• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
You didn't read my surfer dude version I take it? It's the STORAGE and rapid *RELEASE* of that stored electric or magnetic field energy. Do you comprehend the definition?
In other words part of the first sentence of Peratt's defintion.
So Dungey and Alfven were wrong when they defined it as currents?

ETA
It is a rather dumb defintion as far as solar flares are concerned: Solar flares are "the rapid *RELEASE* of stored electric or magnetic field energy". So you have a circular defintion: solar flare -> release of energy -> electrical dicharge -> release of energy -> solar flare.
Trivial and useless since it does not actaully give any model of the details of flares.
 
Last edited:
In other words part of the first sentence of Peratt's defintion.

A discharge is simply the release of stored EM energy. It's not a complicated thing to understand. It can occur in a gas, it can occur in plasma too. It can occur in a solid, and also a liquid. It can turn a solid into a plasma during the process. Do you get the concept of releasing stored electromagnetic energy yet?
 
In other words part of the first sentence of Peratt's defintion.
So Dungey and Alfven were wrong when they defined it as currents?

ETA
It is a rather dumb defintion as far as solar flares are concerned: Solar flares are "the rapid *RELEASE* of stored electric or magnetic field energy". So you have a circular defintion: solar flare -> release of energy -> electrical dicharge -> release of energy -> solar flare.
Trivial and useless since it does not actaully give any model of the details of flares.

Actually RC, it really is as simple as that. An electrical discharge in a plasma is the rapid release of stored electromagnetic energy. Whether it's stored in the electric field or the magnetic field, once it's release, it results is a discharge of stored energy. Once the discharge is complete, the process is complete. A flare is such a process. It's a massive release of EM energy into a confined region of plasma. The result is just as described by Peratt in his PUBLISHED DEFINITION (you know, the kind you never actually provide).
 
FYI RC, the coronal loop is a "circuit" according to Alfven. Alfven talks about the "circuit energy", and the release of that energy. What *ELSE* has been shown to emit gamma and x-rays *NATURALLY* here on Earth and other large bodies in the solar system with a magnetic field and an atmosphere?
 
A discharge is simply the release of stored EM energy. It's not a complicated thing to understand. It can occur in a gas, it can occur in plasma too. It can occur in a solid, and also a liquid. It can turn a solid into a plasma during the process. Do you get the concept of releasing stored electromagnetic energy yet?
You are wrong.
A discharge in the context that you want it for the purposes of the "exctric sun" theory only is the release of stored EM energy.

The definition of electrical discharge generally used in physics is the sudden current caused by the transition of an insulating (dielectric) medium to a conducting medium. This can bever happen in a plasma.

Do you get the concept of using the appropriate defintion of electrical discharge yet?
 
It's the STORAGE and rapid *RELEASE* of that stored electric or magnetic field energy.

And FYI, that's not even accurate. It's not the "storage of" that is a "discharge", it's the release and/or dissipation of previously STORED electromagnetic energy that is a "discharge". The storage part happens in the circuit or coronal loop. The discharge occurs when the circuit or loop is interrupted in the exploding double layer. That RELEASE of energy stored in the circuit is a "discharge" we call a flare and it typically shows up as a spike in the GOES x-ray flux data.
 
The definition of electrical discharge generally used in physics is the sudden current caused by the transition of an insulating (dielectric) medium to a conducting medium. This can bever happen in a plasma.

You keep stating that the words "dielectric breakdown" are associated with all types of "discharges", but you always fail to cite a source. Notice a pattern of running, dodging and hiding when asked to produce a source for that claim?
 
FYI RC, the coronal loop is a "circuit" according to Alfven. Alfven talks about the "circuit energy", and the release of that energy. What *ELSE* has been shown to emit gamma and x-rays *NATURALLY* here on Earth and other large bodies in the solar system with a magnetic field and an atmosphere?
FYI MM - you are wrong.

Alfven never states that a coronal loop is a circuit. That would be idiotic. A circuit is a conceptual model of wires connecting resistors, inductors, batteries and double layers.

Alfven models coronal loops as circuits. This allows the gross properties of coronal loops to be investigated. By analysing the model he shows that energy is released.

What *ELSE* has been shown to emit gamma and x-rays is any process that creates high energy particles, e.g. double layers and magnetic reconnection.
 
Yes they are. It's just one type of discharge among many types. The only thing that is "different" about a lightening discharge is that it *JUST SO HAPPENS* to start in a gas and the process *STARTS* by ionizing a gas once the buildup process reaches a critical energy state. In other words, it just so happens that the process *STARTS* in a gas, rather than a plasma, but other than that, it's still buildup (storage) of EM energy, followed by a DISCHARGE that ionizes the media and CONTINUES TO DISCHARGE THROUGH A CONDUCTOR.

A plasma is a gas. The gas in this case is a dielectric however, a difference you seemed determined not to mention. The only reason there is a “buildup (storage) of” charge is because that gas is a dielectric.

How many ways to I have to explain that? The lightning is just *ONE* kind of "electrical discharge", albeit a POWERFUL one, and a FAST one, hence the comparison by MANY authors including Dungey and Bruce.

An electrical discharge that specifically involves the breakdown of a dielectric and the dielectric is responsible for the charge separation in the first place.

Yes. I'd rather start with ALFVEN's circuits actually since it is THOSE circuits and presentation we are discussing, not tusenfem's circuits.

So start, show you can explain as you have claimed you could. Oh and we are also talking about tusenfem's circuits, specifically why after having them presented you just don’t want to address them.


All I can say is "wow". I have never been involved in a thread with so many dodged direct questions before. Every time I ask a question that might settle any sort of debate, the individuals simply dodges the question and around and around the denial-go-round we go. Was Dungey correct that discharges can happen in plasma? Yes or no? It's really a simple question. Why do you refuse to answer it?

Excuse me, where have I refused to answer anything? Dungey appears to be referring to a large and sudden current as a discharge and in that context yes large and sudden currents can happen in plasma. Did you really need another poster to tell you this?

How can I explain anything if we can't agree on what a "discharge" in a "plasma" is and everyone keeps dodging the direct questions that might settle anything?

Your question is ambiguous; you have not defined what you mean by “discharge" let alone a “"discharge" in a "plasma"”. We don’t need to agree (and we very likely may not) you just need to define explicitly what you mean by “a "discharge" in a "plasma"”. While I doubt it will actually settle anything it might enable us to actually talk about what you do mean by ““"discharge" in a "plasma"”.


Nothing is going to get settled until you define what you mean by "discharge" and explained how you think it happens in a "plasma". I’ve given an explanation of what I mean by discharge (a dissipation of an accumulated charge) you’re the one who keeps dogging


Yes or no did Dungey claim electrical discharges could happen in the solar atmosphere? Just answer the question.

From what I've read he did, so what?


*IF* I could get GM or the other haters to AGREE on that a "discharge" is a storage and rapid release of EM energy we might have a shot at "explaining' something. If everyone is intent on dodging every direct question and issue, it's nothing but a denial-go-round. Your call.

What you mean like the direct question I asked you that you have not answered?

Why are you so hung up on GeeMack, Reality Check, Dungey, Alfven or anyone? Define specifically what you mean, only then can the discussion advance (hopefully).

Oh by the way “storage and rapid release of EM energy” doesn’t really work that well, as a the “storage” part is the building up of the accumulated charge and though that can happen as a result of a much larger charge discharging it does have to be that way. Second a discharge can happen over a long period of time, in general without any breakdown the discharge takes as long as the charging did. So essentially what you seem to be saying is that a solar flare is a “rapid release of EM energy” (amazing insight) and you just want to define a "discharge" as a “rapid release of EM energy”. Actually that would still make magnetic reconnection a viable cause for a solar flare as that is a “storage and rapid release of EM energy”.
 
