Magnetic reconnection and physical processes

[Michael Mozina]

A low pressure plasma conducts.

That is irrelevant. Electrons are going to seek a path of "least resistance" to the current flow. The low pressure areas around the filament act to insulate the current inside the loop from the plasma round the loop. The same process takes place inside an ordinary plasma ball. All the "dusty plasma" in the ball is "conductive", but the "current flows" tend to arrange themselves into filamentary shapes where the bulk of the current flows through ropes, not the entire plasma.

 

[Ziggurat]

The low pressure areas around the filament act to insulate the current inside the loop from the plasma round the loop. The same process takes place inside an ordinary plasma ball.

No, Michael. An ordinary plasma ball is filled with gas, not plasma, which experiences dielectric breakdown under high fields which ionizes the gas into a plasma along the filaments. The filaments are not surrounded by plasma, they are surrounded by gas.

All the "dusty plasma" in the ball is "conductive"

No, Michael. It's not conductive, and it's not a plasma.

but the "current flows" tend to arrange themselves into filamentary shapes where the bulk of the current flows through ropes, not the entire plasma.

No, Michael. The only plasma in a plasma ball is the glowing filaments themselves, and they are turned into plasma by dielectric breakdown of an insulating gas. Current doesn't flow through the rest of the gas because the rest of the gas is not conducting.

This display of ignorance is exactly what I was talking about.

 

[Michael Mozina]

No, Michael. An ordinary plasma ball is filled with gas, not plasma, which experiences dielectric breakdown under high fields which ionizes the gas into a plasma along the filaments. The filaments are not surrounded by plasma, they are surrounded by gas.

A z-pinch in plasma is not dependent upon the ionization rates of the plasma! All plasmas are "dusty". Gah. Have you even read Cosmic Plasma yet?

 

[Reality Check]

Cosmic Plasma citation: All plasmas are "dusty".

A z-pinch in plasma is not dependent upon the ionization rates of the plasma! All plasmas are "dusty". Gah. Have you even read Cosmic Plasma yet?

Gah Michael Mozina can you read?

Ziggurat does not mention z-pinches. He is talking about what you are talking about: the creation of plasmas by electrical discharges through insulating medium such as gases.

As for "All plasmas are "dusty".": You are wrong as usual - Dusty Plasma

A dusty plasma is a plasma containing nanometer or micrometer-sized particles suspended in it. Dust particles may be charged and the plasma and particles behave as a plasma, following electromagnetic laws for particles up to about 10 nm (or 100 nm if large charges are present). Dust particles may form larger particles resulting in "grain plasmas".


Dusty plasmas are encountered in:

• Industrial processing plasmas
• Space plasmas

But that is Wikipedia so:
First asked 4 February 2010
Michael Mozina,
What are the page numbers from Cosmic Plasma where Alfven states that all plasmas are "dusty"?
Or did you get this from one of the many other modern plasma physics textbooks that you have read? In that case cite them.

 

[Reality Check]

Citation for electrical discharges can happen in plasmas

And since I seem to be on a question asking bender:
First asked 4 February 2010
Michael Mozina,
Can you cite any textbooks or scientific papers where it is stated that electrical discharges can happen in plasmas?

We know that double layers in plasmas can accelerate electrons but that is not an electrical discharge.
N.B. A paper that models activity in a plasma as a electric circuit does not mean that the plasma contains electrical discharges.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Ziggurat does not mention z-pinches. He is talking about what you are talking about: the creation of plasmas by electrical discharges through insulating medium such as gases.

Gases can also "conduct". They simply "conduct" less efficiently than the plasma in the filament. No plasma in the solar atmosphere is fully ionized (stripped of all electrons), not even the plasma inside the coronal loops. Some of the iron ions get stripped of many electrons, but even they are not fully ionized ions.

All plasmas in the solar atmosphere are also "dusty", even the photosphere is "dusty" and contains "gases" that are not ionized.

 

[Michael Mozina]

And since I seem to be on a question asking bender:
First asked 4 February 2010
Michael Mozina,
Can you cite any textbooks or scientific papers where it is stated that electrical discharges can happen in plasmas?

http://www.catastrophism.com/texts/bruce/era.htm

You and your goofy lists. Do you ever cross anything off those lists, or do you just ignore everything I post all the time?

We know that double layers in plasmas can accelerate electrons but that is not an electrical discharge.

What "causes" the double layer to form in your opinion?

N.B. A paper that models activity in a plasma as a electric circuit does not mean that the plasma contains electrical discharges.

How is a z-pinch not a discharge through plasma?

 

[tusenfem]

A) The temperatures associated with these events.

Could you be any more vague? I guess you mean the temperature of the plasma in the solar loop, which mainly comes from the current in the loop, as I have already stated and as can be read in many a mainstream paper. This had NOTHING to do with reconnection.

B) The speed of propagation of the event which Bruce demonstrated in the 50's.

The speed of propagation of what. The only speed that is in the Bruce "paper" is that of electrons, as far as I could see (searching for the word speed), so this is bunk

C) The "looping nature" of the discharges themselves as Birkeland actually *predicted* (real empirical predictions too, not your fudge factor, after the fact stuff) over 100 years ago.

Birkeland did not model the sun with the loops you are so fond of, but the Kronian rings.
Solar loops are NOT discharges, but evidently you don't understand how discharges work.

D) produce x-rays galore

The X-ray galore is produced at the footpoints of the loops where accelerated electrons are creating them by bremsstrahlung. Accelerated electrons can be created by reconnection.

E) produce gamma rays "naturally" in our own atmosphere.

Yes, discharges maybe, but not reconnection. But as reconnection is not a discharge, that is no problem at all.

So, question MM, when are we going to get your circuit description of magnetic reconnectin (or discharge or induction or particle or whatever name you want to give it). I guess we are NEVER going to get that, because you don't have such a model. You can easily admit you don't have it, as it is impossible to do anyway, you don't have to be ashamed.

I have discussed almost ALL the papers that you linked to, though you have basically ignored whatever I have written, e.g. about the plasma ball, for which you were going to give an explanation, but I guess mine was so perfect, that you could not add to it anymore. I am glad I am going on a trip, who knows what surprises I will find when I come back in 3 weeks.

 

[Reality Check]

http://www.catastrophism.com/texts/bruce/era.htm

I said a textbook or scientific paper.
Not the same old debunked web page that you keep on regurgitating. Bruce was ignorant enough to think that solid particles can exist at temperatures of 6000K in the Sun. Actually he ignores the science that shows that the photosphere is 6000K and arbitarily states that it is 4000K (also no solid particles!)
Do not be as dumb as him.

How is a z-pinch not a discharge through plasma?

z-pinch

 

[Michael Mozina]

I said a textbook or scientific paper.

Are you really trying to claim Bruce's work was never "published"? OMG. This is just stupid. I give you exactly what you ask for and you ignore it. That's a pattern now.

Not the same old debunked web page that you keep on regurgitating.

I simply provided you with a link to the actual work. It has nothing to do with where it comes from. Birkeland's work was all "published" too. Did you just intend to ignore that work too? That was rhetorical question you need not answer since your actions make the answer rather obvious.

Bruce was ignorant enough to think that solid particles can exist at temperatures of 6000K in the Sun.

You're the one who's ignorant because sunspot studies regularly record temps below 4000 where carbons form solids. FYI Bruce even correctly pegged the true "cause" of these solids IMO, and there certainly are solids below the photosphere IMO.

Actually he ignores the science that shows that the photosphere is 6000K and arbitarily states that it is 4000K (also no solid particles!)
Do not be as dumb as him.

You and GM seem to rely rather heavily on the personal put down as a means to control the thoughts of others. I personally tend to get tired of such tactics, and most folks tend to see through it after awhile. I highlighted the key word you used to manipulate the conversation.

z-pinch

In fusion power research, the Z-pinch, or zeta pinch, is a type of plasma confinement system that uses an electrical current in the plasma to generate a magnetic field that compresses it (see pinch).

Do you even read your own links?

 

[Reality Check]

Outstanding questions for Michael Mozina

You and your goofy lists. Do you ever cross anything off those lists, or do you just ignore everything I post all the time?

Actually I do cross things off the list when you answer them with actual scientific evidence rather than unsupported assertions. The problem is that you never answer them, as in the 30-odd outstanding questions from me and others in this list.

Speaking of lists - we may as well start one for this thread.

1. Alfven and Perratt have stated that "these activities" = electrical discharges
   First asked 2 February 2010
2. Cosmic Plasma citation: twisted magnetic rope = discharge filament
   First asked 4 February 2010
3. Cosmic Plasma (or other) citation: All plasmas are "dusty"
   First asked 4 February 2010
4. Textbook or scientific paper citation for electrical discharges can happen in plasmas
   First asked 4 February 2010
   N.B. The flaws in the one "paper" by Briuce that you always link to have been pointed out many times before. Basically: No solid dust particles can exist on the Sun.

If anyone else wants to create posts asking Michael Mozina a specific question then feel free to add them to this list.

 

[Reality Check]

Are you really trying to claim Bruce's work was never "published"? OMG. This is just stupid. I give you exactly what you ask for and you ignore it. That's a pattern now.

I am not claiming that it was never piublished (though I have no idea where). I an stating that it is wrong.

You're the one who's ignorant because sunspot studies regularly record temps below 4000 where carbons form solids. FYI Bruce even correctly pegged the true "cause" of these solids IMO, and there certainly are solids below the photosphere IMO.

Citation to the "carbons form solids" in sunspots please (not to Bruce). This would be interesting if true.

ETA:
I would say that it is just possible in the coolest sunspot for there to be some carbon particles. Carbon has a sublimation point of 3900 K.
But then there is fact that only 0.29% of the Sun is carbon. So you end up with a very lightly dusted plasma and still no electrical discharges because the plasma conduction balances any electric potential immediately.

ETA2
If anyone is interested, Bruces "paper" is on the web as MM has stated before (Successful Predictions of the Electrical Discharge Theory of Cosmic Atmospheric Phenomena and Universal Evolution).
His bibliography has "Successful Predictions of the Cosmic Electric Field and Discharge Theory". Co-operative Electrical Research, No. 16, pp. 3-7, Jan. 1962.

My guess is that the "Co-operative Electrical Research" journal must be a really famous and highly respected journal on astrophysics !

Do you even read your own links?

Can you understand that an electric current is not an electrical discharge?

 

[Ziggurat]

A z-pinch in plasma is not dependent upon the ionization rates of the plasma!

It's got to be a plasma, though. And the gas inside a "plasma ball" is not a plasma except inside the filaments where dielectric breakdown has occurred.

All plasmas are "dusty".

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about dusty versus non-dusty plasmas, I'm talking about plasmas versus gasses. The stuff surrounding the filaments in a "plasma ball" is not a plasma. Not even a dusty one.

Gah. Have you even read Cosmic Plasma yet?

Have you even read an introductory physics textbook yet? Because the mistakes you keep making are at the introductory level.

 

[GeeMack]

If anyone else wants to create posts asking Michael Mozina a specific question then feel free to add them to this list.

I'd love to add the list of the 20 or 30 questions he ignored several years ago when he was touting that ridiculous solid iron surface Sun notion on a couple of other forums. But it's off topic, it was material from other forums, and he's given up on that crazy idea anyway.

I am still interested in hearing him describe, quite nicely, how the "circuit/resistor" approach explains heating a coronal loop to millions of degrees. He claimed to have provided the answer to that, but obviously he didn't in any way that anyone in this discussion could understand.

 

[Ziggurat]

Gases can also "conduct". They simply "conduct" less efficiently than the plasma in the filament.

You don't get it. It doesn't matter if gasses can conduct a little bit. The dielectric breakdown is still an abrupt and giant transition in conductivity, and there is no such transition in a plasma. It isn't possible to have one.

No plasma in the solar atmosphere is fully ionized (stripped of all electrons), not even the plasma inside the coronal loops.

That is irrelevant. They are still conducting (meaning they CANNOT support large charge separations), and the transition from conducting to more conducting is always gradual (meaning discharge, as opposed to simply a current, is not possible).

All plasmas in the solar atmosphere are also "dusty"

This has no relevance at all to what I'm talking about.

 

[Michael Mozina]

I am not claiming that it was never piublished (though I have no idea where). I an stating that it is wrong.

So regardless of the source, or where it was published, if you don't like it, you'll just 'state that is is wrong' (in pure handwave fashion) and ignore it. That's a ugly pattern you keep falling into RC.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Plasma-filaments.jpg

Click on that last link to the image from your Wiki page of a "z-pinch". Doesn't that look like a "discharge" to you?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about dusty versus non-dusty plasmas, I'm talking about plasmas versus gasses. The stuff surrounding the filaments in a "plasma ball" is not a plasma. Not even a dusty one.

Let's try to get real focused here for a second. Is the photosphere fully ionized in your opinion or is it "dusty" with non ionized gases in it?

 

[Ziggurat]

So regardless of the source, or where it was published, if you don't like it, you'll just 'state that is is wrong' (in pure handwave fashion) and ignore it. That's a ugly pattern you keep falling into RC.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Plasma-filaments.jpg

Click on that last link to the image from your Wiki page of a "z-pinch". Doesn't that look like a "discharge" to you?

Once again, you demonstrate your cluelessness. That picture is indeed a discharge. And guess what, Michael? It's happening in air. Which is a gas. Not a plasma. The discharge process ionizes gas into a plasma along the discharge lines, and these then experience a z-pinch. But dielectric breakdown happens first in the process shown by that picture. If you're dealing with something that's already a plasma, there is no dielectric breakdown, and there is no discharge. You can have a z-pinch without discharge, you know. Discharge is not synonymous with current.

 

[Ziggurat]

Let's try to get real focused here for a second. Is the photosphere fully ionized in your opinion or is it "dusty" with non ionized gases in it?

Irrelevant and off topic. If you want to talk about the photosphere and your ridiculous and thermodynamically impossible conceptions of it, start a new thread. You have failed to answer so may basic questions about that in the past, I'm not going to start answering yours here when it has no bearing on what I wrote.

 

[Reality Check]

So regardless of the source, or where it was published, if you don't like it, you'll just 'state that is is wrong' (in pure handwave fashion) and ignore it. That's a ugly pattern you keep falling into RC.

You not doing basic research is a really ugly pattern you keep falling into MM.
So just where was Bruces "paper" published? Well I can answer that if you cannot: "Successful Predictions of the Cosmic Electric Field and Discharge Theory". Co-operative Electrical Research, No. 16, pp. 3-7, Jan. 1962.

What is this "Co-operative Electrical Research" journal?

The British Electrical and Allied Industries Research Association has commenced publication of a house journal with the title Co-operative Electrical Research. It is intended to issue two numbers per year and include articles written by members of the staff and others closely associated with the work of the association. These articles will review various aspects of the association’s activities and emphasize the effect
of these on the practical problems facing the electrical and allied industries. The joumal is meant to appeal to those in executive positions in these industries, who have a broad but not necessarily a specialized knowledge of the subjects and have neither the time nor the need to study them in great detail.

That is as far from being a peer-reviewed scientific journal as you can get without publishing in comics.

Where this "paper" was published does not really matter. What matters is that basic flaw in this electrical engineer's paper on the Sun, stars and rest of the universe. That is he treats everything as if it was an insulating gas undergoing electrical discharges. Any one with basic scientific knowledge know that plasma is not a insulating gas.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Plasma-filaments.jpg
Click on that last link to the image from your Wiki page of a "z-pinch". Doesn't that look like a "discharge" to you?

Looks like plasma filaments and an separate electrical discharge to me. The caption agrees. There is an electrical discharge creating the plasma in which the z-pinches occur: "Z-pinches constrain the plasma filaments in an electrical discharge from a Tesla coil."

But since pretty pictures impress you so much have a look at the Z machine in action

The Z machine fires a very powerful electrical discharge (several tens of millions of amperes for less than 100 nanoseconds) into an array of thin, parallel tungsten wires called a liner (pictured here). The high electrical current vaporizes the wires, which are transformed into a cylindrical plasma curtain. Simultaneously, the current density induces a powerful magnetic field and their combination creates Lorentz forces which radially compress the plasma into a z-pinch process.