[Steve Smith]

In reality, fiberglass is a non-conductive material. Just like any glass, it's a dialectric insulator. I'll have to look at the links where your images are located more closely.

Just as in the Russell Crater TPOD, future articles will be addressing the electric nature of Mars and the other planets and moons.

[dahlenaz]

Thanks for clearing that up Steve, this fact that you provide may explain why that material is so activly attracted to a finger as it moves into close proximity with the CRT surface. Some of the other charicteristics, during power-on tests, are less clarified though. I'm sure comming up short on alot of the technical side of this subject and experiment. Thanks-you and everyone else for filling in the details. dz

[chessdude3]

Dahlenaz, there is no malfunction in your monitor, older monitors / TV sets are best for this --- they seem to be more "lively" than newer ones. One possible reason for this is that all newer screens have a coating on the outside to tint the screen for better visibility in bright light -- this coating probably dissipates the charge by acting as the second plate (even though it probably has a very high resistance) it will allow the charge to leak away via the already grounded CRT mounting assembly.

Forgot to mention in first post -- all colour TV / monitor screens have a steel plate directly behind the phosphor coating -- this is the shadow mask and is essential for separating the three electron beams so that they only illuminate their own colour phosphor (the beams have to pass through tiny holes in the mask to reach the phosphor screen) -- it is also connected to the 27,000V supply so will also help form the internal plate for the capacitor, the back of the phosphor coating is also aluminised (to help reflect the light from the phosphor forward) so we have a conductive coating directly on the inner surface as well.

I don't think the electron beam has any effect on the results as electrically it is only a load on the supply --- you get the same results even with the CRT heater disconnected (no beam).

[dahlenaz]

Thank-you chessdude for adding more details.

Now to Plamatics' experiment,
There is a feature among the many notable features in the 2100mp8 image that i'd like to draw some attention towards. In the lower left quarter there is an excellent crater at the top of a mountain of dust which caught my eye. Nice going, I hope you can get some video to see if a discharge may have launched from that point! dz

[dahlenaz]

Someone, outside of this forum, made the suggestion that the reason for a similarity, between small scale discharge patterns and those on celestial bodies, is because of fractal geometry. No relationship to electricty and plasma dynamics was made.
Does anyone know about that mathamatical exercise and if it can be applied to explain pattern similarities or if it is just another case of math taken out of its function and into the department of make-believe to avoid real explanations. dz

[dahlenaz]

My attention keeps returning to the ESA's stereo image of the caldera which has
material streaming down into it from the surrounding surface.

In that dry environment would an intense amount of interaction occur between the dust and the walls and rim of the crater to cause a sculpting of that material into dendritic ridges that broaden as they extend out into the crater? dz

http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMFEB474OD_FeatureWeek_1.html

[mgmirkin]

[dahlenaz]

outdoor dust covered by fiberglass powder is full of surpfises. Fiberglass powder by itself is alsoquite intersting. For the real big discharges outdoor dust seems to win the day. Let me know if you get similar results. dz

[@rc-us]

[dahlenaz]

Here is where my ignorance will either start showing up more clearly or become revealed as nothing of the kind. A relationship between fractal geometry and patterns from electrical dynamics seems limited at best and falls short quickly, except in the imaginings of computer modelists.

Let me attempt an explanation.

In the modern world there seems to be a tendency to use increasingly complex explanations to make a subject less clear and in the process of trying to understand something an analogous construct is applied without real merit. The use of geometry and mathamatics, made easier in the computer age, get me more mistified about an explanation than closer to understanding. In my opinion the misuse of math and geometry is what turns some sciences into pseudo-sciences because too much of the explanation is resting on equations and models and not enough on real understanding and honest assessment of observed characteristics.

All i've seen so far of fractal geometry is that it is an artsy application of computer power with no real value to a scientific understanding of the subject of electrical dynamics. The term self repeating pattern was used to explain a fractal but this seems to only be applicable in a 'model' of electrical dynamics yet not a true representation by any stretch of the truth, only a stretch of the imagination.

What i'm trying to say is that math and geometry do not mirror the real word, fractal geometry implies symmetry but in the real world exact symmetry is not accomplished, only approximated symmetry is achieved. This is why i believe that math and geometry can be use only to a point and no further toward understanding the world around us. Some things can only be explained by dynamic complexity and in the relm of plasma dynamics computer models are limited.
Too much of a dependence on modeling produces fiction. Just like in the fashion industry modeling equated with fantasy.

Anything you can add to help me understand the subject of fractals and their practical application would be appreciated but the subject may be more of a distraction than a legible signpost.

Take a look at some of these images of experiments with electrical discharge and get back to me on this topic of the application of fractal geomerty. Thanks for the reply.

http://www.geocities.com/dhlndsign/crtdust_discharge_Images.html

http://www.geocities.com/dhlndsign/Static_Discharge_Pattern.html

dz

[@rc-us]

Not being a mathematician I can't fault your reasoning, not that I'd want to anyway. I can only say that I do see a fractal relationship in the patterning of discharge effects when they display that particular pattern. Without reading any more into it, to me it's basically just another indicator showing the principle of scalar relationship (see fractal reference below). And possibly leading us to see heretofore unnoticed or disregarded relationship because of the apparent lack of visible symmetry. As you point out, nature rarely manifests precise symmetries, certainly not of the mathematical variety that the human mind conjures. But I think the purity of mathematical relationships - when not divorced from physical reality and done solely for its own sake - does, indeed, evoke engineering possibilities that would otherewise be impossible to envision and carry out in physicality (and there's nothing wrong in mathematics done for its own sake, either, just like in abstract art - so long as it's appreciated for what it is, a product of mental conception that is a step removed from what actually manifests in the denser realms of physicality as we know it).

So, for example, by recognition of fractal patterns (regardless of whether I take it to an extreme of creating a formal concept and discipline of "fractal geometry" or not) I see that there is a relationship of some sort between lightning, the branches and root systems of trees and plants, the networking of blood vessels, the structuring of neural networks, etc. (see also the Cymatics thread in the Mad Ideas forum). And, for me at least, that relationship is electrical in nature. So I guess, in terms of precision and predictability of these relationships then a mathematical development of fractal geometry might be of use in engineering practical application, say in designing an organic computer chip based on neural relationship as one example that comes to mind. Not that I have any particular interest in it one way or another, but scientists at Intel or AMD might?

Don't know if any of this is applicable to your views on the matter or not.

Best,
Arc-us
______________________

Fractal - n. A geometric pattern that is repeated at ever smaller scales to produce irregular shapes and surfaces that cannot be represented by classical geometry. Fractals are used especially in computer modeling of irregular patterns and structures in nature.[French, from Latin fractus, past participle of frangere, to break. See FRACTION.] (Am. Heritage dictionary, 3rd ed.).

EDIT:052607: Also see this link (thanks to Klar DC in a post from the Electric Sun thread):

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070525092931.htm

[lk]

.I like those Lichtenberg figures etc. Have you ever gotten anything to work besides your finger? Have you tried a spoon, a comb, a balloon, fruit, egg in shell, other food, plant, glass, finger coated with nail polish, finger in glove? You could try comb and balloon before and after rubbing. You could try various kinds of magnets and maybe batteries etc.
.Do you have a theory of what it is about your finger that makes it work and makes other things not work? I know our blood is electrically charged, so maybe that charge is involved.
.On another forum I'm discussing experiments of larger scale crater, rille etc formation that can be videoed and publicised on youtube etc. Can you video the Lichtenberg figures formation etc?
.I'm thinking of asking members if they'd like to give donations to some of the EU people who'd like to do such experiments. I'd like to donate for a good experiment.

[Plasmatic MnemoHistory]

I will be posting a video soon of my experience with the ionizer.
_________________
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"....Ayn Rand

[dahlenaz]

I've really appreciated all your input and effort at your own experiments. And I hope you're returning regularly to check for changes in web page content. there are some surprises behind those links.

My request is that we direct questions and comments with some reference such as name.

To lk: Two post prior to this one i'm thinking you're directing your post to me but i'm not sure but it won't hurt to answer some of your questions.

In reference to items other than my finger; I've tried a large safety pin with no success at that time. A pencil, with the surface characteristic of field dust covered by fiberglass powder, began to interact at well over 3 inches but in another test it did nothing. A piece clear packaging plastic interacted dramatically with the same surface conditions.

I'm beginning to see that changes to the characteristics of the surface cause changes to the interactions so at this point i'm sticking with only a few objects to attempt replication or evaluation under various surface conditions. My i encourage others to do the same with different object and then we can compile our findings. there is however a clincher, the monitor i'm using seems to have an internal malfunction that reveals itself as a oeriodic internal acr of moderate magnitude. A local shop went all fear-department on me an warned me of feir hazards. So this may be a characteristic that you won't be able to replicate. It may not matter though. before the internal arcing started i was getting already getting good surface patterns from healthy discharges. I also am using a new portable TV/VCR and it gives me some good patterns so you all might be able to get good activity if you're in a very dry room or climate. Keep me informed on what you find
Once i'm done with the upcoming conferences i'll have time to devote to a wide range of experiments to fill in the blanks that have been left open.
Best wishes on you efforts and don't get reckless, like me, with this old CRT. Follow those links for more surprises. dz

[Solar]