You keep stating that the words "dielectric breakdown" are associated with all types of "discharges", but you always fail to cite a source. Notice a pattern of running, dodging and hiding when asked to produce a source for that claim?
You are lying again
I state that the usual defintion (as I remember it from the physics textbooks that I have read) is that it requires dielectric breakdown.

I state that an example of electrical discharge (lightning) requires dielectric breakdown.


I never state that all types of discharges require dielectric breakdown.
  • Dungey's outdated use of the term for the high current density caused by magnetic reconnection does not require dielectric breakdown
  • Dams dicharging water do not require dielectric breakdown :).
 
Last edited:
Oh by the way “storage and rapid release of EM energy” doesn’t really work that well, as a the “storage” part is the building up of the accumulated charge and though that can happen as a result of a much larger charge discharging it does have to be that way. Second a discharge can happen over a long period of time, in general without any breakdown the discharge takes as long as the charging did. So essentially what you seem to be saying is that a solar flare is a “rapid release of EM energy” (amazing insight) and you just want to define a "discharge" as a “rapid release of EM energy”. Actually that would still make magnetic reconnection a viable cause for a solar flare as that is a “storage and rapid release of EM energy”.

And there we go....

Yes, I noted the same problem myself as our posts crossed. And this is exactly the problem. I have provided a perfect definition of an electrical flare in a plasma IMO, and from a true/real "expert". The moment I deviate from it, even by a SINGLE word, the problems begin. Why do you have any problem just using the definition by Peratt and going with it? There's no point in my doing a personal tap dance just to find flaws in my personal presentation when we can stick with the definition provided by an "expert". Jane, get me off this denial-go-round crazy thing......
 
I state that the usual defintion (as I remember it from the physics textbooks that I have read) is that it requires dielectric breakdown.​


Please present the definition, and cite the source. I want to see if your memory still serves you. :) Its the part in yellow I'm worried about. :)​
 
The result is just as described by Peratt in his PUBLISHED DEFINITION (you know, the kind you never actually provide).
Here you go then: a PUBLISHED DEFINITION
Originally Posted by Peratt
An electrical discharge is a sudden release of electric or magnetic stored energy. This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually detemined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium.
(goes onto mention aurora and lightning)

Note that the "energy transmission medium" has to breakdown.
 
Yesterday, 09:51 PM #2046
Michael Mozina
Philosopher


Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,301
Originally Posted by Perpetual Student
OK, I'll bite. Since you have gained the above claimed expertise by studying Alfven's circuit diagrams for many years, please explain in your own words 'the release of circuit energy in terms of "induction" and such.'
Sure, I'll be happy to as long as this is a two way conversation. While I'm sitting here learning a bit about the Latex features, how about you start by answering a couple of quick direct questions about whether an electrical discharge can occur in plasma. Yes or no?
Remember this? You have not yet explained in your own words 'the release of circuit energy in terms of "induction"' that you promised.

Do you really think the following is a genuine response?
Sure. We'll try rearranging Peratt's basic definition and give it a "surfer dude" vernacular for you.

Dude, an "electrical discharge" in a plasma is a righteous, awesome, tubular, super fast release of energy into the plasma, either stored magnetic field energy, or electric field energy. Got it dude?
Where is the word "induction" in your silly "dude" comment? This is the kind of garbage response that invokes all that disdain you deservedly get in these threads. What does "release of circuit energy in terms of induction" mean? Do you know? My meager electronics background will help me understand how this might work -- if you can describe it. Can you?
 
An ionized gas/plasma is not a conductor? :confused:
Peratt never defines an electrical discharge in a plasma or you would be able to answer:
His definition is the general one (e.g for aurora and lightning) that is impossible for plasmas.
And we are probably going to get your delusion about the section title again so:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom