Galactic wind provides clues to evolution of galaxies

Galactic wind provides clues to evolution of galaxies
The magnetic field lines of the the Cigar Galaxy (also called M82) appear in this composite image. The lines follow the bipolar outflows (red) generated by exceptionally high rates of star formation. Credit: NASA/SOFIA/E. Lopez-Rodiguez; NASA/Spitzer/J. Moustakas et al.

The Cigar Galaxy (also known as M82) is famous for its extraordinary speed in making new stars, with stars being born 10 times faster than in the Milky Way. Now, data from the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, or SOFIA, have been used to study this galaxy in greater detail, revealing how material that affects the evolution of galaxies may get into intergalactic space.

Researchers found, for the first time, that the flowing from the center of the Cigar Galaxy (M82) is aligned along a magnetic field and transports a very large mass of gas and dust—the equivalent mass of 50 million to 60 million Suns.

"The space between galaxies is not empty," said Enrique Lopez-Rodriguez, a Universities Space Research Association (USRA) scientist working on the SOFIA team. "It contains gas and dust—which are the seed materials for stars and galaxies. Now, we have a better understanding of how this matter escaped from inside galaxies over time."

Besides being a classic example of a starburst galaxy, because it is forming an extraordinary number of compared with most other galaxies, M82 also has blowing gas and dust into intergalactic space. Astronomers have long theorized that these winds would also drag the galaxy's magnetic field in the same direction, but despite numerous studies, there has been no observational proof of the concept.

Researchers using the airborne observatory SOFIA found definitively that the wind from the Cigar Galaxy not only transports a huge amount of gas and dust into the intergalactic medium, but also drags the magnetic field so it is perpendicular to the galactic disc. In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself.

"One of the main objectives of this research was to evaluate how efficiently the galactic wind can drag along the magnetic field," said Lopez-Rodriguez. "We did not expect to find the magnetic field to be aligned with the over such a large area."

These observations indicate that the powerful winds associated with the starburst phenomenon could be one of the mechanisms responsible for seeding material and injecting a magnetic field into the nearby intergalactic medium. If similar processes took place in the , they would have affected the fundamental evolution of the first galaxies.

The results were published in December 2018 in the Astrophysical Journal Letters.

SOFIA's newest instrument, the High-resolution Airborne Wideband Camera-Plus, or HAWC+, uses far- to observe celestial dust grains, which align along magnetic field lines. From these results, astronomers can infer the shape and direction of the otherwise invisible . Far-infrared light provides key information about magnetic fields because the signal is clean and not contaminated by emission from other physical mechanisms, such as scattered visible light.

"Studying intergalactic magnetic fields—and learning how they evolve—is key to understanding how evolved over the history of the universe," said Terry Jones, professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota, in Minneapolis, and lead researcher for this study. "With SOFIA's HAWC+ instrument, we now have a new perspective on these magnetic fields."

The HAWC+ instrument was developed and delivered to NASA by a multi-institution team led by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. JPL scientist and HAWC+ Principal Investigator Darren Dowell, along with JPL scientist Paul Goldsmith, were part of the research team using HAWC+ to study the Cigar Galaxy.


Explore further

Magnetic fields may be the key to black hole activity

More information: Terry Jay Jones et al. SOFIA Far-infrared Imaging Polarimetry of M82 and NGC 253: Exploring the Supergalactic Wind, The Astrophysical Journal (2019). DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf8b9 , https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.06816
Citation: Galactic wind provides clues to evolution of galaxies (2019, March 5) retrieved 20 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-03-galactic-clues-evolution-galaxies.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
557 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 05, 2019
This guy is making 7k a month scamming people, so too is the plasma ignoramus that said this;

"One of the main objectives of this research was to evaluate how efficiently the galactic wind can drag along the magnetic field," said Lopez-Rodriguez. "We did not expect to find the magnetic field to be aligned with the wind over such a large area."


Mar 05, 2019
*sigh*

Not only have they *inferred* magnetic field 'directions', but they then went and compounded their simplistic 'guesswork' by ASSUMING that this galactic wind material...
drags the galactic magnetic field
...with it!

Can it be that they DON'T KNOW that this 'wind' is Plasma (ions and electrons) in complex swirling-linear flow STREAMS which CREATE their OWN magnetic field patterns/coils etc around/through themselves on their way into intergalactic space as it emerges from the INITIAL galactic-wind EXPULSION DYNAMICS closer to the galactic disc/core which sent this material outwards in the first place?

