Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

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: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:08 am

Plasmascape

A website that provides a 3D look at the solar system’s place in the local interstellar region; graphics are somewhat superior to my line diagrams!

https://plasmascape.com/blog/
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Mon Oct 21, 2019 4:01 pm

Robertus Maximus wrote:Plasmascape

A website that provides a 3D look at the solar system’s place in the local interstellar region; graphics are somewhat superior to my line diagrams!

https://plasmascape.com/blog/

This is what I've advertised here some months ago. :)
We're currently experiencing a lull in activity. I still hope in the coming months we'll restart the thing and add more features, but some of the key people (myself included) are busy doing other stuff, unfortunately.
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby celeste » Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:01 pm

paladin17 wrote:
Robertus Maximus wrote:Plasmascape

A website that provides a 3D look at the solar system’s place in the local interstellar region; graphics are somewhat superior to my line diagrams!

https://plasmascape.com/blog/

This is what I've advertised here some months ago. :)
We're currently experiencing a lull in activity. I still hope in the coming months we'll restart the thing and add more features, but some of the key people (myself included) are busy doing other stuff, unfortunately.


Eugene,
It would help if key people worked together here. Robertus Maximus and Solar have key pieces of information for scales that David, Chris, etc, can help map in Plasmascape. Also, Gareth of “See the Pattern” on YouTube, can make this material more readily accessible to the newbie, as he has with a number of EU and other “non-mainstream approved” topics.
If you want, consider Robertus probably the expert on Plasmascape scales from Sun for sure, up to heliosphere, possibly. Solar should be the “go to” for local interstellar cloud scale, for sure.
My dream, would be maybe you and Gareth, interview these two first. Possibly include DJ if he isn’t overcommitted with other tasks.

My general point, is that with these still too splintered groups of the Thunderbolts forum, “See the Pattern” YouTube site, “Plasmascape”, “The Electric View” Skype group (also on YouTube, sometimes), etc, too much information is falling through the cracks, or at least, not channeled to those who need it. i.e., the geeky details we need in Plasmascape, vs the general speculation that is also encouraged in “the Electric View” discussions.
celeste
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Fri Oct 25, 2019 7:04 am

I'd like a decent in-detail talk on skype, but neither of them uses it, as I understand.
Gareth is on Plasmascape chat already. Though not much is happening there recently.
And yes, I agree that a lot of useful info is falling through the cracks. Organizing research is not an easy task.
Recently I became concerned with another - related - problem: that a lot of not useful info does not fall through the cracks. And some people keep clinging to their theories despite the evidence that they don't work (e.g. the anode Sun model).
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Thu Nov 07, 2019 12:51 pm

Voyager 2 at the Edge

Charged particle measurements

A recent series of scientific papers revealed Voyager 2’s findings at the edge of the heliosphere.

“Voyager 1 (V1) exited the heliosphere on 25 August 2012 at a distance of 121.6 AU (18.3x109km) and latitude 34.5 degrees (using the heliographic inertial coordinate system) and within a few degrees of the nose of the heliosphere… Voyager 2 (V2), on a slower trajectory than V1 and south of the heliographic equatorial plane at a heliographic latitude of around -32.2 degrees… (o)n 5 November 2018, V2 crossed the heliopause (HP) at a distance of 119AU (17.9x109km) at 218 degrees heliographic longitude.” (1)

With both Voyager spacecraft now in the local interstellar medium (LISM) a reasonable assessment can be made of their findings and how it fits, or perhaps does not fit, with the proposal on this thread.

“The heliosheath (HS) is also the principal acceleration region for anomalous cosmic rays (ACRs) most of which were previously thought to be accelerated at the termination shock (TS). V1 encountered a plasma stagnation region 8AU before crossing the HP, when the radial component of the solar wind became zero and later became intermittently negative, while the tangential flow was nearly steady at around 40km/s in the –T direction (in conventional RTN (radial-tangential-normal) heliographic coordinates, in which the +T direction is that of planetary motion around the Sun).” (2)

Voyager 1 exited the heliosphere during solar maximum conditions (mainstream researchers tend to factor in a solar cycle ‘delay’ when interpreting the data from both Voyager spacecraft) when it detected a counter-rotating solar wind flow, how does this compare to Voyager 2’s findings?

“The intensity fluctuations in the electrons are much more pronounced than those of ions of similar energies, indicative of substantial plasma/magnetic field structures sensed by the small gyroradius and relativistic speeds of the electrons.” (3)

Voyager 2 found that ‘structures’ were heavily influencing electrons and ions at the HP.

“Thus, heliospheric material is apparently leaking out of the HS to >0.6AU beyond the HP…”. “…at V2, there are both low and high energy ions upstream of the HP, and they persist to at least 0.6AU, while ACR protons are apparently present to >1.1AU. Not surprisingly, they flow along the interstellar magnetic field away from the HP…” (4)

In the 1970’s Ralph Juergens suggested that cosmic rays were the ‘return current’ of stars with a greater potential than the Sun; the potential of our own Sun causes ‘material’ to ‘leak’ out of the heliosphere. Juergens theorised that solar wind protons (i.e. ‘return current’) were the main current carriers powering the solar discharge, Voyager 2 has found the ‘return current’.

“…ions of >3MeV inside the HP are nearly isotropic, although at E>28keV, they show motion away from the nose of the heliosphere (+T direction). Those outside the HP, however, move primarily in the –T direction along the magnetic field…” (5)

Voyager 2 exited the heliosphere under solar minimum conditions at the spacecraft’s latitude it found charged particle motions opposite to those found by Voyager 1, outside of the heliosphere the motions reversed again- counter-rotating you may say.

“The tangential component fluctuated between 60km/s and 160km/s in the +T direction… with occasional excursions of >50km/s, and substantial structure, particularly close to the HP. The radial component ranged from a few kilometres per second to 100km/s, but was occasionally close to zero, such as on 2017.3, and again on 2018.4 at distances of 114AU and 117AU, respectively. Further there are remarkable excursions in the tangential component in late 2017 and 2018, suggestive of deep penetration of the Galactic magnetic field through the HP…” (6)

Voyager 2 not only found the tangential solar wind flow to be opposite to that measured by Voyager 1, but large variances were suggestive of ‘Galactic’ structures influencing the heliosphere itself.

“At V1…there were multiple episodes of magnetic flux tubes containing enhanced field and GCR intensities.”

“…It is clear that no radial inflow was seen on the upwind flank of the HP. (by V2) The contrast with the interaction at V1 is obvious. There is inflow of cold Galactic plasma in this case. The observed angular distributions reflect this inflow and suggest a field line interchange, all consistent with a flux interchange instability at the HP boundary.” (7)

As has been suggested on this thread, at solar maximum, current arriving at the Sun is not focussed near the Sun’s polar regions rather it becomes more filamentary arriving at lower latitudes- this is what Voyager 1 found by contrast and although there were many similarities, Voyager 2 found a more orderly HP as would be expected during solar minimum conditions.

On the ‘tangential’ solar wind component

Mainstream solar scientists view both Voyager spacecraft as exiting the heliosphere in the ‘nose’ direction, I disagree. I have made the case in earlier posts that the concept of ‘nose’ and ‘tail’ are incorrect. To my mind both Voyagers have left the heliosphere in a pinched region of the ‘heliotube’ and as such the tangential solar wind may be interpreted as a ‘wrap-around’ flow along the long axis of the ‘heliotube’.

References

1. Krimigis. S. M. et al. 2019. Energetic charged particle measurements from Voyager 2 at the heliopause and beyond. Nature Astronomy, 3, 997-1006 (2019) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-019-0927-4
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:44 am

Voyager 2 at the Edge

Magnetic Fields

“…the Voyager 1 spacecraft, moving radially in the northern hemisphere, which crossed the heliopause on 25 August 2012 at a distance of 121.6AU. We show using observations of the magnetic field and energetic particles that Voyager 2 crossed the heliopause in the southern hemisphere on 5 November 2018 at a distance of 119.0AU. Voyager 2 observed a much thinner and simpler heliopause than Voyager 1 as well as stronger interstellar magnetic fields, and it discovered a ‘magnetic barrier’ in the heliosheath that strongly influences the entry of cosmic rays into the heliosphere…These observations, together with the Voyager 1 observations and existing models, show that the magnetic barrier, the heliopause and the neighbouring very local interstellar medium form a complex interconnected dynamical system.” (1)

At solar minimum, Voyager 2 found a far simpler, less chaotic heliopause than Voyager 1 found at solar maximum, this time, however, the LISM magnetic fields were stronger than those measured by Voyager 1.

“It is conventional to measure magnetic field direction in a spacecraft-centred radial-tangential-normal (RTN) coordinate system. In the RTN coordinate system, R is the unit radius vector directed radially from the Sun, T is the cross-product of the solar rotation vector with R, and the unit vector N completes a right-handed system…the azimuthal angle was close to 270 degrees throughout the interval…Thus, the average azimuthal angle before the heliopause crossing was the same as the average angle azimuthal angle after the heliopause crossing…The largest component of B was the BT component, which was negative (directed opposite to the direction of solar rotation).” (2)

Once again we see a ‘tangential’ magnetic field were the radial magnetic field is highly diminished; as previously mentioned the ‘tangential’ nature of the magnetic field applies only to mainstream models of the heliosphere. The expected sharp difference between solar and interstellar magnetic fields has not been found rather there has been a gradual change as if the heliopause is a structure surrounded by a much larger structure in the LISM.

“…the magnetic barrier, the (particle) density was relatively high (reaching a maximum 0.004 cm3), the temperature was high (60,000K) and the speed was relatively low (but still 100 km/s)… shows the magnetic barrier as a porous barrier to the >70MeV nucleon cosmic rays…thus the magnetic barrier, with its strong magnetic fields in the heliosheath, acted as a ‘leaky barrier’ to the cosmic rays from the VLISM.” (3)

A region of higher magnetic field strength coincides with a drop of cosmic rays approaching the heliosphere, is the ‘magnetic wall’ or ‘magnetic barrier’- an indication of the Sun’s potential?

“Voyager 2 crossed the heliosphere from the magnetic barrier and entered the VLISM on 5 November 2018 (day 309) at a distance of 119AU from the Sun. The magnetic field strength increased to 0.68 nT across the heliopause and the counting rate of the >0.5 MeV nucleon particles decreased across the heliopause, as observed by Voyager 1 when it crossed the heliopause in 2012. The heliopause observed by Voyager 2 was stable and thin, in contrast to the unstable thick heliopause observed by Voyager 1… Observations from Voyager 1 have shown that shock waves and pressure waves can propagate through the heliopause and into the VLISM…The magnetic field strength observed by Voyager 2 in the VLISM (0.68+/-0.03 nT) was significantly larger than the draped magnetic field (0.49 nT) of the VLISM observed by Voyager 1, indicating an asymmetry of the heliosheath and heliopause…As observed by Voyager 2 , there was either no net change or a very small change in the magnetic field direction from one side of the heliopause to the other.” (4)

The Voyager spacecraft found a similar but different heliopause, the main asymmetry is related to the solar cycle and not to the location of the two spacecraft. The VLISM now shows a stronger magnetic field and appears more ordered. During solar maximum the heliopause and VLISM was more chaotic with the appearance of ‘flux tubes’.
With increasing distance from the heliosphere Voyager 1 has found that charged particle levels gradually increase, if both Voyager spacecraft are still functioning by the maximum of Solar Cycle 25, estimated to occur between 2023 and 2026, I predict that both spacecraft will find traces of the solar cycle beyond the heliosphere- as it is beyond the heliosphere where the solar cycle originates.

References

1. Burlaga. L. F. et al. 2019. Magnetic field and particle measurements made by Voyager 2 at and near the heliopause. Nature Astronomy, 3, 1007-1012 (2019) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-019-0920-y
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:26 am

Voyagers, Bessel Functions and Professor Don Scott

In a recent Space News ‘Voyager 2 and our Solar System’s Birkeland Current’ (https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2019/11/15/donald-scott-voyager-2-and-our-solar-systems-birkeland-current-space-news/) Professor Don Scott takes a look at the latest findings from the Voyager 2 spacecraft.

In an earlier post I predicted that both Voyager spacecraft will continue to measure aspects of the solar cycle for as long as they continue to function, however, what both Voyagers measure may not exactly reflect the solar cycle we observe at the Sun.

