Spacecraft measurements reveal mechanism of solar wind heating

February 14, 2019, Queen Mary, University of London
Illustration of the MMS spacecraft measuring the solar wind plasma in the interaction region with the Earth's magnetic field. Credit: NASA

Queen Mary University of London has led a study which describes the first direct measurement of how energy is transferred from the chaotic electromagnetic fields in space to the particles that make up the solar wind, leading to the heating of interplanetary space.

The study, published in Nature Communications and carried out with University of Arizona and the University of Iowa, shows that a process known as Landau damping is responsible for transferring energy from the electromagnetic plasma turbulence in space to electrons in the solar wind, causing their energisation.

This process, named after the Nobel-prize winning physicist Lev Landau (1908-1968), occurs when a wave travels through a plasma and the plasma particles that are travelling at a similar speed absorb this energy, leading to a reduction of energy (damping) of the wave.

Although this process had been measured in some simple situations previously, it was not known whether it would still operate in the highly turbulent and complex plasmas occurring naturally in space, or whether there would be a different process entirely.

All across the universe, matter is in an energised plasma state at far higher temperatures than expected. For example, the solar corona is hundreds of times hotter than the surface of the Sun, a mystery which scientists are still trying to understand.

It is also vital to understand the heating of many other astrophysical plasmas, such as the interstellar medium and the disks of plasma surrounding black holes, in order to explain some of the extreme behaviour displayed in these environments.

Being able to make direct measurements of the plasma energisation mechanisms in action in the solar wind (as shown in this paper for the first time) will help scientists to understand numerous open questions, such as these, about the universe.

The researchers discovered this using new high-resolution measurements from NASA's Magnetospheric Multi-Scale (MMS) spacecraft (recently launched in 2015), together with a newly-developed data analysis technique (the field-particle correlation technique).

The solar wind is the stream of charged particles (i.e., plasma) that comes from the Sun and fills our entire solar system, and the MMS spacecraft are located in the measuring the fields and particles within it as it streams past.

Lead author Dr. Christopher Chen, from Queen Mary University of London, said: "Plasma is by far the most abundant form of visible matter in the universe, and is often in a highly dynamic and apparently chaotic state known as turbulence. This turbulence transfers energy to the particles in the plasma leading to heating and energisation, making turbulence and the associated heating very widespread phenomena in nature.

"In this study, we made the first direct measurement of the processes involved in turbulent heating in a naturally occurring astrophysical plasma. We also verified the new analysis technique as a tool that can be used to probe plasma energisation and that can be used in a range of follow-up studies on different aspects of plasma behaviour."

University of Iowa's Professor Greg Howes, who co-devised this new analysis technique, said: "In the process of Landau damping, the electric field associated with waves moving through the plasma can accelerate electrons moving with just the right speed along with the wave, analogous to a surfer catching a wave. This first successful observational application of the field-particle correlation technique demonstrates its promise to answer long-standing, fundamental questions about the behavior and evolution of space plasmas, such as the heating of the solar corona."

This paper also paves the way for the technique to be used on future missions to other areas of the solar system, such as the NASA Parker Solar Probe (launched in 2018) which is beginning to explore the and environment near the Sun for the first time.

Explore further: Magnetic pumping pushes plasma particles to high energies

More information: "Evidence for Electron Landau Damping in Space Plasma Turbulence". C. H. K. Chen, K. G. Klein, and G. G. Howes. Nature Communications , DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-08435-3

Related Stories

Magnetic pumping pushes plasma particles to high energies

November 5, 2018

As you walk away from a campfire on a cool autumn night, you quickly feel colder. The same thing happens in outer space. As it spins, the sun continuously flings hot material into space, out to the furthest reaches of our ...

Magnetic turbulence trumps collisions to heat solar wind

August 17, 2012

(Phys.org) -- New research, led by University of Warwick physicist Dr Kareem Osman, has provided significant insight into how the solar wind heats up when it should not. The solar wind rushes outwards from the raging inferno ...

Recommended for you

Meteorite source in asteroid belt not a single debris field

February 17, 2019

A new study published online in Meteoritics and Planetary Science finds that our most common meteorites, those known as L chondrites, come from at least two different debris fields in the asteroid belt. The belt contains ...

Diagnosing 'art acne' in Georgia O'Keeffe's paintings

February 17, 2019

Even Georgia O'Keeffe noticed the pin-sized blisters bubbling on the surface of her paintings. For decades, conservationists and scholars assumed these tiny protrusions were grains of sand, kicked up from the New Mexico desert ...

Archaeologists discover Incan tomb in Peru

February 16, 2019

Peruvian archaeologists discovered an Incan tomb in the north of the country where an elite member of the pre-Columbian empire was buried, one of the investigators announced Friday.

Where is the universe hiding its missing mass?

February 15, 2019

Astronomers have spent decades looking for something that sounds like it would be hard to miss: about a third of the "normal" matter in the Universe. New results from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory may have helped them ...

What rising seas mean for local economies

February 15, 2019

Impacts from climate change are not always easy to see. But for many local businesses in coastal communities across the United States, the evidence is right outside their doors—or in their parking lots.

125 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
2.7 / 5 (12) Feb 14, 2019
"In the process of Landau damping, the electric field associated with waves moving through the plasma can accelerate electrons moving with just the right speed along with the waves...

Electric fields associated with accelerating and heating of the charged particles, weird! Electric fields are also associated with accelerating the solar wind too.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (9) Feb 14, 2019
"In the process of Landau damping, the electric field associated with waves moving through the plasma can accelerate electrons moving with just the right speed along with the waves...

Electric fields associated with accelerating and heating of the charged particles, weird! Electric fields are also associated with accelerating the solar wind too.


And...............................?
Da Schneib
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 14, 2019
Unfortunately for the EU narrative Landau damping was shown in the lab in 1964. This isn't new stuff. What's new is they showed it happening to the solar wind. It's one of those theories that has been around a long time and finally was shown to be right.

Da Schneib
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Oh and regarding the other component of the solar wind, since protons are about 1836 times more massive than electrons, the effect is 1836 times less since the charges are identical.

So much for EU.

Yes, I can predict what you'll lie about next. It doesn't take psychic powers; you're fools and easy to predict.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Electric fields are also associated with accelerating the solar wind too.


