When Physicists DON'T Focus Their Lives On DM

[BeAChooser]

Perhaps you can troll the comment section on the NASA website.

LOL!

[BeAChooser]

What a shame that Ian w (aka mcfc16) has taken the topic of this thread so far from the OP as to be unrecognizable.

[Maol]

I sincerely hope you gentlemen can continue this dialog without any ad hominem diverticulation spoiling the exchange of ideas for others following this discussion.

[BeAChooser]

diverticulation

Huh?

[mcfc16]

How could you detect the electron drift in the interplanetary medium, if you are not looking for it and are working from the a priori assumption that it cannot exist?

Firstly, he needs them to enter the solar system. That is not possible. As I explained. Secondly, they would be detected within the solar system by any of the countless spacecraft that are equipped to make electron detections! They aren't there, and cannot be there. Remember the moving magnetic field, heading out to the heliopause at ~ 400 km/s? Ask any plasma physicist you like, you are not getting charged particles to simply ignore that field. You need cosmic rays to get anywhere near the Sun. And we know the flux of them.

The electric sun theory requires that the net flow of electrons be toward the Sun...Scott uses the term "drift." Space probes are not set up to determine if there is an overall electron drift to the Sun. Of course this would be a test of an electric sun theory. But, afaik, no such test has been done.

Space probes are most certainly set up to detect the direction and velocity of charged particles. In the x, y and z directions. Don't believe me? Go ask anyone involved in missions that use such instruments. It is kind of an important thing to know! There is no net movement of electrons toward the Sun. That is impossible. Remember the magnetic field?

If it could be conclusively shown that this drift is impossible or does not exist then the theory will have been falsified and it would be time to move on to some other theory to explain the source of solar power.
With regard to the 'drift', your use of the word "Impossible" is simply a biased decree!

It is shown to be impossible. Moving magnetic field, remember? How are you getting electrons past that? Are they relativistic? If so, they will be easily detected. And are. Cosmic rays is what we call them. And it is trivial to show that there aren't enough of them to power much of anything. Drift electrons are indeed impossible. Again, ask any plasma physicist you like. Heck, you could even do an experiment. Make a plasma, then introduce a moving magnetic field. See which way the ions and electrons go. And by the way, Alfven called it impossible.

Interstellar electrons entering the solar system have been detected by the Voyagers.

...Voyager has detected a 100-fold increase in the intensity of high-energy electrons from elsewhere in the galaxy diffusing into our solar system from outside...

from: NASA's Voyager Hits New Region at Solar System Edge
Perhaps, you should immediately contact NASA and point out to them that there is "no mechanism" to explain their observation, so therefore they must be mistaken.
Perhaps you can troll the comment section on the NASA website.

Perhaps you should read the papers instead of the press releases? Those are an increase in cosmic rays. And we know their flux at 1 AU.

'THE MODULATION OF GALACTIC COSMIC-RAY ELECTRONS IN THE HELIOSHEATH'
R. A. Caballero-Lopez, H. Moraal, and F. B. McDonald (2004)
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... /725/1/121

From the abstract;

It is shown that the observations suggest that these electrons are not freshly accelerated on the termination shock, but rather that they are of galactic origin—while they may be re-accelerated by that shock. In this paper, these intensities are modeled with numerical solutions of the cosmic-ray transport equation. It is shown that because they are relativistic.........

My bolding. Relativistic energy electrons are not dawdling in! By definition.

Scott's electric sun model requires that electrons from interstellar space enter the heliosphere and drift toward the Sun.

Not possible, as explained.

Scott is speaking of a net drift.

Which isn't there, and is impossible, as Alfven told us, and in-situ measurements confirm.

So in the seemingly chaotic motions of electrons the net motion would be to the Sun. It would require an concerted effort by any space agency to detect this net drift.

Nope, it would be blindingly obvious, as well as being impossible.

That has not been done.

Yes it has. By countless spacecraft that have sampled the solar wind.

I am sure that Scott et al would come up with an experimentum crucis to determine the existence of this drift or not; if NASA or other space agency would approach him for a plan.

Why would NASA approach an EE whose impossible 'model' does not exist in the peer-reviewed literature? And is not taken seriously by a single plasma physicist? And is trivially shown to be impossible?

Let me reiterate some very basic plasma physics - you are not getting drift electrons past a moving magnetic field. Plasma physics 101.

[Maol]

diverticulation

Huh?

A knowm joke, I thought you'd get it. It was a test. You didn't pass it.

[Maol]

The Ulysses space probe detected galactic electrons entering the solar system. Ulysses' orbit was over the solar poles, where the sun's magnetic field is weaker, instead of in the usual ecliptic plane.

this is a snip from the abstract here https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ar_minimum

Ulysses observation that the galactic cosmic ray electron flux exceeds the one of the protons by more than 30% in 2008 and 2009, we conclude that charge sign dependent effects (drifts) are of major importance for calculating galactic cosmic ray intensities.

another here https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19720060880

Observation of a quiet-time component of interplanetary electrons having energies above solar-wind energies and below those characterized as cosmic radiation. The energy spectrum of this component generally falls with energy from 18 keV to 1.8 MeV, but shows a feature in the 100 to 300-keV range. The observed temporal variations of the intensity suggest that the 18 to 100-keV portion is solar and that the 0.3 to 1.8-MeV portion is galactic in origin. Solar and terrestrial neutron-decay electrons appear inadequate to explain the 100 to 300-keV feature.

[BeAChooser]

A knowm joke, I thought you'd get it. It was a test. You didn't pass it.

Darn! Must be because of my Schizencephaly.

