Persistent currents in the heliopause?

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

Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Jim W » Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:45 am

You’ve probably seen images of the interstellar magnetic field “draping” over the heliopause, as seen here:
https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net ... bexmap.jpg
and explained by the “frozen in” magnetic field here:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... /805/2/153

If we don’t want to accept the idea of magnetic fields “frozen into” plasma, how do we explain the “draping”?

Note here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meissner_effect
That there is an image of the magnetic field lines “draping” over the surface of the superconductor, yet here it is argued that the effect is due to “persistent currents” near the surface of the superconductor.

Could it be that persistent currents flowing within the heliopause are causing the “draping” in the same way?
Jim W
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:19 pm

Re: Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Tue Jun 11, 2019 2:33 pm

There is no superconductivity in space.
Plasma is a semiconductor.

There are no magnetic field lines.

There are no frozen in magnetic fields.
Magnetic fields need electric currents to maintain.

There is no magnetic field draping.
Magnetic fields are simply the result of moving charges,
usually electric currents.

All the ideas of magnetism in plasma are based on nonsense.
Alfven warned them about it when he got the Nobel prize.
The astronomers even omit all electric fields.

Sometimes they switch electric fields for magnetic fields.
So if there is a persistent magnetic field (which requires a strong current),
it is very likely a persistent electric field (which requires a small current).

But somehow the astronomers are very persistent.
And they are pushing the wrong ideas into normal physics sometimes.
So they pushed the idea of magnetic field lines in superconductor physics.
Well. In reality there are no magnetic field lines there either.
Here is a video about
the integer and fractional quantum hall effect
which goes deep into the physics of superconductors.

I am also against the idea that black holes / heavy objects can slow down light.
If I apply the actual effect of gravity, the light simply redshifts due to acceleration,
and does not change speed. That is because it can not change speed (according to relativity).
The black hole model comes from the use of Newton's gravity, with gives an escape speed.
With pure the Einstein's gravity, we do not get that. And the speed of light is constant.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 990
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Jim W » Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:32 pm

Zyxzevn wrote:There is no superconductivity in space.
Plasma is a semiconductor.

Except that a true dark mode Bessel function filament does behave exactly as a superconductor.
And, will fail to be superconducting for the same reason as other superconductors, in that a relatively low temperature also destroys the Bessel function filament. Do you agree?
Jim W
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:19 pm

Re: Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:28 pm

Jim W wrote:
Zyxzevn wrote:There is no superconductivity in space.
Plasma is a semiconductor.

Except that a true dark mode Bessel function filament does behave exactly as a superconductor.


No. Superconductivity is something different than good conductivity.

When electrons move through a medium, they encounter resistance as they move from
atom to atom. The resistance is related to the weak magnetic fields of the atoms.
This is what commonly happens when we have any matter.

In a super conductor the electrons can be in some kind of multi-position state.
The theory calls this Cooper pairs. But I personally think that it is a bit more complicated.
Superconductivity means that the electrons encountering no resistance at all.
The electrons do not encounter the fields of the other atoms on their way.

We can get these states in certain crystals.
This does not really in plasmas.
Plasmas usually do not have shared state of electrons.

Maybe you can have low resistance when the space is almost empty.
This is not superconducting, but it could be very low resistance.

Due to the zero resistance, superconductors can react differently to
magnetic fields than normal matter.
There is a huge difference between the magnet that meets copper,
Image
(see: https://imgur.com/gallery/i62LE )
and the magnet that meets a superconductor (and iron dust).
Image
(see: https://imgur.com/gallery/xFQo6qj )

In very cold temperatures we can also get similar states in liquid helium.
We get a superfluid. In it the electrons do not roam freely, but the atoms
themselves move around as if they are all connected.
Here is a superfluid fountain with zero fluid resistance.
Image
https://imgur.com/gallery/6Bd3rmu
But I think these temperatures are far too cold for the universe.

But you are free to theorize about weird stuff happening in the cold regions of the universe,
most mainstream astronomers come up with much weirder stuff.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 990
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Jim W » Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:52 pm

“The resistance is related to the weak magnetic fields of the atoms. This is what commonly happens when we have any matter”. True.
“Superconductivity means that the electrons encountering no resistance at all. The electrons do not encounter the fields of the other atoms on their way”. Also true.

Yet in an ideal dark mode Bessel function filament, all the moving charge (of either sign), is moving ALONG the collective magnetic field due to all those other neighboring particles. There is ZERO resistance from the magnetic fields in this configuration.

Again, this is only possible if each particle is allowed to follow exactly the magnetic field at any point. So here too, we have to keep the random motion of the particles (temperatures), exceeding low, in order to have a true Bessel function filament.

Remember the logic of the Bessel function filament. It is not ignoring the magnetic fields of all those other ions,electrons,atoms along the way. It is saying that charge at any point is following the collective magnetic fields of the other charges. Each particle’s velocity is exactly aligned to the net magnetic field at that point.
Jim W
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:19 pm

Re: Persistent currents in the heliopause?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:29 am

Jim W wrote:Remember the logic of the Bessel function filament. It is not ignoring the magnetic fields of all those other ions,electrons,atoms along the way. It is saying that charge at any point is following the collective magnetic fields of the other charges. Each particle’s velocity is exactly aligned to the net magnetic field at that point.


The collective magnetic field is always different from the atomic-local magnetic field.
In ferro-magnetism we have domains that have each their own magnetic field.
And in this domain we have atoms with their own magnetic field.
While the global magnetic field seems smooth, the electron encounters them all and
can get resistance from each minor fluctuation.

So I believe that your situation does not work as a superconductor.
But maybe as a very good conductor.

Then we have also the problem of stability.

In ferromagnetism, the crystals maintain the direction of the domains and
thus can maintain a magnetic field. This is a stable situation.

If the domains or atoms would be free, they would just cluster up. The north and south poles
would just cluster together.

Here is a demonstration.
Image
Magnetism in a free world is not stable.

This is why magnetism needs an active component,
like solar wind or plasma-currents to exist.
Something that even mainstream astronomers do not seem to know.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 990
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm


Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest