Merged Electric Sun Theory (Split from: CME's, active regions and high energy flares)

[tusenfem]

You mean except for that fact that Bennett created his pinches in a "discharge chamber"??????

That is a way to a means!

In astrophysical plasmas there is no discharge in a Bennett pinch.

 

[tusenfem]

Um, T, you seem to be suggesting that something *OTHER THAN* current flow creates filaments and double layers in plasma. What?

Where on Earth do I claim that? Don't put words in my mouth to make yourself come out good or feel good. Please quote me specifically.

Also, double layers need not be produced by currents, they can also be created between plasmas of different quality, how about reading Alfvén and his successors, especially Raadu, on this topic?

 

[Reality Check]

Now, this gives a very global description of the system, the long wavelength approximation. You just throw away all the plasma physics that is in there and replace it with a resistivity and a battery and a capacitance, and you forget about the small scale stuff, like plasma waves, wave-particle interactions etc etc, everything that is small on the scale size of the magnetic loop is combined in the global parameters V, R and C.

Do the plasma waves excluded include Alfvén waves?

MM: The theory of Alfvén waves (later confirmed in experiments and observations) contributed to Alfvén being granted the Nobel Prize. They are a probable energy source for coronal heating and the solar wind.
I suspect that you stating that the circuit representation is the only valid representation of plasma physics rules out Alfvén waves. In that case, do you think that Alfvén's Nobel Prize was wrongly granted?

 

[Reality Check]

You mean except for that fact that Bennett created his pinches in a "discharge chamber"??????

Could this be a "plasma discharge chamber"???????
IOW a chamber that causes a discharge of plasma??????
A citation to your source and a quote would be good.

 

[Michael Mozina]

No, but then again, so what?

So what is the point of going for "magnetic reconnection" as a viable "explanation", if you've never seen it done? We know for a fact that discharges/pinches will emit these wavelengths already. Why do we need any "exotic" explanations, when a "simple" explanation already exists and we know it occurs in the atmosphere of every large body in the solar system with a magnetic field?

FYI, you and I both know that your magnetic reconnection 'lab" techniques involve "discharges" through elements to "heat up" the plasma, to create "pinches" in the plasma. Those "pinches", or what Alfven called "circuits", were simply run into one another. Turn off the electrical current and the show is over in an instant Tim. It's "current flow" that drives the parade, not "magnetic lines".

 

[Michael Mozina]

the longevity of current carrying DLs depends on the current, their strength, possible instabilities in the plasme, etc. etc. etc.

So what *EXACTLY* creates a "double layer", and a "pinch" that might emit x-rays and gamma-rays and neutrons and stuff we observe in solar events?

 

[Michael Mozina]

And yes, you can find the energy of that circuit, and what could be released by some process, however that process will be too small to be described by the circuit representation.

I know you've read Alfven's work, so I know that you know that you and he are in disagreement on this point. That also seems to be the basic disagreement between our two positions. Could you elaborate as to how the
B orientations delivers any more "energy" to the event than the E orientation?

I don't get it.

 

[GeeMack]

So what is the point of going for "magnetic reconnection" as a viable "explanation", if you've never seen it done? We know for a fact that discharges/pinches will emit these wavelengths already. Why do we need any "exotic" explanations, when a "simple" explanation already exists and we know it occurs in the atmosphere of every large body in the solar system with a magnetic field?

The claim is that electrical discharges are or are the cause of solar flares and CMEs. Given the current state of solar physics it's a ridiculous claim, downright stupid. And if there was anything to it, so far in all these posts in this thread nobody has been willing to take the time and invest the necessary scientific effort to support it.

A bunch of unsupported assertions and waving around some outdated material while completely ignoring contemporary science doesn't seem to be getting the "simple" message across. The "simple" explanation from the crackpots is apparently not simple enough for them to actually describe it in a legitimately scientific way, quantitatively and objectively. Could it be that it's not that "simple"? Maybe that "simple" explanation is just plain bogus? Or do the crackpots just not have what it takes to explain something "simple"?

 

[GeeMack]

I don't get it.

Absolutely.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Absolutely.

Just go away. At least T has read the materials in question. He also explains his position clearly and directly and scientifically. You on the other hand dodge every direct scientific question put to you, like why Alfven used the term circuits in that paper I cited, because you never did your homework.

 

[Michael Mozina]

The claim is that electrical discharges are or are the cause of solar flares and CMEs.

First of all, who claimed that? Quote me!

Given the current state of solar physics it's a ridiculous claim, downright stupid. And if there was anything to it, so far in all these posts in this thread nobody has been willing to take the time and invest the necessary scientific effort to support it.

That's all false information. You just refuse to read or respond to any papers presented. You handwave it all away in a sentence or two.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Also, double layers need not be produced by currents, they can also be created between plasmas of different quality, how about reading Alfvén and his successors, especially Raadu, on this topic?

Could you briefly explain what you mean by "quality' and how that term (condition) might apply to the solar atmosphere?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Could it be that it's not that "simple"? Maybe that "simple" explanation is just plain bogus? Or do the crackpots just not have what it takes to explain something "simple"?

When does Occum's razor apply to this argument? Electrical current/discharges through plasma can generate and do generate x-rays and gamma rays on Earth and other bodies in the solar system every single day. Why do I need something "exotic" and something Alfven labeled "pseudoscience" to explain what nature does with electricity every single day of the year?

 

[Michael Mozina]

That is a way to a means!

Yes, and nature does that all the time.

In astrophysical plasmas there is no discharge in a Bennett pinch.

It's certainly a "current carrying device" that is powered by "current flow". The pinch stops the moment we turn off the "current flow" and the plasma turns right back into a gas.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Alfven was right that electric currents flow in the sun, but his manner of describing them is not well suited for modern plasma physics, which is far more complicated than anything Alfven dealt with.

Huh? He "dealt with" every topic under the sun (and universe) in terms of "circuits". It's only 'complicated" now because you overcomplicate what should be and is an otherwise straight forward (electrical) process.

But you don't accept Alfven anyway, so why do you even bother with him?

In terms of his descriptions of corona loops, and solar atmospheric behaviors like flares and CME's, I *ABSOLUTELY* agree with his position. In terms of power sources ect, not so much.

 

[Reality Check]

Could you briefly explain what you mean by "quality' and how that term (condition) might apply to the solar atmosphere?

Double layer answers the first question.
It is obvious that the solar atmosphere has plasma with different properties.

 

[Reality Check]

Yes, and nature does that all the time.

No: Nature does not construct big metal chambers to generate discharges of plasma.
Nature does use electric currents all of the time to create plasma, e.g. lighning.
Nature does use heat all of the time to create plasma, e.g. stars.

It's certainly a "current carrying device" that is powered by "current flow". The pinch stops the moment we turn off the "current flow" and the plasma turns right back into a gas.

Plasma generating apparatus in labs are powered by electricity.
In some lasers are used to create plasma.
In some electrical currents are used to create plasma.
So what?

 

[GeeMack]

First of all, who claimed that? Quote me!

Here are some of the easier to find quotes that certainly infer staunch support for that claim....

*YOU* are the one that made specific claims about CME's and flares *NOT* being related to discharges. I've shown you evidence to the contrary. You can't even keep your stories straight anymore and you certainly have no idea how to "tell the truth". Who (which moderator) told you that this thread had the purpose that you claimed? Let me guess. You just "made it up" like you make up all of your ridiculously false statements.

The effect of these electrical discharges on the surface of the photosphere is most visible in 1600A SDO images. The flare process clearly begins *UNDER* (not above) the photosphere and the mass flow through the photosphere light up the surface in 1600A. The same effects can be seen in the 1700A images as well, but they are most visible in the 1600A images/videos.

If you've got bandwidth to burn, the 94A SDO images have a very interesting feature in them today. You can watch the active region on the right at about the 2:30 position "glow discharge" to an area in the north. It looks virtually identical to the ray like discharges that my "small" plasma ball makes when you touch the sides. The discharge is unusual in size, and very interesting IMO.

It's really called a "discharge" inside of a plasma.

Alfven describes these magnetic ropes as *CURRENT CARRYING CIRCUITS*. The mainstream points RHESSI at the Earth and sees x-rays and gamma rays from *DISCHARGES* in the Earth's atmosphere. It points the same device at the sun, sees those same high energy signatures and claims "magnetic reconnection did it". Baloney. Electrical discharges work in nature and they work in the lab, and your beloved "magnetic reconnection" is nothing more than "circuit reconnection" with a stupid name. Magnetic lines form as a complete and full continuum, without beginning and without end and without the ability to "disconnect" or "reconnect" to any other magnetic line. Circuits disconnect and reconnect all the time in nature.

Of course it could be that the claim has been abandoned and I just don't recall seeing the post. So do we all agree now that electrical discharges are not, or are not the cause of, solar flares and CMEs?

That's all false information. You just refuse to read or respond to any papers presented. You handwave it all away in a sentence or two.

Since I don't refuse to read any papers presented, that comment is another lie. The fact is the material presented has been so thoroughly misunderstood and dishonestly misrepresented by the PC/EU nuts and electric Sun crackpots that it hardly merits a legitimately scientific response. That doesn't mean I haven't read it. It means I don't care to indulge some crank's desire to talk all sciency when it's clear that the crackpots clearly don't possess the qualifications necessary to understand real science anyway.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Double layer answers the first question.
It is obvious that the solar atmosphere has plasma with different properties.

A double layer is a structure in a plasma and consists of two parallel layers with opposite electrical charge

I was looking for something *OTHER THAN* charge separation RC. You guys just told me that no plasma can have a net "electrical" charge, all it can do is "carry current". Which is it?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Here are some of the easier to find quotes that certainly infer staunch support for that claim....

Thanks. Now I at least know you're reading *SOMETHING*. Of course you never dealt with your claim and you handwaved away all the physical evidence, including Alfven's work. What's left to discuss?

Of course it could be that the claim has been abandoned and I just don't recall seeing the post.

Nope. Evidently you folks are getting all upity over the terms "plasma discharge" and "electrical discharge". It's still a flow of electrons through the plasma and the filaments won't and don't form without the "current flow" through the plasma. Do any of you even know the name of the device Bennett used to create pinches?

Let's see:

You sort of handwaved away at those lab test with iron. You don't care that discharges and "pinches" due to "current flow" generate gamma rays. You have no evidence at all that "magnetic reconnection' is even capable of such a stunt *in the absence of the pinch itself*. In fact you have no evidence that *ANY* of your theories work in the absence of "current flow" because each and every one of the lab experiments done to date *REQUIRE* 'current flow" to sustain them.

Current flow, discharge, call it whatever you like, but it's the one force of nature that not only creates plasma from gases, but also cause them to generate gamma rays and pinches and double layers in plasmas.