Discovering trailing components of a coronal mass ejection

August 27, 2018, Planetary Science Institute
In the image above, Mercury is seen as the bright dot on the right; the MESSENGER spacecraft was orbiting it. Radio signals from MESSENGER probed the near-solar environment observed. Credit: Tom and Elizabeth Kuiper, (JPL/STAR Prep Academy)

Using Green Bank Observatory in West Virginia, PSI Associate Research Scientist Elizabeth A. Jensen's team observed radio signals from the MESSENGER spacecraft and discovered that solar eruptions known to cause communication disruptions and electrical grid failures as they hit Earth have secondary trailing impacts. Jensen is lead author of "Plasma Interactions with the Space Environment in the Acceleration Region: Indications of CME-trailing Reconnection Regions" that appears in The Astrophysical Journal. Co-authors include PSI Senior Scientists Deborah Domingue Lorin and Faith Vilas.

Coronal mass ejections, or CMEs, are powerful, massive that can trigger geomagnetic storms, Jensen said. CMEs are often associated with solar flares.

"The most powerful CMEs may travel at 2,000 kilometers per second, passing the Earth in seconds. We have discovered reconnection regions trailing behind a CME traveling 750 kilometers per second," Jensen said. "This suggests that the impact of a CME on the Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from the CME and also secondary shocks from powerful electrical currents and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake."

These events can affect human activity and technology not only in space, but also within the atmosphere and ultimately on the ground, Jensen said. In 1989, a powerful CME caused problems in satellites orbiting the Earth, the space shuttle Discovery, and electric grids resulting with 6 million people in Canada losing power.

"These secondary regions trailing the CME front have never been seen before because we have had few opportunities to probe this area with spacecraft. The MESSENGER spacecraft orbiting Mercury on the other side of the Sun was in the right place at the right time to observe a CME safely by passing through it to the Earth," said Jensen. "Understanding the three-dimensional structure of these eruptions that strike the Earth is essential to properly preparing for their potential effects."

Explore further: Coronal mass ejection to pass Earth, Messenger and Juno

More information: Elizabeth A. Jensen et al. Plasma Interactions with the Space Environment in the Acceleration Region: Indications of CME-trailing Reconnection Regions, The Astrophysical Journal (2018). DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac5dd

Related Stories

Coronal mass ejection to pass Earth, Messenger and Juno

July 16, 2013

On July 16, 2013, at 12:09 a.m. EDT, the sun erupted with an Earth-directed coronal mass ejection or CME, a solar phenomenon that can send billions of tons of particles into space that can reach Earth one to three days later. ...

NASA spacecraft observe Nov. 20 solar eruption

November 20, 2012

On Nov. 20, 2012, at 7:09 a.m. EST, the sun erupted with a coronal mass ejection or CME. Not to be confused with a solar flare, a CME is a solar phenomenon that can send solar particles into space and can reach Earth one ...

Sun erupts with a CME toward Earth and Mercury

July 10, 2013

On July 9, 2013, at 11:09 a.m. EDT, the sun erupted with an Earth-directed coronal mass ejection or CME, a solar phenomenon that can send billions of tons of particles into space that can reach Earth one to three days later. ...

Three NASA satellites recreate solar eruption in 3-D

March 9, 2018

The more solar observatories, the merrier: Scientists have developed new models to see how shocks associated with coronal mass ejections, or CMEs, propagate from the Sun—an effort made possible only by combining data from ...

New sunspots producing space weather

January 14, 2013

On Jan. 13, 2013, at 2:24 a.m. EST, the sun erupted with an Earth-directed coronal mass ejection or CME. Not to be confused with a solar flare, a CME is a solar phenomenon that can send solar particles into space and reach ...

Recommended for you

How to drive a robot on Mars

November 12, 2018

Some 78 million miles (126 million kilometers) from Earth, alone on the immense and frigid Red Planet, a robot the size of a small 4x4 wakes up just after sunrise. And just as it has every day for the past six years, it awaits ...

Aging a flock of stars in the Wild Duck Cluster

November 8, 2018

Do star clusters harbor many generations of stars or just one? Scientists have long searched for an answer and, thanks to the University of Arizona's MMT telescope, found one in the Wild Duck Cluster, where stars spin at ...

56 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (12) Aug 27, 2018
"This suggests that the impact of a CME on the Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from the CME and also secondary shocks from powerful electrical currents and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake."

Don't show this to jonesdumb, he'll have a conniption as this observation clearly violates the quasi-neutrality and Deybe length of the solar wind.
Steelwolf
2.3 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2018
I was thinking the same, even though it PLAINLY States

"...the impact of a CME on the Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from the CME and also secondary shocks from powerful electrical currents and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake."

He will state that they are basically neutral. Well, so is an AC electrical system neutral over a timeframe or distance. So is a battery, until a connection is made between poles, which is the same thing plasmas have found to do in carrying electrical current from the Sun.

If only he would see that he is using the wrong info from the very points and papers he uses for his arguments, most of them point to a combined effect between electromagnetism and gravity, they are additive forces, and even the push provided from same polarity ions can give rise to something similar in effect to what they are looking for in Dark Matter, which was always known to be a term for matter we just could not see due to tech limits.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Aug 28, 2018
@steel
So is a battery, until a connection is made between poles, which is the same thing plasmas have found to do in carrying electrical current from the Sun
just a quick question and request for clarification from you:
are you stating that the CME is what connects the sun to the earth as the "second pole" in your current and or circuit?

thanks for the clarification

feel free to add supporting material if you have it
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (12) Aug 28, 2018
If only he would see that he is using the wrong info from the very points and papers ....


I've read the paper, have you? No, didn't think so. I don't know what Jensen is talking about in the quote abouve, as it isn't mentioned in the paper - if you were really interested you'd email her - but the only current mentioned in the paper is a current sheet formed due to magnetic reconnection, which is what this paper is about. Hence the title:

Plasma Interactions with the Space Environment in the Acceleration Region: Indications of CME-trailing Reconnection Regions
Jensen, E. A. et al.
http://iopscience...5dd/meta

jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (12) Aug 28, 2018
From the above linked paper:

The MESSENGER radio frequency signal properties are capable of probing the critical, yet local and intermittent, phenomena of magnetic reconnection in the outer reaches of the solar corona, the acceleration region. Reconnection plays a significant role in solar wind evolution and dynamics, and remotely measuring the phenomenon is an important achievement.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (11) Aug 28, 2018
feel free to add supporting material if you have it


:)

cantdrive85
1.4 / 5 (11) Aug 28, 2018
Magnetic reconnection is pseudoscience, most of the paper is BS but the observations are there.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (12) Aug 28, 2018
Magnetic reconnection is pseudoscience, most of the paper is BS but the observations are there.


Wrong. There is no mention of currents in the paper, other than the current sheets required for MRx. If you can see it measured somewhere, then highlight the relevant text. And why would you believe anything written by people who believe in MRx, anyway? Kind of disqualifies practically every plasma physicist on the planet!
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (10) Aug 28, 2018
Still don't understand the difference between observations and interpretation, do you jonesdumb?
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 28, 2018
@idiot illiterate conspiracy theorist and eu acolyte cantdrive proclaims
Magnetic reconnection is pseudoscience
whereas laboratories, electrical engineers, plasma physicists and astrophysicists all demonstrate, with evidence, repeatedly (validated in every plasma physics lab out there) that he's full of sh*t
https://www.pppl....nnection

plasma physics labs: 200K experiments and counting
eu: absolutely nothing but cantdrive making claims
most of the paper is BS
considering the plasma physicists who are authors in the paper?

you still think that?

wow

and here all this time I thought you could read and that yall advocated for plasma physics
LMFAO
Still don't understand the difference between
still don't understand the difference between Science and pseudoscience like your eu cult yet, do you cantthink?
Steelwolf
2 / 5 (8) Aug 28, 2018
Stumpy, did you bother reading the above article?
JD, do you understand American English?

Taken direct from article above No mention of a current sheet at all in the article, and even in reference works. But to highight from the Above Article for Stump and JD:

"This suggests that the impact of a CME on the Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from the CME and also secondary shocks from POWERFUL ELECTRICAL CURRENTS (emph mine) and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake."

Can they write it more plainly?

