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

Status
Not open for further replies.
MM: Quote Alfvén stating that there are electrical discharge in plasma

Michael Mozina said:
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9704264

Here's another paper about electrical discharges in plasma too by the way.
Click to expand...
Oh dear - you are displaying your ignorance yet again.
Heliospheric Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts has the term 'electrical discharge' in its abstract. Big woo! Lots of publications call discharges of electrons, 'electrical discharges'
The discharge model is from Alfvén H. 1981, Cosmic Plasma.

Wait a minute - you have the book, Michael Mozina!
Can you quote Alfvén stating that there are electrical discharge in plasma without a double layer?
DL's accelerate electrons and that is sometimes (as in this paper) called an 'electrical discharge', i.e. a sudden acceleration of electrons. It is not the usual definition as in Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharge (no dielectric breakdown)
 
Michael Mozina said:
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501334

In section 2 of this paper Li talks about Alfven's discharge theories in relationship to solar flares. It's a great paper too.
Click to expand...
Let us do what any competent person would do:
Note that this is a pre-print with no record of having been published.
Well maybe it has been cited - whoops no sign of that either!
Maybe ADSABS has a publication or citations for this preprint - no again!

Thus Heliospheric Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts shows no signs of being a paper at all :eye-poppi!

Section 3 has this one sentence about Alfvén and Carlqvist's double layer theory for solar flares
"In fact, Alfv´en and Carlqvist (1967) suggested exploding discharges of electric double layers to be responsible for solar flares."

Alfvén double layer theory for solar flares that is severely limited in its ability to explain solar flare, e.g. it cannot say anything about the electric or magnetic filed topology in flares.


 
nvidiot said:
This is rapidly becoming more and more farcical.

The projection in this thread on MM's part is almost pathological.
Click to expand...

Ya, like I'm PROJECTING the fact that his permeability feature describes *INDUCTANCE* per distance unit? Sorry to burst your bubble and "project" scientific fact. FYI, Alfven rejected the whole MR concept as "pseudoscience" for decades, till the day he died.
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
Wow RC, you struck the motherload with that author. Turn to page 108.

Read section 4.5 entitled: "Acceleration in current sheets, why?"

He even uses the term "reconnecting current sheets". I don't know how much clearer he could be about the "reconnection" process being a pseudonym for "current sheet acceleration" just like Alfven said!
Click to expand...

How convenient that pages 107 and 108 are not available at google books. So this is once more pulled out of context.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Yes, I know. That's why I've been calling it "current reconnection".
Click to expand...
It is magnetic connection (changing of magnetic field topology) that allows current sheets to reconnection. The first thing that happens is magnetic reconnection. That is why scientists call the process magnetic reconnection.

Of course you are now admitting that magnetic reconnection happens just as thousands of scientists over 60 decades say is happens :jaw-dropp!
You just have an obsession with renaming it.
And you get that wrong - it should be 'current sheet reconnection'.
 
Missed this bit of stupidity:
Michael Mozina said:
That specific author explicitly uses the terms "current" and "induced E fields" RC.
Click to expand...
Every book on plasma physics should include the words "current" and "induced E fields" MM.
Plasmas have currents.
Plasmas have induced E fields.

The point of this citation is that it covers what you say is not covered:
Cosmic plasma physics By Boris V. Somov
"Section 4.4.2 Reconnection in vacuum" covers this topic in a page and a half :jaw-dropp!
The entire page and a half is available in Google Books.
 
Michael Mozina said:
No, I agree that "current reconnection" happens in plasma, as do "electrical discharges".
Click to expand...
Still wrong: real electrical discharges (e.g. lightning) can never happen in plasma by definition.

In the context of magnetic reconnection, high current densities are called electrical discharges: Dungey's 'electric discharge' = high current density in magnetic reconnection
In the context of double layers, electron acceleration can be called electrical discharge.

That currents can connect in plasma is obvious.
That current sheets reconnect during magnetic reconnection is standard magnetic reconnection.
 
tusenfem said:
How convenient that pages 107 and 108 are not available at google books. So this is once more pulled out of context.
Click to expand...

No, it's actually not out of context in any way. FYI, I thought that author sounded very familiar to me, but I didn't recognize the text. I went through my plasma physics books at work and lo and behold, I own his book "Fundamentals of Cosmic Electrodynamics". He talks extensively about current sheets and current sheet acceleration in that book too. :)

On page 308 of the book I have, Somov talks all about Alfven's circuit orientation. I'm absolutely certain that Somov understands both the E and B orientations.
 
Reality Check said:
It is magnetic connection (changing of magnetic field topology) that allows current sheets to reconnection.
Click to expand...

Current is MOBILE and quantized. It can indeed "reconnect" to other "circuits" in plasma. So what? It's an ELECTRICALLY DRIVEN, INDUCTANCE per unit length based process!

The first thing that happens is magnetic reconnection. That is why scientists call the process magnetic reconnection.
Click to expand...

There is no "magnetic reconnection" at two ZERO points in two magnetic fields because there is no magnetic kinetic energy at that location. The CURRENT is the mechanism of energy transfer, and INDUCTION is the method of energy transfer. No "reconnection" of "magnetic lines" (B lines) ever actually takes place because B lines have no beginning and no ending and no physical ability to "disconnect from" nor reconnect to, any other magnetic line.

Of course you are now admitting that magnetic reconnection happens just as thousands of scientists over 60 decades say is happens :jaw-dropp!
Click to expand...

No, I admitted years ago that CURRENT RECONNECTION in plasma takes place and electrical discharges in plasma occur as well. So what? What does that have to do with "reconnecting magnetic lines"?

You just have an obsession with renaming it.
And you get that wrong - it should be 'current sheet reconnection'.
Click to expand...

The obvious reasons to "rename" it "current reconnection" or "circuit reconnection" would be to:

A) Be scientifically accurate about the kinetic energy transfer mechanism (current and induction, not monopoles)
B) Make it 100% compatible with all other areas of physics and science, including electrical engineering and particle physics.
C) Make is likely that electrical engineers will understand the E orientation of the process IMMEDIATELY.
D) Makes it obvious that the transfer process of magnetic field energy into particle kinetic energy is measured in INDUCTANCE per distance unit, not 'magnetic reconnections' per distance unit

The obvious problem in the name is best exemplified by your personal foot dragging and pure confusion for the past 2 years. If you weren't so damn confused you would have agreed with me YEARS ago that the COMPLETE PROCESS can also be called "current reconnection" or "circuit reconnection".
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
Just out of curiosity, which of Clingers equations did you see in Somov's book? Did you see that part about *INDUCED* E fields?
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity - do you imagine that all of Somov's book is available in Google Books?
Since Clinger's equations are the basic equations of EM and MHD, they should be in every book about plasma physics, e.g. Alfvén's Cosmic Plasma

I saw the part about *INDUCED* E fields.

Did you see that part about: MAGNETIC RECONENCTION IN VACUUM?

ETA: Since you are quote mining (lying) again here is the full text:
Cosmic plasma physics By Boris V. Somov
Reconnection in vacuum is a real physical process: magnetic field lines move to the X-type neutral point and reconnect in it as well as
the electric field is induced and can accelerate a charge particle of particles in the vicinity of the neutral point.
Click to expand...
(emphasis in the original text)

So the changing magnetic fields induce an electric field and that accelerated particles.

Can you see how insane it is to cite a book on magnetic reconnection (that explicitly addresses magnetic reconnection in vacuum) when it is your assertion that magnetic reconnection does not exist?

Alternately you think that MR exists but just have an obsession with changing its name. To bad - it has a had a good name that describes what actually happens for over 60 years.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom