Magnetic reconnection and physical processes

[Tim Thompson]

Magnetic Reconnection Redux XIII

... But, of course, MM believes in reconnection, he just wants to give it another name particle/circuit reconnection or induction. ...

Perhaps better to say that he agrees that the observed results of magnetic reconnection are real (facts so obvious that even the likes of Mozina cannot ignore them). But the name "circuit reconnection" is more than just a semantic problem with language, it implies a serious physical impossibility, which I have argued before, which Mozina has ignored before, which I will argue again now, and Mozina will ignore once again.

We already know that (a) whether or not something shows up in a lab is not critical to empiricism, as the world outside Mozina understands the word, and (b) your alleged commitment to laboratory results is nothing more than cynical hypocrisy at its "best". You always do and always will ignore any and all laboratory experiments that defy your religious & philosophical prejudice. You are already on record as ignoring in situ laboratory observations of magnetic reconnection. Your hypocrisy is already exposed.

Actually Tim, I've always (well, since Space.com) accepted that "circuit reconnection" is real, and works in the lab, I just think your terminology sucks. Which one of those lab experiments involved no form of "current flow" prior to "reconnection" Tim?

The fact that currents are flowing is not a sufficient reason to replace "magnetic reconnection" (which is a physically correct description of what actually happens) with "circuit reconnection" (which is not a physically correct description of what actually happens).

Just consider the basic physics implied by "circuit reconnection". Currents are flowing with a total energy E₁. The currents then "reconnect" and now have a total energy E₂, where E₂ is greater than E₁, and commonly very much greater. So one asks the natural question: Where does all that new energy come from? Certainly it is not spontaneously created out of nothing in the currents. One would naturally suspect that the magnetic field is the source, but what is the process? Mozina will tell you it must be magnetic induction, despite the fact that this is known to be impossible (see Magnetic Reconnection Redux VII). In laboratory experiments we see the magnetic field reconfigure first (that's the reconnection of magnetic field lines) and then we see the currents gain energy. These are the controlled ("empirical" according to Mozina's own criteria) laboratory experiments which Mozina chooses to reject because they disagree with his religious preconceptions (see, e.g., Comments on Magnetic Reconnection, Comments on Magnetic Reconnection III and Magnetic Reconnection Redux XI).

The primary lesson to take away from this, and all other threads involving Michael Mozina is that first, Mozina denies the validity of science; he will say that he does not, but he explicitly does. And second, his own "theories" (iron sun, cosmology, electric universe & etc.) are all purely religious conceptions, complete with a pantheon of demigods (Birkeland, Alfven, & etc.) who cannot ever be wrong or questioned on anything.

 

[brantc]

In laboratory experiments we see the magnetic field reconfigure first (that's the reconnection of magnetic field lines) and then we see the currents gain energy.

That is exactly what happens in an electrical circuit.

Take a lamp connected to the wall.

If there is a bare spot in the wires halfway down the wire and you drop a spoon across the 2 bare wires(flux tube), what happens?

The current now flows cross wise(magnetic field reconfigure).

The current flow increases(the energy of the whole circuit plus the source is instantly available to power the short), because you now have a zero ohm load(short) as opposed to the lamp.

Even the energy that is in the wire connected to the lamp just after the short, dumps its energy into the short.

 

[Reality Check]

That is exactly what happens in an electrical circuit.

Take a lamp connected to the wall.

If there is a bare spot in the wires halfway down the wire and you drop a spoon across the 2 bare wires(flux tube), what happens?

The current now flows cross wise(magnetic field reconfigure).

The current flow increases(the energy of the whole circuit plus the source is instantly available to power the short), because you now have a zero ohm load(short) as opposed to the lamp.

Even the energy that is in the wire connected to the lamp just after the short, dumps its energy into the short.

That is wrong on so many points.
First you ignore that simple fact that a plasma is not a lamp wire !
And you ignore that magnetic reconnection has nothing to to with a short circuit in a lamp.

And if we were dumb enough to ignore this:
Take a lamp connected to the wall.

If there is a bare spot in the wires halfway down the wire and you drop a spoon across the 2 bare wires(flux tube), what happens?

1. The current now flows cross wise
2. the magnetic field reconfigure at the same time.

The current flow increases (the energy of the whole circuit plus the source is instantly available to power the short), because you now have a zero ohm load(short) as opposed to the lamp.

Even the energy that is in the wire connected to the lamp just after the short, dumps its energy into the short.

If you not have a fuse then all of the energy in the national grid as

 

[tusenfem]

That is exactly what happens in an electrical circuit.

No, you cannot use circuit description for magnetic reconnection as one of the main restrictions of a circuit description is that it is only valid in the long wavelength approximation.

So, for the same reason why reconnection cannot happen in ideal MDH (that is where Alfvén was correct), the scales that need to be looked at, where the important processes happen are on the electron scale, which is well outside of both MHD and circuit description.

 

[brantc]

That is wrong on so many points.
First you ignore that simple fact that a plasma is not a lamp wire !
And you ignore that magnetic reconnection has nothing to to with a short circuit in a lamp.

And if we were dumb enough to ignore this:
Take a lamp connected to the wall.

If there is a bare spot in the wires halfway down the wire and you drop a spoon across the 2 bare wires(flux tube), what happens?

1. 
   [*]The current now flows cross wise
   [*]the magnetic field reconfigure at the same time.

The current flow increases (the energy of the whole circuit plus the source is instantly available to power the short), because you now have a zero ohm load(short) as opposed to the lamp.

Even the energy that is in the wire connected to the lamp just after the short, dumps its energy into the short.

If you not have a fuse then all of the energy in the national grid as

My bold. If you measure that lag between the time current flows and the strength of the magnetic field you would see that the magnetic field lags ever so slightly behind current.

A flux tube carries a current. You can tell by the helical magnetic field.
So if you have a spot between the 2 flux tubes that touches then you have a crosswise current flow. The magnetic field reconfigures. The current strength increases. Radiation is emitted...Etc. Just like a wire.

 

[brantc]

No, you cannot use circuit description for magnetic reconnection as one of the main restrictions of a circuit description is that it is only valid in the long wavelength approximation.

So, for the same reason why reconnection cannot happen in ideal MDH (that is where Alfvén was correct), the scales that need to be looked at, where the important processes happen are on the electron scale, which is well outside of both MHD and circuit description.

That would be PIC, wouldnt it. That is what I have been saying all along.

You need to look at the kinetic energy of the electrons(protons) to determine the energetics of the system.

 

[Reality Check]

My bold. If you measure that lag between the time current flows and the strength of the magnetic field you would see that the magnetic field lags ever so slightly behind current.

A flux tube carries a current. You can tell by the helical magnetic field.
So if you have a spot between the 2 flux tubes that touches then you have a crosswise current flow. The magnetic field reconfigures. The current strength increases. Radiation is emitted...Etc. Just like a wire.

So what? You just ignored what Tim said.

Read what Tim Thompson said:

In laboratory experiments we see the magnetic field reconfigure first (that's the reconnection of magnetic field lines) and then we see the currents gain energy. These are the controlled ("empirical" according to Mozina's own criteria) laboratory experiments which Mozina chooses to reject because they disagree with his religious preconceptions (see, e.g., Comments on Magnetic Reconnection, Comments on Magnetic Reconnection III and Magnetic Reconnection Redux XI).

My bold

The only thing missing from Tim Thompson's post is a citation to a textbook or paper.
But I am sure that you, brantc, with your extensive knowledge of plasma physics can provide us with many citations to show that in magnetic reconnection the currents gain energy first and then the magnetic field reconnect .

And what I said:

That is wrong on so many points.
First you ignore that simple fact that a plasma is not a lamp wire !
And you ignore that magnetic reconnection has nothing to to with a short circuit in a lamp.

And if we were dumb enough to ignore this:
...

(My bold made bolder)


The point is that a plasma is not a wire. Only an truely ignorant person (as I emphasis above) would treat a plasma like a wire.

 

[Reality Check]

A flux tube carries a current. You can tell by the helical magnetic field.
So if you have a spot between the 2 flux tubes that touches then you have a crosswise current flow. The magnetic field reconfigures. The current strength increases. Radiation is emitted...Etc. Just like a wire.

And of course you continue to ignore the actual physics of magnetic reconnecton.
So if you have a plasma with where magnetic reconnection happens (I do not think that flux tubes are needed) then you have charges moving to preserve charge neutrality. The magnetic field reconfigures first on a reconnection. The current changes. Radiation is emitted...Etc. Just like magnetic reconnection in a plasma and not at all like a wire.

 

[tusenfem]

That would be PIC, wouldnt it. That is what I have been saying all along.

You need to look at the kinetic energy of the electrons(protons) to determine the energetics of the system.

Then WHY, prithee, claim "That is exactly what happens in an electrical circuit." I have the feeling that you don't fully understand things here.

And PIC simulations, sure, I am all for that, for the regions where it is necessary, full pic modelling of a magnetosphere is impossible from logistical reasons.

But in theory we also have to describe things. Plasma physics is not just doing simulations, and thus circuit theory and MHD have to be "thrown out" if we want to discuss reconnection.

And in general, the kinetic energy of the particles is rather negligible with respect to the processes going on in reconnection. Only in the reconnection exhausts is there a significant kinetic energy of the accelerated bulk plasma flow, generated by the tension of the magnetic field. PIC does not mean you look at the kinetic energy of the particles, it just means you look at the particles.

 

[Reality Check]

MM: Magnetic reconnection experiments in labs reach millions of degrees

deleted - wrong thread