Researchers find solar eruptions may not have slinky-like shapes after all

"coronal mass ejections have been assumed to resemble a large Slinky – one of those spring toys—with both ends anchored at the sun, even when they reach Earth about one to three days after they erupt,"

It's a good thing that despite both ends being anchored to points in the sun of opposing polarity, this is a "quasi-neutral" flow of particles...otherwise these things could cause some real damage should they discharge...hell something of this size contacting the earths magnetosphere may even be felt on a global scale should any kind of charge disparity produce a discharge into our atmosphere due to it's connection to the magnetosphere...thank God that doesn't ever happen...because quasi-neutral.

JonesDave will be along to tell us all about it.

@theredpill:
Or it could be a matter of the contents of the CME having very strong magnetic fields associated with them. Do we see a net shift in overall charge of the Sun or the Earth during/after a CME? not as far as I know, since the material contained within is overall net neutral to the best of our knowledge.

How would one measure "the overall charge of the Sun"? How is the "overall charge" of a random object measured in a lab?

"coronal mass ejections have been assumed to resemble a large Slinky – one of those spring toys—with both ends anchored at the sun, even when they reach Earth about one to three days after they erupt,"

It's a good thing that despite both ends being anchored to points in the sun of opposing polarity, this is a "quasi-neutral" flow of particles...otherwise these things could cause some real damage should they discharge...hell something of this size contacting the earths magnetosphere may even be felt on a global scale should any kind of charge disparity produce a discharge into our atmosphere due to it's connection to the magnetosphere...thank God that doesn't ever happen...because quasi-neutral.

JonesDave will be along to tell us all about it.

Add CMEs to the list of things you don't understand. As well as the solar wind/ CME interaction with the magnetosphere.

"Or it could be a matter of the contents of the CME having very strong magnetic fields associated with them"

It very well could be...as a matter of fact it is likely.

" Do we see a net shift in overall charge of the Sun or the Earth during/after a CME? not as far as I know"

Why would a CME anchored in 2 spots on the sun alter the polarity of the entire sun? Do we monitor the entire sun for constant polarity flips on various surface regions? Or do we only know that the two anchors for the regions where the CME emanates from MUST be of opposing polarity?

" since the material contained within is overall net neutral to the best of our knowledge. "

I've noticed people here who attempt to debate the electrical nature of these observations continue to push the "net neutral" angle without addressing how "net neutral" creates the discharges we observe. Can anyone NOT mentally handcuffed by "net neutral" dogma with a physics degree please explain to these folks so they get it?

Hello, Jonesdave. Lets submit the conversation from the other section to a group of plasma physicists and see who they think the "shit for brains is"...once they stop laughing at your denial of 3 different definitions of what constitutes a current and all of the links provided to you at your request that you either didn't understand or chose to ignore, I am sure they will side with you....

Hello, Jonesdave. Lets submit the conversation from the other section to a group of plasma physicists and see who they think the "shit for brains is"...once they stop laughing at your denial of 3 different definitions of what constitutes a current and all of the links provided to you at your request that you either didn't understand or chose to ignore, I am sure they will side with you....

They will, because they are educated in the relevant science. You aren't. No go address something that you do understand. Whatever that might be.

How massive is the sun divided by how massive a coronal mass ejection is
The ratio will give the difference in percentage of the change in overall charge of the sun after the CME is ejected, is there a point that is being made here, does the sun light up with enormous electrifying charge after ejecting a 1x10+12kg or 2x10+18 to 1, if you could measure the difference the ratio is too large for any measurable difference in charge!

" since the material contained within is overall net neutral to the best of our knowledge. "

I've noticed people here who attempt to debate the electrical nature of these observations continue to push the "net neutral" angle without addressing how "net neutral" creates the discharges we observe. Can anyone NOT mentally handcuffed by "net neutral" dogma with a physics degree please explain to these folks so they get it?

Well it is nice of you to confirm you lack a proper science background.
Riddle me this: are clouds net neutral before a lightning strike? answer is yes. How does it work? charge separation. try getting a degree before you debate with these folks.

How would one measure "the overall charge of the Sun"? How is the "overall charge" of a random object measured in a lab?

@CD85:
you could try measuring the escape velocity of electrons and ions leaving the Sun. If a charge were building, you would see a shift in the escape velocities due to electrostatic repulsion or attraction. You could also use those dang math equations and compare what we actually do measure for escape velocity to that of the "perfect model"

"Riddle me this: are clouds net neutral before a lightning strike? answer is yes."

" How does it work? charge separation. try getting a degree before you debate with these folks."

So...you understand that a cloud is a neutral body, and that charge separation results in a lightening strike, and this is your rebuttal?

Lightning is a sudden electrostatic discharge that occurs typically during a thunderstorm. This discharge occurs between electrically charged regions of a cloud (called intra-cloud lightning or IC), between two clouds (CC lightning), or between a cloud and the ground (CG lightning). WIKI

See up there where it says "electrically charged regions", not "net neutral" regions? It appears that if you have a degree you paid someone else to get it for you. No wonder you guys hate the EU guys so much...they actually know a lot more than you about relevant physics.

See up there where it says "electrically charged regions", not "net neutral" regions? It appears that if you have a degree you paid someone else to get it for you. No wonder you guys hate the EU guys so much...they actually know a lot more than you about relevant physics.

^^^^And that just shows why EUists are treated as idiots! Not a plasma physicist or astrophysicist amongst them. Let me try to put it in language even an EUist might understand;
There can be currents WITHIN the solar wind. Due to a number of reasons. They will be of small spatial scale, and short duration. This has nothing whatever to do with the OVERALL solar wind being net neutral. If you really want to know about what happens in the solar atmosphere, I would suggest investing in a decent text book. Are there currents around in the corona? Shock horror! Yes there are. Is the Sun losing a net charge? No, it isn't, for bloody obvious reasons.

"Not a plasma physicist or astrophysicist amongst them. "

Well, you aren't a plasma physicist or astrophysicist either, or you may have attempted to educate yourself to be one but given the amount of time you spend here and the nature of your comments, you are definitely not employed as one. Hey JonesDave, what color is that zebra? "well I'd say it's quasi-gray"....

"Not a plasma physicist or astrophysicist amongst them. "

Well, you aren't a plasma physicist or astrophysicist either, or you may have attempted to educate yourself to be one but given the amount of time you spend here and the nature of your comments, you are definitely not employed as one. Hey JonesDave, what color is that zebra? "well I'd say it's quasi-gray"....

So grow a pair, and go post your beliefs on a physics forum. Why are you people so allergic to them? Trust me, I've seen these unqualified loons posting the same crap as you at various forums, where they very shortly get put in their place by people who are qualified. There is a reason that EU woo only exists in places like this. It simply doesn't stand up to a moments' scrutiny. Which is why no one takes it seriously.
You do not understand what net neutral means, and you do not know what quasi-neutral means.

I know what a current is....

@theredpill:
you point out from your Wiki the term "electrically charged regions" to prove your point and agree with both myself and jonesdave that there are regions within the larger system (i.e. the whole cloud) that are and can be electrically charged. Charge separation of course happens. You have any links showing that an entire cloud is of a single polarity with regards to charge build up? likely not. How does your intra-cloud lightning work in a single cloud if there is not opposite charges elsewhere in the cloud? Those opposite charges create what is know as a "net-neutral body". see how this works?

I know what a current is....

No, you quite obviously don't. What is the net current of; p e p e p e? Where p = proton, e = electron, and the whole is moving in the same direction at the same velocity? If you prefer; 1 + -1 + 1 + -1 + 1 + -1? Looks like zero to me. Any anybody else with half a brain. However, like I say, go post your woo elsewhere, and see what replies you get. I would suggest Cosmoquest's Q & A section. This guy is a mod., and is a practicing plasma astrophysicist. Something, as I have mentioned previously, that you do not have within EU;

https://forum.cos...t=plasma

https://www.resea..._Volwerk

I'm sure he won't mind me bigging him up, although he is highly unlikely to visit this sh*tfest of pseudoscience.

The EU circuit analysis doesn't make sense. That's the problem. They assume per Don Scott our Sun is traveling across huge birkeland currents which are spread out across the galaxy. And that these birkeland currents power the Sun. Let's see the circuit analysis.

@Old_C_Code.

The EU circuit analysis doesn't make sense. That's the problem. They assume per Don Scott our Sun is traveling across huge birkeland currents which are spread out across the galaxy. And that these birkeland currents power the Sun. Let's see the circuit analysis.

To be fair, mainstream has discovered cosmic-scale magnetic fields; and the charge-flows which created them, and in turn are being redirected/modified by them. So we can now assume that there IS a larger system, and that our solar system/inter-stellar systems are but SUB-systems of larger cosmic system. So arbitrarily 'constraining' the scales/extents under study will necessarily cause arguments when 'boundary conditions' for 'local parameters' are not 'factored into' the respective 'sides' claims/arguments. Best to identify what can be agreed on and THEN expand the treatment/arguments to encompass what was previously arbitrarily excluded by BOTH 'sides'.

Gravity, E-M, cause 'currents'. :)

The EU circuit analysis doesn't make sense. That's the problem. They assume per Don Scott our Sun is traveling across huge birkeland currents which are spread out across the galaxy. And that these birkeland currents power the Sun. Let's see the circuit analysis.

Something like this;
https://www.resea...85991555
And those Birkeland currents look something like this;
http://plasmauniv...nts.html

Where p = proton, e = electron, and the whole is moving in the same direction at the same velocity?

Doesn't exist, this is purely a fanciful faerie tale of jonesdumb. The solar wind is variable, there is the fast and slow solar wind, and there are at least three different different speeds of electrons alone. The heliospheric current sheet has an inflow component which is coincidentally (or not) the location of the slow solar wind. The solar circuit looks something like this;
http://www.holosc...n-again/

These plasma processes are scalable, the stellar pinch will have a resemblance of the galactic pinch.
Stellar pinch;
https://astronomy...ynebula/
Galactic pinch;
https://www.cfa.h.../2012-16

There can be currents WITHIN the solar wind. Due to a number of reasons. They will be of small spatial scale, and short duration.

This is not what is shown by observations, according to observations the solar wind is composed of a spaghetti like flux tube (Birkeland currents) morphology.

Oops, forgot to link a paper on the flux tube structure of the SW.

https://arxiv.org...402.0329

There can be currents WITHIN the solar wind. Due to a number of reasons. They will be of small spatial scale, and short duration.

This is not what is shown by observations, according to observations the solar wind is composed of a spaghetti like flux tube (Birkeland currents) morphology.

The solar wind has no net current. Obviously. Your lack of knowledge of all things plasma physics related is retarding your understanding.

Where p = proton, e = electron, and the whole is moving in the same direction at the same velocity?

Doesn't exist, this is purely a fanciful faerie tale of jonesdumb. The solar wind is variable, there is the fast and slow solar wind, and there are at least three different different speeds of electrons alone. The heliospheric current sheet has an inflow component which is coincidentally (or not) the location of the slow solar wind. The solar circuit looks something like this;
http://www.holosc...n-again/

Sorry, linking to crank websites is pointless. Point me a plasma physicist who says the solar wind is a net current.

Oops, forgot to link a paper on the flux tube structure of the SW.

https://arxiv.org...402.0329

Nope. Says nothing about them being currents, let alone Birkeland currents.

These plasma processes are scalable, the stellar pinch will have a resemblance of the galactic pinch.
Stellar pinch;
https://astronomy...ynebula/

No idea why you have linked to those stories. Absolutely nothing to do with pinches, and nobody in their right mind would suggest that they are.

Nope. Says nothing about them being currents, let alone Birkeland currents.

That just shows your utter ignorance of flux tubes (field-aligned currents) and the physics of how they are created. It also reveals your ignorance of the fact that all field-aligned currents are also known as Birkeland currents.

No idea why you have linked to those stories. Absolutely nothing to do with pinches, and nobody in their right mind would suggest that they are.

You have already displayed your utter ignorance of plasma physics, of course you can't understand it. Clearly most of the matter in the image is plasma, and it is being pinched by the magnetic fields.

No idea why you have linked to those stories. Absolutely nothing to do with pinches, and nobody in their right mind would suggest that they are.

You have already displayed your utter ignorance of plasma physics, of course you can't understand it. Clearly most of the matter in the image is plasma, and it is being pinched by the magnetic fields.

Nope. And nobody has ever suggested such idiocy. If they have, then, by definition, they are an idiot.

You have already displayed your utter ignorance of plasma physics, of course you can't understand it. Clearly most of the matter in the image is plasma, and it is being pinched by the magnetic fields.

Evidence? Other than of the 'looks like a bunny' type? Thought not.

I'm sure he won't mind me bigging him up, although he is highly unlikely to visit this sh*tfest of pseudoscience.

Maybe the plasma ignoramus should grow a pair and "educate" us with his pseudoscientific claptrap.

I'm sure he won't mind me bigging him up, although he is highly unlikely to visit this sh*tfest of pseudoscience.

Maybe the plasma ignoramus should grow a pair and "educate" us with his pseudoscientific claptrap.

They do. Hence why I linked to his tutorial on Cosmoquest. Thought it might come in handy for somebody who is obviously uneducated in the subject area. In other words, anybody promoting EU woo. Plenty of papers in the scientific literature.

Sorry, linking to crank websites is pointless.

Yet, you do it continuously with your links to plasma ignoramus claptrap. It also an apropos response to me pointing out your belief in faerie tales. Clearly the SW is nothing like you keep claiming.

Hence why I linked to his tutorial on Cosmoquest.

It's amusing you are so proud to link to pseudoscientific claptrap.

Sorry, linking to crank websites is pointless.

Yet, you do it continuously with your links to plasma ignoramus claptrap. It also an apropos response to me pointing out your belief in faerie tales. Clearly the SW is nothing like you keep claiming.

Yes it is. And you are clueless on the subject, as are all EUists, due to being unqualified in the requisite subjects. I've told you before - if you think there is any validity to your nonsense, then go post it on a physics forum, where people who are qualified in the subject area can point out where you are going wrong. You don't have any conviction in your claims, otherwise that is what you would do. The fact that you won't, tells us everything we need to know.

Hence why I linked to his tutorial on Cosmoquest.

It's amusing you are so proud to link to pseudoscientific claptrap.

Nope. A qualified plasma astrophysicist. What are you qualified in, woo boy? Please point me to the plasma physicists in the EU. There are none. Hence why they believe the crap that they do.

jonesdave says "The solar wind has no net current. Obviously. Your lack of knowledge of all things plasma physics related is retarding your understanding."
What about the auroras light?

jonesdave you're a bright guy, but I don't know why you fight about current so much, it doesn't make the EU "galaxy powers the Sun" idea valid in any way.

jonesdave says "The solar wind has no net current. Obviously. Your lack of knowledge of all things plasma physics related is retarding your understanding."
What about the auroras light?

jonesdave you're a bright guy, but I don't know why you fight about current so much, it doesn't make the EU "galaxy powers the Sun" idea valid in any way.

Try to learn a little about the subject, before commenting upon it. The aurorae are an induced current within the Earth's magnetosphere. They have nothing whatsoever to do with the solar wind being a net current. If it were, the Sun would charge up oppositely. Yes?

There's no reason to question that a huge ball of fusion wouldn't create it's own electrical effects. So electricity and magnetism should be no surprise in/at/outside the Sun, for either theory.

The big question still is: why does the temperature go from 5000K on the surface to over 2 million K in the corona above the surface? Maybe the Parker probe will answer some questions.

The aurora is created by the solar wind, there is current in the aurora. A debate of whether the charge is bound or not or net neutral as it travels it silly. Stop rambling on and on, you're smarter than that.

There's no reason to question that a huge ball of fusion wouldn't create it's own electrical effects. So electricity and magnetism should be no surprise in/at/outside the Sun, for either theory.

Yes, if you study helioastronomy, you will find that there are all sorts of interesting things going on. However, the solar wind IS NOT a net current. Like I said to cantthink - if you think otherwise, go pose your question on a physics forum, and link us to the thread here.

The aurora is created by the solar wind, there is current in the aurora. A debate of whether the charge is bound or not or net neutral as it travels it silly. Stop rambling on and on, you're smarter than that.

Sorry, but that is just ignorant nonsense. The charge separation leading to the currents happens within, and because of, the Earth's magnetosphere. Why don't you go study the subject, before making such ignorant assertions.

The Earth is charging up, yes. Do'h!!!

The Sun has electricity spewing out of it, you are the ignoramus jones, and as arrogant as they get. As if you have a very sad career, smart and no hands on product development, too bad Dude, you've become a madman, literally.

The Earth is charging up, yes. Do'h!!!

Mate, go get an education, yes?

Start here:

Basics of the Solar Wind
Meyer-Vernet, N.
https://www.resea...lar_Wind

From section 5.4;

Since electrons and protons have opposite charges, electric quasi-neutrality requires them to have roughly the same number density n. Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed.

The Sun has electricity spewing out of it, you are the ignoramus jones, and as arrogant as they get. As if you have a very sad career, smart and no hands on product development, too bad Dude, you've become a madman, literally.

And you are an uneducated idiot. Obviously. 'The Sun has electricity spewing out of it'!!!!!! Lol. Which textbook did you get that from? Thunderdolts? Haha.

I've told you before - if you think there is any validity to your nonsense, then go post it on a physics forum,

I have done so, used links to scientific papers, direct measurements, and numerous other scientific research projects which agree with alternative viewpoints. Only to be banned for proposing something other than the religiously defended dark sciences. Physicsforums for one is a joke, little more than a religious forum used to protect the plasma ignoramuses from being shown how dreadfully ignorant they are.

Since electrons and protons have opposite charges, electric quasi-neutrality requires them to have roughly the same number density n. Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed.

This is the problem with basing your beliefs entirely on maths equations, they have no relation to reality. It has been shown repeatedly that your claimed morphology of the solar wind is bollocks. Give up on your fanciful faerie tales jonesdumb, it doesn't exist.

It has been shown repeatedly that your claimed morphology of the solar wind is bollocks. Give up on your fanciful faerie tales jonesdumb, it doesn't exist.

Nothing of the sort has been shown, other than your inability to understand plasma physics. Along with the rest of the loons who are thick enough to believe Earth orbited Saturn! You think anybody needs lessons from cretins like that? Like I keep saying, go make your assertions on a physics forum, or show us where any of the EU idiots have challenged the fact that the solar wind is not net neutral. They've had plenty of time. Where is it?

study says... " directly measure the solar wind, and have found it to be ionized, but electrically neutral. In other words, the same number of positive and negative particles are emitted "
It's still IONIZED, it will react with anything, like the Earth's magnetosphere, as it does.
As if somewhere there's a school that teaches jones BS, call it Mechanical Astrophysics.

This is the problem with basing your beliefs entirely on maths equations, they have no relation to reality.

Nope, they are based on models, which are further refined as more data from in-situ observation becomes available, Such as from ACE, WIND, Cluster, Themis, etc, etc. Whereas your beliefs are just that - faith based nonsense based on no evidence whatsoever, and a total inability to understand the science.

It's still IONIZED, it will react with anything, like the Earth's magnetosphere, as it does.

Of course it's ionised, you idiot! Do you know what electrically neutral means? It means you've just killed your own argument! And of course it will react with a magnetosphere. I told you that above. That is how the aurorae are formed.
Look, you obviously have little to no knowledge in this area, so why are you commenting on it, instead of trying to increase your knowledge by learning the subject?

I've told you before - if you think there is any validity to your nonsense, then go post it on a physics forum,

I have done so, used links to scientific papers, direct measurements, and numerous other scientific research projects which agree with alternative viewpoints. Only to be banned for proposing something other than the religiously defended dark sciences. Physicsforums for one is a joke, little more than a religious forum used to protect the plasma ignoramuses from being shown how dreadfully ignorant they are.

So they told you you were talking crap? No surprise there then, given your performances here. Go play on the mythology website thunderdolts; it is about at your level. Some links to said threads on the alleged forums would be interesting, otherwise I doubt it happened.

I have done so, used links to scientific papers, direct measurements, and numerous other scientific research projects which agree with alternative viewpoints.

I very much doubt that. Far more likely, that as on here, you simply fail to understand the papers you reference.

Talbott's ideas are nonsense, the only orbit which can explain his ideas is basically impossible.
He polluted Thornhill, he is pushing the insane Saturn polar-stationary Earth orbit idea too. This orbit is like two missiles flying through space, the bigger one Saturn leading the smaller one Earth. Both going the same velocity... LOL, crazy stuff.

He polluted Thornhill,.....

Thornhill is an idiot in his own right. He didn't need polluting, he was already a Velikoskian. By definition, that renders him scientifically illiterate.

So it'a not ionized? Ionized means free charge, regardless of the numbers. You are the idiot jones, okay, you moron, since an idiot (IQ 0-24) can't read or write or log online. Morons abound (IQ 50-80). For the record, Imbecile (IQ 25-49).

So it'a not ionized? Ionized means free charge, regardless of the numbers. You are the idiot jones, okay, you moron, since an idiot (IQ 0-24) can't read or write or log online. Morons abound (IQ 50-80). For the record, Imbecile (IQ 25-49).

You obviously do not have a clue what you are talking about. Read the book I linked to. The solar wind is not a net current. You will not find a single plasma/ astrophysicist that will disagree with me. Your ignorance of the subject is staggering. The fact that you seem to think you are qualified to comment on that subject, and that you have overthrown a very basic tenet of plasma physics, suggests that Messrs. Dunning and Kruger would be interested in you.

Electric currents are measured in amperes, strangely enough the heliospheric current sheet has said value;

"The electric current in the heliospheric current sheet has a radial component (directed inward) as well as an azimuthal component, the radial circuit being closed by outward currents aligned with the Sun's magnetic field in the solar polar regions. The radial current in the circuit is on the order of 3×10^9 amperes.[5] As a comparison with other astrophysical electric currents, the Birkeland currents that supply the Earth's aurora are about a thousand times weaker at a million amperes. The maximum current density in the sheet is on the order of 10−10 A/m² (10−4 A/km²)."

The current sheet will extend to the limits of the solar heliosphere, to say there is no current in the solar wind defies even mainstream ignorance.

God you arrogant buffoon, Ionized means free charge, I guess you have to be an EE or have a brain to get it.

Why the f*** would they say IONIZED? You s***head.

The current sheet will extend to the limits of the solar heliosphere, to say there is no current in the solar wind defies even mainstream ignorance.

The HSC is not a current due to the solar wind. It is caused by the oppositely directed magnetic fields in the Sun's N and S hemispheres. As I've said, the solar wind is not a net current. Only an idiot would suggest otherwise.

And you are an uneducated idiot. Obviously. 'The Sun has electricity spewing out of it'!!!!!! Lol. Which textbook did you get that from?

But somehow there is an induced electric current (Birkeland currents) at Earth without the presence of electricity... Obviously jonesdumb relies on magic for his dark science to explain electricity out of nothing. There is no doubt he resides in the 0-24 range on the IQ scale.

God you arrogant buffoon, Ionized means free charge, I guess you have to be an EE or have a brain to get it.

Why the f*** would they say IONIZED? You s***head.

God, you're thick. Read the book, dumbo. What is the net charge leaving the Sun? Hmmm? Zero, you loon, otherwise the ****ing Sun would charge up. Idiot. Read the passage I quoted from the paper upthread. Jesus, talk about thick!

Since electrons and protons have opposite charges, electric quasi-neutrality requires them to have roughly the same number density n. Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed.

Which part of that is beyond you?

And you are an uneducated idiot. Obviously. 'The Sun has electricity spewing out of it'!!!!!! Lol. Which textbook did you get that from?

But somehow there is an induced electric current (Birkeland currents) at Earth without the presence of electricity... Obviously jonesdumb relies on magic for his dark science to explain electricity out of nothing. There is no doubt he resides in the 0-24 range on the IQ scale.

Hey, thicko, want me to link that Alfven paper again? Remember? Something about Ni - Ne = 0?
It's an induced current, idiot. Don't tell me that you don't even understand how the aurorae are formed?

The HSC is not a current due to the solar wind.

Cart in front of the horse as usual, magnetic fields are a result electric currents. The magnetic fields will then confine the currents. Backwards as usual jonesdumb.

The HSC is not a current due to the solar wind.

Cart in front of the horse as usual, magnetic fields are a result electric currents. The magnetic fields will then confine the currents. Backwards as usual jonesdumb.

Wrong. There is no net current in the solar wind. The solar magnetic fields are due to an Alpha-Omega dynamo.

Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed.

First, this assumes the Sun is isolated and not part of a circuit. Shown to be wrong yet you remain willfully ignorant of this fact.
Second, the claims of the "same radial bulk speed" is complete bollocks as shown by direct measurements. Yet you still remain willfully ignorant.

By the way jones... So light isn't electric? It's E&M at a visible wavelength. The Sun blasts out plenty of E&M constantly!!! you dope, err, you genius who's gone mad over anything electric.

By the way jones... So light isn't electric? It's E&M at a visible wavelength. The Sun blasts out plenty of E&M constantly!!! you dope, err, you genius who's gone mad over anything electric.

What are you prattling on about? The solar wind is not a net current. End of story. If you think otherwise, write it up.

The solar magnetic fields are due to an Alpha-Omega dynamo.

Hypothesized, by plasma ignoramuses with zero observational evidence.

Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed.

First, this assumes the Sun is isolated and not part of a circuit. Shown to be wrong yet you remain willfully ignorant of this fact.
Second, the claims of the "same radial bulk speed" is complete bollocks as shown by direct measurements. Yet you still remain willfully ignorant.

God you're stupid. Why don't you write up your nonsense, and calculate the net current of the solar wind, hmmmm? Sounds like Nobel Prize territory to me.

No 'net current' now, lol, oh okay, like an op-amp input. But ionized means it's ready to react with anything it touches, else why didn't it get bound shortly after being expelled? It wouldn't be ionized.

The solar magnetic fields are due to an Alpha-Omega dynamo.

Hypothesized, by plasma ignoramuses with zero observational evidence.

Sorry? And who are the plasma geniuses that disagree? They can't be EU idiots, because you have no plasma physicists, do you?

No 'net current' now, lol, oh okay, like an op-amp input. But ionized means it's ready to react with anything it touches, else why didn't it get bound shortly after being expelled? It wouldn't be ionized.

Jesus. My point has always been that the solar wind is not a NET current. I have already said that currents can be formed WITHIN the solar wind, or due to its interactions with various bodies. This is the part that the EU idiots disagree with. They think the whole solar wind is a current. Which is obviously impossible. It has to be NET neutral.

It's ionized, you refuse to acknowledge this fact jones. I'm not EU, I listened to them, and concluded they were full of BS. But I know ionized is free charge and conductive. A plasma can be conductive at 1% ionization. It doesn't say current flow, where would the current flow to?

They think the whole solar wind is a current. Which is obviously impossible. It has to be NET neutral.

It's not impossible, just beyond your level of understanding. The SW terminates near the heliopause, where it is likely redirected to the heliospheric current circuit, recombines with galactic electrons (discovered by Voyager) which may create the recently detected hydrogen wall at the edge of the heliosphere or the ENA's that form a ring around the solar system as discovered by IBEX.
Regardless, the solar wind are charged particles, and they are moving through a magnetic field which by definition is an electric current. It is a simple irrefutable fact, quasi-neutral or not.

It's ionized, you refuse to acknowledge this fact jones. I'm not EU, I listened to them, and concluded they were full of BS. But I know ionized is free charge and conductive. A plasma can be conductive at 1% ionization. It doesn't say current flow, where would the current flow to?

You are talking utter crap. Of course it is ionised. I said that myself. There are essentially equal numbers of ions and electrons in the wind. That is why it is electrically neutral overall. I am not a plasma physicist, but any idiot that knows anything about astrophysics know that the solar wind is bloody ionised. It was when I was reading papers about Comet Halley 30 odd years ago, and it still is. What the hell is your problem? I already said; go learn the subject, and stop spouting off about stuff you obviously have no knowledge of.

They think the whole solar wind is a current. Which is obviously impossible. It has to be NET neutral.

It's not impossible, just beyond your level of understanding. The SW terminates near the heliopause, where it is likely redirected to the heliospheric current circuit, recombines with galactic electrons (discovered by Voyager) which may create the recently detected hydrogen wall at the edge of the heliosphere or the ENA's that form a ring around the solar system as discovered by IBEX.
Regardless, the solar wind are charged particles, and they are moving through a magnetic field which by definition is an electric current. It is a simple irrefutable fact, quasi-neutral or not.

Wrong. The solar wind is carrying the magnetic field. And the heliospheric current sheet is flowing inward at the equator, and exiting through the poles. No net current is added to the Sun. Guess what would happen if that happened?

... the Sun has it's magnetic field extending to the heliopause. I suppose any planet with a magnetic field does the same. This is common sense EE, I see why the Mechanical Astrophysicist doesn't get t.

Jones: Builds up and is shot back out in a CME? hehe, hey why not? That's how little they actually know about the Sun.

The most classic question about the Sun in history, the best can't answer this:

Why is the surface of the Sun only 5000 degrees K, and the corona above the surface over 2 million degrees K?

... the Sun has it's magnetic field extending to the heliopause. I suppose any planet with a magnetic field does the same. This is common sense EE, I see why the Mechanical Astrophysicist doesn't get t.

Because EEs are generally not trained in the relevant plasma physics, and are unaware of the processes involved.

Why is the surface of the Sun only 5000 degrees K, and the corona above the surface over 2 million degrees K?

There are numerous possible mechanisms. including Alfven waves and nanoflares The problem is deciding which one, or combination thereof, is responsible. Google Scholar is your friend.

.....the Sun has it's magnetic field extending to the heliopause. I suppose any planet with a magnetic field does the same.

The Sun's magnetic field, the IMF, is carried out to the heliopause by the solar wind. The interaction of planetary magnetic fields woth the IMF is interesting, but why would they extend to the heliopause? There is plenty of literature on the solar wind/ IMF interaction with magnetospheres, You might want to gen up on it.

Jones: Builds up and is shot back out in a CME? hehe, hey why not? That's how little they actually know about the Sun.

Sorry, you are going to have to translate that into scientific language. Not registering, I'm afraid.

Because ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING says the Sun's magnetic field extends to the heliopause.
You are not as smart as I thought.

Jones on why the corona is much much hotter than the surface... "There are numerous possible mechanisms. including Alfven waves and nanoflares The problem is deciding which one"

That is such utter horses***, they have no idea, their best one sucks, the 30,000 year journey from the center BS.

Because ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING says the Sun's magnetic field extends to the heliopause.
You are not as smart as I thought.

