Electric universe theories here.

[jonesdave116]

You know your over the target when the flak increases.

Know we all can agree the solar wind in an electric current we can move on.

Nope, the solar wind is not a current. And cannot be for reasons that should be obvious to a 12 year old;

The correlation of the magnetic storms and aurorae with the solar activity indicates that they are due to some agent emitted from the sun. As this agent causes magnetic and electric disturbances on the earth, it probably consists of charged particles. But, as Schuster has shown, the emission of a sufficient amount of particles, all having the same sign, is impossible because it would give rise to an enormous space charge. This difficulty is avoided if the emitted agent is assumed to consist of the equal amount of positive and negative particles.
Consequently the general nature of the current system during the main phase of a magnetic storm must be somewhat as follows. The stream approaching the earth contains positive and negative charge in equal amounts so that the electric current is zero.
Through the action of the magnetic field of the earth the paths of the positives and of the negatives become differentiated, but until the particles reach the forbidden region, the space charge is always zero because the positives and negatives neutralize each other.

Now, show me who the idiot is that is claiming that it is a current. Anyone other than a bunch of mythologists? Thought not.

 

[Steve]

Bite...

You could just say no. Or even admit that you have absolutely no idea at all of what a proper scientific theory actually is (it does not involve posting little snippets of words and partial sentences on the internet). Instead of just making yourself look foolish.

 

[Steve]

Nope, the solar wind is not a current. And cannot be for reasons that should be obvious to a 12 year old;



Now, show me who the idiot is that is claiming that it is a current. Anyone other than a bunch of mythologists? Thought not.

We seem to have such a claim in this very thread .

 

[Sol88]

Nope, the solar wind is not a current. And cannot be for reasons that should be obvious to a 12 year old;



Now, show me who the idiot is that is claiming that it is a current. Anyone other than a bunch of mythologists? Thought not.

Wait, now your saying, no electric currents?

Jeez, make up ur mind.

Which is it?

The solar wind contains electric currents or not?

 

[jonesdave116]

Wait, now your saying, no electric currents?

Jeez, make up ur mind.

Which is it?

The solar wind contains electric currents or not?

Will you learn to read? The solar wind can contain currents. Got it? Is the solar wind as a whole a current, as claimed by the clown Scott? No, it isn't. As Alfven keeps telling you. Want me to quote him for the 20th time? Which part of this are you not understanding? What is the Debye length? What does it describe?
Do I need to draw a picture? Are Alfven's words too complicated for you?

 

[jonesdave116]

Wait, now your saying, no electric currents?

Jeez, make up ur mind.

Which is it?

The solar wind contains electric currents or not?

Maybe I need to dumb it down even further. If the solar wind as a whole was a current, what does that imply? That the solar wind is either solely composed of one charge of particle (ions, as Scott would have it, despite decades of evidence to the contrary), or there is an excess of one species of charged particle over the other. Yes? That gives you a net current. And a space charge that Alfven tells us cannot be there, and isn't there.

It also implies that the Sun charges up to the opposite sign. It is losing more of one species of charged particle than the other, OK? What happens then? It explodes due to Coulomb repulsion. Scott would claim, in his ignorance of all things plasma physics, that the non-existent incoming electrons balance the outgoing ions. Except there are no incoming electrons, they are all heading out along with the ions, as measured for decades.***

So, can perturbations in the solar wind induce transient small scale currents? Yes. Does this mean that the solar wind flow as a whole is a current? No. The sum of all the + charges leaving the Sun is balanced by the sum of all the negative charges of the electrons leaving the Sun. Which is how it must be, as Alfven, quoting even earlier work, realised > 80 years ago.

This is not rocket science. Except to retired EEs, it would seem. And his followers.

EDIT:
*** See following comment.

 

[jonesdave116]

Now Scott, and his equally clueless partner in crimes against science, Thornhill, were interviewed by the EU supporter Gareth Samuel (AKA 'See the Pattern') about the detections of equal numbers of ions and electrons.

