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

[Reality Check]

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.

Here you go

Originally Posted by Peratt in Cosmic Plasma
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.

 

[Michael Mozina]

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.

I don't know why I post anything to this thread. You never read it or respond to it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6754609&postcount=1722

D. Solar Prominence Circuit. Solar Flares

The circuit consists of a magnetic flux tube above the photosphere and part of photosphere (see Fig. 10). The generator is in the photosphere and is due to a whirl motion in sunspot magnetic field. Generator output increases circuit energy which can be dissipated in two different ways: ( 1 ) When current density surpasses critical value, an exploding DL is produced in which most of the circuit energy is released. This causes a solar flare. Hénoux (1985) has recently given an interesting study of solar flares and concludes that a current disruption by DL's is an appealing explanation of solar flares. (2) Under certain circumstances the electromagnetic pressure of the current loop may produce a motor which gives rise to a rising prominence (Alfvén and Carlqvist, 1967; Carlqvist, 1982b).

The part in yellow is where the "discharge" occurs.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Here you go

Just as I thought. The word "dielectric" appears nowhere in your/our/Peratt's definition.

 

[Michael Mozina]

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.

In THAT particular case, yes, but so what? In the case of flares, a buildup of the circuit energy occurs in the circuit/pinch itself. The release of that energy and the ensuing discharge are a result of the exploding double layer reaching a critical point. The "buildup" is a different process, but the discharge itself is pretty much the same. Once the circuit energy is depleted through the exploding double layer, the discharge is complete.

 

[Reality Check]

I don't know why I post anything to this thread. You never read it or respond to it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6754609&postcount=1722

The part in yellow is where the "discharge" occurs.

You are lying - I have read that quote many times and responded to it.
As I posted:

Originally Posted by Reality Check
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.

The part in yellow is not Alfven stating that a coronal loop is a circuit.

He is saying that the circuit energy (the model) is released when a DL is created and explodes (the proposed physics).

D. Solar Prominence Circuit. Solar Flares
The circuit consists of a magnetic flux tube above the photosphere and part of photosphere (see Fig. 10). The generator is in the photosphere and is due to a whirl motion in sunspot magnetic field. Generator output increases circuit energy which can be dissipated in two different ways: ( 1 ) When current density surpasses critical value, an exploding DL is produced in which most of the circuit energy is released. This causes a solar flare. Hénoux (1985) has recently given an interesting study of solar flares and concludes that a current disruption by DL's is an appealing explanation of solar flares. (2) Under certain circumstances the electromagnetic pressure of the current loop may produce a motor which gives rise to a rising prominence (Alfvén and Carlqvist, 1967; Carlqvist, 1982b).

 

[Perpetual Student]

Laymen and professionals use the word "discharge in a number of ways:


A battery is said to discharge as it transforms chemical energy into electrical energy.
A capacitor is said to discharge stored electric energy when a circuit is completed.
An inductor is said to discharge stored magnetic energy when the magnetic field collapses (current is turned off).
A charged cloud discharges its stored electrical energy when the insulating nature of air is breached.

There are likely to be more such diverse usages of the word discharge. They all involve a current -- either rapid or slow, depending on the source and conducting medium. Whatever some 50 year old paper or text said about discharges in the sun or solar flairs clearly needs to be precisely defined for any modern conversation to take place.

So Mozina's comment that solar flairs are themselves discharges needs a further definition to be rationally discussed. Has he provided such a definition?

 

[GeeMack]

The selective ignorance on the part of electric Sun adherents is amazing amusing. The fact that they claim to want a scientific discourse, but steadfastly ignore their responsibility to define the terms they use, demonstrates unequivocally that they don't really want discourse, that they are liars. But if there are any electric Sun proponents who haven't weighed in yet, or for that matter anyone who thinks solar flares are electrical discharges, the claim was...

For the record, I said that a solar flare *IS* an electrical discharge.

The implication, based on many comments made by electric Sun adherents, is that the "electrical discharge" mentioned is akin to an electrical discharge like lightning here on Earth or like sparks in a toy plasma ball. So just for the sake of clarity, is it reasonable to describe the claim as this?...

"A solar flare is an electrical discharge like lightning here on Earth or the sparks in a toy plasma ball."​

If not, we will accept that the term "electrical discharge" in the claim is not like lightning here on Earth or the sparks in a toy plasma ball. And then, in order to move forward, the term "electrical discharge", as used in the claim, will need to be defined in an unambiguous objective way.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Laymen and professionals use the word "discharge in a number of ways:

Yes, but I provided a PROFESSIONAL/PUBLISHED definition and as far as I know, you're all LAYMEN on this topic, just like me. Thus far, when asked, you've run like creationists when asked to present even so much as a published PROFESSIONAL DEFINITION of an electrical discharge to support your claim of a need for a dielectric breakdown for a discharge to occur. I small a rat.

Wake me up when someone FINALLY provides a "published definition" to work with. Right now, all I'm hearing are "back pocket" claims devoid of scientific support.

 

[Reality Check]

Just as I thought. The word "dielectric" appears nowhere in your/our/Peratt's definition.

Just as I thought. You are obsessed with the word dielectric !

 

[Michael Mozina]

The selective ignorance on the part of electric Sun adherents is amazing amusing.

If you think that's amusing you should be on my side of the aisle watching you dodge that question about the meaning of Peratt's first sentence, not to mention Alfven's use of circuits. I've seen creationists run from direct questions before, but WOW, this is like watching rats running from a sinking ship. Release of stored EM energy? What energy? Published definition of a discharge from us? What definition? Sheesh.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Just as I thought. You are obsessed with the word dielectric !

Not me, you. I'm completely fine with a circuit breakdown inside an exploding double layer. You're the one insisting on a dielectric breakdown.

 

[Michael Mozina]

I need something to eat now. t, please tell me where things stand and pick one of ALFVEN's papers or books (since I know you have them both), and one or more of his equations and or circuit diagrams to discuss. I want to start with his work, not your work or my work.

 

[GeeMack]

If [...][*irrelevant complaint snipped*]

Okay, one more time...

For the record, I said that a solar flare *IS* an electrical discharge.

The implication, based on many comments made by electric Sun adherents, is that the "electrical discharge" mentioned is akin to an electrical discharge like lightning here on Earth or like sparks in a toy plasma ball. So just for the sake of clarity, is it reasonable to describe the claim as this?...

"A solar flare is an electrical discharge like lightning here on Earth or the sparks in a toy plasma ball."​

It seems none of the against-the-mainstream claimants are willing to clarify their terms here. And if it's just some random words strung together, it's not even a claim. It's nonsense.

 

[Perpetual Student]

Yes, but I provided a PROFESSIONAL/PUBLISHED definition and as far as I know, you're all LAYMEN on this topic, just like me. Thus far, when asked, you've run like creationists when asked to present even so much as a published PROFESSIONAL DEFINITION of an electrical discharge to support your claim of a need for a dielectric breakdown for a discharge to occur. I small a rat.

Wake me up when someone FINALLY provides a "published definition" to work with. Right now, all I'm hearing are "back pocket" claims devoid of scientific support.

Why do you want someone else to define a term that is critical to your claim that solar flares are electrical discharges? Just explain what you mean by discharge. Forget about what is published or not; forget about dead discredited people. Just tell us what you mean by electrical discharge when you say that a solar flare is an electrical discharge, and describe the mechanism you have in mind. Can you do that or not? Fess up!

 

[GeeMack]

Why do you want someone else to define a term that is critical to your claim that solar flares are electrical discharges? Just explain what you mean by discharge. Forget about what is published or not; forget about dead discredited people. Just tell us what you mean by electrical discharge when you say that a solar flare is an electrical discharge, and describe the mechanism you have in mind. Can you do that or not? Fess up!

With over 2000 posts in the thread and not a lick of forward motion since the opening post, I'll put $20 on "not".

 

[dasmiller]

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.

If that's your definition of an electrical discharge in a plasma, do you believe that the mainstream solar model is not consistent with it? Does the mainstream model require that flares are powered by neither electricity nor magnetism?

 

[dasmiller]

FYI, you aren't a "hater" in my book, and I'm not complaining about our conversations at all.

FWIW, I never felt that you put me on the list of "haters."

You did see the word discharge in there with respect to flares however, right?

As I recall, yes, but what's the relevance?

FYI, I'm not trying to demonstrate a WHOLE ELECTRIC SUN theory out of Dungey's one paper. I'm simply trying to demonstrate that discharges happen in "conductors"!

For many definitions of "discharge," that's trivially true. For others, it's trivially false. Using Dungey's definition, it's trivially true that discharges happen in conductors. Dungey's paper provided no support for the idea that discharges happen in solar flares.

I'm not trying to suggest Dungey's one paper proves everything by itself about an electric sun

You complained that nobody addressed Dungey's paper. I feel that I addressed it.

Are you suggesting that the paper proves or even supports anything about the electric sun?

I'm simply noting that discharges occur in plasmas and have been associated with solar flares for 50 or more years!

What's the relevance of the 50 years?

 

[GeeMack]

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.

If that's your definition of an electrical discharge in a plasma, do you believe that the mainstream solar model is not consistent with it? Does the mainstream model require that flares are powered by neither electricity nor magnetism?

So for purposes of clarifying this claim...

For the record, I said that a solar flare *IS* an electrical discharge.

... what do we get?

Crank: A solar flare is an electrical discharge.

Skeptic: Define "electrical discharge".

Crank: An electrical discharge is a solar flare.​

When asked to clarify the claim that a solar flare is an electrical discharge, the response is that an electrical discharge, for purposes of the claim, is a solar flare. To address that argument directly: It's raw unadulterated stupid. It's the same evasive dishonest circular illogic that we have been pointing out since this thread was opened. I still have a $20 bill that says this is as good as it will ever get, and that no objective or quantitative support will ever be provided by any electric Sun adherent.

 

[Reality Check]

Not me, you. I'm completely fine with a circuit breakdown inside an exploding double layer. You're the one insisting on a dielectric breakdown.

Wow - so many errors in one post !.

• There is no such thing as a "circuit breakdown".
• There is no circuit inside a double layer.
  A double layer can be part of a circuit model of a physical situation, e.g. a coronal loop. There is a standard symbol for this (-DL-).
• The only situation that I insist on a dielectric breakdown is when the definition of electrical breakdown being used includes a dielectric breakdown.

 

[Reality Check]

I need something to eat now. t, please tell me where things stand and pick one of ALFVEN's papers or books (since I know you have them both), and one or more of his equations and or circuit diagrams to discuss. I want to start with his work, not your work or my work.

Who is this addressed to and why should anyone want to discuss Alfven's work in a thread about the electric sun idea?
ETA: Maybe by "t" you mean tusenfem. In that case I suggest that you start a new thread to discuss Alfven's work rather than tainting his reputation with the electric sun pseudoscience.

Alfven did not think that the Sun was powered like a lightbulb as in the electric sun idea.

Alfven did not think that solar flares were caused by electric discharges. He thought that they were caused by exploding double layers. See Solar flares are not caused by electrical discharges.


See the Double Layers in Astrophysics (proceedings from a 1986 workshop). Alfven's keynote address includes

• Figure 3 (page 22) - a simple circuit with a motor, inductor, generator, resistor and DL.
• Figure 10 (page 26) - Prominence-solar flare circuit with 2 motors, 2 inductors and a DL.

Alfven's use of electronic circuit models to represent coronal loops is standard plasma physics. Thinking that means the sun is electric would be as ignorant as thinking that electronic circuit models of the economy means that economic is electric.