Errrm, who gives a toss what EEs think? It has been known for some considerable time that the Sun's magnetic field extends to the heliopause. It is bloody obvious to anyone that understands astrophysics. Where the hell else would it go? You are arguing against things that you think are not known in astrophysics, but have been known for a very long time. Not only should you gen up on plasma physics/ astrophysics, you should maybe look at the history of it. You are doing very well at making yourself look utterly stupid. Do not go down cantthink's route.

That is such utter horses***, they have no idea, their best one sucks, the 30,000 year journey from the center BS.

WTF are you talking about? What 30 000 year journey are you on about? Sounds to me like, despite your protests, that you may have drank too deeply of the EU Kool-Aid. Ever read the crap by Don Scott? That ought to show you how EEs really should leave astrophysics to those that understand it. Bloody clueless, that bloke.

The advantage EE's have over plasma ignoramuses (i.e. astrophysicists) is they understand circuits, plasma ignoramuses clearly do not. Natural plasmas operate in circuits, just like they do in the lab. Astrophysicists do not have "special" knowledge, they have erroneous knowledge. They believe in all types of pseudoscience which they can get away with because many of their closely held religious beliefs are not falsifiable. They pontificate fanciful faerie tales of matter that only exists in maths equations while they are continuously surprised by each new piece of data or discovery. It would be pathetic if it weren't so expensive.

The advantage EE's have over plasma ignoramuses (i.e. astrophysicists) is they understand circuits, plasma ignoramuses clearly do not. Natural plasmas operate in circuits, just like they do in the lab. Astrophysicists do not have "special" knowledge, they have erroneous knowledge. They believe in all types of pseudoscience which they can get away with because many of their closely held religious beliefs are not falsifiable. They pontificate fanciful faerie tales of matter that only exists in maths equations while they are continuously surprised by each new piece of data or discovery. It would be pathetic if it weren't so expensive.

And where have these geniuses written their crap? Not falsifiable? What about the ****wit Juergens? Or Scott? How much scientific sense do you think that unevidenced, impossible crap makes? Links, please, to these geniuses. Lol.

@CD85:
you could try measuring the escape velocity of electrons and ions leaving the Sun. If a charge were building, you would see a shift in the escape velocities due to electrostatic repulsion or attraction.

Yep, not gonna work. This is an electrodynamic system, electrostatics alone does not resolve the "overall charge" of the Sun.

@CD85:
you could try measuring the escape velocity of electrons and ions leaving the Sun. If a charge were building, you would see a shift in the escape velocities due to electrostatic repulsion or attraction.

Yep, not gonna work. This is an electrodynamic system, electrostatics alone does not resolve the "overall charge" of the Sun.

Lol. Word salad. Translation; 'none of us can do the maths.' Straight out of the idiot Thornhill's book of excuses not to quantify anything. Faith is all you need. Scientific knowledge is optional, and discouraged. Wasters.

The advantage EE's have over plasma ignoramuses (i.e. astrophysicists) is they understand circuits, plasma ignoramuses clearly do not.

More lies. Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

The advantage EE's have over plasma ignoramuses (i.e. astrophysicists) is they understand circuits, plasma ignoramuses clearly do not.

More lies. Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

In essence, circuit theory is a much bigger approximation of astrophysical plasmas than the most modern PIC models. It is a bit outdated. Just like the EU loons.

Yep, not gonna work. This is an electrodynamic system, electrostatics alone does not resolve the "overall charge" of the Sun.

Sounds like BS to me. Perhaps we could have a link? You know, what is the charge on the Sun? What sign is it? How does the solar wind exist under such conditions? Quantify it. If it already has been, then link to it. Otherwise, stop making crap up.

Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

Let's see it.

In essence, circuit theory is a much bigger approximation of astrophysical plasmas than the most modern PIC models.

You really are ignorant of the situation. Alfvén wrote in 'Double Layers and Circuits in Astrophysics';
"A study of how a number of the most used textbooks in astrophysics treat important concepts like double layers, critical velocity, pinch effects and circuits is made. It is found that students using these textbooks remain essentially ignorant of even the existence of these, in spite of the fact that some of them have been well known for half a century (e.g., double layers, Langmuir, 1929: pinch effect, Bennet, 1934). The conclusion is that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of those astrophysicist who have got their main knowledge from these textbooks...."

TBC...

Cont...

"...Earth bound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory. It should be remembered that at least by volume the universe consists to more than 99% of plasma, and that electromagnetic forces are 10^39 time stronger than gravitation."

It's basic EE, any magnetic field will extend out into the noise margin. You are a Mechanical Astrophysicist Jones.

The abstract of that paper began;
"As the rate of energy release in a double layer with voltage DeltaV is P corresponding to IDeltaV, a double layer must be treated part of a circuit which delivers the current I. As neither double layer nor circuit can be derived from magnetofluid models (MHD) of a plasma, such models are useless for treating energy transfer by means of double layers. They must be replaced by particle models and circuit theory."

You see that jonesdumb, PIC in combination with circuit theory. Clearly a field for EE's and not plasma ignoramuses.

I know this is too complex for you jonesdumb, but the solar wind is a bipolar current. The ions are accelerated by the Sun's electric field. Dr. Scott describes it here;
http://electric-c...Wind.pdf

Your objections to the theory are due to your ignorance of the relevant science.

Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

Let's see it.

In essence, circuit theory is a much bigger approximation of astrophysical plasmas than the most modern PIC models.

You really are ignorant of the situation. Alfvén wrote in 'Double Layers and Circuits in Astrophysics';
"A study of how a number of the most used textbooks in astrophysics treat important concepts like double layers, critical velocity, pinch effects and circuits is made. It is found that students using these textbooks remain essentially ignorant of even the existence of these, in spite of the fact that some of them have been well known for half a century (e.g., double layers, Langmuir, 1929: pinch effect, Bennet, 1934). The conclusion is that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of those astrophysicist who have got their main knowledge from these textbooks...."

TBC...

And when was that written?

I know this is too complex for you jonesdumb, but the solar wind is a bipolar current. The ions are accelerated by the Sun's electric field. Dr. Scott describes it here;
http://electric-c...Wind.pdf

Your objections to the theory are due to your ignorance of the relevant science.

No, it isn't. And Scott is a moron. Ask any plasma physicist, which Scott most certainly isn't. He has described the ions being accelerated by an electric field! Where are the electrons going? Read it carefully, and then compare to observation. Like I said, the idiot is clueless.

The abstract of that paper began;
"As the rate of energy release in a double layer with voltage DeltaV is P corresponding to IDeltaV, a double layer must be treated part of a circuit which delivers the current I. As neither double layer nor circuit can be derived from magnetofluid models (MHD) of a plasma, such models are useless for treating energy transfer by means of double layers. They must be replaced by particle models and circuit theory."

You see that jonesdumb, PIC in combination with circuit theory. Clearly a field for EE's and not plasma ignoramuses.

Really? And where is this study? In the last decade or so? Did Alfven have no students? Why are they not doing what he advised many decades ago? Because we know a lot more now than we did when Alfven was musing about such things. EEs simply aren't qualified in the relevant areas.

It's basic EE, any magnetic field will extend out into the noise margin. You are a Mechanical Astrophysicist Jones.

Show me the literature. Otherwise, you are making sh*t up.

Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

Let's see it.

Don't conveniently forget this challenge jonesdumb.

Show me the literature. Otherwise, you are making sh*t up.

A perfect example of willful ignorance and an attempt to avoid a discussion. Just because it is not in the "scientific literature" doesn't mean something is wrong or invalid. Take this article that discusses 'STEVE';
https://phys.org/...ora.html
Science and scientists are ignorant of a great many things, jonesdumb prefers to be willfully ignorant and intolerant of anything that scientists refuse to believe.

Want me to find a post by a plasma astrophysicist who discusses the limitations of circuit theory?

Let's see it.

Don't conveniently forget this challenge jonesdumb.

Here you go thicko;
http://www.intern...unt=3727

From a plasma physicist who knew Alfven from when he was at the same institution in Stockholm, and wrote his PhD on double layers.

He has described the ions being accelerated by an electric field! Where are the electrons going?

jonesdumb is incapable of rational thought, he cannot grasp that electromagnetism is more complex than him remedial knowledge. It is a bipolar current, the ions are accelerated by the electric field, some of the electrons are driven in the same direction *but not accelerated by the electric field*. Your erroneous belief that electron and ions cannot flow in the same direction in an electric field only reveals your willful ignorance of EM theory. Your ignorance in no way determines something to be impossible, only that you are ignorant.

Show me the literature. Otherwise, you are making sh*t up.

A perfect example of willful ignorance and an attempt to avoid a discussion. Just because it is not in the "scientific literature" doesn't mean something is wrong or invalid. Take this article that discusses 'STEVE';
https://phys.org/...ora.html
Science and scientists are ignorant of a great many things, jonesdumb prefers to be willfully ignorant and intolerant of anything that scientists refuse to believe.

So show us where the Earth's magnetic field has been observed to extend to. Or Jupiter's. If you can't do that, you are just making sh*t up. As usual.

He has described the ions being accelerated by an electric field! Where are the electrons going?

jonesdumb is incapable of rational thought, he cannot grasp that electromagnetism is more complex than him remedial knowledge. It is a bipolar current, the ions are accelerated by the electric field, some of the electrons are driven in the same direction *but not accelerated by the electric field*. Your erroneous belief that electron and ions cannot flow in the same direction in an electric field only reveals your willful ignorance of EM theory. Your ignorance in no way determines something to be impossible, only that you are ignorant.

Read it again dumbo. The cretin tells us precisely what happens to the electrons. They are left behind. His fast solar wind comprises ions only. Which is ****ing stupid, because it is observed to be ions and electrons, moving together. I'll quote the relevant passages if you are too dishonest to do it yourself.

Here you go thicko;
http://www.intern...unt=3727

From a plasma physicist who knew Alfven from when he was at the same institution in Stockholm, and wrote his PhD on double layers.

Show me in the literature, not some opinion piece in a blog or discussion thread. If the plasma ignoramus is so sure of himself I sure he "wrote it up".

So show us where the Earth's magnetic field has been observed to extend to. Or Jupiter's.

You are clearly a moron jonesdumb, OCC never claimed as much. He was referring to the Sun's magnetic field extending to the noise margin. You are using one of your typical tactics by confusing the discussion to make yourself look right, you are pathetic.

The cretin tells us precisely what happens to the electrons. They are left behind.

It's no wonder you are incapable of understanding anything as you clearly don't understand the written word. He doesn't say that at all, he states the electrons are not accelerated by the E-field. You need to reread it.

So show us where the Earth's magnetic field has been observed to extend to. Or Jupiter's.

You are clearly a moron jonesdumb, OCC never claimed as much. He was referring to the Sun's magnetic field extending to the noise margin. You are using one of your typical tactics by confusing the discussion to make yourself look right, you are pathetic.

And I have already pointed out that it has long been known that the IMF is carried as far as the heliopause. We don't need a couple of amateurs pointing out something that we already knew, and claiming that it took EEs to point it out! Read the literature.

And I have already pointed out that it has long been known that the IMF is carried as far as the heliopause. We don't need a couple of amateurs pointing out something that we already knew,

That's quite amusing considering Velikovsky predicted there would be an IMF and was ridiculed for it. Seems as if an amateur pointed out to the "professionals" and their responses are similar to the ridicule you choose to dish out. How pathetic it must be the plasma ignoramuses need to be shown up by a Mythologist. LOL!

The cretin tells us precisely what happens to the electrons. They are left behind.

It's no wonder you are incapable of understanding anything as you clearly don't understand the written word. He doesn't say that at all, he states the electrons are not accelerated by the E-field. You need to reread it.

Well, dummy, that is not what is observed, is it? Jesus.

Electrons that were associated with these ions drift downward, back out of the lower corona, and serve to maintain the DL as per the Langmuir requirement

As per the aforementioned idiot, Scott. So, where are the electrons going?

As per the aforementioned idiot, Scott. So, where are the electrons going?

The first sentence of the paper;
"Charged particles (both electrons and positive ions) stream from the Sun in what has become known as the solar 'wind'."

Again, you clearly cannot understand the written word!

And I have already pointed out that it has long been known that the IMF is carried as far as the heliopause. We don't need a couple of amateurs pointing out something that we already knew,

That's quite amusing considering Velikovsky predicted there would be an IMF and was ridiculed for it. Seems as if an amateur pointed out to the "professionals" and their responses are similar to the ridicule you choose to dish out. How pathetic it must be the plasma ignoramuses need to be shown up by a Mythologist. LOL!

Really? And where and when did he do this?

As per the aforementioned idiot, Scott. So, where are the electrons going?

The first sentence of the paper;
"Charged particles (both electrons and positive ions) stream from the Sun in what has become known as the solar 'wind'."

Again, you clearly cannot understand the written word!

Yes, I can thicko. He then goes on to propose his idiotic mechanism for the fast solar wind. And that leads to the stupid quote I highlighted above. Nowhere does he explain why the electrons are also accelerated. He tells us that they are drifting downward. This is why this crap has never seen the light of day in the scientific literature. It would be laughed at.

Really? And where and when did he do this?

It was an explicit requirement of his 'Worlds in Collision' proposal, and later confirmed;

https://www.googl...bH9SHiB0

Really? And where and when did he do this?

It was an explicit requirement of his 'Worlds in Collision' proposal, and later confirmed;

https://www.googl...bH9SHiB0

Given that Velikovsky was a scientifically illiterate moron, I shall not be reading that in any depth. If, according to that woo, the IMF was not even predicted by scientists prior to 1960, then it is wrong. Alfven already had used it in his description of comet tails in (iirc) 1957. So, their information is wrong, and no doubt biased. Hardly surprising for Velikovskian loons.

He then goes on to propose his idiotic mechanism for the fast solar wind.

Yep, that is what the paper is about. The electric field mechanism of acceleration of the ions. The electrons are not subject to this mechanism, as such they are not discussed in the paper which is explicitly about this mechanism.
Now, we now opposites attract. The electrons are not subject to the same potential gradient as the ions, it is in fact the opposite. The "potential hill" obstructing the ion escape then providing the acceleration is actually a "potential pool" for electrons. But that "pool" will fill up and excess charges can escape and due to ion/electron attraction the electrons are swept up in the SW. It's not all that complex, but clearly far beyond jonesdumb's ability to comprehend.

Really? And where and when did he do this?

It was an explicit requirement of his 'Worlds in Collision' proposal, and later confirmed;

https://www.googl...bH9SHiB0

You may also want to explain to the boys and girls, how the existence of the IMF has anything at all to do with Venus being ejected from Jupiter, and doing handbrake turns around the solar system ~3000 years ago.

Yep, that is what the paper is about. The electric field mechanism of acceleration of the ions. The electrons are not subject to this mechanism, as such they are not discussed in the paper which is explicitly about this mechanism.
Now, we now opposites attract. The electrons are not subject to the same potential gradient as the ions, it is in fact the opposite. The "potential hill" obstructing the ion escape then providing the acceleration is actually a "potential pool" for electrons. But that "pool" will fill up and excess charges can escape and due to ion/electron attraction the electrons are swept up in the SW. It's not all that complex, but clearly far beyond jonesdumb's ability to comprehend.

Nope. He specifically tells us what happens to the electrons, and provides precisely no mechanism for their acceleration. That is why this junk only exists on a crank website. It is laughably bad.

I shall not be reading that in any depth.

jonesdumb proudly professes his willful ignorance! LOL!

Alfven already had used it in his description of comet tails in (iirc) 1957.

And Alfvén was seen as a heretic as well. When he proposed galactic magnetic fields in 1942 he was also scoffed at and ridiculed for the same reasons Velikovsky was, the mainstream "scientists" couldn't comprehend how magnetic fields could be supported in the "vacuum of space". Your use of Alfvén to support your POV is truly laughable and a clear attempt at revisionist history.

I shall not be reading that in any depth.

jonesdumb proudly professes his willful ignorance! LOL!

Alfven already had used it in his description of comet tails in (iirc) 1957.

And Alfvén was seen as a heretic as well. When he proposed galactic magnetic fields in 1942 he was also scoffed at and ridiculed for the same reasons Velikovsky was, the mainstream "scientists" couldn't comprehend how magnetic fields could be supported in the "vacuum of space". Your use of Alfvén to support your POV is truly laughable and a clear attempt at revisionist history.

Errrm, alfven based his paper on prior work by Ludwig Biermann. Idiot.

He specifically tells us what happens to the electrons, and provides precisely no mechanism for their acceleration.

It must be tough to get through life when your intellectual superiors are found attached to doors, eh jonesdumb? The "potential pool" I described is where he mentions the electrons go *due to the action of the electric field*, that is the extent of the relevance of the mechanism in relation to the electrons. Per the electric field mechanism (what the paper is about), that is where the electrons aspect of this mechanism ends.

***The electrons are not accelerated by the electric field, any further mention of them would not be relevant to this paper***
***This paper is about the electric field acceleration of the ions, period.***

When the electron potential well fills up, the electrons are free to drift away and as such, due to opposites attract, are swept up in the solar wind.

Venus being shot out of Jupiter is such a great/fun idea. But the mechanism of how it could happen via charge imbalance has not be shown anywhere else. And if you look there are a couple of big craters visible via RF on it's surface, so that ruins the theory. No craters is another matter. Proponents argue there are no craters, but there are.

Errrm, alfven based his paper on prior work by Ludwig Biermann. Idiot.

Revisionist history once again. The "generally accepted" guess of the time (when Alfvén, Velikovsky made predictions, not way in the future that you are speaking of) was magnetic fields could not exist in the "vacuum of space". The historical record is clear, these men were laughed at for suggesting otherwise. Just as with Velikovsky's prediction of hot Venus and radio emissions of Jupiter. The parochialism on display by you and the scientific community is no different than the behavior of the Vatican in suppressing science for centuries in the past.

Venus being shot out of Jupiter is such a great/fun idea. But the mechanism of how it could happen via charge imbalance has not be shown anywhere else.

This is not entirely true, the ejection of quasars from their parent galaxies is a direct analog on a galactic scale.

And if you look there are a couple of big craters visible via RF on it's surface, so that ruins the theory.

Who said there would be zero craters? Electrical cratering would indeed be expected in an electrical birthing event. The only theory suffering due to the crater count (far too few for a 4 billion-year-old body) is the standard guesswork.

Venus being shot out of Jupiter is such a great/fun idea. But the mechanism...

You recently remarked on Talbot's polar configuration and your claimed impossibility of such an arrangement. You may not be aware of Herbig-Haro objects. The most likely direction of an ejection from the interior of a magnetic object would be in a polar arrangement. The polar arrangement is actually a predictable morphology of an electrical "birthing" event.

Errrm, alfven based his paper on prior work by Ludwig Biermann. Idiot.

Revisionist history once again. The "generally accepted" guess of the time (when Alfvén, Velikovsky made predictions, not way in the future that you are speaking of) was magnetic fields could not exist in the "vacuum of space". The historical record is clear, these men were laughed at for suggesting otherwise. Just as with Velikovsky's prediction of hot Venus and radio emissions of Jupiter. The parochialism on display by you and the scientific community is no different than the behavior of the Vatican in suppressing science for centuries in the past.

Yada, yada, yada. Wildt predicted a hot Venus in 1940. Due to greenhouse warming. He was right. Velikovsky was an ignorant fool.

Wildt predicted a hot Venus in 1940. Due to greenhouse warming.

Max temps for his failed model, 175 degrees or so. Actual temperature, 800 degrees. Abject failure claimed as success. Velikovsky's prediction, 600 degrees. Revisionist history once again.

***The electrons are not accelerated by the electric field, any further mention of them would not be relevant to this paper***
***This paper is about the electric field acceleration of the ions, period.***

When the electron potential well fills up, the electrons are free to drift away and as such, due to opposites attract, are swept up in the solar wind.

Bollocks. Stop making excuses for the cretin. I am not at home now, and on a different lappy, but I sat through an hour of this idiot describing precisely what happens to the electrons. The moron says that they fall into what he calls a saucepan! What happens to them? They plunge down through the corona, and end up neutralising some non-existent tufts on the surface No more electrons. He is bloody clueless. You seriously think this dick, who suggests nuclear fusion in the chromosphere, has solved one of science's big questions, by posting total crap on a woo site? Deary me.

Wildt predicted a hot Venus in 1940. Due to greenhouse warming.

Max temps for his failed model, 175 degrees or so. Actual temperature, 800 degrees. Abject failure claimed as success. Velikovsky's prediction, 600 degrees. Revisionist history once again.

Wildt got the mechanism correct. Velikovsky's guess was based on scientifically impossible nonsense which is easily shown to be wrong. So it doesn't matter what he predicted, because his mechanism was garbage.

Venus being shot out of Jupiter is such a great/fun idea. But the mechanism...

You recently remarked on Talbot's polar configuration and your claimed impossibility of such an arrangement. You may not be aware of Herbig-Haro objects. The most likely direction of an ejection from the interior of a magnetic object would be in a polar arrangement. The polar arrangement is actually a predictable morphology of an electrical "birthing" event.

Bollocks. There is no scientifically viable method of having Earth orbiting Saturn in the recent past. Laws of physics come into it. If you think it has been described scientifically, then link us to the maths describing the orbital parameters, conservation of angular momentum, temperatures, the orbit of the Moon, etc, etc. This crap is nothing to do with science. It is the brainndead fantasy of non-scientists, and only exists in woo-woo land.

Only in your gravity only electrically sterile faerie tales jonesdumb, in the real world which is driven by electromagnetism it all works just fine.

Venus being shot out of Jupiter is such a great/fun idea. But the mechanism of how it could happen via charge imbalance has not be shown anywhere else.

This is not entirely true, the ejection of quasars from their parent galaxies is a direct analog on a galactic scale.

And if you look there are a couple of big craters visible via RF on it's surface, so that ruins the theory.

Who said there would be zero craters? Electrical cratering would indeed be expected in an electrical birthing event. The only theory suffering due to the crater count (far too few for a 4 billion-year-old body) is the standard guesswork.

Lol. Referencing woo to back up woo! Electrical cratering! Jesus. It should have been molten. How are you getting electric woo to create craters in bloody lava? Christ, the crap you mythologists believe in is staggering.

Only in your gravity only electrically sterile faerie tales jonesdumb, in the real world which is driven by electromagnetism it all works just fine.

Then link us to this scientific explanation. Where is it? Nowhere, is it? Not in the scientific literature. Only on woo sites and Youtube. Sorry to inform you, but that is not science. It is just woo.

Electrical cratering! Jesus. It should have been molten. How are you getting electric woo to create craters in bloody lava?

Because jonesdumb, time passes and objects will cool. You know, basic thermodynamics.

Not in the scientific literature.

See 'STEVE', known atmospheric phenomenon but not in "scientific literature". Does not take away from the fact it is a real phenomenon. Just because it is not in the "scientific literature" is meaningless. The modern peer-review process uses the same tactics as the Vatican used centuries ago to protect their "knowledge".

Not in the scientific literature.

See 'STEVE', known atmospheric phenomenon but not in "scientific literature". Does not take away from the fact it is a real phenomenon. Just because it is not in the "scientific literature" is meaningless. The modern peer-review process uses the same tactics as the Vatican used centuries ago to protect their knowledge.

Lol. Typical response of cranks. "It's all a conspiracy!" Pathetic. Have you stolen the idiot Thornhill's script? Must be worth a few points on the crackpot index.

Who said there would be zero craters? Electrical cratering would indeed be expected in an electrical birthing event. The only theory suffering due to the crater count (far too few for a 4 billion-year-old body) is the standard guesswork

~1000 craters. Many of them large enough to have caused mass extinctions on Earth. All in 3 000 years? Lol. Please link to a paper describing how Venus' craters were formed by electric woo.

There's no reason to question that a huge ball of fusion wouldn't create it's own electrical effects.

Yes there is, in particular for the idea that solar wind is electrically charged i.e. more + or - particles leaving the sun.

If the total solar wind had a net charge, it would mean the sun would accumulate the opposite charge by expelling this charged current. Being a ball of plasma, what happens in a non-neutral plasma is that the particles repel each other like the hairs on the head of a person touching a van-de-graaf generator - and the sun would sooner than later blow up once the electrostatic force overcomes gravity.

But far before that can happen, the density of the sun would drop below the point where it can sustain fusion, so the sun would actually turn off, and then collapse back as the radiation pressure dissapears, and then back on again... or remain bloated up just barely fusing hydrogen.

Now, are the stars in the sky all blinking?

Now, to explain why all stars aren't turning into blinking brown giants, the EU suppository should have to invent an incoming current that neutralizes the sun's charge in order to stop these things from happening.

But there's no "solar rain" to be observed coming in from the rest of the universe. The sun must be ejecting equal amounts of positive and negative charged particles, which means the solar wind is net neutral.

It may not be neutral in all directions at all times, but taken all together it must be neutral, or there would be dire consequences for the lifespan of all stars.

, the EU suppository should have to invent an incoming current that neutralizes the sun's charge in order to stop these things from happening.

The stars are powered by intragalactic Birkeland currents filaments, like beads on a string. Just as has been observed by Herschel. This is a prediction of PC, no need for any EU people to invent anything. It's a natural consequence of the Plasma Cosmology.

But there's no "solar rain" to be observed coming in from the rest of the universe.

Voyager detected galactic electrons collecting at the edge of the Sun's magnetosphere.
http://electric-c...2013.pdf
Dr. Scott also discusses the observation by Ulysses of Birkeland currents over the solar polar regions. There is plenty of available evidence which shows a connection to the galaxy.

~1000 craters. Many of them large enough to have caused mass extinctions on Earth. All in 3 000 years?

Yeah jonesdumb, it is entirely within the realm of possibility of the proposed mechanism. In fact, all of them likely happened soon after the expulsion due to proximity. This mechanism doesn't require eons of time to explain chance encounters of the impact guesswork.

But the craters, more than 5000 of them all named now, are not just on one side of Venus, but all around the planet. That would require it to be spinning pretty fast if happened after ejection, but Venus rotates very very slowly, one Earth year to go around currently.

But the craters, more than 5000 of them all named now, are not just on one side of Venus, but all around the planet.

Electric discharge will take the path of least resistance, at right angles to the surface.

That would require it to be spinning pretty fast if happened after ejection, but Venus rotates very very slowly, one Earth year to go around currently.

First, it will have spin in this arrangement due to the Birkeland currents through the poles. But it's somewhat meaningless to this question because the discharges will follow paths of high conductivity.
And Venus' current slow rotation is due to it interaction with the Sun.

Like a battery, the sun has north and south poles (Pos and Neg polarity) the plasma of space can easily carry current, and it tends to flow around magnetic field lines, which do make connections and reconnections to the Earth's circuit, now, since the 'quasi neutral' plasma is capable of carrying current, and these 'slinky-like springs from a NORTH polarity and a SOUTH Polarity, thus you get a DC current along the field lines.

It is actually well decided science and MainStream, so there SHOULD be no controversy here.

But some folks hold onto disproven ideas from a book printed in 2015 that took 10 years to compile results and do experimentation and modeling, and so far the geomagnetic and solar magnetic connection is not even argued anymore, that the solar wind carries not just one current but many different ones, has gotten some folks riled up.

But that is how science works, we learn new things that show old models faulty, and replace old with new.

, the EU suppository should have to invent an incoming current that neutralizes the sun's charge in order to stop these things from happening.

The stars are powered by intragalactic Birkeland currents filaments, like beads on a string. Just as has been observed by Herschel. This is a prediction of PC, no need for any EU people to invent anything. It's a natural consequence of the Plasma Cosmology.

But there's no "solar rain" to be observed coming in from the rest of the universe.

Voyager detected galactic electrons collecting at the edge of the Sun's magnetosphere.
http://electric-c...2013.pdf
Dr. Scott also discusses the observation by Ulysses of Birkeland currents over the solar polar regions. There is plenty of available evidence which shows a connection to the galaxy.

No there isn't. You made that sh*t up. As usual.

The stars are powered by intragalactic Birkeland currents filaments, like beads on a string. Just as has been observed by Herschel. This is a prediction of PC, no need for any EU people to invent anything. It's a natural consequence of the Plasma Cosmology.

More fairy tales, with no basis in reality, and no evidence for them. Stop making crap up to support other crap. It is pure woo. Nothing to do with science.

Dr. Scott ..........

Is a moron. Is that the best you've got? A retired EE who has no qualifications in the relevant areas? The bloke is a nutjob. Try harder. Find a real plasma/ astrophysicist to support this garbage, and show us the papers.

Voyager detected galactic electrons collecting at the edge of the Sun's magnetosphere.

Aaaannnddddd.....? What do you expect where the heliosphere meets interstellar space? If Voyager, or any other craft, had seen those electrons coming toward the Sun well inside the heliosheath, then that would be news. Scott fails to understand the paper. Again.

https://forum.cos...t-claims

jonesdumb has nothing, a bunch of hand wavy denials and a link to a forum of morons. Try again jonesdumb.

Is that the best you've got? A retired EE who has no qualifications in the relevant areas? The bloke is a nutjob. Try harder. Find a real plasma/ astrophysicist to support this

jonesdumb puts his parochialism on display. I have explained to you astrophysicists, better known as plasma ignoramuses, do not have special knowledge. They have erroneous, faerie tale knowledge of nothing which really exists. The morons are missing 96% of the Universe and morons such as yourself believe all they spew. It's quite amusing.

jonesdumb has nothing, a bunch of hand wavy denials and a link to a forum of morons. Try again jonesdumb.

Is that the best you've got? A retired EE who has no qualifications in the relevant areas? The bloke is a nutjob. Try harder. Find a real plasma/ astrophysicist to support this

jonesdumb puts his parochialism on display. I have explained to you astrophysicists, better known as plasma ignoramuses, do not have special knowledge. They have erroneous, faerie tale knowledge of nothing which really exists. The morons are missing 96% of the Universe and morons such as yourself believe all they spew. It's quite amusing.

Lol. So the erroneous ramblings of a fruitloop on a crank website really is all you've got? After how long? Pathetic.

Jonesdumb has nothing, a bunch of hand wavy denials and a link to a forum of morons. Try again jonesdumb.

Wrong. Actual scientists in some cases, including a plasma astrophysicist. Where do you expect to see Scott's garbage debunked? Given that he hasn't published it, it isn't going to be in the scientific literature, is it? Why doesn't he grow a pair, and send his crap to ApJ, A & A, MNRAS, etc? Because he knows damn well that it is scientifically illiterate crap.

Actual scientists in some cases, including a plasma astrophysicist.

Correction, plasma ignoramus. Actual pseudoscientists.

Why doesn't he grow a pair, and send his crap to ApJ, A & A, MNRAS, etc?

I have already explained their Vatican like tactics. And it ain't no conspiracy theory, the parochialism of all things dark and magical are obvious for anyone who can open their eyes.

Actual scientists in some cases, including a plasma astrophysicist.

Correction, plasma ignoramus. Actual pseudoscientists.

Why doesn't he grow a pair, and send his crap to ApJ, A & A, MNRAS, etc?

I have already explained their Vatican like tactics. And it ain't no conspiracy theory, the parochialism of all things dark and magical are obvious for anyone who can open their eyes.

Lol. Pathetic response. Typical cranks. It's all a conspiracy! Scott is a moron, and his rubbish is easily shown to be wrong. Ditto Juergens.

Regarding your "plasma astrophysicist", he is as big a crank as the self avowed Crank Astronomer Bridgeman. Briefly reading through the thread it is quite apparent where you have developed your own tactics. You merely parrot the plasma ignoramuses using the same misinformation and utter ignorance of the real physics occurring. Why don't you try again when you get a clue.

Regarding your "plasma astrophysicist", he is as big a crank as the self avowed Crank Astronomer Bridgeman. Briefly reading through the thread it is quite apparent where you have developed your own tactics. You merely parrot the plasma ignoramuses using the same misinformation and utter ignorance of the real physics occurring. Why don't you try again when you get a clue.

How the hell would you know? Nobody in your cult is qualified in the relevant areas, and you sure as hell aren't. Why don't you tell us who these brilliant scientists are that have verified Scott's lunatic ramblings? Nobody, would be the answer to that. Correct? Your idiocy doesn't even exist as far as real science is concerned.

NASA invites morons to speak? Dr. Scott spoke there.

But I do like jonedave's question; why don't you see those heliospheric electrons flowing into the solar system? That might explain the charge buildup heating in the corona.

I said come back when you get a clue, clearly hasn't happened yet.

Your idiocy doesn't even exist as far as real science is concerned.

Yep, just like STEVE. Because of willful ignorance. Just like STEVE.

I said come back when you get a clue, clearly hasn't happened yet.

Your idiocy doesn't even exist as far as real science is concerned.

Yep, just like STEVE. Because of willful ignorance. Just like STEVE.

Hahaha. Really losing it now. Still no science, woo boy, only faith in clueless morons like Scott and Thornhill. Not a lot to hang your hat on is it?

NASA invites morons to speak? Dr. Scott spoke there.

But I do like jonedave's question; why don't you see those heliospheric electrons flowing into the solar system? That might explain the charge buildup heating in the corona.

No, NASA didn't invite him to speak, and he sure as hell didn't try to bring up his electric Sun idiocy, as far as I can see.

why don't you see those heliospheric electrons flowing into the solar system?

The proper resolution to observe them and testing those observations against the actual hypothesis in question.
There are a couple reasons it will be difficult to measure. There will be a "drift" current of those electrons, a very small ratio of the total electron quantity will be responsible for this drift current. Second, an understanding of the "flux tube" (Birkeland currents) morphology of the solar wind and the physics of those coaxial plasma currents is absolutely vital to account for the total flux.

why don't you see those heliospheric electrons flowing into the solar system?

The proper resolution to observe them and testing those observations against the actual hypothesis in question.
There are a couple reasons it will be difficult to measure. There will be a "drift" current of those electrons, a very small ratio of the total electron quantity will be responsible for this drift current. Second, an understanding of the "flux tube" (Birkeland currents) morphology of the solar wind and the physics of those coaxial plasma currents is absolutely vital to account for the total flux.

Total woo. They would be bleeding obvious to any number of spacecraft. And there is no way they would be getting past the solar wind, and the outflowing IMF. Only a complete idiot would believe otherwise.

Second, an understanding of the "flux tube" (Birkeland currents) morphology of the solar wind and the physics of those coaxial plasma currents is absolutely vital to account for the total flux.

Pure word salad, with no basis in reality.

The stars are powered by intragalactic Birkeland currents filaments, like beads on a string.

That description doesn't make any sense. You've got to mind Kirchoff's law: current going to a point and the current leaving the point must be equal. You just described a star that is radiating charge in a solar wind that's going everywhere around, but then you got "strings" of current entering and leaving the star, carrying current both coming and going.

So you have mixed explainations. The star can't both be "stringed up" and radiating electric charge around, and if both are true then there's again unaccounted charges. If the star is radiating charge, then the other stars along the string see less and less current at each hop, like a river that branches out into the desert and eventually dries up.

eikka: " current entering and leaving the star,".. FYI, the theory is it enters via the poles.

The big question is: where is the energy which is supposed to power the Sun and heats the corona? Space isn't filled will free charge racing toward the Sun.

That description doesn't make any sense.

The Local Interstellar Cloud is the filamentary Birkeland current powering the Sun. A plasmoid instability arises along a z-pinch plasma which are the stars.
http://www.electr...xies.pdf

The star can't both be "stringed up" and radiating electric charge around, and if both are true then there's again unaccounted charges

Yet that is what is observed, and given the proper circuitry it would be an analog of a string of Christmas lights.

If the star is radiating charge, then the other stars along the string see less and less current at each hop, like a river that branches out into the desert and eventually dries up.

Circuits! These Birkeland currents are connected closed circuits. The galaxy rotates in plasma, it is a homopolar motor (see flat rotation). This motor drives electric current through the spiral arms and into to galactic circuit. Stars are also homopolar motors.

^^^^And not a single observation to support such nonsense, nor even a viable model within the scientific literature. Pure woo.

^^^And not a single observation to support such nonsense, nor even a viable model within the scientific literature.

Yep, when you keep the blinders on. And lest we not forget STEVE.

^^^And not a single observation to support such nonsense, nor even a viable model within the scientific literature.

Yep, when you keep the blinders on. And lest we not forget STEVE.

So, if I haven't seen this evidence within the scientific literature, then tell me where it is, and which geniuses have said that the Sun is powered by anything other than fusion. It doesn't exist, because it is a really, really dumb idea. There is a hell of a lot of evidence that the Sun is powered by fusion, and not a single piece of evidence to back up Scott's woo.

There is a hell of a lot of evidence that the Sun is powered by fusion, and not a single piece of evidence to back up Scott's woo.

Nice hand wavy exclamations from opposite world.

There is a hell of a lot of evidence that the Sun is powered by fusion, and not a single piece of evidence to back up Scott's woo.

Nice hand wavy exclamations from opposite world.

What? Want me to prove it? I suggest you start with the references showing that the electric sun idiocy is actually viable.

What? Want me to prove it? I suggest you start...

Nice diversion. Regardless, you can't do it. You don't even understand the processes.

What? Want me to prove it? I suggest you start...

Nice diversion. Regardless, you can't do it. You don't even understand the processes.

Yes I do. Which is why I, and any other sane person who has looked at this ES crap says it is nonsense. It doesn't work, and there is zero evidence for it. End of story. It is a non-hypothesis, that only exists in woo-woo land, and is only believed by cranks.

Yes I do. Which is why I, and any other sane person who has looked at this ES

Ummm, not so much poopsie, not even the basics. Recall the discussions about electrochemistry in plasma? Your response was;
Where is the electrolyte?
ROTHLMFAO! Where is the electrolyte in plasma? The basics.
You still believe in frozen-in fields as a real condition and not just a maths modeling technique. Your rudimentary knowledge of EM theory, circuit theory, and real plasma physics in no way offers you an ability to cast aside the proposals. You only offer knee jerk hand wavy exclamations for your superior knowledge when in fact you lack the neural capability to outwit a doorknob.

Yes I do. Which is why I, and any other sane person who has looked at this ES

Ummm, not so much poopsie, not even the basics. Recall the discussions about electrochemistry in plasma? Your response was;
Where is the electrolyte?
ROTHLMFAO! Where is the electrolyte in plasma? The basics.
You still believe in frozen-in fields as a real condition and not just a maths modeling technique. Your rudimentary knowledge of EM theory, circuit theory, and real plasma physics in no way offers you an ability to cast aside the proposals. You only offer knee jerk hand wavy exclamations for your superior knowledge when in fact you lack the neural capability to outwit a doorknob.

You are prattling on about the some idiot on thunderdolts (anariba?) suggesting how water was created. He is another moron. Electrochemistry! Lol.
And plenty of people who know far more about plasma physics than idiots like you and your cult, declare the ES to be impossible woo. Zero science, no evidence

A bit of fun stuff with new article. JD, Tell me about 'No Space Currents'?
https://phys.org/...tem-menu

A bit of fun stuff with new article. JD, Tell me about 'No Space Currents'?
https://phys.org/...tem-menu

Somebody else that can't read! What has any of that to do with the solar wind not being a net current? Tell me - if the solar wind was a net current, what would happen to the Sun?

ES... "Zero science, no evidence", yes.

But the mystery of why the corona above the surface is so much hotter, is a legitimate question.
Alven waves or nanoflares is a lame distraction.

Who says net current ? YOU alone, We are talking about the solar wind, how it has a relativistic electron flow, a slower electron flow and then a slower yet Ion Flow, and how those flows form along magnetic field lines from the sun, and how we have currents going from and returning to the sun, you DO understand the North South polarity configurations of sunspots and their prominences, how there is material incoming all the time into the sun, largely in cometary material containing both electrons and protons.

We watch and gauge magnetic fields on the sun full time, live, and watch solar connections and disconnections sometimes live, usually clear in the data steams.

Good article to read, then look for daily Solar Magnetogram online, is findable...and Trackable:
http://solar-cent...ams.html

Those events lead to prominences, some of which form CME's, plasma filaments may do the same and lift off as a CME rather than dissipate downwards.

Who says net current ?

Cantthink, and some other loon who was posting in another thread. Ergo, you may need to tell the EU loons that the solar wind is net neutral. I realise that every plasma physicist who studies the solar wind realises that, but it hasn't seemed to infiltrate the minds of these particular loons.

Another article to look at is this one:
https://www.nasa....0SEC.pdf

About the Earth-Sun Connection, and the funding etc for the STEREO A and B Program with the Solar Dynamics Observatory.
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

AND, if you do your study, you find that there are North and South Phi Angle shifts, which indicate what polarity field we are in due to magnetic change in near-Earth space.

The Solar magnetic field lines directly connect to Earth's magnetic field lines, and that is the connection being studied and observed, it is THIS Sort of Hard Data that is the source of our info on there being a heavy electron flux in the solar wind, yes, it is 'quasi-neutral', which means it holds a charge until it is able to dissipate into the background charge,but that changes the background too and so it is a constant act of balancing the unbalanceable.

What is the total charge of the Neutrino Flux?

What is the total charge of the Neutrino Flux?

Errr, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that that was meant as a joke!

Also, since we have a high speed electron flux it does charge things in it's way, as the Van Allen belts do for the Geo-stat satellites, so does the Relativistic Electron Flux charge the 'quasi neutral' plasma flux flowing from the sun, which is part of why we can see the several million mile long solar prominences during the Solar Eclipse: Is that electron flux pressure pushing those magnetic fields faster, and since they are pushing against the chromosphere it is the chromosphere which takes up the heat with the high density electron flux, low density ion flux and associated electron and magnetic field of the 'neutral' plasma charged by the passing high speed electrons, slowing down the high speed electron in the process.

Basic energy transfer, leads to imbalances in the balance. Basic chaos occurs, and we end up with actual forms due to 'path of least resistance'. Least resistance often means to 'Loop a planet's field some along it's way'. We see line and current.

Who says net current ?

Cantthink

jonesdumb must resort to lies to win his argument. You and you alone are blathering on about a 'net current'. It's your own words, if I'm wrong point to where I said otherwise.
By definition, the quasi-neutral solar wind is an electric current.

By definition, the quasi-neutral solar wind is an electric current.

And there you go again, dummy. By definition, you loon, it is not a current. Ask any plasma physicist.

Thanks JD, Yeah, That Was a Joke, but at the same time, since we are beginning to understand that they may change flavor along the way, it actually Does start to pose a real question as to what kind or charge transfer is occurring with regard to Neutrinos, since we know they are rather high energy critters. What kind of charge field might they create while they go thru our 'not empty' space, even though they can go through a bunch of light years of lead and not hit anything, I wonder how much their charge may have either deflected something within the lead, or deflected said neutrino along the way, not enough to hit anything, but enough to bend path. What charge differential would be required? Which flavor Neutrino with which part of the atom? Electron fields or Nucleus? Plasmonic charge differentials amongst quasi-neutral plasmas in situ is part of what Parker Solar Probe is about. And it is on it's way, so we should get data soon.

It's your own words, if I'm wrong point to where I said otherwise.

I said:

What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net current? Hmmm?

You said:

You're not too bright jonesdumb, it has been explained to you several times. The Sun is part of a circuit, as such that which it loses is replenished. In addition, when it builds an excess of positive charge, boom! A CME is the result. These discharges are how the Sun maintains without going supernova. That said, supernovas are the result of stars that build up too much charge and discharge in a grand explosion. It has nothing to do with the faerie tales put forth by the plasma ignoramuses.

So, there you are, claiming that it is a net current, and that it magically gets replenished! Pure woo.

https://phys.org/...ion.html

I wonder how much their charge ...............

OK, I'll bite; what charge?

So, there you are, claiming that it is a net current,

Nope, what I am explaining is it is part of circuit, a node on the galactic circuit. The galactic grid replenishes the circuit. That said, the SW is not whatever your 'net current' may be although it is an electric current. No magic faerie dust required unlike your pet theory.

Also, from a Wiki article, but they do have proper links etc:
https://en.wikipe...ic_field

And in the above I would have you find the line quoted here:
"... the heliospheric magnetic field spirals inward or outward; the magnetic field follows the same shape of spiral in the northern and southern parts of the heliosphere, but with opposite field direction. These two magnetic domains are separated by a two current sheet (an electric current that is confined to a curved plane). ..."

Meaning that with a magnetic fields of North Polarity and South Polarity, in spiral form, creates an electric field flow potential between themselves. It is the magnetically separated charged plasmas interacting that create the electric flow. Note it states the current sheet being an electrical current, even if confined to a curved plane.

So, there you are, claiming that it is a net current,

Nope, what I am explaining is it is part of circuit, a node on the galactic circuit. The galactic grid replenishes the circuit. That said, the SW is not whatever your 'net current' may be although it is an electric current. No magic faerie dust required unlike your pet theory.

No, it is not a current. Ask any plasma physicist. Not got the cojones, have you? The rest of your post is equally unevidenced woo.

That said, the SW is not whatever your 'net current' may be although it is an electric current

In what universe does that statement make any sense? If it is a current, it has a net charge. It doesn't. Net charge = 0. Ergo, it is not a current.

Also, from a Wiki article, but they do have proper links etc:
https://en.wikipe...ic_field

And in the above I would have you find the line quoted here:
"... the heliospheric magnetic field spirals inward or outward; the magnetic field follows the same shape of spiral in the northern and southern parts of the heliosphere, but with opposite field direction. These two magnetic domains are separated by a two current sheet (an electric current that is confined to a curved plane). ..."

Meaning that with a magnetic fields of North Polarity and South Polarity, in spiral form, creates an electric field flow potential between themselves. It is the magnetically separated charged plasmas interacting that create the electric flow. Note it states the current sheet being an electrical current, even if confined to a curved plane.

Errm, yes, we know all about the HCS. It is not altering the charge on the Sun.

Errm, yes, we know all about the HCS. It is not altering the charge on the Sun.

And neither is the SW electric current.
The SW is a flow of electric charges which generate EM fields, how can anyone conceivably claim this is not an electric current.

It does not have to alter the charge of the sun for there to be an electric current, that is a strawman you have beat to death, the magnetic fields, and electric fields, are produced by a Dynamo function within the sun, ya know, it rotating and having magnetic field lines etc?

So it continuously produces it's own magnetic fields and current by the way the material within is churning due to it's heat, same type of processes here in Earth with our liquid Iron dynamo producing the magnetic field along with the Van Allen Belts, which are dynamo-based circuits due to the magnetic fields of the planet...the sun does the same thing so we have the Interplanetary Magnetic Field, which contains a several thousand mile thick pattern of electric current between the segments of North and South polarities in the Parker Spiral.

So there is no need for there to be a 'change in the sun's charge' for there to be electric currents in the solar wind plasmas, which there plainly Are.

So there is no need for there to be a 'change in the sun's charge' for there to be electric currents in the solar wind plasmas, which there plainly Are.

And I have repeatedly said that there can be currents WITHIN the solar wind. The solar wind itself is not a current. Look up Debye length. And the HCS is nothing to do with the solar wind. Except insofar as it is the solar wind which carries the Sun's magnetic field outwards, and it is these oppositely directed magnetic fields in either hemisphere which create the HCS.

Then you DO understand that the area of the Parker Spiral happens to be the area of Current Flow between North Polarity and South polarity, right? That is is caused by magnetic field interactions along with the solar wind carrying the magnetic fields (which are always accompanied by electrical flow (look it up)), and so you get an electric flow potential between the North Hemisphere and the South Hemisphere, and Yes, there is ionic exchange and flowback to the sun in the near regime, before the mass leaves the chromsphere it can dance around all kinds of directions in the VISIBLE Electric fields highlighting the invisible magnetic fields (Electrons do give off syncrotron radiation in the form of visible light due to high speed spiraling of the magnetic field acceleration).

So I do not understand why you are so stubbornly against said idea of electric flow in solar winds, all the way out to the Heliopause it has been detected by aurorae on all active magnetic planets with air

I see, you just want to argue so you go after specific terminology and use a lot of strawman arguments and then backtrack and say I did not mean...JD, Give it up, when you get multiple outside commenters decide to tell YOU Specifically how screwed up you were being, I opened up your normally blocked posts to see what drivel you are pushing.

Have you ever thought that you just might belong to the "Anti-EU Crowd of Loons", Stuck in the '60s and '80s scientifically, with traces of ADHD/ Aspergers? With the Trump Twitter-Text-in Anger Syndrome concerning anything widespread electric plasma effect in the Universe.

At least, that is what you display.

So I do not understand why you are so stubbornly against said idea of electric flow in solar winds, all the way out to the Heliopause it has been detected by aurorae on all active magnetic planets with air

What are you prattling on about? I said the solar wind is not a net current. Idiots like cantthink and theredpill, both EU loons, claim it is. They are quite obviously wrong.
Electric Universe is just a bunch of unscientific Velikovskian crap, with no science, nor evidence to back it up, and is not supported by any observations. It essentially doesn't exist. Just crank sites and Youtube. They are a bunch of unqualified fruitloops.

JD, You Blatantly ignore Doctorates and other papers, ALL of them saying there is current in the solar wind, not just a few people, but it is SETTLED SCIENCE That There is a Major Charge to Solar Wind. That there IS an Offset Balance in that the sun's plasma is preferentially nuclear material near the core of our star, so the exterior is mostly Electrons, which are flooding into space. None of this is in doubt.

There is a North and a South Pole. This is undoubted.

Charge forms between North and South Polarities. This is Basic stuff.

Where charge forms and there is ANY form of a carrier, the charge will take the path of least resistance in order to dissipate. Still following?

This charge sheet, also known as the Parker Spiral, is a double charge Birkland Current Sheet, and it is a HIGH VOLTAGE Sheet of flowing electrons that go from the sun's corona all the way out to the heliopause. Also proven.

So the charge goes from sun to interstellar medium to dissipate. (ctd)

There is electron flow shown in all of the planets with a magnetic field and atmosphere with auroae, they show up strongly still at Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus..Electron Flow, same exact thing as an electric current, carried by plasma in space, all the way from sun to heliopause, where it can dissipate to background levels on the local galactic scale, local cloud.

There is no longer a Question about IF it is there, that has been proven, Now they just want to find out Why it acts the way it does. That is the Point to all these probes and satellites.

MOST satellites are not science instruments at all. They are coms, cameras and data streams only, telecomms account for a lot of the activity in orbit. Science is small percent, but big return.

But JD, Please get off your rag against Combined Electromagnetic and Gravitational effect as it appears to be outdoing Dark Matter as far as actual Proofs. Electromag actually has a Century of proofs behind it, so far. DM; none.

Electric Universe is just a bunch of unscientific Velikovskian crap,

jonesdave

That is sure true;
https://en.wikipe...likovsky

"...Velikovsky argued that electromagnetic effects play an important role in celestial mechanics.
...
...Velikovsky invented a role for electromagnetic forces in counteracting gravity and orbital mechanics.
..
Such ideas do not find support in the conventional literature and are rejected as pseudoscience by the scientific community.
...
...Velikovsky published least on his belief that electromagnetism plays a role in orbital mechanics.
...

In general, Velikovsky's theories have been ignored or vigorously rejected by the academic community.
..."
-because they are a load of crap. "electromagnetism plays a role in orbital mechanics"? Wow that is loony even for the loonies! It denies all the proven scientific facts about orbital mechanics.

What a load of loonies we have here to believe such a load of CRAP!

The various loony ideas I have seen proposed in these posts also include;

1, various loony aether theories (not all aether theories can be dismissed as being just nonsense because some aren't but all the ones I have seen proposed here certainly are).

2, various kinds of 'gotdidits'.

3, the universe being shaped as a perfect sphere with boundaries we can in theory reach and are tangible.

4, the universe isn't expanding.

5, there isn't such thing as vacuum and/or time and/or space.

6, everything in the universe is expanding including the distances between planets and the stars they orbit and also you!

7, relativity and/or quantum mechanics being totally wrong (and not merely incomplete and require unifying). Obviously, if that was true, computers and GPS etc wouldn't work.

I still have only one question, to which the mainstream has no answer...

Why is the corona (2 million K) above the surface (5000 K) so freaking hot?

If the Sun actually generates the heat, there must be big errors in the temperature measurements.

-because they are a load of crap. "electromagnetism plays a role in orbital mechanics"? Wow that is loony even for the loonies! It denies all the proven scientific facts about orbital mechanics.

What a load of loonies we have here to believe such a load of CRAP!

Indeed. It is amazing how we can get spacecraft where they need to go, and then put them in orbit around bodies of various sizes, whilst using only Newtonian mechanics (for the most part).
And I believe the following already ruled out such things with pretty high precision:

https://www.npl.w...h/node/1

And references therein.

JD, You Blatantly ignore Doctorates and other papers, ALL of them saying there is current in the solar wind, not just a few people, but it is SETTLED SCIENCE That There is a Major Charge to Solar Wind. That there IS an Offset Balance in that the sun's plasma is preferentially nuclear material near the core of our star, so the exterior is mostly Electrons, which are flooding into space. None of this is in doubt.

Total and utter nonsense. First of all, for the umpteenth time, I have repeatedly said the can be currents WITHIN the solar wind. Learn to read.
As for the exterior being mostly electrons! Don't even know where to start with that. Might I suggest a first year undergrad course in astrophysics? The solar wind and, by definition, the corona, is composed of pretty much equal numbers of ions and electrons. I say pretty much, because there will be slightly more electrons, due to some of the ions being multiply charged. It is charge neutral.

(........cont)

So, for every H+ there is 1 electron to balance the charge. For every He++ there will be 2 electrons to balance the charge. For every O6+ there will be 6 electrons to balance the charge. And on we go. That is well known science, possibly to high school physics majors, let alone undergrads. To reiterate; the solar wind has no net charge. It should be obvious why. Currents of small scale and duration can certainly form, mainly due to instabilities, such as from CMEs. These will generally be restricted to a few Debye lengths.

Errm, yes, we know all about the HCS. It is not altering the charge on the Sun.

And neither is the SW electric current.
The SW is a flow of electric charges which generate EM fields, how can anyone conceivably claim this is not an electric current.

Ask a plasma physicist, woo boy, and you'll get your answer. Do you know any? As one of them said, the only way it could be considered a current is of the oceanic type.

https://forum.cos...-current

So, perhaps you can now show me your plasma physicist who says otherwise.

What does calling the solar wind a current have to do with anything anyway? So? It doesn't prove or disprove EU stuff. There's things called electron strahls jetting out of the Sun's corona.

This charge sheet, also known as the Parker Spiral, is a double charge Birkland Current Sheet, and it is a HIGH VOLTAGE Sheet of flowing electrons that go from the sun's corona all the way out to the heliopause. Also proven.

Oh dear. More remedial work required. The current sheet is known as the Heliospheric Current Sheet (HCS). It follows the Parker spiral, which is the shape of the Sun's magnetic field, as it twists due to the Sun being a rotating body.
And what the hell is a double charged Birkeland current sheet? I'd love to see you propose that to a plasma physicist! Lol.

I care little about your appeal to authority jonesdumb. The SW is a flow of electric charges which creates electromagnetic fields, that is by definition an electric current. You are a moron for claiming otherwise. Take your claims by your plasma ignoramus and get a clue.

What does calling the solar wind a current have to do with anything anyway? So? It doesn't prove or disprove EU stuff. There's things called electron strahls jetting out of the Sun's corona.

EU is already disproved. As I said, it is just unscientific Velikovskian crap, and is not taken at all seriously. Having said that, it would be nice if they actually summarised their crap, and quantified it, and then published it somewhere where scientists might actually see it. To all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist, scientifically speaking. It is more a cult than any sort of scientific explanation for anything.

I care little about your appeal to authority jonesdumb. The SW is a flow of electric charges which creates electromagnetic fields, that is by definition an electric current. You are a moron for claiming otherwise. Take your claims by your plasma ignoramus and get a clue.

Hey, thicko. Still no evidence, eh? Show me where Alfven or Peratt say the solar wind is a current. Idiot. EU loons seem to be the only people saying it is, and they are scarcely qualified to tie their own shoelaces. So, who is saying it, woo boy? Other than you? Nobody? Thought so.

I care little about your appeal to authority jonesdumb. The SW is a flow of electric charges which creates electromagnetic fields, that is by definition an electric current. You are a moron for claiming otherwise. Take your claims by your plasma ignoramus and get a clue.

Ever heard of Ian Tresman? He is one of your catastrophist EUists. Seemingly somewhat more scientifically literate than the rest of them.
http://www.electr...018.html

I would take his advice in that Cosmoquest thread (he was the OP);

So I guess that to ask "whether the Solar Wind is a current" is poor question, like asking whether the sea is a current; it has currents, but it is not a current.

So, if you refuse to take the advice of a plasma physicist, perhaps one of your fellow wooists might make it easier for you to comprehend.

jonesdumb is incapable of explaining in his own words how this flow of electric charges which creates EM fields is not an electric current. He must use the appeal to authority fallacy to support his POV. How is a flow of electric charges which creates magnetic fields and electrical energy not an electric current jonesdumb? In your own words.

jonesdumb is incapable of explaining in his own words how this flow of electric charges which creates EM fields is not an electric current. He must use the appeal to authority fallacy to support his POV. How is a flow of electric charges which creates magnetic fields and electrical energy not an electric current jonesdumb? In your own words.

It doesn't create a magnetic field, you moron. The magnetic field is created by an alpha-omega dynamo within the Sun. As has been repeatedly explained to you. It is carried by the solar wind.
The solar wind is not a current, and you won't find a plasma physicist to say it is. Hell, even the wooist Tresman got it, and he's one of your lot! Get an education, or get some evidence. That is, a plasma/ astrophysicist to agree with you. I've asked enough times. Otherwise you are just regurgitating the same baseless crap.

I still have only one question, to which the mainstream has no answer...

Why is the corona (2 million K) above the surface (5000 K) so freaking hot?

If the Sun actually generates the heat, there must be big errors in the temperature measurements.

Old_C_Code

Wrong! "mainstream" has answers; The Sun generates heat via nuclear energy and there is nothing wrong with the temperature measurements and the corona being so hot doesn't contradict either of those two things because there are various scientific theories to explain it that don't involve absurdities such as the Sun not generating its own heat or all temperature measurements being way-off by fantastic proportions.
Here are the 3 main theories explained;

https://www.scien...rona-th/

"...theoretical explanations...
...
At the very least, all these hypotheses appear capable of explaining the observed magnitude of coronal heating."

Time will tell which is correct.

humy says "Wrong! "mainstream" has answers" ... yeah, I read your link, the Sun is not boiling water though, going from 5000 degrees up to 5 million is not done through the sound of the surface turbulence, not a 2 or 5 million degree increase. That's very hard to believe, and not a theory the big wigs even talk about. That link is a NOAA physicist being creative.

Time will tell which is correct.

Indeed. Not sure if the Parker Solar Probe will get close enough to resolve it, but we'll see. There is certainly no weird electric sun nonsense needed to explain it. That is just another of their misconceptions. Nicely summed up by Tim Thompson, here:

http://www.tim-th...l#corona

humy says "Wrong! "mainstream" has answers" ... yeah, I read your link, the Sun is not boiling water though, going from 5000 degrees up to 5 million is not done through the sound of the surface turbulence, not a 2 or 5 million degree increase. That's very hard to believe, and not a theory the big wigs even talk about. That link is a NOAA physicist being creative.

No, it is only hard to believe if you are not conversant with the relevant science, and get your beliefs from idiots like Don Scott.

From jones link... " The specific mechanism for heating the corona indeed remains unknown. "

Did you even read your link jones? Ugh...

... yeah, I read your link, the Sun is not boiling water though, going from 5000 degrees

Old_C_Code

So now you make out you don't understand the concept of analogy. Let we help you with that;

https://en.wikipe..._analogy

Obviously, nobody was suggesting there is water boiling in the Sun, idiot!

And the link says "At the very least, all these hypotheses appear capable of explaining the observed magnitude of coronal heating."
So, there ARE scientific theories NOT involving the absurdities you imply.

From jones link... " The specific mechanism for heating the corona indeed remains unknown. "

Did you even read your link jones? Ugh...

Yes, I did. And the specific mechanism remains unknown. So what? There could be one of a number of mechanisms that are perfectly capable of heating the corona. Or it could be a combination of any or all of them. You want them to put a satellite inside the corona? Good luck with that! The Parker probe is as close as we'll get, Whether that is close enough to fully resolve matters, or allow us to put constraints on it, remains to be seen. However, no new physics, or impossible physics (EU) is going to be required.

Idiots can't read or write... you moron.

Idiots can't read or write... you moron.

Thornhill and Scott can, so that rather blows that hypothesis out of the water!

It doesn't create a magnetic field, you moron. The magnetic field is created by an alpha-omega dynamo within the Sun.

'Fraid not poopsie. Frozen-in fields is pure crank pseudoscience.

It doesn't create a magnetic field, you moron. The magnetic field is created by an alpha-omega dynamo within the Sun.

'Fraid not poopsie. Frozen-in fields is pure crank pseudoscience.

No, it isn't. That's just you misrepresenting Alfven from many decades ago, before we even had decent measurements of the solar wind. Which we now have, and show, indisputably, that the magnetic field is carried by the solar wind, as per Alfven's 1957 paper on comet tails. However, if you think otherwise, show me the papers where the IMF is shown to be anything other than the solar magnetic field carried into interplanetary space by the solar wind. Good luck with that.
More baseless assertions, I'm afraid. Have you ever studied science, or do you just rote memorise tracts of EU dogma?

Hey I think EU has ruined many people's ability to look at E&M as a factor in galactic rotation for one thing. Talbott's mythology is like a religion, and loses all credibility. So any mention of EU wreaks with new-age religious BS.

The galaxy spins like an electric motor, a coincidence, okay if you say so, can't really argue with you.

But E&M makes more sense than invisible dark matter, they should have started there.
We have a huge galactic magnetic field. How does this effect galaxy rotation?

The galaxy spins like an electric motor, a coincidence, okay if you say so, can't really argue with you.

But E&M makes more sense than invisible dark matter, they should have started there.
We have a huge galactic magnetic field. How does this effect galaxy rotation?

Nope. Not a single piece of evidence for such a thing. Nor a valid mechanism. Tell me this - how is this mysterious EM stuff causing + ions, - electrons, and huge uncharged stars, at the same distance from the galactic centre, to rotate in the same direction at the same velocity?
Explain that, and I'll see if I can reach Stockholm on my phone, and tell them to hold the presses.

We have a huge galactic magnetic field. How does this effect galaxy rotation?

It doesn't.

Dark matter siller, you are in la la land. There's a generated magnetic field, you just ignore that.
Who cares how the magnetic field is generated?

You ignore the galactic sized magnetic field in your analysis. Jones you really are a Mechanical Astrophysicist

Dark matter siller, you are in la la land. There's a generated magnetic field, you just ignore that.
Who cares how the magnetic field is generated?

You ignore the galactic sized magnetic field in your analysis. Jones you really are a Mechanical Astrophysicist

And you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Show me this crap you're espousing in the scientific literature. I already linked to the Eot-Wash tests. Pure gravity. How is EM moving a star around a galaxy? Simple question. Why can't you answer it?
You've drunk too deeply of the EU Kool-Aid, methinks. There is no viable mechanism.

You ignore the galactic sized magnetic field in your analysis.

No, every sane scientist ignores it. It is p1ss weak, and cannot affect the motions of stars. Period.

Not a single piece of evidence for such a thing. Nor a valid mechanism.

Willful ignorance is jonesdumb's M.O.

Galaxy formation and evolution
https://www.plasm...ormation

Not a single piece of evidence for such a thing. Nor a valid mechanism.

Willful ignorance is jonesdumb's M.O.

Galaxy formation and evolution
https://www.plasm...ormation

Sorry, but that is a long since debunked model, and it never explained how stars orbit. The model was crap, and is not backed up by observation, which is why the author has long since abandoned this barely cited work. It didn't even explain the spiral structure properly. It was as Peratt was moving into his 'looks like a bunny' phase. Total nonsense, and rightly ignored.

I don't like EU, you're insane, your certainty of dark matter proves it. It's ruined astrophysics.

Who knows how a weak magnetic field effects a stars orbits? Once it gets to speed initially somehow, it doesn't take much to keep it at speed, just saying. Do the Newtonian calculation. Would the star get pulled back slower? I don't know.

At least it's a better first step than assuming something totally impossible like invisible dark matter. What a fairytale.

Sorry, but that is a long since debunked model, and it never explained how stars orbit.

'Fraid not poopsie, was never even vetted. You see all those little dots orbiting, those are your stars.

Sorry, but that is a long since debunked model, and it never explained how stars orbit.

'Fraid not poopsie, was never even vetted. You see all those little dots orbiting, those are your stars.

No, they aren't. Read the paper/s. He never explained it. And the spiral structure was all wrong as well. Then there was his double-lobed galaxy nonsense, although he wouldn't have know back then that they were hosted in ellipticals! He also needed giant currents, and they simply aren't there.
Why do you think it was ignored? It was nonsense.

I don't like EU, you're insane, your certainty of dark matter proves it. It's ruined astrophysics.

Who knows how a weak magnetic field effects a stars orbits? Once it gets to speed initially somehow, it doesn't take much to keep it at speed, just saying. Do the Newtonian calculation. Would the star get pulled back slower? I don't know.

At least it's a better first step than assuming something totally impossible like invisible dark matter. What a fairytale.

Read this:

http://www.intern...count=54

Check the maths. 22 orders of magnitude too weak! What are you going to do? Increase the observed magnetic fields by 22 oom? Or the charge on the star? Pure nonsense.

At least it's a better first step than assuming something totally impossible like invisible dark matter. What a fairytale.

The presence of DM can be inferred from observation. This EM stuff is totally impossible. Which would you prefer? Unknown matter, or an hypothesis that is impossible from the get-go?

Ok, 1 part in 10^22 magnetic, and how much is the weak weak Newtonian force which slows it down? Probably 1 part in 10^23... no mention.

DM can not be inferred from observation, what observation? That the galaxy runs like an electric motor? That's your evidence for dark matter.

Dark matter evidence:
The galaxy runs like an electric motor. LOL.

Ok, 1 part in 10^22 magnetic, and how much is the weak weak Newtonian force which slows it down? Probably 1 part in 10^23... no mention.

Not even close. Is anybody proposing that the mass of galaxies is comprised of ~10^22 parts DM to 1 part ordinary matter? No, they aren't. You'll find that the force due to ordinary matter is ~ 10^21 times greater than EM.

DM can not be inferred from observation, what observation? That the galaxy runs like an electric motor? That's your evidence for dark matter.

Dark matter evidence:
The galaxy runs like an electric motor. LOL.

You have obviously never read a scientific paper in your life, have you? The very fact that the galaxies are not flying apart is very good evidence on its own. As are gravitational lensing observations. As is the observation of colliding galaxies, such as the Bullet Cluster. You really need to get a grip of the science, before you start trying to tear it down.

https://arstechni...-matter/

Your link explains that dark matter started with; trying to come up with something which would keep galaxies that were moving too fast, not to fall apart. They added magic mass to them. No E&M or plasma physics involved. Plasma is conductive as metal at as little as 1% ionization, galaxies are 99% plasma. Albeit no conductive plasma near us (maybe the Sun), but plenty out there. What are the forces involved with a conductive plasma galaxy and it's magnetic field?

I've looked at dark matter, it's ruined astrophysics with it's invisible magic.

JD, You DO understand that the Bullet Cluster was debunked as far as being caused by 'Dark Matter' in the fact that they actually found gas and dust clouds where they thought was empty space and Dark Matter, ended up being filled with shocked Lyman Alpha Hydrogen cloud instead showing the evidence of having been passed through by the other cluster.

In other words, there was no missing mass in the Bullet Cluster collision.

And back to Ignoring Jonsie as I normally do, since he never has solid science backing, only a foul mouth and personal insults to intelligence of posters who obviously understand the mechanics of what is going on better than him, and it throws him into screaming tissy fits of hammering on his keyboard. Sort of like a 'science' based Trump-Troll.

Albeit no conductive plasma near us (maybe the Sun), but plenty out there. What are the forces involved with a conductive plasma galaxy and it's magnetic field?

Plasma is plasma, the conductive plasma the Earth is immersed in is the same as the plasma "over there".

No conductive plasma near Earth typically, else our satellites couldn't communicate with a conductive sheath of plasma covering everything.

JD, You DO understand that the Bullet Cluster was debunked as far as being caused by 'Dark Matter' in the fact that they actually found gas and dust clouds where they thought was empty space and Dark Matter, ended up being filled with shocked Lyman Alpha Hydrogen cloud instead showing the evidence of having been passed through by the other cluster.

In other words, there was no missing mass in the Bullet Cluster collision.

And back to Ignoring Jonsie as I normally do, since he never has solid science backing, only a foul mouth and personal insults to intelligence of posters who obviously understand the mechanics of what is going on better than him, and it throws him into screaming tissy fits of hammering on his keyboard. Sort of like a 'science' based Trump-Troll.

Really? Point me to the paper.

Your link explains that dark matter started with; trying to come up with something which would keep galaxies that were moving too fast, not to fall apart. They added magic mass to them. No E&M or plasma physics involved. Plasma is conductive as metal at as little as 1% ionization, galaxies are 99% plasma. Albeit no conductive plasma near us (maybe the Sun), but plenty out there. What are the forces involved with a conductive plasma galaxy and it's magnetic field?

I've looked at dark matter, it's ruined astrophysics with it's invisible magic.

No, you appear to be scientifically and mathematically incapable of assessing anything to do with astrophysics. Show me your EM model with numbers. Stockholm are on hold, and it's costing me a fortune.

.....since he never has solid science backing,

Lol. I'm the only one linking to science and scientists, you moron. You are the one making stupid claims due to being unqualified in the relevant areas. Everything I say is backed up by mountains of literature. You've got diddly. Take about hypocrisy! Lol. What is the charge on a neutrino, again? Dear me.

Oh, I didn't know EU had any numbers, I'm just here speculating, like they should have done decades ago. I'm referring to galaxy star orbiting and dark matter, not about galaxy powered stars.

Jones I've created more complex products they you ever possible could. You seem incapable of thinking for yourself. I'm capable, I have over a hundred products I've designed in the field. My assessment is you have none.

No conductive plasma near Earth typically, else our satellites couldn't communicate with a conductive sheath of plasma covering everything.

Plasma density outside the magnetosphere is about 7 ions and 7 electrons per cm^3. If the EU invisible current were there, having done the maths, you are right - we'd never get a radio signal through that! Maths is not their strong point, though. They never quantify anything.

Oh, I didn't know EU had any numbers, I'm just here speculating, like they should have done decades ago. I'm referring to galaxy star orbiting and dark matter, not about galaxy powered stars.

Jones I've created more complex products they you ever possible could. You seem incapable of thinking for yourself. I'm capable, I have over a hundred products I've designed in the field. My assessment is you have none.

I am no expert. I have two degrees, covering astrophysics, mainly, and worked briefly in volcanology. Planetary science is my main thing. I have studied many other subjects informally and/or below degree level. What plasma physics I know comes from a plasma physicist and books and papers he recommends. You will not see me post anything that is not backed up by actual science and maths. Now, where is that EM model? Stockholm are getting antsy.

Yes, we communicate out to Mars, and the heliosphere for that matter, there can't be any (virtually none) conductive plasma within the solar system in much quantities, except the Sun.

The broadcast space would be impossible to use.

Anyone who pushes that is not an EE, that's for sure.

Oh, I didn't know EU had any numbers, I'm just here speculating, like they should have done decades ago. I'm referring to galaxy star orbiting and dark matter, not about galaxy powered stars.

They don't. They a numerophobic (I'm trademarking that if it isn't already a word). There is no harm at looking at alternatives. That is called theoretical physics. However, one cannot just say, "Oh, it's EM, 'cos DM sucks!" You need a bloody good hypothesis, falsifiable, and backed up by maths. I have seen nothing like that on here. That is why EU is such a crapfest.

Yes, we communicate out to Mars, and the heliosphere for that matter, there can't be any (virtually none) conductive plasma within the solar system in much quantities, except the Sun.

The broadcast space would be impossible to use.

Anyone who pushes that is not an EE, that's for sure.

Plasma is actually VERY conductive, and is the basis for Alfven's MHD, and his Nobel Prize. It is not infinitely conductive but, depending on the timescale on is looking at, the frozen-in condition is fine. There are some circumstances where it breaks down. The problem with plasma and radio reception is the electron density. However, that is not an issue in the solar system. Except if you calculate the number of electrons required to power the non-existent electric sun.

No conductive plasma near Earth typically, else our satellites couldn't communicate with a conductive sheath of plasma covering everything.

You're going jonesdumb on me here with your misconceptions. Sheaths and double layers are in fact extremely important to space plasma but it doesn't pose the problem you are putting forth. Plasma is plasma, whether here or there.

It is not infinitely conductive but, depending on the timescale on is looking at, the frozen-in condition is fine.

Nope, timescale is irrelevant. No magnetic field is frozen-in to any plasma, it is merely a modeling technique. Frozen-in condition...spoken like a true crank.

It's hard to get anyone, EU or Feinman, to explain the electric current in a permanent magnet. E&M says there has to be a current somewhere. I think they mean permanent magnets not frozen in magnetic fields. Hey maybe they're electro-magnets. hehe

cantdrive85, sadly, you are very wrong. Double layers have nothing to do with it. There isn't
conductive plasma blocking the broadcast space, anywhere. This is basic EE, any EE knows if you put a circuit in a metal box things can't get in or out. The plasma would be a metal box.

cantdrive85: You're supposed to say, "you mean a grounded metal box"...Do'h!!! yes.

cantdrive85: You're supposed to say, "you mean a grounded metal box"...Do'h!!! yes.

The is no ground in space. For that matter there is no absolute zero when it comes to charge.

This is basic EE, any EE knows if you put a circuit in a metal box things can't get in or out. The plasma would be a metal box.

Kinda like how the dark mode plasma discharge of the ionosphere reflects radio signals? Fortunately we don't live within a glow (or especially arc) mode discharge where we would be blind to the Universe. The still conductive dark mode plasma of the solar wind and ionosphere are not quite as "blinding" as glow and arc mode plasma.

"The is no ground in space" ...
Of course not. With no shield signal, the metal/plasma would act as an RF block, as the RF would go through the metal box at greatly reduced amplitude into the noise margin a short distance away.

It is not infinitely conductive but, depending on the timescale on is looking at, the frozen-in condition is fine.

Nope, timescale is irrelevant. No magnetic field is frozen-in to any plasma, it is merely a modeling technique. Frozen-in condition...spoken like a true crank.

Nope. Want me to quote a plasma physicist or two? Including Alfven? Stop lying about things that you don't understand. i.e. anything to do with plasma physics.

Kinda like how the dark mode plasma discharge of the ionosphere reflects radio signals?

Lol. Spoken like a true EU moron with not the foggiest clue of what he is talking about! Dark mode discharge! Bloody hell, you have to laugh at these idiots!

cantdrive85: you are not an EE, clearly, you don't know basic circuit theory. From the way you talk about plasma, I thought you knew what you were talking about.

You're not getting it, if significant plasma (there's always a bit 1 ion per cubic cm) occupied free space, we could not communicate. It's conductive, what don't you get? Even EU doesn't say there's more plasma than that in free space. WTF is wrong with you?

You're not getting it, if significant plasma (there's always a bit 1 ion per cubic cm) occupied free space, we could not communicate.

The Earth is absolutely surrounded by plasma, this is a known fact. The ionosphere is ~1% ionized, but it is a plasma and yes it deflects radio waves. You are misinterpreting the observed reality. BTW, the EU also understands the Earth is within the Sun's plasma environment, contrary to whatever your misinformed POV my relate.

Spoken like a true EU moron with not the foggiest clue of what he is talking about! Dark mode discharge!

jonesdumb insists we throw aside all real plasma research in favor of his fanciful hypothetical beliefs of faerie dust. Plasma is in one of three modes jonesdumb, dark, glow, and arc. This is a undeniable fact.

Want me to quote a plasma physicist or two? Including Alfven?

Yes, absolutely! Point me to a real plasma physicist who claims the frozen-in is anything other than a modeling technique and I will show you a true plasma ignoramus. jonesdumb, for thelast time the frozen-in condition does not exist in reality. Magnetic fields are created by electric currents or changing electric fields, per Maxwell's equations. Period, end of story! You're pushing crap crank beliefs.

Hey JD, Check out this morning's article:
https://phys.org/...tem-menu

Talking specifically, in the first portion, about the preponderance of lightning formed spheres found in meteorites, and the mechanism for creating the charge required, and how it is a part of the accretion cycle, that and the chemical differences and their charges impact planetary formation. It then goes on to other parts of their modeling, but you are not going to like this JD.

Less than 1% ionized plasma is not electrically conductive. So they still communicate beyond it.
Plasma being conductive is it's greatest novelty imo.

Also JD, Author is first here, so ye can see she is real thing:

"Sabine Hossenfelder is a blogger and Theoretical Physicist who researches quantum gravity. She is a Research Fellow at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies where she leads the Analog Systems for Gravity Duals group." (Wikipedia)

And her article on the Bullet Cluster:
http://backreacti...nst.html

Want me to quote a plasma physicist or two? Including Alfven?

Yes, absolutely! Point me to a real plasma physicist who claims the frozen-in is anything other than a modeling technique and I will show you a true plasma ignoramus. jonesdumb, for thelast time the frozen-in condition does not exist in reality. Magnetic fields are created by electric currents or changing electric fields, per Maxwell's equations. Period, end of story! You're pushing crap crank beliefs.

I already have. And I didn't say it was frozen-in perfectly. I said in certain circumstances it is fine to use the frozen-in condition depending on the timescale you are looking at.
And you are the only idiot pushing crank beliefs, you moron! When was Earth orbiting Saturn again? Lol. Velikovskian loon.

Hey JD, Check out this morning's article:
https://phys.org/...tem-menu

Talking specifically, in the first portion, about the preponderance of lightning formed spheres found in meteorites, and the mechanism for creating the charge required, and how it is a part of the accretion cycle, that and the chemical differences and their charges impact planetary formation. It then goes on to other parts of their modeling, but you are not going to like this JD.

Huh? That is standard science. What makes think otherwise? And it certainly doesn't tie in with anything EU idiots believe.

Also JD, Author is first here, so ye can see she is real thing:

"Sabine Hossenfelder is a blogger and Theoretical Physicist who researches quantum gravity. She is a Research Fellow at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies where she leads the Analog Systems for Gravity Duals group." (Wikipedia)

And her article on the Bullet Cluster:
http://backreacti...nst.html

Not interested in articles - where is it written up? And you may like to know that MOND has taken an absolute kicking lately. Much of it is ruled out, and the bits that are left (which few people believe) seem to still require dark matter.

Less than 1% ionized plasma is not electrically conductive. So they still communicate beyond it.

Well, you're wrong. The ionosphere is a plasma, this is a fact.
https://www.nap.e...hapter/7
There is another fact, HAM radio signals (among others) do reflect off the ionosphere.

I'm not wrong, plasma less than 1% ionization is NOT conductive. Don't be such an idiot.

So you're saying the ionosphere is not plasma? Electric currents do not form across the ionosphere? Clearly someone is wrong and there is volumes of data which shows the ionosphere is plasma and is conductive. Maybe you could explain over the horizon radio signals.
Like this;
https://en.m.wiki.../Skywave
Check the first sentence, how is that crow?

drive85 says: "So you're saying the ionosphere is not plasma?"

Not enough to stop communications to any planet. That's the point, and that's just one spot. Of course Jupiter is very noisy, and Saturn, but only noisy near them.

It's just the little bitty ionosphere anyway! What is your lame point? Free space throughout the solar system is not filled with charge! get a grip.

It's just the little bitty ionosphere anyway! What is your lame point? Free space throughout the solar system is not filled with charge!

My point is your statement of certainty is dead wrong. The Universe is 99.99% plasma, including the ionosphere and near Earth space all the way out to the edge of the solar system and beyond. It is all dark mode plasma, except the Sun and other arc discharges, comet comas and other glow mode discharges, and the solid stuff and planets.

Less than 1% ionized plasma is not electrically conductive.

But it is, obviously to a lesser degree but it certainly is conductive.

There wouldn't be an ionosphere if free charge went all the way out to the heliosphere!!!
EU doesn't even think this... You are really nuts man.

It's 99% plasma because STARS ARE PLASMA, not because there's 1 atom per cc of plasma in free space.

It's 99% plasma because STARS ARE PLASMA, not because there's 1 atom per cc of plasma in free space.

No, as Kristian Birkeland said;
"It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds."
Known since way back in 1900 or so space is plasma and currents flow through it.

Known since way back in 1900 or so space is plasma and currents flow through it.

Wrong. It is electron and ions, and is quasi-neutral. As any plasma physicist would tell you.

cant: but the calculation doesn't add up to near that required to power the Sun. Why I lost interest in the EU science.

I had lost interest in Talbott's mythology right away, realizing he had no valid scientific conclusion to his endless story.

Yes, absolutely! Point me to a real plasma physicist who claims the frozen-in is anything other than a modeling technique and I will show you a true plasma ignoramus.

This is useful in deciding whether the magnetic field evolution is dominated by the diffusion process (Rm << 1) or the frozen-in process (Rm >> 1). For example the magnetic Reynolds number in the solar wind is estimated to be about Rm ∼ 7×10^16, reflecting our previous argument of the negligible magnetic diffusion in the solar wind.

From;
Plasma Turbulence in the Solar System
Narita, Y.
https://www.sprin...42256660

And their previous argument:

For an example consider the solar wind. Its density is of the order of 5 cm−3 and its electron temperature is about 50 eV. The estimated magnetic diffusion time is scaled as Ď�d ~ 0.3L^2 for collisions between electrons and ions, where Ď�d is given in units of seconds and L in meters. The time that the solar wind needs to flow with its typical velocity of 500 km/s across the Sun–Earth distance of 1.5 × 10^11 m is Ď�sw = 3 × 10^5 s or 3.5 days. Thus, the magnetic field is permitted to diffuse across the solar wind over the short distance of only about 1.9�šĎ�sw �Ľ 10^3 m during the travel across the Sun–Earth distance. The magnetic field is practically frozen-in to the solar wind and the field lines are carried by the flow.

Obviously some special characters are not appearing in the last post, however the relevant text is available free here:

https://www.googl...N6ORFuVL

Links directly to PDF.

And as another plasma astrophysicist said:

Now, Alfvén states his doubts on the frozen-in condition in the second volume of Cosmical Electrodynamics (1963) when space exploration was still starting up, and he was right about stating doubt on the general applicability of the frozen-in condition. Nowadays, we have dedicated magnetospheric missions, even multi-spacecraft, like Cluster. Now, we can measure magnetic fields, plasma data and electric fields in situ, and thus check whether or not the frozen-in condition is valid.

https://forum.cos...t=plasma

Like I said, there are some plasma ignoramuses. They are morons just like you if they believe in frozen-in condition being other than a modeling technique. Alfvén was explicit in his warning. He invented the technique, he understood the limitations. You and the plasma ignoramuses obviously do not.

Frozen-in magnetic fields, solar wind, neither have to do with much of anything. Yawn.

Tell us how you calculate the energy of the Sun created by 1 atom of dark plasma per cc, the volume of the solar system, ok, continue...

Like I said, there are some plasma ignoramuses. They are morons just like you if they believe in frozen-in condition being other than a modeling technique. Alfvén was explicit in his warning. He invented the technique, he understood the limitations. You and the plasma ignoramuses obviously do not.

Wrong, dumbo. Alfven didn't know squat about the various plasma regimes compared to modern plasma physicists, because they simply hadn't had the missions, and observations that they now. Listen, idiot, if you know so much about plasma physics, do the maths yourself, you fraud.
What does a magnetic Reynolds number of 7 x 10^16 mean to you? What does the diffusion of 1 km over 1 AU mean to you? It doesn't mean anything, because you don't understand the subject. Along with all the other EU fruitloops. That is why none of them produce plasma physics papers.

cant: but the calculation doesn't add up to near that required to power the Sun. Why I lost interest in the EU science.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the matter involved, this is the same reason jonesdumb claims these things are impossible. Do yourself a favor and get better informed.

cant: but the calculation doesn't add up to near that required to power the Sun. Why I lost interest in the EU science.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the matter involved, this is the same reason jonesdumb claims these things are impossible. Do yourself a favor and get better informed.

No, he's correct. That is why there has never been any quantification or explanation of these non-existent electrons. It's a dumb idea, and any fool can see that it doesn't work. Which is why nobody takes it seriously.

My fundamental misunderstanding is there's no fuel for the fire detected. You pretend the solar system is filled with enough charge to power the Sun. But there is not nearly enough to power the Sun. Why would astrophysicists ignore this evidence if it was there?

Alfven didn't know squat about the various plasma regimes compared to modern plasma physicists,

That is absolutely laughable, unless you can point to even a single example. Good luck!

Listen, idiot, if you know so much about plasma physics, do the maths yourself, you fraud.
What does a magnetic Reynolds number of 7 x 10^16 mean to you? What does the diffusion of 1 km over 1 AU mean to you?

Nothing, other than a bunch of pseudoscientific MHD mumbo jumbo that has no relation to reality. You have already acknowledged there is a non-zero electric field, that alone voids all that maths gymnastics you refer to as evidence.

^^^^^^Total crap. When Alfven was pontificating we had practically no knowledge of conditions in space. We have a hell of a lot more now. As mentioned, these are not guesses; they are observations, which Alfven would no doubt have accepted. He'd look silly if he didn't. And that is not maths gymnastics you idiot, it is well accepted plasma physics. I'm sure I could find a quote from Alfven or Falthammar backing that up.
In short, you are clueless on the subject, and nobody studying astrophysical plasmas will agree with you. All you've got is a a religious-like belief in the ancient works of a long dead scientist, talking about stuff before we had the data we have now. Observation wins every time. He was wrong. Get over it.

.......there is a non-zero electric field, that alone voids all that maths gymnastics you refer to as evidence.

Really? You should write this up, as it invalidates the whole of decades worth of solar wind observations. Amazed that a dunce like you is the only one to realise this!

As mentioned, these are not guesses; they are observations,

More laughable nonsense, just like claims of "observed" MRx, it is nothing more than interpretations of observational data in which they apply their pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo to arrive at the conclusions. The frozen-in field condition is crank BS.

As mentioned, these are not guesses; they are observations,

More laughable nonsense, just like claims of "observed" MRx, it is nothing more than interpretations of observational data in which they apply their pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo to arrive at the conclusions. The frozen-in field condition is crank BS.

Nope, you are the only crank here, and you have nothing to back up your claims. Just another scientifically illiterate Velikovskian wooist, who wouldn't know science if they fell over it. Which is how they are able to believe the crap they do. Earth orbiting Saturn, anyone?

Hmm, then do please explain the electron flux monitoring with GOES..
http://legacy-www..._3d.html

Where Electron Flux values are updated every 5 min at different frequencies, is this not an electric flow? Electron flux detector is same as Voltmeter...for MeV in the 10^3 region generally, as a background baseline, but can, of course, go much higher as the scale is logarithmic.

Sure looks to me like they are measuring the current of the sun at that point in space, are they not?

Hmm, then do please explain the electron flux monitoring with GOES..
http://legacy-www..._3d.html

Where Electron Flux values are updated every 5 min at different frequencies, is this not an electric flow? Electron flux detector is same as Voltmeter...for MeV in the 10^3 region generally, as a background baseline, but can, of course, go much higher as the scale is logarithmic.

Sure looks to me like they are measuring the current of the sun at that point in space, are they not?

Huh? There are instruments measuring electron flux and ion flux. There are pretty much equal numbers. Ergo, no net current.

Here is the index of all instrument measurements;

http://legacy-www...dex.html

.......there is a non-zero electric field, that alone voids all that maths gymnastics you refer to as evidence.

Really? You should write this up, as it invalidates the whole of decades worth of solar wind observations. Amazed that a dunce like you is the only one to realise this!

To elucidate on that, the description here is the best I can find in layman's language:

https://www-spof....ift.html

As they say;

Space physics can be weird. In regions of magnetic fields, the relation between electric fields and currents is very different from its form in everyday technology.

Which is possibly why some EEs think they understand stuff about plasma astrophysics, but obviously don't. Totally different areas.

Huh? There are instruments measuring electron flux and ion flux.

Utter moron!
Definition of flux;
The action or process of flowing or flowing out.

And it's measured with a voltmeter which are used to measure currents. But jonesdumb still believes in faerie tales.

Huh? There are instruments measuring electron flux and ion flux.

Utter moron!
Definition of flux;
The action or process of flowing or flowing out.

And it's measured with a voltmeter which are used to measure currents. But jonesdumb still believes in faerie tales.

Jesus Christ! Flux means 'flow', so it measures the flow, i.e. the number of electrons hitting the detector per second, you idiot! Why do you think it isn't a frigging voltmeter, and the data are defined in terms of number of detections? Don't take my word for it; go look at the instrument pages for GOES, ACE, WIND, etc, etc. Like I said, you know jack about plasma physics, and are getting confused with high school lab stuff.
Show me any instrument reading on that GOES page, or on the ACE page, that is measuring a frigging voltage. Or can't you even understand a clearly labelled plot? Particles per cm^2..... means what, in EU circles?

Space physics can be weird. In regions of magnetic fields, the relation between electric fields and currents is very different from its form in everyday technology.

LOL, plasma ignoramuses trying to impart their patriarchal specialization yet dramatically mislead, misinterpret and misunderstand the facts. Field-aligned currents are ubiquitous in plasmas per direct measurements, yet these plasma ignoramuses claim just the opposite. Any wonder why they aren't updating the page, it's utter bollocks.

Space physics can be weird. In regions of magnetic fields, the relation between electric fields and currents is very different from its form in everyday technology.

LOL, plasma ignoramuses trying to impart their patriarchal specialization yet dramatically mislead, misinterpret and misunderstand the facts. Field-aligned currents are ubiquitous in plasmas per direct measurements, yet these plasma ignoramuses claim just the opposite. Any wonder why they aren't updating the page, it's utter bollocks.

Really, dumbo? And where are these field aligned currents in the solar wind? The frigging electric field is PERPENDICULAR to the magnetic field, you idiot. As observed numerous times. Field aligned currents do occur in the magnetosphere. As has been known for some time. That is where frozen-in can break down. i.e. it is necessary for MRx. You just keep babbling on about stuff that you've read somewhere, but don't understand.

Jesus Christ! Flux means 'flow', so it measures the flow, i.e. the number of electrons hitting the detector per second,

ROTHLMFAO! What an utter moron...
First sentence from wikistupidia on 'electric current' page;

"An electric current is a flow of electric charge."

https://en.m.wiki..._current

But wait, it's not flux, it's "flux".
There aren't electrons, it's "electrons".
jonesdumb resides in Bizarro Land.

Jesus Christ! Flux means 'flow', so it measures the flow, i.e. the number of electrons hitting the detector per second,

ROTHLMFAO! What an utter moron...
First sentence from wikistupidia on 'electric current' page;

"An electric current is a flow of electric charge."

https://en.m.wiki..._current

But wait, it's not flux, it's "flux".
There aren't electrons, it's "electrons".
jonesdumb resides in Bizarro Land.

You seriously are an idiot. Look at the label on the axes, you dipsh!t! Christ, talk about thick! Dear god.
Tell you what, know-nothing - why not ask your question of what they are measuring on a physics forum? Or email GOES or ACE? Please post the reply here, you idiot.

Here is a description of what the EPAM instrument measures, in terms of electron and ion flux;

http://www.srl.ca...esc.html

And here is the EPAM instrument;

http://www.srl.ca...aper.pdf

Sounds like no voltmeter I've ever heard of! Unless a Low Energy Foil Spectrometer means the same as voltmeter. Somehow, I think not.