The Moons Atomosphere

[Phi for All]

10 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

So I have a job and cant answer everything to your liking. This is speculations and you dont allow it. I didn't say I was right I said I was speculating and looking for answers. 

answers that I can understand

Part of the problem is you came to a science site, looking presumably for science replies to your questions, yet when they're given you reject them because you don't understand them. You speculate, misconceptions and mistakes in your ideas are pointed out by others who've studied science extensively, yet you take that to mean you're not allowed to speculate. If you're looking to learn, why do you push back so hard against those trying to help? 

Sorry this is really off-topic, but clarity is needed in order to progress. 

[Theredbarron]

I have not rejected any of them. I only speculate to the possibility of something else. I never said anyone here is wrong. As a matter of fact I came here because of exactly that. Do you think I can get this type of information from people just hanging out? Just because I'm contradicting does not mean I'm not listening. A response with "your wrong and I'm right" logic does not make me understand things. I ask for links as to see what information it has so in can understand more and ask questions. What is it do you think I'm doing? Have I once said that all that's wrong? Maybe to know the whole picture you would have to see it so I'm trying to see it. Maybe I'm actually looking how it parallels with all of it. 

3 hours ago, studiot said:

I blame the education system for fostering the popular myth about the existence of suction and the famous phrase "Nature abhors a vaccum"

Neither are true.

Even (medical) doctors who are intelligent folk and should know much better fall into this trap.

It is the devils own job getting over to them that we do not suck air into our lungs. It is pushed in by outside pressure.

I heard it all. I do get how this all sounds. I'm not trying to disprove anything or prove anything. I'm merely speculating as to a possible method of application not that its a new thing either.

What else is this forum for. I mean come on its speculations. No need to be so uptight about it all. 

[Ghideon]

 

1 minute ago, Theredbarron said:

I only speculate to the possibility of something else

That is cool, but a lot of it looks like speculations about something else that is completely impossible for many reasons. 

Some of the problems in the thread sometimes looks like language issues*. Maybe you have a question but to the reader it comes across as suggestions or misconceptions about more basic physics that needs to be addressed first?

10 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

answers that I can understand

I often have to work pretty hard just to put together a question that I can understand. There is probably evidence in several threads where I have been active...

 

*) Probably pretty obvious; english isn't my first language. I'm not sure I'm in a position to make a valid guess.

[Theredbarron]

Can anyone tell me what elements are not typically effected by static electricity?

[t686]

3 hours ago, Theredbarron said:

Why is everyone stuck on gravity? I'm talking about static electricity. I get that it looks as though a vacuum is suction and that pressure is actually pushing on it. Wouldn't that intensify the effects of the static electricity attraction or make it stronger in a direction as to appear to suck it up? Isn't static electricity the balancing of electrical properties as material moves near or while in contact with other matter of different properties? Since gravity is constant all around the surface and the surface is contacting itself all around the planet or moon and the matter in the core is moving past and rubbing against under the surface could it then generate static electricity? Not only does the core already have magnetic properties couldn't it amplify the static electrical difference that are being created all around it? 

This is saying that the crust itself has magnetic properties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field_of_the_Moon

The static electricity of the Moon.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2007/04/static-electricity-could-short-circuit-moon-missions

Earth creates Lightning With its size of magnetic field correct?

Wouldn't that mean that your entire device should be grooved out in mountains and spinning under vacuum to reduce all pressure off the device, and inside the device would be zero vaccuum.  So if you pretend your device is a glass jar under vaccuum you could spin that and do away with the spinning wheel inside the vaccuum (and the outside of the glass jar would be grooved out in mountains, and then inside the glass jar is very close to true vaccuum).  There are devices that you can put on top as a lid that will allow spinning, but won't tangle the two hoses.  According to what you've shown, it should get very close to a vaccuum.  However, like I said there is the problem of the "tilt", which won't allow getting to true vaccuum until that's solved.  It's the grooved mountains that cause slippage like the guy above said, so there's no friction or grab that air pressure can hold onto.  ie with the grooved mountains on the outside of the glass jar, you could keep sucking air pressure out until very nearly a true vaccuum without causing collapse of the glass, but you won't get to the exact true vaccuum until you solve the "tilt" that I saw in the video that showed the inside of the cylinder (not the vacuum one).

Edited August 29, 2018 by t686

[Theredbarron]

What I'm going for is to make one possible to use static electricity as a force. For what I'm not sure yet but how can I find out how to use something like static electricity in low density environments? I'm not sure if this helps but if I were to add something to the mix in a low density environment in order to increase its effects, What kinds of element's could be used possibly to generate more efficiently. This is why I'm so interested in the moon. It would be a perfect scenario for a low density environment.

[Strange]

11 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

Can anyone tell me what elements are not typically effected by static electricity?

Typically, only materials that are insulators (or small amounts of conductive material that are insulated/isolated) are affected by static charges. Conductive materials will diffuse the charge so it has no effect. 

6 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

What I'm going for is to make one possible to use static electricity as a force.

You need to go back a few centuries and look at things like van der Graaf generators, Leyden jars, etc. 

45 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

This is speculations

The speculations forum is not for just making up any old nonsense 

Edited August 29, 2018 by Strange

[Theredbarron]

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

Typically, only materials that are insulators (or small amounts of conductive material that are insulated/isolated) are affected by static charges. Conductive materials will diffuse the charge so it has no effect. 

So maybe argon gas could be a good one? it has 8 valence electrons is why and uses with insulating welds. What kind of material would be best for wheel? I had a plastic one but it exploded. 

[Strange]

46 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

As soon as I bring up something that's argumentative to the norm you just act like you know everything.

If you don’t want your errors and misunderstandings corrected ...

 

[studiot]

7 minutes ago, Strange said:

Typically, only materials that are insulators (or small amounts of conductive material that are insulated/isolated) are affected by static charges. Conductive materials will diffuse the charge so it has no effect. 

You need to go back a few centuries and look at that nags like van der Graaf generators, Leyden jars, etc. 

I expect the OP has camped out sometime in his Arizona desert and received a belt off a metal trailer doorhandle in the morning.

I certainly did in Arabia.

 

Static electricity is a subject in itself, at one time it was the only source of electricity so Strange is correct to suggest looking at older devices.

The Winshurst Machine is was capable of providing a large store of charge in metal plates.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=7_-GW7SQA4zGgAaulamwAg&q=wimshurst+machine&oq=wimshurst&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l10.2220.5182.0.7870.11.8.1.2.2.0.174.902.3j5.8.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.11.980...0i131k1j0i10k1.0.o1r2YbiFqaU

Edited August 29, 2018 by studiot

[Strange]

2 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

So maybe argon gas could be a good one?

I can’t imagine how you are going to use argon. 

3 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

What kind of material would be best for wheel? I had a plastic one but it exploded. 

This is about the best device ever developed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_de_Graaff_generator

2 minutes ago, studiot said:

I expect the OP has camped out sometime in his Arizona desert and received a belt off a metal trailer doorhandle in the morning.

I certainly did in Arabia.

Happens all the time in Tokyo in winter. Your body builds up a charge (friction) and it is discharged through metal. 

[Phi for All]

30 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm not trying to disprove anything or prove anything.

Sorry, but this is also flat-out false. You said yourself you're speculating about a non-mainstream idea, and you're not listening to points that refute it. 

Can I ask what your job is, just to give you a relevant example of how this sort of speculation works?

[beecee]

36 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I have not rejected any of them. I only speculate to the possibility of something else. I never said anyone here is wrong. As a matter of fact I came here because of exactly that. Do you think I can get this type of information from people just hanging out? Just because I'm contradicting does not mean I'm not listening. A response with "your wrong and I'm right" logic does not make me understand things. I ask for links as to see what information it has so in can understand more and ask questions. What is it do you think I'm doing? Have I once said that all that's wrong? Maybe to know the whole picture you would have to see it so I'm trying to see it. Maybe I'm actually looking how it parallels with all of it. 

I heard it all. I do get how this all sounds. I'm not trying to disprove anything or prove anything. I'm merely speculating as to a possible method of application not that its a new thing either.

What else is this forum for. I mean come on its speculations. No need to be so uptight about it all. 

I'll let you know about a "rule of thumb" with regards to science and the scientific methodology. First and foremost, before you let your imagination run free, searching/looking for any new ideas that are not mainstream, please make an effort to get to know the mainstream product, and why it is mainstream and held as valid by most scientists...learn its predictions that have been shown to be valid...research the experiments that have supported its validity...check out all the observational data that support it. Then if you really and truly believe there is a serious fault with the particular incumbent model, start imagining why over so many years, the professionals and experts in that particular discipline, have not found this serious fault. You see that is the scientific method. Theories/models do not get established and then just rest on their laurels. They are conducting experiments everyday, testing the limits and accepted successes of the theories. Even long established theories are tested everyday...Even SR and GR are continually asked to live up to their deserved reputation.

If you do that honestly, you will see why the chances of any Tom, Dick or Harry, coming to a forum open to all, to invalidate or propose some new model over-riding the incumbent is pretty close to zero. Best of luck anyway.

[Theredbarron]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Sorry, but this is also flat-out false. You said yourself you're speculating about a non-mainstream idea, and you're not listening to points that refute it. 

Can I ask what your job is, just to give you a relevant example of how this sort of speculation works?

I fail to see how this is appropriate or relevant. I'm a disabled vet that has to work odd job to odd job in order to financially support my family. What were you going to speculate again?

spec·u·la·tion

ˌspekyəˈlāSH(ə)n/

noun

noun: speculation; plural noun: speculations

1. 1.

   the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.

   "there has been widespread speculation that he plans to quit"
2. 2.

   investment in stocks, property, or other ventures in the hope of gain but with the risk of loss.

   "the company's move into property speculation"

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I expect the OP has camped out sometime in his Arizona desert and received a belt off a metal trailer doorhandle in the morning.

I certainly did in Arabia.

 

Static electricity is a subject in itself, at one time it was the only source of electricity so Strange is correct to suggest looking at older devices.

The Winshurst Machine is was capable of providing a large store of charge in metal plates.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=7_-GW7SQA4zGgAaulamwAg&q=wimshurst+machine&oq=wimshurst&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l10.2220.5182.0.7870.11.8.1.2.2.0.174.902.3j5.8.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.11.980...0i131k1j0i10k1.0.o1r2YbiFqaU

Thank you. 

 

1 hour ago, Strange said:

I can’t imagine how you are going to use argon. 

What I had in mind was pumping the vacuum then filling it with argon and see what happens or is this just as likely to create static as oxygen or helium?

[Phi for All]

46 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I fail to see how this is appropriate or relevant. I'm a disabled vet that has to work odd job to odd job in order to financially support my family. What were you going to speculate again?

OK, you've had military experience that gave you a certain skill set, knowledge that makes it easier for you to understand other bits of data close to your field of expertise. You understand the jargon. You know almost immediately when someone is speaking about the military whether they've actually served before or not. 

If I came to you with an idea about a new military weapon that would make guns obsolete, you'd probably be skeptical ("Dumbass called them guns instead of rifles!"). If I described the intricate workings that make my new weapon very powerful, you might know instantly that such a weapon would never survive use in the desert sands or anywhere near water. You can also tell by the way I describe the weapon that I don't really understand how explosives work. The power of the weapon is my sole focus, but you know that doesn't matter because the weapon is going to malfunction when the intricate workings heat up/clog up/freeze up, and I don't have the right kind of ordinance to do what I think I'm doing.

When you tell me this, I might think you're just putting my idea down because you love your rifle, or that you won't accept anything that's not standard issue. I might only be interested in comments that support my idea, even though you're only trying to help by telling me, based on your expertise, that my idea is fundamentally flawed. 

[studiot]

Note the rules of speculations towards the top left of the picture.

 

Note also there are half a dozen helpful guides as well at the top of the list.

28 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm a disabled vet

I saw a TV series (Dr Watsons amazing cases if I remember rightly,) which included some truly amazing medical rehab work with vets as well as other frontier medical stuff.

I thoroughly recommend it if you can get to see it.

Edited August 29, 2018 by studiot

[Theredbarron]

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

OK, you've had military experience that gave you a certain skill set, knowledge that makes it easier for you to understand other bits of data close to your field of expertise. You understand the jargon. You know almost immediately when someone is speaking about the military whether they've actually served before. 

If I came to you with an idea about a new military weapon that would make guns obsolete, you'd probably be skeptical ("Dumbass called them guns instead of rifles!"). If I described the intricate workings that make my new weapon very powerful, you might know instantly that such a weapon would never survive use in the desert sands or anywhere near water. You can also tell by the way I describe the weapon that I don't really understand how explosives work. The power of the weapon is my sole focus, but you know that doesn't matter because the weapon is going to malfunction when the intricate workings heat up/clog up/freeze up, and I don't have the right kind of ordinance to do what I think I'm doing.

When you tell me this, I might think you're just putting my idea down because you love your rifle, or that you won't accept anything that's not standard issue. I might only be interested in comments that support my idea, even though you're only trying to help by telling me, based on your expertise, that my idea is fundamentally flawed. 

I see. What I'm getting at is just telling me it doesn't work does not help me understand why nor does it argue or support itself. Why is it flawed?  and what is flawed I'm trying to get information so again with the other subject and not this one. If vacuum or gravity gets brought up again then I will ignore all questions related and the person who keeps bringing it up. Would this help? if so then what words or jargon should I use in terms of attracting matter with static electricity? I haven't had time to look at the links that I have been given to me and I was asked to ask so can I have a few to understand some of this stuff. I'm am genuinely interested in this no matter what it is. I dont mean to be so contradictive. Its kind of hard to translate my questions to where people can understand when its not in person.  

[studiot]

Judging by the photos in your previous thread, you seem to be a very handy, practical sort of chap.

Great but why don't you just ask questions about what you need to know?

I am absolutely useless at welding, platering , playing the piano or guitar and I could never paint a picasso, or even soemthing worthy of a competent 10 year old.

So I aks somweone else about these things.

(Od course speling is my strngest suite.   )

[Phi for All]

3 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I dont mean to be so contradictive. Its kind of hard to translate my questions to where people can understand when its not in person.  

A couple of things. You didn't get into science in school, but now you realize it's pretty interesting, and much cooler than you thought back then. If I'm not describing you, then I'm describing me. It took me a long time to see the benefits of using scientific methodology in explaining various phenomena. But at first, I had to unlearn a lot of garbage I'd picked up from popular science publications. It takes a while to sort the cream from the Kaku.

The contradictions come because you're filling in gaps in your knowledge with stuff you've made up. The best way is to go back to the basics and re-learn them. It's never too late. That way, you can go to the top of the building to speculate, instead of trying to rebuild the foundations and lower floors everyone relies on.

[Theredbarron]

37 minutes ago, studiot said:

I saw a TV series (Dr Watsons amazing cases if I remember rightly,) which included some truly amazing medical rehab work with vets as well as other frontier medical stuff.

I thoroughly recommend it if you can get to see it.

Dr Watson Incredible Medicine? 

 

18 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

A couple of things. You didn't get into science in school, but now you realize it's pretty interesting, and much cooler than you thought back then. If I'm not describing you, then I'm describing me. It took me a long time to see the benefits of using scientific methodology in explaining various phenomena. But at first, I had to unlearn a lot of garbage I'd picked up from popular science publications. It takes a while to sort the cream from the Kaku.

The contradictions come because you're filling in gaps in your knowledge with stuff you've made up. The best way is to go back to the basics and re-learn them. It's never too late. That way, you can go to the top of the building to speculate, instead of trying to rebuild the foundations and lower floors everyone relies on.

I was but nobody around me was. I took a bunch of electricity and electronic in school even if it doesn't sound like it. I have actually been looking into to some courses to see where it goes. I'm sure you can tell I'm like a kid saying whats that right now is how I think this is going down.  

[Phi for All]

36 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I was but nobody around me was. I took a bunch of electricity and electronic in school even if it doesn't sound like it. I have actually been looking into to some courses to see where it goes. I'm sure you can tell I'm like a kid saying whats that right now is how I think this is going down.  

This, THIS is why the folks here are taking the time. You have this wonderful curiosity, and a sharp mind that desperately wants all the pieces to fit. Nobody cares about mistakes as long as you learn from them, and it's obvious you're not just digging in your heels on principle, as so many do when their ideas make so much sense to them. 

Congratulations on the new coursework. Hopefully we'll see free college in the US soon, and more people will take advantage of the chance to splash around in the well of accumulated human knowledge.

[Theredbarron]

28 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

This, THIS is why the folks here are taking the time. You have this wonderful curiosity, and a sharp mind that desperately wants all the pieces to fit. Nobody cares about mistakes as long as you learn from them, and it's obvious you're not just digging in your heels on principle, as so many do when their ideas make so much sense to them. 

Congratulations on the new coursework. Hopefully we'll see free college in the US soon, and more people will take advantage of the chance to splash around in the well of accumulated human knowledge.

Thank you. I know what I say is pretty outstandingly ridiculous in many ways. I wanted to get this stuff out of the way before I jump into reality so I can get my dreams crushed. 

Joking. I wanted to see it out and get perspective of what things really are. Like I said I dont have anyone to bounce stuff off of so it can get out of control sometimes. Does this mean that I can bring other crazy stuff to you all?

plus I get to build stuff

[beecee]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

This, THIS is why the folks here are taking the time. You have this wonderful curiosity, and a sharp mind that desperately wants all the pieces to fit. Nobody cares about mistakes as long as you learn from them, and it's obvious you're not just digging in your heels on principle, as so many do when their ideas make so much sense to them. 

Congratulations on the new coursework. Hopefully we'll see free college in the US soon, and more people will take advantage of the chance to splash around in the well of accumulated human knowledge.

Thoughtfully and nicely put.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Some off-topic posts have been hidden. Let's stick to the subject at hand, please.

 

[Theredbarron]

Ok so as far as I understand the moons gravity is holding the gas that it has but it is also possible that in part static is attracting and repelling some of this gas. Do this sound right?