Astronomers investigate AGN jet in the Messier 87 galaxy

Astronomers investigate AGN jet in the Messier 87 galaxy
Combined X-ray spectra of M87. All three spectra are well fit by an absorbed power-law model. The core spectrum is harder than both the kpc-scale jet and HST-1. Image credit: Lucchini et al., 2019.

Astronomers have taken a closer look at the relatively nearby Messier 87 (or M87) galaxy to investigate the jet of its active galactic nucleus (AGN). The new research, described in a paper published July 31 on arXiv.org, delivers important insights into the parameters of the jet, which could improve the understanding of AGNs in general.

AGNs are accreting, super- residing at the centers of some galaxies, emitting powerful, high-energy radiation as they accrete gas and dust. These nuclei can form jets, having mostly cylindrical, conical or parabolic shapes, which are observed even on megaparsec scales.

Located some 53.5 million away in the Virgo cluster, M87 is a supergiant elliptical galaxy. It hosts one of the most well-known and remarkable jetted AGNs discovered to date. The jet of M87 is easily detected on a variety of physical scales, which enabled astronomers to obtain many high-quality images of this feature. This makes it a unique source to study the physics of jets in accreting black holes.

Now, a trio of astronomers from the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, led by Matteo Lucchini, has conducted another study of M87, focused on investigating the properties of its AGN jet. They analyzed the available dataset, mainly from NASA's Chandra and Fermi spacecraft, in order to unveil the jet's key parameters.

"In this paper, we employ a multi-zone model designed as a parametrization of general relativistic magneto-hydrodynamics (GRMHD); for the first time, we reproduce the jet's observed shape and multi-wavelength spectral energy distribution (SED) simultaneously. We find strong constraints on key physical parameters of the jet, such as the location of particle acceleration and the kinetic power," the astronomers wrote in the paper.

The study found that the location of particle acceleration occurs very close to the black hole, far closer to the central engine than the acceleration distance. Notably, high-resolution very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) images of the jet show a "pinching" of the outflow around this distance. This, according to the researchers, suggests that the initial injection of particle acceleration in the jet may be influenced by this pinching region.

Moreover, the astronomers matched their model's jet dynamics and shape with those inferred from direct imaging of the outflow through VLBI. This allowed them to find that the main contribution to the core's limited gamma-ray flux is due to inverse Compton scattering of the host galaxy's starlight, rather than synchrotron self-Compton (SSC).

Furthermore, the research found that in the case of M87, the radiating leptons need to be accelerated to very high Lorentz factors in order to extend the synchrotron spectrum up to the Chandra energy range. The study also revealed that the particle distribution in the jet is consistent with being isothermal, even beyond the dissipation region.

Summing up the results, the astronomers emphasized the importance of their study, noting that it could be fundamental for future investigations of M87 an other jetted AGNs.

"Our results have important implications both for comparisons of GRMHD simulations with observations, and for unified models of AGN classes. (…) Our results are particularly important in light of the upcoming observations of M87 with the Event Horizon Telescope, which provide even more detailed imaging of the regions near the black hole," the authors of the paper concluded.


Explore further

Geometry transition detected in nearby active galactic nuclei jets

More information: Matteo Lucchini, et al. The unique case of the AGN core of M87: a misaligned low power blazar? arXiv:1907.13408v1 [astro-ph.HE]: arxiv.org/pdf/1907.13408.pdf

© 2019 Science X Network

Citation: Astronomers investigate AGN jet in the Messier 87 galaxy (2019, August 8) retrieved 21 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-astronomers-agn-jet-messier-galaxy.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
136 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 08, 2019
Notably, high-resolution very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) images of the jet show a "pinching" of the outflow around this distance.

Pinching... LOL! Who'da thunk electric currents such as these jets experience plasma pinching?

Aug 08, 2019
Notably, high-resolution very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) images of the jet show a "pinching" of the outflow around this distance.

Pinching... LOL! Who'da thunk electric currents such as these jets experience plasma pinching?


Why isn't there a star there? Last I heard from you, pinches form stars, galaxies, and galaxy clusters.

Aug 08, 2019
Outflows are ubiquitous in astrophysics. Despite different sizes, velocity and amount of transported energy, luminosity and degree of collimation, they have obvious morphological similarities. However, what is important for us, there is the picture of the outflows from everywhere and none of inflows into somewhere. That is an obvious asymmetry. There is no universal mechanism that can explain the origin of all these jets and outflows. There is no consensus about the exact ejection mechanism. The situation is even more severe, for in many cases researchers do not understand what constitutes content of the jets. Is it atomic, molecular or ionic gas, relativistic electrons or protons, or even electron-positron plasma?
https://www.acade...and_Jets

Aug 08, 2019
Notably, high-resolution very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) images of the jet show a "pinching" of the outflow around this distance.

Pinching... LOL! Who'da thunk electric currents such as these jets experience plasma pinching?


Why isn't there a star there? Last I heard from you, pinches form stars, galaxies, and galaxy clusters.

Your own willful ignorance leads you to misinterpret what is being said.

Aug 08, 2019
Your own willful ignorance leads you to misinterpret what is being said.


Lol. Irony, or what? Nobody is claiming that this is a z-pinch!

Aug 08, 2019
What causes the jets is staring them in the face but they cannot see.

Aug 08, 2019
Your own willful ignorance leads you to misinterpret what is being said.


Lol. Irony, or what? Nobody is claiming that this is a z-pinch!

You still don't know what z-pinched plasma is, do you?

Aug 08, 2019
This gentleman explains how the jets are just exactly that, plasma shaped by the z-pinch.

https://youtu.be/87xgH1FXXX0

Aug 09, 2019
This gentleman explains how the jets are just exactly that, plasma shaped by the z-pinch.

https://youtu.be/87xgH1FXXX0
at ~1:30 "We cannot model gravity for example." Right, which is responsible for the structure in the first place, and which holds it all together despite the obvious plasma instabilities that happen naturally because current flow is induced in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field...

Aug 09, 2019
This gentleman explains how the jets are just exactly that, plasma shaped by the z-pinch.

https://youtu.be/87xgH1FXXX0
at ~1:30 "We cannot model gravity for example." Right, which is responsible for the structure in the first place, and which holds it all together despite the obvious plasma instabilities that happen naturally because current flow is induced in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field...

You assume it is responsible "in the first place". He explains the z-pinch holds it all together, despite your claims. And these are field-aligned currents, they are very stable as is explained.

Aug 09, 2019
This gentleman explains how the jets are just exactly that, plasma shaped by the z-pinch.

https://youtu.be/87xgH1FXXX0
at ~1:30 "We cannot model gravity for example." Right, which is responsible for the structure in the first place, and which holds it all together despite the obvious plasma instabilities that happen naturally because current flow is induced in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field...

You assume it is responsible "in the first place". He explains the z-pinch holds it all together, despite your claims. And these are field-aligned currents, they are very stable as is explained.


So, you agree with him that the jets are the result of an AGN? And nothing to do with plasmoid woo? That's a start, I suppose.

Aug 09, 2019
But what is an AGN if not a plasmoid? We aren't discussing faerie tales so the discussion reverts back to the fact the AGN is a plasmoid and the jets are created by the plasmoid, you know, real science based hypotheses.

No comment regarding the egg on your face per the z-pinch? Good job attempting to change the subject. You are despicable through and through.

Aug 09, 2019
But what is an AGN if not a plasmoid? We aren't discussing faerie tales so the discussion reverts back to the fact the AGN is a plasmoid and the jets are created by the plasmoid, you know, real science based hypotheses.

No comment regarding the egg on your face per the z-pinch? Good job attempting to change the subject. You are despicable through and through.


What z-pinch? And not a sane person on the planet thinks an AGN is a plasmoid! Only idiots. For the umpteenth time, explain stellar orbits using a plasmoid. You can't. As an hypothesis, it doesn't exist. Pure woo.

Aug 09, 2019
What z-pinch?

The gentleman in the video explains it clearly, the jet is being held together by the z-pinch fields.

Aug 09, 2019
What z-pinch?

The gentleman in the video explains it clearly, the jet is being held together by the z-pinch fields.


Don't think so. Watched it again, and read one of his papers. I may be way off base, but it appears to me that the z-pinch machine is used simply to launch the jet. Its collimation is due to the normal toroidal field around a current moving in the z direction. What is known as magnetic hoop stress. This is not pinching the jet, merely collimating it. And there is no mention of a pinch at the sort of scaled distance seen in the M87 observations, above. As he says;

That is, even if the jet is initially collimated by magnetic forces once it becomes ballistic and with high Mach number due to cooling, then the field no longer needs to exist to provide collimation.


Magnetic tower outflows from a radial wire array Z-pinch
Lebedev, S. V. et al.
https://academic..../1024185

Aug 09, 2019
Its collimation is due to the normal toroidal field around a current moving in the z direction.

This is the z-pinch, and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.

Aug 09, 2019
Its collimation is due to the normal toroidal field around a current moving in the z direction.

This is the z-pinch, and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.


Yes, and it is cylindrically symmetrical. The whole jet is pinched by the hoop stress. There is no part of the jet that is constricted more than any other part. Now, your claim was that a constriction seen in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch. Methinks you are getting confused with pictures of coke cans pinched in the middle. This is not what is happening here. The whole jet is collimated ('pinched') in a cylindrically symmetrical way. It is a stabilised pinch. Therefore claims of a constriction in the M87 jets as being a z-pinch are just dumb.

Aug 09, 2019
Its collimation is due to the normal toroidal field around a current moving in the z direction.

This is the z-pinch, and you claim I don't know what I am talking about.


Yes, and it is cylindrically symmetrical. The whole jet is pinched by the hoop stress. There is no part of the jet that is constricted more than any other part. Now, your claim was that a constriction seen in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch. Methinks you are getting confused with pictures of coke cans pinched in the middle. This is not what is happening here. The whole jet is collimated ('pinched') in a cylindrically symmetrical way. It is a stabilised pinch. Therefore claims of a constriction in the M87 jets as being a z-pinch are just dumb.

Nope, jonesdumb, you are confused. Both are z-pinch plasmas.

https://www.resea...87181460

Aug 09, 2019

Nope, jonesdumb, you are confused. Both are z-pinch plasmas.

https://www.resea...87181460


Nope. You made a specific claim. Back it up. Show where Lebedev, or anybody else, has shown a constriction as per the M87 observations when modelling astrophysical jets.

Aug 09, 2019
Notably, high-resolution very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) images of the jet show a "pinching" of the outflow around this distance.

Pinching... LOL! Who'da thunk electric currents such as these jets experience plasma pinching?
says CD85

LOL As soon as I read the word, "pinching" in the article, somehow I KNEW you would be here, with Castrovagina not long in coming after you.
I want to caution you in your suspicion that "Electric Currents" are involved. It is possible, but there may be something else occurring that is causing that pinching.
Proceed with caution, CD.

Aug 09, 2019
@CD85
@JaxPavan

Jets coming out of Black Holes, whether pinched or not, are "waste products" or a sort of effluent that relieve the Pressure, even slightly, from the source of the jets. Think of M87 and Black Holes as MACHINES that consume and eliminate Matter/Energy.
It is not hard to imagine that 'electric currents' could also be present in the jets, as a by-product of a magnetic field coming off the source of the jets at M87.
It is far easier to understand the workings of these bodies, once you begin to realise that they are ALL MACHINES with mechanistic functions of consuming, metabolising of energy and mass, and elimination of overabundance into the Cosmos where that overabundance gets recycled.
Life Forms are also machines with the same principles of functioning. And either AC or DC currents are necessary to keep everything functioning well in the Universe.

Aug 09, 2019
This gentleman explains how the jets are just exactly that, plasma shaped by the z-pinch.

https://youtu.be/87xgH1FXXX0
at ~1:30 "We cannot model gravity for example." Right, which is responsible for the structure in the first place, and which holds it all together despite the obvious plasma instabilities that happen naturally because current flow is induced in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field...
says Protoplasmix

Sounds like Alternating Current (AC).

Aug 09, 2019
at ~1:30 "We cannot model gravity for example." Right, which is responsible for the structure in the first place, and which holds it all together despite the obvious plasma instabilities that happen naturally because current flow is induced in a direction that opposes the change in the magnetic field...


Indeed. I'm just reading a 2019 review paper by Lebedev et al (paywalled). He says;

Unfortunately, laboratory experiments, including those using pulsed-power devices, cannot reproduce the gravity of the central object, and this limitation makes laboratory simulation of full accretion disk physics impossible. Still, as shown in recent years, it is possible to reproduce key aspects of the sheared rotation of magnetized plasmas and transformation of the radially convergent flow into the bipolar jets


https://journals....1.025002

The paper refers to an experiment using a rotating disk by Bennett et al (2015), which I'll read later.

Aug 09, 2019
Ok, the above paper is free access;

https://spiral.im...pted.pdf

That opens the PDF directly. Lebedev is a co-author.

Very interesting experiment. CD won't like much of it. High magnetic Reynold's number, field tied to the plasma, MHD etc etc!

Magnetic fields are also important in accretion disks, where the transport of angular momentum is thought to be the result of turbulence generated by the magneto-rotational instability. We estimate that the magnetic Reynolds number in our experiments is sufficiently high (Rem ∼ 10-100) that the magnetic field is well coupled to the plasma to have an effect on its dynamics. As shown in other wire array Z-pinch experiments, the magnetic field is advected by the plasma streams [14-17] and we expect that a predominantly toroidal magnetic field will be present in the rotating plasma. However the strength of this field is as yet poorly constrained.

Aug 09, 2019
You are dreadfully confused jonesdumb. Although the Z-machine is a machine that creates the z-pinch, the term z-pinch refers to the physical process of the plasma being pinched by the current's torodial magnetic fields. He clearly describes this in the video. He shows the magnetic field configuration at about :53sec in. A few seconds later he explicitly states those fields are what collimates the jets.
The diagram of the magnetic fields, that is Alfvén's diagram, he described that configuration as being a Birkeland current. The z-pinch mechanism is fundamentally associated with these field-aligned currents. This mechanism is responsible for the filamentary structure of the Universe.

Aug 09, 2019
The diagram of the magnetic fields, that is Alfvén's diagram, he described that configuration as being a Birkeland current. The z-pinch mechanism is fundamentally associated with these field-aligned currents. This mechanism is responsible for the filamentary structure of the Universe.


Bollocks. And you claimed that the constriction in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch. It ain't. End of story. Go learn some science, instead of teeny bits of what Alfven said, so that you can carry on with your mindless hero worship. You don't understand the science. It's OK, because we all know that to be a prerequisite of being a Velikovskian loon.
As Lebedev says in his papers, the mechanism is not fully understood, and collimation can happen without magnetic confinement once the jet is launched.

Aug 09, 2019
I want to caution you in your suspicion that "Electric Currents" are involved. It is possible, but there may be something else occurring that is causing that pinching.

Caution if you so choose, but these currents have been confirmed already;
https://www.newsc...t-found/

Aug 09, 2019
I want to caution you in your suspicion that "Electric Currents" are involved. It is possible, but there may be something else occurring that is causing that pinching.

Caution if you so choose, but these currents have been confirmed already;
https://www.newsc...t-found/


Our knowledge of likely currents in astrophysical jets long predates the formation of your cult.

Aug 09, 2019
And as an example of the above;

Current-carrying beams in astrophysics - Models for double radio sources and jets
Benford, G. (1978)
http://adsabs.har...83...29B

Aug 09, 2019
Whoops, editing the above cut part of my post out. I only mentioned that paper as I recognised the author as somebody whose sci-fi books I have read;

https://en.wikipe..._Benford

Aug 09, 2019
And you claimed that the constriction in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch.

Yes, as Lebedev states in the video, the z-pinch mechanism (the toroidal magnetic fields constricting the plasma) is the cause of the collimation of the plasma over the whole length of the jets. See the magnetic field diagram.
As Lebedev says in his papers,

I am pretty certain you don't understand what he is writing, see your quote above;

"...turbulence generated by the magneto-rotational instability...the magnetic field is advected by the plasma streams...predominantly toroidal magnetic field will be present in the rotating plasma..."

IOW, plasma instability, like a plasmoid instability for example...flowing charges (electric currents) create the magnetic fields...and there is a donut shaped magnetic field in the flowing plasma, hence a magnetic plasma structure (AKA, plasmoid)...

Complete fail jonesdumb!


Aug 09, 2019
As induction requires a changing magnetic field, and the induced current is supposed to run in a single direction in most reactor designs, the current in the transformer has to be increased over time to produce the varying magnetic field. This places a limit on the product of confinement time and magnetic field, for any given source of power.


https://en.wikipe.../Z-pinch

Aug 10, 2019
Yes, as Lebedev states in the video, the z-pinch mechanism (the toroidal magnetic fields constricting the plasma) is the cause of the collimation of the plasma over the whole length of the jets. See the magnetic field diagram.


No, he does not. Nor does he in any of his papers. The jet is collimated over the whole length in his experiments. That's assuming they even match reality. There is nothing about further constrictions in the jet being due to 'more z-pinching' going on in a particular zone. Ergo, there is no reason to suggest that as the reason for the constriction seen in the M87 jet. Learn to read and understand scientific papers, woo boy.

Aug 10, 2019
IOW, plasma instability, like a plasmoid instability for example...flowing charges (electric currents) create the magnetic fields...and there is a donut shaped magnetic field in the flowing plasma, hence a magnetic plasma structure (AKA, plasmoid)...


Wrong. He is saying, you illiterate clown, that his plasma has a high magnetic Reynolds number. Remember that? I've told you about it often enough. That means the magnetic field is tied to the plasma. Frozen-in, woo boy. Therefore, when the plasma moves, so does the field. It is not rocket science to understand that passage, you clown. And nowhere does he mention any plasmoid woo.

Aug 10, 2019
So, what do S. V. Lebedev, A. Frank, and D. D. Ryutov have to say about where these accretion disks come from? There should be a clue in the name, for the hard of thinking!

Accretion disks (Pringle, 1981) are formed around a variety of celestial objects, from young stars to ***supermassive black holes*** in the center of galaxies. They "feed" central objects and are also thought to be responsible for the formation of jets that emanate from the vicinity of the central object.


The interaction of ***gravity***, shear flows, and magnetic fields creates a complex dynamical system that is the subject of active study observationally, theoretically, and numerically. The role of the fluid turbulence, magnetic fields, and disk vertical structure are all examples of open questions in the study of accretion disks.


https://journals....1.025002

Aug 10, 2019
^^^^^^.........

Unfortunately, laboratory experiments, including those using pulsed-power devices, cannot reproduce ***the gravity of the central object***, and this limitation makes laboratory simulation of full accretion disk physics impossible. Still, as shown in recent years, it is possible to reproduce key aspects of the sheared rotation of magnetized plasmas and transformation of the radially convergent flow into the bipolar jets (Ryutov, 2011). This experimental approach allows studies of fast phenomena occurring on a time scale of one rotation period. Modeling phenomena that develop on time scales of many (∼100) rotation periods remain beyond the current capabilities of pulsed-power or laser-driven experiments.


Aug 10, 2019
.................

Typical flow parameters in the jets formed from tungsten wires were..... (snipped values that will mean nothing to innumerate Velikovskians)........ (all values were inferred from ***MHD simulations***, shadowgraphy, and interferography). As seen from these numbers, the jet is made of a highly collisional plasma (more snipped numbers) that can be accurately described by the ***standard MHD equations***.

Aug 10, 2019
This is useless when you don't even grasp basic definitions such as the z-pinch mechanism, nor are you able to understand the words coming out of his mouth when he states "these fields are responsible for driving the jets over the entire length". One of two things is likely, you are a despicable lying POS (undoubtedly), or you are dumb as a bag of rocks (obviously).

Aug 10, 2019
..................

The magnetic Reynolds number exceeds unity which means that the radial magnetic field embedded in the rotating disk will experience significant stretching by differential rotation. Such "winding" of the field is an essential step in so-called α−Ω dynamo models* which are expected to be a principal means by which fields are generated in disks.


Even more important, the late-time images in Fig.31 show a significant inward expansion of the inner boundary of the disk, which occurs on a time scale of only ∼ 50ns (∼0.5 of rotation period). This time scale is significantly (by 4–5 orders of magnitude) smaller than the diffusion time calculated for the classical(Spitzer) viscosity**


*See; http://web.gps.ca...Ch22.pdf

**Translation; the magnetic field has not had time to diffuse from the plasma. Therefore it is carried by the plasma. AKA, frozen-in.


Aug 10, 2019
This is useless when you don't even grasp basic definitions such as the z-pinch mechanism, nor are you able to understand the words coming out of his mouth when he states "these fields are responsible for driving the jets over the entire length". One of two things is likely, you are a despicable lying POS (undoubtedly), or you are dumb as a bag of rocks (obviously).


Wrong. It is collimated, and only in these experiments. I am still waiting for you to show how this constriction, as seen in the M87 jet, is modelled by Lebedev. Or anybody else. You made a claim. Back it up. You can't because the science is beyond you, and you cannot understand scientific papers. Your limit is trying to comprehend minutes-long videos. Read the papers, dummy.

Aug 10, 2019
that his plasma has a high magnetic Reynolds number. Remember that?

Oh, you mean where he states;
"We ***estimate*** that the magnetic Reynolds number in our experiments is sufficiently high (Rem ∼ 10-100) that the magnetic field is well coupled to the plasma to have an effect on its dynamics."
Do you know what the word ***estimate*** means?

He then states that, like the z-pinch experiments, the magnetic fields are created by the electric currents.

I do need to apologize to all bags of rocks out there, to compare you to jonesdumb was a terrible insult.

Aug 10, 2019
that his plasma has a high magnetic Reynolds number. Remember that?

Oh, you mean where he states;
"We ***estimate*** that the magnetic Reynolds number in our experiments is sufficiently high (Rem ∼ 10-100) that the magnetic field is well coupled to the plasma to have an effect on its dynamics."
Do you know what the word ***estimate*** means?

He then states that, like the z-pinch experiments, the magnetic fields are created by the electric currents.

I do need to apologize to all bags of rocks out there, to compare you to jonesdumb was a terrible insult.


Idiot., This is what I mean! You are thick, woo boy. The toroidal fields in the jet are due to the current. The field in the accretion disk is not. See that bit about magnetic Reynolds number, thicko? That is him saying the jet is launched due to the twisting up of the fields (being frozen-in) by the rotation of the disk. That, you uneducated clown, is what magneto-rotational means. Duh!

Aug 10, 2019
Here is the paper I've been quoting from;
Exploring astrophysics-relevant magnetohydrodynamics with pulsed-power laboratory facilities
S. V. Lebedev, A. Frank, and D. D. Ryutov
http://sci-hub.se...1.025002

(Hint: clue in the title of the paper, beginning with 'M')

See section IV in particular. Moreover, try to understand it. Difficult, I know, given your complete lack of understanding of plasma physics, but give it a try anyway.

Aug 10, 2019
The toroidal fields in the jet are due to the current.

Indeed, due to the current in the z direction and the toroidal fields constricting the current. Hence the terminology z-pinch. Just as he explained it in the video.

Aug 10, 2019
The toroidal fields in the jet are due to the current.

Indeed, due to the current in the z direction and the toroidal fields constricting the current. Hence the terminology z-pinch. Just as he explained it in the video.


Yep, and nothing to do with the constriction in the M87 jet. And , as Lebedev says;

The toroidal magnetic field in the cavity is supported by the current propagating through the central jet and the cavity's envelope. The growth of the cavity is driven via injection of magnetic energy at its base. In **astrophysical scenarios** this is provided by the winding of the initially poloidal magnetic field by rotation of an accretion disk. In **laboratory experiments** a similar configuration is generated via appropriately configuring the path of an electrical current driven by a pulsed-power generator as will be discussed next.


So, they are making a distinction between the lab set up, and what is believed to happen in reality.

Aug 10, 2019
Damn you are stoopid! Who puts your pants on again?

Aug 10, 2019
Damn you are stoopid! Who puts your pants on again?


I quoted the passage. What is your problem? Apart from being scientifically illiterate? You do not understand the science. That is why you cannot understand scientific papers. It is why it is so easy to show where clowns like you are wrong. Hint; in the paper he draws a distinction of how the fields are formed in the ***experiment*** and in ***reality***. Why is that? Because it is difficult to produce a black hole in a lab. Thankfully. Hence why they go on to discuss rotating disk experiments in section IV. Read it. Understand it.

Aug 10, 2019
The toroidal fields in the jet are due to the current.


Indeed, due to the current in the z direction and the toroidal fields constricting the current. Hence the terminology z-pinch. Just as he explained it in the video.


Yep, and nothing to do with the constriction in the M87 jet.

This is exactly the mechanism that describes the collimation of the jets, the z-pinch.

Aug 10, 2019
The toroidal fields in the jet are due to the current.


Indeed, due to the current in the z direction and the toroidal fields constricting the current. Hence the terminology z-pinch. Just as he explained it in the video.


Yep, and nothing to do with the constriction in the M87 jet.

This is exactly the mechanism that describes the collimation of the jets, the z-pinch.


Nope, it is cylindrically symmetric. Show me where the extra pinching comes from in any of his papers. You can't.

Aug 10, 2019
My god your stoopidity knows no bounds! The "cylindrically symmetric" jets are subjected to the z-pinch mechanism along the whole length of the jets (AKA, Birkeland currents). He clearly states this in the video.

BTW, why did you introduce the discussion of the accretion disk? Change the subject much? At no point was this discussion about the creation of the jets, only the pinching of those currents. Try and catch up and pull your head out of your backside.

Aug 10, 2019
My god your stoopidity knows no bounds! The "cylindrically symmetric" jets are subjected to the z-pinch mechanism along the whole length of the jets (AKA, Birkeland currents). He clearly states this in the video.

BTW, why did you introduce the discussion of the accretion disk? Change the subject much? At no point was this discussion about the creation of the jets, only the pinching of those currents. Try and catch up and pull your head out of your backside.


And the pinch is cylindrically symmetrical, you utter clown. Where is he showing in any of his papers where a constriction of the jet, as seen at M87, is due to some further pinching of the cylindrically symmetric jet? Point it out. He's been involved in plenty of papers. Show me.

Aug 10, 2019
And if anybody thinks that this mechanism of collimating and accelerating jets is something new from Lebedev, it isn't. Not that he is claiming any such thing, but it appears to be news to Velikovskians. Probably due to it finally appearing on Youtube, from whence they get all their 'science'!

See, for instance;

Magnetohydrodynamical winds from an accretion disk - Driving by the magnetic pressure and tension of toroidal magnetic fields
Fukue, J. (1990)
http://articles.a...000.html

....and;

A magnetodynamic mechanism for the formation of astrophysical jets. II - Dynamical processes in the accretion of magnetized mass in rotation
Shibata, K. & Uchida, Y. (1986)
http://adsabs.har...38..631S

....... and references therein.

Aug 10, 2019
What are you talking about with "further pinching of the cylindrically symmetric jet"?
Remember this diagram from the video?
https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg
The straight black arrow is the current in the z direction. The green circular lines, torodial magnetic fields, squeeze the plasma in the current, the z-pinch mechanism. The whole length of the "cylindrically symmetric" Birkeland currents experience these z-pinch forces.
The hourglass shape you seem to be conflating with this discussion arises when instabilities form within the z-pinch. Such as a plasmoid arising in a Birkeland current, as seen in this image;
https://scitechda...bula.jpg
The whole length of the Birkeland current is subject to the z-pinch forces, however where the "further pinching" occurs there is an instability present which increases the current density and the strength of the magnetic field. The degree of intensity of the field is the change

Aug 10, 2019
^^^^^Word salad. Show me where Lebedev has shown this. I am not interested in your uneducated opinions of a subject that you don't understand.

Aug 10, 2019
^^^^^Word salad. Show me where Lebedev has shown this. I am not interested in your uneducated opinions of a subject that you don't understand.

In other words, you have been shown to look a fool and you want to change the subject again. Watch the video, he explained it clearly at about one minute in. When the pretty picture of the jets shows up he states; "...these fields (z-pinch) are what drives the jets in astrophysical models..."
By your responses you clearly don't understand the concept at all.

Aug 10, 2019
^^^^^Word salad. Show me where Lebedev has shown this. I am not interested in your uneducated opinions of a subject that you don't understand.

In other words, you have been shown to look a fool and you want to change the subject again. Watch the video, he explained it clearly at about one minute in. When the pretty picture of the jets shows up he states; "...these fields (z-pinch) are what drives the jets in astrophysical models..."
By your responses you clearly don't understand the concept at all.


And you claimed, you idiot, that a constriction in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch. Where is this constriction in Lebedev's papers? Where is it explained elsewhere? Stop commenting on sh!t you don't understand, woo boy. Stick to Earth orbiting Saturn.

Aug 10, 2019
By your responses you clearly don't understand the concept at all.


I just linked you to papers saying exactly that from 1986 & 1990, you utter moron! The helical fields, possibly, drive the jet acceleration and collimation. Learn to read, you tool. Why are you getting so giddy about this sh!t, when it has been known and/or proposed for many decades? Because somebody put it on Youtube? Lol. Why hadn't you seen the 1986 paper? Or the 1990 paper? Or the first modelling of currents in AGN jets in the 70s? Why is this news to you? WTF are you talking about? Learn the subject, you clown.

Aug 10, 2019
Another point to make is the difference between toroidal and helical fields. Helical fields seem to be the most likely, based on observation. As can be seen in Fig. 3 of this paper;

Evidence for Helical Magnetic Fields Associated with AGN Jets and the Action of a Cosmic Battery
Gabuzda, D.
https://www.mdpi..../1/5/htm

Might also be worth looking at Figs. 1 & 2, as well.

Aug 10, 2019
You brought up irrelevant papers in effort to change the subject, I linked a video which he described the z-pinch mechanism clearly. My point has been made, I need not go further.

Do you at least understand the concept yet?
And you claimed, you idiot, that a constriction in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch.

Oops, not even close. You still don't get it.

Aug 10, 2019
You brought up irrelevant papers in effort to change the subject, I linked a video which he described the z-pinch mechanism clearly. My point has been made, I need not go further.
Do you at least understand the concept yet?


The papers are not irrelevant, you tool. They are describing, over three decades ago, the same mechanism. They are just not performing the experiments in a lab. This is not news, woo boy. What Lebedev at al are doing is confirming the details of what has been proposed long since before your cult came into existence.

Aug 10, 2019
You brought up irrelevant papers in effort to change the subject, I linked a video which he described the z-pinch mechanism clearly. My point has been made, I need not go further.

Do you at least understand the concept yet?
And you claimed, you idiot, that a constriction in the M87 jet was due to a z-pinch.

Oops, not even close. You still don't get it.


Yes, I do, due to having a far better understanding of the subject than a clown like you. What happens when you run a current through a wire, nobhead? What does the magnetic field look like? So, what would one expect it to look like in an AGN jet that is carrying a current?

Aug 10, 2019
Another point to make is the difference between toroidal and helical fields. Helical fields seem to be the most likely, based on observation.

You didn't look at this diagram, did you?
https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg
Note the helical and toroidal fields. The toroidal fields are a result of the helical electric current, this is a Birkeland current.
Evidence for Helical Magnetic Fields Associated with AGN Jets and the Action of a Cosmic Battery
Gabuzda, D.

LOL, his diagram for these currents look conspicuously like Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current;
http://www.ptep-o...1-13.PDF
See figs. 3-8.....


Aug 10, 2019
Another point to make is the difference between toroidal and helical fields. Helical fields seem to be the most likely, based on observation.

You didn't look at this diagram, did you?
https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg
See figs. 3-8.....



I see no mention of Birkeland currents in any papers on AGN jets. And Scott is a complete tool! And I've looked at plenty of his diagrams. In his papers.

Aug 10, 2019
And Scott's pictures look nothing like those of Gabuzda. See how her 'end on' view has current heading inward in the central helical field? And outward between that and the outer helical field? Looks nothing like a Birkeland current to me. I have, however, seen it described as similar to a coaxial cable current. Scott shows only one direction of current in his Fig, 3. In the + z direction. Where is the incoming current?

Aug 10, 2019
Another point to make is the difference between toroidal and helical fields. Helical fields seem to be the most likely, based on observation.

You didn't look at this diagram, did you?
https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg]https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg[/url]
See figs. 3-8.....



I see no mention of Birkeland currents in any papers on AGN jets. And Scott is a complete tool! And I've looked at plenty of his diagrams. In his papers.

Lebedev used this diagram ( https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg]https://en.m.wiki...rope.svg[/url] ) to describe the magnetic field of the jets, the same figure is found on the wikistupidia Birkeland current page;
https://en.m.wiki..._current
It is what it is, regardless of what people call it.

Aug 10, 2019

It is what it is, regardless of what people call it.


Nope. Look at his papers. I see no figures resembling a Birkeland current. Where is your incoming current? As shown in the Gabuzda paper?

Aug 10, 2019
@Castrogiovanni
@cantdrive85.

Careful, @Castro, both the 'launching' magnetic field pattern and the 'self-formed' magnetic field pattern along the length/path of the jet itself are both responsible for what we 'see' overall once the jets are self-stabilised/established across significant time/space. Moreover. you must have seen many of those observed jets which have 'diamond patterns' formed n the plasma stream where 'pinches occur in a regular periodic/resonant pattern along the full stream length until final stopping far into space. And again moreover, your own Benford reference also acknowledges the "circuit" aspect as part of his treatment to better understand/reproduce the observed dynamics/patterns...ie:
Treating beams by a circuit analogy implies that Ohmic dissipation can occur at the tips of the beams, re-accelerating particles, and this may explain the high energies in double radio sources.
You two tacitly agree on many things, but personal animosity buries it? :)

Aug 10, 2019
See how her 'end on' view has current heading inward in the central helical field? And outward between that and the outer helical field?

That is Dr. Scott's model, it is the source of the counter-rotating cylinders. It just goes to show you understand nothing whatsoever.

Aug 10, 2019

It is what it is, regardless of what people call it.


Nope. Look at his papers. I see no figures resembling a Birkeland current. Where is your incoming current? As shown in the Gabuzda paper?

You keep diverting attention away from the video, do you think he is lying? The figure they included in the video matches the figure Alfvén proposed as the model of the Birkeland current. Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current is coaxial, just as in the paper you linked.
And lastly, from the Gabuzda paper, the first sentence states;
"Theoretical models for the electromagnetic launching of astrophysical jets have long indicated that this process should generate helical magnetic fields, which should then propagate outward with the jet plasma."

"Electromagnetic launching"... Nothing to do with a black hole monster.

Aug 10, 2019
@cantdrive85
@Castrogiovanni.

Careful, @cantdrive, you miss the point of what creates that 'EM launching' pattern in the first place (ie, the toroidal etc material structure orbiting/accreting around the gravitationally accreting central material body). Seems that both you and Castro have 'blind spots' where your personal animosity and one-eyed biases 'hide' the otherwise bleeding obvious things from your respective perspectives. Try to talk to each other and get past your respective personal animosity and biases and blind spots...and thus get to the full reality rather than keeping to your respective 'partial realities' while talking past each other. Good luck to you both in your further discussions. :)

Aug 10, 2019
See how her 'end on' view has current heading inward in the central helical field? And outward between that and the outer helical field?

That is Dr. Scott's model, it is the source of the counter-rotating cylinders. It just goes to show you understand nothing whatsoever.


Wrong. He is only showing the current going in the + z direction. See the little blue x in a circle? That is his current. Dummy. Scott is a cretin. And certainly no plasma physicist.

Aug 10, 2019

"Electromagnetic launching"... Nothing to do with a black hole monster.


Everything to do with a black hole, you cretin. As every paper on the subject will tell you. Learn to read, dumbo.

Aug 10, 2019
@Castrobazinga
Incidentally, you left the other phorum in which I have just recently submitted a link to the Scientific American article of 2014 that explains the premise that it is 'time' that is responsible for the differences in Atomic Clocks, and avoids mentioning Gravity's effects on the Mass of the two atomic clocks. I will expect that you will face up to the omission in the article and the premise-in-general of the strength of the gravitational effects At Altitude on such clocks.
But I will leave you here to make a further fool of yourself regarding the jet at M87. Carry on.

Aug 10, 2019
@Castrobazinga
Incidentally, you left the other phorum in which I have just recently submitted a link to the Scientific American article of 2014 that explains the premise that it is 'time' that is responsible for the differences in Atomic Clocks, and avoids mentioning Gravity's effects on the Mass of the two atomic clocks. I will expect that you will face up to the omission in the article and the premise-in-general of the strength of the gravitational effects At Altitude on such clocks.
But I will leave you here to make a further fool of yourself regarding the jet at M87. Carry on.


WTF are you talking about lizard boy? You already lost that argument, remember?

Aug 10, 2019
See how her 'end on' view has current heading inward in the central helical field? And outward between that and the outer helical field?

That is Dr. Scott's model, it is the source of the counter-rotating cylinders. It just goes to show you understand nothing whatsoever.


Wrong. He is only showing the current going in the + z direction. See the little blue x in a circle? That is his current. Dummy. Scott is a cretin. And certainly no plasma physicist.

From his paper, while pretending you aren't resorting to name calling;
"The angle of pitch of the helix varies smoothly and continuously with increasing radial distance, r, from the central axis of the current out as far as the plasma's current-carrying charge density extends. This causes cyclical reversals of direction (counter-flows) in both the axial and azimuthal magnetic field and its collinear current density."
And see fig. 5, it shows the alternating currents. Stop lying jonesdumb.

Aug 10, 2019

And see fig. 5, it shows the alternating currents. Stop lying jonesdumb.


Scott is a clown. Please refer to real plasma physicists. His Fig. 5 bears no resemblance to the figures I referred to. Central axis - current incoming. Outer axis - current outgoing. Scott's laughable, erroneous 'paper', in a predatory journal, does not count as valid science. He is clueless. And is certainly not a plasma physicist. He is also a liar, by the way.

Aug 11, 2019

And see fig. 5, it shows the alternating currents. Stop lying jonesdumb.


Scott is a clown. Please refer to real plasma physicists. His Fig. 5 bears no resemblance to the figures I referred to. Central axis - current incoming. Outer axis - current outgoing. Scott's laughable, erroneous 'paper', in a predatory journal, does not count as valid science. He is clueless. And is certainly not a plasma physicist. He is also a liar, by the way.

All you got is name calling and ad hominem attacks. You are the clueless liar.

Aug 11, 2019

All you got is name calling and ad hominem attacks. You are the clueless liar.


Nope, Scott is talking out of his arse in a crap, erroneous paper, in a fake, predatory journal. And Scott is the liar. Want to know why? Happy to clue you in. One would go so far as to call it professional misconduct, had it not appeared in a 'journal' where nobody was ever going to see it. Like I say, happy to fill in the details of his misconduct. Let me know. Got an email from the aggrieved author too. Sneaky, lying bastard, is Scott. As well as being clueless regards plasma/ astrophysics. Which would explain why he belongs to your Velikovskian cult.

Aug 11, 2019

All you got is name calling and ad hominem attacks. You are the clueless liar.


Nope, Scott is talking out of his arse in a crap, erroneous paper, in a fake, predatory journal. And Scott is the liar. Want to know why? Happy to clue you in. One would go so far as to call it professional misconduct, had it not appeared in a 'journal' where nobody was ever going to see it. Like I say, happy to fill in the details of his misconduct. Let me know. Got an email from the aggrieved author too. Sneaky, lying bastard, is Scott. As well as being clueless regards plasma/ astrophysics. Which would explain why he belongs to your Velikovskian cult.

Knowing how you lie it is nothing more than a complete fabrication to protect your dead guesswork.

Aug 11, 2019
What I do see, however, is a diagram of a current that looks remarkably like what Scott produced three years prior than the paper you linked. Seems as if your author stole Dr. Scott's model and tried to pass it as his own. Deplorable to say the least.

Aug 11, 2019
What I do see, however, is a diagram of a current that looks remarkably like what Scott produced three years prior than the paper you linked. Seems as if your author stole Dr. Scott's model and tried to pass it as his own. Deplorable to say the least.


Wrong. It is nothing like Scott's woo. Where is the current shown in his nonsense? I told you - the blue cross. That means it is heading into the page. In the + z direction. Now, he has a bunch of concentric fields, alternating between clockwise and anticlockwise directions. What is the RH rule? So, where is the current one out from the centre that causes the anticlockwise motion of that field? And the current causing it to revert to clockwise in the next field? And so on. It is pure bollocks.
There are only two sources of current in the coaxial model. One travelling down the central axis, and one travelling in the opposite direction between the central axis and the surrounding helical field. The two have nothing in common.

Aug 11, 2019
Knowing how you lie it is nothing more than a complete fabrication to protect your dead guesswork.


I don't have any guesswork. I have observation, valid science and evidence. You are getting confused with your cult's unscientific fairy tales.
As for Scott - he lied. In his dumb dark matter 'paper', in the crank predatory journal, PiP. As well as stuffing up the maths, he wrote;

It has been suggested [8] that galaxies form on and along cosmic Birkeland currents.


Which is an outright lie. Reference [8] is to an article on astronomy.com! However, the paper is freely available. So, why didn't he reference the paper? Because he knew he was lying. Neither the article nor the paper mention anything about galaxies forming along Birkeland currents. It is a total fabrication to suggest that the article or paper's authors have suggested such idiocy. It is his uneducated opinion only, and he should have made that clear. He is a fraud. More to come, if you want?

Aug 11, 2019
So, the paper which the article refers to, and that Scott did his utmost not to reference, was;

Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): fine filaments of galaxies detected within voids
Alpaslan, M. et al.
https://academic..../1393805 (free access!)

Scott's 'paper' is the one linked by CD;

http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF

The false claim is made at the start of section 6. The article that Scott referenced, in order not to bring his lies to the attention of the author, is this one;

http://www.astron...ty-space

Email correspondence between myself and the lead author;

My email;
https://www.chris...c013.jpg

Alpaslan's reply;
https://www.chris...47a8.jpg

Aug 11, 2019
So you got nothing, Dr. Scott referred to an article about galaxies forming along galactic Birkeland currents. Your author acknowledged they form along "faint strings". In a Plasma Universe those faint strings are Birkeland currents, and galaxies form along them as is predicted. He didn't claim the paper because that would have been fraud, he did however point to the observation and not the plasma ignoramuse's interpretation.
And, Lian jonesdumb, Your email shows even further you're a despicable POS as to how you frame your inquiry.
The only fraud I see is the paper using a slightly altered diagram of Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current as their own.

Aug 11, 2019

The only fraud I see is the paper using a slightly altered diagram of Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current as their own.


Give up you uneducated poser. Nobody would have seen the idiot Scott's hilarious diagram! It was in a crank, predatory journal. It was meant not to be seen! He was posing for idiots like you. And he lied. Nobody in the article or paper claimed anything about Birkeland currents. That is something he made up (lied about), and deliberately avoided referencing the paper. If it is that uneducated idiot's claim that they are Birkeland currents, then he should make it plain that it is HIS claim. He didn't . He most definitely used the paper (indirectly) to suggest others had made those claims. He is a fraud and a liar. As well as being crap at physics. That is why he is a nonentity, hanging around with other liars and loons of the electric looniverse cult.
And he screwed up the maths! He is a waste of space.

Aug 11, 2019
And if anyone cannot tell the difference between the idiotic diagram of Scott, and that of Gabuzda, then they are even more stupid than originally believed. If that is possible!

Aug 11, 2019
Nobody in the article or paper claimed anything about Birkeland currents

There is no doubt that the plasma ignoramuses claimed anything about Birkeland currents, no they called them by the plasma ignoramuse terminology of "cosmic strings". Very sciency of them. They probably call them "cosmic strings" of "gas" as well. And likely talked about other such pseudoscientific claptrap like frozen-in fields. You cannot penalize Dr. Scott because of the plasma ignoramuses ignorance of plasma physics. They are tacitly admitting just what Dr. Scott explained.
Got it? Lyin' Ian?

Aug 11, 2019
And if anyone cannot tell the difference between the idiotic diagram of Scott, and that of Gabuzda, then they are even more stupid than originally believed. If that is possible!

Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current is quantified, far more complex/complete, and accurate (including the observed Marklund convection) than the rudimentary diagram of Gabuzda. It does, however, mimic Dr. Scott's coaxial current almost identically.

Aug 11, 2019
Nobody in the article or paper claimed anything about Birkeland currents

There is no doubt that the plasma ignoramuses claimed anything about Birkeland currents, no they called them by the plasma ignoramuse terminology of "cosmic strings". Very sciency of them. They probably call them "cosmic strings" of "gas" as well. And likely talked about other such pseudoscientific claptrap like frozen-in fields. You cannot penalize Dr. Scott because of the plasma ignoramuses ignorance of plasma physics. They are tacitly admitting just what Dr. Scott explained.
Got it? Lyin' Ian?


Nope, the idiot Scott is clueless about plasma physics. And nobody sane is claiming the Cosmic Web is electric woo! Nobody. In fact, in simulations, it only comes about if you include DM. Funnily enough, it doesn't show up all over the sky in sychrotron. No currents, woo boy. Which is why nobody is claiming such lunacy.

Aug 11, 2019
And if anyone cannot tell the difference between the idiotic diagram of Scott, and that of Gabuzda, then they are even more stupid than originally believed. If that is possible!

