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

[Reality Check]

There is no evidence, no demonstration, no mathematics, no logic that will penetrate. He is incapable of understanding scientific concepts.

That was made fairly obvious several years ago in other threads (and even other forums) that Micheal Mozina has participated in. Little things like not being able to tell that one number (the temperature of the Sun) is higher than another number (the melting or even boiling point of iron) !

In this thread the major things he has displayed is an ignorance of high school science (Michael Mozina's ignorance of high school science (the right hand rule)) and fantasies about several easily understood texts, e.g. Michael Mozina's delusions about Somov's 'Reconnection in a Vacuum' section - a section about "Reconnection in vacuum' is not actually about reconnection in vacuum !

 

[Reality Check]

http://my.execpc.com/~rhoadley/magmotion.htm
What a load of crap. They are specifically talking about the PHYSICAL MAGNETS that "reconnect", not the B field lines

What a load of crap.
Experiments with magnets and our surroundings

Magnets in Motion
This page shows how the magnetic fields twist and bend as magnets are moved about with respect to each other.

They are specifically talking about how the magnetic fields twist and bend.
They are specifically talking about moving magnet around.
and then:

The two pieces are pulled apart, and reconnected, N to S.

These are the PHYSICAL MAGNETS that are pulled apart.
These are the PHYSICAL MAGNETS that reconnected, N to S.

A person who can see will then look at the animations and note that the magnetic field lines twist and bend and break and reconnect.

A knowledgeable person will look at the animations and note that these magnetic field lines that twist and bend and break and reconnect do this outside of the magnets. They will then know that the lines can be either H or B lines.

 

[Michael Mozina]

That was made fairly obvious several years ago in other threads (and even other forums) that Micheal Mozina has participated in. Little things like not being able to tell that one number (the temperature of the Sun) is higher than another number (the melting or even boiling point of iron) !

In this thread the major things he has displayed is an ignorance of high school science (Michael Mozina's ignorance of high school science (the right hand rule)) and fantasies about several easily understood texts, e.g. Michael Mozina's delusions about Somov's 'Reconnection in a Vacuum' section - a section about "Reconnection in vacuum' is not actually about reconnection in vacuum !

Notice here Belz that they go right back to attacking the individual rather than acknowledge Dungey's "electrical discharges". The rationalizations are mind numbing after awhile. Neither one of them has read a plasma physics textbook, nor can they understand the text on a random website they found in cyberspace. They then blame me for their personal ignorance. Wow.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Magnets in Motion
This page shows how the magnetic fields twist and bend as magnets are moved about with respect to each other.

RC the magnetic fields around the magnets just twist and bend, only the PHYSICAL MAGNETS "reconnect". If you can't understand the text on a website, what hope is there that you will EVER understand a plasma physics textbook, even ASSUMING (hope springs eternal) you ever bother reading one?

 

[Reality Check]

MM: What is the toptic of "Plasma Astrophysics: Reconnection and flares" by Somov

Notice here Belz that they go right back to attacking the individual rather than acknowledge Dungey's "electrical discharges". .

Notice here Belz that we go back to noting that Michael Mozina cannot answer a simple high school science question and thus:

Michael Mozina's ignorance of high school science (the right hand rule)
​

And that Michael Mozina is lying about Dungey's "electrical discharges" which we have "acknowledged" for almost a year and pointed out what they happen in magnetic reconnection:
Dungey's 'electric discharge' = high current density in magnetic reconnection
Dungey's and Peratt's definition of discharge are different.
13th January 2011 (10 months and counting)

And that Michael Mozina is lying about us blaming him for his personal ignorance (see above, Michael Mozina's delusion that permeability is inductance! and Michael Mozina's delusion about "*RECONNECTIONS* per unit length").
What I blame him for is not seeming to want to learn and just twisting valid science into his personal fantasies. His continuous use of this tactic makes him make a number of deluded statements which anyone who reads his sources can easily see.

I do not have not read the Somov book that he has but I wonder what he thinks topic is covered in the book Plasma Astrophysics: Reconnection and flares by Boris V. Somov (2006).

This well-illustrated monograph is devoted to classic fundamentals, current practice, and perspectives of modern plasma astrophysics. The first part of the book is unique in covering all the basic principles and practical tools required for understanding and work in plasma astrophysics. The second part represents the physics of magnetic reconnection and flares of electromagnetic origin in space plasmas in the solar system, single and double stars, relativistic objects, accretion disks, their coronae. The level of the book is designed mainly for professional researchers in astrophysics. The book will also be interesting and useful to graduate students in space sciences, geophysics, as well as to advanced students in applied physics and mathematics seeking a unified view of plasma physics and fluid mechanics.

