Re:Perhaps you could actually learn some physics? (Score 1)

Just to introduce myself, I am Martin Volwerk of the incredibly pink double layer thesis. I have not performed any experiments on exploding double layers. Acutally, I am not aware of any having been done at all. The idea of exploding DLs by Alfven was to describe the substorm process in the Earth's magnetotail. However, this tenet is not usable any more, because this double layer has not been found to exist in the Earth's magnetotail. Nowadays, there is the current disruption model, which is sort of similar to the exploding double layer, but more in agreement with observations. I know (from BAUT and other places) that the PU is a highly debated topic. Interestingly, colleagues of mine use the term "Plasma Universe" in e.g. the description of magnetospheric physics (THEMIS, MMS, etc.) But that does not mean that they think that plasma processes are the dominating drivers of the universe. And that is where the divide lies. The ATM/PU states that magnetic fields and currents are the main drivers of the cosmos, including the creation of planetary systems and whole galaxies. The mainstream PU realizes that plasma processes are very important on their own scales, but that on large scales gravity will dominate. This is because plasmas have positive and negative charges and looking from outside, there is only a neutral cloud hanging there. And indeed, mainstream PU sees a plasma as an (ionized) gas, which it is. It has all the properties of a gas, but has some extra properties because it consists of charged particles, i.e. it can carry currents. Well, that is just my 2 eurocents for the moment.