The only saving grace of this 'work' is they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters. :)

Mar 05, 2019
There are some very complicated issues of galaxy formation. Unfortunately, here is the same problem as with the stars. The origin of galaxies remains unclear, in spite of huge activity in the field. What the "formation" means? It means that we have the material that is assembling into galaxies.
https://www.acade...ome_From

Mar 05, 2019
*sigh*

Not only have they *inferred* magnetic field 'directions', but they then went and compounded their simplistic 'guesswork' by ASSUMING that this galactic wind material...
drags the galactic magnetic field
...with it!

Okay, "extend" might have been a better word.
Can it be that they DON'T KNOW that this 'wind' is Plasma (ions and electrons) in complex swirling-linear flow STREAMS which CREATE their OWN magnetic field patterns/coils etc around/through themselves

Okay, again, extend might have been better...and I'm pretty sure it's already known...
on their way into intergalactic space as it emerges from the INITIAL galactic-wind EXPULSION DYNAMICS closer to the galactic disc/core which sent this material outwards in the first place?

EXPULSION dynamics...?


Mar 05, 2019
*sigh*
The only saving grace of this 'work' is they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters. :)

I doubt such a thing as a "free" quark.
It is MY (longstanding) understanding that this is already a (longstanding) understanding understood by most, and is NOT any unique understanding, understood by only yourself...

Mar 05, 2019
I doubt such a thing as a "free" quark.
.....a quark has never been isolated.

Mar 05, 2019
In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself.

LOL, not fact! The wind is an electric current which creates the magnetic fields, only a plasma ignoramus would suggest winds drag or carry magnetic fields.
injecting a magnetic field into the nearby intergalactic medium

Injecting a magnetic field? Is this the pseudoscientific claptrap they are relying on at JPL? No wonder everything is such a mystery.

Mar 05, 2019
Gee, aren't those outflows plasma?

And doesn't plasma have a magnetic field?

I mean, just askin'.

Mar 05, 2019
I doubt such a thing as a "free" quark.
.....a quark has never been isolated.

So what? Quantum chromodynamics says they can't be. The color force is so strong that it doesn't act as an inverse square force; it gets stronger the further you try to separate the particles it acts on. This is basic quantum field theory. And it's obvious that the color force is stronger than the EM force; otherwise nuclei couldn't hold together against the positive charges of all the protons.

This is duh ummm.

Mar 06, 2019
so too is the plasma ignoramus that said


Thing is, YOU are the plasma ignoramus. You don't even understand: conductors, insulators, or Generalized Ohms Law for Plasmas.

Mar 06, 2019
In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself.

LOL, not fact! The wind is an electric current which creates the magnetic fields, only a plasma ignoramus would suggest winds drag or carry magnetic fields.
injecting a magnetic field into the nearby intergalactic medium

Injecting a magnetic field? Is this the pseudoscientific claptrap they are relying on at JPL? No wonder everything is such a mystery.


Complete nonsense. You obviously have no understanding of the relevant science.

Mar 06, 2019
LOL, not fact! The wind is an electric current which creates the magnetic fields, only a plasma ignoramus would suggest winds drag or carry magnetic fields.


So that would be every plasma physicist alive, yes?

Mar 06, 2019
The Winds of Change
In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself

The ionic wind of particles are not permanent magnets
the electric current is a flow of ionic particles
which being an electric current
is a magnetic field
which
only retains a magnetic field
as long as the current flows
which
is as long as the ions flow
in the wind
so
this ionic wind
is not dragging a magnetic field in the wind
The Winds of Change

Mar 06, 2019
The Winds of Change
In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself

The ionic wind of particles are not permanent magnets
the electric current is a flow of ionic particles
which being an electric current
is a magnetic field
which
only retains a magnetic field
as long as the current flows
which
is as long as the ions flow
in the wind
so
this ionic wind
is not dragging a magnetic field in the wind
The Winds of Change


Scientific links to that pile of nonsense, please.

Mar 06, 2019
Gee, for someone who is always screaming about solar plasma, sure seems "skeptical" about the solar plasma from a million stars.

Wonder why that is?

Just askin'.

Mar 06, 2019
Thing is, YOU are the plasma ignoramus. You don't even understand blah, blah, blah

As you insist electric currents cannot flow through space, in direct conflict with article above.

Mar 06, 2019
Thing is, YOU are the plasma ignoramus. You don't even understand blah, blah, blah

As you insist electric currents cannot flow through space, in direct conflict with article above.


This paper has no mention of electric currents. Try reading it.

https://iopscienc...aaf8b9s4

Mar 06, 2019
TrollianCastroGiovanni
Castrogiovanni> Complete nonsense. You obviously have no understanding of the relevant science

How about, TrollianCastroGiovanni
providing
links
for your own, "Complete nonsense. You obviously have no understanding of the relevant science"
just
as in your previous incarnation, TrollianCastroGiovanni
you never made independent comments of your own
you always made
a flying fly by
of tirade and abuse
where, as then, as of now as TrollianCastroGiovanni
you continue in your distinctive style
you
obviously, TrollianCastroGiovanni
have not spent sufficient time in the Naughty Box
it
is that time again, TrollianCastroGiovanni
to
find solace
under your bridge
TrollianCastroGiovanni

Mar 06, 2019
Complete nonsense. You obviously have no understanding of the relevant science.

Please do enlighten us, jonesdumb, as to how one "injects" magnetic fields. Is a syringe used?

So that would be every plasma physicist alive, yes?

Not every one jonesdumb, just the one who erroneously believe in the frozen-in pseudoscience.

Mar 06, 2019
This paper has no mention of electric currents. Try reading it.

Clearly written by plasma ignoramuses then, wasn't it?
"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven

Mar 06, 2019
Plasma involved in star creation has nothing to do with foolish EU crap about the galaxy powering the Sun. Standard physics doesn't question the fact that much plasma is created by violently breaking apart matter in star creating regions.

I have no idea what Cantdrive85 even argues about.

Mar 06, 2019
I have no idea what Cantdrive85 even argues about.

No one has. He just grabs random "sciency" sounding words off the internet and plugs them together. There's a couple of these people floating around.

Mar 06, 2019
This paper has no mention of electric currents. Try reading it.

Clearly written by plasma ignoramuses then, wasn't it?
"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents." Hannes Alfven


That is nothing to do with your silly contention that there is a 700 pc wide electric current. That is utter nonsense. The plasma from these stars powerful stars will, by definition, be quasi-neutral. There is no way for any significant current to form. This is almost analogous to the solar wind from our own star. It is quasi-neutral, and carries the magnetic field of the Sun outward with it. There will be some process involving currents that initially created the field within the Sun, but no currents are required for it to propagate outward with the solar wind.

Mar 06, 2019
The only way you are going to get the observed field-aligned conditions is an electric current. Period, end of story.
And Falthammar pointed out in a paper you have attempted to quote several times that the conditions described above violate the frozen-in approach. But you don't care about facts or science, just arguing about that which you don't have a clue.

Mar 06, 2019
This guy is making 7k a month scamming people, so too is the plasma ignoramus that said this;

"One of the main objectives of this research was to evaluate how efficiently the galactic wind can drag along the magnetic field," said Lopez-Rodriguez. "We did not expect to find the magnetic field to be aligned with the wind over such a large area."


Perhaps it's the wind aligning with the mag field....

Mar 06, 2019
No one has. He just grabs random "sciency" sounding words off the internet and plugs them together.

Funny, the ignorant ones just know I have to be incorrect, even though they are too stupid to get it.

Mar 06, 2019
Perhaps it's the wind aligning with the mag field....

And a "wind" of charged particles is an electric current. Why the fear to acknowledge such a basic concept? Especially when it is so utterly obvious.


Mar 06, 2019
@Whyde.
"extend" might have been a better word.
Yes; and they would have done even better if they had explained that the 'newly added extension' is produced by the expelled plasma material itself once it emerges from the parent galaxy's expulsion-dynamics immediate influence.
EXPULSION dynamics...?
The galactic wind material was expelled from the galactic centre/disc by force(s) resulting from interplay of gravitational/electromagnetic dynamics. Hence expulsion dynamics. Any more hairs' you would like to split, mate? :)
they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters. :)
I doubt such a thing as a "free" quark.
Limited text format necessitated "etc" to imply "gluon" part. :)

Mar 06, 2019
PS @Whyde.

In your eagerness to trivialise science discussion you missed the salient point I made; ie:
they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters.
Which explains the observed 'primordial seeming' Hydrogen-Helium clouds, metal-poor stars/star-clusters, diffuse/faint galaxies etc found in deep space between galaxies/clusters; all of which were PREVIOUSLY INTERPRETED to be 'BB-related relics' that have (supposedly) not undergone much interaction since (alleged) BB.

Now mainstream above CONFIRMS what I've long pointed out: humongous amounts of 'deconstructed material' from galaxies going to deep space over EONS. There FORMING 'pristine looking' clouds/stars/galaxies etc. NOT BB-'primordial'. :)

Mar 06, 2019
Standard physics doesn't question the fact that much plasma is created by violently breaking apart matter in star creating regions.

Far from a factual claim. Not sure if you are aware, but 99.999% of the Universe is in the plasma state. The star creating region are plasma before any star creating happens. And electric currents lace the Universe at all scales, they are ubiquitous in plasma.
Your views are skewed up, down, side to side, forward an back.

Mar 06, 2019
Far from a factual claim. Not sure if you are aware, but 99.999% of the Universe is in the plasma state.


Bound up in stars, i.e. 99.999% of the universe is stars. Dope. And our nearest star is like another soccer ball 2000 miles away with nothing in between.

Mar 06, 2019
Bound up in stars, i.e. 99.999% of the universe is stars. Dope. And our nearest star is like another soccer ball 2000 miles away with nothing in between

Actually more than 90% of the baryonic matter in the Universe is in the intergalactic/interstellar medium, and it's plasma. As usual you have it backwards.

https://www.googl...F_z3gsq1

Mar 06, 2019
Perhaps it's the wind aligning with the mag field....

And a "wind" of charged particles is an electric current. Why the fear to acknowledge such a basic concept? Especially when it is so utterly obvious.


No. A "wind" of charged particles is a battery.
NO ELECTRIC circuit is made until you have a low resistance (a conductor) path to a lower (negative) charge.

Mar 06, 2019
@Whyde.
"extend" might have been a better word.
Yes; and they would have done even better if they had explained that the 'newly added extension' is produced by the expelled plasma material itself.

I'm sticking with extending...
EXPULSION dynamics...?
The galactic wind material was expelled from the galactic centre/disc by force(s) resulting from interplay of gravitational/electromagnetic dynamics. Hence expulsion dynamics.

Can you elaborate on that "interplay"?
.
they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters. :)

Entropy in action, I'd guess you'd say....

Mar 06, 2019
PS @Whyde.

In your eagerness to trivialise science discussion you missed the salient point I made; ie:
they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters.
Which explains the observed 'primordial seeming' Hydrogen-Helium clouds, metal-poor stars/star-clusters, diffuse/faint galaxies etc found in deep space between galaxies/clusters; all of which were PREVIOUSLY INTERPRETED to be 'BB-related relics' that have (supposedly) not undergone much interaction since (alleged) BB.

I don't "trivialize" it. I merely seek to make it understandable to my simple thought process...
What I DO trivialize is the egotistical manner in which it is sometimes presented.

Mar 07, 2019
Perhaps it's the wind aligning with the mag field....

And a "wind" of charged particles is an electric current. Why the fear to acknowledge such a basic concept? Especially when it is so utterly obvious.



Incorrect. You obviously have little to no understanding of the subject. The solar wind is not a current, and it drags out the Sun's magnetic field. Go read a book, or otherwise educate yourself.

Mar 07, 2019
The only way you are going to get the observed field-aligned conditions is an electric current. Period, end of story.
And Falthammar pointed out in a paper you have attempted to quote several times that the conditions described above violate the frozen-in approach. But you don't care about facts or science, just arguing about that which you don't have a clue.


No he did not. And what have electric fields got to do with anything? A moving magnetic field will set up an electric field. Just as in the solar wind. You really do not understand the subject.
And is this the paper where Falthammar agrees that magnetic reconnection occurs due to this violation? And what has it got to do with the paper above? You really do seem out of your depth here.

Mar 07, 2019
The solar wind is not a current, and it drags out the Sun's magnetic field. Go read a book, or otherwise educate yourself

I did, by reading up on the subject by non-plasma ignoramuses. Which is why I know the frozen-in pseudoscience is invalid. Also why I know your claims are non-science blather.

Mar 08, 2019
@Whyde.
I'm sticking with extending
Without context, that's open to misunderstandings as to what process/entities are involved in such "extension". It would have been better expressed as I suggested before.
Can you elaborate on that "interplay"?
Study the galaxy and its processes involving both gravitational features/processes and electromagnetic features/processes which lead to the expulsion of said recycled material (plasma) 'winds' from both the central region and the disc region. Then understand the 'hybrid' gravity-em dynamics/forces involved that produce said 'winds'.
they FINALLY ADMIT humongous amounts of 'plasma' material has been going to deep intergalactic/inter-galactic-cluster space for EONS. Thus further supporting MY longstanding CLAIM that such 'deconstructed' material (protons, electrons, quarks etc) REFORMS into the many observed 'primordial-seeming' stars/galaxies/clusters.
Entropy in action, I'd guess you'd say....
No. Recycling. :)

Mar 08, 2019
@Whyde.
In your eagerness to trivialise science discussion you missed the salient point I made; ie:....Which explains the observed 'primordial seeming' Hydrogen-Helium clouds, metal-poor stars/star-clusters, diffuse/faint galaxies etc found in deep space between galaxies/clusters; all of which were PREVIOUSLY INTERPRETED to be 'BB-related relics' that have (supposedly) not undergone much interaction since (alleged) BB.
I don't "trivialize" it. I merely seek to make it understandable to my simple thought process...What I DO trivialize is the egotistical manner in which it is sometimes presented.
You would understand things better if you were to just ignore the messenger's personal style and just concentrated on the objective scientific/logical substance of what was posted for the benefit of your better objective understanding of the universal reality phenomena. :)

Mar 09, 2019
@Whyde.
No. Recycling. :)

Those particles are going to be have to be moving at an escape velocity to populate interstellar or inter galactic (from stars or from galaxies) space...

Mar 09, 2019
@Whyde.
You would understand things better if you were to just ignore the messenger's personal style and just concentrated on the objective scientific/logical substance of what was posted for the benefit of your better objective understanding of the universal reality phenomena. :)

It's tuff to ignore condescension that has reached "Grandma" level...

Mar 09, 2019
@Whyde.
No. Recycling. :)
Those particles are going to be have to be moving at an escape velocity to populate interstellar or inter galactic (from stars or from galaxies) space...
Yes, they are helped on their way by the e-m fields/structures which 'collimate' the plasma material (protons and electrons etc) into humongous jets (from galactic BH feature), and the wider flow-streams via the galactic disc's magnetic field pattern which also accelerates the overall 'wind' to intergalactic/intercluster deep space. :)
You would understand things better if you were to just ignore the messenger's personal style and just concentrated on the objective scientific/logical substance of what was posted for the benefit of your better objective understanding of the universal reality phenomena. :)
It's tuff to ignore condescension that has reached "Grandma" level...
It's even tougher to ignore juvenile levels of triviality and misunderstandings. Just be objective. :)

Mar 09, 2019
The solar wind is not a current, and it drags out the Sun's magnetic field. Go read a book, or otherwise educate yourself

I did, by reading up on the subject by non-plasma ignoramuses. Which is why I know the frozen-in pseudoscience is invalid. Also why I know your claims are non-science blather.


Sorry, you are talking nonsense. Again. The frozen-in condition is valid in the solar wind, depending on the timescale you are measuring it over.

Mar 09, 2019
Which is why I know the frozen-in pseudoscience is invalid. Also why I know your claims are non-science blather.


Get thee an education. Given typical solar wind conditions, then at 1 AU the magnetic field is expected to diffuse by about 1 km, over a distance of 150m km. You can look at the magnetic Reynolds number, Rm. When Rm << 1, then diffusion dominates, and the frozen-in condition is not valid. Where Rm >> 1, the frozen-in condition is valid, not forgetting the proviso of the timescale you are studying.
The solar wind Rm is calculated to be ~ 7 x 10^16. Which is >> 1, I would say.

Perhaps thousand of plasma physicists have been using an erroneous calculation. In which case you need to show where they stuffed it up.

I cannot provide a link, as the pdf opens directly from a search result. However, if you go to this page, you will see the relevant chapter. Page 20 onwards;

[cont]

Mar 09, 2019
[cont]..............................

https://www.googl...Fdzvuagg

Third article down.

Mar 10, 2019
Perhaps thousand of plasma physicists have been using an erroneous calculation. In which case you need to show where they stuffed it up.

A thousand or a million plasma ignoramuses makes not a difference, wrong is wrong. Every in situ observation taken since day one of the space age shows MHD is invalid yet the plasma ignoramuses still use it with impunity at every turn.

Mar 10, 2019
Perhaps thousand of plasma physicists have been using an erroneous calculation. In which case you need to show where they stuffed it up.

A thousand or a million plasma ignoramuses makes not a difference, wrong is wrong. Every in situ observation taken since day one of the space age shows MHD is invalid yet the plasma ignoramuses still use it with impunity at every turn.


Wrong. You obviously know nothing about plasma physics.

Mar 10, 2019
I ignore plasma ignoramics in favor of real plasma physics. If you were aware of and actually understood Alfvén's and Falthammar's warnings you would be aware their warnings were about SW and other non-collisional plasmas. Alfvén was very clear when he said MHD ***may*** be relevant in dense plasmas such as on the Sun but applying elsewhere would likely lead to erroneous conclusions.

Mar 10, 2019
I ignore plasma ignoramics in favor of real plasma physics. If you were aware of and actually understood Alfvén's and Falthammar's warnings you would be aware their warnings were about SW and other non-collisional plasmas. Alfvén was very clear when he said MHD ***may*** be relevant in dense plasmas such as on the Sun but applying elsewhere would likely lead to erroneous conclusions.


Turns out he was wrong. That's what in-situ data can do. Good, eh? Why should we care what he hypothesised before we even had those data? Go work out the magnetic Reynolds number for the solar wind. Get back to us when you've done it.

Mar 10, 2019
Go work out the magnetic Reynolds number for the solar wind. Get back to us when you've done it.

Your abstract maths is merely an attempt to explain physical reality, though it is not physical reality. Your Reynolds numbers are being applied based on theory and purely on the assumption that it is relevant to the physical reality. Direct in situ observations have shown the SW to be laced by "spaghetti like flux tubes" (i.e. Birkeland currents) just like a plasma ball, the solar "glass" being the Sun's heliopause. Your physics are irrelevant to describing this system.

Mar 10, 2019
Go work out the magnetic Reynolds number for the solar wind. Get back to us when you've done it.

Your abstract maths is merely an attempt to explain physical reality, though it is not physical reality. Your Reynolds numbers are being applied based on theory and purely on the assumption that it is relevant to the physical reality. Direct in situ observations have shown the SW to be laced by "spaghetti like flux tubes" (i.e. Birkeland currents) just like a plasma ball, the solar "glass" being the Sun's heliopause. Your physics are irrelevant to describing this system.


Translation; 'I can't do maths, and I know Jack about plasma physics.' I doubt you know any kind of physics. Go away, you are an irrelevance, and do not know what you are talking about.

Mar 10, 2019
Go work out the magnetic Reynolds number for the solar wind. Get back to us when you've done it.

Your abstract maths is merely an attempt to explain physical reality, though it is not physical reality. Your Reynolds numbers are being applied based on theory and purely on the assumption that it is relevant to the physical reality. Direct in situ observations have shown the SW to be laced by "spaghetti like flux tubes" (i.e. Birkeland currents) just like a plasma ball, the solar "glass" being the Sun's heliopause. Your physics are irrelevant to describing this system.


Birkeland currents! Plasma ball! Where did you get this stuff from! And Alfven was pontificating before we really had any in-situ measurements. We since have an abundance. And the maths is only abstract if you don't understand maths. The figures are there to plug into the equations to obtain the Reynolds number, and calculate the diffusivity. You are obviously a complete stranger to plasma physics.

Mar 10, 2019
For those interested in plasma physics, and have at least a vague understanding of it, here is how modern PPs go about checking the validity of their models;

Magnetospheric plasma boundaries: a test of the frozen-in magnetic field theorem
R. Lundin, M. Yamauchi, J.-A. Sauvaud, A. Balogh
https://hal.archi...2005.pdf

&

Breakdown of the frozen‐in condition in the Earth's magnetotail
Lui, A. T. Y. et al.
https://agupubs.o...JA012000

Mar 10, 2019
jonesdumb prefers willful ignorance, it's easier to believe in pseudoscientific claptrap. Direct measurements of the SW by WIND, ACE, etc.. which shows the flux tubes;
https://www.googl...Eehj5pUg

Mar 11, 2019
jonesdumb prefers willful ignorance, it's easier to believe in pseudoscientific claptrap. Direct measurements of the SW by WIND, ACE, etc.. which shows the flux tubes;
https://www.googl...Eehj5pUg


And what has that got to do with anything? The field is frozen-in. Nobody is saying that it isn't. Go learn some science.

Mar 11, 2019
Not even close jonesdumb, the magnetic fields are not frozen-in tubes like structures. They are created by the electric currents of those Birkeland currents.

Mar 11, 2019
Not even close jonesdumb, the magnetic fields are not frozen-in tubes like structures. They are created by the electric currents of those Birkeland currents.


Liar. No Birkeland currents. Stop making things up.

Mar 11, 2019
That is what those observed flux tubes are, get a clue.

Mar 11, 2019
That is what those observed flux tubes are, get a clue.


No they are not. You are lying. Show me where this is stated in the scientific literature. You are clueless on the subject, so I want an actual plasma physicist who is calling them Birkeland currents.

Mar 11, 2019
Show me where this is stated in the scientific literature.

Peratt says it in first couple of paragraphs, here;

http://adsabs.har...40..143P

Mar 11, 2019
Show me where this is stated in the scientific literature.

Peratt says it in first couple of paragraphs, here;

http://adsabs.har...40..143P


A long since failed and ignored paper. Observations of these Birkeland currents please.

Mar 11, 2019
Messed that up!


Mar 11, 2019
That's convenient for you to be able to pick and choose which papers are valid in your mind. Fact is, real plasma physicists such as Alfvén, Peratt, Falthammar, Dessler, et al. regularly refer to all field-aligned currents as Birkeland currents. Read their papers, and try to understand them.

Mar 11, 2019
That's convenient for you to be able to pick and choose which papers are valid in your mind. Fact is, real plasma physicists such as Alfvén, Peratt, Falthammar, Dessler, et al. regularly refer to all field-aligned currents as Birkeland currents. Read their papers, and try to understand them.


Those papers are disproven by observation. As it happens, I didn't mess up my previous comment, so here it is again;

From Peratt's abstract;

Long-time simulation runs (of about 10 to the 9th years) show the evolution of barred spiral galaxies with large-scale bisymmetric magnetic field distributions having 100-micro-G field strengths.


100 mG is 10 nT. Observed galactic field strengths are ~ 0.1 - 1 nT. Then there is a bunch of nonsense about double-radio galaxies which is pure science fiction. I shall have a closer look at that.

Mar 11, 2019
On to Double Radio galaxies;

It probably wasn't known when Peratt wrote his nonsense, but DRGs are just elliptical galaxies with jets shooting out from an AGN. Perratt has them as two separate galaxies which eventually evolve into spiral galaxies! Fail.

Peratt's full 'paper';

http://adsbit.har...000.html

Mar 11, 2019
I was merely pointing out his comments about calling field-aligned currents Birkeland currents, not sure what tangent you are on.

Mar 11, 2019
I was merely pointing out his comments about calling field-aligned currents Birkeland currents, not sure what tangent you are on.


Magnetic flux tubes are not Birkeland currents.

Mar 11, 2019
They are precisely the same, regardless of your ignorant blather.

Mar 11, 2019
Maybe you could explain the difference between the two?

Mar 11, 2019
They are precisely the same, regardless of your ignorant blather.


No, they are not. Stop being stupid. No current for a start. And the field lines are flowing along the tube. That is not the case in a Birkeland current. If the science is too much for your tiny brain to grasp, how about some piccies?

Flux tube:
https://en.wikipe...ntic.jpg

https://en.wikipe...rope.svg
Surely even a plasma ignoramus such as yourself can see the difference? Nope, on second thoughts...............!

Mar 11, 2019
Last post got mangled when I edited it. So, for clarity;

They are precisely the same, regardless of your ignorant blather.


No, they are not. Stop being stupid. No current for a start. And the field lines are flowing along the tube. That is not the case in a Birkeland current. If the science is too much for your tiny brain to grasp, how about some piccies?

Flux tube:
https://en.wikipe...ntic.jpg

Birkeland current:
https://en.wikipe...rope.svg

Surely even a plasma ignoramus such as yourself can see the difference? Nope, on second thoughts...............!


Mar 11, 2019
Even TrollianCastroGiovanni hath given up the pretence
jonesdumb prefers willful ignorance, it's easier to believe in pseudoscientific claptrap


Castrogiovanni> And what has that got to do with anything? Go learn some science.

Or is jonesdumb a pseudonym for TrollianCastroGiovanni

p.s. what, more pseudonyms

Mar 11, 2019
And the field lines are flowing along the tube.


Actually, that is a pretty crap description. The field lines from the Sun flow radially outward, following the Parker spiral. Occasionally a bunch of field lines are essentially compressed together, hence the flux tube. These tubes tend to move transversely to the overall field morphology. So, they aren't flowing along the tube; the tube is carrying them outward at an angle that is offset from the Parker spiral.

Mar 11, 2019
Flux tube:
https://en.wikipe...ntic.jpg

jonesdumb is too stupid for his own good, scroll down to "see also" on flux tube page, there it lists Birkeland current....
Oops!

Mar 11, 2019
Flux tube:
https://en.wikipe...ntic.jpg

jonesdumb is too stupid for his own good, scroll down to "see also" on flux tube page, there it lists Birkeland current....
Oops!


Idiot! Where do you think the figure of the Birkeland current came from? Which shows it to be a totally different entity. Just because wiki has a link to Birkeland currents on the same page is the scientific evidence that you are presenting to back up your ignorant assertion? Ye Gods. Science not your forte, is it?

Mar 11, 2019
Even TrollianCastroGiovanni hath given up the pretence
jonesdumb prefers willful ignorance, it's easier to believe in pseudoscientific claptrap


Castrogiovanni> And what has that got to do with anything? Go learn some science.

Or is jonesdumb a pseudonym for TrollianCastroGiovanni

p.s. what, more pseudonyms


Why are you here? You contribute nothing other than unintelligible word salad.

Mar 11, 2019
Interesting
These magnetic fields emanating from the solar sunspot
where electrons spiral along the magnetic fields
forming tubular currant loops from one sunspot to the next
As these magnetic fields in this photosphere they loop round and come out at the surface again in continuous loops intensifying the solar sunspot magnetic fields

Mar 11, 2019
currant loops


A loop of dried grapes? Yeah, right.

Mar 11, 2019
Where's the links to explain the English language, TrollianCastroGiovanni
The Winds of Change
In fact, the wind drags the magnetic field more than 2,000 light-years across—close to the width of the wind itself

The ionic wind of particles are not permanent magnets
the electric current is a flow of ionic particles
which being an electric current
is a magnetic field
which
only retains a magnetic field
as long as the current flows
which
is as long as the ions flow
in the wind

TrollianCastroGiovanni > Scientific links to that pile of nonsense, please.

TrollianCastroGiovanni, concerning that pile of nonsense
was carefully scribed
so that is was self explanatory
as it is a description describing that ions moving through space are not dragging a magnetic field because as soon as the flow stops, the current stops, and the magnetic field ceases
There are no links in this Universe that explain the explanatory English language

Mar 11, 2019
The field lines from the Sun flow radially outward, following the Parker spiral. Occasionally a bunch of field lines are essentially compressed together, hence the flux tube. These tubes tend to move transversely to the overall field morphology.

You certainly have the pseudoscience angle to a tee. First, there are no field lines, you claiming they are flowing, following, bunching, and compressing into flux tubes is absolute pseudoscientific claptrap. The tubes are there due to the matter and the fields within the fields the interacting matter creates. The tubes cannot exist without currents creating them, whether you want to call them flux tubes, magnetic ropes, plasma cables, or Birkeland currents.

Mar 12, 2019
[The tubes cannot exist without currents creating them, whether you want to call them flux tubes, magnetic ropes, plasma cables, or Birkeland currents.


Another pile of fail. Birkeland currents in no way resemble magnetic flux tubes. As has been explained to you. The fact that you cannot explain those diagrams is telling. If there were a current through these flux tubes, in which direction would the field be traveling? And yes they can exist without currents. Read the literature. Stop making things up.

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