This makes his solar flares = electrical discharges fantasy even unsupported by the author of at least one book that he has read.

 

[Reality Check]

RC the magnetic fields around the magnets just twist and bend, only the PHYSICAL MAGNETS "reconnect". If you can't understand the text on a website, what hope is there that you will EVER understand a plasma physics textbook, even ASSUMING (hope springs eternal) you ever bother reading one?

MM, the magnetic fields around the magnets just twist and bend and break and reconnect as shown in the animations, and the PHYSICAL MAGNETS split and "reconnect".
If you can't understand the text and animations on a website, what hope is there that you will EVER understand what you have ever read in any physics textbook.

We have little hope of you understanding either this web page or any textbook since you have demonstrated that your ignorance expends to high school science - Michael Mozina's ignorance of high school science (the right hand rule).

 

[Belz...]

Point noted. Now what?

Now nothing. My point is made. I'll let you know if there's something else you need to know.

You can't actually "disagree" with something you don't understand in the first place. Haters don't take take the time, nor make the effort to educate themselves to the topic before "disagreeing" with it.

It still does not indicate the presence of "hate". I think you are emotionally invested in it and feel the need to attach an emotional label to the disagreement.

You're too much of a "newbie" to the topic to be educated in your choice IMO.

1) That is not a counter-argument.
2) I know a bit about gravity and nuclear fusion, and I know enough to ask "how can you have electrical discharges without electrons", which you admit you cannot answer.

"We" (as in Dungey, Peratt, Alfven, myself, etc) understand that electrical discharges occur in plasmas too. Most "educated" individuals on the topic of *plasma physics* understand this stuff. It's basic stuff actually.

Then it should be easy to link to.

 

[Belz...]

You know Belz, my honey-do list today is rather lengthy so I don't have time to respond to RC's nonsense at the moment.

After you've read that first paper by Dungey, you might try explaining to RC that he's effectively calling Dungey a "total idiot". Maybe you can talk some sense into him.

Why ? I call people idiots all the time.

 

[Belz...]

Guys, guys, I know how much my approval means to you but, please, stop fighting over me !

 

[tusenfem]

So, MM has come to the conclusion that H can reconnect, whereas B cannot reconnect. I guess that is a step forward. Now, to make the next step, in the plasma experiments on reconnection the relation between B and H still holds and according to Somov (Plasma Astrophysics Part 1, 2006, page 206):

In cosmic plasma, the magnetic permeability and the electric permittivity can almost always be replaced by their vacuum values.

As a plasma has no magnetization M, as it does not consist of a collection of magnetic dipoles that can be aligned like in solids (a bar magnet for example), but of a collection of electric monopoles, in the end we find that:

B = μ₀ H

So, there is only a scaling value of 4π 10^-7 between the two.

Interestingly, in Plasma Astrophysics Part 2 (Reconnection and Flares) by Somov 2006 (the other trustworth source for MM) the word "discharge" is absent, except for 2 titles in the literature list at the end of the book.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Why ? I call people idiots all the time.

That might be logical if he were not trying to support "magnetic reconnection" theory, Dungey wasn't the guy that defined it, and Dungey had not described the PROCESS in terms of electrical discharges in plasma.

Keep in mind that I'm not personally obligated to explain how Clinger's vacuum handwave experiment is supposed to work. He's never provided a published reference to support any of his claims and I've never seen anyone try to claim what Clinger is claiming. The closest thing they could find in term of a published reference was one or two sentences from Somov, but Somov uses INDUCED E FIELDS to accelerate plasma. IMO Clinger's contraption won't work for two reasons. He removed the MEDIUM that is conductive, and allows for E fields to be induced at the X point and for CURRENT to flow through the X point as Dungey describes it. He's also trying to change dB/dt "slowly" so as not to induce any E field in the first place. I have no idea how that Clinger handwave experiment is supposed to work. That's his job to explain to you, not mine.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Now nothing. My point is made. I'll let you know if there's something else you need to know.

Okey Dokey.

It still does not indicate the presence of "hate". I think you are emotionally invested in it and feel the need to attach an emotional label to the disagreement.

There is no logical or scientific reason for them to dispute the fact that electrical discharges occur in plasma. There is PLENTY of documented evidence presented in this thread to support that claim. The only reason they won't accept that process in plasma is because they hate being wrong, and they hate EU theory. They are stuck in a hardcore denial process as a result.

1) That is not a counter-argument.
2) I know a bit about gravity and nuclear fusion, and I know enough to ask "how can you have electrical discharges without electrons", which you admit you cannot answer.

