Electric universe theories here.

[jonesdave116]

Let’s have a look a the ELECTRON density in these “switchbacks” (Birkeland currents), shall we...

Why just the electron density? What about the ion density?

 

[Sol88]

The Electron Structure of the Solar Wind

Time-series measurements of the number density ncore and temperature Tcore of the core-electron population of the solar wind are examined at 1 AU and at 0.13 AU using measurements from the WIND and Parker Solar Probe spacecraft, respectively. A statistical analysis of the ncore and Tcore measurements at 1 AU finds that the core-electron spatial structure of the solar wind is related to the magnetic-flux-tube structure of the solar wind; this electron structure is characterized by jumps in the values of ncore and Tcore when passing from one magnetic flux tube into the next. The same types of flux-tube jumps are seen for Tcore at 0.13 AU. Some models of the interplanetary electrical potential of the heliosphere predict that Tcore is a direct measure of the local electrical potential in the heliosphere. If so, then jumps seen in Tcore represent jumps in the electrical potential from flux tube to flux tube. This may imply that the interplanetary electrical potential (and its effect on the radial evolution away from the Sun of solar-wind ions and electrons) independently operates in each flux tube of the heliosphere.

Mmmmm......yup.

Birkeland currents all the way.

 

[jonesdave116]

The Electron Structure of the Solar Wind



Mmmmm......yup.

Birkeland currents all the way.

Not. Even. Close. Lol. Proving that not only do you not know what these switchbacks are, but also that you don't know what Birkeland currents are!

 

[Sol88]

Why?
But lead the way, show us.

Oh no. Sol88 has googled a new “discovery” confirming Don Scott’s

Summary and Discussion

A statistical analysis of 120 days of solar-wind measurements at 1 AU show that the density structure and temperature structure of the core electrons of the solar wind are both related to the magnetic-flux-tube structure of the solar wind; in this structure the number density ncore and temperature Tcore of the core-electron population tend to jump in value from flux tube to flux tube. An examination of Tcore measurements at 0.13 AU shows the same features related to the magnetic structure, with Tcore jumps associated with current-sheet crossings.

The relationship between the electron number density ncore and the magnetic flux tubes is no surprise in light of quasi-neutrality considerations, since it is known that the proton number density structure of the solar wind reflects the magnetic structure (Borovsky, 2012b; Borovsky, 2020b). The variations in Tcore that are related to the magnetic-flux-tube structure are more interesting.

If a local value of Tcore represents a measurement of the local electrical potential ϕ, then Tcore varying from tube to tube means ϕ varies from tube to tube. If ϕ(r) is (as in an exosphere model) determined by the evolution of the solar-wind ions and electrons away from the Sun, then variations of ϕ from tube to tube might mean that exosphere models apply tube by tube, i.e., that the solar-wind evolution is to some degree independent from tube to tube.

There is no reason to argue that the differing flux tubes should not act independently. At 1 AU it is seen that the intensity of the electron stralh can vary from flux tube to flux tube (Borovsky, 2021): this strahl variation is an indication that different flux tubes at 1 AU are connected to different features in the corona (Gosling et al., 2004a,b; Borovsky, 2021). The differences in connection to the corona could result in independent exospheric scenarios in the different flux tubes.

So Don Scott’s model is correct.... Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model

The physical properties of the resulting intricate magnetic field structure are described. The cause of its characteristic counter-rotation and counter-flows are identified. The describ- ing equations are put into state-variable form and a step-wise approximation is applied. This solution reveals the primary effect of the force-free parameter, α, as being a scale factor of radial distance. We show that: 1) both the axial and azimuthal magnetic and current density components cyclically reverse their directions with radial distance from the central axis of the current; 2) the magnetic field extends farther from the central axis within a force-free field than it would if produced by a current in a long straight conductor.

Just saying....


Tusenfem, you observed them here too

Currents in Cometary Comae

 

[Sol88]

9.1 Diamagnetic cavity Only the Giotto spacecraft [Reinhard, 1986], with its closest approach (CA) to the nucleus, observed the diamagnetic cavity around comet 1P/Halley. The observations by the Giotto magnetometer [Neubauer et al., 1986] clearly showed a field-free region around CA. The duration of this signature was s which corresponded to a physical width of km. Fig. 5BB shows the transition of Giotto into the diamagnetic cavity, where over a very sharp boundary (C) the magnetic field strength decreases from nT to almost zero.

From the behaviour of the magnetic field components it was deduced that there are not only currents perpendicular to the magnetic field (taking care of the shielding of the cavity) but there are also strong field-aligned currents in alternating directions.

m Volwerk

Think you and jd116 better get your stories straight...

 

[Sol88]

Not. Even. Close. Lol. Proving that not only do you not know what these switchbacks are, but also that you don't know what Birkeland currents are!

How’s is the diamagnetic cavity formed at comets, jd116?

 

[jonesdave116]

The Electron Structure of the Solar Wind

The relationship between the electron number density ncore and the magnetic flux tubes is no surprise in light of quasineutrality considerations, since it is known that the proton number density structure of the solar wind reflects the magnetic structure (Borovsky, 2012b; Borovsky, 2020b).

My bolding. More proof, were it needed, that Sol does not even read the screeds of copypasta that he doesn't understand!

 

[Sol88]

Not. Even. Close. Lol. Proving that not only do you not know what these switchbacks are, but also that you don't know what Birkeland currents are!

Birkeland currents are what the experts (tusenfem) call them.

What would you like to call them?



Don Scott tubes?

 

[jonesdave116]

How’s is the diamagnetic cavity formed at comets, jd116?

At Halley? Almost certainly ion-neutral friction. As known for decades.
At 67P, more likely electron-neutral friction.

Why do you want to bring up a totally unrelated subject that you also don't understand? More gish-galloping? How are you and Scott getting on with the positively charged dust detected by Ulysses and Cassini? Seem to have gone quiet on that front.

 

[Sol88]

My bolding. More proof, were it needed, that Sol does not even read the screeds of copypasta that he doesn't understand!

Laughing....

In future, a statistical analysis of the changes in Tcore in the Parker Solar Probe data is needed accounting for the types of plasma being observed and the rapid longitudinal motion of the spacecraft. In particular this will be interesting when future closer passes to the Sun have occurred and the variations of the interplanetary electric potential can be examined where the potentials are anticipated to be greater in magnitude nearer to the Sun.

Jd116? The interplanetary electric potential...between the heliosphere and the Anode...

Fill us in champ!

What

 

[jonesdave116]

Birkeland currents are what the experts (tusenfem) call them.

What would you like to call them?



Don Scott tubes?

Nope, stop making **** up. Tusenfem does not call flux tubes Birkeland currents. Nobody sane does.

 

[jonesdave116]

Laughing....



Jd116? The interplanetary electric potential...between the heliosphere and the Anode...

Fill us in champ!

What

I've already explained it to you umpteen times. Learn to read. Borovsky et al also explain it. Do you never read what you post? Rhetorical.

In exospheric models, the electrons more easily escape the Sun from thermal acceleration than do ions, which feel the Sun's gravity more than the much less massive electrons, yes?( Sigh, how many times?)
So, we cannot have a solar wind composed entirely of electrons, can we? Alfven told us why that is impossible. So, as the electrons and ions attempt to separate, an electric field sets up which accelerates the ions and retards the electrons, ensuring that as many of both leave as stay. It is called 'quasi-neutrality'.
And I know that I said PP was bloody complicated, but that bit is hardly rocket science!

As Borovsky, et al say:

If a local value of T_core represents a measurement of the local electrical potential ϕ,then T_core varying from tube to tube means ϕ varies from tube to tube. If ϕ(r) is (as in an exosphere model) determined by the evolution of the solar-wind ions and electrons away from the Sun, then variations of ϕ from tube to tube might mean that exosphere models apply tube by tube, i.e., that the solar-wind evolution is to some degree independent from tube to tube.

 

[Sol88]

At Halley? Almost certainly ion-neutral friction. As known for decades.
At 67P, more likely electron-neutral friction.

Why do you want to bring up a totally unrelated subject that you also don't understand? More gish-galloping? How are you and Scott getting on with the positively charged dust detected by Ulysses and Cassini? Seem to have gone quiet on that front.

Just to show you up of course.

We’ll get to the dust now you accepted the electric currents that flow into and OUT of the poles of the sun.

Baby steps for you, as you still believe gas is the cause of the diamagnetic cavity at comets.

9.1 Diamagnetic cavity

Only the Giotto spacecraft [Reinhard, 1986], with its closest approach (CA) to the nucleus, observed the diamagnetic cavity around comet 1P/Halley. The observations by the Giotto magnetometer [Neubauer et al., 1986] clearly showed a field-free region around CA. The duration of this signature was s which corresponded to a physical width of km. Fig. 5BB shows the transition of Giotto into the diamagnetic cavity, where over a very sharp boundary (C) the magnetic field strength decreases from nT to almost zero.

From the behaviour of the magnetic field components it was deduced that there are not only currents perpendicular to the magnetic field (taking care of the shielding of the cavity) but there are also strong field-aligned currents in alternating directions.

m Volwerk

If you don’t believe me, ask tusenfem..

 

[Sol88]

also strong field-aligned currents in alternating directions.

Currents in Cometary Comae Martin Volwerk

At 1 AU typical Tcore changes across flux-tube walls are ∼1 eV, although larger potentials can be found. This represents a change in electrical potential of ∼1 V across the boundary between adjacent flux tubes. If at 1 AU a current sheet (flux-tube wall) is 1,000-km thick (e.g., Siscoe et al., 1968; Vasquez et al., 2007) and the potential change is 1 V, then the electric field of this potential change is E = 1 × 10−6 V/m. For a magnetic field strength of 5 nT, this corresponds to an E × B drift speed of 0.2 km/s [Note that if the potential is a few times the core-electron temperature (cf. Maksimovic et al., 1997), then these electric-field values and drift speeds are a few times larger].

What’s the difference, plasma expert?

Rhetorical...

 

[jonesdave116]

Just to show you up of course.

We’ll get to the dust now you accepted the electric currents that flow into and OUT of the poles of the sun.

Baby steps for you, as you still believe gas is the cause of the diamagnetic cavity at comets.

m Volwerk

If you don’t believe me, ask tusenfem..

What the hell are you talking about? I don't think you even know. You just make a fool of yourself post after post, and then jump to something different when your ignorance is exposed.

Learn to read. The current at the DM cavity boundary is INDUCED. It is not the cause of the cavity!

Sigh. Talk about chimps and quantum mechanics!

 

[jonesdave116]

What’s the difference, plasma expert?

Rhetorical...

Difference between what? You don't understand what you are posting. You never have. You don't understand the first thing about plasma physics. Get over it, and stop showing yourself up. Go join the flat earth society, where I am sure your input would fall on more accommodating brain cells.

 

[jonesdave116]

also strong field-aligned currents in alternating directions.

Where is that quote from? It is not from the Borovsky paper. Link your quotes.

 

[Sol88]

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

Birkeland currents.

 

[Sol88]

Where is that quote from? It is not from the Borovsky paper. Link your quotes.

Tusenfem paper on cometary currents.

Birkeland currents.

 

[Sol88]

Difference between what? You don't understand what you are posting. You never have. You don't understand the first thing about plasma physics. Get over it, and stop showing yourself up. Go join the flat earth society, where I am sure your input would fall on more accommodating brain cells.

The difference between the Birkeland currents at comets and the ones from the sun.




I’d ask you but....