In a recent post: https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=16299&start=255#p128309 I suggested that a study by V. V. Zharkova et al. has actually revealed the subtle influence of an external Birkeland current as a cause of the solar cycle.
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258681236_Principal_component_analysis_of_background_and_sunspot_magnetic_field_variations_during_solar_cycles_21-23)

Figure 3 from that paper traces a Bessel function:

Solar Cycle PC Plot A1.jpg
Figure 3 from Zharkova et al.

It can be compared directly with Figure 2 from Professor Don Scott’s paper: Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model (http://www.ptep-online.com/2015/PP-41-13.PDF)

Bessel Function.JPG
Figure 2 from Don Scott

The Solar Cycle is a Bessel function, even the continuing weakening of successive cycles follows a Bessel function!

What does this mean? I have suggested that stellar cycles and the Solar Cycle in particular originate in a star’s environment, with this in mind, I would suggest that relative motion between the Sun and the hourglass pinch of what I have rather unimaginatively called the ‘Heliotube’ causes the Solar Cycle, the cycle does not run “like clockwork” and is subject to long-term variability such as the weakening trend we see today and therefore both Voyager spacecraft may now measure different properties of the Heliotube- some will be directly related to the current solar cycle, others may not. Such measurements will continue to puzzle mainstream astrophysicists, Electric Universe proponents will understand any measurements in terms of the structure of the Heliotube.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:27 pm

Robertus Maximus wrote:The Solar Cycle is a Bessel function, even the continuing weakening of successive cycles follows a Bessel function!

What does this mean? I have suggested that stellar cycles and the Solar Cycle in particular originate in a star’s environment, with this in mind, I would suggest that relative motion between the Sun and the hourglass pinch of what I have rather unimaginatively called the ‘Heliotube’ causes the Solar Cycle, the cycle does not run “like clockwork” and is subject to long-term variability such as the weakening trend we see today and therefore both Voyager spacecraft may now measure different properties of the Heliotube- some will be directly related to the current solar cycle, others may not. Such measurements will continue to puzzle mainstream astrophysicists, Electric Universe proponents will understand any measurements in terms of the structure of the Heliotube.

But the historical observations of solar activity don't fit into this function (in terms of weakening).
In fact, none of the things I've checked (the solar cycles and planetary orbits) fit this function. It was a big disappointment to me.
In this last video Scott also contradicts himself and basic plasma physics several times. (E.g. he doesn't explain the - supposedly - spherical geometry of the heliosphere from the quasi-cylindrical geometry of the hypothetical current; he states that the Z-pinch is the reason for lower density in the heliosphere with respect to the interstellar medium - whereas the pinching actually should increase the density - etc.).

I mean, to translate the Lundquist-Scott Bessel function into time you need to assume that the Sun linearly progresses from the center of the filament outwards (or something like that).
One popular idea of merging the two together is an assumption that the orbit of the Sun around the barycenter is the key (the current shoots through the barycenter, so the Sun gets to different layers of the current). Unfortunately, it's not working. The magnetic polarity of the Sun doesn't correspond to its position with respect to the barycenter. So even if the Bessel function is somehow involved, it should be something else.

Recently, after reading some of Alfven's works, I began to think that some large-scale MHD wave might actually be responsible for the solar cycles. One peculiar piece of evidence is that neutral Helium ("interstellar wind") is flowing with the velocity of ~ 26 km/s, so to traverse 120 a.u. (the radius of the heliosphere) it would need about 22 years.
So if there's a standing Alfven wave in the heliosphere (which somehow transfers these neutrals along the way - no idea how), this might be the thing that's regulating the solar activity just by simple e/m induction. And as the period of the wave is so large, it might be "invisible" (if one doesn't know what to look for), it would just look like background; plus the coincidence with the Hale cycle helps to mask it, as the changes would be attributed to the Sun itself, and not the environment.
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Solar » Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:35 am

paladin17 wrote:Recently, after reading some of Alfven's works, I began to think that some large-scale MHD wave might actually be responsible for the solar cycles. One peculiar piece of evidence is that neutral Helium ("interstellar wind") is flowing with the velocity of ~ 26 km/s, so to traverse 120 a.u. (the radius of the heliosphere) it would need about 22 years.
So if there's a standing Alfven wave in the heliosphere (which somehow transfers these neutrals along the way - no idea how), this might be the thing that's regulating the solar activity just by simple e/m induction. And as the period of the wave is so large, it might be "invisible" (if one doesn't know what to look for), it would just look like background; plus the coincidence with the Hale cycle helps to mask it, as the changes would be attributed to the Sun itself, and not the environment.


That is interesting. The all too often neglected dynamics of ball lightning plasmoids:

Observations of Ball-Lightning-Like Plasmoids Ejected from Silicon by Localized Microwaves: Yehuda Meir et al

In the quest for analogs. From the above paper the "substrate" in space could correspond to "molecular clouds". The "hotspots" would correspond to "proto-stellar cores" along the filament channel, the incident and reflected microwaves "impedance-matching effect, which dictates the plasmoid’s autonomous evolution" are analogously interesting in relation to "some large scale MHD wave" idea. Also: Figures 9, 10, 11, and 12 might be interesting.

Ball Lightning Caused by Oxidation of Nanoparticle Networks from Normal Lightning Strikes on Soil: J. Abrahamson and J. Dinniss

"Stars along filaments" is an interesting observation however, once initiated, they do not have to remain directly along the filament axis. They can survive in the highly charged medium containing filaments of much lower density surrounding the main axis and/or, via induction, develop localized 'subtle filaments' with not a hint of a continuously sustained "pinch" in sight.

Slingshot Mechanism in Orion: Kinematic Evidence For Ejection of Protostars by Filaments: Amelia M. Stutz, Andrew Gould

The appearance of a plasmoid from a lightning strike to the ground shows the subsequent disappearance of the lightning channel itself followed by an autonomous plasmoid afterward. Scaled up to the Sun; ball lightning plasmoids make interesting analogs of a star's seeming "autonomous evolution". Especially when no obvious filament is present (merely less dense filamentary clouds abound). So, I agree that principles of EM induction amongst a confluence of charged environmental influences could make significant contributions.

Focus: First Spectrum of Ball Lightning

But the plasmoid and electric sun models analysis has already been covered extensively. It unfortunately seems to be one of those things left to lay on the floor. It is however one of my favorite approach to this topic.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:15 pm

paladin17 wrote:Recently, after reading some of Alfven's works, I began to think that some large-scale MHD wave might actually be responsible for the solar cycles. One peculiar piece of evidence is that neutral Helium ("interstellar wind") is flowing with the velocity of ~ 26 km/s, so to traverse 120 a.u. (the radius of the heliosphere) it would need about 22 years.
So if there's a standing Alfven wave in the heliosphere (which somehow transfers these neutrals along the way - no idea how), this might be the thing that's regulating the solar activity just by simple e/m induction. And as the period of the wave is so large, it might be "invisible" (if one doesn't know what to look for), it would just look like background; plus the coincidence with the Hale cycle helps to mask it, as the changes would be attributed to the Sun itself, and not the environment.

Instead of a wave how about an electrical breakdown?

I have quoted below from The Role of Electrical Discharges in Astrophysical Phenomena by Charles Bruce.

"2. Some properties of electrical discharges
In this section some of the more conspicuous properties of electrical discharges are described, to assist in the recognition of discharges in cosmic sources.

"(i) Rate of propagation. The speed of propagation of electrical breakdown in the Earth’s atmosphere is of the order of 100 km/s. Schonland has shown that the speed will be proportional to the breakdown field and to the mean free path; the limiting field is proportional to the gas pressure, and the mean free path is inversely proportional, so that there is no resultant dependence of the rate of propagation upon pressure. In appropriate circumstances, the discharge may generate a plasma jet with a velocity higher than the rate of the voltage breakdown; the discharge may then propagate at the plasma velocity.

"(ii) Magnetic fields are associated with the flow of current in a discharge. The fields are circular around the axis of the discharge. They can be recognized by polarization and Zeeman displacements (or broadening) of radiation emitted from within them.

"(iii) Pinch effect. The conducting particles in an electrical discharge are within the discharge’s own magnetic field, which exerts upon them a centripetal force proportional to the current and current density. There is accordingly an increase of pressure towards the axis of the discharge; it has been measured directly in laboratory arcs, and reaches values as high as 100 atmospheres in lightning discharges. It is this inwardly-directed magnetic pressure which constricts the discharge and is responsible for its characteristic filamentary nature.