I don't have to explain how CLINGER's handwave thing is supposed to work WITHOUT electrons. Dungey's work on "magnetic reconnection" theory occurs in plasma and it REQUIRES them. Clinger has a problem because he has no plasma particles to accelerate in his vacuum. You need to get HIM to explain to you how he intends to work around that problem, not me.

 

[Michael Mozina]

So, MM has come to the conclusion that H can reconnect, whereas B cannot reconnect. I guess that is a step forward.

For the FORTH TIME now, the H lines only "reconnect" *INSIDE* (not outside) the physical magnet, and that reconnection is a direct result of the physical MAGNET reconnection.

 

[Michael Mozina]

MM, the magnetic fields around the magnets just twist and bend and break and reconnect as shown in the animations,...

BS. The website says NOTHING about the field LINES reconnecting. It only claims the lines bend and twist. The only time "reconnection" is mentioned on the website is in relationship to the MAGNET PIECES physically being "reconnected". You can't even tell a field line from a solid magnet!

 

[Belz...]

There is no logical or scientific reason for them to dispute the fact that electrical discharges occur in plasma.

Are all astronomers and physicists "haters" ?

I don't have to explain how CLINGER's handwave thing is supposed to work WITHOUT electrons.

Just like you don't actually have to eat. But it would help your argument a whole lot if the theory fit with, you know, reality.

 

[GeeMack]

That might be logical if he we're not trying to support "magnetic reconnection" theory, Dungey wasn't the guy that defined it, and Dungey had not described the PROCESS in terms of electrical discharges in plasma.

Dungey was the guy who originated the term "magnetic reconnection". He was a forerunner in that particular area of solar physics. Much of the contemporary understanding of magnetic reconnection and how it applies to solar flares and the heating of the corona was built on a foundation he laid. And if he didn't describe magnetic reconnection in a way that corresponds with the conjecture that solar flares are somehow analogous to lightning on Earth, maybe that's because it would have been ridiculous for him to do so. He wasn't an idiot. Obviously, in his neglecting to even mention it, he didn't consider any sort of cathode Sun or lightning bolt solar flares to be reasonable explanations for how the Sun works.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Are all astronomers and physicists "haters" ?

Certainly not. Dungey obviously had no problem with electrical discharges in plasma. Peratt has no problem with them. It's only the half dozen or so folks in this thread that are "haters".

Just like you don't actually have to eat. But it would help your argument a whole lot if the theory fit with, you know, reality.

Dungey's definition is "reality". Clinger's experiment is a handwave.

 

[tusenfem]

For the FORTH TIME now, the H lines only "reconnect" *INSIDE* (not outside) the physical magnet, and that reconnection is a direct result of the physical MAGNET reconnection.

Wow, I guess that whole book by your new hero Somov is totally bunk!

So now we had circuit reconnection and current reconnection, and newly in the hitparade magnet reconnection, from nothing to one in one week! Justin Bieber eat your heart out.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Wow, I guess that whole book by your new hero Somov is totally bunk!

Not at all. In fact it was Somov who specifically connects the B orientation to the E orientation (including Alfven's ideas) in the last chapter of his book. That's essentially where I got the term "current reconnection" in fact.

So now we had circuit reconnection and current reconnection, and newly in the hitparade magnet reconnection, from nothing to one in one week! Justin Bieber eat your heart out.

I hate to break it to you, but according to Somov, this whole "process" is also an example of "Reconnecting electrical currents", and induced E fields. In fact he describes the filaments/lines in chapter 16 as reconnecting "field aligned currents", or current reconnection. That's why I'm cool with the term 'current reconnection'. IMO that would have been a logical term. Then all the haters would not be so DAMN CONFUSED about the actual physical induction process and the electrical discharge processes that it describes. Oy Vey. What's in a name? At least a year of pain and suffering in just this one thread. Your side refuses to embrace the E orientation, so around and around we go.....

 

[Michael Mozina]

Dungey was the guy who originated the term "magnetic reconnection". He was a forerunner in that particular area of solar physics. Much of the contemporary understanding of magnetic reconnection and how it applies to solar flares and the heating of the corona was built on a foundation he laid.

That's also why you, RC and Clinger are so screwed in terms of embracing 'electrical discharges' in plasma. Dungey describes the release mechanisms as A) an induced E field at the X point, followed by an 'electrical discharge' that releases all that stored EM energy, aka an 'electrical discharge' in Peratt's DEFINITION.

You're personally clinging so tightly to that oversimplification fallacy and that denial-go-round, that it's squealing like a pig. Do you *HONESTLY* think anyone's buying that BS anymore?