Which electric fields are you on about? The expansion outwards of the solar wind is mainly due to temperature. Given that electrons are much less massive than ions, then a situation arises whereby the electrons will leave the ions behind. This violates quasi-neutrality, so that an ambipolar field is formed which accelerates the ions, and thereby preserving q-n.
However, I don't think anyone is suggesting that solar wind acceleration as a whole is due to an electric field.
Da Schneib
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
However, I don't think anyone is suggesting that solar wind acceleration as a whole is due to an electric field.
Nope, nor is this paper. This is just an energy transfer from narrow wavelengths of solar energy.
wduckss
3 / 5 (2) Feb 14, 2019
" that make up the solar wind, leading to the heating of interplanetary space."
Prepisano iz "If there is no radiation, or if it is minimal, matter is very cold. If there is no visible matter, space warms up (80 to 180°K), just as visible matter."
The article forgets show deviations (because then all inconsistencies of the statement are apparent):
Mercury…min.temp..80°K … 0,39AU
Moon……..100…..1
Mars……….143…..1.52
Vesta………..85…..2,36
Ceres……..168……2,77
67P/C-G…180……3,46
Callisto….80±5….5.20
Solon
5 / 5 (1) Feb 14, 2019
"Which electric fields are you on about?"

If the Sun is a fusion device then an electric field will exist.

Electric field formation in three different plasmas: A fusion reactor, arc discharge, and the ionosphere.
https://aip.scita....5002162
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Feb 14, 2019
"Which electric fields are you on about?"

If the Sun is a fusion device then an electric field will exist.

Electric field formation in three different plasmas: A fusion reactor, arc discharge, and the ionosphere.
https://aip.scita....5002162


Yes, we kind of know about solar wind electric fields.

wduckss
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 14, 2019
"the Sun does not emit gamma rays .., but it does emit gamma rays from solar flares. The Sun also emits X-rays, ultraviolet, visible light, infrared, and even radio waves;.. "
If there is a fusion, how do you explain the following:
Mass vs Mass
2M 044144..9.8±1.8M Jupiter…1.800°K…Distan.15 ± 0.6AU
DT Virginis..8.5 ± 2.5…695±60….1.168

Teide 1……57± 15…..2.600±150
Epsilon Indi 40–60…1.300-1400 ..1.500

B Tauri FU.........15……2.375………….700
DENIS J081730..15……950
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (6) Feb 14, 2019
^^^^^^^^^^ No idea what relevance that is supposed to have.
cantdrive85
2.7 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Yes, we kind of know about solar wind electric fields.

LOL! Now it's self-evident... How do the ions and electrons travel in the same direction in said electric field you now claim to have known about all along?
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Yes, we kind of know about solar wind electric fields.

LOL! Now it's self-evident... How do the ions and electrons travel in the same direction in said electric field you now claim to have known about all along?


Twat. What is an ambipolar field? Dickhead. There is also a motional electric field in the solar wind. Look it up, shitforbrains. Educate yourself, loser. Shit, you are thick.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Cantthink + plasma physics = car wreck. Tosser.
valeriy_polulyakh
1 / 5 (1) Feb 14, 2019
Outflows are ubiquitous in astrophysics. Despite different sizes, velocity and amount of transported energy, luminosity and degree of collimation, they have obvious morphological similarities. However, what is important for us, there is the picture of the outflows from everywhere and none of inflows into somewhere. That is an obvious asymmetry.
https://www.acade...and_Jets
beeds
not rated yet Feb 14, 2019
Can the suns photons accelerate the plasma/solar wind away from the sun? or is there no interaction between them?
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Feb 14, 2019
Neat trick jonesdumb, now it is obvious to you electrons and ions can flow in the same direction in an electric field (such as the Sun's). Only took you 4-years of posting ridicule and wooisms to get that. How many times did you claim it was impossible for ions and electrons to travel the same direction in an electric field? Hundreds at least, but now you acknowledge, amusing!

Look it up, shitforbrains. Educate yourself

You are something else you duplicitous POS. Fact is, you finally decided to educate your dumbass! Although, I bet it was one of those emails you claimed to have sent to authors of papers yet never seem to post their responses. Did some authority figure finally enlighten your dumbass? I'm fairly sure that is the only way you can learn something new, when someone you know is smarter than you tells you it's ok to believe something or other. Clearly you are unable to think for yourself.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Feb 14, 2019
Oh, and contrary to your claims, the SW is not the homogenous flow of electrons and ions traveling at the same speed. It is full of structure (tubes), the fast and slow SW, drifting electrons, the inflowing current sheet, and the huge polar Birkeland currents. There is absolutely a large scale electric field with this menagerie of electric currents.
wduckss
1 / 5 (1) Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^^^^ No idea what relevance that is supposed to have.

1. The body of 1320000 km diameter must have enormous values of radiation (Even the most powerful flares are barely detectable in the total solar irradiance (the "solar constant").
So there is no evidence of radiation and fusion.
2. example gives bodies below 13 M Jup. which can not make fusion (by hypothesis).
3. bodies of the same mass have completely different temperatures.
Evidence should be known to read and understand.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (7) Feb 15, 2019
Neat trick jonesdumb, now it is obvious to you electrons and ions can flow in the same direction in an electric field (such as the Sun's).


No dickhead. We were talking about acceleration. As per the idiot Scott's garbage. The electric fields discussed are induced. One by a conductor (plasma) flowing in a magnetic field (IMF) inducing an electric field. The other by the thermal acceleration of the solar wind accelerating electrons faster than ions, and therefore causing an ambipolar field, which retards the electrons and accelerates the ions.
Learn to science, dummy.
In the idiot Scott's woo, the ions are accelerated, and the electrons stay at home. Which is dumbness squared.
This is why your cult has no adherents who are plasma physicists. You haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 15, 2019
Oh, and contrary to your claims, the SW is not the homogenous flow of electrons and ions traveling at the same speed. It is full of structure (tubes), the fast and slow SW, drifting electrons, the inflowing current sheet, and the huge polar Birkeland currents. There is absolutely a large scale electric field with this menagerie of electric currents.


Birkeland currents are not in the solar wind, you dick. They are induced within the Earth's magnetosphere. And the solar wind is quasi-neutral. There are all sorts of interesting phenomena happening within the solar wind. All jolly interesting, but nothing to do with the ignorant BS believed by the EU plasma ignoramuses.
Here, educate yourself;

BASICS OF THE SOLAR WIND
NICOLE MEYER-VERNET
https://www75.zip...ile.html
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
In the idiot Scott's woo, the ions are accelerated, and the electrons stay at home.

Lie much jonesdumb? You clearly don't understand what you read, no wonder you are so confused.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2019
In the idiot Scott's woo, the ions are accelerated, and the electrons stay at home.

Lie much jonesdumb? You clearly don't understand what you read, no wonder you are so confused.


I understood it completely. As addressed here;

https://www.chris...72444566

The guy is an idiot.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 15, 2019
The idiot is you, clearly.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
The idiot is you, clearly.


Why? I quoted from the idiot's own 'paper'. Which part do you want me to re-quote?
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2019
Just in case anyone is wondering, the piece of garbage by Scott that I am referring to is this;

https://electric-...Wind.pdf
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
First sentence of paper jonesdumb doesn't understand;
"Charged particles (both electrons and positive ions) stream from the Sun in what has become known as the solar 'wind'..."
Clearly too much for jonesdumb to understand.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
First sentence of paper jonesdumb doesn't understand;
"Charged particles (both electrons and positive ions) stream from the Sun in what has become known as the solar 'wind'..."
Clearly too much for jonesdumb to understand.


Read what he wrote, shitforbrains;

When seeking an effective mechanism for accelerating a charged particle such as a proton or other positively charged ion, an obvious idea would be to investigate the effects of the presence of an electric field.........
It is important to note that the required charge density as shown in figure 6 is everywhere greater than zero. ***Thus, only positive charges (+ions) are involved in the acceleration mechanism. No participation of electrons in the required charge distribution is indicated.***


jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
.....cont;

The ES hypothesis states that outward bound positive ions and protons (that will become constituents of the solar wind) rise up from the photosphere, accelerate through a plasma double layer (DL) and collide with neutrals, other atoms, and ions in the lower corona..........
***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.


So how the **** has this idiot got ions going one way, and electrons going the other way? It is puerile (senile?) garbage. If the protons are accelerated, they leave the electrons behind. This violates quai-neutrality. An electric field will form to ***slow down*** the protons and accelerate the electrons to achieve the q-n that we observe. However this idiot has the electrons drifting downwards! He is as dumb as a bag of spanners. A total cockwomble.
cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Whoosh...
Let me help you catch up jonesdumb, re-quoting your quote with some more stars;

***Thus, only positive charges (+ions) ***are*** ***involved*** ***in*** ***the*** ***acceleration*** ***mechanism***. No participation of electrons in the required charge distribution is indicated.***

It's a bit more complex than you seen to be willing to acknowledge. The region he is commenting on is close to the Sun, at the acceleration region where there will be a strong electric field. No spacecraft has ever even been close to this region, no measurements ever taken. Your statements that he is wrong is based entirely on your unfounded claims, no facts involved.
Out past this region where the electric field is much weaker and nearer areas we have sent spacecraft the electrons would not "get left behind" as they will be attracted to the accelerated protons. Lest we forget, there are at least three populations of electrons with different characteristics.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
It's a bit more complex than you seen to be willing to acknowledge.


No it isn't - the idiot f***ed up. Nowhere does he address the electron acceleration. He has them going the wrong way. He is an idiot. Just as the loon f***ed up the equations in his idiotic Birkeland current woo. He is clueless. Why do you think he belongs to the EU cult?
He has an imaginary current of electrons heading in toward the Sun to power it, battling against the outflowing solar wind and its magnetic field. Then he has something accelerating the ions outward, and, according to you, also accelerating the electrons (???!!!) outward, but not affecting the imaginary incoming electrons! The guy is an idiot. Anybody that believes that shit is an idiot.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 15, 2019
More stars...
The ES hypothesis states that outward bound positive ions and protons (that will become constituents of the solar wind) rise up from the photosphere, accelerate through a plasma double layer (DL) and collide with neutrals, other atoms, and ions in the lower corona..........
***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.

Given you utter ignorance of double layers it's obvious why you cannot grasp this concept. Once again, his remarks are about the lower corona, no measurements ever taken in situ. Your claims, baseless.

Oh, and as been shown repeatedly, quasi-neutrality is often and regularly violated. Direct measurements of double layers in space prove this beyond any doubt whatsoever. Try and learn some basic plasma concepts.

jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^^^Not to mention that the loon has fusion occurring in the chromosphere! It is cluelessness squared, from someone who knows sod all about plasma physics or astrophysics. He needs to stick to rewiring houses, or whatever he used to do.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019

Oh, and as been shown repeatedly, quasi-neutrality is often and regularly violated. Direct measurements of double layers in space prove this beyond any doubt whatsoever. Try and learn some basic plasma concepts.



I have seen Scott's crap addressed by a real plasma physicist. He will tell you the same as me. He is clueless. A total loon. An unqualified nobody, with little to no knowledge of the subjects he is addressing.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Electrons that were associated with these ions drift downward


Yep, the wrong way. Where does he tell us how the electrons are being accelerated? Please quote the relevant passage. Isn't his idiotic electric sun supposed to be an anode? How the f*** are the electrons accelerating outward? It is a scientifically impossible fairy tale, dreamed up by another idiot - Juergens. It has been nowhere near peer reviewed literature for a good reason. It is garbage.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Given you utter ignorance of double layers...


You know shit about DLs. Nor does Scott. DL at the Sun! Lol. The plasma physicist I mentioned did his PhD on DLs at Alfven's lab. He thinks Scott hasn't got a scooby.
cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Nowhere does he address the electron acceleration.

He quite clearly states the electrons are not part of the acceleration mechanism, why do you keep bringing it up? The electrons aren't required to be accelerated. Some of those ions have electrons (who'da thunk it), and some of those ions lose electrons in the collisions he mentioned occurs in the corona. The disassociated electrons drift back to the photosphere. Why is this hard to understand?
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Nowhere does he address the electron acceleration.

He quite clearly states the electrons are not part of the acceleration mechanism, why do you keep bringing it up? The electrons aren't required to be accelerated. Some of those ions have electrons (who'da thunk it), and some of those ions lose electrons in the collisions he mentioned occurs in the corona. The disassociated electrons drift back to the photosphere. Why is this hard to understand?


How can they be accelerated outward, as measured, if they are drifting downwards, you idiot? What is accelerating the electrons OUTWARD? Where does the idiot address this?
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 15, 2019
plasma physicist I mentioned did his PhD on DLs at Alfven's lab.

I know, your femboy hack Tusenfem. Alfvén's protegé has the opposite opinion, which would hold more weight with most rational people.
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Methinks Scott and his idiot acolyte cantthink have failed to understand that the accelerated solar wind is composed of ions and electrons. Both are being accelerated. How?
jonesdave
2 / 5 (4) Feb 15, 2019
Alfvén's protegé has the opposite opinion, which would hold more weight with most rational people.


Falthammar? Oh no he doesn't. Both he and Alfven knew/ know that the Sun is powered by fusion. Not a single scientist believes in Scott's idiotic woo.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2019
I know, your femboy hack Tusenfem


He is a plasma physicist, you ignorant f***wit. Something that your cult lacks, eh? Wonder why that is?
Still awaiting an explanation for this;

He has an imaginary current of electrons heading in toward the Sun to power it, battling against the outflowing solar wind and its magnetic field. Then he has something accelerating the ions outward, and, according to you, also accelerating the electrons (???!!!) outward, but not affecting the imaginary incoming electrons! The guy is an idiot. Anybody that believes that shit is an idiot.


cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 15, 2019
How can they be accelerated outward, as measured, if they are drifting downwards,

Can you read? Ions, some of which have electrons, are accelerated and collide into other particles in the lower corona. Electrons are disassociated in these collisions, which drift back down. Maybe read that two or three times to let it calculate.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2019
How can they be accelerated outward, as measured, if they are drifting downwards,

Can you read? Ions, some of which have electrons, are accelerated and collide into other particles in the lower corona. Electrons are disassociated in these collisions, which drift back down. Maybe read that two or three times to let it calculate.


Yes, you twat, I can read. So how are the electrons being accelerated outward? Because that is what is seen, idiot. It is not just the ions being accelerated. Both are accelerated, dumbo. What is accelerating the electrons, as measured?
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2019
Can you read? Ions, some of which have electrons, are accelerated and collide into other particles in the lower corona


And the coronal plasma is collisionless, so that is more idiocy from the fruitloop!

cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
Alfvén's protegé has the opposite opinion, which would hold more weight with most rational people.


Falthammar? Oh no he doesn't. Both he and Alfven knew/ know that the Sun is powered by fusion. Not a single scientist believes in Scott's idiotic woo.

I was referring to Peratt, but that's part of the uniqueness of Alfvén that he influenced so many brilliant scientists. And strangely enough, Peratt had a presentation at the Suspicious Observers conference just yesterday where he continues to offer his viewpoints regarding Plasma Cosmology and near-Earth plasma formations. And contrary to more of your baseless claims, Peratt commented directly to 'The Electric Sky' and he fully supports the notion and agrees the physics are a natural consequence of his and Alfvén's work.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
He is a plasma physicist, you ignorant f***wit.

Let me fix that comment for ya;
"He is a plasma ignoramus , you individual of superior wit and intellect" jonesdumb
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Peratt commented directly to 'The Electric Sky' and he fully supports the notion and agrees the physics are a natural consequence of his and Alfvén's work.


Peratt has lost the plot, and has never endorsed the electric sun idiocy. Scott quoted a review which could have been part of a longer review. Peratt has nothing in the literature supporting this idiocy.

Alfven;

Whether the Sun was produced by a gravitational collapse or by 'stellesimal' accretion, it now seems unavoidable that the primeval Sun must have contained a reasonably large quantity of deuterium which must have been burned before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***.


Evolution of the solar system
Alfven, H. & Arrhenius, G.
https://ntrs.nasa...6016.pdf

So, why follow the unqualified loon Scott over Alfven in this case?
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
He is a plasma physicist, you ignorant f***wit.

Let me fix that comment for ya;
"He is a plasma ignoramus , you individual of superior wit and intellect" jonesdumb


No, he is a plasma physicist, you ignorant twat. And you have precisely zero in your ranks, have you? Why is that? Who is saying he is an ignoramus, and what are their qualifications in plasma physics? Answer, shitforbrains. F***ing fraudulent clown.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Still waiting for this to be addressed by the ignorant clown cantthink;

He has an imaginary current of electrons heading in toward the Sun to power it, battling against the outflowing solar wind and its magnetic field. Then he has something accelerating the ions outward, and, according to you, also accelerating the electrons (???!!!) outward, but not affecting the imaginary incoming electrons! The guy is an idiot. Anybody that believes that shit is an idiot.


jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Anthony Peratt (2015);

Countering the growth of faster computers, better diagnostics, and nuclear research facilities has been the encroachment of those not schooled in plasma science, computer science, physics, astrophysics, or high-power electrical, pulsed energy, and nuclear engineering. Without exception they rail at barriers placed to insure sound scientific technique and methodology. In times past, their 'achievements' were limited to hand-written, mimeographed, or in-house notes. Peer-reviewed papers in print in archived journals or even short letters in their town OpEd page were beyond their reach. However, now the internet or World Wide Web allows anyone, even cults, to present their cacophony to the world, often citing unsuspecting researchers as 'colleagues' for false endorsement.


Wonder who he is referring to here? Lol.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
Wonder who he is referring to here? Lol

Most certainly Darkists such as yourself, given the fact he presented at a conference on Plasma and Electric Cosmology just yesterday.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Wonder who he is referring to here? Lol

Most certainly Darkists such as yourself, given the fact he presented at a conference on Plasma and Electric Cosmology just yesterday.


Wrong, dickhead. It is obvious that he is talking about wooists who do not publish in peer-reviewed literature, and use his name to support their work. That would be you f***wits. That was from the 2nd edition of 'Physics of the Plasma Universe', 2015. Lol. you got pwnt.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
He has an imaginary current of electrons heading in toward the Sun to power it, battling against the outflowing solar wind and its magnetic field. Then he has something accelerating the ions outward, and, according to you, also accelerating the electrons

From this paper;
https://www.googl...25902975

"In the solar wind frame, the core electrons drift sunward along the background magnetic field line, whereas the suprathermal (halo and strahl) electrons drift anti-sunward."

As you can see, observation matches Scott's model.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
He has an imaginary current of electrons heading in toward the Sun to power it, battling against the outflowing solar wind and its magnetic field. Then he has something accelerating the ions outward, and, according to you, also accelerating the electrons

From this paper;
https://www.googl...25902975

"In the solar wind frame, the core electrons drift sunward along the background magnetic field line, whereas the suprathermal (halo and strahl) electrons drift anti-sunward."

As you can see, observation matches Scott's model.


Wrong. These electrons are all emanating from the Sun. No incoming electrons battling the solar wind and IMF and whatever Scott proposes is accelerating the electrons outward. You fail to understand this part - 'In the solar wind frame.' Fail.
cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
These electrons are all emanating from the Sun

Baseless claims, electrons experience Brownian motion, there is no way this claim can be made with any certainty. Also, given how statistical analysis works, when measurements beyond the error bars occur those measurements are then ignored.
And given the SW looks like this;
https://phys.org/...lar.html
...the presence of the turbulence shows the SW is entirely composed of counter flows and vortex type mixing. There is no impenetrable wall for which you like to pontificate fanciful.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
^^^^Total shite. Your dumb model fails trivially. As shown. No mechanism, no science, no evidence.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
You fail to understand this part - 'In the solar wind frame.' Fail.

You fail to understand how (regardless of the interpretation) this violates your claim from above, that the ions and electrons are traveling at the same speed. Quasi-neutrality violated.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
^^^^^No, it is not, you f***wit. You simply don't understand the science. Because you don't understand plasma physics, and neither does anybody else in your cult. What are the ions doing, you tosser? Lern to scienz, thicko.
Da Schneib
2.3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
https://plasmauniverse.info/

The Plasma Universe and Plasma
Cosmology have no ties to the anti-
science blogsites of the holoscience
'electric universe'.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
As shown. No mechanism, no science, no evidence.

Except for the decades of laboratory evidence of plasma phenomena which support all of the claims. It is the hypothetical beliefs of the plasma ignoramuses which precludes these concepts from being more widely accepted. The proliferation of endless thought experiments, maths gymnastics, and computer games will never lead to real advances in the sciences.

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture." Hannes Alfvén

And just look at the dark sciences.
Da Schneib
1.7 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
You mean like the experiments at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory?

Just askin.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
What are the ions doing,

Being accelerated by the electric field, feels like were going in circles. The electrons are drifting sunward, drifting anti-sunward, and shot out in collimated electron beams, nothing resembling your description.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
You mean like the experiments at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory?

You mean like these that further support the approach Alfvén demanded was necessary for real advances as well as supporting Plasma and Electric Cosmology?

https://phys.org/...ngs.html

Yep, couldn't agree more, all except the interpretations using pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo of MRx. The experimentation is solid though, in their electric plasma lab.

rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Feb 16, 2019
cant thunks because the security guards are keeping him outside the perimeter fences to the experimental laboratories? That all those big buildings must be empty & unused.

Huh, a pertinent, impertinent self-desxriprion of cant.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Except for the decades of laboratory evidence of plasma phenomena which support all of the claims.


Nope, no lab experiments support electric universe woo.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
What are the ions doing,

Being accelerated by the electric field, feels like were going in circles. The electrons are drifting sunward, drifting anti-sunward, and shot out in collimated electron beams, nothing resembling your description.


Really? Where is that spelled out in this piece of scientifically illiterate crap from Scott? How are they being accelerated OUTWARD, shitforbrains? The Sun is supposed to be an anode in your idiotic woo. If the ions are being accelerated in a region where the electrons are drifting back toward the Sun, then when do they get around to joining the ions? How do they do it? Scott doesn't say. He says the electrons are not involved! Of course they are f***ing involved. They are measured to be involved. You need to accelerate ions and electrons in the same direction, at the same velocity. How are you doing it? Answer.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Yep, couldn't agree more, all except the interpretations using pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo of MRx. The experimentation is solid though, in their electric plasma lab.


Not a single scientist is disagreeing with MRx. You are an ignorant liar. It is observed, multiple times in the lab, and in-situ. Alfven was wrong. As Falthammar would tell you. Your uneducated opinion is worthless.

jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
As shown. No mechanism, no science, no evidence.

Except for the decades of laboratory evidence of plasma phenomena which support all of the claims. It is the hypothetical beliefs of the plasma ignoramuses which precludes these concepts from being more widely accepted. The proliferation of endless thought experiments, maths gymnastics, and computer games will never lead to real advances in the sciences.

"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture." Hannes Alfvén

And just look at the dark sciences.


Wanker. Ancient history. You are clueless, as is every single one of the EU cultists. Earth orbiting Saturn! Lol. What a bunch of dicks. Seen that in a lab experiment, have you, woo boy? Velikovskian crap, spouted by non-scientists. You are an irrelevance. Just as Velikovsky was.
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
"We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture." Hannes Alfvén


Show me the mechanisms, evidence and science for the electric sun crap. There isn't any.
It is non-science.

Whether the Sun was produced by a gravitational collapse or by 'stellesimal' accretion, it now seems unavoidable that the primeval Sun must have contained a reasonably large quantity of deuterium which must have been burned before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***


Hannes F***ing Alfven, woo boy.

cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
Nope, no lab experiments support electric universe woo.

Stop lying jonesdumb.

https://jp4.journ...408.html

https://www.safireproject.com

cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
If the ions are being accelerated in a region where the electrons are drifting back toward the Sun, then when do they get around to joining the ions?

Beyond the double layers he is describing.
You need to accelerate ions and electrons in the same direction, at the same velocity. How are you doing it?

Why do you keep making this erroneous claim? I just pointed to a paper of in situ observations, there are at least three populations of electrons with different characteristics. Stop lying!
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Nope, no lab experiments support electric universe woo.

Stop lying jonesdumb.

https://jp4.journ...408.html



Birkeland's stuff is irrelevant to idiotic EU non-science, and SAFIRE is a joke. The electric sun is already debunked, and scientifically impossible. And the Sun is not a metallic sphere with squillions of volts entering it. Fail. So, there is no lab experiment to back up EU woo.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
Why do you keep making this erroneous claim? I just pointed to a paper of in situ observations, there are at least three populations of electrons with different characteristics. Stop lying!


F*** me, you are stupid! And each of those populations of electrons has its associated ions, you tosspot. The strahl is the fast solar wind electron component. What is accelerating it and the associated ions? Where is this written down? If these electrons were all on their own, you ignorant f*** that would violate q-n. That is not seen, you idiot. What is accelerating the electrons away from your anode, dickhead? Point to it in the literature.

cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
Hannes F***ing Alfven,

As mentioned, Alfvén's protege considered Scott's model to be a natural extension of his and Alfvén's Plasma Cosmology.

Birkeland's stuff is irrelevant to idiotic EU non-science,

Lie some more jonesdumb? The Safire Project is a modern version of Birkeland's Little Terella experiments. Take off the blinders jonesdumb.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
And each of those populations of electrons has its associated ions,

It doesn't say that moron, fail again?
jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
Hannes F***ing Alfven,

As mentioned, Alfvén's protege considered Scott's model to be a natural extension of his and Alfvén's Plasma Cosmology.

Birkeland's stuff is irrelevant to idiotic EU non-science,

Lie some more jonesdumb? The Safire Project is a modern version of Birkeland's Little Terella experiments. Take off the blinders jonesdumb.


Nope, Peratt does not believe in the electric sun idiocy. Why do you think he is pissing all over the EU woo in the passage I linked previously?

before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***


Alfven. Read it and weep, woo boy.

And, as pointed out, the SAFIRE nonsense is nothing to do with the reality of the Sun. It is a pointless waste of time and money, and will never see the light of day in any sort of decent journal. Still betting zero.

jonesdave
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2019
And each of those populations of electrons has its associated ions,

It doesn't say that moron, fail again?


Dickhead. Lol. Of course they are f***ing there. Otherwise you have got a current, you tit, and ACE and WIND would notice that! Electron counts would be way above ion counts. Not seen. Go check the data. As the f***wit Scott should have done before putting his big foot in his ignorant mouth. At least now I see where the twat has got confused! Told you - he is shit at plasma physics and astrophysics.
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 16, 2019
Of course they are f***ing there

They must be, right, so you are right! That is handy you can justify blanket inferences for every observation for your hypothetical beliefs, yet affording the same to an alternative POV is not acceptable. Nice double standard. All your claims are baseless, the SW is nothing like you claim. It is structured with current sheets and flux tubes, and energy is discharged from one region to the next. The article which describes this was already posted in this thread. Your fantasyland nonsense about frozen-in fields and absolute quasi-neutrality are not based in reality.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
^^^^^Go look at the ACE data, you twat!

Your fantasyland nonsense about frozen-in fields and absolute quasi-neutrality are not based in reality.


Yes they are. Ask a plasma physicist, dickhead. Oh, sorry, you haven't got any! Why is that?

jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
yet affording the same to an alternative POV is not acceptable.


There is no alternative POV. Not from any plasma physicist I know of. Where is it written up? By whom? What are they qualified in? Why should I, or anybody else, give a tuppeny f*** about a bunch of unqualified mythologist ramblings? It doesn't exist.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
The main problem with these scientifically illiterate cranks, is that they do not understand the subject area, and do not know how to access, let alone analyse, the freely available data. So, they end up lying. A perfect example is the well known liar Wal Thornhill. Been lying his tits off for years about comets (among other things). Has he ever downloaded the freely available data from the Giotto magnetometer to look for his non-existent electric woo? Or that from Deep Impact? Or Rosetta? Of course he hasn't, and wouldn't understand, nor know what to do with it, if he did. So all these clowns are left with is either lying, or talking crap, due to not understanding the subject area. As with Scott and the solar wind. Or anything else to do with plasma physics or astrophysics. And they wonder why nobody takes them seriously!
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
So, we come on to the idiot Scott. He's obviously seen a paper or, more likely, a press release, detailing the fast solar wind speed as measured from the ion velocity. Possibly by SWICS on Ace. What he doesn't realise is that there are a shed load of other instruments on that spacecraft, that measure both ion and electron parameters. And that the people reporting and overseeing that data are far smarter than he is. He thinks..."Duh, a lectic field will ac..aca...acca....make ions go faster." Failing to realise that the f****ing electrons are are also accelerating. Total dunce. Each instrument will have a team associated with it. They will report there findings based on either electrons or protons. Somebody, eventually, will combine the data into a model. Probably multi-fluid. This shit is beyond idiots like Scott, and various other amateur posers. Which is why you won't see it in the peer reviewed literature. They have a bridge to sell, and some people are dumb enough to buy it.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
Arrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Cardinal sin above. 'Their' not' there'! Excuse me while I self-flagellate.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
absolute quasi-neutrality


Dafuq is that? It is either q-n or it isn't! By definition, all astrophysical plasmas are q-n. Dummy. If the solar wind had an excess of electrons over protons/ ions, then it would build up a + charge. That is dumb. I would suggest consulting somebody who understands plasma physics. Not sure where you can turn :) EU is a plasma physicist-free zone. Yes? (rhetorical).
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
all astrophysical plasmas are q-n

That is likely the dumbest thing I have read from you this year, and you are exceedingly capable at saying moronic crap.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
all astrophysical plasmas are q-n

That is likely the dumbest thing I have read from you this year, and you are exceedingly capable at saying moronic crap.


Really, shitforbrains? Why is that, you uneducated moron? What happens when neutrals are ionised? Sneaking in extra electrons or protons from another dimension, are we? Dickhead.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
Here is someone (cantthink) who has never studied plasma physics, and knows Jack shit about it, telling the whole of the plasma physics community that they are wrong. This twat also believes that Earth used to orbit Saturn! Should we take him seriously? I say not. His is likely retarded. I'm open to suggestions, though.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (2) Feb 16, 2019
all astrophysical plasmas are q-n

That is likely the dumbest thing I have read from you this year, and you are exceedingly capable at saying moronic crap.


Really, shitforbrains? Why is that, you uneducated moron? What happens when neutrals are ionised? Sneaking in extra electrons or protons from another dimension, are we? Dickhead.


Ahhh, silly me - there is another option; protons or electrons are being lost preferentially from this dimension! I really need to think this shit through! Which is it, woo boy?
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
Why is that, you uneducated moron? What happens when neutrals are ionised? Sneaking in extra electrons or protons from another dimension, are we?

What does that have to do with anything we have been discussing? You're the one that believes in extra dimensions.

Double layers have been measured in situ within astrophysical plasma, this one fact destroys you claim. It is not the whole of the plasma physics community that is wrong, just you and your skewed.

cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) Feb 16, 2019
**skewed understanding....
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 19 hours ago
Why is that, you uneducated moron? What happens when neutrals are ionised? Sneaking in extra electrons or protons from another dimension, are we?

What does that have to do with anything we have been discussing? You're the one that believes in extra dimensions.

Double layers have been measured in situ within astrophysical plasma, this one fact destroys you claim. It is not the whole of the plasma physics community that is wrong, just you and your skewed.



What the hell have DLs got to do with anything? Nothing to do with electric sun idiocy.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 18 hours ago
What does that have to do with anything we have been discussing?


Because astrophysical plasmas (and lab ones, for that matter) are quasi-neutral by definition. Unless, that is, you believe there are more electrons created by ionization than protons (or vice versa). So, where are you getting the extras from? Not this universe. Ditto in the lab. Put a bunch of neutrals in a storage device, zap them to ionize them, and you get the same number of electrons as protons/ ions. You can do certain things to them to separate the charges, but only around the order of the Debye length. In the solar wind that is ~ 10m. In the corona, where the idiot Scott wants a humongous DL, much less, due to higher density. He is an idiot, as previously noted.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) 16 hours ago
What the hell have DLs got to do with anything?

Moron says what! DL's in plasmas are regions where quasi-neutrality is violated, Electric Sun or not.
So, where are you getting the extras from? Not this universe.

Just when you thought the stupid couldn't get any stupider, jonesdumb raises the scale of stupidity to new heights. Who puts your pants on?
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 16 hours ago
What the hell have DLs got to do with anything?

Moron says what! DL's in plasmas are regions where quasi-neutrality is violated, Electric Sun or not.
So, where are you getting the extras from? Not this universe.

Just when you thought the stupid couldn't get any stupider, jonesdumb raises the scale of stupidity to new heights. Who puts your pants on?


Dickhead. A DL is not an overall violation of q-n, you f***wit. And where are you getting the excess of one charge over another from, you moron? You know shit about plasma physics, nor any other sort of physics. You believe Earth used to orbit Saturn, you scientifically illiterate freak. Now piss off, and learn some basic science, you ignorant poser.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 16 hours ago
Electric Sun or not.


Not. Scientifically impossible rubbish. No mechanisms, no science, no evidence. The fairy tale beliefs of a bunch of scientifically illiterate mythologists. Zero support from any respected scientists.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 16 hours ago
For any of the plasma ignorumuses, in other words all EU thickos, I would suggest reading this;

https://web.archi.../yr2004/

In particular, section 19.3.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (2) 16 hours ago
A DL is not an overall violation of q-n, you f***wit.

By definition, it is a violation of quasi-neutrality, there smartie pants;

"A double layer is a structure in a plasma consisting of two parallel layers of opposite electrical charge."

The presence of electron beams as measured by Ulysses and Cassini is also a violation of quasi-neutrality and Debye length.

The measured flux-transfer-events of Sun to Earth Birkeland currents is a violation of quasi-neutrality and Debye length. These discharge events are a process to regain quasi-neutrality, clearly quasi-neutrality must have been violated to allow these discharge events.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (2) 15 hours ago
LOL! Kip Thorne lectures? King of the plasma ignoramuses, his utterances can be unconditionally ignored. He is a sci-fi movie maker isn't he?
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
A DL is not an overall violation of q-n, you f***wit.

By definition, it is a violation of quasi-neutrality, there smartie pants;

"A double layer is a structure in a plasma consisting of two parallel layers of opposite electrical charge."

The presence of electron beams as measured by Ulysses and Cassini is also a violation of quasi-neutrality and Debye length.

The measured flux-transfer-events of Sun to Earth Birkeland currents is a violation of quasi-neutrality and Debye length. These discharge events are a process to regain quasi-neutrality, clearly quasi-neutrality must have been violated to allow these discharge events.


And does not violate the overall q-n of a plasma, dickhead. If the Sun were losing an excess of one charge over another, what would happen, shitforbrains? Duh!
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
LOL! Kip Thorne lectures? King of the plasma ignoramuses, his utterances can be unconditionally ignored. He is a sci-fi movie maker isn't he?


Sorry, ignorant wanker? Who are your plasma physicists? You haven't got a single one, have you? Not a single wooist who has qualified in plasma astro/physics. Why the f*** should we listen to unqualified twats like you on matters of plasma or astrophysics? Who are these geniuses, and what are their qualifications? Where did you graduate with a PhD in plasma physics from, woo boy? Where are your papers? Why the f*** should we listen to ignorant posers like you?
All of those questions are obviously rhetorical. You are a scientifically illiterate, Velikovskian nutjob. Of no relevance or interest. Except to psychologists.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
LOL! Kip Thorne lectures? King of the plasma ignoramuses, his utterances can be unconditionally ignored. He is a sci-fi movie maker isn't he?


And do you think Kip Thorne is the only person who will tell you that, idiot? I linked to a book on Zippyshare for you a few days back. Try reading it. Or any other textbook on plasma physics. However, why would you? Not a chance of understanding them have you? Rhetorical. None of you are sufficiently intelligent nor qualified to understand such things.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (2) 15 hours ago
Your textbooks authored by plasma ignoramuses is meaningless nonsense, as are all mumblings offered by the sci-fi author Kippy Thorne.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
Your textbooks authored by plasma ignoramuses is meaningless nonsense, as are all mumblings offered by the sci-fi author Kippy Thorne.


Wanker. Show me the qualifications of the person saying this. Nobody who knows anything about plasma physics or astrophysics, correct? So, why should we care what such a tosser thinks on a comments section?
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) 15 hours ago
And regardless of all your proclamations from ignorance, quasi-neutrality of plasmas doesn't preclude conductivity of said plasma. Even a fully neutral plasma is an excellent conductor of electricity.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
And regardless of all your proclamations from ignorance, quasi-neutrality of plasmas doesn't preclude conductivity of said plasma. Even a fully neutral plasma is an excellent conductor of electricity.


Oh Jesus! Talk about dumb! Of course it is a good conductor. That is the whole basis of MHD, for which Alfven got a Nobel.
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (2) 15 hours ago
Nobody who knows anything about plasma physics or astrophysics, correct?

'Cosmic Plasma' by Alfvén and 'The Physics of the Plasma Universe' by Peratt are two such books written by experts in plasma physics. And they bear no relation to the plasma ignoramuses textbooks, as such you are once again caught lying.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
And regardless of all your proclamations from ignorance,...


This from an ignorant fool that believes Earth used to orbit Saturn. Lol.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 15 hours ago
And they bear no relation to the plasma ignoramuses textbooks, as such you are once again caught lying.


Lying twat. Show me where either of those books say that the solar wind is not quasi-neutral. Show me in either of those books where they suggest massive charge separation in the solar wind. Show me where they posit an electric sun. Show me where they disagree with Debye shielding. And, in case you haven't noticed, one of those books is ancient. The other is hardly part of a modern plasma physicist's main library. And criticises the EU implicitly in the intro. Try again, woo boy. In case it has passed you by, much has been learned by in-situ measurement since either of those books were first published.

jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 14 hours ago
'Cosmic Plasma' by Alfvén


This would be the same Alfven who said;

before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***


?
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (4) 14 hours ago
Peratt comments in regards to the electric sun theory which was proposed after Alfvén passed away;

"It is gratifying to see the work of my mentor, Nobel Laureate Hannes Alfvén enumerated with such clarity. I am also pleased to see that Dr. Scott has given general readers such a lucid and understandable summary of my own work."
According to Peratt, Dr. Scott is right on the mark.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (1) 14 hours ago
Peratt comments in regards to the electric sun theory which was proposed after Alfvén passed away;

"It is gratifying to see the work of my mentor, Nobel Laureate Hannes Alfvén enumerated with such clarity. I am also pleased to see that Dr. Scott has given general readers such a lucid and understandable summary of my own work."
According to Peratt, Dr. Scott is right on the mark.


Nope. Scott is talking shit about something that neither Peratt nor Alfven ever suggested. That is quite possibly a cherry picked piece of a longer comment on the book that said; "While I disagree with the proposal of an electric sun.....................However.........."
Why do you think he trashes EU in his intro to the 2nd edition of PotPU?

Alfven (1976);

before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***


cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) 14 hours ago
That is quite possibly a cherry picked piece of a longer comment on the book that said; "While I disagree with the proposal of an electric sun.....................However.........."

Project much? You don't have a dignified electron in your body, willing to lie at every turn. How do you live with yourself?
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 14 hours ago
That is quite possibly a cherry picked piece of a longer comment on the book that said; "While I disagree with the proposal of an electric sun.....................However.........."

Project much? You don't have a dignified electron in your body, willing to lie at every turn. How do you live with yourself?


I'm not lying about anything. You are. Suggesting Alfven and Peratt would have any truck with the unscientific bollocks of the electric sun.

Alfven (1976);

before the Sun could reach its ***present hydrogen-burning state***


And you need to read section 3.10.3 from PotPU;

The electrons can separate from the ions about a Debye length (EQUATION SNIPPED) before they are restrained by the ions. The ions then follow the electrons in a process known as ambipolar diffusion.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 14 hours ago
Also, form PotPU, Section 5.1;

Due to the acceleration of the streaming particles by the double layer potential, the density of each streaming particle population decreases on the downstream side. Therefore, trapped particles must be produced to ensure overall charge neutrality.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 13 hours ago
And further from PotPU, Section 1.2.5;

The ***nuclear core of the Sun*** is a plasma at about a temperature of 1.5keV.


The 2nd edition is 2015. When did Scott write his crap?

jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 13 hours ago
And from the same section as the previous;

Stellar plasmas have not only the dimension of the star, 0.3 × 10^6-10^8 km, but
also the stellar magnetospheres, a remnant of the interstellar plasma that the star and
its satellites condensed out of.


Whoa, the Sun condensed? Wasn't formed by some z-pinch, or other electrical nonsense? Seems like Peratt and Alfven are as far away as you can get from Scott's unscientific crap.
DeliriousNeuron
1 / 5 (3) 12 hours ago
It's been a while since I've logged in....dang.
I wanted to let everyone know how much pleasure I get watching Jonesdumb back peddle and stumble on Cantdrives comments.

I'm pretty sure Jonesdumb is just a bot. He posts one thing and contradicts himself on a previous news story. Get your story straight dude!! LMAO!!
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 12 hours ago
It's been a while since I've logged in....dang.
I wanted to let everyone know how much pleasure I get watching Jonesdumb back peddle and stumble on Cantdrives comments.

I'm pretty sure Jonesdumb is just a bot. He posts one thing and contradicts himself on a previous news story. Get your story straight dude!! LMAO!!


Really? Where did this happen, woo boy?
DeliriousNeuron
1 / 5 (2) 11 hours ago
Just reread your replies to Cantdrive. Then find a news story on a similar topic and read your replies.

Also, name calling and curse words makes you look stupid. It weakens an argument, without doubt. It muddies and obscures the sense of what you want to say and makes it sound like you don't have a case. You're just angry and completely inarticulate. In fact, it can make you sound like a moron.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 11 hours ago
Just reread your replies to Cantdrive. Then find a news story on a similar topic and read your replies.

Also, name calling and curse words makes you look stupid. It weakens an argument, without doubt. It muddies and obscures the sense of what you want to say and makes it sound like you don't have a case. You're just angry and completely inarticulate. In fact, it can make you sound like a moron.


So, it didn't happen? Cheers, thought not. Now piss off, woo boy.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) 11 hours ago
It muddies and obscures the sense of what you want to say and makes it sound like you don't have a case.


Yep, linking to actual quotes from Alfven and Peratt in papers that I own makes me look stupid. Linking to plasma physics books that I own, and have gone to the trouble of uploading to a file host, makes me look stupid. Linking to course material from Caltech makes me look stupid. Nice one woo boy. WTF have you got? Clown.

jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) 8 hours ago
It's been a while since I've logged in....dang.


Do yourself a favour, woo boy - stay away. You are likely even more scientifically illiterate than the idiot cantthink. Tough call, but it's possible. Eh, tosser?
cantdrive85
not rated yet 2 hours ago
jonesdumb doesn't understand what it is to be real scientist. Real scientists don't think in absolutes as jonesdumb does, they can accept that there may be a different explanation and the currently held POV may be wrong.
Alfvén was open to the electric sun prior to his passing, so much so the he developed his solar circuit model. He did not propose how it was connected to the galactic circuit. He remarked;
"The stellar current closes at large distances, but we do not know where."
And Peratt remarked directly to the Electric Sun model, as pointed out above. Remember, unlike you he is a scientist and accepts the validity of the model.
cantdrive85
not rated yet 1 hour ago
Here is a conference editorial that Peratt wrote (he helped to organize the conference) in which Dr. Scott gave a discussion of the importance of electrical engineering concepts in discussing space plasmas and Thornhill
spoke of his paper on the z-pinch formation of stars. Peratt remarked;

"Plasma Cosmology, or cosmology of the plasma universe as derived by K. Birkeland, H. Alfvén, C.-G. Fäthammar, N. Herlofson, B. Lehnert, L. P. Block, P. Carlqvist, and a host of others since Anders Celsius first identified the aurora as an electromagnetic phenomena nearly 300 years ago has long associated the plasma pinch as the progenitor of many objects in the cosmos. In the paper, "The Z-pinch morphology of supernova 1987a and electric stars", W. Thornhill revisits plasma cosmology adding new insights that link together plasma phenomena ranging from auroras to supernovae."

https://plasmauni...asma.pdf

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.