The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What makes lightning?  (Read 33976 times)

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #50 on: 20/03/2015 16:07:58 »
TheBox, try this 1,

http://www.sciforums.com
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #51 on: 20/03/2015 18:22:40 »
I am considering 2 surfaces! but not a solid surface like you are considering .....

No, I'm not considering solid surfaces.
We were discussing lightning. If you have a cloud, or a volume of air, carrying a charge, the outer edge of that volume is the surface I was talking about. It could also be an invisible volume of air.


I'll make one other comment although it's not part of my reply

Your main evidence is electron micro scope ........

That statement is incorrect.

By interference and manually exciting the atoms, what says the excitement is not proton released?

Mass


Do some more reading as advised. That last answer should have been obvious if you had.

I'm out of this thread until you do.



 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #52 on: 20/03/2015 20:44:42 »
TheBox, try this 1,

http://www.sciforums.com

Been there, wore the shirt, got banned, they claimed I could not write, was disillusioned etc and they had no idea what i was saying.

 
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #53 on: 20/03/2015 21:07:28 »
I am considering 2 surfaces! but not a solid surface like you are considering .....

No, I'm not considering solid surfaces.
We were discussing lightning. If you have a cloud, or a volume of air, carrying a charge, the outer edge of that volume is the surface I was talking about. It could also be an invisible volume of air.


I'll make one other comment although it's not part of my reply

Your main evidence is electron micro scope ........

That statement is incorrect.

By interference and manually exciting the atoms, what says the excitement is not proton released?

Mass


Do some more reading as advised. That last answer should have been obvious if you had.

I'm out of this thread until you do.

Apart from maths, is there anything I can really read that I can not think for myself about and question it?

My questions have not been answered, people avoid them.


what allows the neutron to be attracted and part of an atom?

what part does the neutron have in lightning?

Does the neutron absorb energy?

Is positive energy anti-matter?

added ? - Deuterium is negative?
« Last Edit: 20/03/2015 21:11:40 by Thebox »
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #54 on: 20/03/2015 21:48:13 »
My questions have not been answered, people avoid them.
No, you avoid listening!
Quote from: Thebox
what allows the neutron to be attracted and part of an atom?
The strong nuclear force.
Quote from: Thebox
what part does the neutron have in lightning?
It's just a part of the molecule that becomes ionized providing a path for the current to flow.
Quote from: Thebox
Does the neutron absorb energy?
I haven't looked into this very deeply but I'd say yes because all matter particles can acquire varying degrees of energy. But absorb is not the correct word to use here. Acquire might be more appropriate.
Quote from: Thebox
Is positive energy anti-matter?
Matter nor antimatter can be classed as energy. Energy is a separate and distinct attribute that matter has and can acquire.

Quote from: Thebox
added ? - Deuterium is negative?
Deuterium is the hydrogen atom with an added neutron within it's nucleus. Deuterium is a neutral atom because all the charges cancel out leaving zero charge.

All of this information is readily available at Wikipedia and I recommend that you explore the possibilities and opportunities registered there.
« Last Edit: 20/03/2015 22:14:49 by Ethos_ »
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #55 on: 20/03/2015 22:23:46 »
Apart from maths, is there anything I can really read that I can not think for myself about and question it?

That is a very arrogant viewpoint, it's basically saying there is nothing you can learn!

My questions have not been answered, people avoid them.

Rubbish, arrogance, stupidity.
I'm irritated, very
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #56 on: 20/03/2015 23:17:27 »
My questions have not been answered, people avoid them.
No, you avoid listening!
Quote from: Thebox
what allows the neutron to be attracted and part of an atom?
The strong nuclear force.
Quote from: Thebox
what part does the neutron have in lightning?
It's just a part of the molecule that becomes ionized providing a path for the current to flow.
Quote from: Thebox
Does the neutron absorb energy?
I haven't looked into this very deeply but I'd say yes because all matter particles can acquire varying degrees of energy. But absorb is not the correct word to use here. Acquire might be more appropriate.
Quote from: Thebox
Is positive energy anti-matter?
Matter nor antimatter can be classed as energy. Energy is a separate and distinct attribute that matter has and can acquire.

Quote from: Thebox
added ? - Deuterium is negative?
Deuterium is the hydrogen atom with an added neutron within it's nucleus. Deuterium is a neutral atom because all the charges cancel out leaving zero charge.

All of this information is readily available at Wikipedia and I recommend that you explore the possibilities and opportunities registered there.

You say  the strong Nuclear force is why a Neutron is attracted and apart of the atom, that answer seems a bit narrow, can you expand the answer and explain how a Neutral can be attracted to anything?

You say ''Matter nor antimatter can be classed as energy. Energy is a separate and distinct attribute that matter has and can acquire.''


That was not my question, I asked if positive energy was anti matter as positive energy can not bind to itself of itself, where as a negative will not repel a negative, and matter both positive and negative is needed to form matter.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #57 on: 20/03/2015 23:23:35 »
Apart from maths, is there anything I can really read that I can not think for myself about and question it?

That is a very arrogant viewpoint, it's basically saying there is nothing you can learn!

My questions have not been answered, people avoid them.

Rubbish, arrogance, stupidity.
I'm irritated, very

I am an amateur and have spent 4 years reading , I am not being arrogant , I have just done enough reading and I am discussing the reading, I will never be a scientist. If you do not wish to discuss science then why post in the first place?

You all answered my earlier questions and now I am talking complex and asking why is not this way or that way you seemingly shy away.

That is why we have question marks


Maybe I should start on something simple, what is happening in and of the ground before the streamer is emitted?


interaction learning is best



« Last Edit: 20/03/2015 23:26:52 by Thebox »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: Lightning mechanism?
« Reply #58 on: 20/03/2015 23:44:05 »
when a positive lighting cloud meets a negative lighting cloud, if 1 is hot enough, the other 1 will jumps over with energy burst following a long tail of lighting.

the tails of the lighting spread out like a tree branch.

A cloud can be  a positive only, is that possible?
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4728
  • Thanked: 155 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #59 on: 21/03/2015 00:11:15 »

How can what goes up be the opposite of what comes down, they are both a plasma and both emit light suggesting both are a  positive in energy.

How can a negative possibly emit light?

Simply appropriating scientific terms and stringing them into a sentence does not generate meaning. Adding a questionmark doesn't help. As you seem to have an idiosyncratic concept of positive, negative and energy, I don't think you are going to find yourself taken seriously in the company of scientists, for whom such words are currency.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #60 on: 21/03/2015 01:14:25 »

How can what goes up be the opposite of what comes down, they are both a plasma and both emit light suggesting both are a  positive in energy.

How can a negative possibly emit light?

Simply appropriating scientific terms and stringing them into a sentence does not generate meaning. Adding a questionmark doesn't help. As you seem to have an idiosyncratic concept of positive, negative and energy, I don't think you are going to find yourself taken seriously in the company of scientists, for whom such words are currency.

In reply

Mechanism is not the process like the hands on a clock but rather the internal workings that makes the process.  We all know that we have a gravity calculation based on mass that defines orbital actions and an acceleration that an object will fall at too the Earth from the sky.  This is process and actions rather than a mechanism, a comparison to owning a car and knowing it can move but not knowing what an engine is that drives the actions.  It is also said that everything in the Universe of a matter or mediums form is made up of atoms, atoms consist of 3 Quarks that make up a Proton and also there is a  Neutron that makes up the Nucleus of the atom and an electron of a outer electron shell , although some elements of the Universe   made of atoms are without Neutrons.  It is also explained that all matter or a medium has mass, mass being essential to the equations of the gravity calculation and Newtons force.  Mass of an object is defined normally in kilograms, not to be mistaken for  a weight which is Newtons of force calculated by an objects mass.  In explanation of Gravity it is also said that all mass is attracted to mass, meaning any object of matter or mediums such as air are attracted to each other by Gravity of each others mass.

Atoms are bound together by a strong nuclear force and have the ability to become excited by gaining positive charge or becoming dormant when negative charged known in science as positive or negative charged ions.  A positive ion will repel an equally positive ion where as a negative ion is attracted to a positive ion, a negative ion has no effect on a negative ion.  In context referring to the actions of atmospheric gases and a said buoyancy , I would like to mention what I consider an ion flux and the ion flux being the magic and mechanism of gravity.

It is a well known fact that Helium and Hydrogen are buoyant gases and air is buoyancy dependant on energy in the air in the form of heat, hot air rises.  However , where as Hydrogen and Helium will rise and remain rising, air has a differential in the characteristics of behaviour, when the air cools down as it rises the air eventually will fall back down to the Earth, a sort of yoyo action by thermodynamic increase or decrease.  Air being made of atoms that becomes positively charged and rises opposing the effects of gravity and effectively decreasing in Newtons.  A consequence of actions of being a positive more than a negative being repelled by the positive ion's Earth's core, from once it returns to its equilibrium state and loses the charge when the air is cooled as it rises creating a  negative effect that then is attracted back down to the positive ion core.

Thanks for reading.
I will complete it tomorrow and link it to lightning.
« Last Edit: 21/03/2015 01:23:56 by Thebox »
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #61 on: 21/03/2015 02:14:29 »

How can what goes up be the opposite of what comes down, they are both a plasma and both emit light suggesting both are a  positive in energy.

How can a negative possibly emit light?

Simply appropriating scientific terms and stringing them into a sentence does not generate meaning. Adding a questionmark doesn't help. As you seem to have an idiosyncratic concept of positive, negative and energy, I don't think you are going to find yourself taken seriously in the company of scientists, for whom such words are currency.

In reply

Mechanism is not the process like the hands on a clock but rather the internal workings that makes the process.  We all know that we have a gravity calculation based on mass that defines orbital actions and an acceleration that an object will fall at too the Earth from the sky.  This is process and actions rather than a mechanism, a comparison to owning a car and knowing it can move but not knowing what an engine is that drives the actions.  It is also said that everything in the Universe of a matter or mediums form is made up of atoms, atoms consist of 3 Quarks that make up a Proton and also there is a  Neutron that makes up the Nucleus of the atom and an electron of a outer electron shell , although some elements of the Universe   made of atoms are without Neutrons.  It is also explained that all matter or a medium has mass, mass being essential to the equations of the gravity calculation and Newtons force.  Mass of an object is defined normally in kilograms, not to be mistaken for  a weight which is Newtons of force calculated by an objects mass.  In explanation of Gravity it is also said that all mass is attracted to mass, meaning any object of matter or mediums such as air are attracted to each other by Gravity of each others mass.

Atoms are bound together by a strong nuclear force and have the ability to become excited by gaining positive charge or becoming dormant when negative charged known in science as positive or negative charged ions.  A positive ion will repel an equally positive ion where as a negative ion is attracted to a positive ion, a negative ion has no effect on a negative ion.  In context referring to the actions of atmospheric gases and a said buoyancy , I would like to mention what I consider an ion flux and the ion flux being the magic and mechanism of gravity.

It is a well known fact that Helium and Hydrogen are buoyant gases and air is buoyancy dependant on energy in the air in the form of heat, hot air rises.  However , where as Hydrogen and Helium will rise and remain rising, air has a differential in the characteristics of behaviour, when the air cools down as it rises the air eventually will fall back down to the Earth, a sort of yoyo action by thermodynamic increase or decrease.  Air being made of atoms that becomes positively charged and rises opposing the effects of gravity and effectively decreasing in Newtons.  A consequence of actions of being a positive more than a negative being repelled by the positive ion's Earth's core, from once it returns to its equilibrium state and loses the charge when the air is cooled as it rises creating a  negative effect that then is attracted back down to the positive ion core.

Thanks for reading.
I will complete it tomorrow and link it to lightning.
I find myself in total agreement with you Alan.......................
 

Offline Ophiolite

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #62 on: 21/03/2015 06:53:32 »
At The Box. You say you have a desire to learn. This is a very positive thing. Some forum members, respecting that desire, have attempted to help you to learn, by answering your questions, pointing out errors in your thinking and providing links that go into greater depth.

Unfortunately, you do not appear to be willing to take advantage of any of this well intentioned help. Now that "appearance" may simply be a result of how you go about learning. Before I invest any time in helping you learn I would welcome an answer to these questions:

Do you accept that, for the most part, science has been able to provide detailed and well validated explanations for many aspects of "reality"?

If the answer is no,then why not?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #63 on: 21/03/2015 10:18:34 »
At The Box. You say you have a desire to learn. This is a very positive thing. Some forum members, respecting that desire, have attempted to help you to learn, by answering your questions, pointing out errors in your thinking and providing links that go into greater depth.

Unfortunately, you do not appear to be willing to take advantage of any of this well intentioned help. Now that "appearance" may simply be a result of how you go about learning. Before I invest any time in helping you learn I would welcome an answer to these questions:

Do you accept that, for the most part, science has been able to provide detailed and well validated explanations for many aspects of "reality"?

If the answer is no,then why not?


I accept that the most part of science is correct. Who says I am not learning? 
I am not accepting without questioning what I learn, a big difference.

I am not a ten year old who is scared to tell the teacher I think that is not quite right in fear of failure .

If something is logical it is good, if it not quite logical then I need to know why, I do not just want to know what an engine is, I want to know how the insides work.

I understand I present some difficult questions, but in discussion WE should be able to answer those questions , especially  the questions with no answers yet such has gravity mechanism or lightning.







 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #64 on: 21/03/2015 10:38:28 »
Continued questioning?

Continuing in my quest in search of full answers and not partial answers I considered the various effects of gravity on various elements.  This lead me to the clouds and also a consideration for the mechanism of lightning.  Clouds are the epoch of recombination of vaporised water molecules and a gathering of dust particles,smoke, Co2 etc..  The bottom of the cloud  can be observed of becoming more dense allowing the bottom of the cloud to have a greater thermodynamic absorption in the occupied space.  A density created by gravity pulling at the clouds elements, elements that are firstly more negative than positive but gradually becomes a more positive charge.

The top of the cloud does not propagate light has much as the bottom of the cloud where the greater density creates a cluster of positive ions, that are repelled by the positive ions of the planet and also repelled by the ionisation upper atmosphere layer to remain in a steady orbit  above the ground but within our atmosphere suspended between the two positives I mentioned of the ionising core and ionising upper layer of the atmosphere.

A white cloud will reflect more light and allow more light to pass through than a dark cloud, space underneath a dark cloud becoming more negative than the space above the cloud.  The cloud being a thermal and electrical  barrier between the spaces that gains charge, a process by Kinetic action of the exited clouds atomís being positive ionís that is implemented by  thermodynamic increase by light propagation by the density of the clouds lower layer implemented by gravity.

A process that which by positive ionís become compressed centripetally into a cluster by the surrounding attracted negative ionís with greater volume and the positive ionís of the earthís core and the upper layer positive ions forcing the positive ionís of the cloud to be in a suspended equilibrium making a virtual containment that causes the positive ionís of the cloud that have to repel each other to build up an energy pressure that eventually tears itself apart in an instant creating a directed burst of energy through a negative containment pathway of negative ion trails,  creating a rift through the fabric of atmosphere.

In the ground there is a similar process and the ground gains a positive charge that in general comparison  is spread out like water poured onto a flat surface and being a puddle.   Then once the cloud releases its energy in the form of lightning , at that very instance the point zero of the clouds energy starting point becomes a negative that then sucks like a straw to that point the energy from the ground.

https://wordpress.com/read/post/id/65645687/271/





« Last Edit: 21/03/2015 14:11:31 by Thebox »
 

Offline Ophiolite

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #65 on: 21/03/2015 17:57:18 »
I accept that the most part of science is correct. Who says I am not learning? 
I am not accepting without questioning what I learn, a big difference.
Very good. However, the manner in which you question creates the definite impression that you are not accepting, or perhaps not understanding the answers that are given to you.

Asking, both for clarity and in order to achieve a deeper understanding is welcome and desirable. But I would ask you to consider this. When I ask questions on forums I do so in the expectation that at least some of the answers will come from individuals who are more knowledgeable than I. I have hopes of receiving the "correct" answer. My starting assumption is that there is a good chance that this is possible. So far I have rarely been disappointed.

However, your questions create the impression that your starting assumption is that the answers you receive will be wrong. Further than that, there is an implication that you have about as good an idea of the answer as anyone involved in the discussion.

Now, this impression - created by your posts - is not only my impression, but seems to be the impression formed other members in this thread. If that was not your intent then you need to find a way of modifying your posting style.

Your comments on these thoughts would be most welcome.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #66 on: 21/03/2015 23:56:59 »
I accept that the most part of science is correct. Who says I am not learning? 
I am not accepting without questioning what I learn, a big difference.
Very good. However, the manner in which you question creates the definite impression that you are not accepting, or perhaps not understanding the answers that are given to you.

Asking, both for clarity and in order to achieve a deeper understanding is welcome and desirable. But I would ask you to consider this. When I ask questions on forums I do so in the expectation that at least some of the answers will come from individuals who are more knowledgeable than I. I have hopes of receiving the "correct" answer. My starting assumption is that there is a good chance that this is possible. So far I have rarely been disappointed.

1.However, your questions create the impression that your starting assumption is that the answers you receive will be wrong. Further than that, there is 2.an implication that you have about as good an idea of the answer as anyone involved in the discussion.

Now, this impression - created by your posts - is not only my impression, but seems to be the impression formed other members in this thread. If that was not your intent then you need to find a way of modifying your posting style.

Your comments on these thoughts would be most welcome.

1. An assumption that the answers I am given may be incomplete.

2. I can think for myself , I know enough basics about forces and work and energies to make a reasonable assumption , if my questions or thoughts coincide with anything that is present information that is coincidence and my guess work being a good approximation of the process.
(of cause I already have some knowledge)

I do not consider the Universe and process is that complex or hard to visualise.




 

Online evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4130
  • Thanked: 249 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #67 on: 22/03/2015 10:14:11 »
Quote from: Thebox
The bottom of the cloud  can be observed of becoming more dense ....  A density created by gravity pulling at the clouds elements
The reason that clouds float in the sky is because they are slightly less dense than the atmospheric layers below them. Because clouds are buoyant, they are almost weightless, and you can almost ignore gravity, even in the absence of electric fields.

Quote from: Thebox
I considered the various effects of gravity on various elements [of lightning]
Gravity is an extremely weak force. If there are strong electrical fields around (such as you have with lightning in clouds), you can ignore gravity.

Quote
A white cloud will reflect more light and allow more light to pass through than a dark cloud
If you have been in an airplane over a storm, you will know that from the top, the dark clouds are also very white.

The reason heavy rainclouds are darker underneath is because they are thicker than light fluffy clouds, and the depth of the clouds scatters more light away from reaching the ground.

Thunderclouds are very efficient at transferring energy between layers within the atmosphere, with fast-moving updrafts and downdrafts which generate the lightning (static electricity) by friction. These thunderclouds tower thousands of feet high, and not much light gets through.

So the lightning is an effect of the rapid updrafts and downdrafts reaching high altitudes. And the dark base of the cloud is also an effect of the rapid updrafts and downdrafts reaching high altitudes.

But it would be wrong to say that light causes the lightning - after all, violent and spectacular thunderstorms can happen at night.

Quote
thermodynamic absorption...thermodynamic increase
Thermodynamics does suggest that large energy differences between different layers of the atmosphere will tend to dissipate or equalize over time.

The measure of thermodynamics is "entropy". Is this referring to entropy increasing?

I don't understand the terms "thermodynamic absorption" and "thermodynamic increase". Can you explain them, or try a different term?
« Last Edit: 22/03/2015 10:27:18 by evan_au »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #68 on: 22/03/2015 10:35:05 »
Quote from: Thebox
The bottom of the cloud  can be observed of becoming more dense ....  A density created by gravity pulling at the clouds elements
The reason that clouds float in the sky is because they are slightly less dense than the atmospheric layers below them. Because clouds are buoyant, they are almost weightless, and you can almost ignore gravity, even in the absence of electric fields.

Quote from: Thebox
I considered the various effects of gravity on various elements [of lightning]
Gravity is an extremely weak force. If there are strong electrical fields around (such as you have with lightning in clouds), you can ignore gravity.

Quote
A white cloud will reflect more light and allow more light to pass through than a dark cloud
If you have been in an airplane over a storm, you will know that from the top, the dark clouds are also very white.

The reason heavy rainclouds are darker underneath is because they are thicker than light fluffy clouds, and the depth of the clouds scatters more light away from reaching the ground.

Thunderclouds are very efficient at transferring energy between layers within the atmosphere, with fast-moving updrafts and downdrafts which generate the lightning (static electricity) by friction. These thunderclouds tower thousands of feet high, and not much light gets through.

So the lightning is an effect of the rapid updrafts and downdrafts reaching high altitudes. And the dark base of the cloud is also an effect of the rapid updrafts and downdrafts reaching high altitudes.

But it would be wrong to say that light causes the lightning - after all, violent and spectacular thunderstorms can happen at night.

Quote
thermodynamic absorption...thermodynamic increase
Thermodynamics does suggest that large energy differences between different layers of the atmosphere will tend to dissipate or equalize over time.

The measure of thermodynamics is "entropy". Is this referring to entropy increasing?

I don't understand the terms "thermodynamic absorption" and "thermodynamic increase". Can you explain them, or try a different term?

I am amazed I have not heard that a cloud is Buoyant before being sarcastic.

A boat is Buoyant, air is not.

I am not sure I want to explain any more I am sick of being insulted by certain members, I am just a crackpot so does it really matter?

I give my time freely to science, about 4 years of it, to get mocked and ridiculed, it is like being in kinder garden.

thermodynamic absorption-intake of heat/energy /radiation

thermodynamic increase - an increase in temperature and kinetic action

thermodynamic release - the energy emitted often in the form of heat ,light or an energy burst such as a solar flare.


Entropy - the above 3 , the collective for the subsets.

added - Thermodynamic coupling


Because is a glass half empty or is a glass half full, it is neither the glass is always full, half of one substance and half of another substance.

I never see half a glass of anything.

There are two types of theoretical scientists, there is the first type that see only the water in the glass, a quantitative measurement, then there is the second type of scientist who agrees completely there is water in the glass, but visualises the unseen substance and process in the ''empty'' half of glass.


 
« Last Edit: 22/03/2015 11:38:25 by Thebox »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4728
  • Thanked: 155 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #69 on: 22/03/2015 16:05:24 »
Just a few notes



In reply

Mechanism is not the process like the hands on a clock
Quote
hands are mechanism. movement of hands is process.
but rather the internal workings that makes the process.  We all know that we have a gravity calculation based on mass that defines orbital actions and an acceleration that an object will fall at too the Earth from the sky.  This is process and actions rather than a mechanism, a comparison to owning a car and knowing it can move but not knowing what an engine is that drives the actions.  It is also said that everything in the Universe of a matter or mediums form is made up of atoms, atoms consist of 3 Quarks that make up a Proton and also there is a  Neutron
Quote
also made of quarks
that makes up the Nucleus of the atom and an electron of a outer electron shell , although some elements of the Universe   made of atoms are without Neutrons.  It is also explained that all matter or a medium
Quote
can you distinguish between matter and medium, please?
has mass, mass being essential to the equations of the gravity calculation and Newtons force.  Mass of an object is defined normally in kilograms, not to be mistaken for  a weight which is Newtons of force calculated by an objects mass
Quote
not only mass but also local gravitational field. Indeed I think the assertion is inverted: we normally calculate mass from a comparision of weights in a given field
.  In explanation of Gravity it is also said that all mass is attracted to mass, meaning any object of matter or mediums such as air are attracted to each other by Gravity of each others mass.

Atoms are bound together by a strong nuclear force
Quote
not atoms, nuclei
and have the ability to become excited by gaining positive charge or becoming dormant when negative
Quote
no, a negative ion is just as "active" as a positive ion
charged known in science as positive or negative charged ions.  A positive ion will repel an equally positive ion where as a negative ion is attracted to a positive ion, a negative ion has no effect on a negative ion
Quote
on the contrary, negative ions repel one another too
.  In context referring to the actions of atmospheric gases and a said buoyancy , I would like to mention what I consider an ion flux and the ion flux being the magic and mechanism of gravity
Quote
you may consider it so, but it isn't an ion flux may be affected by gravity but gravity does not require the transfer of ions
.

It is a well known fact that Helium and Hydrogen are buoyant gases
Quote
only compared with more dense gases. In a vacuum, they sink
and air is buoyancy dependant on energy in the air in the form of heat, hot air rises.  However , where as Hydrogen and Helium will rise and remain rising
Quote
not true. all gases convect
, air has a differential in the characteristics of behaviour, when the air cools down as it rises the air eventually will fall back down to the Earth, a sort of yoyo action by thermodynamic increase or decrease
Quote
try using "temperature", which is what you mean, rather than thermodynamic, which isn't
.  Air being made of atoms that becomes positively charged and rises opposing the effects of gravity and effectively decreasing in Newtons
Quote
not ture. The gravitational force on a mass of air is independent of the temperature or charge of that mass
.  A consequence of actions of being a positive more than a negative being repelled by the positive ion's Earth's core,
Quote
both positive and negative ions may be attracted towards the surface
from once it returns to its equilibrium state and loses the charge when the air is cooled
Quote
no, charge is not affected by altitude or temperature
as it rises creating a  negative effect that then is attracted back down to the positive ion core.

Thanks for reading.
I will complete it tomorrow and link it to lightning.

 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #70 on: 22/03/2015 20:22:53 »
Just a few notes



In reply

Mechanism is not the process like the hands on a clock
Quote
hands are mechanism. movement of hands is process.
but rather the internal workings that makes the process.  We all know that we have a gravity calculation based on mass that defines orbital actions and an acceleration that an object will fall at too the Earth from the sky.  This is process and actions rather than a mechanism, a comparison to owning a car and knowing it can move but not knowing what an engine is that drives the actions.  It is also said that everything in the Universe of a matter or mediums form is made up of atoms, atoms consist of 3 Quarks that make up a Proton and also there is a  Neutron
Quote
also made of quarks
that makes up the Nucleus of the atom and an electron of a outer electron shell , although some elements of the Universe   made of atoms are without Neutrons.  It is also explained that all matter or a medium
Quote
can you distinguish between matter and medium, please?
has mass, mass being essential to the equations of the gravity calculation and Newtons force.  Mass of an object is defined normally in kilograms, not to be mistaken for  a weight which is Newtons of force calculated by an objects mass
Quote
not only mass but also local gravitational field. Indeed I think the assertion is inverted: we normally calculate mass from a comparision of weights in a given field
.  In explanation of Gravity it is also said that all mass is attracted to mass, meaning any object of matter or mediums such as air are attracted to each other by Gravity of each others mass.

Atoms are bound together by a strong nuclear force
Quote
not atoms, nuclei
and have the ability to become excited by gaining positive charge or becoming dormant when negative
Quote
no, a negative ion is just as "active" as a positive ion
charged known in science as positive or negative charged ions.  A positive ion will repel an equally positive ion where as a negative ion is attracted to a positive ion, a negative ion has no effect on a negative ion
Quote
on the contrary, negative ions repel one another too
.  In context referring to the actions of atmospheric gases and a said buoyancy , I would like to mention what I consider an ion flux and the ion flux being the magic and mechanism of gravity
Quote
you may consider it so, but it isn't an ion flux may be affected by gravity but gravity does not require the transfer of ions
.

It is a well known fact that Helium and Hydrogen are buoyant gases
Quote
only compared with more dense gases. In a vacuum, they sink
and air is buoyancy dependant on energy in the air in the form of heat, hot air rises.  However , where as Hydrogen and Helium will rise and remain rising
Quote
not true. all gases convect
, air has a differential in the characteristics of behaviour, when the air cools down as it rises the air eventually will fall back down to the Earth, a sort of yoyo action by thermodynamic increase or decrease
Quote
try using "temperature", which is what you mean, rather than thermodynamic, which isn't
.  Air being made of atoms that becomes positively charged and rises opposing the effects of gravity and effectively decreasing in Newtons
Quote
not ture. The gravitational force on a mass of air is independent of the temperature or charge of that mass
.  A consequence of actions of being a positive more than a negative being repelled by the positive ion's Earth's core,
Quote
both positive and negative ions may be attracted towards the surface
from once it returns to its equilibrium state and loses the charge when the air is cooled
Quote
no, charge is not affected by altitude or temperature
as it rises creating a  negative effect that then is attracted back down to the positive ion core.

Thanks for reading.
I will complete it tomorrow and link it to lightning.

Are you saying Neutrons are also made of Quarks?

Matter - dust or objects

medium - air, a gas, an electrical medium,

I did mean nuclie, sorry wording badly.

How can a negative energy repel a negative energy, how can there be a negative energy?

''you may consider it so, but it isn't an ion flux may be affected by gravity but gravity does not require the transfer of ions''

Not a transfer of ions, an equilibrium offset of ions, a fluctuation in positive or negative hence the up and down of air.


In a vacuum Hydrogen sinks because there is no intake of energy only loss.

''both positive and negative ions may be attracted towards the surface''

Yes , gravity, the surface is both positive and negative depending on charge,






 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1879
  • Thanked: 145 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #71 on: 22/03/2015 23:13:26 »
Yes, neutrons are also made of quarks.

Air and gases are also matter (so are electrons and other subatomic particles.)

Gravity and charge (electrostatic attraction or repulsion) are different sets of forces. Neither one require the other.

Air and clouds can definitely be buoyant--an air-filled balloon floats in water for the exact same reason a hydrogen-filled balloon floats in air, and a water-filled balloon floats on mercury (the metal).

I don't know how you're coming up with these definitions, but you are using different definitions from what everyone else uses for pretty much every word... (buoyancy, thermodynamic, negative/positive, entropy, matter, medium, time, dimension) They all have agreed-upon and specific meanings that you are not intending when you use these words (and others) this is partly why people get so confused in discussion with you.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #72 on: 22/03/2015 23:58:48 »
Yes, neutrons are also made of quarks.

Air and gases are also matter (so are electrons and other subatomic particles.)

Gravity and charge (electrostatic attraction or repulsion) are different sets of forces. Neither one require the other.

Air and clouds can definitely be buoyant--an air-filled balloon floats in water for the exact same reason a hydrogen-filled balloon floats in air, and a water-filled balloon floats on mercury (the metal).

I don't know how you're coming up with these definitions, but you are using different definitions from what everyone else uses for pretty much every word... (buoyancy, thermodynamic, negative/positive, entropy, matter, medium, time, dimension) They all have agreed-upon and specific meanings that you are not intending when you use these words (and others) this is partly why people get so confused in discussion with you.

Ok lets try it a different way, I will change my approach of how I write things.


Air is heavier on the ground when it has sunk, air is lighter when it rises , why?

If air  on the ground is attracted by a force what makes air un-attractive to the force, that what makes the air rise up from the ground?


My answer would be that the air attracted to the ground is not the same energy level as the air that rises, the air that rises having more energy by some sort of gain, a gain that is then released as it rises allowing the force of the ground to pull its less energy state back down to the ground.

When the air gains this energy and rises becoming opposed to the force from the ground , an anti and opposite reaction is observed to the force from the ground.


Air floats on air is what science is saying. 

Imagine if you were high in the sky and in each hand you had an un-charged air atom, you drop both atoms at the same time, both atoms fall through the other air atoms of the atmosphere, why?  because they are heavy.


Now imagine we repeat the experiment with two charged air atoms, the atoms would just float on release.


« Last Edit: 23/03/2015 00:28:12 by Thebox »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4728
  • Thanked: 155 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #73 on: 23/03/2015 07:32:02 »


Ok lets try it a different way, I will change my approach of how I write things.
Quote
A good idea. Asserting untruths is the job of priests, politicians and philosophers, not physicists.


Air is heavier on the ground when it has sunk, air is lighter when it rises , why?
Quote
Cart before horse. Warm air is less dense than cold air at the same pressure, so bubbles of warm air will rise through cold air. Archimedes.

If air  on the ground is attracted by a force what makes air un-attractive to the force
Quote
Nothing. Gravity strill applies
, that what makes the air rise up from the ground?
Quote
Archimedes


My answer would be that the air attracted to the ground is not the same energy level as the air that rises, the air that rises having more energy by some sort of gain, a gain that is then released as it rises allowing the force of the ground to pull its less energy state back down to the ground.
Quote
The light  may be dawning here. Read about "adiabatic lapse rate" and the Gas Laws

When the air gains this energy and rises becoming opposed to the force from the ground , an anti and opposite reaction is observed to the force from the ground.
Quote
Convection


Air floats on air is what science is saying.
Quote
yes, indeed, though the mechanism of convection is a lot simpler that your description
 

Imagine if you were high in the sky and in each hand you had an un-charged air atom, you drop both atoms at the same time, both atoms fall through the other air atoms of the atmosphere, why?  because they are heavy.
Quote
How would you know? They are indistinguishable from other air molecules (air is a mixture of molecules rather than atoms) It is true that there is slightly more oxygen and carbon dioxide at low level but it would take a very long time (years) for one CO2 molecule to diffuse its way to the ground from 30,000 ft, whereas a thundercloud can form, discharge and disperse in an hour


Now imagine we repeat the experiment with two charged air atoms, the atoms would just float on release.
Quote
Untrue. You can ionise a molecule by adding or subtracting one electron, which would alter the mass of an oxygen molecule by about 1 part in 60,000 - hardly enough to reverse its buoyancy, as nitrogen is about 10% less dense.


 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #74 on: 23/03/2015 10:25:49 »


Ok lets try it a different way, I will change my approach of how I write things.
Quote
A good idea. Asserting untruths is the job of priests, politicians and philosophers, not physicists.


Air is heavier on the ground when it has sunk, air is lighter when it rises , why?
Quote
Cart before horse. Warm air is less dense than cold air at the same pressure, so bubbles of warm air will rise through cold air. Archimedes.

If air  on the ground is attracted by a force what makes air un-attractive to the force
Quote
Nothing. Gravity strill applies
, that what makes the air rise up from the ground?
Quote
Archimedes


My answer would be that the air attracted to the ground is not the same energy level as the air that rises, the air that rises having more energy by some sort of gain, a gain that is then released as it rises allowing the force of the ground to pull its less energy state back down to the ground.
Quote
The light  may be dawning here. Read about "adiabatic lapse rate" and the Gas Laws

When the air gains this energy and rises becoming opposed to the force from the ground , an anti and opposite reaction is observed to the force from the ground.
Quote
Convection


Air floats on air is what science is saying.
Quote
yes, indeed, though the mechanism of convection is a lot simpler that your description
 

Imagine if you were high in the sky and in each hand you had an un-charged air atom, you drop both atoms at the same time, both atoms fall through the other air atoms of the atmosphere, why?  because they are heavy.
Quote
How would you know? They are indistinguishable from other air molecules (air is a mixture of molecules rather than atoms) It is true that there is slightly more oxygen and carbon dioxide at low level but it would take a very long time (years) for one CO2 molecule to diffuse its way to the ground from 30,000 ft, whereas a thundercloud can form, discharge and disperse in an hour


Now imagine we repeat the experiment with two charged air atoms, the atoms would just float on release.
Quote
Untrue. You can ionise a molecule by adding or subtracting one electron, which would alter the mass of an oxygen molecule by about 1 part in 60,000 - hardly enough to reverse its buoyancy, as nitrogen is about 10% less dense.



I feel that science is missing the entire point, what goes up comes back down through itself.  If I dropped a drip of water into a  glass of water, would the water drip sink?

If i was to add about 50,000 volts to wire surrounding an aluminium structure and it rises of the ground would you not consider that anti-gravity?

I am still considering lightning, just down a different path than a normal person would take.


''See'' this please, air is not buoyant when it is sinking......

Imagine two separate clusters of air molecules at ground level, let's say 10 molecules per cluster and 10 atoms per molecule.

Cluster (a) we start to add energy, the cluster then starts to expand, so per cubic mm, the density becomes less, in effect being lighter than cluster (b).

Lighter meaning less Newtons of force.

Lets say (a) and (b) start off at 1kg.   0.981n of force and both clusters are only 1 inch cubed.

and both clusters have 100 atoms total volume.

Cluster (a) expands making now 50 atoms per cubic inch compared to 100 atoms a cubic inch of (b).

Less dense making less weight, newtons of force.

This still does not explain why it rises opposing gravity,

neither does it account for that when the air is expanding it opposes itself.

Cluster (a) is held together by gravity, cluster (a) expands, cluster (a) opposes its own gravity when charged.

If you can imagine a positive charged invisible sphere, the sphere will always want to rip itself apart.

I am sure you have seen one of these video before.




The energy from the explosion expanding making a temporal energy vacuum in the water , as the water pressurises and the explosion force radius weakens, the vacuum then implodes forcing the explosion upwards, upwards being the less dense and less pressure.


Now at the very instance of the explosion the starting point(s), I call this zero point space,


This is what I want to know about lightning, the zero point space.

I have centripetally pressurised positive ion's clusters that then gain charge and explode at point zero.

The negative ion's absorb the charge and then collapse into point zero forcing an implode and then an escape seen as lightning.

A similarity to the underwater link without the water.


What magnetic bottling holds the sun together?


















« Last Edit: 23/03/2015 13:01:26 by Thebox »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: What makes lightning?
« Reply #74 on: 23/03/2015 10:25:49 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length