[ForumModerator]

You stated that Scott's drift was not possible because electrons could never get through the heliopause. This is a straw man argument. Scott's model has electron drift toward the Sun taking place inside of the heliosphere, ie within the solar system.

Nevertheless, the electrons which are entering the Solar System have been discovered by the Voyagers. You chastised me for pointing that out, saying that they were actually cosmic rays and I should have read the original article. But again this is nothing but a misdirection on your part. The news release conveyed that information, so reading the original paper was not necessary since the information I was looking for was contained in the news article. This is not just a news release from my local town newspaper, it is an official release from NASA. And it states that high energy electrons are entering the Solar System and in great quantities. This is consistent with the Electric Sun theory. If you consider the mind boggling size of the surface area of the heliopause there would certainly be enough of these galactic electrons to power the Sun.

Note the bold sentence: here is an opportunity for you, as professional plasma researcher, to investigate in an objective fashion. Where do all of these high energy galactic electrons entering through the heliopause go once they are in the solar system? Perhaps there is a Nobel Prize for the scientist that finds the real source of power for the Sun. Of course, as a gentleman and a scholar, it would only be fair if you shared the award with Dr. Scott.

[Cargo]

colliding galaxy clusters

Doctor mcfc16, we have a Red Shift problem. How do you plan to hide it?

What redshift problem is that? Please be specific.

The Doctor's solution then is to ignore it because he's unknowingly ignorant I assume. I'll wait until after you discover Seeing Red.

How can I ignore something that doesn't exist, and that you cannot spell out in scientific terms?

Clearly you're not saying Red Shift doesn't exist? I thought you were educated in something about space science.
There's a science based book called Seeing Red. Look it up and Check It Out.

[mcfc16]

Clearly you're not saying Red Shift doesn't exist? I thought you were educated in something about space science.
There's a science based book called Seeing Red. Look it up and Check It Out.

You mean Arp's nonsense? He was long ago shown to be wrong.

[jacmac]

Maol said:

Ulysses' orbit was over the solar poles, where the sun's magnetic field is weaker,

I remember that the angle of the orbit of Ulysses was about 82 degrees, once in it's full orbit.
Also, the average radius was very large. My calculation at the time placed Ulysses about 30 million miles
to the side of the sun axis of rotation line. Therefore, I caution against saying Ulysses was OVER the solar poles.
It certainly was way above the sun but not really In the plasma stream directly above the poles.
I am only suggesting that as good as Ulysses was there might be plasma conditions more directly over the poles
very different from what Ulysses detected.

[Maol]

Maol said:

Ulysses' orbit was over the solar poles, where the sun's magnetic field is weaker,

I remember that the angle of the orbit of Ulysses was about 82 degrees, once in it's full orbit.
Also, the average radius was very large. My calculation at the time placed Ulysses about 30 million miles
to the side of the sun axis of rotation line. Therefore, I caution against saying Ulysses was OVER the solar poles.
It certainly was way above the sun but not really In the plasma stream directly above the poles.
I am only suggesting that as good as Ulysses was there might be plasma conditions more directly over the poles
very different from what Ulysses detected.

Recognizing there is always a shortcoming in satisfying our desire for perfection, nevertheless, Ulysses (and other probes) detected electrons determined to be of galactic origin.

[mcfc16]

The Ulysses space probe detected galactic electrons entering the solar system. Ulysses' orbit was over the solar poles, where the sun's magnetic field is weaker, instead of in the usual ecliptic plane.

this is a snip from the abstract here https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ar_minimum

Ulysses observation that the galactic cosmic ray electron flux exceeds the one of the protons by more than 30% in 2008 and 2009, we conclude that charge sign dependent effects (drifts) are of major importance for calculating galactic cosmic ray intensities.

another here https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19720060880

Observation of a quiet-time component of interplanetary electrons having energies above solar-wind energies and below those characterized as cosmic radiation. The energy spectrum of this component generally falls with energy from 18 keV to 1.8 MeV, but shows a feature in the 100 to 300-keV range. The observed temporal variations of the intensity suggest that the 18 to 100-keV portion is solar and that the 0.3 to 1.8-MeV portion is galactic in origin. Solar and terrestrial neutron-decay electrons appear inadequate to explain the 100 to 300-keV feature.

Yep, cosmic rays. High energy electrons. I already said they can get in. What they cannot do is just drift at half-rat power towards the sun. And they are easily detected because of their energies. There aren't enough of them to power much of anything.
Juergens' original model posited a huge potential between the Sun and heliosphere which most certainly would have resulted in relativistic electrons. I think Scott realised how fatal those electrons would be as they smashed into the night side of our planet! And how easily detectable they are, and how there aren't enough of them. So, he went with 'drift' electrons, which are so slow that spacecraft cannot detect them. God of the gaps type thing. What he didn't realise that it is the combined speed of the electrons and the spacecraft that determine whether they will be detected. And the spacecraft velocity is not inconsiderable, usually. If they were there (impossible) they would be detected. They aren't there.
You cannot get a drift electron past a magnetic field moving in the opposite direction at ~ 400 km/s. Basic plasma physics.
Apart from anything else, we know how the Sun is powered.

[mcfc16]

Therefore, I caution against saying Ulysses was OVER the solar poles.
It certainly was way above the sun but not really In the plasma stream directly above the poles.
I am only suggesting that as good as Ulysses was there might be plasma conditions more directly over the poles
very different from what Ulysses detected.

Why would it be different over the poles? We study the plasma and fields at the poles from Earth, and possibly from orbit. It is all heading outward. Were it not, it would be very obvious. We don't need to wait for an eclipse. You fit one of those whatsits, whose name escapes me, to the telescope, which blocks out the light from the disc.