Talk:Plasma (physics)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Psychology section should goKingpoulet (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

I do not understand the section about potential psychological effects of plasmas. Having worked in a plasma lab for many years now with multiple magnetically induced plasmas, I have a hard time understanding how any of this is in any way, shape, or form, is viably true. Moreover, physics is quite clear in the saying that magnetic fields interact independently from its source. That is, according to the logic presented here, a person subjected to an MRI would also be subject to hallucinations. I wholeheartedly believe this section is not only misleading, but false, and should be removed unless appropriate, genuine, and up-to-date sources can be used to support these claims.

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree and a look at the sources shows them to be unreliable. I have removed the section. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 18:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Plasma Explosion

I would like to know what would happen if a Nuclear Fusion reactor has an issue with the Plasma and you get a Nuclear Plasma Explosion?

How bad would it be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.29.7 (talk) 00:48, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

That is covered at Fusion_power#Accident_potential MrOllie (talk) 00:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

A question

I have one question. I thought it must be a contradiction to first say that plasma only can exist in hot conditions, and then say that the interstellar place probably is filled with plasma. Is it really so hot in the interstellar space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiremaj (talk • contribs)

The plasma is hot, but of very low density, and so the hear capacity of a volume of interstellar plasma is very low. This means that it would not be very effective at heating a satellite or other object. Note that different constituents (electrons, protons, nuclei) can have different temperatures. Attic Salt (talk) 05:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

To extend the thought: the heat transfer from the few nuclei of plasma bouncing around is much lower than the blackbody radiation of heat away from a macroscopic object. So a satellite or other object shadowed from the sun will eventually become cold if it does not have an internal heat source. VQuakr (talk) 08:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

But I still can´t understand how something can be hot in the interstellar space? What source would this heet come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiremaj (talk • contribs) 23:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Kiremaj, See Interstellar_medium#Heating_mechanisms MrOllie (talk) 23:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2021

Under Section Properties and Parameters Under Density and ionization degree $n_{e}$ to n_e

the rest of the equations in this section require similar fixing in this manner or another, they are not rendering properly in the way that they are currently written using < math > < /math > Vanadiumfour (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

They look fine to me. Are you sure it's not just something on your end? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:05, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Typo?

I can't edit the page, but I'm pretty sure that "Collisionessless" under Ideal Plasma should be "Collisionlessness". The only results I find for the former when searching are other websites that have clearly lifted Wikipedia's own text, and if we're talking about the property of being collisionless, it should clearly be the latter. Aldrenean (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

You are right, thanks! Fixed. --Evgeny (talk) 08:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2022

Typo in the 3rd sentence, change "presense" to "presence" Johnalexjay (talk) 03:40, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done INDT (talk) 07:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Contradiction

"It consists of a gas of ions" but also "describing a low-density plasma as merely an "ionized gas" is wrong and misleading, " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.72.40.86 (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Not really a contradiction – a single sentence cannot delve into details. Nevertheless, I clarified the text in this change. Evgeny (talk) 15:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Ionized gas redirect

Should Ionized gas/Ionised gas redirect here if the article states that "describing a low-density plasma as merely an 'ionized gas' is wrong and misleading"? CoronalMassAffection (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe the redirect is correct. It is true that when inquiring about "ionized gas" one may be not interested in collective plasma phenomena. So in principle there could be a separate article, clearly stating that. But then what is going to be there? A definition of degree of ionization? I do not see anything else. Evgeny (talk) 10:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"Filamentation" link under first image is broken.

Title.. Can't edit because locked.. Kgrimelid (talk) 07:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. Evgeny (talk) 07:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Inadvertent or conscious mystification

This article certainly needs improvement. I came here simply to understand why plasma is a fourth state of matter and why it is different to gas. The article doesn't address either. For a far better explanation of plasma see https://www.advancedplasmasolutions.com/what-is-plasma/.

I also don't see why the article is protected - it would be difficult for any editors to make it worse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.6.235.59 (talk) 17:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Plasma brake?

we have a red link Plasma brake. Is it a definable concept? If not, then the redirect should be done or red links to be unlinked Estopedist1 (talk) 06:34, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Where do you see this link?? Evgeny (talk) 09:13, 8 February 2023 (UTC)