1 of 3
1
A question on magnetohydrodynamics
Posted: 25 June 2010 10:43 PM   [ Ignore ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Two of them actually.

The first is kinda complex, and I ain’t gonna bother posting anything about the subject because isolated tidbits may be misleading. But my understanding is that plasma is signifigantly more influenced by a magnetic field than a gravitational one. Perhaps enough that a strong enough magnetic field would hold a very dense ball of matter in place, even within another, much larger, gravity well. Is this correct?

And the second one… do the guys who do this stuff actually call it that when the waitress politely asks?

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2010 11:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15435
Joined  2006-02-14
Stormy Fairweather - 25 June 2010 10:43 PM

Two of them actually.

The first is kinda complex, and I ain’t gonna bother posting anything about the subject because isolated tidbits may be misleading. But my understanding is that plasma is signifigantly more influenced by a magnetic field than a gravitational one. Perhaps enough that a strong enough magnetic field would hold a very dense ball of matter in place, even within another, much larger, gravity well. Is this correct?

I’m no expert. Far from one, in fact, so you probably shouldn’t listen to my impressions on the subject. But I believe the answer is “yes”. The present technologies for achieving fusion power depend on bottling up a plasma in a strong toroidal magnetic field. Not sure a ball would work as well, but then as I say, I’m no expert. I did recently visit a fusion test reactor in construction, and one form of plasma is in a “cored apple” formation that’s close to a sphere but not quite.

Stormy Fairweather - 25 June 2010 10:43 PM

And the second one… do the guys who do this stuff actually call it that when the waitress politely asks?

I would certainly hope so! LOL

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 02:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

The shape of said mass of plasma is of no relevence to my question here, I said spere as I had assumed it would be the simplest to achieve. Perhaps betraying my own ignorance on the matter.

But if the answer is yes, extremely dense mass in plasma form can be held in place solely using magnetic fields, then I have a couple interesting thoughts to share…

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 12:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15435
Joined  2006-02-14
Stormy Fairweather - 26 June 2010 02:43 AM

The shape of said mass of plasma is of no relevence to my question here, I said spere as I had assumed it would be the simplest to achieve. Perhaps betraying my own ignorance on the matter.

But if the answer is yes, extremely dense mass in plasma form can be held in place solely using magnetic fields, then I have a couple interesting thoughts to share…

FWIW, the mass in a typical plasma used for test fusion reactions is not extremely dense. Indeed, it’s typically extremely thin; very close to a perfect vacuum in fact.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 05:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Yes indeed. I am talking about hypothetical plasma though. My understanding of magnetohydrodynamics (which is certainly incomplete)  tells me that magnetic fields have so much more of an affect on plasma than gravity, that even a very dense mass of plasma could be held in place relatively easily against the gravity of, say, earth via magnets

If there is a flaw in that interpretation, I would like to see it before I voice thoughts that depend on it.

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 05:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4865
Joined  2007-10-05

Magnetic fields have an immensely stronger effect than gravity on everything, not just plasma. If there is a flaw in your idea the mathematics is well beyond anything I have mastered. If you have something important to contribute to the field of magnetohydrodynamics you would be better off publishing it in a refereed science journal than posting it on Internet discussion forum. You’ll get much more relevant feedback that way.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 06:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  28
Joined  2010-06-10

This is a good free of charge introductory book:

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/plasma/lectures1/index.html

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 06:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Screw it. Posting an idea in a forum is another possible avenue of seeing it implemented, or debunked. And an easy one. (I am lazy)

Here is the entiretly of my thought… if one could suspend a mass of dense enough plasma to create a gravity well that is intense enough to pull a vehcle that houses the device that controls it, then it may be the best way overcome gravity.

I know that the strength of gravity increases by orders of magnitude as you approach the source (it gets stronger, faster. damn I wish I could remember the proper terminology), so I speculate that a very dense mass of plasma can be configured to create a gravity well sufficient to move a vehicle without overtly affecting much around.

And, as iceing on the cake, such a vehicle would be a constant state of ‘falling’ forward, perfectly balancing out inertia for any occupants as you accelerate in different directions. (all turns would be 0 g’s)

I suck at higher math (though I love the implications of the same), so if someone better than me can point out any flaws with this theory (or runs with it), that would be great.

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 07:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4865
Joined  2007-10-05

A) How do you propose to keep this plasma confined? This is but one major hurdle for physicists working on fusion generators.
B) What are you going to use to generate power to confine the plasma? How much power will confining the plasma require?
C) This sounds suspiciously like a perpetual motion machine.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 08:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Manufacturing and methodologies are better ascertained by a research team of engineers. At least in regards to higher technologies (you don’t build a quantum processor in your garage). That was A) and B).

The question at hand is; is the concept plausable.

We all know perpetual motion is impossible. Comparing a new idea to one that has long since been debunked with nothing in common is… well, insulting.

I speculate such a vehicle would have a tremendous power supply, likely the biggest we could make (nuclear), and I am in no way suggesting one could get more energy than is used to produce it. And that is the gist of perpetual motion.

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 08:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4865
Joined  2007-10-05

Considering thousands of excellent engineers have spent billions of dollars trying to harness plasma to power a fusion reactor what make you things someone such as yourself, with inadequate training in math and physics, can do better?

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 08:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

In what part of my post do I say anything at all about harnessing anything from plasma?

Matter has mass. Mass causes gravity. If you can hold mass (the plasma) in place with magnetic fields that are strong enough to render the ambient gravitational field secondary to the motion of said mass, then you can control the position of very massive objects that are a dense plasma. In effect placing a controllable gravity source where you want.

...I had thought I was clear. No harnessing. Just matter, mass, gravity and a few magnets.

So once again. Is the effect of magnetic fields sufficently stronger than gravitional ones in the case of plasme to be able to control enough mass to move a vehicle solely through with gravity?

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 08:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4865
Joined  2007-10-05

Gravity is the weakest known force in the Universe. Any gravitational field strong enough to move a car would have to be much more massive than the car. You are not going to do so by confining dense plasma under the hood. Even if you could, you would need a fusion reactor in the trunk to power your confinement field.

I highly recommend you read the site Count Iblis linked above.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 June 2010 08:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Why can’t you just say you don’t know?

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2010 11:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  731
Joined  2007-06-20
Stormy Fairweather - 26 June 2010 08:25 PM

In what part of my post do I say anything at all about harnessing anything from plasma?

Matter has mass. Mass causes gravity. If you can hold mass (the plasma) in place with magnetic fields that are strong enough to render the ambient gravitational field secondary to the motion of said mass, then you can control the position of very massive objects that are a dense plasma. In effect placing a controllable gravity source where you want.

...I had thought I was clear. No harnessing. Just matter, mass, gravity and a few magnets.

So once again. Is the effect of magnetic fields sufficently stronger than gravitional ones in the case of plasme to be able to control enough mass to move a vehicle solely through with gravity?

Help me understand why your scenario is different from those vertical wind tunnels used by skydivers in special wind suits.  If you can hold mass (the skydiver) in place with a column of wind that is strong enough to render the ambient gravitational field secondary to the motion of said mass, then you can control the position of very massive objects that are skydivers.  In effect placing a controllable gravity source (skydivers) where you want.  Just matter, mass, gravity and a big fan.

???

 Signature 

PC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2010 11:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2008-10-09

Providing you could find a fat enough skydiver to cause a signifigant gravity well, any fan would be pushing down with the same force it is pointing up.

In effect, trying to pick yourself up.

 Signature 

My superiority complex is better than yours.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 3
1