms—is stable, but chlorate, a related chemical with only three oxygen atoms, is a strong oxidizer as demonstrated by Kaushik Mitra, a Washington University graduate student in earth and planetary sciences.

Wang's new research shows that chlorate is the first and major product in the pathway of phase transitions from chloride to perchlorate during multiphase redox plasma chemistry—the new mechanism first described Oct. 15 in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

A source of energy in the storm

On Earth, naturally occurring perchlorates are formed by photochemical reactions powered by sunlight. They're rare, but they do exist: Perchlorates sourced this way have been found in the soils of hyper arid regions on Earth, such as the Atacama Desert of Chile, Antarctica's dry valleys or the Qaidam Basin on Tibet Plateau, for example. But Mars has about 10 million times more perchlorates in its soil than would be predicted through this type of photochemistry alone.

Modelers suggested that lightning could provide the energy for these chemical reactions on Mars. But Wang and her Washington University team—which includes Kun Wang (no relation), assistant professor in earth and planetary sciences; Jennifer Houghton, research scientist; and Chuck Yan, engineering technician—were the first to create an actual experimental simulation that demonstrated a yield of chlorate/perchlorate that was 1,000 times the yield generated by photochemistry in the laboratory.

This work was completed in collaboration with Z. C. Wu at the Institute of Space Science, Shandong University in China; William Farrell at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; and Andrew Jackson at Texas Tech University.

Close-up image of a dust storm on Mars acquired by NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter in Nov 2007. Credit: NASA

The researchers designed two sets of experiments using a simulator dubbed the Planetary Environment and Analysis Chamber (PEACh), creating a Mars-like atmosphere with similar pressure and temperature conditions.

In the low-density Mars-like atmosphere, which has less than one percent of the atmospheric pressure of the Earth, charged particles are less likely to accumulate at a distance to form the dramatic spiking arc of lightning. Instead, wind events carrying sand and dust are more likely to develop near-surface electric fields that result in either Townsend Dark Discharge, an effect which is not visible, or normal glow discharge—which appears, just as it sounds, as a dim glow.

"If a photo was taken in the evening without sunlight, the normal glow discharge should be seen in the form of a weak light and may last longer than lightning," Alian Wang said. "Actually, I have suggested to an atmospheric scientist who is working on the Curiosity rover that they should design an evening photo sequence to catch dust devils!"

In the Mars chamber in the laboratory, the research team observed the instantaneous generation of free radicals—molecules with highly reactive unpaired electrons—in normal glow discharge, detected by in situ plasma emission spectroscopy. They also measured the transition of chloride to chlorate, and then to perchlorate through interaction with the free radicals, using laser Raman spectroscopy.

Masking the signs of life

On average, global dust storms on Mars occur once every two Martian years, while regional and local occur every year.

Electricity in Martian dust storms helps to form perchlorates
A self-portrait of NASA’s Curiosity rover taken on Sol 2082 (June 15, 2018). A Martian dust storm has reduced sunlight and visibility at the rover’s location in Gale Crater. Credit: NASA

Wang and her team are confident that their results can be scaled up to general Mars conditions and can help researchers understand the large concentrations of these chemicals in Martian soils.

What's more, Wang suggests, chlorates produced in large quantities during dust events could be acting as scavengers, reacting with other surface chemicals in such a way that they "clean up" the biosignatures of active microbes—masking or erasing the evidence of life on Mars.

"This study opens a door. It demonstrates the strong oxidation power of electrons in electrostatic discharge process generated by dust events," she said. "It suggests that electrostatic discharge in Martian dust events can affect many other redox processes in the Mars atmosphere and Mars surface and subsurface, such as iron and sulphur systems as well."

Explore further: Chlorate-rich soil may help us find liquid water on Mars

More information: Zhongchen Wu et al. Forming perchlorates on Mars through plasma chemistry during dust events, Earth and Planetary Science Letters (2018). DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2018.08.040

Related Stories

Chlorate-rich soil may help us find liquid water on Mars

September 28, 2018

If liquid water exists on the surface of Mars, it is most likely in the form of a briny mixture with magnesium chlorate salts, according to new experiments based on discoveries previously made by NASA's Phoenix and Viking ...

Image: Mars dust storm

July 20, 2018

The high resolution stereo camera on board ESA's Mars Express captured this impressive upwelling front of dust clouds – visible in the right half of the frame – near the north polar ice cap of Mars in April this year.

Where Martian dust comes from

July 24, 2018

The dust that coats much of the surface of Mars originates largely from a single thousand-kilometer-long geological formation near the Red Planet's equator, scientists have found.

NASA encounters the perfect storm for science

June 14, 2018

One of the thickest dust storms ever observed on Mars has been spreading for the past week and a half. The storm has caused NASA's Opportunity rover to suspend science operations, but also offers a window for four other spacecraft ...

Recommended for you

109 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
1.9 / 5 (21) Oct 24, 2018
It's not lightning but another form of electrostatic discharge that packs the key punch in the planet-wide distribution of the reactive chemical,

LOL! According to jonesdumb this is "electric discharge", not electric discharge...

"This study opens a door. It demonstrates the strong oxidation power of electrons in electrostatic discharge process generated by dust events," she said. "It suggests that electrostatic discharge in Martian dust events can affect many other redox processes in the Mars atmosphere and Mars surface and subsurface, such as iron and sulphur systems as well."

Say it ain't so, electric "woo" isn't impossible.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (23) Oct 24, 2018
Say it ain't so, electric "woo" isn't impossible.


Idiot. This is due to triboelectric charging, which has long been known about. It has been measured in dust devils on Earth. And lightning on Earth is known to create perchlorates. All they are doing in this experiment, is using the fact that Mars has global dust storms, and therefore likely global electrostatic effects, to explain the high perchlorate levels measured at different points on the Martian surface. You can see the effects of triboelectric charging in volcanic plumes, as lightning. You should read the paper. Given that it's paywalled, I'm guessing that won't happen, and you'll be left with having to make stuff up. As usual.
jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (15) Oct 24, 2018
Here is a freely available 15 year old paper on electrostatic discharging on Mars;

Electrical discharges and broadband radio emission by Martian dust devils and dust storms
Renno, N. O. et al.
https://agupubs.o...GL017879

rossim22
3.5 / 5 (6) Oct 24, 2018
@cantdrive

Even the Thunderbolts acknowledge in several articles that the non-thermal radiation and glow discharging observed has been credited to electrostatic discharging by mainstream scientists, this isn't news.

