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

[Tubbythin]

We do of course encounter problems measuring the electric current inside a plasma. One of the primary difficulties is the formation of "plasma double layers" around the instruments, which interferes with their operation. However, we do have direct observations of the "solar wind", which accelerates as it leaves the sun. Accelerating charged particles in one direction is direct evidence of an electric field applied in the other direction. Particle physics 101 there.

Erm, electromagnetism 101. Charged particles of opposite sign will be accelerated in opposite directions by the same electromagnetic field. This is of course a fatal flaw in your claims.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Oh boloney.You cannot tell the difference between a solar flare that is 100,000 km in scale and a spark plug ?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6629697&postcount=390

Read Alfven's last sentence, note the distance, and tell me WHY and HOW you ruled out induction as the culprit of the "explosive" local event?

It is that 100,000 km scale that means that it would take a time scale of 1 million years for a flare to produce its observed energy via induction.

That's a completely bogus argument. Induction is a 'fast" process and it can induce into plasmas ANYWHERE AROUND THE FILAMENT, not 100,000 KM away because all the plasmas are "current carrying" plasmas!

And yes: indicution happens in coils in cars.
Just because something happens in some situations does not mean that they are the same.

You can't automatically *ASSUME* they are different either!

 

[Arthur Mann]

Except that there nobody has provided any quantitative evidence to support the idea that billions and billions of Joules per second of energy can be produced this way.

Here is a passage from Sandia's web site, explaining about their "z machine", an apparatus developed to study "z pinch" phenomena in plasmas:

Z (formerly called PBFA-Z) is the most powerful generator of X-rays in the world. In the past ten months, the machine, located at Sandia National Laboratories, has more than quintupled its output from 40 to 210 trillion watts (terawatts). It took 25 years for a succession of Sandia accelerators to reach 40 terawatts.

Z's output is now 60 times the world's usage of electrical power at a given moment.

Keep in mind this power output is generated in a fraction of a second, by an electric discharge through a conductor (hand-built matrix of wires). A sustained current would produce this effect in a sustained fashion. A star is the focus of a "z pinch" in a birkeland current, planets are formed by similar "z pinches", that's why they're all spherical, stars, planets, moons, because they all essentially slag from an electric arc, just like the spherical slag produced when an arc from an arc welder impinges on a surface. And the math is very solid on this, using the known properties and behaviors of electromagnetic forces, not appeals to "unobservable" stuff or imaginary processes that can't be reproduced in the lab.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

One thing you always need to keep in mind is that plasma effects are scalable across about fourteen orders of magnitude, at least. This means we can study small plasmas and from that determine the properties of large plasmas. All real physical phenomena share this, they are the same on every scale.

Uh, no. The fact that some physical phenomena do not scale was already known in the 19th century:

If a cat can kill a rat in a minute, how long would it be killing 60,000 rats? Ah, how long, indeed! My private opinion is that the rats would kill the cat.

Lewis Carroll. On Cats and Rats, 1880.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Erm, electromagnetism 101. Charged particles of opposite sign will be accelerated in opposite directions by the same electromagnetic field. This is of course a fatal flaw in your claims.

See "sputtering".

 

[D'rok]

We do of course encounter problems measuring the electric current inside a plasma. One of the primary difficulties is the formation of "plasma double layers" around the instruments, which interferes with their operation. However, we do have direct observations of the "solar wind", which accelerates as it leaves the sun. Accelerating charged particles in one direction is direct evidence of an electric field applied in the other direction. Particle physics 101 there.

We also observe this electricity leaving the sun, as all electricity in a circuit must COMPLETE that circuit. These discharges are known colloquially as "polar jets". They are not "jets", however, as the term is commonly understood. They are birkeland currents, a spontaneous effect of electric discharge in plasma that is readily reproduced in the lab and conforms precisely to larger currents observed around (the Earth, the moon, virtually every planet and most of the moons of the larger planets, and) the sun.

So they're inferred rather than observed. If we can observe the solar wind, then electric currents strong enough to power the sun should be trivially obvious to observe.

 

[GeeMack]

Keep in mind this power output is generated in a fraction of a second, by an electric discharge through a conductor (hand-built matrix of wires). A sustained current would produce this effect in a sustained fashion. A star is the focus of a "z pinch" in a birkeland current, planets are formed by similar "z pinches", that's why they're all spherical, stars, planets, moons, because they all essentially slag from an electric arc, just like the spherical slag produced when an arc from an arc welder impinges on a surface. And the math is very solid on this, using the known properties and behaviors of electromagnetic forces, not appeals to "unobservable" stuff or imaginary processes that can't be reproduced in the lab.

So is this why the Sun has a sold iron surface?

 

[Perpetual Student]

Where is the dielectric medium in your toaster? Describe how it breaks down when an electric discharge toasts your bread.

Wait a minute! Do you really believe a toaster uses an electric discharge to toast bread? If so, would you please explain exactly where this discharge takes place in the toaster?

 

[Arthur Mann]

Erm, electromagnetism 101. Charged particles of opposite sign will be accelerated in opposite directions by the same electromagnetic field. This is of course a fatal flaw in your claims.

Electromagnetic theory does not deal with "particles", you're thinking of particle physics. Further, what we observe is positively charged particles (protons) accelerating away from the sun, not neutral particles. This is another problem for stellar fusionists, as their models suggest there should be a flood of neutrons from the sun, but we don't observe that. In fact we only observe "neutral" particles in the solar wind at such distances where they can become "neutral" by scavenging electrons from the radial electric field powering the sun, in essence becoming hydrogen. We observe this (and many other electrically catalyzed reactions) around comets, around aurorae, and so on.

 

[Tubbythin]

Here is a passage from Sandia's web site, explaining about their "z machine", an apparatus developed to study "z pinch" phenomena in plasmas:

All very interesting. Do you think the Sun is made of tungsten?

Keep in mind this power output is generated in a fraction of a second, by an electric discharge through a conductor (hand-built matrix of wires). A sustained current would produce this effect in a sustained fashion.

No it wouldn't. You'd quickly run out of tungsten.

A star is the focus of a "z pinch" in a birkeland current, planets are formed by similar "z pinches", that's why they're all spherical, stars, planets, moons, because they all essentially slag from an electric arc, just like the spherical slag produced when an arc from an arc welder impinges on a surface. And the math is very solid on this,

Lets see it then.

using the known properties and behaviors of electromagnetic forces, not appeals to "unobservable" stuff or imaginary processes that can't be reproduced in the lab.

So the neutrinos we observe from the Sun that can be produced in a lab... are they appeals to unobservables or imaginary processes?

 

[Reality Check]

Arthur Mann: Citations for exploding double layers do match solar flares

It doesn't.

It does .

This specious claim is based on the false premise that "magnetic reconnection",

Wrong: read the quote again.
Originally Posted by Tim Thompson Why not induction?
It is from Magnetic Reconnection: MHD Theory and Applications by Eric Priest & Terry Forbes, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
But the calculation that the authors do that induction woudl take a million years to release the amount of energy onvolved with solar flares has nothing to do with magnetic reconnection.

Repeating it over and over again won't make it true. Perhaps you can demonstrate your mathematical analysis of this problem, by showing that these laboratory double layers exploding don't nicely conform to the same phenomenon we observe in the sun, with scale being the only significant difference?

I never said that. The textbook quote is about induction not exploding double layers.
It is your assertion that exploding double layers do match solar flares. As such it is up to you to support this with citations to the literature.

From what I have read they match the total energy output and some of the observed x-rays but not the details.

First asked 10 Decaember 2010
Arthur Mann
Can you give citations to the scientific lliterature that shows how they explain solar flares?

P.S.
Michael Mozina: You do realize that exploding double layers are not electrical discharges. There is no breakdown of a dielectric material. They cause electrons to be accelerated, i.e. produce currents. A few authors refer to these as discharges (e.g. Alfven). There is at least one paper where they saved space in the abstract by using the tern "electrical discharge" rather than "the discharge of electrons accelerated by a changing magnetic field" (Energy build-up and release mechanisms in solar and auroral flares (1975)).

So Arthur Mann will be producing evidence that your idea that solar flares are produced by electrical discharges is not only wrong by defintion but can be replaced by an even better theory.

 

[Arthur Mann]

All very interesting. Do you think the Sun is made of tungsten?

No, if you mean primarily tungsten, though of course there is nothing preventing tungsten from existing in the sun. Spectra indicate the sun is primarily calcium-rich and iron-rich rock, at least at the surface. Beneath that we don't know, though it's safe to assume all material in the sun is sorted by species according to electrical properties, as are all plasmas subjected to an electric field.

 

[Arthur Mann]

It does

False.

 

[Arthur Mann]

It is your assertion that exploding double layers do match solar flares. As such it is up to you to support this with citations to the literature.

It's not merely my assertion, it's demonstrable reality, as the paper pointed out by Michael Mozina has illustrated.

 

[GeeMack]

No, if you mean primarily tungsten, though of course there is nothing preventing tungsten from existing in the sun. Spectra indicate the sun is primarily calcium-rich and iron-rich rock, at least at the surface. Beneath that we don't know, though it's safe to assume all material in the sun is sorted by species according to electrical properties, as are all plasmas subjected to an electric field.

Where did Peratt, Bruce, Alfvén, and Scott specify that the Sun has a solid iron surface?

 

[Arthur Mann]

So the neutrinos we observe from the Sun that can be produced in a lab... are they appeals to unobservables or imaginary processes?

If you mean "simulated on a computer" instead of "produced in a lab", then you're onto something. So far as I know, the only "neutrino generators" that exist are theoretical software models that are utterly divorced from any physical constraints and not bound by the laws of physics as they're understood.

 

[Arthur Mann]

Where did Peratt, Bruce, Alfvén, and Scott specify that the Sun has a solid iron surface?

I don't know. Have you purchased Dr. Donald Scott's book yet? I suggest you read it if you want a decent summary of the electric sun model. You have to understand something before you can even begin to refute it, if you intend to be intellectual honest.

 

[Arthur Mann]

Then please show, in detail, how, to within an order of magnitude the Sun produces a steady ~3.9x10^26 W, in the form of electromagnetic radiation, over time periods of at least 100 years, according to the Electric Sun model.

The mechanics of generating electromagnetic radiation using electricity are well-understood. Are you suggesting they're not? Apply those principles to your observations of a star if you wish to understand the electric star model. Verify your ideas by experiment, as plasma cosmologists routinely do.

 

[Michael Mozina]

All very interesting. Do you think the Sun is made of tungsten?

Mostly Iron and Nickel actually. Don't worry, you won't run out. The iron usually falls back due to gravity.

 

[GeeMack]

I don't know. Have you purchased Dr. Donald Scott's book yet? I suggest you read it if you want a decent summary of the electric sun model. You have to understand something before you can even begin to refute it, if you intend to be intellectual honest.

Okay, so the proponents of the electric Sun conjecture don't really know how it works. That's pretty much exactly what I expected, and what has been demonstrated in this and several other forums for years.