Electrical Polarity Of Our Atmosphere.

[Village Idiot]

so, you say you have an electronics background so why don't you build or buy the equipment & conduct the experiment(s) and report the results instead of simply decrying what others have done? :shrug:

 

 

Let me try again, to explain that expert council from anointed experts has been advising us that Earth has a negative electrical charge and her atmosphere has an equal and opposite electrical charge. (That would be positive.) All I want to know is how they reached their determination of the atmosphere's electrical polarity. You are quite correct in your supposition that I do not build or buy (what?) equipment and conduct (what?) experiment(s). One reason for not doing so is that I do not know what experimental procedures (or windfall evidence) an anointed one will declare to have been involved with their accomplishment. That is why I ask my question. Watashi admits to presenting the appearance of finding the work of others somehow under suspicion, but my quest just makes that a dead giveaway. It breaks my heart to be so unkind, but isn't it unavoidable? Is it really fair for you to accuse me of decrying what others have done? And conversely, how is it so OK for you to decry me for decrying others. If the foo shxts put it on.

[Turtle]

None of this posting's message is on-topic. Thanks for trying to help just the same.

 

you're welcome.

 

The word "charge" is such a useful thing that we use it for everything. Teddy Roosevelt is alleged to have use the word in Cuba, but it was not really at San Juan Hill. We have to narrow down on our application of the word here, and "macroscopic" seems to fit the bill.

 

An electron is often called a charged particle. The "ed" suffix implies that some charging process has proceeded in the past, but no one has ever charged an electron and what is more, they cannot be discharged to the extent that they would lose their electrical influence.

 

Here, on this thread, the question of the day pertains to a quest for technical evidence of any positive macroscopic electric charge to the earth's atmosphere. The meaning of the word "macroscopic" contrasts with the word "microscopic" in similar fashion to what happens for a monkey with a telescope. When he or she peeks in the proper lens, sighted objects seem closer. When he or she peeks through the objective lens, sighted objects seem farther away, but a broader scope is afforded the viewer. The macroscopic charge of a planet, lets say as a count of the total extra electron count, remains completely independent from how much or how little ionization is occurring within. Electrons arrive as discrete little pieces of matter, and cannot travel by radiation.

 

so, when the idea of using a field mill came up as a means of determing a [local?] [macrospic?] charge i got that your objection was that you didn't know if such a device could also indicate the polarity of that charge. the implication to me was that if you could understand that -and per se see how- the device could do that, then it would indeed be the equivalent of a monkey looking the broad way through a telescope. (since a field mill accumulates many charged particles on its plate in a cycle, i presume it isn't a "microscopic" observation.)

 

so, the one link/reference i gave is exactly what you said/implied that you needed; a peek inside a field mill specifically credited/designed with determining polarity of a charge in the atmosphere. so, did you peek inside? did i miss your dismissing field mills on the account i just gave? my point in all of it is to answer you question about how annointed experts know the polarity, rather than just fudging it in.

 

Let me try again, to explain that expert council from anointed experts has been advising us that Earth has a negative electrical charge and her atmosphere has an equal and opposite electrical charge. (That would be positive.) All I want to know is how they reached their determination of the atmosphere's electrical polarity. You are quite correct in your supposition that I do not build or buy (what?) equipment and conduct (what?) experiment(s). One reason for not doing so is that I do not know what experimental procedures (or windfall evidence) an anointed one will declare to have been involved with their accomplishment. That is why I ask my question.

 

i think i covered most of this just now.

 

Watashi admits to presenting the appearance of finding the work of others somehow under suspicion, but my quest just makes that a dead giveaway. It breaks my heart to be so unkind, but isn't it unavoidable? Is it really fair for you to accuse me of decrying what others have done? And conversely, how is it so OK for you to decry me for decrying others. If the foo shxts put it on.

 

well, i suppose we think, therefore we argue. the decrying in-and-of-itself is no more-or-less than questioning, i agree. yes, it is fair. the difference between our decries i would say is that you only offer suspicions and inuendo where as i have offered reasons and/or a method for you to allay your suspicions.

 

on the matter of charges & polarity on cosmic scales, perhaps you should start a separate thread on that in the space section. :shrug: you might get a different set of respondents and responses. :smilingsun:

[LaurieAG]

Hi Turtle, All,

 

In the Electric Field Mill Fabrication link you posted the calibration does not seem to take into consideration local EMF leakage.

 

And if you do normalise out local EMF from the measurement you are probably throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

Global electricity network throughput and the subsequent EMF leakages would be interesting to see plotted on the surface of a sphere to see where the greatest imbalances are. It would have to be a time based plot recorded in much the same way as weather stations do and it could produce a similar chart with 'isobars' drawn for the measurements made. Hmmm.

[Chewbalka]

LaurieAG

 

I am curious to what degree of impact does the lack of EMF measurements do? How much energy is leaked this way? I am trying to find links to help me understand but I seem to be at a loss here can you help me find info on this subject! I am seriously interested in trying to understand what it is your talking about lol!

 

Thanks in advance!

[Turtle]

Hi Turtle, All,

 

In the Electric Field Mill Fabrication link you posted the calibration does not seem to take into consideration local EMF leakage.

 

is that the first link/device, or the second in Franks quote that has a means of determing polarity? both?

 

And if you do normalise out local EMF from the measurement you are probably throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

Global electricity network throughput and the subsequent EMF leakages would be interesting to see plotted on the surface of a sphere to see where the greatest imbalances are. It would have to be a time based plot recorded in much the same way as weather stations do and it could produce a similar chart with 'isobars' drawn for the measurements made. Hmmm.

 

your implication is that you can measure local emf leakage, so rather than "normalizing" the field mill itself, you set up nearby the field mill whatever device measures local EMF leakage and subtract/filter that [noise?] from the result on the field mill? :shrug:

 

how about this!? 2 field mills, one "normalized" and one not & compare results? or perhaps, because the field mill has a shutter and so an aperature, orienting the device(s) other than with the aperature pointing straight up?

 

yes i agree that would be an interesting network. i think frank had something similar in mind for field mills in regards to earth's [polarity] charge in the relation to earthquakes.

 

EDIT: a triad of field mills oriented 90º to one another??

Edited November 1, 2012 by Turtle

[Village Idiot]

 

 

so, the one link/reference i gave is exactly what you said/implied that you needed; a peek inside a field mill specifically credited/designed with determining polarity of a charge in the atmosphere. so, did you peek inside? did i miss your dismissing field mills on the account i just gave? my point in all of it is to answer you question about how annointed experts know the polarity, rather than just fudging it in.

 

i think i covered most of this just now.

 

 

You covered nothing that shows the charge polarity of the atmosphere. I peeked at the circuitry and was satisfied that the field mill could sense relative voltage variations. That means that its use is comparable to use of a voltmeter. Relative voltage difference measurements have no bearing upon the ionic makeup of the atmosphere. The high electron density to be found atop a negatively charged planet would offer a proper neutral reference point for absolute voltage measurements, but that seems hopelessly impractical. Were we to accomplish such a connection, we should find greater negative voltages as we measure at lower altitudes.

 

EDIT: By "atop a ... planet, I was referring to the the location aloft where the charged particles of the excess polarity would come to rest. That is the location that charged particles that are in the majority of grand total population: The macroscopic electric charge upon the planet.

 

Our quest totally embraces earthly science. If you were to desist from hijacking this thread with nontechnical bickering, we might await a scientific reply. Pointing to a shiny "black box" tells no one anything.

 

That gets me right back to where I started in post #1. It does not occur to me how scientists have ever determined the electrical polarity of Earth's atmosphere to be positive. If anyone can tell me I would be most appreciative.

 

EDIT: Perhaps I should amend my expression of "people fudging in" of dis- or mis- information. No contemptuous connotation was intended. If "bridging the gap" might seem less unkind, let us go with that. It is evident for many cases where the bigendians assure us that our atmosphere is positive, that they focus upon an assumption of zero macroscopic electrical charge. There lies the rub! Emmy Noether never ruled against an electrically charged universe. Cosmic neutrality in the electrical department has a way of surfacing in our minds as an axiomatic premise. (I fought my way out of that pitfall myself.)

 

Check it out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem

 

The outstanding expression to be heeded is : "dissipative systems with continuous symmetries do not necessarily have a corresponding conservation law."

Edited December 23, 2012 by Heedless