Magnetic Reconnection

[Zyxzevn]

SO states that we see magnetic regions on the sun

I saw the SuspiciousObserver talking about strong magnetic regions on the sun. I hope he will stop that soon.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02wvcewUfno&t=23s

He was describing this solar flare:



And showed this image with the Zeeman/Stark effect. Stating it showed magnetic fields.



It is not the Zeeman effect (magnetic field) it is the Stark effect (electric field). It is similar.
I have to correct the mistake:
These regions are electric positive and electric negative charged regions.
That is why we see a current connecting them.

Dark Spots

The charge of the regions also explains why we see black spots.



These spots are black, because of the excess of electrons (or protons).

You can see how this works in this image:


Electrons create a dark reflective surface (like graphite).
Protons probably do the same thing.

So dark spots on the sun are likely to show up on places where the electric charge is very strong.

Magnetic unicorns

The mainstream thinks that they can predict solar flares with unicorns.


Now they added a twist to make these lines disconnect and reconnect.
No idea what can cause such a twist, but then I do not believe in unicorns in space.

Full list of images on imgur

[Michael Mozina]

And showed this image with the Zeeman/Stark effect. Stating it showed magnetic fields.



It is not the Zeeman effect (magnetic field) it is the Stark effect (electric field). It is similar.
I have to correct the mistake:
These regions are electric positive and electric negative charged regions.
That is why we see a current connecting them.

You're obviously right that electric fields ultimately drive and sustain the process, but you can't have current without generating magnetic fields. I think we should be careful not to fall into the same trap as the mainstream by trying to "dumb down" what is fundamentally an "electromagnetic" process by attempting to describe it in terms of *only* electric fields, or *only* magnetic fields. It's both.

The polarity of the spots in that image are directly related to the direction of the flow of current through those specific locations.

All magnetic ropes generate powerful magnetic fields and powerful current flows and many of them pass through the surface of the photosphere without generating sunspots. I believe that sunspots represent areas where we observe dissimilar types of materials rising up and through the surface of the photopshere. Sunspots only form over *very* active discharge regions which are heating up the solar atmosphere above the electrode very significantly. They also tend to represent areas where massive 'bundles" of coronal loops pierce the surface.

[Zyxzevn]

You're obviously right that electric fields ultimately drive and sustain the process, but you can't have current without generating magnetic fields...

Yes. I agree that both fields will be present, but only at places where there are currents.

I do think that the electrical field might be a lot larger than the magnetic field
caused by the current. But that depends on the effective resistance of the plasma.
I don't know whether these fields cause the Stark/Zeeman effect in the same or opposite direction?

For the electric sun models:
Can we use the Stark effect to see the overall electrical charge of the sun?

Additionally I think that the Stark effect might be responsible for very high redshift in Quasars.
It might mean that these objects are strongly electrically charged.

[Michael Mozina]

You're obviously right that electric fields ultimately drive and sustain the process, but you can't have current without generating magnetic fields...

Yes. I agree that both fields will be present, but only at places where there are currents.

True. That's where the mainstream "blows" it, and oversimplifies the process. It's the current that generates those strong magnetic fields. We however don't have to oversimplify the process only because they do, nor should we try to overcompensate for their error.

I do think that the electrical field might be a lot larger than the magnetic field
caused by the current.

They're related mathematically but as Dr. Scott points out, there can be bidirectional current within the same coronal loop which may in fact complicate the measurement process.

But that depends on the effective resistance of the plasma.
I don't know whether these fields cause the Stark/Zeeman effect in the same or opposite direction?

More than likely it's a "combo" process where both factors play a role.

For the electric sun models:
Can we use the Stark effect to see the overall electrical charge of the sun?

Hmmm. The coronal loops tend to be "surface to surface" discharges where one point on the surface posses a different charge than the other. I think the flow of particles from the sun, and toward the sun should allows us to determine it's charge with respect to "space". IMO the cosmic rays surrounding and flowing into our solar system are overwhelming positively charged, so "space' is likely to be more positively charged than the surface of the sun. Birkeland did predict that cathode rays would flow off of the sun, and indeed that's what we observe:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sune ... trahl.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strahl_(astronomy)

NASA euphemistically refers to high speed electrons as "strahl" at times.

Birkaland's cathode model also predicted that both types of charged particle flow from the sun, not just electrons, and indeed that's what we observe in the slower (than strahl) speed solar wind.

Additionally I think that the Stark effect might be responsible for very high redshift in Quasars.
It might mean that these objects are strongly electrically charged.

I'd tend to agree, and I suspect that the electrical current flowing through massive objects generates x-rays and such, meaning that NASA probably overestimates the mass of such objects since they try to explain such emissions from gravity alone.

[Zyxzevn]

You're obviously right that electric fields ultimately drive and sustain the process, but you can't have current without generating magnetic fields...

Yes. I agree that both fields will be present, but only at places where there are currents.

I have to correct myself.
The current in the plasma creates a magnetic field around the current.
So it does not matter for the magnetic field whether the current goes up or down.



But in the image they assign polarity to the Zeeman effect.
I have no idea how they get a polarity from this effect in the image.
On wikipedia it seems not to depend on the polarity.
While the strength of the magnetic field is stronger near the current,
it moves around in circles at the end-points.
It has no up/down direction, but is parallel to the surface.

This means that this polarity in the image can not describe the
magnetic field. Though, it can perfectly match with the electric field.

There seems to be a difference between both effects, but the only good
source I have is wikipedia. It appears that the Stark effect creates more
spectral lines than the Zeeman effect.
This might cause the interleaving of the polarity in the image.
(Yellow near the blue, and green near the red).

The source of these electrical charges is not too difficult to model.
I think some processes on the sun may work like a Vandegraaff generator.
(Charged material collects near the surface).

There may be other ways to detect the solar electro-magnetic field.
It shows inthese images.


These images show the plasma around the sun, extending much
further than the mainstream wants to admit.

From these images it seems to me that this is also a realistic representation
of the solar electrical field. Maybe some of the lines are going out to certain stars or planets.
If the sun has a magnetic field, it seems to have two main poles.

For the Electric Sun model, it would be good science to
do a full analysis of the Stark and Zeeman and many other effects on and around the sun.

[seasmith]

Zyxzevn wrote:

There seems to be a difference between both effects, but the only good
source I have is wikipedia. It appears that the Stark effect creates more
spectral lines than the Zeeman effect.

Here's a brief comparison of Zeeman and Stark effects in solar spectroscopy from the RSAS, somewhat better than the dumbass wiki entries:
(sect. 3.3.2)

https://books.google.com/books?id=z73VC ... py&f=false

[Zyxzevn]

Here's a brief comparison of Zeeman and Stark effects in solar spectroscopy from the RSAS, somewhat better than the dumbass wiki entries:
(sect. 3.3.2)

I still have to read the full book. It is great, but also shows the bias.

It tells why they neglect the electrical fields in plasma:
because plasma is a good conductor.
(p 84: "high conductivity of the sun makes it difficult to sustain significant electrical fields")
And it seems to reason that there almost no field, so almost no Stark-effect in the spectrum...
A nice example of circular reasoning.
They forget that Magnetic fields can not be sustained either, due to the greater than zero
resistance of plasma. Only ferro-magnetic atoms and superconductive material can sustain magnetic
fields for some time, everything else can not. Both require low temperatures.

Anyway, still have to read most of the book,
and maybe I find some better evidence to believe in strong magnetic fields on the sun.
In the mean time I hope I don't lose braincells due to the stupid circular reasoning inside the book.

[seasmith]

Zyx,
I only offered the source a brief explanation of Solar Spectroscopy, not a theory of electric sun. You know we always have to read Around the MS bias, to glean whatever particular data we are looking for.

Here's a brief comparison of Zeeman and Stark effects in solar spectroscopy from the RSAS, somewhat better than the dumbass wiki entries:
(sect. 3.3.2)

I still have to read the full book. It is great, but also shows the bias.
Of course, it's obvious, so what?

It tells why they neglect the electrical fields in plasma:
because plasma is a good conductor.
(p 84: "high conductivity of the sun makes it difficult to sustain significant electrical fields")
A true statement. Good conductors promote electric currents, but inhibit electric fields.

...
They forget that Magnetic fields can not be sustained either, due to the greater than zero
resistance of plasma. Only ferro-magnetic atoms and superconductive material can sustain magnetic
fields for some time, everything else can not. Both require low temperatures.

What ??

If there are constant electric currents, there are constant magnetic fields associated therewith.

Anyway, still have to read most of the book,

[Zyxzevn]

Thanks for the link Seasmith.

I just wondered what current is needed to get a 0.1 Tesla field of a size of one earth,
as is sometimes "observed via the zeeman effect" in black spots.

I found this link to do the calculation:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magcur.html#c2
0.1 Tesla,
10000 km, (rather small)
needed current= 5,000,000,000,000 Ampere.
Sustained for many days.

Or "maybe" most of it is just Electric instead.
The same effect (Stark effect) corresponds with a few 500 kilovolt
(estimated with the wikipedia page).
Which will maybe produce a current of a few thousands of Ampere.

The Zeeman/Stark effect shows a gradual change in charge.
It does not seem to follow the 1/R² rule of the magnetic field caused by a current.
Instead it seems to follow a gaussian distribution, likely caused by static charges
reaching the surface.

[seasmith]

Thanks for the link Seasmith.

I just wondered what current is needed to get a 0.1 Tesla field of a size of one earth,
as is sometimes "observed via the zeeman effect" in black spots.

I found this link to do the calculation:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magcur.html#c2
0.1 Tesla,
10000 km, (rather small)
needed current= 5,000,000,000,000 Ampere.
Sustained for many days.

Or "maybe" most of it is just Electric instead.
The same effect (Stark effect) corresponds with a few 500 kilovolt
(estimated with the wikipedia page).
Which will maybe produce a current of a few thousands of Ampere.

The Zeeman/Stark effect shows a gradual change in charge.
It does not seem to follow the 1/R² rule of the magnetic field caused by a current.
Instead it seems to follow a gaussian distribution, likely caused by static charges
reaching the surface.

I doubt if the current state of our detector technology is up the the task of distinguishing between the electric and magnetic components of a solar expulsion e.g. flares, hoops, sunspot pairs etc ; because braided filaments e.g. Birkelands, flux tubes, ropes etc ., are currents of electric charge being 'twisted' by their inherent magnetic/Lorentzian torsions.
[Not even with the detector arrays rubbing their Stark and Zeeman heads together.

All they seem able to do at present, and at the available resolution, is to note Electric current nuetral / non-nuetral zones
and Magnetic polarities.


SOLA: ms_rev.tex; 24 August 2017

Energy released in flares is known to be stored in the intense, complex mag- netic field configurations of solar active regions. The ability of magnetic fields to store energy is associated with their departure from a current-free (potential) state. This non-potentiality is evident in optical (Hα, Hβ), EUV and X-ray images of the active region solar corona, where significant twist of the coronal loops is seen (Leka et al., 1996; Schrijver, 2016). This twist requires the presence of substantial amounts of field–aligned electric currents. Therefore, the magnetic field configuration and the electric current distribution offer two aspects of the same physical reality (see e.g. Melrose, 1995, and references therein). Since infer- ring the electric currents requires the ability to record all three components of the magnetic field vector, studies focusing on electric currents and their role in flares started after vector magnetograms became widely available (see e.g. Canfield et al., 1993; Zhang, 1995; Leka et al., 1996, and references therein). Nowadays, the regular flow of high temporal and spatial resolution photospheric vector magnetograms has boosted research in this topic (e.g. Ravindra et al., 2011;
Kontogiannis et al.
...
Non-neutralized currents and flare productivity
Gosain, D ́emoulin, and Lo ́pez Fuentes, 2014; Janvier et al., 2014; Vemareddy, Venkatakrishnan, and Karthikreddy, 2015; Inoue et al., 2015).
A pertinent issue is whether electric currents in solar active regions are neu- tralized. In the ideal case of an isolated twisted flux tube embedded in a field-free medium, the net current along the tube should be zero, being equal to the sum of two opposite directed currents: a direct (volume) current along its axis that produces its twist and a return (surface) current that isolates the flux tubes from the field-free environment (Parker, 1979). Current neutralization subsequently means that direct and return currents balance each other within a given mag- netic polarity of an active region, giving rise to a zero net current per polarity. However, early calculations based on vector magnetograms showed that high values of net currents exist within active regions, implying a non-neutralization situation and a subsequent injection of net currents in the solar corona (Melrose, 1991, 1995).

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.07087.pdf

[seasmith]

`
Slo-mo clip of an directionally active solar "Coronal Loop" ( ~min. 17):
(courtesy of member MotionTheory)

https://youtu.be/9bAeSdyBte4
~

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16979&p=123756#p123756

[Zyxzevn]

`
Slo-mo clip of an directionally active solar "Coronal Loop" ( ~min. 17):
(courtesy of member MotionTheory)

https://youtu.be/9bAeSdyBte4

The field-lines are different than the lines produced by the material.
You can get iron that is attracted to both south-poles or both north-poles.
Just place a piece of iron inbetween two magnets, and you will see that it attracts both
independent of polarity.

The model of the solar magnetic field is completely wrong in the video, plasma does not follow
magnetism, it follows electric field. The flow of plasma creates a magnetic field by itself, and this is perpendicular.

The magnetic field causes the circular flow of the current. And it causes the slow falling of the plasma, when it falls towards the sun due to gravity. Maybe you can see how the plasma does not accelerate much?

[seasmith]

`
Slo-mo clip of an directionally active solar "Coronal Loop" ( ~min. 17):
(courtesy of member MotionTheory)

https://youtu.be/9bAeSdyBte4

The field-lines are different than the lines produced by the material.
You can get iron that is attracted to both south-poles or both north-poles.
Just place a piece of iron inbetween two magnets, and you will see that it attracts both
independent of polarity.

The model of the solar magnetic field is completely wrong in the video, plasma does not follow
magnetism, it follows electric field. The flow of plasma creates a magnetic field by itself, and this is perpendicular.

The magnetic field causes the circular flow of the current. And it causes the slow falling of the plasma, when it falls towards the sun due to gravity. Maybe you can see how the plasma does not accelerate much?

Zyxzevn, Is this like your electric model of a 'coronal loop', current-wise ?

The coronal loops are ultimately caused by the voltage between the magnetosphere and Telluric currents below Earth’s crust, just as they occur above and below the photosphere of the Sun and in the atmospheres of Jupiter, Saturn and Venus.

https://thedailyplasma.blog/2017/09/30/ ... hermopile/

[Zyxzevn]

Zyxzevn, Is this like your electric model of a 'coronal loop', current-wise ?

The thermoelectric effect is not very strong.
With my model, the earth would be receiving charged particles that cause
such thunderstorms.

Common electric model that I use (Maxwell):
Electrons go from - to +. Positive Ions from + to -.

This is the basis for all currents that I know of.

From laboratory and plasmaballs. we know that currents form line structures in plasma.
Very similar to what we see on the sun.
So from this it is evident that the lines are currents that connect two opposite
electrically charged regions.

In solar physics they seem to assume that magnetism can just magically create line structures
in plasma. They are supposed to connect two opposite magnetic polar regions.
I have not seen any proof of this yet, except for the observation of the Zeeman effect on these regions.
But if this is the Stark effect, this magnetic assumption is clearly false.
Since I can see only minor traces of magnetism in the solar flares,
it seems that the electric field is the major contributor to the Stark/Zeeman effect.

With magnetic fields we get all kinds of physically impossible models.
These are frozen magnetism, reconnecting field-lines, absolute zero electrical field.
They still can not model the sun correctly. And which can not be repeated in laboratory.

With electrical charges, the model and dynamics of solar lines and solar flares
are very simple and can be repeated in laboratory.


In this image you can see plasma go from one flare to another.
This happens very often, and is only possible if these flares have positive and negative charged
regions. The charged plasma will be attracted by the opposite charged region.
And yes, the electrical fields must be very strong to do that.

To maintain a strong electrical field, there must be a continuous flow of energy.
That is because it will cause electrical currents to flow.
Which is also what we see: the sun is producing light continuously.

[seasmith]

.

Zyxzevn wrote:In this image you can see plasma go from one flare to another.

In your video above, they seem to go back and forth, not just from one flare to another.
How does your model explain that ?

https://i.imgur.com/Q7AjfZY.gif