Vlasov Solver [work in progress]

[alexjrgreen]

alexjrgreen: "Read Ch 8 of Hestnes book"

Which Hestnes book is that?

The one you suggested:

David Hestenes (1966). Space-Time Algebra, Gordon & Breach.
http://modelingnts.la.asu.edu/pdf/SpaceTimeCalc.pdf

[blaisepascal]

alexjrgreen: "Read Ch 8 of Hestnes book"

Which Hestnes book is that?

The one you suggested:

David Hestenes (1966). Space-Time Algebra, Gordon & Breach.
http://modelingnts.la.asu.edu/pdf/SpaceTimeCalc.pdf

The chapter entitled "Directed Integrals and the Fundamental Theorem", in the part of the book entitled "Mathematical Fundamentals"? I didn't see any new physics there. Could you point it out to us?

[alexjrgreen]

The chapter entitled "Directed Integrals and the Fundamental Theorem", in the part of the book entitled "Mathematical Fundamentals"? I didn't see any new physics there. Could you point it out to us?

There's a glitch in the numbering.

"PART II: Quantum Theory" Page 60 "The Zitterbewegung Interpretation"

[blaisepascal]

"PART II: Quantum Theory" Page 60 "The Zitterbewegung Interpretation"

If I read that correctly (and it isn't certain I am), Hestenes is proposing that a small contribution to the solution to the Dirac equation has a physical meaning? That the Zitterbewegung noticed and named by Erwin Schrödinger is real and not just an artifact of the math?

An alternative explanation (or interpretation) of a mathematical result of QM discovered in the 1930's hardly qualifies in my mind as "new physics".

I'll fully admit I hadn't heard of the Zitterbewegung previously, nor was I aware of the issues surrounding it (Wikipedia provided more information, including a link to another paper by Hestenes regarding his solution to it). It's not something unnoticed and forgotten; apparently people worked on it for a while.

The important question is (not a real quote, just highlighted):

Do the GA or Quaternion formulations of physics (EM, SR, GR, and QM) differ in the predicted results of any experiments?

So far, I haven't seen anything.

[alexjrgreen]

The important question is (not a real quote, just highlighted):

Do the GA or Quaternion formulations of physics (EM, SR, GR, and QM) differ in the predicted results of any experiments?

So far, I haven't seen anything.

See, for example:

The precessional frequency of a gyroscope in the quaternionic formulation of general relativity
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v43686q288781101/

Maxwell assumed the existence of a luminiferous aether, which would have measurable fluid properties including, as Stokes pointed out, viscosity.

The Michelson Morley experiment looked for aether drift and didn't find any. Although Stokes pointed out that the result could be due to the Earth dragging the aether round with it, the aether was soon abandoned as a concept.

Heavyside and Gibbs therefore had no need to model the properties of an aether which was then considered not to exist.

The fabric of spacetime, frame dragging, virtual particles and dark energy have come by since then. Whether an aether of some kind exists has become a more, rather than less, open question.

There is plenty of new Plasma physics waiting to be described. Ball lightning, for example, achieves self-organised plasma containment for several seconds at atmospheric pressure.

[MSimon]

I have had the honor of being in the same room as ball lightning. About 1/2 meter to one meter across. And it glowed green. The electric field was palpable. I backed away slowly. It faded.

[Art Carlson]

There is plenty of new Plasma physics waiting to be described. Ball lightning, for example, achieves self-organised plasma containment for several seconds at atmospheric pressure.

Except there are good reasons to believe that ball lightning, whatever it really is, is not a high temperature plasmoid.

[alexjrgreen]

There is plenty of new Plasma physics waiting to be described. Ball lightning, for example, achieves self-organised plasma containment for several seconds at atmospheric pressure.

Except there are good reasons to believe that ball lightning, whatever it really is, is not a high temperature plasmoid.

That might make a good discussion thread.

Long-lived plasmoids generated by surface microwave discharges in chemically active gases
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m12p2u4152v54222/

Great balls of lightning
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/24175

Ball Lightning Punches Circular Hole In Window
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf085/sf085g13.htm

[Torulf2]

There are some conditions stabile plasmoids can exist despite the viral theorem.
In atmosphere pressure and if the plasmoid have a complex topology.

J. Reece Roth. Ball lighting: What nature is trying to tell the plasma research community. Fusion thchnology vol27. May 1995.

Witalis says plasmoids can be stabile if the Hall-Effect is strong. This is the case for some space plasmas. Plasmoids have been observed in the magneto tails of Earth, and Jupiter.
Witalis theoretical invented a fusion reactor similar to the idea of Electron power systems.

E.A. Witalis. Nonthermal fusion reactor consept based on Hall-effect magnetohydrodynamics plasma theory. Kerntechnik 53. 1988. No2

The Hall-Effect and complex topology is also present in the plasmafokus plasmoid.

[Art Carlson]

There are some conditions stabile plasmoids can exist despite the viral theorem.
In atmosphere pressure and if the plasmoid have a complex topology.

J. Reece Roth. Ball lighting: What nature is trying to tell the plasma research community. Fusion thchnology vol27. May 1995.

Witalis says plasmoids can be stabile if the Hall-Effect is strong. This is the case for some space plasmas. Plasmoids have been observed in the magneto tails of Earth, and Jupiter.
Witalis theoretical invented a fusion reactor similar to the idea of Electron power systems.

E.A. Witalis. Nonthermal fusion reactor consept based on Hall-effect magnetohydrodynamics plasma theory. Kerntechnik 53. 1988. No2

The Hall-Effect and complex topology is also present in the plasmafokus plasmoid.

I believe I read the Roth paper at some point, but I don't know the other refs. I have looked into the dense plasma focus.

It is consistent with the virial theorem to have a plasmoid contained by atmospheric pressure. Aside from the question of cooling due to neutral particles penetrating the configuration, the maximum energy of plasma plus magnetic field (and electric field, if it's strong enough to matter) is approximately equal to the confining pressure, 1 atm = 10^5 Pa = 100 J/Liter. This is too low to account for many reported phenomena.

The other problem with a plasmoid model of ball lightning is the buoyancy. A plasmoid consisting of hot plasma and magnetic fields will weigh much less than the surrounding air and would rise like a helium balloon, only faster.

[MSimon]

Since this is the ball lightning thread:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/g ... ls-of.html

And yeah. The wired guy who picked that url has a sense of humor.

[Art Carlson]

Since this is the ball lightning thread:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/g ... ls-of.html

And yeah. The wired guy who picked that url has a sense of humor.

Ah. Koloc. An old friend from sci.physics.fusion