Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,611 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 370,149
Pageviews Today: 1,092,547Threads Today: 552Posts Today: 11,044
02:28 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)

 
Grant
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 2199
United States
12/26/2005 01:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
The most recent draft of Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute is now available for advanced review at [link to www.grantchronicles.com] This paper first released on Bad Astronomy's BB yesterday is incomplete and still has some incomplete thoughts, spelling and grammar errors in it until its final release later this week.

Topics Covered:
Fossil Field Theory
Dynamo Theory
Amplified Magnetic Particle Flow
White Dwarf Accretion
Creation of Nebulas
Creation of Stellar Masses
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57053
United States
12/26/2005 01:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Thanks Grant
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35822
United States
12/26/2005 02:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
i would cut off my left nut and eat it on a ritz cracker before i would click on a link to your website.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 2199
United States
12/26/2005 02:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
whatever
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 52209
United States
12/26/2005 02:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant,

What's the update on the holiday earthquakes?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57113
United States
12/26/2005 02:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
nuts on ritz crackers?

you are making me, chronic gayrant, hungry

time for a white dwarf cretin on a ritz cracker
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57120
United Kingdom
12/26/2005 02:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
"This paper first released on Bad Astronomy's BB yesterday is incomplete and still has some incomplete thoughts, spelling and grammar errors in it until its final release later this week."

And I expect that even after that it'll have incomplete thoughts (i.e. total gibberish) and plenty of pelling and grammar errors in it, since you hardly ever check things, and your knowledge of science could be written on te back of a postage stamp in inch-high letters...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12494
United States
12/26/2005 02:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant,

Where is PX?

You fool!
Deacon Blue
User ID: 57134
United States
12/26/2005 03:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
=====
This paper first released on Bad Astronomy's BB yesterday...
=====
1) It's the Bad Astromomy Universe Today BAUT) BB.
2) So far, your "paper" has gotten 48 viewings and 0 replies!
3) Your "paper" shows your usual misunderstanding of physics. One minor example: "Currie temperature" applies ONLY to solids, but "I am astrophysics" Grant thinks9???) that it applies to plasmas! 1rof1
dumbass
Deacon Blue
User ID: 57134
United States
12/26/2005 03:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Dang! Maybe I should register, just so I can edit my posts. That should have read:
=====
This paper first released on Bad Astronomy's BB yesterday...
=====
1) It's the Bad Astromomy Universe Today (BAUT) BB.
2) So far, your "paper" has gotten 48 viewings and 0 replies!
3) Your "paper" shows your usual misunderstanding of physics. One minor example: "Currie temperature" applies ONLY to solids, but "I am astrophysics" Grant thinks(???) that it applies to plasmas!

1rof1

dumbass
Grant NLI (OP)
User ID: 2199
United States
12/26/2005 03:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
3) Your "paper" shows your usual misunderstanding of physics. One minor example: "Currie temperature" applies ONLY to solids, but "I am astrophysics" Grant thinks(???) that it applies to plasmas!

Do you have a answer for the flaws in current theories or just a babbling mouth? wtf

Deacon go back to sleep

The Curie point is a term in physics and materials science, named after Pierre Curie (1859-1906), and refers to a characteristic property of a ferromagnetic material.

The Curie point, or Curie temperature, Tc, of a ferromagnetic material, is the temperature above which it loses its characteristic ferromagnetic ability: the ability to possess a net (spontaneous) magnetization in the absence of an external magnetic field.

At temperatures below the Curie point the magnetic moments are partially aligned within magnetic domains in ferromagnetic materials. As the temperature is increased from below the Curie point, thermal fluctuations increasingly destroy this alignment, until the net magnetization becomes zero at and above the Curie point. Above the Curie point, the material is purely paramagnetic.

At temperatures below the Curie point, an applied magnetic field has a paramagnetic effect on the magnetization, but the combination of paramagnetism with ferromagnetism leads to the magnetization following a hysteresis curve with the applied field strength. The destruction of magnetization at the Curie temperature is a second-order phase transition and a critical point where the magnetic susceptibility is theoretically infinite.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 2199
United States
12/26/2005 05:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 18760
United States
12/26/2005 08:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 18760
United States
12/27/2005 12:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
bump
Bored Huge Krill nli
User ID: 55138
United States
12/27/2005 01:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant,
in reply to Deacon's point that:

"3) Your "paper" shows your usual misunderstanding of physics. One minor example: "Currie temperature" applies ONLY to solids, but "I am astrophysics" Grant thinks(???) that it applies to plasmas!"

you posted a link to Wikipedia on ferromagnetism, along with a quote from it. As it turns out, a little further reading of that page, and in particular, the link to the page on ferromagnetic materials, confirms Deacon's point, specifically:

All ferromagnetic materials are crystalline (ie solid) or in rare cases amorphous alloys (solid). There are no instances of anything non-solid being ferromagnetic.

As it happens, I also have a rather good book on the subject in front of me: "Electricity and Magnetism" third edition, B. I. Bleaney and B. Bleaney. It's an undergraduate engineering text. Here's a quote from chapter 6, page 171:

"Ferromagnetic substances are all solids, and each is characterised by a certain temperature known as the Curie point at which its properties change abruptly."

Regards
Krill
Deacon Blue
User ID: 57314
United States
12/27/2005 08:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Since Krill covered your lack of understanding of ferromagnetism (proving once again that, although you know how to cut and paste, it does not mean that you understand it) I will just say that the only flaws I see are in your understanding of the subject.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2782
United States
12/27/2005 09:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
By that, do you mean his understanding of physics in general?
Grant NLI (OP)
User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 09:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
You seem to be ignoring the facts Hydrogen plasma does not retain a magnetic field, yes it can be energized but does not hold one without being influenced by another field or organized particle movement.
Grant  (OP)

User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 09:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Krill & Deacon,
Please tell us how a nebula retains a magnetic field to provide the basis for a magnetic white dwarf? Better yet show us how an experimental chamber of compressed hydrogen plasma could hold a magnetic field without the introduction of another field or charged particles?
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 2782
United States
12/27/2005 12:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Why don't you show us Grant. Invite us all up to your laboratory where you conduct all your experiments and obviously have tons of test equipment to verify your results.
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6330
United States
12/27/2005 12:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant -- before asking questions at others, perhaps you should defend your theory by andwering the criticism that has been levelled against it.

Just a suggestion.
Grant  (OP)

User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 01:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant -- before asking questions at others, perhaps you should defend your theory by andwering the criticism that has been levelled against it.

Just a suggestion.


I am defending it. If we are to believe Krill and Deacon the metal in its solid form once it passes the Curie temperature and melts ferromagnetic properties stabilize, BS. The molecular movement that disrupts magnetic properties in a solid is also present in an even hotter liquid. The point is gaseous nebulas can not be the basis for stellar magnetars, because they did not retain a magnetic field.

CB shut up and go back to your postal job.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 02:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
bump
Bored Huge Krill nli
User ID: 55138
United States
12/27/2005 03:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Grant,
a magnetic field is caused by the movement of charged particles. It's hardly a surprise that a large dynamic cloud of anything with free charges generates electric and magnetic fields (they're directly connected, remember). Have you never seen a thunderstorm? In fact, it's precisely what you'd expect.

You post refers to *ferromagnetism* which is a property of some materials which can retain a level of magnetism in a static, equilibrium state. This occurs in what you would commonly call "a magnet". It doesn't refer to clouds of gas or dust. Nobody except you has suggested that magnetism in stars or clouds of dusts is due to them being ferromagnets. It's due to them being electrically charged and in motion.

Your description of magnetism not being possible in a cloud of gas and dust above the "Curie point" is nonsense, because ferromagnetism and Curie temperatures relate only to very specific solid magnetic materials. Hence, your whole article is nonsense.

Regards
Krill
Grant  (OP)

User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 03:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
You post refers to *ferromagnetism* which is a property of some materials which can retain a level of magnetism in a static, equilibrium state. This occurs in what you would commonly call "a magnet". It doesn't refer to clouds of gas or dust. Nobody except you has suggested that magnetism in stars or clouds of dusts is due to them being ferromagnets. It's due to them being electrically charged and in motion.

Your description of magnetism not being possible in a cloud of gas and dust above the "Curie point" is nonsense, because ferromagnetism and Curie temperatures relate only to very specific solid magnetic materials. Hence, your whole article is nonsense.

Is it nonsense, can you recreate conditions here on Earth, no. Have our instruments detected nebulas capable of creating immense magnetic fields without a source of energy? Are you trying to apply a dynamo theory to a cloud of gas? Is the motion organized in a nebula, no, what would the gravitational reference of rotation. If the cloud is expanding then charges would be dissipating. Listen to yourself Krill.

Regards
Krill
Bored Huge Krill nli
User ID: 55138
United States
12/27/2005 03:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
"Is it nonsense, can you recreate conditions here on Earth, no. Have our instruments detected nebulas capable of creating immense magnetic fields without a source of energy? Are you trying to apply a dynamo theory to a cloud of gas? Is the motion organized in a nebula, no, what would the gravitational reference of rotation. If the cloud is expanding then charges would be dissipating. Listen to yourself Krill."

Obviously we haven't recreated the conditions here on Earth - except in a simulation, which is the best we can practically do.

You still haven't addressed the central point - your misapplication of ferromagnetism to a cloud. Everything you derive from that is nonsense.

The two competing theories under discussion are dynamo based or fossil field based. One is based on a mechanically rotating charged cloud, the other (as far as I understand it, but I'm willing to be corrected) on a resonant stable electromagnetic wave (which itself moves the charged particles around, but in an oscillatory fashion). Incidentally, it doesn't show the overall electromagnetic energy increasing - it shows the overall energy decreasing due to resistive effects in the conductive cloud.

Neither has anything to do with ferromagnetism, and hence your criticism of either as not conforming to the principles of ferromagnetism is nonsense. When are you going to stop blowing smoke and acknowledge this?

Regards
Krill
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 2782
United States
12/27/2005 04:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
"CB shut up and go back to your postal job."

I don't work for the post office Grant. Judging by your response, I obviously struck a nerve. What's the matter Grant? You don't have a laboratory? No test equipment either? Ah, too bad.

In the meantime, I'm going to sit back and watch as Krill tries, in vain to be sure, to educate you.
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.
Grant  (OP)

User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 05:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
You still haven't addressed the central point - your misapplication of ferromagnetism to a cloud. Everything you derive from that is nonsense.

Nonsense again, you cannot explain how a cloud maintains a charge with random movement, in the cold environment of space how much movement occurs in the cloud, How do the poles organize? All of which negates a cloud from holding ferromagnetic properties and thus transferring magnetic properties into white dwarfs as the institute proposes.
Grant  (OP)

User ID: 2199
United States
12/27/2005 05:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
Please CB get a life
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2782
United States
12/27/2005 06:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
LOL!!! That's funny Grant. Why don't you follow your own words of advice. Talk about irony.
Atma

User ID: 57027
United States
12/27/2005 06:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Magnetic Stars: Rebuttal to Max Planck Institute (Advanced Draft Release: The Grant Chronicles)
popcorn





GLP