upriver wrote:And this is what is observed in the local filaments that CLUSTER studies.
I put a link to this at: QDL / Articles / Science / Theoretical / Hot Topics
Sounds like there is a wealth of information in this, concerning the behaviors of plasma in general, and solar fluxes in particular. I just have no idea what this means!
Lloyd wrote:Sounds like that's what our work group ought to focus on: analyzing Bob Johnson's Plasmoid Sun model and seeing what are the main requirements for it and what evidence goes for and against those requirements.
You mean... wait... you mean... posts that are ON-topic??? Is that even a word?
As with other topics, I'll try to collect the arguments for & against, and put them into a reference document.
QDL / Articles / Science / Theoretical / Astronomy / Topics / Solar Models / Bob Johnson: Toroidal Plasmoid
Bob didn't provide detailed diagrams of his proposal, but here's the gist of it...
Bob Johnson wrote:A stable plasmoid is like a Birkeland Current wrapped round into a closed loop. This force-free toroidal form occurs at all scales. It’s been suggested that the electron itself is a toroid. Wal Thornhill has argued that there is a plasmoid at the heart of the Milky Way. So it seems possible that a plasmoid may be contained inside the Sun and other stars as well.
I totally agree that CFDLs provide the defining characteristics of the Sun (surface & interior). But a plasmoid strong enough to maintain distinct CFDLs in the Sun, whose leakage
could light up the whole solar system, would require an extremely powerful, well organized magnetic field. The Sun's actual magnetic field is poorly organized, and averages 1 Gauss, which is merely twice the strength of the Earth's magnetic field. Of course, it's reasonable to assume that the solar toroidal plasmoid would be far from the surface. But for its effects to be felt so significantly at the surface, its magnetic field would be detectable as well. So I think that the B-field is out of range. This brick wall is what sent me looking for another way of sustaining CFDLs, which is how I arrived at compressive ionization as the organizing principle. This accomplishes the same feat, but without any magnetic fields.
upriver wrote:If space was not a conductor would you get plasma filaments? Logically I would say no.
And if free space was not a conductor, neon lights wouldn't work. Lightning wouldn't happen. The aurora wouldn't happen. Any time an electron has to pass through free space in order to get from one atom to the next, because it is outside of the electron cloud of a crystal lattice, it is passing through... free space. If free space was a perfect insulator, discharges in plasma wouldn't happen.
And don't tell me that free space is a perfect insulator, but that sometimes an electron can tunnel through it. If that's the case, it isn't exactly a perfect insulator anymore. Especially if this happens at a regular rate. That would be like saying that a seive can form a perfect seal, except for the holes in it
, which sometimes allow stuff through. Which times? All times! That's not a perfect seal. It's a seive!
The only thing preventing an electron from zipping freely through empty space in response to an electric field is the binding energy of the last atom it called home. Once outside of an electron cloud, the only resistance comes from collisions with atoms.
Anyway, I created a reference document for this topic.
QDL / Articles / Science / Theoretical / Fundamentals / Electromagnetism / The Resistance of a Vacuum
In time, I'll try to pull together more of the statements. Future discussions should begin by reading the reference document. Otherwise, we'll just keep going back and forth on this. If there are open questions, we'll leave them open. But we should never have to re-hash anything.
PersianPaladin wrote:Some further clarifications, or perhaps I'm repeating myself again?
I'm still hoping that you'll find an answer to the question about the fate of high-speed filaments. If
a star forms, how long will it last with that kind of velocity relative to its environment?
PersianPaladin wrote:Regarding that paper about plasmoids detected in solar flares [...] It's simply a measurement of accelerated electrons respective to the magnetic field.
Actually, it's just an MHD assumption that it's the magnetic field that is accelerating the electrons. It's also possible that the earlier CME ejected a large mass of positive ions, creating a charge imbalance, and drawing a waft of electrons out of the Sun. They would then tend to follow the magnetic field lines, which would bring them to the top of the arcade. Once the electrons can no longer make outward progress as field-aligned currents, they slow down, and then break out of the magnetic field, thereafter proceeding directly on out into space. This explains the high charge density in the helmet streamers, as noted in the image. Magnetic connection does not. Time varying magnetic fields can induce currents, but they're not going to create extraordinary charge densities, and certainly not at the mid-point of the field lines. Rather, the magnetic fields should accelerate the charges all of the way down the lines, and if anything, we'd expect higher charge densities at the footpoints of the field lines.
Also, it "might be" just an assumption that it is a magnetic field that is keeping these clusters of electrons organized, thus justifying the term "plasmoid". I don't have access to that journal, so you'll have to tell me: did they explicitly discount the possibility of a clump of positive ions at the centers of these clusters, which would make them electrostatic plasma cells, instead of electrodynamic plasmoids? If so, can you supply the quote?
PersianPaladin wrote:Frankly, the hypothesis that stars are plasmoids also needs to be seriously considered rather than just dismissed.
considered it. I ran into some tough, unanswered questions about condensing matter from ions (despite the Coulomb force resisting it), and about the stability of condensed matter formed at relativistic speeds (necessary for such a powerful z-pinch). "Serious consideration" means actually thinking about it, not just casually taking somebody else's word for it.
BTW, can you ask Wal about the size of the "blueberries" that they created in the Vemasat Labs?
PersianPaladin wrote:The pinch-process can produce such morphologies in both the lab and in space, and thus we need to seriously reconsider our understanding of stars in general. Are they formed from dense condensation of matter - or are they simply unstable and much less dense electron\proton vorticies that have fusion reactions on their surfaces. And yes, I agree with Wal Thornhill about reconsidering the methodology in which stellar masses and densities are calculated in light of their electric nature.
As noted above, the first question concerning the stellar plasmoid model is, "Where are the magnetic fields?" In some cases, they're definitely there (e.g., white dwarfs, magnetars), with fields exceeding millions of Gauss. I consider those to be toroidal plasmoids (a.k.a., natural tokamaks). But that doesn't speak to the nature of the Sun. In the end, I found it necessary to maintain two stellar models, one for the "exotic" stars (black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, etc.) and the other for "normal" stars (such as our Sun), due to the distinct differences in properties.