Scott's claims were that the instruments could not tell which way the particles were heading! They can, by the way. It is kind of an important thing to know. Not just in the x-y plane, but also in the z direction. So, given that the vast majority of detections of the solar wind have been ~ in the ecliptic, Scott certainly knows that there are as many electrons at that latitude as there are ions. A few exceptions would be Ulysses, which reached ~ 80 degrees from the ecliptic, and both Voyagers, which ended up well away from the plane of the ecliptic. So, we know that there are ~ equal numbers of ions and electrons at all latitudes up to ~ 80 degrees.
However, in a recent-ish video I saw, he claimed to his audience (Christ knows how much he paid them to attend. Whatever it was, it wasn't enough!) that they think that the bulk of the electrons are entering at the poles. Well, what the hell are they doing in equal numbers at every latitude we've looked at? His claim is that we don't know their direction, therefore they must be heading inwards at those latitudes also.
But hang on, he has already told us that Alfven was wrong yet again, by claiming that the plasma is not dragging out the Sun's magnetic field (he doesn't seem to like Alfven!), but that his current of ions is creating its own field. Great. How are the incoming electrons getting past that? Surely they will create their own incoming field? What happens when these two impossible flows meet? As they must, because his electrons in the ecliptic are heading inwards, according to him.

So, when I say that Scott is clueless, and that his 'model' is impossible, it isn't me just being nasty. It is me stating the bleedin' obvious. And it ought to be obvious to anyone with even a basic understanding of the relevant subjects.

EDIT:

If anyone is into listening to the oaf Scott murdering basic plasma physics, this is the video I was referring to. I strongly advise Tusenfem to stay well away from sharp objects if he watches it;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WlB9PfM0nU&t

 

[tusenfem]

Electrons the same temperature in the solar wind, tusenfem?

Seems there not, ay.

So, are electrons and ions the same temperature in the solar wind, tusenfem?

Do you know the difference between temperature and bulk velocity?
Explain please what the temperature difference between electrons and ions does.
And (url=https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4365/aab71c/pdf]here is a paper by Lynn Wilson[/url] about the solar wind temperature to help you.

 

[tusenfem]

Okay, I am getting too old for this stuff, so let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start.

Sol88's question if there are Electric currents in the solar wind?
That is an easy way to answer, in general space physics, and it is of course: YES.
The solar wind is a magnetoplasma and it would be absurd to think there are no currents in a magnetoplasma. HOWEVER, in Sol88's case we have to tread carefully, because of the background of this question, the EU claims that the Sun is electrically driven.

So, start at the beginning, what is a current? It is the flow of charged particles, which is defined as:

http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex? {\bf J} = \Sigma_k n_k q_k {\bf v}_k

where subscript k stands for all species in the plasma (ions, electrons), n is the density, q the charge and v the velocity. So if, as measured, the solar wind is quasi-neutral and, as measured, all particles move at the same velocity, then it is easy to see that you get J = 0. The bulk flow of the solar wind does NOT constitute a current.

Next step is to look at the magnetic field that is flowing along with the solar wind. This comes from the Sun and at far distances the dipole component is of course dominant. The rotation of the Sun makes that the magnetic field is wound-up in a spiral form, often termed as the "bashfull ballerina.

The interplanetary magnetic field eiter points towards or away from the Sun, but as magnetic field lines are closed, they are loops. Just like in the Earth's magnetotail, the field goes in one direction at one side of the "equator! and in the other direction at the other side. As we all (maybe) know, oppositely directed magnetic fields create a current:

http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex? {\bf J} = \mu_0 \nabla \times {\bf B}

This creates the heliospheric current sheet:



The current flows perpendicular to the magnetic field. Because of the spiral shape of the magnetic field, this perpendicular current has a radial component, see Israelevich et al. (2001). Their simulations estimate the total current to be I ~ 10⁹ A. So this is, indeed, a global current flowing, because of the solar magnetic field and rotation. Note that there is no way that this current can power the Sun. But still, this is the only large scale flowing in what one could call a solar current circuit.

Then, of course there are other currents. The exploding promenences on the Sun, sending out coronal mass ejections, in the shape of flux tubes propagating fast through the slower solar wind (see e.g. Weiss et al. (2021). The rotation of the field inside has a current, and there are various other processes that can drive current sheets around the CME. Of course, with CMEs being only impulsive events, they cannot power the Sun.

The solar wind is turbulent, so the nice Parker spiral is only observed when you take a long-time average. This means that on small scales there will be all kinds of structures which can drive current sheets. I guess a good paper on the variety of current sheets is by Stefan Erkisson et al. (2022). We are getting here to smaller and smaller scales. Going to even smaller scales, there is a study by Khabarova et al. (2022) discussing the difference between electron and ion bulk velocity in small current sheets. But at this scale this has nothing more to do with powering the Sun, but still interesting what one can do with the excellent instruments of the MMS mission.

So, just a few words about the dos and donts of MHD. It was Hannes Alfvén's great idea that one could "simplify" plasma physics if one looks at large systems and long times (where large and long need to be defined). What are the characteristic scales in a plasma? That would be the gyro radius and the gyro period. Alfvén saw that if you look at scales much larger than the largest gyro radius and at times much longer than the gyro period, the individual motion of the particles does no longer matter and you arrive at a fluid in which the bulk motions are important only. So the kinetic equations are averaged over these scales and you end up with a hydrodynamic descriptino, and as there is also a magnetic field we can now work with MagnetoHydroDynamics (MHD).

Now, Alfvén complained about MHD during his Nobel prize lecture. The problem was that, with a new tool, everybody started using it willy-nilly, without checking whether the restrictions of MHD applied to the situation or not. So, in the beginning there was some junk published because of mis-application. Nowadays, plasma physics students get it hammered in that there are limitations to MDH.

But then, what to do when smaller scales get important? Well, in data analysis you have "all" the information (especially with MMS) and you just work with the data, then there is no discussion "is this MHD or not". You just see the relationships between N, B, E, v, etc. The picture is there.
But in numerical codes it becomes more difficult. I can make a grid for an MHD model, but if I zoom in then the motion of the ions becomes important. Then we get to hybrid codes, where the large scale is modeled by MHD, but in the areas (e.g. around a cometary nucleus) where the motion of the ions becomes important the kinetic equations are solved, which is done with Paricle In Cell (PIC) codes. And if you go even deeper at e.g. reconnection, you will have another scale for the electrons, where they have to be modeled kinetically.

Why not do it all the kinetic way? A simple answer: MONEY and TIME. Kinetic codes are very time expensive even on huge super computers.

Well, I guess this post is long enough, this old guy is signing off, So Long, Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, Goodbye

 

[jonesdave116]

Okay, I am getting too old for this stuff, so let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start.

Sol88's question if there are Electric currents in the solar wind?
That is an easy way to answer, in general space physics, and it is of course: YES.
The solar wind is a magnetoplasma and it would be absurd to think there are no currents in a magnetoplasma. HOWEVER, in Sol88's case we have to tread carefully, because of the background of this question, the EU claims that the Sun is electrically driven.

So, start at the beginning, what is a current? It is the flow of charged particles, which is defined as:



where subscript k stands for all species in the plasma (ions, electrons), n is the density, q the charge and v the velocity. So if, as measured, the solar wind is quasi-neutral and, as measured, all particles move at the same velocity, then it is easy to see that you get J = 0. The bulk flow of the solar wind does NOT constitute a current.

Next step is to look at the magnetic field that is flowing along with the solar wind. This comes from the Sun and at far distances the dipole component is of course dominant. The rotation of the Sun makes that the magnetic field is wound-up in a spiral form, often termed as the "bashfull ballerina.

The interplanetary magnetic field eiter points towards or away from the Sun, but as magnetic field lines are closed, they are loops. Just like in the Earth's magnetotail, the field goes in one direction at one side of the "equator! and in the other direction at the other side. As we all (maybe) know, oppositely directed magnetic fields create a current:



This creates the heliospheric current sheet:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/2548463cd28c39dc4f.jpg[/qimg]

The current flows perpendicular to the magnetic field. Because of the spiral shape of the magnetic field, this perpendicular current has a radial component, see Israelevich et al. (2001). Their simulations estimate the total current to be I ~ 10⁹ A. So this is, indeed, a global current flowing, because of the solar magnetic field and rotation. Note that there is no way that this current can power the Sun. But still, this is the only large scale flowing in what one could call a solar current circuit.

Then, of course there are other currents. The exploding promenences on the Sun, sending out coronal mass ejections, in the shape of flux tubes propagating fast through the slower solar wind (see e.g. Weiss et al. (2021). The rotation of the field inside has a current, and there are various other processes that can drive current sheets around the CME. Of course, with CMEs being only impulsive events, they cannot power the Sun.

The solar wind is turbulent, so the nice Parker spiral is only observed when you take a long-time average. This means that on small scales there will be all kinds of structures which can drive current sheets. I guess a good paper on the variety of current sheets is by Stefan Erkisson et al. (2022). We are getting here to smaller and smaller scales. Going to even smaller scales, there is a study by Khabarova et al. (2022) discussing the difference between electron and ion bulk velocity in small current sheets. But at this scale this has nothing more to do with powering the Sun, but still interesting what one can do with the excellent instruments of the MMS mission.

So, just a few words about the dos and donts of MHD. It was Hannes Alfvén's great idea that one could "simplify" plasma physics if one looks at large systems and long times (where large and long need to be defined). What are the characteristic scales in a plasma? That would be the gyro radius and the gyro period. Alfvén saw that if you look at scales much larger than the largest gyro radius and at times much longer than the gyro period, the individual motion of the particles does no longer matter and you arrive at a fluid in which the bulk motions are important only. So the kinetic equations are averaged over these scales and you end up with a hydrodynamic descriptino, and as there is also a magnetic field we can now work with MagnetoHydroDynamics (MHD).

Now, Alfvén complained about MHD during his Nobel prize lecture. The problem was that, with a new tool, everybody started using it willy-nilly, without checking whether the restrictions of MHD applied to the situation or not. So, in the beginning there was some junk published because of mis-application. Nowadays, plasma physics students get it hammered in that there are limitations to MDH.

But then, what to do when smaller scales get important? Well, in data analysis you have "all" the information (especially with MMS) and you just work with the data, then there is no discussion "is this MHD or not". You just see the relationships between N, B, E, v, etc. The picture is there.
But in numerical codes it becomes more difficult. I can make a grid for an MHD model, but if I zoom in then the motion of the ions becomes important. Then we get to hybrid codes, where the large scale is modeled by MHD, but in the areas (e.g. around a cometary nucleus) where the motion of the ions becomes important the kinetic equations are solved, which is done with Paricle In Cell (PIC) codes. And if you go even deeper at e.g. reconnection, you will have another scale for the electrons, where they have to be modeled kinetically.

Why not do it all the kinetic way? A simple answer: MONEY and TIME. Kinetic codes are very time expensive even on huge super computers.

Well, I guess this post is long enough, this old guy is signing off, So Long, Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, Goodbye

I have just added the equations to Tusenfem's excellent post for clarity.

 

[tusenfem]

I have just added the equations to Tusenfem's excellent post for clarity.

tnx, somehow the tex does not work.

 

[Ziggurat]

I think Sol88's brain is breaking. The misspellings and grammar mistakes are becoming more and more common.

 

[Sol88]

So what’s the best method to observe these electric currents? A big clamp meter?

 

[Sol88]

As we all (maybe) know, oppositely directed magnetic fields create a current:

Great we can talk “switchbacks”!

Opposite directed magnetic field and all

 

[tusenfem]

Great we can talk “switchbacks”!

Opposite directed magnetic field and all

Sure, if you first explain in detail what a switchback is, and why you think they need to be discussed separately.

 

[Sol88]

Well, they’re electric currents obviously.

Mainstream...doh, sorry. “Flux tubes”

Some reconnecting going on here, my friends. Though I see a new term for it.

The Electric Sun.

 

[tusenfem]

Well, they’re electric currents obviously.

Yeah,sorry, but that does not cut it, Sol88. A bit more explanation is expected from you. Just claiming that they are "obviously electric currents" shows that you are not even trying to support what you are writing.

What would have been good is when you would have written a description of what switchbacks are, or at least how they are defined, e.g. Dudok de Wit et al. (2020) write:

Switchbacks are characterized by their high Alfvénicity, the absence of notable temperature changes, and an increase in the wind velocity by approximately 20% (Bale et al. 2019; Kasper et al. 2019). Likewise, the proton density also tends to increase inside these switchbacks. The Alfvénicicity is attested by the low relative variability of the total magnetic field. The duration of these switchbacks ranges from less than a second to more than one hour. A remarkable result is the occasional presence of periods of quiet solar wind with low levels of magnetic field fluctuations and coherent wave activity (Bowen et al. 2020; Malaspina et al. 2020).

Do you agree with this, and if yes: why; and if no: also why?
What kind of currents are switchbacks (if they are currents at all)?

So many questions, so little time.

 

[jonesdave116]

The Electric Sun.......

.....is scientifically impossible gibberish. No mechanism, no evidence, and violates laws of physics.

 

[Sol88]

Yeah,sorry, but that does not cut it, Sol88. A bit more explanation is expected from you. Just claiming that they are "obviously electric currents" shows that you are not even trying to support what you are writing.

What would have been good is when you would have written a description of what switchbacks are, or at least how they are defined, e.g. Dudok de Wit et al. (2020) write:



Do you agree with this, and if yes: why; and if no: also why?
What kind of currents are switchbacks (if they are currents at all)?

So many questions, so little time.

What are the electrons up to?

Speed n density wise, any idea?

 

[tusenfem]

What are the electrons up to?

Speed n density wise, any idea?

Well ... YOU brought into play the switchback, so I assume you have something to tell us.
I have nothing to add until you deliver.