"(iv) Plasma jets. If either the current or current density varies along the channel of a discharge, there will be a corresponding gradient of the axial pressure; accordingly a jet of hot gas or plasma will be accelerated along the discharge. This is the origin of the anode and cathode jets observed in laboratory discharges. The speed of the jet is limited to the speed of sound in the medium of which it is composed. In ionized hydrogen the sonic speed is 12 km/s at 10,000 K; it varies as the square root of the absolute temperature. The velocities observed in discharge plasmas may be interpreted in terms of the temperatures of the discharges.

"(v) Current wave-form. The current in an electrical discharge builds up rapidly to a peak value, and then decays on a slower time-scale. Anomalous wave-forms sometimes shown by high-current lightning strokes arise from self-extinction by the pinch effect.

"3. Identification of electrical discharges in astrophysical sources

"(ii) Long-period variable stars. The hypothesis that the variation in long-period variable stars arises from electrical discharges allows a number of difficulties to be readily resolved. The basic process envisaged is that radially-directed electric fields build up in the dust laden atmosphere of the star until breakdown occurs, and then the discharge propagates outwards…

"(iv) Novae. Typical light-curves of novae show a sudden onset which is characteristic of an electrical discharge, followed by an equally characteristic slower decline…It is readily understood on the electrical-discharge mechanism as being due to self-extinction of the initial discharge by pinching out, followed by recovery as the constriction of the discharge channel relaxes as a result of the removal of the current- induced pressure…"

In the last section replace ‘light-curves’ with sunspot number and we have a description of one aspect of the solar cycle.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:22 pm

I do agree with Solar that the plasmoid idea seems to be the least improbable. However, it is still not clear how exactly does this plasmoid keep magnetically repolarizing itself. And what stabilizes it thermally/gravitationally.
Despite my criticism of SAFIRE applicability to the Sun I must note the correct idea of Monty that since there are so many stars out there, the mechanism by which they appear should be very simple and very stable at the same time.
Robertus Maximus wrote:Instead of a wave how about an electrical breakdown?

...

"(iv) Novae. Typical light-curves of novae show a sudden onset which is characteristic of an electrical discharge, followed by an equally characteristic slower decline…It is readily understood on the electrical-discharge mechanism as being due to self-extinction of the initial discharge by pinching out, followed by recovery as the constriction of the discharge channel relaxes as a result of the removal of the current- induced pressure…"

In the last section replace ‘light-curves’ with sunspot number and we have a description of one aspect of the solar cycle.

It's hard for me to translate the concept of breakdown to the stellar level. I don't quite understand the idea. Do you mean that the breakdown occurs periodically (and drives the cycle)? Or that it occurs one time (which "lights the star up"), after which the evolution of the star occurs on its own? And what exactly is breaking down? The interplanetary plasma in some external electric field?
I don't think the analogy you give at the end is valid, because the sunspot cycle does not have a sudden onset. Both the sunspot and solar polar field cycle are pretty smooth, sine-ish.

Speaking about the induction, Bob Johnson in one of his papers describes the idea that as the solar polar fields start to diminish (when we depart from the bottom of the solar minimum), it should drive currents (parallel to the equatorial plane) which would try to compensate the changes in the magnetic flux. Perhaps that's what sunspots are about?..
But at the same time they have really peculiar properties - first of all, a very strong magnetic field of their own (orders of magnitude stronger than the general solar field). It's super baffling.
Alfven, for example, considered sunspots as being the external manifestations of internal plasma tori that propagate from the solar core outwards. And the cycle length was just a consequence of the amount of time it would take for these tori to migrate all the way up. But Alfven (when formulating this theory) didn't know about the magnetic reversals which happen during each maximum. I wonder if that would make the picture more simple.
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Sun Nov 24, 2019 1:45 pm

One thing I thought about few days ago: since the Sun is moving with respect to the local standard of rest (as an approximation, we might assume that local plasma structures are stationary with respect to it), then the interstellar magnetic field should induce the electric field in the heliosphere. Or maybe in the Sun itself even.
Interstellar magnetic field is about 1 nT, and our velocity is about 13 km/s. So v*B should be of the order of 10^(-5) V/m. Which for the whole heliosphere (10^13 m) translates into 10^8 V. This might be noticeable IMO.

