JustJoe

Could mass be grounded by mass ? 

All mass contains a positive and a negative electrical charge and in research I've discovered that  electrical energy is grounded . 

3 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

You do realize this is a different equation than the first one you wrote, right?

No I didn't know sorry , thought I'd just missed out the time value . 

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Nobody said anything like that.

Qmax = xt/V isn’t a valid equation, because the LHS has units of charge (coulombs) while the RHS has units of charge * time/volume (assuming your “charge variable” has units of charge)

 

I was considering x in a general sense but yes I suppose it must have a unit . Is the math an impossibility because we can't determine how much electrical energy is being grounded ? 

3 hours ago, studiot said:

 

Before I go ?

Where are you going ?

 

I have no idea where you obtained the formula you posted, but it is just plain nonsense.

The equation is dimensionally unbalanced so totally non scientific.

 

go well

I got the equation by the process of grounded electrical energy divided by the earths size . 

How would you describe grounded electrical energy / the earths size ? 

How can m/V be an equation but x/V can't ? 

On 12/12/2022 at 12:33 PM, studiot said:

 

Far easier to just say X amount of 'energy' is transferred from the gas to the water.

 

It is still an interesting question and you gave me the answer of x ,  Qmax=x/V   

How much electrical energy could the earth store before it caused molecules to become unstable ? 

Does the stored electrical energy increase interior thermodynamics ? 

Does the interior dissipated electrical energy have any affect on the Earths field ? 

22 hours ago, studiot said:

I'm sorry to need to post this but it seems we are enjoined to give time wasters what is, in my opinion. excessive rope.

I put a deal of thought and effort into trying to offer help, at an appropriate level to one such who was a self confessd novice at science.

After several tap dancing replies to my moderately lengthy explanations, I was beginning to smell a rat when this person decided to no only question what was being said, but also expound his own gospel of the laws of physics something he had already said he knew little or nothing about, all the while carefully ignoring simply prepared explanations, just for him.

What other behaviour would this suggest, other than trolling?

I further note that since I and other regular members left the thread in question, he has opened a series of increasingly far fetched new threads.

Don't you think time wasters would find a more entertaining forum than a science forum ? 

I didn't lie to you , I only know bits of science and wish to learn more . At times I may add my own opinion but I certaintly am not a time waster . 

3 hours ago, swansont said:

How would you do this?

 

Space isn’t defined by the EM field.

And there’s no indication you understand how complex this question is, and what would be needed to address it.

I was hoping science could devise something to curve field lines . I'm not 100% sure , I could only make assumptions . 

Assuming the magnetic field has magnetic properties , perhaps a super large lump of magnetic material may curve the field lines towards it . 

Assuming the field has some electrical properties , perhaps a super large conductive material could curve the field lines towards it .  Iron may be a good all rounder .

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

No, any E or M fields of the earth are too weak to do much. We don’t see things flying off into space spontaneously 

Wormholes are not so easily created. You need to provide more detail as to how this might happen, or narrow the scope of the question you ask. This is too broad.

 

Space isn’t going to get closer.

Yes the field is weak but wouldn't compressing the field lines by device make it more dense and give it more magnitude ? 

''Space isn’t going to get closer.'' - If we  define the EM field  as a vector and label upwards as (+y) , then contract the vector (-y) , how isn't that a shorter route out of the Earths EM field ? 

Wormholes - I asked if science could make such a device , I have a few ideas but I have no idea whether they'd work or not . 

15 minutes ago, swansont said:

It’s a plasma, so it’s a substance. What do you mean by “relative to permitivity and permeability“?

A plasma has a permittivity a permeability but it’s complicated

https://cds.cern.ch/record/1693043/files/p85.pdf

(equation 98)

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169454/calculating-the-magnetic-permeability-of-a-known-plasma

Members in the main section said lightning wasn't a substance that is why I made this post to discuss the issue . I was also under the impression lightning was a plasma . 

''What do you mean by “relative to permitivity and permeability“?''

I mean the medium or object the lightning strikes or wants to pass through . In plasma physics , science attempts to use magnetic bottling to contain and create plasma , the magnetic field having a level of permitivity and permeability .

Could the Earths Em field be used to propulse a craft into space ? 

In engineering terms , could we create a device that could manipulate the Earths Em field to create some sort of spatial wormhole ? 

If we could create a device that  curved  the field in a -ve manner towards the device , wouldn't space be closer ? 

Would a helium filled rocket ''top section'' help the rocket to vertically land ? 

Is lightning a substance relative to permitivity and permeability ?

34 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

 

Thanks for the information, how did you get on understanding that energy is not a substance - there is no such thing as pure energy?

Before I go you might be interested in this 

2 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Here we go again. This is more time-wasting, by yet another sockpuppet of Theorist. 

 Caun't understand you ? 

5 minutes ago, Genady said:

This process produces light.

Thought somebody said it was electrical ? 

1 minute ago, Genady said:

@JustJoe. In case of lightening, it's a process.

Ok but we can see lighting so it must be made of something ? 

6 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

 

Thanks for the information, how did you get on understanding that energy is not a substance - there is no such thing as pure energy.

Pure energy ? 

What travels through Pylons if it isn't a substance ? 

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

No, it is not. It is a phenomenon.

I thought lighting has a tangible, solid presence because it can break trees when it strikes ? 

What do you mean by phenomenon?

Just now, Genady said:

@JustJoe. In the Modern and Theoretical Physics, where this thread is posted, electricity is not a substance.

Ok, what is it then ? Lighting was mentioned , isn't lightning a substance ? 

5 minutes ago, Markus Hanke said:

 

Yes, I did mention that we need to provide sensory channels, or else the results will be unpredictable. It would also be an ethical issue - imagine finding yourself conscious as a disembodied brain with all sensory channels turned off? Not good.

How would you be conscious if all sensory channels were turned off ? Wouldn't you then just be words ? 

1 hour ago, studiot said:

 

So when you are asking about electrical energy dissipated to space what exactly are you thinking about and why do you think the conductance of space (if any) plays a part ?

The better you can explain your question the better will be the final answer.

 

Incidentally we do say that all bodies give off and receive electromagnetic radiation at all times which results in a transfer of energy.
But this is a thermal process not an electric one.

I have heard the term heat rises and wondered what electrical energy did . It was explained that electrical energy is grouded , which is quite the opposite to heat rising . I know metals are conductive and thought in  some way that electrical energy was attracted to conductive metals like gravity, I also thought that electrical energy rises like heat , so thought space must be conductive too . I see electricity as a substance . 

3 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

 

Remember we will eventually have an exact replica of the human brain, except that, instead of biological neurons, it is made of computers. 

You might want to add five inherent senses to that because for sentient beings to be conscious , that is a necessity . Consciousness is a sentient beings ability to experience the universe via the five inherent senses . Although some sentient beings may be limited in this ability due to species . 

12 hours ago, Mordred said:

Dissipates into the ground and effectively neutralizes.

From the replies I've noticed that nobody mentioned whether or not some of the electrical energy was dissipated into space ? 

Also what do you mean by neutralizes , do you mean it ceases to exist ? 

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Well the ground is conductive but conductivity will vary location to location. An easy way to see this is lightning strikes. This is a good example of the EM field in our atmosphere interacting with the Earths surface. (The term grounding) in electrical circuits dissipates unwanted electrical charge via Earth surface the grounded conductor is bonded to.

When this grounding process occurs of electrical energy , does the Earth store this energy within or does the electrical energy dissipate into space ? 

1 hour ago, studiot said:

This is an interesting question that has many ramifications in GeoPhysics, but could you narrow it down a bit ?

Also you say conducted, do you know the difference between conductive current and displacement current ?

Finally the Earth is far from homogeneous and the values for sigma and epsilon vary with local materials eg seawater v granite.

Hi , I do not know much science , just bits . I am sorry if my words aren't the correct words . I don't know  the difference between conductive current and displacement current, I've no idea what those terms mean . I remember from my schools days that the Earth has conductive materials like iron and was wondering whether these materials conduct any electrical energy that may be created externally, compared to the electrical energy being dispersed into space ? 

I was thinking about electricity and was wondering how much electrical energy was conducted by the Earth compared to space ? 

Do we use the letter q for electrical charge ? 

On 11/27/2022 at 12:25 AM, raphaelh42 said:

Hello

In your opinion, what is the most important thing that the humans should work together to try to achieve ?

Is there a list/poll answering this somewhere ?

IMO I think about being able to create artificial brains to upload the minds of biological ones into them, to have more time/less weaknesses to try to understand how the universe works.

I also think about creating a website to suggest and vote for rules to apply to communities/countries/world

The list is extensive because humans tend to disagree most of the time on most things . 

In an ideal world , there wouldn't be any independent countries or nationalities . The world would correctly be viewed as being one place . 

The world wouldn't need armies , instead they'd just have world policing . 

This is probably impossible to acheive though because world rulers listen to feelings rather than common sense . 

15 hours ago, Sensei said:

 

 

The structural integrity between the outer surface and the inner surface is none, because there is a vacuum between them and nothing else....

This should be obvious to any physicist (or former physicist)..

 

As I explained the outer shell will be connected to the inner shell via honeycomb form ''strutting'' . 

The created vacuum will be an auto vac , either the compartment air will be allowed to escape the shell natural through vents or the air will be sucked into the craft into an air tank as the craft ascends .