• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Magnetic reconnection and physical processes

The Man said:
Yes I did repeatedly, the magnetic fields. Which we can physically measure and interact with. Let me guess you have a rather unphysical definition of physical. If you are going to claim that those field are not physical then you are going to have a hard time explaining how you claimed they can pass “the kinetic energy of the photons in the magnetic field” let alone store energy.
Click to expand...

FYI, don't confuse me with Z. I didn't say the magnetic field had no energy or that they didn't exist. My position would be that the photons that make up the EM field are the "physical things" that make up the field.

You have yet to even attempt to identify your ‘circuits’ in that reconnection “You can't handwave at me” MM you’ll need identify those ‘circuits’.
Click to expand...

Did you even bother to read any of those papers I provided?

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813

See the term "circuits"?
 
The Man said:
Yes I did repeatedly, the magnetic fields. Which we can physically measure and interact with. Let me guess you have a rather unphysical definition of physical. If you are going to claim that those field are not physical then you are going to have a hard time explaining how you claimed they can pass “the kinetic energy of the photons in the magnetic field” let alone store energy.


You have yet to even attempt to identify your ‘circuits’ in that reconnection “You can't handwave at me” MM you’ll need identify those ‘circuits’.
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

I'm going to guess what MM will say, re magnetic fields ...

... he will say that they are not physical, but that what is physical is the photons that are exchanged (the electromagnetic interaction - a.k.a. force - is an exchange of virtual photons) ...

... then someone will ask him how virtual photons can be physical (or, in MM mode, how "virtual" photons can be "physical") ...

... and we will be in yet another "lather, wash, rinse, repeat" cycle ...
 
DeiRenDopa said:
(emphasis added)

I'm going to guess what MM will say, re magnetic fields ...

... he will say that they are not physical, but that what is physical is the photons that are exchanged (the electromagnetic interaction - a.k.a. force - is an exchange of virtual photons) ...

... then someone will ask him how virtual photons can be physical (or, in MM mode, how "virtual" photons can be "physical") ...

... and we will be in yet another "lather, wash, rinse, repeat" cycle ...
Click to expand...

I didn't call them "virtual" anything, you did.
 
By the way TM....

Can you cite a published paper on the topic of magnetic reconnection that used refrigerator magnets in the "reconnection" process?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Do you mean the photons that make up the magnetic fields are "reconnecting" in some way?
Click to expand...

Yes the magnetic fields are reconnecting to a lower energy state releasing energy.

If you are looking for a more QED (Quantum Electro-Dynamics) based explanation using virtual photons as the carriers of electromagnetic force then you should understand that QED is a quantum field theory not a quantum ‘circuit’ theory.



Michael Mozina said:
How does this in any way relate to solar physics and heating plasma to tens of millions of degrees? Can you "reconnect" your magnetic fields in a way that heats plasma to millions of degrees? Yes or no?
Click to expand...


Yes, it is just a matter of the energy stored in the reconnecting fields and the presence of a highly conductive media like plasma.
 
Michael Mozina said:
FYI, don't confuse me with Z. I didn't say the magnetic field had no energy or that they didn't exist. My position would be that the photons that make up the EM field are the "physical things" that make up the field.
Click to expand...

I did not confuse you with anyone, but I did note that your lists of


Michael Mozina said:
...physical things (photons, electrons, magnets, whatever) that actually physically "reconnect".
Click to expand...

Did conspicuously not contain the words “magnetic field” or even just “field”. So don’t confuse yourself with someone else.

Michael Mozina said:
Did you even bother to read any of those papers I provided?

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813

See the term "circuits"?
Click to expand...

Then

The Man said:
Please identify these ‘circuits’ for the reconnection examples I have given.
Click to expand...

We still have not seen that yet.
 
Michael Mozina said:
There is some truth to that statement. One of the difficulties of EU/PC theory is that while it is relatively easy to directly measure a magnetic field at a distance, it's not as easy to measure "current flow" directly. We can only "calculate" that number based on the strength of the magnetic field itself.
Click to expand...


Correction: You can't calculate it because you can't calculate.
 
The Man said:
Yes the magnetic fields are reconnecting to a lower energy state releasing energy.
Click to expand...

The magnetic fields are "reconnecting" to what physical thing to achieve a "lower energy state"? How did they release energy? What did they release energy into?

Yes, it is just a matter of the energy stored in the reconnecting fields and the presence of a highly conductive media like plasma.
Click to expand...

If you take that stored magnetic energy and impart it into a charged particle as kinetic energy, it's called "induction". That is *NOT* magnetic reconnection. It's called "induction".
 
Michael Mozina said:
Do you mean the photons that make up the magnetic fields are "reconnecting" in some way?
Click to expand...
So far as I know, every photon that ever existed was/is entirely ELECTRO-magnetic, consisting of oscillating electric & magnetic fields. There is no such thing as a "photon" of magnetic field. The magnetic field is the magnetic field and there are no photons involved.
 
Tim Thompson said:
So far as I know, every photon that ever existed was/is entirely ELECTRO-magnetic, consisting of oscillating electric & magnetic fields. There is no such thing as a "photon" of magnetic field. The magnetic field is the magnetic field and there are no photons involved.
Click to expand...

Something is the carrier particle of the EM field. Call it whatever you like if "photon" doesn't suit you personally.
 
Zeuzzz said:
Odd skimmed them all and still no real explanations past the good old theoretical geometric theory based on our chosen visualization.

Numerous astronomical events that were explained by magnetic reconnection in the past are now being better explained by completely separate electrical processes.

Heres one as a minor example:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ITPS...35..751A

More to come. I can copy and paste the figures if people are really interested.
Click to expand...

That was one of the worst papers I have ever read.
Seems like Akasofu not only wants to start physics from start, he also seems unaware of a lot of old solar physics, e.g. early models of magnetic arcades and the currents etc. for example the models by Kuperus and van Tend, no need to go to Choa and Lee.

An oversimplification is done, and no new information is taken along, i.e. measurements by STEREO and Cluster.

Also, he keeps on hammering that MHD cannot describe the processes. That is well know for the micro physics, modifications of MHD like "resistive MHD" and "Hall-MHD" and "electron MHD" are implemented, kinetic or particle in cell models are used.

So, it seems that with "going back to the beginning" Akasofu also means throw away everything we have measured since the early 80s.

Good that it appears in IEEE, that way not too many people wil have to read this badly written paper. (pdf available on request, but first on monday)
 
Michael Mozina said:
Were you constantly verbally abused as a child or what?
Click to expand...


Interestingly enough, I'm not the one who continues to equate simple criticism with abuse. That would be you.

It's only reasonable, given the length of this discussion, to point out from time to time, for any lurkers and/or newcomers, that you don't seem to be able to understand the things being discussed, certainly not in terms of legitimate science and physics, because you haven't demonstrated the ability to grasp the mathematics involved.

Also you have a habit of redefining terms to suit your whim and fancy, so in order to help people avoid confusion, it's reasonable to point out that when you say "we" can calculate something, you don't mean "you", because you can't calculate.
 
Michael Mozina said:
But that same "current flow" that twists your "magnetic lines" into "bundles" also turns your "magnetic line" into a "circuit"!

If we observe a topology change between two flowing circuits how is that not "circuit reconnection"?
Click to expand...

"turns it into circuit" yes and so what? I used that in my masters thesis, linked somewhere above I think.

twisting of a flux tube into a more rope like structuer does not constitute a topological change.

Michael, you really have to come up with a complete description of what you think "circuit reconnection" is and how you can explain the accelerated plasma (both electrons and ions) in the reconnection exhaust and create all the observed characteristics around the reconnection region as shown by Cluster observations. Just claiming "it's circuit/particle reconnection" or "it's magnet reconnection" is all fine, if you can show that it is like that. Somehow you seem to think that just giving it another name solves the opposite views that we (the mainstream folk) and you (brantc zeuzzz etc, the EU folk) have.
 
Michael Mozina said:
The magnetic fields are "reconnecting" to what physical thing to achieve a "lower energy state"?
Click to expand...

Each other it is a reconnection of the fields.

Michael Mozina said:
How did they release energy?
Click to expand...

After the reconnection the fields can reconfigure from a higher energy state to a lower energy state. Where the fields were not free to reconfigure in that manor before the reconnection.

Michael Mozina said:
What did they release energy into?
Click to expand...

Transferred would be a better term then 'release into'. In the case of the refrigerator magnets some kinetic energy applied in sliding the magnets is stored in the fields and then returned as kinetic energy applied to the magnets after the reconnection (as explained before).


Michael Mozina said:
If you take that stored magnetic energy and impart it into a charged particle as kinetic energy, it's called "induction". That is *NOT* magnetic reconnection. It's called "induction".
Click to expand...

First the reconnection must happen before the stored energy is returned to the refrigerator magnets “as kinetic energy“ in the direction of the sliding. If the reconnection does not occur then the energy remains in the field configuration opposing the sliding. It can also be returned as kinetic energy to the to the refrigerator magnets by releasing the force used to slide the magnets before reconnection. However the magnets will simply snap back to where they were before as the lower energy state. It is only after the reconnection that sliding forward becomes the lower energy state (because of the changes to the field configuration) as opposed to just snapping back to the previous position. So your “induction”, the transfer of the “stored magnetic energy” “into a charged particle as kinetic energy”, is specifically preceded by the reconnection, also in the case of releasing before reconnection does not even involve reconnection, and thus not the same event.

Secondly; then almost, if not, everything is "induction" by your “definition“. Even just pushing the keys on your keyboard as the kinetic energy of your fingers is transferred to kinetic energy of the keys by the charged particles in your fingers and the keys (specifically electrons) repelling each other. Makes your “induction” a rather useless term.

So magnets are magnetic now, but just inductors as well (along with every thing else that contains charged particles)?



Again

The Man said:
Please identify these ‘circuits’ for the reconnection examples I have given.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom