Magnetic fields and Electric Currents

[nick c]

This latest Space News is worth watching.
Up for discussion...Donald Scott: No Magnetic Universe w/o Electric Currents

[Solar]

Book:

Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond
Andreas Keiling (Editor), Octav Marghitu (Editor), Michael Wheatland (Editor)

Advice:

Abstract.In 1967, at the Birkeland Symposium in Sande-fjord, Norway, Professor Hannes Alfv ́en stated that the sec-ond approach (in solving unsolved problems by the standardMHD theory) to cosmic electrodynamics is to “thaw” the“frozen-in” magnetic field lines. “We can illustrate essen-tial properties of the electromagnetic state of space either by depicting the magnetic field lines or by depicting electric cur-rent lines,” he said. There has been much progress in space physics since the Birkeland Symposium more than 40 years ago, but unfortunately our scientific community has not re-ally succeeded in thawing the frozen-in field lines. Instead,it has pursued magnetic reconnection, a concept that Alfv'en had been critical of. It is shown here that we have to study many unsolved problems and problems thought to be solved in terms of both the magnetic field line concept and the current system concept. In taking Alfv ́en’s approach, we must consider the whole system, including the power supply (dynamo process) and its transmission and distribution (electric currents) and observed phenomena (power dissipation processes). Such a consideration can provide physical insight into many of our unsolved problems and problems thought to be solved. In this paper, we consider substorm onset processes, the substorm current system, sunspots, solar flares, coronal mass ejections, the interplanetary current sheet, and the magnetic field configuration of the heliosphere in terms of the current system concept. In particular, it is shown that a study of the current system is essential in substorm studies, more than changes of the magnetic field configuration in the magnetotail.

The choice of the concept of magnetic field lines or of electric current lines: Alfv'en medal lecture S.-I. Akasofu Ann. Geophys., 29, 1215–1232, 2011

[Michael Mozina]

It's rather apparent that astronomers today are *woefully* lacking in any sort of critical thinking skills, and they are pitifully incompetent when it comes to basic behaviors and features of plasma.

It shouldn't be necessary to point out that *electrical current* is what sustains those galactic sized magnetic fields that they observe, but alas they stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the role of electrical current as it relates to magnetic fields in plasma in space. We see the same problem rear it's ugly head with respect to solar physics and coronal loops. We see the same problem with respect to "magnetic reconnection" models to explain solar flares and magnetosphere activity. We see the same problem with respect to they lack of any explanation for magnetic fields in astrophysical settings in general. They seem to treat magnetism as being completely separate from electrical current even when it would be physically impossible for them to *be separate* in the first place.

They erroneously talk about "open" magnetic field lines coming from the sun. They even map the magnetic fields around the solar atmosphere while blissfully ignoring the electrical currents that sustains them. They use mathematical equations that Alfven called "pseudoscience" rather than embrace anything related to circuit theory.

About all I can say after that whole "Obler's paradox" conversation for a *second* time at CF is that it's damn clear that astronomers today are simply professionally incompetent when it comes to actual physics. Light doesn't reain it's brightness indefinitely, and magnetic fields do not exist in plasma without electrical current and/or changing electric fields. They literally do not understand the most *rudimentary* features and behaviors of light and plasma. No wonder they're stuck in the dark ages of astronomy.

[JP Michael]

I actually found the presentation remarkably helpful. The question, "What causes magnetic fields?" is the clincher of this whole debate:

1. Electric currents.
2. Electric fields.
3. Ferromagnetic metals.

In space we can safely eliminate #3. So what are we left with as the cause? The two entities mainstream physics do not want to talk about as pervading that selfsame space!

[nick c]

Hi JP,
Actually #3 may or may not have any relevance to Astronomy, but the fact is that a lodestone or 'permanent magnet' is a remnant of a past electrical discharge, which has arranged the atoms within the ferromagnetic material into a lattice which generates an internal electric current. So even in a lodestone/permanent magnet the magnetic field is created by an electric current.

When the atoms are arranged in a uniform lattice, so as to form the magnet, the interior surface currents cancel out, leaving a current which flows only on the outer surface of the magnet.

see:
https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/ ... ode77.html

also lodestones are created by an electric discharge:
https://www.scienceunderground.org/spac ... ghtning-2/

[JP Michael]

So even in a lodestone/permanent magnet the magnetic field is created by an electric current.

Aye, this is how permanent ferromagnets are made: wrap the metal with a solenoid and pass a current through it. That causes all the atoms in the ferrometal to align along the field. So yup, even ferromagnetic metals usually have their fields ultimately caused by an electric current!

[Michael Mozina]

So even in a lodestone/permanent magnet the magnetic field is created by an electric current.

Aye, this is how permanent ferromagnets are made: wrap the metal with a solenoid and pass a current through it. That causes all the atoms in the ferrometal to align along the field. So yup, even ferromagnetic metals usually have their fields ultimately caused by an electric current!

It's certainly cause by and related to a synchronized movement of electrons inside of the atomic lattice.

The part the blows my mind is the absolute *blatant* existence of electrical current inside of coronal loops that *heats* the plasma (via resistance) to millions of degrees, and sustains that plasma at millions of degrees for hours and days on end. It's impossible to make that happen in plasma *without* electric current, yet the mainstream tries to chalk it all up to "magnetic reconnection", in spite of the fact that they cannot begin to produce anything of the sort in the lab with MRX. At *best* one might use changing magnetic fields to induce a *short* burst of electrical current inside the plasma, but there is simply no possible physical way to explain a *sustained* high temperature "magnetic rope" without current. Period. They've never demonstrated a sustained hot plasma in a lab via MRx, and they never will.

There should be no need to explain to astronomers that those magnetic fields in space are *caused* by electrical current, but even when one points that issue out to them, they willfully bury their collective heads in the sand and they simply pretend that it's *not* caused by current. It's like talking to a brick wall.

[spark]

What is Magnetism?
https://youtu.be/JGIn45-rw7M?t=516

What is electricity? Teaser video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEo0rUkLXDw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGJ5fG_u2fk

Full video on explaining what is electricity is coming soon on this channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/FractalWoman/videos

[spark]

An Aether Model of Electricity : The Missing Secret of Magnetism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-tEALIeU_0

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... r_-_Part_1

[crawler]

An Aether Model of Electricity : The Missing Secret of Magnetism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-tEALIeU_0

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... r_-_Part_1

This invents electrigen propagating along a wire, & the electrigen gives the surrounding aether a circular wave motion.
Why not just say that there are two kinds of oscillations or something of the aether.

[nick c]

"A truly new idea is at first ridiculed, then violently opposed, and when finally accepted said to be not new."
Schopenhauer

Here is an interesting article, in which the opening sentence admits to the possibility that cosmic magnetic fields as having their origins in electric currents.
This is no small admission as EU proponents have over the years repeatedly been ridiculed for attributing cosmic magnetic fields as evidence of enormous electric currents spanning the cosmos.

https://www.pppl.gov/news/2020/09/resea ... -reactions

Electric current is everywhere, from powering homes to controlling the plasma that fuels fusion reactions to possibly giving rise to vast cosmic magnetic fields.

[crawler]

"A truly new idea is at first ridiculed, then violently opposed, and when finally accepted said to be not new."
Schopenhauer

Here is an interesting article, in which the opening sentence admits to the possibility that cosmic magnetic fields as having their origins in electric currents.
This is no small admission as EU proponents have over the years repeatedly been ridiculed for attributing cosmic magnetic fields as evidence of enormous electric currents spanning the cosmos.

https://www.pppl.gov/news/2020/09/resea ... -reactions

Electric current is everywhere, from powering homes to controlling the plasma that fuels fusion reactions to possibly giving rise to vast cosmic magnetic fields.

Catt & Co would say that electric currents have their origins in magnetic fields.

[Orion]

Consider this that coherent photons, electromagnetic waves, laser light are examples of energy forms that can be combined is specific patterns in space void of local matter to produce electric and/or magnetic fields that are stationary at least for a short period of time. Where are the charges that produce these aligned fields? One could argue that the devices which had moving charges that propelled the energy in the form of photons etc. which had fields that overlapped to momentarily create the said local electromagnetic fields are the sources. The source is the lasers or antenna systems, the circuit is the space and path of energy flow or flight. if the system is closed the energy will be routed to a sink or ground in the black box representing the closed system. If the system is open then the circuit and energy continue away from the source while the temporary fields follow the energy in the photons that created the fields.

The situation above is an example where energy can form electric and/or magnetic fields with no need for positive or negative charges to create them. If the energy exceed twice that of any particle mass a matter anti-matter pair can be produced. The patter of light is specific and must overlap in a collision format to produce the standing wave and hence convert energy into matter without the need for a heavy atomic nucleus. The stable remnant of matter in this local region of space will have stored energy in the form of mass with magnetic moment and some may have net charge (electrons, protons). The virgin field will be complemented with the field produced by the local matter to conserve total energy that has not left the system. Future waves of energy can alter the above described system to make what we see today in what is known as the cosmic web.

[Michael Mozina]

This latest Space News is worth watching.
Up for discussion...Donald Scott: No Magnetic Universe w/o Electric Currents

This specific issue, and astronomer's aversion to embracing the circuit/electrical side of the physical processes in space, along with their own cognitive dissonance is making them go to great lengths to try to avoid dealing with the current flow issue entirely. They do this by literally "making up" new purely "magnetic" devices, like the term "magnetic switchbacks" when describing current flow changes in and around the solar atmosphere.

Astronomers end up speaking a completely new language of their own creation that is based on trying to eliminate the need for acknowledging electrical current in plasma, and it's primary role in terms of kinetic energy, with terms like "magnetic reconnection", 'magnetic switchbacks', "STEVE", yada yada yada. None of it has any useful predictive value in the lab either.

To this very day, astronomers have never demonstrated that "magnetic reconnection' is capable of producing *and sustaining* a full sphere solar corona, or planetary aurora, a full *century* after that was first done with circuit theory.

[nick c]

Astronomers end up speaking a completely new language of their own creation that is based on trying to eliminate the need for acknowledging electrical current in plasma

Euphemisms are a way of dealing with unpleasantness without having to face the implications.

Definition: Solar Wind.... "The outflow of charged particles from the solar corona into space."

Definition: Electric Current....."the movement of electrically charged particles, atoms, or ions

How has this equivalence and its implications escaped modern Astronomy?