The discrepancy lies in the fact that the scientists here start with a dust devil that results in an electric field and discharging.
While the Thunderbolts argue that Mars' atmosphere is too thin (~1% of earth's) to generate dust devils which have been observed to be over 20,000 meters in height.

Dust devils form when warm 'air' near the surface begin to rotate horizontally then eventually stand vertical. Hard to imagine that a 12-mile high pocket of air doing the same in Martian atmosphere.

Thunderbolts claim pre-existing electric fields generate the dust devils.

I feel that predictions could easily be made by the Thunderbolts using the satellites in orbit around Mars but I'm not aware of any, just the general concepts.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (12) Oct 24, 2018
Dust devils form when warm 'air' near the surface begin to rotate horizontally then eventually stand vertical. Hard to imagine that a 12-mile high pocket of air doing the same in Martian atmosphere.


Arguments from incredulity are not reasonable arguments. Nobody in the literature is seeing any problem with the scale of Martian dust devils, in either areal terms, or in altitude terms.

rossim22
4 / 5 (4) Oct 24, 2018
Dust devils form when warm 'air' near the surface begin to rotate horizontally then eventually stand vertical. Hard to imagine that a 12-mile high pocket of air doing the same in Martian atmosphere.


Arguments from incredulity are not reasonable arguments. Nobody in the literature is seeing any problem with the scale of Martian dust devils, in either areal terms, or in altitude terms.



Yeah, that's true. But they're also not looking for any.

That being said, I'm sure somebody has. I can't seem to find any papers in the last five years discussing the scale of Martian dust devils.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (12) Oct 24, 2018
That being said, I'm sure somebody has. I can't seem to find any papers in the last five years discussing the scale of Martian dust devils.


No reason they'd be restricted to the last 5 years. Here is one which I've un-paywalled ;)

http://sci-hub.tw...4722.175

The references (14), (15) & (16) in the latter part of that paper seem to be the ones to follow.

Here is (14);

https://journals....0.CO%3B2
jonesdave
3 / 5 (10) Oct 24, 2018
Thunderbolts claim pre-existing electric fields generate the dust devils.


And I wonder which of their resident planetary science geniuses came up with this particular nonsense?
rossim22
4 / 5 (4) Oct 24, 2018
Tallest dust devil observed in those references were 7km though in 2012 a 20km tall dust devil observed, that's why I was looking for something more recent.

I'm not arguing on behalf of any side, I was just trying to lay out a couple general points each side was making on the subject.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (11) Oct 24, 2018
Tallest dust devil observed in those references were 7km though in 2012 a 20km tall dust devil observed, that's why I was looking for something more recent.

I'm not arguing on behalf of any side, I was just trying to lay out a couple general points each side was making on the subject.


There is probably more theoretical work around. However, it is not really worth spending hours, or even days, searching it out, when the only voices contesting what we see are from EU non-scientists.
Some things to consider would be;

Mars' gravity.
Mars' atmospheric pressure.
Dust size.
Thermal properties of the surface and atmosphere.

In regard to the above, one should not be led astray by comparison to terrestrial properties. Mars is not Earth.
rossim22
4.6 / 5 (7) Oct 24, 2018
In regard to the above, one should not be led astray by comparison to terrestrial properties. Mars is not Earth.


I think that's the rationale the Thunderbolts are banking on as well.

Thunderbolts claim pre-existing electric fields generate the dust devils.


And I wonder which of their resident planetary science geniuses came up with this particular nonsense?


Well we know that an atmospheric electric circuit exists on Mars, though it's believed to be driven by the same electrostatic processes described in this article.

https://agupubs.o...JE001271

Since the ionosphere interacts with the solar wind, I think it's possible that there is a relationship with the Martian global circuit, and thus the formation of the electrified dust devils.

https://agupubs.o...GL023483
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (11) Oct 24, 2018
^^^^^I'm afraid you've got that first link arse about face. The dust storm has to form first, to then create the field! You can't have your cake and eat it! And the second link has nothing to do with surface properties, as the solar wind is not reaching the surface, due to the induced Martian magnetosphere.
jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (10) Oct 24, 2018
Furthermore, here are a couple of papers comparing the convective boundary layers on Earth and Mars. The height of these has a bearing on how high dust devils can rise to. On Earth it is ~ 3 - 4 km. On Mars, ~ 45 km.

https://agupubs.o...JE001037

Which references this paper for the CBL heights;

https://agupubs.o...JE900024
rossim22
4.8 / 5 (6) Oct 24, 2018
The dust storm has to form first, to then create the field! You can't have your cake and eat it! And the second link has nothing to do with surface properties, as the solar wind is not reaching the surface, due to the induced Martian magnetosphere.


Your preconceived notions have you believe that I'm disagreeing with you, instigating your relentless urge to prove yourself right.

I am not disagreeing with you or supporting any side (like I've said already).

"Well we know that an atmospheric electric circuit exists on Mars, though it's believed to be driven by the same electrostatic processes described in this article."
- This is me stating that the dust storm/devil must form first.

The solar wind affects the ionosphere, ionosphere is part of the global electric circuit. Thunderbolts might use this to say solar wind can indirectly affect the surface. That is all.

I'll leave now before I confuse you any further with my intentions.
rossim22
4.3 / 5 (3) Oct 24, 2018
Furthermore, here are a couple of papers comparing the convective boundary layers on Earth and Mars. The height of these has a bearing on how high dust devils can rise to. On Earth it is ~ 3 - 4 km. On Mars, ~ 45 km.

https://agupubs.o...JE001037


.

In regard to the above, one should not be led astray by comparison to terrestrial properties. Mars is not Earth - Jonesdave
jonesdave
3 / 5 (12) Oct 24, 2018
Furthermore, here are a couple of papers comparing the convective boundary layers on Earth and Mars. The height of these has a bearing on how high dust devils can rise to. On Earth it is ~ 3 - 4 km. On Mars, ~ 45 km.

https://agupubs.o...JE001037


.

In regard to the above, one should not be led astray by comparison to terrestrial properties. Mars is not Earth - Jonesdave


Precisely. That is why the CBL is much higher on Mars than it is on Earth. Therefore, to argue from incredulity that 20 km high dust devils seem to be extraordinary, is not a valid argument. Follow the science, not the woo merchants.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 24, 2018
I'll leave now before I confuse you any further with my intentions.


Your intentions were perfectly clear. You said;

Since the ionosphere interacts with the solar wind, ****I think it's possible that there is a relationship with the Martian global circuit, and thus the formation of the electrified dust devils.****


Which is obviously bollocks, yes?

rossim22
4.2 / 5 (5) Oct 24, 2018

Since the ionosphere interacts with the solar wind, ****I think it's possible that there is a relationship with the Martian global circuit, and thus the formation of the electrified dust devils.****


Which is obviously bollocks, yes?



possible: (adj.) able to happen although not certain to; situation that may or may not occur or be so.

I'm merely being as open-minded as possible and acknowledging the fact that what scientists 'know' has a degree of uncertainty.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Oct 24, 2018

Since the ionosphere interacts with the solar wind, ****I think it's possible that there is a relationship with the Martian global circuit, and thus the formation of the electrified dust devils.****

Which is obviously bollocks, yes?

I'm merely being as open-minded as possible and acknowledging the fact that what scientists 'know' has a degree of uncertainty.

In pondering this a little, I can see where an induced global magnetic field might present local magnetic fluctuations sufficient to allow for electrical charge assist to the standard convection driven dust devil model. The two would work in tandem.
That said, I don't feel electrical charge can induce them on it's own...
Solon
3 / 5 (4) Oct 24, 2018
Structure and formation of dust devil–like vortices in the atmospheric boundary layer: A high‐resolution numerical study.

https://agupubs.o...JD016010
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 24, 2018
The Martian surface is obviously coupled with the atmosphere, which is coupled to the thermosphere, which is connected to the ionosphere, the ionosphere to the SW. Mars has an electric field which creates currents. And there is an increase in those currents when there is a higher electron content in the ionosphere, not seasonal temperatures. This is when the global dust storms occur. The vortex of the dust devils is due to the interaction of charges. The temperature, winds, scortched earth and any other such phenomena are the side effects of these charges.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 25, 2018
The Martian surface is obviously coupled with the atmosphere, which is coupled to the thermosphere, which is connected to the ionosphere, the ionosphere to the SW. Mars has an electric field which creates currents. And there is an increase in those currents when there is a higher electron content in the ionosphere, not seasonal temperatures. This is when the global dust storms occur. The vortex of the dust devils is due to the interaction of charges. The temperature, winds, scortched earth and any other such phenomena are the side effects of these charges.


Total bollocks.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 25, 2018

Since the ionosphere interacts with the solar wind, ****I think it's possible that there is a relationship with the Martian global circuit, and thus the formation of the electrified dust devils.****


Which is obviously bollocks, yes?



possible: (adj.) able to happen although not certain to; situation that may or may not occur or be so.

I'm merely being as open-minded as possible and acknowledging the fact that what scientists 'know' has a degree of uncertainty.


And you are qualified to know this how, exactly? By listening to scientifically illiterate Velikovskians? Show me where this has been written up. Or even suggested. Woo sites not allowed.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 25, 2018
Mars has an electric field which creates currents. And there is an increase in those currents when there is a higher electron content in the ionosphere, not seasonal temperatures.


Show us the data that suggest the electron density in the ionosphere corresponds with the onset of dust storms. And then I'll show you the data that show that they are seasonal, and related to surface temperatures. The only way you are getting higher electron densities in the ionosphere is from increased solar wind flux. Ergo, the storms should happen at the times of flares and CMEs. Easy enough to check.
Stop making crap up.

jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 25, 2018
Structure and formation of dust devil–like vortices in the atmospheric boundary layer: A high‐resolution numerical study.

https://agupubs.o...JD016010


Nice find. Doesn't help Rossim or cantthink, though.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Oct 25, 2018

In pondering this a little, I can see where an induced global magnetic field might present local magnetic fluctuations sufficient to allow for electrical charge assist to the standard convection driven dust devil model. The two would work in tandem.
That said, I don't feel electrical charge can induce them on it's own...


The problem for the EU wooists, is that the induced field is at considerable altitude, ~ 150 km. It works in a similar way to the induced magnetosphere at a comet. The IMF, carried by the solar wind, piles up, increases in strength. Within the cavity formed by this process at comets, there is zero magnetic field. I can see no way of this being a mechanism, which is likely why it has never been suggested.
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Within the cavity formed by this process at comets, there is zero magnetic field. I can see no way of this being a mechanism, which is likely why it has never been suggested.

There is an electric field, this has been measured. That is all that is needed to allow for your "incomprehensible" mechanism.
Old_C_Code
3.8 / 5 (5) Oct 26, 2018
Electric dust devils, auroras, electric scared surfaces... none of these are surprising and worth an argument. Electric actions exist in the solar system cantdrive85, so what? HOWEVER, THE SUN IS NOT POWERED BY THE GALAXY. No evidence of this. And this is what makes EU the most wrong (scientifically). They are obviously wrong on history and the polar Saturn orbit Earth was in?....Ugh.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Within the cavity formed by this process at comets, there is zero magnetic field. I can see no way of this being a mechanism, which is likely why it has never been suggested.

There is an electric field, this has been measured. That is all that is needed to allow for your "incomprehensible" mechanism.


No it isn't. Please show us the theory. Where is it written up? Otherwise, you are just making sh!t up. As usual.
cantdrive85
1.9 / 5 (9) Oct 26, 2018
Please show us the theory. Where is it written up?

You don't know how an electric field works? Needless to say the charge separation is already present. And given we already know the SW reaches deeply into the Earth's atmosphere (if not the surface), the likelihood the SW reaches Marx's surface is obvious. As already mentioned, the vortices are due to particle interactions, the winds and other such phenomena are the side effect.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Please show us the theory. Where is it written up?

You don't know how an electric field works? Needless to say the charge separation is already present. And given we already know the SW reaches deeply into the Earth's atmosphere (if not the surface), the likelihood the SW reaches Marx's surface is obvious. As already mentioned, the vortices are due to particle interactions, the winds and other such phenomena are the side effect.


No, I didn't ask for your uneducated opinion - I asked for where this has been written up by somebody with a reasonable degree of scientific understanding.
And why is it obvious that the SW would reach Mars' surface? It doesn't reach the surface of a comet when it is active.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
It doesn't reach the surface of a comet when it is active.

Another false claim.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
It doesn't reach the surface of a comet when it is active.

Another false claim.


Quit lying, you nutjob.

The birth and growth of a solar wind cavity around a comet – Rosetta observations
Behar, E. et al.
https://academic..../4036875

And I could go back to 1986 to find the same observations at Halley.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
Nobody is denying the cavity, but to claim zero SW gets to surface is false and it is in the literature.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
Nobody is denying the cavity, but to claim zero SW gets to surface is false and it is in the literature.


No it is not, you liar. Are you f***ing blind, you moron?

In-between these two periods, from 2015 April 28 (1.76 au), the solar wind is not detected anymore by RPC-ICA, and reappears after perihelion at 1.64 au on 2015 December 11.


Why do you insist on lying when people can read the papers for themselves? Mental illness?
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
Willful ignorance jonesdumb, you rely on willful ignorance. It's in the literature, the SW and its EM energy still interact with the surface. Regardless of your junk paper.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
Willful ignorance jonesdumb, you rely on willful ignorance. It's in the literature, the SW and its EM energy still interact with the surface. Regardless of your junk paper.


So link to it you lying tosser! Neither the SW nor the IMF are getting anywhere near the comet when it is most active. And the paper is not junk, you f***wit, it is written by people who know what they're doing, unlike your cultists, and it is based on what instruments are telling them. Quit lying you idiot.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
It's amazing how incapable you become when it comes to you are challenged. It is in the literature. And with all the data, there is still interpretation involved, contrary to your beliefs.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
It's amazing how incapable you become when it comes to you are challenged. It is in the literature. And with all the data, there is still interpretation involved, contrary to your beliefs.


Nope, you are lying, and I have a bunch of scientific literature to back that assertion up, whereas you only have lies. You lose.
rossim22
1 / 5 (1) Oct 26, 2018
Electric dust devils, auroras, electric scared surfaces... none of these are surprising and worth an argument. .


Where have you seen obvious electric-scared [sic] surfaces?
jonesdave
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
[
It's amazing how incapable you become when it comes to you are challenged.


Yes, so incapable that I am immediately able to find papers to back up what I'm saying, and to challenge your lies. In response to that challenge you just lie some more.
rossim22
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 26, 2018
And why is it obvious that the SW would reach Mars' surface? It doesn't reach the surface of a comet when it is active.


https://www.resea...0000.pdf

"Intense crustal magnetic fields in the southern hemisphere are strong enough to form 'magnetocylinders' that extend well above the 400km spacecraft altitude. On the night hemisphere these magnetocylinders are marked by a series of plasma voids separated by electron flux spikes where the crustal field is radially oriented. The electrons on the radial field lines originate from the solar wind, indicating that these field lines were at one time connected to the solar wind. When the magnetocylinders rotate into sunlight, they trap newly created ionospheric plasma."

Solar wind -> ionosphere -> surface
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018


Solar wind -> ionosphere -> surface


Wrong. Lol, you don't even understand what they are saying, and then make an erroneous conclusion based on that lack of understanding! Why don't you email the author/s?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
OK, let's see what Mitchell et al say in the paper that Rossim has failed to either read or, if he did read it, failed to understand it;

The ionosphere is separated from the solar wind
by a plasma boundary, which is marked by a change in the
electron energy spectrum. Above the boundary the electron
population is dominated by the stagnating, mass-loaded solar
wind as it flows past the planet. Below the boundary the
electron population is dominated by atmospheric photoelec-
trons that are produced by solar ultraviolet and soft X-ray
photons deep in the atmosphere and travel from the exobase
(-180-km altitude) along magnetic field lines to the space-
craft, where they are measured.


So, where is the solar wind?
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
So, where is the solar wind?

Some of the particles and EM reaches the surface, to suggest otherwise one must invoke willful ignorance.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
So, where is the solar wind?

Some of the particles and EM reaches the surface, to suggest otherwise one must invoke willful ignorance.


Nope, you are making sh!t up again. What 'EM' is reaching the surface? Just point to the papers describing this process, otherwise it is a fairy story.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
*EM energy...
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
What 'EM' is reaching the surface?


Ahhhh, figured it out! Sunlight! Which causes heating, which then causes the dust devils!
cantdrive85
1.9 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Dust devil vortices are due to interacting charges, temperature is a side effect of the energy of the particles.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
Dust devil vortices are due to interacting charges, temperature is a side effect of the energy of the particles.


Nope. Point to this claim in the scientific literature, otherwise you are making it up. Again.
rossim22
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 26, 2018
Some of the particles and EM reaches the surface

temperature is a side effect of the energy of the particles.


This is just way off.
rossim22
2 / 5 (4) Oct 26, 2018

So, where is the solar wind?


Interacting directly with Mars' ionosphere, which is an integral component of the Martian atmospheric electric current.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018

So, where is the solar wind?


Interacting directly with Mars' ionosphere, which is an integral component of the Martian atmospheric electric current.


Which part of the following did you fail to understand?

The ionosphere is separated from the solar wind by a plasma boundary, which is marked by a change in the electron energy spectrum


jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018
For anybody interested, the induced magnetospheres of Mars, Venus and Titan are described here;

The Induced Magnetospheres of Mars, Venus, and Titan
Bertucci, C. et al.
https://www.resea...0000.pdf
granville583762
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
Mars never lost its atmosphere

The solar magnetic field with the solar wind induces a Martian magnetic field, which is why Mars never lost its magnetic field, as Mars has only ever had a partial interior magnetic field
This shows Mars never lost its atmosphere
It never had an atmosphere in the first place
As it has always a had a solar induced magnetic field
rossim22
3 / 5 (2) Oct 26, 2018

So, where is the solar wind?


Interacting directly with Mars' ionosphere, which is an integral component of the Martian atmospheric electric current.


Which part of the following did you fail to understand?

The ionosphere is separated from the solar wind by a plasma boundary, which is marked by a change in the electron energy spectrum




"Because Mars lacks a global magnetic field, the solar wind interacts directly with the atmosphere/ionosphere over much of the planet. As a result of this interaction, a plasma boundary is formed at a median altitude of 380km..."