Dr. Scott's model of a Birkeland current is quantified, far more complex/complete, and accurate (including the observed Marklund convection) than the rudimentary diagram of Gabuzda. It does, however, mimic Dr. Scott's coaxial current almost identically.


Wrong. Scott has the current going in one direction. Bur still has concentric rings of field following different directions. That is nothing like what real plasma physicists have. And Scott is not a plasma physicist. Or any other sort of physicist. He is a senile retired EE. Who thinks one can explain the fast solar wind with an electric field! Failing to realise (idiot that he is) that + & - are accelerated in opposite directions in an electric field! Schoolboy error. The guy is a complete loser.

Aug 11, 2019
Scott has the current going in one direction. Bur still has concentric rings of field following different directions.

Man, you are dumb! Why do you think the field is changing? Because the currents are dumbass. He states this explicitly. Do you know what the words "main current" implies? Obviously not. Again, who puts on your pants?

Aug 12, 2019
Scott has the current going in one direction. Bur still has concentric rings of field following different directions.

Man, you are dumb! Why do you think the field is changing? Because the currents are dumbass. He states this explicitly. Do you know what the words "main current" implies? Obviously not. Again, who puts on your pants?


And why and how are these currents changing in such a way as to have concentric rings of opposite field? Where has this been suggested and written up? I am not talking about a bunch of erroneous crap in a crank, predatory journal, by a senile, retired EE with zero knowledge of plasma and astrophysics? You know - by a real scientist in a real paper?

Aug 12, 2019
^^^^^More to the point, why is Scott lying about what other scientists have claimed? And why did he do this by referencing an article, when the paper was freely available? I'll tell you why - because he knew he was lying, and even in this execrable journal, any reference to the original paper would have added to its citations, which may well have been noticed by the authors. Who, as shown, think he is talking out of his arse.
This is disgraceful behaviour, but not untypical of the EU nutjobs. Had Scott been a working scientist, with an employer, he would be in trouble.

Aug 12, 2019
And why and how are these currents changing in such a way as to have concentric rings of opposite field?

Well, you will have the read his paper as he is the first to complete and quantify Lindquist's bessel solution. In addition, you will actually have to understand what he wrote which you obviously didn't else you wouldn't be asking a question which was answered in the paper.
More to the point, why is Scott lying about what other scientists have claimed?

I already explained that you are the liar, not he. He linked the article as he was directing the point to the observation, not the plasma ignoramuse's interpretation. The plasma ignoramuses tacitly admitted to Scott's claim, but their ignorance of plasma physics prevents them from seeing the obvious.

Aug 12, 2019
^^^^^
Idiot. The paper is trash, and he f***s up the maths. As already shown. And he most definitely lied. It is as plain as the nose on your face, woo boy. Read it;

It has been suggested [8] that galaxies form on and along cosmic Birkeland currents


Which is a complete lie. Reference [8] says nothing of the sort. As the author of the paper confirmed. So, who is suggesting it? The tosser Scott. So, why not reference his own woo, instead of trying to pretend that this author supports him? Because he is a liar. As well as being totally incompetent.

Aug 12, 2019
^^^^^ Want to see how that lie should have been worded, so as not to be the obvious lie that it is?

It has been suggested that galaxies form along filaments of the cosmic web [8]. My idiotic interpretation is that these filaments are Birkeland currents.
That would be honest and accurate. And reference [8] would be to the freely accessible paper, not a bloody astronomy.com article, in order to escape the notice of the authors. Like I said; he is a sneaky, lying bastard. And clueless to boot.

Aug 12, 2019
There are no maths errors, just a moron reading it who doesn't get it.
And it is not Scott's problem that the plasma ignoramuses are ignorant of plasma physics. Cosmic strings are not an official name for anything, whereas Birkeland currents are acknowledged as the correct terminology for field aligned currents.

Aug 12, 2019
There are no maths errors, just a moron reading it who doesn't get it.
And it is not Scott's problem that the plasma ignoramuses are ignorant of plasma physics. Cosmic strings are not an official name for anything, whereas Birkeland currents are acknowledged as the correct terminology for field aligned currents.


Yep, there are maths errors. And he lied. Nobody is claiming that the cosmic web is Birkeland current woo. Only idiots. Scott's problem is that he lied that other people had made this claim. He lied. Simple.

Aug 12, 2019
Stop lying, lyin' Ian jonesdumb. There are no maths errors, only you and that other moron have made the claim. One moron plus you equals two morons, no maths errors there.

And as already explained, you cannot penalize Scott for the ignorance of yourself and the rest of the plasma ignoramuses. In a Plasma Universe, those currents are considered Birkeland currents.

Aug 12, 2019
Stop lying, lyin' Ian jonesdumb. There are no maths errors, only you and that other moron have made the claim. One moron plus you equals two morons, no maths errors there.

And as already explained, you cannot penalize Scott for the ignorance of yourself and the rest of the plasma ignoramuses. In a Plasma Universe, those currents are considered Birkeland currents.


Yep, maths errors. And we are likely among the very few people who have actually critically assessed that heap of crap.
And he lied. It doesn't matter what the deluded cretin believes - he referenced somebody else as suggesting the same thing. Ergo, he lied. I know of nobody who has suggested the cosmic web is anything to do with Birkeland currents. Only the nonentity Scott.

Aug 12, 2019
And we are likely among the very few people who have actually critically assessed that heap of crap.

ROTFLMFAO! You cannot critically assess the snap on your pants let alone maths equations such as written in Scott's paper. And the maths isn't Scott's, he merely completed Lindquist's bessel solutions and gave them physical meaning. Your childish claims are completely unfounded, just as are your ad hominem rants.

Aug 12, 2019
And we are likely among the very few people who have actually critically assessed that heap of crap.

ROTFLMFAO! You cannot critically assess the snap on your pants let alone maths equations such as written in Scott's paper. And the maths isn't Scott's, he merely completed Lindquist's bessel solutions and gave them physical meaning. Your childish claims are completely unfounded, just as are your ad hominem rants.


Wrong. As pointed out, you clown. He f****ed up the substitutions in the equations. Want to take it to a physics forum? Get an independent view? He screwed up. His paper is a pile of erroneous, unscientific crap, in a predatory journal. If it wasn't, he'd have seen some peer review which told him essentially what I have just said. He hasn't got the cojones to send that garbage to a real journal. Or maybe he did? Maybe he sent it to a few. And the only one he could get it published in was a crank, predatory, pay-to-publish rag!

Aug 12, 2019
And something else a competent scientist wouldn't do, and a proper journal wouldn't allow - referencing bloody sci-news website articles, and sodding Youtube videos!

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