Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #617006 > unrolled thread

Van Allen radiation belt

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 15:54 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 15:58 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 00:19 +0000
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 01:22 -0800
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-08 18:51 +0000
          Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-08 17:10 -0600
            Re: Van Allen radiation belt pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 16:53 -0800
              Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-08 19:01 -0600
                Re: Van Allen radiation belt pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 17:20 -0800
                  Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-09 12:04 -0600
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 16:05 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-08 08:13 -0600
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 09:45 -0800
          Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-08 17:12 -0600
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 16:10 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 00:25 +0000
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-04 20:52 -0500
          Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 03:15 +0000
            Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 16:50 -0500
              Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-06 23:51 +0000
                Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 19:48 -0500
                  Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-07 01:41 +0000
                    Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 16:30 -0500
                      Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-07 21:48 +0000
                        Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 20:52 -0500
                          Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-08 03:51 +0000
                            Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 21:33 -0800
                            Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 16:58 -0500
                              Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-08 22:08 +0000
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-08 19:02 -0600
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 01:24 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 00:22 +0000
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-04 20:50 -0500
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 03:17 +0000
          Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 16:50 -0500
            Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-06 23:52 +0000
              Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 19:48 -0500
                Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-07 01:42 +0000
                  Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 16:30 -0500
                    Re: Van Allen radiation belt Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-09 11:59 -0600
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-04 20:22 -0500
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 18:28 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 12:37 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-02-05 20:49 +0000
      or, PI < 10/31 in some base_n > 3 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 14:36 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 14:07 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 14:33 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:04 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:05 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:51 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:52 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:54 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:55 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:56 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 08:47 -0800
        waves are wavey noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:02 -0800
          Re: waves are wavey noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 19:05 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 15:57 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 14:02 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 01:20 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 01:21 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 12:14 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 12:28 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 13:41 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-09 11:19 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 10:45 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 10:47 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 10:52 -0800
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-02-11 12:56 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 11:36 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 13:10 -0800
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-02-11 16:32 -0800
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-02-12 13:43 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 08:58 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 13:46 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-13 13:13 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-02-13 13:59 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-13 14:34 -0800
        Re: Van Allen radiation belt "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-02-13 15:55 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 09:57 -0800
      Re: Van Allen radiation belt noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 10:06 -0800
    Re: Van Allen radiation belt numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 10:41 -0800

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

#617006 — Van Allen radiation belt

Is it causing gravity?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#617009

The sun is emitting light and therefore, electrons.  It would make sense that the belt's electrons originate from the sun. Then cosmic rays originate from the sun.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617028

numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
> The sun is emitting light and therefore, electrons.

Non sequitur.

The Sun is emitting light but is not emitting electrons because of it.

Starting with an inane premise invalidates everything to follow.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617539

On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 6:58:27 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote:
> The sun is emitting light and therefore, electrons.  It would make sense
> that the belt's electrons originate from the sun. Then cosmic rays
> originate from the sun.

Cosmic rays originate in the COSMOS, IOW outside the solar system,
NOT from the Sun.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617598

edprochak@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 6:58:27 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The sun is emitting light and therefore, electrons.  It would make sense
>> that the belt's electrons originate from the sun. Then cosmic rays
>> originate from the sun.
> 
> Cosmic rays originate in the COSMOS, IOW outside the solar system,
> NOT from the Sun.

Cosmic rays are high-energy radiation, mainly originating outside the
Solar System.

Sharma (2008). Atomic And Nuclear Physics. p. 478. ISBN 978-81-317-1924-4.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617641

On 2/8/2017 12:51 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> edprochak@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 6:58:27 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> The sun is emitting light and therefore, electrons.  It would make sense
>>> that the belt's electrons originate from the sun. Then cosmic rays
>>> originate from the sun.

>> Cosmic rays originate in the COSMOS, IOW outside the solar system,
>> NOT from the Sun.
>
> Cosmic rays are high-energy radiation, mainly originating outside the
> Solar System.
>
> Sharma (2008). Atomic And Nuclear Physics. p. 478. ISBN 978-81-317-1924-4.
>
>

cosmic rays have the nucli of an atom, speeding along.
not like a gamma which is pure EM.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617656

On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 3:10:13 PM UTC-8, Serg Io wrote:

> cosmic rays have the nucli of an atom, speeding along.
> not like a gamma which is pure EM.

Here are 4 explanations of gamma rays and cosmic rays...

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-cosmic-rays-and-gamma-ray-bursts-What-specific-particle-can-we-detect-on-earth-for-each-one

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617657

On 2/8/2017 6:53 PM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 3:10:13 PM UTC-8, Serg Io wrote:
>
>> cosmic rays have the nucli of an atom, speeding along.
>> not like a gamma which is pure EM.
>
> Here are 4 explanations of gamma rays and cosmic rays...
>
> https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-cosmic-rays-and-gamma-ray-bursts-What-specific-particle-can-we-detect-on-earth-for-each-one
>

some additional

with Gamma you get 2,
gamma's are always produced in pairs (some medical devices based upon 
this fact)

gamma rays travel in stright lines, so they can build gamma telescopes 
and see where they came from  (perhaps gav lensing could distort)

Cosmic rays do not travel in stright lines, Mag fields change path, one 
cant tell where they are from.


anyhow you can detect both with a PMT and scintillation plastic bought 
off eBay for about $200 or less (you need a scope, can get a mini for 
about $50 too)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617663

On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 5:01:10 PM UTC-8, Serg Io wrote:

> anyhow you can detect both with a PMT and scintillation plastic bought 
> off eBay for about $200 or less (you need a scope, can get a mini for 
> about $50 too)

No, gamma rays never make it to the ground, they are all destroyed in the atmosphere. You CAN detect the particle cascade caused by the gamma rays... from my link...

"Gamma rays are absorbed by the atmosphere long before they hit the earth so you won't be able to see those."
- Joseph Wang, Ph.D. Astrophysics

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617766

On 2/8/2017 7:20 PM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 5:01:10 PM UTC-8, Serg Io wrote:
>
>> anyhow you can detect both with a PMT and scintillation plastic
>> bought off eBay for about $200 or less (you need a scope, can get a
>> mini for about $50 too)
>
> No, gamma rays never make it to the ground, they are all destroyed in
> the atmosphere. You CAN detect the particle cascade caused by the
> gamma rays... from my link...
>
> "Gamma rays are absorbed by the atmosphere long before they hit the
> earth so you won't be able to see those." - Joseph Wang, Ph.D.
> Astrophysics
>

all true, the gamma telescopes are in outer space (exo-atmospheric)

Interesting how partical cascade happen, and how they are shaped at the
surface of earth, like a pancake, about a meter thick, and about 500(?)
meter wide, (lots of particals) going near the speed of light, not too 
much off the orgional angle to the atmosphere of the orginal partical, 
about 2 degrees max.  (its in a book somewhere over here)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617014

Geologists hypothesize that the Earth's center is composed of predominantly iron. The outer portion of the center, known as the "outer core", is thought to be liquid iron. While the interior portion of the center, known as the "inner core" is thought to be solid iron.


This does not make sense since the density of iron is 8 and the density of the earth is 5.5.


Also, if the outer core of the earth is liquid iron where iron has a melting point of 3,000 degrees, the surface of the earth would feel this heat.

I think that the earth is a solid magnet.


.



.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617559

On 2/4/2017 6:05 PM, numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
> Geologists hypothesize that the Earth's center is composed of
> predominantly iron. The outer portion of the center, known as the
> "outer core", is thought to be liquid iron. While the interior
> portion of the center, known as the "inner core" is thought to be
> solid iron.
>
>
> This does not make sense since the density of iron is 8 and the
> density of the earth is 5.5.
>
>
> Also, if the outer core of the earth is liquid iron where iron has a
> melting point of 3,000 degrees, the surface of the earth would feel
> this heat.
>
> I think that the earth is a solid magnet.

how do your thoughts explain movement of the magnetic poles ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617584

it's just tomography, i.e seismograms, since
sound travels differently in different media, as doth waves
of light (the wave is said to be photonic, duh

> > I think that the earth is a solid magnet.
> 
> how do your thoughts explain movement of the magnetic poles ?

great question; any thoughts -- after our self-anointed expert?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617642

On 2/8/2017 11:45 AM, noTthaTguY wrote:
> it's just tomography, i.e seismograms, since
> sound travels differently in different media, as doth waves
> of light (the wave is said to be photonic, duh

>>> I think that the earth is a solid magnet.
>>
>> how do your thoughts explain movement of the magnetic poles ?
>
> great question; any thoughts -- after our self-anointed expert?
>

the magnetic poles move because of too much Żywiec Porter w iron or its 
closing time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617016

The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617030

numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
> The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use
> radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio
> waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.

How are the pictures getting back from all of the Mars probes and
rovers genius?


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617046

On 2/4/2017 7:25 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
>> The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use
>> radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio
>> waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.
>
> How are the pictures getting back from all of the Mars probes and
> rovers genius?

That's the point chimporoni, they can't get back hence must be hoaxes. 
You've often argued this kind of thing yourself.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617059

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 2/4/2017 7:25 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
>>> The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use
>>> radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio
>>> waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.
>>
>> How are the pictures getting back from all of the Mars probes and
>> rovers genius?
> 
> That's the point chimporoni, they can't get back hence must be hoaxes. 
> You've often argued this kind of thing yourself.

Typical troll nonsense and ad hominem. 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617249

On 2/4/2017 10:15 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 2/4/2017 7:25 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use
>>>> radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio
>>>> waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.
>>>
>>> How are the pictures getting back from all of the Mars probes and
>>> rovers genius?
>>
>> That's the point chimporoni, they can't get back hence must be hoaxes.
>> You've often argued this kind of thing yourself.
>
> Typical troll nonsense and ad hominem.
>
No discussion from chimp. just wasted bandwidth.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617286

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 2/4/2017 10:15 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/4/2017 7:25 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> The Mars mission may also be fake since it may not be possible to use
>>>>> radio waves at the distance of 33 millions of miles since radio
>>>>> waves are dependent on the inverse of the fifth power.
>>>>
>>>> How are the pictures getting back from all of the Mars probes and
>>>> rovers genius?
>>>
>>> That's the point chimporoni, they can't get back hence must be hoaxes.
>>> You've often argued this kind of thing yourself.
>>
>> Typical troll nonsense and ad hominem.
>>
> No discussion from chimp. just wasted bandwidth.

There is no point in attempting to discuss anything with an admitted
troll liar.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web