Jonesdave, which part did you fail to understand?
cantdrive85
2.4 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
jonesdumb's boundary layer is a double layer, a double layer is part of circuit.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 26, 2018

So, where is the solar wind?


Interacting directly with Mars' ionosphere, which is an integral component of the Martian atmospheric electric current.


Which part of the following did you fail to understand?

The ionosphere is separated from the solar wind by a plasma boundary, which is marked by a change in the electron energy spectrum




"Because Mars lacks a global magnetic field, the solar wind interacts directly with the atmosphere/ionosphere over much of the planet. As a result of this interaction, a plasma boundary is formed at a median altitude of 380km..."

Jonesdave, which part did you fail to understand?


None of it. An ionopause is created. Which part of the solar wind does not reach the surface are you struggling with? Why would it?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
jonesdumb's boundary layer is a double layer, a double layer is part of circuit.


Nope, absolutely zero observations of anything even remotely looking like a double layer. You made that up, as usual. Why do you keep doing that? Some kind of mental affliction?
rossim22
3 / 5 (2) Oct 26, 2018
None of it. An ionopause is created. Which part of the solar wind does not reach the surface are you struggling with? Why would it?


"Intense crustal magnetic fields in the southern hemisphere are strong enough to form 'magnetocylinders' that extend well above the 400km spacecraft altitude. On the night hemisphere these magnetocylinders are marked by a series of plasma voids separated by electron flux spikes where the crustal field is radially oriented. The electrons on the radial field lines originate from the solar wind, indicating that these field lines were at one time connected to the solar wind. When the magnetocylinders rotate into sunlight, they trap newly created ionospheric plasma."

We have solar wind ions flowing along radially magnetic field lines from the crust via 'magnetocylinders'.
granville583762
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Mars never lost its tenuous atmosphere

The tenuous atmosphere such as Mars has, has always existed, interacting plasmaticly with the solar wind, its own partial magnetic field and the solar magnetic field
Such, that now there is an induced Martian magnetic field.
Protecting the billion years old tenuous atmosphere
That has existed for 4.5billion years
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 26, 2018
We have solar wind ions flowing along radially magnetic field lines from the crust via 'magnetocylinders'.


Nope, you are failing to understand the paper. Try this;

For example, at the base of the magnetosheath is a region marked by ***a transition from solar wind to planetary plasma***. This boundary is sometimes referred to as the Induced Magnetosphere Boundary (IMB) or the Magnetic Pileup Boundary (MPB) [e.g.,Nagy et al., 2004]. The transition from the induced magnetosphere to the ionosphere is sometimes identified by ***the photoelectron boundary, which marks the transition from shocked solar wind electrons in the induced magnetosphere to electrons produced by the ionization of atmospheric neutrals at lower altitudes*** [e.g.,Mitchell et al., 2001] or a sharp and substantial decrease in electron density [Duru et al.,2009], sometimes called an ionopause.


https://agupubs.o...GL065269

cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 26, 2018
absolutely zero observations of anything even remotely looking like a double layer.

Oh right, jonesdumb is talking about the plasma ignoramuses' pseudo-plasma, in the real world there is actually plasma involved. When actual plasma is involved we must use real plasma physics, leave the pseudoscience at home jonesdumb.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
absolutely zero observations of anything even remotely looking like a double layer.

Oh right, jonesdumb is talking about the plasma ignoramuses' pseudo-plasma, in the real world there is actually plasma involved. When actual plasma is involved we must use real plasma physics, leave the pseudoscience at home jonesdumb.


Huh? Please point to the spacecraft observations, and the freely available instrument data, that show the signature of DLs. There aren't any. You are obsessed with the bloody things for some reason, despite having zero understanding of astrophysical plasmas.
rossim22
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 26, 2018
We have solar wind ions flowing along radially magnetic field lines from the crust via 'magnetocylinders'.


Nope, you are failing to understand the paper.


No, it's just difficult to rebut each of your strawman arguments.

Moral of the story, I think it's ** possible ** that an influx of solar wind ions would alter the ion composition of the Martian ionosphere/atmosphere, which is an integral component of the Martian atmospheric electric current.

"Analysis of the relative abundances of O+ and O2+ ions near the ionopause suggests that the ionopause can be an ion composition boundary as well as an electron density boundary. At altitudes above ~300 km, therelative abundance of O+ is significantly larger for profiles with an ionopause than those without."

The ionosphere is essentially a double layer, electrons on the outside and positive ions on the inside.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
The ionosphere is essentially a double layer, electrons on the outside and positive ions on the inside.


No it isn't, and nobody is claiming that it is. Those ions will be accompanied by electrons.
And I am making no strawman arguments, I am linking to the scientific literature which tells you that the solar wind does not reach the bloody surface. Email any of the authors if you doubt what I'm saying.

jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
From;
The influence of crustal magnetism on the solar wind interaction with Mars: recent observations
Crider, D. H.
http://sci-hub.tw...3.04.013

Of particular note;

At lower altitudes, a transition is observed in electron fluxes in which the solar wind electrons are no longer seen. This is called the photoelectron boundary (PEB) because the electron spectrum becomes dominated by locally produced photoelectrons.


And, from the conclusion;

Crustal magnetic fields do not dominate the interaction with the solar wind at Mars; however, they do play an important role in the following:

.............
3. excluding solar wind flow
.............
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
"Intense crustal magnetic fields in the southern hemisphere are strong enough to form 'magnetocylinders' that extend well above the 400km spacecraft altitude. On the night hemisphere these magnetocylinders are marked by a series of plasma voids separated by electron flux spikes where the crustal field is radially oriented. The electrons on the radial field lines originate from the solar wind, indicating that these field lines were at one time connected to the solar wind. When the magnetocylinders rotate into sunlight, they trap newly created ionospheric plasma."

Solar wind -> ionosphere -> surface


And, from the abstract;

Closed field lines anchored to highly elongated crustal sources form "magnetic cylinders," which ***exclude solar wind plasma*** traveling up the magnetotail.


Which is what Crider is saying. They do the opposite of what you are proposing.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 26, 2018
Also from the Mitchell et al paper, again in the abstract;

Since many of these crustal fields are locally strong enough to ***stand off the solar wind to
altitudes well above 400 km***, the ionosphere can extend much higher than would otherwise be possible in the absence of crustal fields.


You either didn't read that paper, or read it very selectively.

cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Oct 27, 2018
The ionosphere is effectively a sheath or double layer as are the various atmospheric layers. Mars is a charged object immersed in plasma and as such the various layers arise to protect the charged body from the differently charged plasma. An just like Earth, there will be an electric circuit which describes the interaction.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 27, 2018
The ionosphere is effectively a sheath or double layer as are the various atmospheric layers. Mars is a charged object immersed in plasma and as such the various layers arise to protect the charged body from the differently charged plasma. An just like Earth, there will be an electric circuit which describes the interaction.


Nope, no DLs. If you think there are, then point to their detection in the scientific literature. Instead of making sh!t up. As usual.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
Mars is a charged object immersed in plasma


Lol. Where do you get this crap from? What is the charge on Mars?
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
What is the charge on Mars?

It really doesn't matter what the charge is, only that it is different from the surrounding plasma. The proof of this is the presence of the ionosphere and Mars' electric field.
If you think there are, then point to their detection in the scientific literature.

https://agupubs.o...JA023591
"Mysterious" layers in the ionosphere...
It's quite a simple concept, clearly Mars is charged compared to the surrounding plasma. To say otherwise is purely moronic.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 27, 2018
It really doesn't matter what the charge is, only that it is different from the surrounding plasma. The proof of this is the presence of the ionosphere and Mars' electric field.


Jesus, what an idiot. So, you just made it up, yes? Thought so. As usual.

"Mysterious" layers in the ionosphere...


And absolutely zilch to do with bloody DLs, you idiot. Stop making sh!t up.

......and point to a variety of possible explanations for its formation, including the Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability, magnetic flux ropes, x‐type magnetic reconnection, and solar wind magnetic field rotations.


Quit with the uneducated lying, woo boy.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Oct 27, 2018
The proof of this is the presence of the ionosphere and Mars' electric field.


What electric field? And the ionosphere is caused by photo-ionisation of neutrals in the atmosphere, and possibly from electron impact ionisation of the same from the solar wind. So, what the hell are you blabbering about?
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
......and point to a variety of possible explanations for its formation, including the Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability, magnetic flux ropes, x‐type magnetic reconnection, and solar wind magnetic field rotations.


Quit with the uneducated lying, woo boy.

Amusing, while quoting a paper where they rattle off numerous "possible" explanations of the "mysterious" layers. And their explanations, K-H instabilities is a fluid treatment, the SW/ionosphere interaction is plasma and plasma physics need to be used. Magnetic flux ropes, aka Birkeland currents, pretty likely and double layers are part and parcel to them. MRx, we know it's pseudoscience so, no. "Solar wind magnetic field rotations", which describes electric currents (Birkeland currents) in the SW. Magnetic fields do not just rotate, it is the particle flow which creates these currents/fields.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 27, 2018
And the ionosphere is caused by photo-ionisation of neutrals in the atmosphere, and possibly from electron impact ionisation of the same from the solar wind.

Nope, the photoionization layer is well within the ionosphere. These are non-collisional plasmas, but there are plenty of electrons and ions to get separated.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
Magnetic flux ropes, aka Birkeland currents,


No they aren't. And the paper has zero mentions of DLs. So, like I keep having to say - you are making sh!t up. Nobody is suggesting DLs in the scientific literature, and neither you, nor any of your fellow cultists, know squat about plasma physics, so we can safely dismiss that particular non-hypothesis.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
And the ionosphere is caused by photo-ionisation of neutrals in the atmosphere, and possibly from electron impact ionisation of the same from the solar wind.

Nope, the photoionization layer is well within the ionosphere. These are non-collisional plasmas, but there are plenty of electrons and ions to get separated.


Wrong.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
Nobody is suggesting DLs in the scientific literature

Yeah, I know. Been saying it for awhile. As did Alfvén;

"Students using astrophysical textbooks remain essentially ignorant of even the existence of plasma concepts, despite the fact that some of them have been known for half a century. The conclusion is that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of astrophysicists who have gotten their main knowledge from these textbooks. Earthbound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory."
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
Nobody is suggesting DLs in the scientific literature

Yeah, I know. Been saying it for awhile. As did Alfvén;

"Students using astrophysical textbooks remain essentially ignorant of even the existence of plasma concepts, despite the fact that some of them have been known for half a century. The conclusion is that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of astrophysicists who have gotten their main knowledge from these textbooks. Earthbound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory."


Lol. No science, so take an ancient Alfven quote out of context. Have a look in Cosmic Plasma, around p. 60, iirc. Alfven discusses Gringauz' model for the Venusian solar wind interaction, which is very similar to Mars, as well as comets. No DLs there. So, Alfven wasn't expecting them.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 27, 2018
Earthbound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory


And his 'modern plasma theory' is now ancient news. Today's PPs know far more about astrophysical plasmas than Alfven could ever have dreamed about. And circuit theory is a bigger approximation than MHD.

cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 27, 2018
And his 'modern plasma theory' is now ancient news. Today's PPs know far more about astrophysical plasmas than Alfven could ever have dreamed about. And circuit theory is a bigger approximation than MHD.

Nope, the opposite is true. The plasma ignoramuses still rely on hypothetical ideal gases, still after all these decades. In situ observations have shown it to be dramatically wrong but nothing has changed as they are still searching for the missing 96% of their universe.
And circuit theory is the correct way to describe the energy transmission and important phenomena such as DL's, CIV, and pinch effects aren't omitted completely like the totally wrong approach of MHD.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Nope, the opposite is true. The plasma ignoramuses still rely on hypothetical ideal gases, still after all these decades. In situ observations have shown it to be dramatically wrong but nothing has changed as they are still searching for the missing 96% of their universe.
And circuit theory is the correct way to describe the energy transmission and important phenomena such as DL's, CIV, and pinch effects aren't omitted completely like the totally wrong approach of MHD.


Wrong. But you could always ask a plasma physicist. Whoops, you haven't got any to ask, have you? Just the idiot Scott, who is a fruitloop retired EE. What makes you think you know anything about plasma physics, woo boy?

http://www.intern...unt=6329

http://www.intern...unt=3727

Now, go find an EU PP to gainsay the real PP linked above. Lol.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Who is this 'real' plasma physicist? All I see is a link to a real plasma ignoramus who doesn't understand why the circuit analysis needs to be done. Regarding the explosive events in plasma the circuit approach describes where the energy is originating. It is a required layer of analysis which describes the system. An analogy of what your plasma ignoramus is stating is an electric circuit needs to be described by only analyzing the anode. He is avoiding the big picture which is needed to understand the system.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Who is this 'real' plasma physicist? All I see is a link to a real plasma ignoramus who doesn't understand why the circuit analysis needs to be done. Regarding the explosive events in plasma the circuit approach describes where the energy is originating. It is a required layer of analysis which describes the system. An analogy of what your plasma ignoramus is stating is an electric circuit needs to be described by only analyzing the anode. He is avoiding the big picture which is needed to understand the system.


He is a qualified plasma astrophysicist, who did his PhD at Alfven's lab in Stockholm on astrophysical DLs, you ignorant tosser. He would know far more than anybody in your cult about plasma physics, yes? Who have they got? Scott? Lol. A fruitloop retired EE! Anyone else, woo boy? No, you are all ignorant and unqualified on the subject, yes? So, why the f*** would we listen to anything you say? Hmmm?

https://www.resea..._Volwerk
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Who is this 'real' plasma physicist? All I see is a link to a real plasma ignoramus who doesn't understand why the circuit analysis needs to be done. Regarding the explosive events in plasma the circuit approach describes where the energy is originating. It is a required layer of analysis which describes the system. An analogy of what your plasma ignoramus is stating is an electric circuit needs to be described by only analyzing the anode. He is avoiding the big picture which is needed to understand the system.


Why don't you join up at ISF or Cosmoquest and tell him yourself, you ignorant tosser? Haven't got the guts, nor the knowledge to be able to do that, have you? All talk, no action, correct? You know you'd get totally shown up for the ignorant poser that you are. But, hey, surprise me, woo boy; go ahead, sign up. Tell him how ignorant he is. Coward.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 28, 2018
Returning to the SW to surface connection, this looks to be and interesting paper;

'From interplanetary space to the ground: The development of magnetic structures and their signatures'
https://www.resea...gnatures

If such currents can occur in a dense atmosphere such as Earth's, then there is no doubt Mars would experience similar currents.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
If such currents can occur in a dense atmosphere such as Earth's, then there is no doubt Mars would experience similar currents.


There are currents in the Martian ionosphere. They don't reach the ground, as Earth, in case you missed it, has a dipole field where the field lines enter and leave at the poles. This is not the case at Mars, where you would be better off, as Alfven told you, comparing it to Venus and comets.

cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Why don't you join up at ISF or Cosmoquest and tell him yourself, you ignorant tosser?

This is a public forum as well, I'm sure he is more than welcome to visit us here.

This paper looks a but curious;
'Observation of double layer in the separatrix region during magnetic reconnection: DOUBLE LAYER IN RECONNECTION'
https://www.resea...NNECTION
What do ya know, DL's involved with "reconnection". Where have I heard of this before?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
This is a public forum as well, I'm sure he is more than welcome to visit us here.


Nope, too many idiots, and a 1000 character limit? No, if you want to play with the big boys, you go join them, or you pussy out. You have chosen the latter.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
What do ya know, DL's involved with "reconnection". Where have I heard of this before?


And nothing at all to do with Alfven's exploding DL stuff. As the author would tell you, but you are too chicken to ask. Notice, the MR comes first, then they see DLs. In Alfven's view, there was no MR, and DLs formed, and then for no reason, exploded.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 28, 2018
And nothing at all to do with Alfven's exploding DL stuff.

Yet, they state in the abstract;

"...The identification of multiple similar DLs indicates that they are persistently produced and therefore might play an important role in energy conversion during reconnection. The observation suggests that energy dissipation during reconnection can occur in any region where the DL can reach."

And although you will claim you knew it all along, you constantly go one about DL's never being detected any where near MRx. Needless to say, you are wrong.
granville583762
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Masking or erasing all evidence of life on Mars
phys.org> What's more, Wang suggests, chlorates produced in large quantities during dust events could be acting as scavengers, reacting with other surface chemicals in such a way that they "clean up" the biosignatures of active microbes—masking or erasing the evidence of life on Mars.

On one hand microbial life survive in perchlorates,
On the other hand, chlorates obliterate all signs of Martian life.
As there is no Martian life, not even microbes, as chlorates obliterate all signs of Martian life
Is another way of saying chlorates are lethal to microbial Martian life as it is to humans and martins if they were to exist
A possible theory of perchlorates, proposed to show why there is no life on mars?
Maggnus
3.9 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Nope, too many idiots, and a 1000 character limit? No, if you want to play with the big boys, you go join them, or you pussy out. You have chosen the latter.
Well, the thing is that cantthink has tried to join many of the real sites around, and he always ends up banned because when it is explained to him why everything he thinks is true about the thunderdolts EU cult is wrong, he explodes into name calling and cries of conspiracy and all his usual crap. He has been engaged even on here, despite the 1000 character limit, but his knowledge of real plasma physics is so shallow that he cannot be reasoned with. He, along with chris reeve and some character named yep are not interested in hearing why, they just want to hear "wow".

They are true believers, and they cannot be reasoned with.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
And although you will claim you knew it all along, you constantly go one about DL's never being detected any where near MRx. Needless to say, you are wrong.


MR is not caused by DLs, which is all I claimed. In other words, Alfven's belief that MR didn't happen, and that everything attributed to it was due to exploding DLs. I read a paper years ago, authored by F. S. Mozer, a sometime co-author with Falthammar, who reported their probable detection in the auroral zone. There were a series of them, vertically. It was proposed that they could be supplying the energy that eventually caused reconnection. Although I might have that totally wrong. Nobody is denying DLs exist; only that they do not cause the signatures of MR. They are two separate things. By your logic, these DLs cannot exist, as MR doesn't exist, therefore they cannot have been in a reconnection zone!

jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
And although you will claim you knew it all along, you constantly go one about DL's never being detected any where near MRx. Needless to say, you are wrong.


Not as wrong as you. You claim MRx doesn't happen, despite multiple in-situ detections, and 2+ decades of laboratory demonstration. What MV's paper shows is that, unsurprisingly, they are very well capable of telling the difference between MRx and DLs, even when they are quite close in time and space. Your claims are based on dogma only.

jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
They are true believers, and they cannot be reasoned with.


Indeed. Some of them bear more resemblance to evangelicals than people interested in science. Rossim (upthread) has some strange ideas, but is at least open to seeing a lot of EU nonsense for what it is.
We also have a true believer on ISF, still arguing, two years after mission end, for the electric comet idiocy! 13 years after Deep Impact blew a shed load of ice out of Tempel 1! No evidence, just pure dogma, lies and obfuscation. It is no different to a cult, in my view.
If Thornhill armed them all with razor blades at the next EU conference, and asked them to slash their wrists, and join him in electric heaven, I suspect he'd get a few takers!
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 28, 2018
Maybe there is hope for the likes of cantthink. Try the link for a tutorial by the aforementioned MV;

https://forum.cos...t=plasma
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Oct 28, 2018
@Jonesdave
Maybe there is hope for the likes of cantthink
I'm sorry but Maggnus is correct

keep adding factual science so that other readers can see where the idiot eu cult are wrong, but don't think there is hope for cd simply because you can comprehend the data

certain posters here are fanatical about their belief not because it's scientific, but because it sounds correct in their head and it fits their own prejudiced perspective

that has nothing to do with reality - it's a cult phenomenon

you address them with facts and their response is to throw their belief and dogma at you, with their "references", and deny reality with condemnation and statements about how blind the rest of the world is

it's also seen in conspiracist ideation, and cd is one of the worst on that (anti-vaxxer, anti-AGW, etc)
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (3) Oct 28, 2018
Returning to the SW to surface connection, this looks to be and interesting paper;

'From interplanetary space to the ground: The development of magnetic structures and their signatures'
https://www.resea...gnatures

If such currents can occur in a dense atmosphere such as Earth's, then there is no doubt Mars would experience similar currents.

Actually, the currents are more readily available on Earth BECAUSE of a denser atmosphere acting as a conductor...
Maggnus
4 / 5 (4) Oct 28, 2018
Maybe there is hope for the likes of cantthink. Try the link for a tutorial by the aforementioned MV

Interestingly, iantresman was once (and in many ways, still is) an EU enthusiast. Tusenfem and Nereid are both well known in the physics forums, and have challenged the likes of Reeve and Cantthink to the point where they either blew up (cantthink) or just retreated into undeterminable dogma (Reeve) that resulted in their being banned. Anyone who reads these pys.org articles and does not spend a few minutes checking out these loonies deserves the scorn that is heaped on them.
Maggnus
4.2 / 5 (5) Oct 28, 2018
@Jonesdave
Maybe there is hope for the likes of cantthink
I'm sorry but Maggnus is correct

keep adding factual science so that other readers can see where the idiot eu cult are wrong, but don't think there is hope for cd simply because you can comprehend the data

certain posters here are fanatical about their belief not because it's scientific, but because it sounds correct in their head and it fits their own prejudiced perspective

that has nothing to do with reality - it's a cult phenomenon

you address them with facts and their response is to throw their belief and dogma at you, with their "references", and deny reality with condemnation and statements about how blind the rest of the world is

it's also seen in conspiracist ideation, and cd is one of the worst on that (anti-vaxxer, anti-AGW, etc)

Yes, this is quite astute.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 29, 2018
Maybe there is hope for the likes of cantthink. Try the link for a tutorial by the aforementioned MV

Interestingly, iantresman was once (and in many ways, still is) an EU enthusiast. Tusenfem and Nereid are both well known in the physics forums, and have challenged the likes of Reeve and Cantthink to the point where they either blew up (cantthink) or just retreated into undeterminable dogma (Reeve) that resulted in their being banned. Anyone who reads these pys.org articles and does not spend a few minutes checking out these loonies deserves the scorn that is heaped on them.


Interesting. I'd seen Reeve around in various comment section/ blogs/ forums, but hadn't noticed either of them being on CQ or ISF, which is where I generally browse through old threads. I think I remember CR showing up on Brian Koberlein's blog at one point. Along with (inevitably) Michael Mozina, before he was (inevitably) banned.
Maggnus
4 / 5 (4) Oct 29, 2018
Interesting. I'd seen Reeve around in various comment section/ blogs/ forums, but hadn't noticed either of them being on CQ or ISF, which is where I generally browse through old threads. I think I remember CR showing up on Brian Koberlein's blog at one point. Along with (inevitably) Michael Mozina, before he was (inevitably) banned.
Good old Mozina, the " I can see mountains in the pictures, so the moon must have an iron crust" nonsense. Were you around for Oliver's Iron Sun blarney? I think Mozina managed to get himself booted by even the EU Dolts Club!
Maggnus
4 / 5 (4) Oct 29, 2018
Good old Mozina, the " I can see mountains in the pictures, so the moon must have an iron crust" nonsense. Were you around for Oliver's Iron Sun blarney? I think Mozina managed to get himself booted by even the EU Dolts Club!
A self correction - Mozina thought the Sun had an iron crust. Well maybe the moon too - he had a lot of very stupid ideas all related to what he thought he could see in false color images.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2018
MR is not caused by DLs, which is all I claimed.

Well the researchers are stating unequivocally, there is no explosive event without a DL. And you claimed repeatedly there were no DL's anywhere, you lying POS.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2018
MR is not caused by DLs, which is all I claimed.

Well the researchers are stating unequivocally, there is no explosive event without a DL. And you claimed repeatedly there were no DL's anywhere, you lying POS.


Idiot. Why not go ask the author of the paper, liar? MRx is NOT an exploding DL, you idiot. MRx causes the DLs. And the authors do not say otherwise. As can be shown by actually reading the paper.

The observation of multiple DLs within the short time span indicates that the DLs are ***continuously created during reconnection***. The work provides a new way to understand ***energy dissipation during magnetic reconnection***.


Or you could just pop on over to CQ or ISF and ask one of the co-authors, instead of making sh!t up on here.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 30, 2018
MRx is NOT an exploding DL, you idiot. MRx causes the DLs.

So the event that cannot occur without the presence of DL's causes the DL's? You must be getting dizzy from your circular reasoning. And yes, being the explosive event is creating inhomogenous plasmas, creating more DL's should be expected.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.