But so far I haven't found any obvious manifestations of this electric field. The vxB direction is (if we take v as the solar apex direction and B as interstellar field, as determined by IBEX) roughly 288 longitude, -35 latitude (ecliptic coordinates); compare to galactic center at 266.8 lon, -5.5 lat.
ExB drift then would be directed towards 167 lon, -35 lat.
One thing that caught my eye is the same latitude of both with respect to the ecliptic. But maybe this is just a coincidence.

Perhaps solar cycles might be related to that. Again, remembering Alfven's point about inductance determining the current - as well as the characteristic timescales, - perhaps one should dig somewhere in this direction.
Using some empirical formulas and assuming the current of the same thickness as the Sun, one might arrive at something like 10^7 H of inductance in the heliosphere. This would make the current (caused by this induced external field) increase at the rate of 10 A/s. So in 11 years (10^8 s) it would rise to the order of GA. This is pretty much the current in the heliospheric current sheet and the current to/from the poles.

Intuitively, one might assume a scenario where the Sun reacts to this external induced field with its own cycle. I.e. it has to periodically repolarize magnetically in order to deal with the external current - since at some point it becomes stronger than the current system of the Sun itself.
This is of course highly hypothetical and vague at the moment. But at least this external field cannot be just negated by polarization (as the naive potential difference fields would), so it should have some effect.
Also, if we assume Alfven velocity of about 48 km/s (in reality it varies) in the solar wind plasma, it would take 11 years to pass through the heliosphere.
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby celeste » Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:28 pm

paladin17 wrote:One thing I thought about few days ago: since the Sun is moving with respect to the local standard of rest (as an approximation, we might assume that local plasma structures are stationary with respect to it), then the interstellar magnetic field should induce the electric field in the heliosphere. Or maybe in the Sun itself.


Under “Interaction with solar magnetic field”, here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_I ... etic_field
we see that the sun is in a strongly magnetized cloud. Wouldn’t this imply that we should use, rather than the local standard of rest, this “magnetized cloud” as our reference frame? The motion of the cloud relative to the sun, is quite different than the motion of the sun compared to the local standard of rest.

Any comments?
celeste
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby paladin17 » Sun Nov 24, 2019 6:00 pm

celeste wrote:
paladin17 wrote:One thing I thought about few days ago: since the Sun is moving with respect to the local standard of rest (as an approximation, we might assume that local plasma structures are stationary with respect to it), then the interstellar magnetic field should induce the electric field in the heliosphere. Or maybe in the Sun itself.


Under “Interaction with solar magnetic field”, here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_I ... etic_field
we see that the sun is in a strongly magnetized cloud. Wouldn’t this imply that we should use, rather than the local standard of rest, this “magnetized cloud” as our reference frame? The motion of the cloud relative to the sun, is quite different than the motion of the sun compared to the local standard of rest.

Any comments?

Yeah, it seems the velocity of the cloud in LSR is actually larger than the velocity of the Sun.
So if one uses their relative velocity instead (259 lon, 5.5 lat), the electric field would be pointing to 353.8 lon, 40.7 lat (or in the opposite direction: 173 lon, -40.7 lat - depending on the magnetic field orientation).
This also doesn't ring any bells to me. Though it's exactly perpendicular to the galactic center direction and pretty close to our galactic rotation vector (348, 59).
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread postby jacmac » Sun Nov 24, 2019 9:43 pm

paladin 17:
I do agree with Solar that the plasmoid idea seems to be the least improbable. However, it is still not clear how exactly does this plasmoid keep magnetically repolarizing itself. And what stabilizes it thermally/gravitationally.

Ball lightening/plasmoids at a minimum shows that plasma can take this shape.
Despite my criticism of SAFIRE applicability to the Sun I must note the correct idea of Monty that since there are so many stars out there, the mechanism by which they appear should be very simple and very stable at the same time.

A simple mechanism for a sun to appear might be the ability or tendency of plasma to isolate a foreign body within itself. The resulting Plasma DL Plasma arrangement might be very stable given enough plasma , and a stable foreign body in size and capacitance.
This basic structure I am suggesting would be the "quiet" sun.
jacmac
 
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests