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

Researchers find solar eruptions may not have slinky-like shapes after all
On August 31, 2012 a long filament of solar material that had been hovering in the sun's atmosphere, the corona, erupted out into space at 4:36 p.m. EDT. The coronal mass ejection, or CME, traveled at over 900 miles per second. The CME did not travel directly toward Earth, but did connect with Earth's magnetic environment, or magnetosphere, causing aurora to appear on the night of Monday, September 3. This is a a lighten blended version of the 304 and 171 angstrom wavelengths. Credit: NASA/GSFC/SDO

As the saying goes, everything old is new again. While the common phrase often refers to fashion, design, or technology, scientists at the University of New Hampshire have found there is some truth to this mantra even when it comes to research. Revisiting some older data, the researchers discovered new information about the shape of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) – large-scale eruptions of plasma and magnetic field from the sun – that could one day help protect satellites in space as well as the electrical grid on Earth.

"Since the late 1970s, 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," said Noe Lugaz, research associate professor in the UNH Space Science Center. "But our research suggests their shapes are possibly different."

Knowing the and size of CMEs is important because it can help better forecast when and how they will impact Earth. While they are one of the main sources for creating beautiful and intense auroras, like the Northern and Southern Lights, they can also damage satellites, disrupt radio communications and wreak havoc on the electrical transmission system causing massive and long-lasting power outages. Right now, only single point measurements exist for CMEs making it hard for scientists to judge their shapes. But these measurements have been helpful to space forecasters, allowing them a 30 to 60 minute warning before impact. The goal is to lengthen that notice time to hours – ideally 24 hours – to make more informed decisions on whether to power down satellites or the grid.

In their study, published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, the researchers took a closer look at data from two NASA spacecraft, Wind and ACE, typically orbiting upstream of Earth. They analyzed the data of 21 CMEs over a two-year period between 2000 and 2002 when Wind had separated from ACE. Wind had only separated one percent of one astronomical unit (AU), which is the distance from the sun to the Earth (93,000,000 miles). So, instead of now being in front of Earth, with ACE, Wind was now perpendicular to the Sun-Earth line, or on the side.

"Because they are usually so close to one another, very few people compare the data from both Wind and ACE," said Lugaz. "But 15 years ago, they were apart and in the right place for us to go back and notice the difference in measurements, and the differences became larger with increasing separations, making us question the Slinky shape."

The data points toward a few other shape possibilities: CMEs are not simple Slinky shapes (they might be deformed ones or something else entirely), or CMEs are Slinky-shaped but on a much smaller scale (roughly four times smaller) than previously thought.

While the researchers say more studies are needed, Lugaz says this information could be important for future space weather forecasting. With other missions being considered by NASA and NOAA, the researchers say this study shows that future spacecraft may first need to investigate how close to the Sun-Earth line they have to remain to make helpful and more advanced forecast predictions.


Explore further

Discovering trailing components of a coronal mass ejection

More information: Noé Lugaz et al. On the Spatial Coherence of Magnetic Ejecta: Measurements of Coronal Mass Ejections by Multiple Spacecraft Longitudinally Separated by 0.01 au, The Astrophysical Journal (2018). DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aad9f4
Citation: Researchers find solar eruptions may not have slinky-like shapes after all (2018, August 30) retrieved 16 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-08-solar-eruptions-slinky-like.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
133 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 30, 2018
"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.

Aug 30, 2018
@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.

Aug 30, 2018
How would one measure "the overall charge of the Sun"? How is the "overall charge" of a random object measured in a lab?

Aug 30, 2018
"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.

Aug 30, 2018
"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?

Aug 30, 2018
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....

Aug 30, 2018
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.

Aug 30, 2018
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!

Aug 31, 2018

" 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.

Aug 31, 2018
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"

Aug 31, 2018
"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.

Aug 31, 2018
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.


Aug 31, 2018
"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"....

Aug 31, 2018
"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.

Aug 31, 2018
I know what a current is....

Aug 31, 2018
@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?

Aug 31, 2018
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.

Aug 31, 2018
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.

Aug 31, 2018
@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'. :)

Aug 31, 2018
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

Aug 31, 2018
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/

Aug 31, 2018
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

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
Oops, forgot to link a paper on the flux tube structure of the SW.

https://arxiv.org...402.0329

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
Hence why I linked to his tutorial on Cosmoquest.

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

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
The Earth is charging up, yes. Do'h!!!

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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).

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
The solar magnetic fields are due to an Alpha-Omega dynamo.

Hypothesized, by plasma ignoramuses with zero observational evidence.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
... 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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?

Sep 01, 2018
... 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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
.....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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
Because ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING says the Sun's magnetic field extends to the heliopause.
You are not as smart as I thought.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
@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.

Sep 01, 2018
@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.

Sep 01, 2018
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?


Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.


Sep 01, 2018
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...

Sep 01, 2018
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."


Sep 01, 2018
It's basic EE, any magnetic field will extend out into the noise margin. You are a Mechanical Astrophysicist Jones.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 01, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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?

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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".

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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!

Sep 02, 2018
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?

Sep 02, 2018
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!

Sep 02, 2018
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?

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018

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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018


***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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
Only in your gravity only electrically sterile faerie tales jonesdumb, in the real world which is driven by electromagnetism it all works just fine.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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".

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.


Sep 02, 2018
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?

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
, 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.

Sep 02, 2018
~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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 02, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
, 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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.


Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.


Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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?

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
^^^^And not a single observation to support such nonsense, nor even a viable model within the scientific literature. Pure woo.

Sep 03, 2018
^^^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.

Sep 03, 2018
^^^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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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

Sep 03, 2018
A bit of fun stuff with new article. JD, Tell me about 'No Space Currents'?
https://phys.org/...tem-menu

Sep 03, 2018
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?

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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?

Sep 03, 2018
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!

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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


Sep 03, 2018
I wonder how much their charge ...............


OK, I'll bite; what charge?

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.


Sep 03, 2018
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

Sep 03, 2018
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.

Sep 03, 2018
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.


Sep 04, 2018
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)

Sep 04, 2018
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.

Sep 04, 2018
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 electromagn