|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: For the Benefit of ICANT - About lightning | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
ICANT writes: The lightning bolt is a bunch of negative electrons and positive positrons getting together and doing their thing.
lyx2no writes: Lightning is not due to matter-antimatter annihilation.
ICANT writes: Why don't you start aa thread and explain to me how negative electrons in the cloud and positive positrons under the cloud and on the ground does not generate the lightning bolt. Hello ICANT I lit the thing. Now let’s see if I inhale. Firstly, your challenge wrongly assumes that there are positrons under the clouds and on the ground to react with electrons within the clouds. There aren’t. Positrons are anti-electrons: antimatter. Antimatter is very rare stuff. Iirc, all the antimatter man has ever created amounts to 3 billionths of a gram. When a positron does happen to be created naturally in the atmosphere it only lasts a few billionth of a second before meeting an electron and poofing into a gamma ray. Now, gamma rays are nasty things. If there were visible electron-positron poofing going on only a mile over our heads we’d be dead. Secondly, lightning is a rebalancing of electric charge. Protons, if that is what you meant rather then positrons, aren’t as free to move around as electrons are. So all of the redistribution of electric charge is redistribution of electrons. In a process not well understood, friction within the clouds forces a charge separation which builds until it is great enough to establish or take advantage of a discharge path. This path can be from cloud to cloud or to ground. I don’t really see how lightning being due to electron-positron annihilation can be debated. The best I can expect is for ICANT to recant. But if there is an argument to be made I love to see it. ICANT, the floor is yours. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added " - About lightning" part to topic title. You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Wouldn't want you to miss your own party.
You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I have sometimes said that the only subject in science that I have never seen a creationist be wrong about is electricity.
I will now withdraw this remark.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
The ones that Zeus used to throw had positrons!!1! It's just these wimpy-assed modern lightning bolts that don't!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Coragyps writes:
Pah! Zeus throws weak bolts! Thor is the true master of lightning! His bolts had nuclear powers!1!111!!! Also, they were much more manly than Zeus's effeminate bolts! The ones that Zeus used to throw had positrons!!1! It's just these wimpy-assed modern lightning bolts that don't! So there!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi lyx2no,
lyx2no writes: Firstly, your challenge I didn't realize I was issuing a challenge. I thought I was suggesting that you show me how my statement was not true.
lyx2no writes: When a positron does happen to be created naturally in the atmosphere it only lasts a few billionth of a second before meeting an electron and poofing into a gamma ray. Is that the only possibility?
The electron is a subatomic particle that carries a negative electric charge. It has no known components or substructure, and therefore is believed to be an elementary particle. Source The antiparticle of the electron is called the positron, which is identical to the electron except that it carries electrical and other charges of the opposite sign. When an electron collides with a positron, they may either scatter off each other or be totally annihilated, producing a pair (or more) of gamma ray photons. Electrons, which belong to the first generation of the lepton particle family,[9] participate in gravitational, electromagnetic and weak interactions. Do you refute that they can just scatter off each other? So electrons and positrons are the same thing on one is positive and the other is negative. In the top of the thunderstorm there are positive charged electrons (positrons). In the middle there are negative charged electrons. These cause a positive charge to be under the cloud to the ground. The lightning bolt is caused by the negative charge producing a leading connection to the ground causing a connection that when returned to the negative charged electrons in the cloud produce the lightning bolt. This is called a negative lightning bolt. This can happen between clouds also. The positive lighting bolt which is 10 time stronger comes from the top of the cloud and the sky can be almost clear. The positive charge is carried by the cloud rather than the ground. The positive bolt only goes to the ground and accounts for only about 5% of the lightning strikes.
lyx2no writes: I don’t really see how lightning being due to electron-positron annihilation can be debated. The best I can expect is for ICANT to recant. But if there is an argument to be made I love to see it. What is there that I need to recant? Electrons and positrons do not always annihilate each other. A positive and a negative charge is required to create a lightning bolt. Whether it is a negative charge in the cloud which created a positive charge under the cloud to the ground which creates negative lighting. OR A positive charge in the top of the cloud going to a negative charge on the ground. Lightning does not need a rain cloud to be produced. It can be produced above an intense forest fire, as well as being produced in a dust cloud from a volcano eruption. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Member (Idle past 3859 days) Posts: 346 From: France,Paris Joined: |
Did you learn chemistry in highschool?
You should be aware that positive charges come from atoms lacking some electrons called cation : Ion - Wikipedia The electricity from the lightning comes from the same source as the one you use to make your computer work: the travel of electrons from anions to cations. I can't believe you ignore that. By the way, back in high schools, we made experiments to make a pile using this.... Surely, you didn't think we created positrons in order to have electricity? Positron - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Not that ICANT isn't wrong, but I did find this interesting:
http://www.sciencenews.org/...timatter_detected_in_lightning
quote: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
In the top of the thunderstorm there are positive charged electrons (positrons). Its not positrons, its positively charged ions. Positrons are antimatter. The positively charged ions in the tops of clouds are just missing electrons. You're fairly accurate in your discription of lightning, you're just wrong about the positron part.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined:
|
Do you refute that they can just scatter off each other? Why would I refute that? Would you refute that babies sometime fall out of windows while discussing what is meant by "firmament" In the King James Bible?
source If you're going to supply a source could you try to make it relevant. The source you need to supply would be one the mentioned electron-positrons annihilation being involved in lightning creation. I'll take a guess that you couldn't find one.
So electrons and positrons are the same thing on[ly] one is positive and the other is negative. Yeah, I know. You could have used my first post as a source for that one.
In the top of the thunderstorm there are positive charged electrons (positrons). See, this is the kind of thing you need a source for. But there isn't one. Google it. You'll find that you are the originator of this statement. Or are you going to use yourself as a source on that one?
ICANT writes: A bunch of irrelevant stuff. I get the idea that you think I'll get confused and agree with your erroneous stuff if you cloud the issue with someone else's real stuff. (Yeah, I read Wiki too.)
A positive and a negative charge is required to create a lightning bolt. Close enough; but the question at hand is of what form is the positive charge. Your claim is that it is positrons. I made no claim but I'm willing to go out on a limb and say cations: atoms and molecules that have been striped of one or more electrons. The electrons are carried away from the cations by one force or another (wind currents, gravity what have you.) When the gradient becomes too great to sustain Flash Boom; the electrons return to the cations, and we don't all die from gamma ray bursts. (A really strong indicator for no positrons.)
What is there that I need to recant? Electrons and positrons do not always annihilate each other. Want to show me where that argument ever came up? Oh! guess what happens to the positron that scatters a billionth of a second later it meets up with an electron that it won't scatter from Pop! Gamma ray pair. I lit it. I inhaled. Yet it is you who blew smoke. Go figure. You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
So there! To be fair, Thor used an atlatl. You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4745 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
I have sometimes said that the only subject in science that I have never seen a creationist be wrong about is electricity. I will now withdraw this remark. Maybe they can bust a fresh move* with levers and inclined planes?
*Develop a new skill set. Edited by lyx2no, : Add definition. You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
lyx2no writes:
That just shows he has brain as well as brawn.
To be fair, Thor used an atlatl.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Zeus Forever!
I'm mighty thor with you thmart-assed thon-of-a-bithes that thupport those Northe gods.....
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024