Or try this:
http://iopscience...6/520038

Detailing plasma and current ropes connecting to our magnetosphere and dumping heavy electron flux and ion density, just like the magnetic reconnection to the Northern Coronal Hole did to us on the 26th Aug 18 with the extremely high KP indices running at 7-8 which starts causing troubles for Human Tech and vulnerable individuals
http://services.s...ndex.png
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
@steel
Stumpy, did you bother reading the above article?
yup
read the study too

so let me ask again:
are you stating that the CME is what connects the sun to the earth as the "second pole" in your current and or circuit?
Can they write it more plainly?
nowhere in the above article *or* study does it mention that the CME connects the earth to the sun as you intimate
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/520038
nope, still no mention of the sun-earth connection there
http://services.swpc.noaa.gov/images/station-k-index.png
no indication of the sun-earth connection there either

I asked you to verify that my clarification is correct
you indicate by quote and links that it is accurate

therefore I would like to see this sun-earth connection because it would be evident and traceable with the exact instrumentation that is used above, yet it's not in any study anywhere

can I write it more plainly?
theredpill
3 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
"no indication of the sun-earth connection there either"
"therefore I would like to see this sun-earth connection "

https://www.space...sun.html

https://science.n...oct_ftes

http://www.esa.in...revealed

Or from google scholar:
https://agupubs.o...JA900099

https://link.spri...99314802

Literally thousands of papers about the subject. I don't see where Steelwolfe insinuated that CME's initiated the connection but the above links state in both laymans terms and more scientifically the nature of the connection. We have observed it for decades.

jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
JD, do you understand American English?


Yes, mostly. Which part of the paper are you referring to? I'm guessing you've read it, yes? I have.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
Literally thousands of papers about the subject. I don't see where Steelwolfe insinuated that CME's initiated the connection but the above links state in both laymans terms and more scientifically the nature of the connection. We have observed it for decades.


This has nothing whatever to do with any EU bollocks, as seems to be advocated by the likes of Steel or Cantthink. It's all mainstream science, and is likely not saying what you think it is.

Steelwolf
2.5 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
JD, the problem is that Mainstream Science is Not saying what YOU seem to think it is saying, plainly and obviously. You have frozen in your mind set and no long allow bad ideas to drop out to be replaced with ones that work better. And YOU keep harping the D-K Problem, same holds if you do not move ahead with the information, you end up stuck in your cave with a bunch of disproven ideas and growl at anyone who comes near your cave with new, Up to date, accurate information that says, in plain words, that what you have been prosetelyzing here is blatantly wrong, has been disproven by more recent science than the 60's (which is where you keep referring to) with up to date studies which have disproven some of your dearly held misconceptions.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
JD, the problem is that Mainstream Science is Not saying what YOU seem to think it is saying, plainly and obviously. You have frozen in your mind set and no long allow bad ideas to drop out to be replaced with ones that work better. And YOU keep harping the D-K Problem, same holds if you do not move ahead with the information, you end up stuck in your cave with a bunch of disproven ideas and growl at anyone who comes near your cave with new, Up to date, accurate information that says, in plain words, that what you have been prosetelyzing here is blatantly wrong, has been disproven by more recent science than the 60's (which is where you keep referring to) with up to date studies which have disproven some of your dearly held misconceptions.


What studies? What are you advocating, and where is it vindicated?
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
Yep, electric connections don't have a thing to do with the EU! LOL! You guys are desperate to show the data to be wrong. Next step, behave like the AGWites and fudge the data. It is a fact, the Sun is connected to the Earth and all the other planets via electric currents.
theredpill
2.7 / 5 (12) Aug 29, 2018
" and is likely not saying what you think it is."

The general gist of all of them is that every 8 minutes the earths magnetic field and the suns couple creating a magnetic portal or channel, allowing a stream of charged particles to flow into the earths magnetosphere... whether it is connecting or "re-connecting"...not only is the connection well documented, but the flow of charged particles (which is, whether you like it or not, a current) has been repeatedly observed. Yes this is mainstream science, and yes it supports "EU bollocks". Although EU theory may not be 100% accurate, it isn't 100% baseless either. The article supports the people you are debating here, not you. You were trolled in by the first comment in the thread as it was picking a fight with you specifically, although I don't know why Captain Stumpy commented what he did...asking for evidence of something we have been observing for decades.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
.....but the flow of charged particles (which is, whether you like it or not, a current)


No, it isn't.

jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
It is a fact, the Sun is connected to the Earth and all the other planets via electric currents.


Wrong.
theredpill
3 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
"No, it isn't. "

https://whatis.te.../current

https://en.wikipe..._current

https://www.brita...-current

Ok, the world defines it as one...but if you say it isn't have it your way. I would caution you about debating publically based on your beliefs when they conflict with evidence, observation, and physical laws as you appear to be doing here. Britannica even mentions a current with a magnetic flux as a carrier...
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
"No, it isn't. "

https://whatis.te.../current

Ok, the world defines it as one...but if you say it isn't have it your way. I would caution you about debating publically based on your beliefs when they conflict with evidence, observation, and physical laws as you appear to be doing here. Britannica even mentions a current with a magnetic flux as a carrier...


What is the net current of the solar wind? Link to peer-reviewed publications only.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
Yes this is mainstream science, and yes it supports "EU bollocks".


No. it doesn't. Please tell us what this seemingly non-existent EU bollocks suggests. Preferably within the scientific literature.
theredpill
3 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
"What is the net current of the solar wind? Link to peer-reviewed publications only."

Here is the most comprehensive data about Proton/electron flux I have seen regarding your request as measured at all points between the earth and the sun we have taken them.

https://omniweb.g...ata.html

Ironically, if someone were to ask you what the net gravitational pull of the MW galaxy is at a certain distance away, you would have a set value, peer reviewed, where the equations include an anomalous variable representing DM content. IOW, a peer reviewed and approved paper stating a specific value for one thing using an equation containing a non-measured ( estimated) value.

But here you are denying the flow of charged particles is an electric current in the comment section of an article referencing the electric currents associated with space plasmas.

Stated as above, I am the dumb one for involving myself in this conversation on my day off.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
But here you are denying the flow of charged particles is an electric current in the comment section of an article referencing the electric currents associated with space plasmas.

Stated as above, I am the dumb one for involving myself in this conversation on my day off.


Nope, you are the one making baseless assertions, with no evidence to back them up. I asked what is the net current of the solar wind. You are unable to answer. What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net charge?
theredpill
3 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
"Nope, you are the one making baseless assertions, with no evidence to back them up."

I have answered every question you have asked and provided links to back up my answers.

" I asked what is the net current of the solar wind. You are unable to answer. "

We have not measured the overall particle flux between the earth and the sun so we cannot apply a current value to it...that doesn't mean we haven't been observing one for decades now. Just because we don't know the total number of craters on the moons surface doesn't mean there aren't any there...

" What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net charge?"

It would be gaining the opposing charge...but it is net neutral. It appears to be expelling Ions in balanced numbers to keep it that way (solar wind, charged particles leaving the sun ). As pointed out above, a battery is net neutral...how do we get a current out of something that is net neutral? Must be more to it than net neutral, right?
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
^^^^^^^More word salad.
Find me a scientist who says the solar wind has a net charge. You won't. And we have been measuring the solar wind for nigh on 60 years. It is not a net current. End of story.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
It would be gaining the opposing charge...but it is net neutral. It appears to be expelling Ions in balanced numbers to keep it that way (solar wind, charged particles leaving the sun )


Way to kill your own argument! Yes it is net neutral. And it has precisely the amount of electrons leaving that are required to balance the charge of the ions that are leaving. Together, they are known as the solar wind. And it is, by definition, net neutral.

jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Aug 29, 2018
For anybody interested, there is a freely available book, entitled 'Basics of the Solar Wind', by Nicole Meyer-Vernet.

https://www.resea...CoverPdf
theredpill
2.8 / 5 (11) Aug 29, 2018
"Find me a scientist who says the solar wind has a net charge"

You have been linked several papers by solar scientists, all of whom write about charged particle flow, how it manifests, how the connection to the earth's magnetosphere results in a particle flux which they all refer as a current or current sheet. In the above comments you have denied the universally accepted definitions of a current, attempted to infer that because we do not have a value for a current one doesn't exist, and still maintain net neutral cannot encompass electrical current generation yet we live in a net neutral universe and here I am powering my computer somehow...to comment under a release from the mainstream which recognized another means of current production due to our interaction with the sun.

If you were truly interested in science you would be above this kind of behaviour, so I can only gather you are not, and just want to fight with people. Your posts demonstrate this, mostly.

jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
"Find me a scientist who says the solar wind has a net charge"

You have been linked several papers by solar scientists, all of whom write about charged particle flow, how it manifests, how the connection to the earth's magnetosphere results in a particle flux which they


Sorry, you are talking crap, and don't even understand those papers. Go to a physics forum with your dumb assertions, and see what any plasma/astro/ physicist will tell you. I gave you a link to a book that even EU idiots should be able to understand. I would suggest reading it, or write up your loony idea on the net current in the solar wind. Because nobody else has.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
You have been linked several papers by solar scientists, all of whom write about charged particle flow, how it manifests,


No, they are papers describing the interaction of the net-neutral solar wind, the IMF and the Earth's magnetosphere. Known as Flux Transfer Events. They are absolutely nothing whatever to do with the solar wind being a net current. If you don't believe me, then email any of the authors. You obviously have very little understanding of the subject, and the limited amount you do know seems to have come from cranks.

jonesdave
3 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
I would also suggest looking at the second last answer posted here, and the references and links therein:

https://physics.s...-current
theredpill
2.8 / 5 (11) Aug 29, 2018
OK, you don't know what an electric current is. You have demonstrated that not only in this comment section, but every one where you use the term "quasi-neutral" or "net neutral" in reference to the solar wind or any ionized gas (hint, you cannot generate any kind of discharge from neutral atoms other than radiation, so to have any kind of electrical event, charge differential initiates that....your "quasi-neutral" plasma generates solar flares, but you refer to my assertions as dumb, interesting) . With that as a starting point, you have nothing to build on and have now resorted to your usual tactics you employ after making a mockery of yourself because you started commenting out of spite instead of intelligence. I will take my leave of this one and let what you have said speak for itself.
cantdrive85
2.2 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2018
jonesdumb resolves to prove his point by linking to a discussion board... LOL!
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2018
OK, you don't know what an electric current is. You have demonstrated that not only in this comment section, but every one where you use the term "quasi-neutral" or "net neutral" in reference to the solar wind or any ionized gas (hint, you cannot generate any kind of discharge from neutral atoms other than radiation, so to have any kind of electrical event, charge differential initiates that....your "quasi-neutral" plasma generates solar flares, but you refer to my assertions as dumb, interesting) . With that as a starting point, you have nothing to build on and have now resorted to your usual tactics you employ after making a mockery of yourself because you started commenting out of spite instead of intelligence. I will take my leave of this one and let what you have said speak for itself.


Hey, sh't for brains! Got any references?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2018
jonesdumb resolves to prove his point by linking to a discussion board... LOL!


From a plasma physicist, dickhead. Want me to link to a few more, you cretin? Including Alfven? Christ you are pathetic.
Tell me; did you ever get beyond primary school science, woo boy? I kind of doubt it, you thick article. Never done plasma physics, have you, thicko? What do you do for a living? What degrees do you have? None, is my guess, because your stupidity is obvious for all to see. Correct? Damn right I am. Just another dumb EU loon. Yes?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2018
OK, you don't know what an electric current is.....


Hey, sh*t for brains, I asked you a question, you thick idiot; what is the measured current in the solar wind? Point me to any plasma physicist who says the solar wind has a net current. If you can't do that, sh*t for brains, then ST*U. Yes? You can't can you, woo boy? Because nobody is dumb enough to believe that, other than amateur tosspots like yourself. Prove me wrong. Burke.
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2018
And now we have fully devolved into vulgarities, name calling, and a series of logical fallacies. It gets boring from here.

theredpill
2.5 / 5 (8) Aug 30, 2018
"now resorted to your usual tactics you employ after making a mockery of yourself because you started commenting out of spite instead of intelligence"

And, true to nature the reply:

"Hey, sh't for brains! Got any references?"

One only needs to read what you have posted here as evidence of your level of understanding about plasma physics...so I reference every post you have made in this comment section.

"Point me to any plasma physicist who says the solar wind has a net current."

You really are a sad sack aren't you?

http://iopscience...ext.html
https://www.scien...velocity
https://journals....6.125001

A quote from the last link: " Based on 3 years worth of Ulysses magnetic field data where over 28 000 current sheets are identified"

Are you going to continue your little tantrum?
theredpill
2.8 / 5 (9) Aug 30, 2018
"A quote from the last link: " Based on 3 years worth of Ulysses magnetic field data where over 28 000 current sheets are identified"

Are they "Quasi-neutral" current sheets Ulysses measured 28000 of? LOL.
granville583762
2.3 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2018
The Tortoise and Hare these CMEs succeed these solar wind particles in wind electric and magnetic field

Travelling at 2,000 km/s passing Earth in seconds have discovered reconnection regions trailing behind these CME travelling 750 km/s, the impact of CMEs on Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from these CMEs and also secondary shocks from powerful electrical currents and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake.
All these facts of interest pale in contrast tp the solar wind of velocity of about 145 km/s, which below the solar escape velocity of 618 km/s, where few of these solar wind particles achieve energies sufficient to reach the terminal velocity of 400 km/s!
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
"A quote from the last link: " Based on 3 years worth of Ulysses magnetic field data where over 28 000 current sheets are identified"

Are they "Quasi-neutral" current sheets Ulysses measured 28000 of? LOL.


At small scales, the solar wind is believed to be ve`xry multifractal with nonlinear interactions causing an intermittent energy dissipation, leading to possible current-sheet structures


Which part of that didn't you understand? Idiot.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
"A quote from the last link: " Based on 3 years worth of Ulysses magnetic field data where over 28 000 current sheets are identified"

Are they "Quasi-neutral" current sheets Ulysses measured 28000 of? LOL.


The fact that you even asked that question shows, like the rest of the EU loons, that you haven't got a clue about plasma physics.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
"Point me to any plasma physicist who says the solar wind has a net current."

You really are a sad sack aren't you?


Nope, you are an idiot who doesn't understand the subject area, which is how you are capable of believing the crap that you do. None of those references say anything about the solar wind being a NET current. Idiot. Get an education. What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net current? Hmmm? Which is why you will not find a plasma physicist who will say otherwise. God you people are stupid.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2018
What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net current? Hmmm?

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.
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 31, 2018
What are the points of contention
This suggests that the impact of a CME on the Earth's space weather consists of the initial shock from the CME and also secondary shocks from powerful electrical currents and accelerated plasmas trailing in the CME's wake

Don't show this to jonesdumb, he'll have a conniption as this observation clearly violates the quasi-neutrality

In the quasi-neutral world of Bennies partial neutron and now candrive's quasi-neutral plasma the contention in these two states of differing matter end in consolidation of quasi-neutral quarks in neutrons and quasi-neutral quarks in plasma both neutrons and plasma are constructed in the solar furnace there is no contention except in cantdrive's predictive abilities in his prediction that "Don't show this to jonesdumb, he'll have a conniption as this observation clearly violates the quasi-neutrality and Deybe length of the solar wind" as we observe and read candrive's magic predictive.
691Boat
5 / 5 (3) Aug 31, 2018
What would happen to the Sun if it were losing a net current? Hmmm?

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 we only see positively charged ions streaming from the sun during a CME? and we have measured a current going in to the sun?
granville583762
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 31, 2018
Quasi-neutral charges of positive and negativity

Quasi-neutral quarks in neutrons in fact have a partial negativity of charge and quasi-neutral quarks in plasma have a positive of charge equal to or greater but in opposition to the electron which has no quarks in its construction, as we complete the circle one more time in quasi-neutral quark constructed matter.
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 31, 2018
Thor's Quasi-neutral lightning

As when you're struck by Thor's bolts of lightning and lying dumb of jonesdave carbonated remains, take heart jonesdave, that fortunately Thor struck you with a bolt of quasi-neutral lightning!
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
[
You're not too bright jonesdumb, it has been explained to you several times.


No, it hasn't, dumbo. Ask any plasma physicist what would happen if the solar wind were a net current. You haven't explained anything. You are talking crap about a subject on which you have a vanishingly small knowledge, just like the rest of the EU loons.
What is the current entering the Sun at the equator? What is the current leaving at the poles?

That will be x, and x/2. What is x - x/2 - x/2? 0, would be the answer to that. Apart from anything else, not a single plasma physicist thinks the solar wind is a net current, otherwise they would have written it up. None of them are that stupid.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
Thor's Quasi-neutral lightning

As when you're struck by Thor's bolts of lightning and lying dumb of jonesdave carbonated remains, take heart jonesdave, that fortunately Thor struck you with a bolt of quasi-neutral lightning!


Go away, you are as thick as the EU loons. You do not understand the subject any more than they do.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2018
Let us see if the following can illuminate things for the hard of thinking:

Since electrons and protons have opposite charges, electric quasi-neutrality requires them to have roughly the same number density n. Furthermore, since the radial electric current must vanish otherwise electric charge would accumulate indefinitely on the Sun, electrons and protons should have also the same radial bulk speed. The simplest generalisation of the one-fluid picture is therefore to consider two fluids having the same bulk velocity but different particle masses, temperatures and heat fluxes.


Section 5.4
Basics of the Solar Wind
Meyer-Vernet, N.
https://www.resea...37009412 (Free access!)
theredpill
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 31, 2018
"The fact that you even asked that question shows, like the rest of the EU loons, that you haven't got a clue about plasma physics."

I wouldn't expect so someone so daft as to not understand what a current is to recognize sarcasm, or I guess I should say that I shouldn't have. Keep going Jones, you are on a roll...

jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2018
"The fact that you even asked that question shows, like the rest of the EU loons, that you haven't got a clue about plasma physics."

I wouldn't expect so someone so daft as to not understand what a current is to recognize sarcasm, or I guess I should say that I shouldn't have. Keep going Jones, you are on a roll...



What are you prattling on about?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.