The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar models.

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:42 pm

Brigit Bara wrote:As I understand it, there are fast electrons from the sun which are emitted and accelerated by even small flares. This is consistent with the theory that the flares are exploding double layers, which supply the power to separate charges and fling them out into space. For the general reader (:


Keep in mind that Parker's original paper essentially suggested that whatever the heat source of the corona might be, he "assumed" it would tend to emit both types of charged particles from the corona purely from the standpoint of kinetic energy. In section 4 of his famous 1958 paper, Parker simply "assumes" that the continuous heat source of the corona could not be EM field related which seems unlikely even in mainstream models frankly:

But let us suppose that the corona cannot be heated electromagnetically, and so, presumably, must be heated by mechanical means (van de Hulst 1953). We shall suppose that by some mechanical process, such as acoustical or hydromagnetic waves, energy is transported from the photosphere out through the corona(4) and is finally absorbed in thermal motions beyond r=a to heat the coronal gas.
.......
(4)In the following paper we suggest that it is probably hydromagnetic waves that are responsible for heating by Fermi acceleration of ions (Fermi 1949, 1953)


Parker doesn't really treat electron motions independently from ion motions in his paper but rather he 'assumes" that kinetic energy is transported from the photosphere to the corona and then that kinetic energy is absorbed by the corona which results in solar wind of both types of particles. Essentially he's moving the kinetic energy problem (or source) into the photosphere where it has to be transported to and absorbed by the corona so the kinetic energy in the corona can turn into solar wind in the corona. The implication is that the mechanical kinetic energy transfer process effects *both* electrons and ions, although his reference (Fermi) is discussing ions.

Parker then suggested in section 4 that hydromagnetic waves were somehow providing spherical and homogeneous heating to the corona via hydromagnetic waves which would in fact be EM field related anyway. :)

Effectively his heating problem for the corona is only marginally defined, but he doesn't really offer a way to explain why it would be heated uniformly and spherically all around the sun at the same continuous rate. Essentially he handwaves in the hydromagnetic heat (kinetic energy) wave argument without really "explaining" it all that well. Presumably this is a "nanaflare' type of continuous emission from the photosphere from all around the sun's photosphere into the corona.

But what this interesting conversation about the namesake of the Parker Probe inspired me to wonder, and what I would like to know is, whether a tenuous electron drift toward the sun can be detected.

In other words, can anything among the payload of scientific instruments detect the drift of electrons in the opposite direction of the solar wind?


It's my understanding that the PSP equipment can measure particle flow from all directions.

Follow up: If the instruments are set up to detect charged particles, but only in one direction, is it possible that the results will be of limited value in answering any question about either an anode or a cathode sun?


The difference between the anode and cathode configuration would primarily be related to electron flow inside the corona. According to Juergens, electrons should flow into the corona, while the ions should flow out of the corona double layer. According to Birkeland, the electrons flow outbound from the cathode (below the surface of the photosphere) and provide the kinetic energy to the ions which should also flow out of corona as well, perhaps based on thermal processes as Parker assumes, if only by kinetic energy transfer alone. There should also be a higher speed (and outbound) "strahl" component involved in Birkeland's model since not all the electron kinetic energy will be absorbed by the coronal ions and some high speed electrons should pass right on through the corona without colliding with ions. "Eventually" (beyond the corona?), ions should also be flowing into the sun too, presumably as high speed "cosmic rays". Slower speed (solar wind speed) ions should move away from the sun in Birkeland's model, while the faster cosmic ray ions should flow toward the sun.

As far as I know, the particle movement patterns detected by previous satellite missions all tend be congruent with Birkeland's particle flow predictions based on a cathode surface heat (kinetic energy) source. To my knowledge the overall electron movement is *away* from the sun, not toward the sun as we would expect in Juergen's anode model. The magnetic field lines around the sun would probably result in flow movements in all directions in the corona, particularly in and around coronal loops which are surface to surface discharges.

My experience is that it is extremely difficult for anyone at NASA to even pronounce the words "electrons" and "sunward" in the same paragraph, let alone sentence. This kind of language is studiously avoided, so in your opinion MMozina (or any one), do you think it will be possible for the instruments to perform any measurements on the movement of electrons sunward?


The forbidden topic is "electric field" in astronomy. As I understand it, the PSP has the capacity to measure electric fields as well as particle flow patterns in all diretions. It's a bit like sticking a Langmuir probe into the corona. In Parker's model/explanation, there really shouldn't be an electric field present in the corona in the first place since it's primarily a thermal (kinetic energy) transfer process that is *not* EM field related according to Parker. In both the anode and cathode solar models, there should be a measurable electric field present in the corona. The only difference between EU/PC models is the orientation of that field. Just the ability to measure the electric fields inside the corona should allow us to differentiate between a purely thermal process (Parker), vs an anode (Juergens) or cathode (Birkeland) heating process. I think NASA is likely to choke on the concept of publicly describing the electric field data that they measure from the probe. The can describe the particle flow patterns without mentioning electric fields so that part isn't likely to be a sticking point for NASA. On the other hand, describing the electric field data is going to present a serious problem for them IMO.

Any charges at all moving toward the sun may be kind of a headache for them -- unless they can come up with an excuse why that does not mean the sun is an electrode. Maybe that would be the best we might be able to expect for the money (: ?? (:


If Juergen's anode model is right, you're correct, they'll be very unhappy about describing any inbound electron flow that they might detect. If Birkeland's cathode model is right, the solar wind and strahl (high speed electron) particle flow movements would almost exclusively be moving particles *away from* the sun in the corona, and only high speed cosmic ray ions would be moving inbound toward the sun. In both EU solar models however there should be a measurable electric field present in the corona, whereas Parker's model specifically ignores that possibility, and no electric field should exist in the corona in Parker's model.

Theoretically speaking, the absence or the presence of a measurable electric field inside the corona should differentiate between Parker's purely thermal model and either electric field driven EU/PC model of coronal heating, and the orientation of that electric field (assuming one exists) should differentiate between the two different EU models. Whether or not they can accurately measure all the various particles from all different directions, the electric field orientations (or lack thereof) inside the corona should be enough information to falsify or verify various models. The model described by Parker is mostly an exclusively mechanical and thermal transfer process whereas Birkeland and Juergen's predict the presence of a measurable electric field inside the corona.

The key here is to see what NASA has to say about the electric field data from the probe, or whether they avoid discussing that topic altogether. They'll most likely wait until they've gotten closer to the sun than they did on their first pass before they start to discuss that electric field data IMO, especially if they measure a strong electric field on the first pass. They'll want to confirm it's existence in several close passes before they discuss it IMO. Keep in mind that this pass was considerably further away from the photosphere than future passes. In theory, the electric field data should show an increase in field strength as they move closer and closer with each pass.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby seasmith » Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:31 pm

Michael Moina wrote: It's my understanding that the PSP equipment can measure particle flow from all directions.
... As I understand it, the PSP has the capacity to measure electric fields as well as particle flow patterns in all diretions.


SWEAP (Solar Wind Electrons Alphas and Protons)
The SWEAP suite includes three instruments: Two Solar Probe Analyzers measure electrons and ions in the solar wind, while the Solar Probe Cup sticks out from behind Parker Solar Probe’s heat shield to measure the solar wind directly as it streams off the Sun. After opening covers, turning on high voltages and running internal diagnostics, all three instruments caught glimpses of the solar wind itself.

Because of Parker Solar Probe’s position and orientation, the science team expected that Solar Probe Cup would mostly measure background noise at first, without picking up the solar wind. But just after the instrument was powered on, a sudden, intense gust of solar wind blew into the cup, visible in the data as the red streak. As the spacecraft approaches the Sun, such observations will be Solar Probe Cup’s bread and butter — and will hopefully reveal new information about the processes that heat and accelerate the solar wind.

A pair of plots, the top with only a little bit of data and bottom with a consistent background measurement.
Credit: NASA/University of Michigan/Parker Solar Probe
The two Solar Probe Analyzers (SPAN) also caught early peeks of the solar wind. During commissioning, the team turned the spacecraft so that SPAN-A — one of the two SPAN instruments — was exposed to the solar wind directly. It captured about 20 minutes’ worth of data (right), including measurements of solar wind ions (top) and electrons (bottom). While SPAN-A and its sister instrument, SPAN-B, will measure solar wind electrons throughout the mission, the spacecraft’s orientation now means that SPAN-A will likely go several more years before it captures such ion measurements again. This is because solar wind electrons can be measured from any direction, as their low mass and high temperature make their motion much more random, while the much heavier solar wind ions follow a relatively direct path out from the Sun.


So yes they are geared to measure other 'fields' and 'particles'. But..

FIELDS
FIELDS measures the electric field around the spacecraft with five antennas, four of which stick out beyond the spacecraft’s heat shield and into the sunlight, where they experience temperatures of 2,500 F. The 2-meter-long antennas are made of a niobium alloy, which can withstand extreme temperatures. FIELDS measures electric fields across a broad frequency range both directly, or in situ, and remotely. Operating in two modes, the four sunlit antennas measure the properties of the fast and slow solar wind — the flow of solar particles constantly streaming out from the Sun. The fifth antenna, which sticks out perpendicular to the others in the shade of the heat shield, helps make a three-dimensional picture of the electric field at higher frequencies.

A trio of magnetometers, each about the size of a fist, help FIELDS assess the magnetic field. A search coil magnetometer, or SCM, measures how the magnetic field changes over time. Since changing magnetic fields induce a voltage in the coil, it’s possible to track how the magnetic field changes by measuring that voltage. Two identical fluxgate magnetometers, MAGi and MAGo, measure the large-scale coronal magnetic field. The fluxgate magnetometers are specialized for measuring the magnetic field further from the Sun where it varies at a slower rate, while the search coil magnetometer is necessary closer to the Sun where the field changes quickly, as it can sample the magnetic field at a rate of two million times per second.

FIELDS was designed, built, and is operated by a team lead by the Space Sciences Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley with principal investigator Stuart D. Bale.

the "fields" are sampled as voltages across a range of frequencies, meaning they are not sampled across the vast range of frequencies along the broad EM spectrum. "Particles" are being created and neutralized continuously in an electric double-layer, making a 'direction' relative to spacecraft position, so they will have plenty of room to fudge all over the place.
Especially without a working theory of currents, but take heart, even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while.

To BB's comment concerning 'incoming',
a goodly portion of low mass particle detection is of positrons, the counter-spin version of electrons; so are we to count them as cations or anions?
Either way, incoming flow increases by the cube of distance, so the total flow adds up big time approaching center of SS.

http://physics.berkeley.edu/news-events ... struments-

https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe ... lar-probe/
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:22 am

seasmith wrote:the "fields" are sampled as voltages across a range of frequencies, meaning they are not sampled across the vast range of frequencies along the broad EM spectrum. "Particles" are being created and neutralized continuously in an electric double-layer, making a 'direction' relative to spacecraft position, so they will have plenty of room to fudge all over the place.
Especially without a working theory of currents, but take heart, even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while.


In this particular case I hoping they find an electric field acorn. :) Hope springs eternal I suppose. :)

It certainly appears as though NASA has designed, built and launched the right satellite for the job. Whether or not they can overcome their preconceived biases, and their severe case of electrophobia is another question entirely, but the equipment they have built and are now using is certainly impressive technology. The PSP satellite seems to be fully capable of answering these kinds of questions.

I'm not holding my breath in terms of NASA making any major announcements based on a single close pass last month, but by the end of next year, they should have completed three close passes through the corona. Assuming they measure the electric fields around the sun in all three passes, it's going to be hard to ignore that observation.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Predictions of a cathode sun configuration

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:12 am

It's worth posting the original predictions of Birkeland in terms of what he expected from a cathode sun, and what the PSP "should" see if he was correct.

1. There should be a measurable electric field which is continuously present in the corona.
2. The overall electric field which is continuously present in the corona should show that the sun's surface has a negative charge with respect to space.
3. Both electrons and protons should flow *away* from the sun.
4. Higher speed (strahl) electrons beams should also flow away from the sun at higher velocity than solar wind. This high speed electron flow is what actually carries the current between the surface and space, not slower speed solar wind which is essentially neutral at slower speeds than strahl.
5. Polar regions and specifically polar jets jets should contain higher numbers of high speed electrons flowing away from the sun. (I don't think PSP goes over poles however).
6. Coronal loops are surface "point to point' discharge processes.
7. Most inbound particle flows should be composed of higher speed cosmic ray protons and ions.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Sun Jan 06, 2019 12:22 pm

Thank you for exploring and contrasting the various models, and the expected particle flows. Very handy! (:

I have forgotten how much I appreciate Don Scott -- here is the link to his quick analysis of the Parker Solar Probe from an Electric Sky perspective:
NASA Probes Our Electric Sun | Space News
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2018/0 ... pace-news/
dur 14:34

He points out several limitations inherent in the instruments:
1. It is restricted to the sun's equator and will tell us nothing of the polar inflow of ions
2. It will approach only as close as 9 solar radii. The corona is within 3-6 solar radii
3. He hopes there will be more detailed observations of the filamentary formations around the sun, called solar caps. These are expected, twisted Birkeland currents, side-on, and connect the planets to the sun, in his model
4. The Parker probe will be unable to reveal the cause of the coronal heating. Claims to have determined that will be speculative.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Sun Jan 06, 2019 12:47 pm

by seasmith » Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:31 pm
Especially without a working theory of currents, but take heart, even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while.


The acorn is the opposite flow of electrons! :D

The question is, can n a s a find the acorn if it lands right in its own cup?

from seasmith's link:



During commissioning, the team turned the spacecraft so that SPAN-A — one of the two SPAN instruments — was exposed to the solar wind directly. It captured about 20 minutes’ worth of data (right), including measurements of solar wind ions (top) and electrons (bottom). While SPAN-A and its sister instrument, SPAN-B, will measure solar wind electrons throughout the mission, the spacecraft’s orientation now means that SPAN-A will likely go several more years before it captures such ion measurements again. This is because solar wind electrons can be measured from any direction, as their low mass and high temperature make their motion much more random, while the much heavier solar wind ions follow a relatively direct path out from the Sun.


I think it has already been announced that the "motion of the electrons is random."

Wouldn't each of the models probably say that electrons increase closer to the sun? And if it is all assumed to be random motion, then nothing has been measured that would falsify or confirm the expected movement of electrons.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Jan 07, 2019 1:51 pm

Brigit Bara wrote:I think it has already been announced that the "motion of the electrons is random."


https://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SolarWind.shtml

I wouldn't say it's actually "random" in terms of motion. They seem to be consistently moving away from the sun. Even what's called "Strahl" (higher speed electrons) also move away from the sun. The one type of measured particle that has been observed moving *toward* the sun are "cosmic rays" which are predominantly composed of positively charged ions (99%).

Wouldn't each of the models probably say that electrons increase closer to the sun?


I suspect both Juergen's model and Birkeland's model would predict a higher concentration of electrons as we get closer to the sun. The difference is predominantly the *direction* of flow.

And if it is all assumed to be random motion, then nothing has been measured that would falsify or confirm the expected movement of electrons.


I would personally argue that Birkeland's predictions with respect to particle flow have actually already been confirmed. Birkeland predicted that "space" has a net positive charge which is confirmed by the composition of cosmic rays which are overwhelmingly of a net positive charge. A full 99 percent of them are composed of positively charged ions, and the remaining 1 percent is about evenly split between electrons and positron which tend to cancel each other out in terms of net charge. He also predicted that both types of charged particles (ions and electrons) would flow away from the sun, and indeed that prediction has also been confirmed by satellites in space. He also predicted that cathode rays would come from the sun and indeed they've measured what they call "electron beams" which come from the sun.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sune ... trahl.html

NASA euphemistically calls them electron beams or "strahl" electrons.

IMO Birkeland's model has passed every observational test to date with respect to particle flow and the direction of particle flow.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Will the PSP folks give EU proponents their due credit?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:34 am

I guess my two major concerns with the Parker Solar probe program are:

1. Will the PSP equipment really be able to shed any new light on the debate. Dr. Scott's video was an interesting watch by the way. Thanks for that link. I realized that the PSP wouldn't be going over the polar regions, but I was unaware of just how far away the probe will still be, even when it's at it's closest approaches to the sun. (9 solar radii)

2. Assuming they actually do manage to measure the presence of electric fields at 9 solar radii, will they give Juergen's or Birkeland their due credit, or will they try to gloss over the fact that EU oriented scientists of the past have predicted the presence of such electric fields?

I'd say the first concern is my biggest concern, but the second one seems important as well. It's unclear if they'll ever get close enough to measure the electric fields around the corona of the sun, or whether it's going to be a bit like the SDO program. In spite of the fact that SDO has far better resolution and much faster cadence than it's Yohkoh, SOHO and TRACE predecessor, SDO imagery seems to have had very little effect on the mainstream. Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely wonderful to see the Helioviewer overlay images which show the relationships between the various wavelengths, but they really don't seem to interpret the images any differently as a result of such wonderful new technology. It's now possible to create overlay images in helioviewer and actually see how the large coronal loops generate bright areas in the 1600A and 1700A AIA SDO images, and the magnetogram images. Unfortunately the mainstream seems to insist on ignoring the fact that the current flowing inside and through the coronal loops determines the magnetic field alignments in the magnetogram images, and the current generates and sustains the heat signatures observed in 1600A and 1700A images. That's just bizarre to me considering how obvious it is to anyone who isn't electrophobic, particularly when we can now overlay the various wavelengths and watch them interact over time.

I'm *so* sick and tired of hearing the mainstream attempt to dumb everything in solar physics down to pure magnetism as though magnetism drives the process when ti's so very obvious that electric fields are the real work horse of the process.

The mainstream simply *abuses* Alfven's MHD formulas. They continue to insist on dabbling with "pseudoscience" as Alfven called it rather than embracing circuit theory as he suggested.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:46 pm

With the antennae in place on the probe to measure it, it does invite the observer to infer that every one knows about the electric field around the sun. (: Don Scott expects that even at 9 solar radii the e-field will be detected.

From the synopsis:


It is electricity that energizes the stars, including the Sun, in a form of glow discharge. This external power source explains why the temperature of the Sun increases above the photosphere to coronal temperatures of 2 million degrees. Powerful plasma feedback effects maintain a steady output of visible solar radiation while variations in power input show up in the familiar sunspot cycle.

It is in the nature of a glow discharge that all stars possess a weak electric field beyond the corona. As charged particles of the solar wind move away from the Sun, they continue to be accelerated due to the Sun’s electric field, which extends to the heliopause.


The acceleration apparently does not continue all the way out to the heliopause, according to Prof Don Scott. It took me a bit of research to find that in one of his presentations. The acceleration of the positively charged particles that make up the solar wind plateaus at the average speed of @800 km/s -- at 9 solar radii. What if it is still accelerating within the orbit of the PSP? Hm.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:34 am

Brigit Bara wrote:With the antennae in place on the probe to measure it, it does invite the observer to infer that every one knows about the electric field around the sun.


Hmmm. I'd say that the inclusion of the electric field probes would infer that they 'suspect" there might be an electric field around the sun, but I've yet to see a published mainstream paper describing it. I suspect that they have a feeling that it's there, but I don't think they have enough evidence yet to feel comfortable trying to describe it in terms of voltages and amperage, etc.

Birkeland estimated the voltage between the surface and the heliosphere to be around 600 million volts, whereas Alfven put it closer to a 1 billion. I'm not sure the PSP will ever get close enough to the electrode surface to measure the actual voltage difference, but it may get close enough to measure some differences in voltage at the probe itself, and be able to describe the orientation of the field. We'll see.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Is it just me, or is the silence a tad deafening?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Jan 15, 2019 9:34 am

I fully realize that it takes time to download all the data from the first pass of the Parker Solar probe, and a proper scientific analysis takes even more time, but typically most such programs are eager to validate the importance of their equipment to the public, if only by offering some photos or some tantalizing tidbits of information in a press conference. What gives with the PSP team? They haven't released a single close in photo of the sun, or anything even remotely like a tantalizing tidbit of information about what they learned from the probe's first close-in pass through the solar atmosphere. What's up with that?

Even the New Horizon folks released a blurry photo both before and after it's close pass by Ultima Thule, long before they're even thinking about releasing any published material associated with that mission.

Is it just me, or is the silence rather deafening with respect to the PSP probe? They've said absolutely nothing over the past couple of months about their close approach to the sun back in November, and they've not even publicly discussed any interesting findings. Does that silence suggest to anyone else that they're having a hard time embracing reality?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Is it just me, or is the silence a tad deafening?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:53 am

Michael Mozina wrote: What's up with that?

Their instruments must be wrong, because their theories are too big to fail.
That means they can not publish.

Their theories have been debunked here extensively.
They must have found some electrical fields or electrical currents.
Or very different temperatures.

Now they have to "correct" the observations.
Otherwise the PhDs can't graduate.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Is it just me, or is the silence a tad deafening?

Unread postby BeAChooser » Tue Jan 15, 2019 9:48 pm

Michael Mozina wrote:Is it just me, or is the silence rather deafening with respect to the PSP probe? They've said absolutely nothing over the past couple of months about their close approach to the sun back in November, and they've not even publicly discussed any interesting findings. Does that silence suggest to anyone else that they're having a hard time embracing reality?


You're right, Michael. They may be having some trouble dealing with reality. And in this day and age, don't be surprised if they alter the published data to fit their reality. And that might take months of work. Because justifying the mainstream meme might be more important than good science. Their careers might depend on it now. That is certainly what's happened in the other big *science* community ... Global Warming/Climate Change. Just saying ...
BeAChooser
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby Cargo » Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:24 pm

We are receiving data, but it must be 'cleaned up' first...
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes
Cargo
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: The Parker Solar probe could help eliminate EU solar mod

Unread postby neilwilkes » Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:39 am

Brigit Bara wrote:The acceleration of the positively charged particles that make up the solar wind plateaus at the average speed of @800 km/s -- at 9 solar radii.


Really?
800Km/s average solar wind speed? I honestly do not think so - that kind of speed would drive the magnetosphere right down into the atmosphere at current field strengths causing huge geomagnetic storms.
Average Solar Wind speed is much, much lower - nearer to 300Km/s and we are currently coming down from a coronal hole stream impact that temporarily raised the KP index but not to storm levels. 800Km/s on average would be bad.
http://spaceweathernews.com/
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest