Study – Solar winds magnetically driven

an outflow of million-degree gas and magnetic field… OK
the Sun’s million-mile-per-hour wind… ?

Everything that happens on our little planet depends on the energy that comes from that big yellow sphere that shows up in the sky every morning. We should try to understand as much as possible about it.

I don’t know plasma. Is reconnection like (or similar to) a pinch?

Are solar flares just an extreme version of this reconnection?

Leif Svalgaard (19:18:43) : “… and in an old-fashioned bicycle lamp dynamo…
Now you’re talking my language and my time, Leif!
Using this as a starting point I may even be able to catch up and understand a little of what at present I can only read here on WUWT with wonder, awe and amazement…

Does the material out of which the Sun formed having an iron content from previous stellar fusion (of 1st gen stars) have anything to do with it’s field? i.e. – if the Sun was formed solely from Hydrogen and Helium of the young universe, would it still have a magnetic field?

David Alan (22:41:20) :
I am aware of the fusion process to iron, after which it takes (super)nova implosion to go any further up the periodic table. Your answer will no doubt help some readers who are not aware of how our Solar System (and Sun) got heavier elements into it.
Leif Svalgaard (23:09:20) :
It’s not often we bump into the frontieres of theory.
I like your explanation with the metal-supplied electrons.
I’ll check out the Biermann process.

I’m not a physicist, just curious… this made me think of magnetic mirrors and magnetic bottles (magnetic scissors)… The wiggling and vibrating of field lines would easily accelerate particles away from the sun.

Leif – ‘the solar wind has nothing to do with electromagnetic forces’ –
I thought magnetic fields were implicated in the spatial distribution of the wind and also in the acceleration of protons and electrons even as the distance from the sun increased – wasn’t this the basis of the controversy with Hannes Alfven? Isn’t the solar wind one great electric current? How does it then interact with the ionospheric current sheet and the huge voltage difference between the top and bottom of the atmosphere – and does this have any implications for climate?
I ask this because I was struck by Svensmark’s experiments – when he cleared the gas chambers (looking for ionisation and nucleation) he used a voltage shock. When we get flares, is there a voltage shock? Could this affect charged particles and transparency of the atmosphere in relation to aerosols?

So-called “magnetic reconnection” is a misnomer.
It is plasma motion, i.e., charged particles that generate the magnetic field.
The intensity of the magnetic field is determined by the velocity of the charged particles and the ‘charge density’.
Magnetic fields aren’t “dragged” anywhere.
They emanate from the charged particles as they are moving.
It’s a simple ‘but for’ test.
But for the movement of the charged particles, there would be no magnetic field.
If you want to understand the Sun or anything else that exhibits a magnetic field, you need to observe & measure the underlying motion of the charged particles, electric current.
So-called “magnetic reconnection” is a failed idea that is carried along by it political inertia in astrophysical circles.
A physical explanation to have any validity must encompass and describe all physical forces and particles of matter involved and a name should convey those forces and particles, i.e. electric field, electric current, magnetic field, and electrons & ions.
The appropriate name and one that does convey the forces and particles of matter involved is ‘plasma electric double layer’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)
From the Wikipedia entry for plasma double layers:
“A double layer is a structure in a plasma and consists of two parallel layers with opposite electrical charge. The sheets of charge cause a strong electric field and a correspondingly sharp change in voltage (electrical potential) across the double layer. Ions and electrons which enter the double layer are accelerated, decelerated, or reflected by the electric field. In general, double layers (which may be curved rather than flat) separate regions of plasma with quite different characteristics.”
Note the supporting footnotes for the Wikipedia entry.
Magnetic merging theories obscure the synergistic role all of the above forces and particle elements play in this physical process.
It’s not magic “magnetic reconnection”, but physics that has been studied in detail, both in the labortatory and now in space.

Adolfo Giurfa (09:17:41) :
Thank you, that page provided a lot of “aha!” insights in a short space. It all fits.
James F. Evans (09:27:21) :
Thank you, that amplified the above.
So… we normally think of electricity as needing a wire, but in fact, it seems that an electric current is perfectly well defined simply as a movement of electrons… or other charged particles… in any medium including space… and this is what is happening with the solar wind. Next inference: the magnetic field is a by-product of the moving charged particles.
However, I’m partial to Zero Point Field expositions – which might precede both the electric and the magnetic aspects of solar wind formation…

All these “new discoveries” and “surprises” were made decades ago.
The reason you never hear of them is because the gravity based
model of the universe is completely wrong and mainstream science
could never admit to it directly.
We live in an Electric Universe.
-one that is ruled by the physics of plasma, electromagnetics
and resonance.
One of the “inconvenient truths” they always conveniently leave out is the word “electro” whenever it turns out “magnetism” was the cause for
some solar or space phenomena.
Of course the solar winds are electromagnetically driven, -they are a
form of plasma (electricaly charged gas-ie: the “the hot gas”)
It has recently even been proven the sun and earth are directly linked
via an electrical conduit.
Even the Electric Sun model has been recently verified.
You will soon learn what has always been forbidden to tell:
-that we live in an “Electric Universe”
Over the next 3 years you will hear about more and more
new discoveries in electromagnetics,
Much of the “unexplained” phenomina will ultimately be
found to be caused by electromagnetics. (or just the politically correct, Magnetics) -this will include gravity.
-More reports of how EMF radiation is harmful to the body will appear… (this is because our bodies are not only electromagnetic “antennas”, but also are completely controlled by electromagnetic resonance. (we can be made sick or healthy by simply being exposed to the correct, pulsed electromagnetic field)
The sun is rapidly changing its resonant field and energy output
in part, due to the new higher frequency cosmic energy
that the solar system is being exposed to as we flow through
the electromagnetic plasma fields this in this region of space,
They will no longer be able to ignore the obvious.
Discover how the universe really works (no fantasy theoretical
math theories required)
You can start at the home of the Electric Universe
Model here:
“The Explosion that Shattered Solar Theory”
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/051201protonstorm.htm
Wal Thornhill, David Scott and Donald E. Scott, and the entire
EU community provide daily, simple pictorial examples of what
mystifies mainstream science
Search on Electric Universe, Electric Sun and Plasma cosmology

Leif, I’m shocked at the tone of your reply. I was careful in my summary of what I personally had understood.
I said, So… we normally think of electricity as needing a wire, but in fact, it seems that an electric current is perfectly well defined simply as a movement of electrons… or other charged particles… in any medium including space… and this is what is happening with the solar wind. Next inference: the magnetic field is a by-product of the moving charged particles.
I think your cavalier dismissal of that, without further explanation, is unwarranted, and does not help the science progress. What is wrong with my statement? I am interested, and am here to speak and listen, but I expect listening in return. Frequently I appreciate your appreciation of detail facts. I had thought that Nigel Calder was criticizing you too freely, but now I am not sure. Please can we keep to factual discussion rather than empty dismissals.

To paraphrase Homer:
Mmm, plasma: The cause of and the solution to all of life’s problems.
More of it in the universe than any other state of matter, and we know next to doodly-squat about it, next to what we know about the fundamental forces, that is…

ok, thanks Leif, I shall study both.

Doncha just love metaphor?

David Alan,
“Probably the one piece of evidence that sort of puts the nail in the EU coffin for me is how magnetic and electric fields react to black holes. Gases, plasma, etc. get drawn in by swirling magnetic fields that intensify and amplify the closer they get to the black hole.”
The unfortunate problem for you is that there is no direct evidence of black holes. There are astronomical observations that the conventional Gravity Universe types could not explain so they bent some math and hypothesis and voila, Black Holes!!!
I go with KISS. We are much closer to experimental evidence in plasma physics on earth of conditions that can explain the astronomical observations without the Black Hole hypothesis.

Leif Svalgaard,
“And with a nice photographs of the most renowned of the 56-fold symmetric megaliths at Stonehenge [yes the ancients knew about Z-pinches, apparently]:”
This is a strawman of high value.
If an alien spacecraft came by and somehow extracted a stream of material from a building in front of you and you then drew a picture or made a sculpture that reasonably showed a VISUAL representation of the occurance, would that mean you UNDERSTOOD how it was done or the physics involved??

Leif Svalgaard,
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/solar_wind_speed.html
“The Sun occasionally launches billion-ton blasts of electrified gas, called coronal mass ejections (CMEs), into space at millions of miles (kilometers) per hour. If a fast CME is plowing through slow solar wind, a shock builds up in front of the CME that accelerates the electrically charged solar wind particles.”
Electrified gas Leif??
Accelerates the electrically charged solar wind Leif???
“Since the solar wind is made up of electrically-charged particles, it responds to magnetic fields that permeate the solar atmosphere. Solar wind particles flow along invisible lines of magnetic force like cars on a highway. When the magnetic field lines bend straight out into space, as they do in “coronal hole” regions, the solar wind acts like cars on a drag strip, racing along at high speed. When the magnetic field lines bend sharply back to the solar surface, like the pattern of iron filings around a bar magnet, the solar wind acts like cars in city traffic and emerges relatively slowly. Scientists have known this for over thirty years and used it to give a crude estimate for the speed of the solar wind — either fast or slow.”
Look Leif, no one (well I am not) is asking you to buy into the extreme Hypothesis of the EU/PU. We would like some simple acknowledgement of REALITY!!!!
Maybe you could invite Dr. Joe Gurman, a solar researcher at NASA Goddard, here for a debate on these basic issues??
Possibly with a no-comment post so us “nutters” can not just create a food fight??

Leif Svalgaard,
“The petroglyphs do not move me. Perhaps aliens from outer space were teaching the ancients about the Electric Universe, just like the bible teaching us about expansion of the universe and the Quraan teaches us about the Flat Earth…”
How many times are you going to repeat this strawman???
Petroglyphs of what an ancient possibly OBSERVED has nothing to do with KNOWLEDGE of the physics involved. Implying that this is what is being claimed is dishonest.

My closer to the truth definition of eshcatology: The study of poop

Leif Svalgaard,
“No, but it seems that the EU leadership would want you to believe that I did.”
could you please provide me with a link to statements supporting your allegation??
My limited reading led me to believe SOME EU types were claiming that ancient humans OBSERVED plasma types NOT of intelligent origin and recorded the SHAPES or their INTERPRETATIONS of them. In some cases making up myths to explain them.

From Wikipedia entry on solar wind:
“The solar wind is a stream of charged particles ejected from the upper atmosphere of the sun. It consists mostly of electrons and protons with energies of about 1 keV. The stream of particles varies in temperature and speed with the passage of time. These particles are able to escape the sun’s gravity, in part because of the high temperature of the corona, but also because of high kinetic energy that particles gain through a process that is not well understood.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind
And more specific:
Wikipedia entry for heliospheric current sheet:
“A small electrical current flows within the sheet, about 10−10 A/m². The thickness of the current sheet is about 10,000 km.
The underlying magnetic field is called the interplanetary magnetic field, and the resulting electric current forms part of the heliospheric current circuit.[4] The heliospheric current sheet is also sometimes called the interplanetary current sheet.”
And continuing:
“The electric current in the heliospheric current sheet is directed radially inward, the circuit being closed by outward currents aligned with the Sun’s magnetic field in the solar polar regions. The total current in the circuit is on the order of 3×109 amperes.[4] As a comparison with other astrophysical electric currents, the Birkeland currents that supply the Earth’s aurora are about a thousand times weaker at a million amperes. The maximum current density in the sheet is on the order of 10-10 A/m² (10-4 A/km²).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliospheric_current_sheet
# 4 footnote: MHD simulation of the three-dimensional structure of the heliospheric current sheet
(We’ve discussed simulations before and you were approving in general.)
“Abstract
The existence of the radial component of the electric current flowing toward the Sun is revealed in numerical simulation. The total strength of the radial current is A. The only way to fulfil the electric current continuity is to close the radial electric current by means of field- aligned currents at the polar region of the Sun. Thus, the surface density of the closure current flowing along the solar surface can be estimated as 4 A/m, and the magnetic field produced by this current is T, i.e. several percent of the intrinsic magnetic field of the Sun. This seems to mean that any treatment of the solar magnetic field generation should take into account the heliospheric current circuit as well as the currents flowing inside the Sun.”
http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=article&url=/articles/aa/full/2001/34/aah2814/aah2814.html&access=standard
Dr. Svalgaard, your initial attempt to characterize the solar wind as “just a hot gas” is not persuasive.

From Leif’s link:
“SOLAR CORPUSCULAR RAYS.’
. BIRKELAND.
[Reprinted from Science Abstracts, Sect. A, May 25, 1916. $531.
From the discussion of an exstensive series of auroral
observations Stormer has decided to regard the aurora as
due to positive corpuscles eniitted from the sun coming
into action in the upper atmosphere of the earth. Birkeland
considers that corpuscles are negnative and brings forward
the evidence given by his extensive experiments
on the discharges from a magnetized kathode in a
special vacuum chamber. -C.P. B[utler].”
(not included was a narrative of an aurora from Chesterbrook Va.)

Speaking of coronal mass ejections (CME):
NASA has made observations & measurements of CME’s and determined the shape or morphology of CME’s:
“April 14, 2009: This just in: The Sun is blasting the solar system with croissants.”
Slightly tongue-n-cheek, but an accurate statement, no less.
NASA goes on:
“Researchers studying data from NASA’s twin STEREO probes have found that ferocious solar storms called CMEs (coronal mass ejections) are shaped like a French pastry. The elegance and simplicity of the new ‘croissant model’ is expected to dramatically improve forecasts of severe space weather.”
Dr. Svalgaard’s “just a hot gas”???
More NASA:
“This is an important advance,” says Lika Guhathakurta, STEREO program scientist at NASA headquarters in Washington DC. “From a distance, CMEs appear to be a complicated and varied population. What we have discovered is that they are not so varied after all. Almost all of the 40-plus CMEs we have studied so far with STEREO have a common shape–akin to a croissant.”
“Almost all…have a common shape–akin to a croissant.”
Why is this shape remarkable?
Because it suggests not just shape, but structure and dynamics.
What does a croissant look like?
Well, a twisted pastry.
This is consistent with a twisted set of electric current filaments, Birkeland currents, where the “electrically-charged particles” (NASA’s description not mine) take the structure of two filaments twisted around each other.
See plasma filamentation:
“Filamentation (or filamentary structure) is often seen in plasmas. It is created because plasma contains free electrons, making it highly electrically conductive — even more than metals, and even in tenuous cosmic plasmas. As charged particles readily move in a plasma, a ring of magnetic field forms around the current that can pinch it into filamentary current strands (ie. pinched filaments).[2]”
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Filamentation
For reasonable sceptics with an open-mind scroll down the link and check out the footnotes with academic books cited and also the peer-reviewed papers that are cited as well.
And look at the schematic on the right of the linked webpage and check out the twisted electric current filaments and how the magnetic field constricts the filaments together.
Ya, there’s not a lick of science supporting these ideas…that’s at least what Dr. Svalgaard and his mechanical model cohorts want you to believe — but the peer-reviewed documentation and NASA observations & measurements speak for themselves.
Croissants anyone?

Pamela Gray (20:32:58) : please Pamela don’t use that kind of snide put-down language we see at RC. It doesn’t help open exploration of the science. I think you can do better than that.
I think I know enough to deconstruct most of CSICOP in their own terms, much as Steve McIntyre does and Monckton does re IPCC science. But here I’m just trying to keep to the thread to learn, to stay on topic, and to try to help make reasonable communication possible in a field that is evidently tending to polarize and possibly threatens to manifest yet another fundamentalism. Even fundamentalisms often contain vital grains of suppressed truths. My reasoning is, we don’t need more divisions into factions who cannot understand each others’ language and cannot practice intelligent courtesy towards each other.

For those more tuned to “visual” [video] learning, I found a
one hour video put together by the main authors of
the current E.U. model some 2 years ago.
While this is not meant to be construed as “evidence”
It goes a long way in explaining why some of us in this
thread embrace E.U.
And as i rambled on above, I found that it is the narrow vision
or focus in which we are taught to study “science” as the cause
as to why many will probably never see E.U. (as it seems in this
thread) as nothing more as a religious cult, no matter how
much “evidence” is presented.
Ironically, many who ran into E.U. or realized it on their
own, have viewed current mainstream science (esp our
“western science”) as having turned into a politically driven
religious cult many decades (if not centuries) ago.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4773590301316220374#
—–
Lastly, if you want to read a blog on astronomy
produced by some quality “real” scientists that appear
not to be encumbered in any way, by the religious
cult that controls all of our mainstream science..
and would like to discover intelligent discussion
over (and using) SOHO/STEREO (and all the rest of
the satellites/telescopes) data, that seems to be
completely void in this country..
I implore you to use google.es to translate this spanish
star blog “Mysteries of astrophysics.” at:
http://starviewer.wordpress.com/
i found this site after trying to figure out all the crazy
data and happenings with the sun over this past summer.
especial around mid july (15th) and august 16th
(I have gigs of satellite and telescope data from the past
8 months that have driven me nuts..until this find..)
I guarantee those with an open mind (esp the E.U. crowd)
will be facinated by what these people have found in the
SOHO/LASCO/STEREO data.
If the owner this blog will permit me, i will post some
direct translation links of past *observations* these scientists
have made that will set your mind afire…
-soundwash

kuhnkat (21:38:09) :
Leif Svalgaard,
“As I said, electric currents are generated by plasma moving across magnetic field lines.”
“Chicken or egg Leif???”
That may be a good question. I suppose there is experimental evidence for Leif’s claims, though. Is it possible to check a moving plasma in an absence of a magnetic field?

So much for detente.
Dr. Svalgaard presents Evans statement: “Thus, having “both feet on the ground”, there exists a circuit of electrical current flowing up out of one “footprint” on the solar surface through the loop and back down into the other “footprint” to complete the circuit just as Hannes Alfven theorized.”
Dr. Svalgaard responds: “No, there is no such current. There are electrons that mirror back and forth between the two end points, so going both ways, and thus no net current. The same process happens in the Earth’s radiation belts.”
I appreciate the correction on the flow of current (I’ll have to check that out), but if electrons go “back and forth between the two end points, so going both ways…”, that sounds vaguely like AC current, which is still electric current, by the way, it still conveys energy, still is charged particles in motion, still emanates magnetic fields.
And that is the problem with the idea of charged particles “embedded” in a magnetic field. It suggests the charged particles are placed in a pre-existing condition — they are not. it is the presence of the free electrons & ions in motion that emanates the magnetic fields. Nowhere, whether in the plasma physics laboratory or in space have magnetic fields been detected that have no relation to moving charged particles. Yes, the extent of the magnetic field maybe remote from the moving charged particles, but nowhere has “free standing” magnetic fields been observed & measured with no relationship to moving charged particles.
Dr. Svalgaard wrote: “The same process happens in the Earth’s radiation belts.”
First, while honored by long usage (the Van Allen radiation belts), these were actually the first space plasma observed & measured in situ by satellite probe in the late 1950’s, The “Van Allen Belt” was discovered in 1958 by James Van Allen (Van Allen developed the detection equipment placed on the satellite probe).
These belts consist of plasma per NASA:
“The radiation belts are regions of high-energy particles, mainly protons and electrons, held captive by the magnetic influence of the Earth. They have two main sources. A small but very intense “inner belt” (some call it “The Van Allen Belt” because it was discovered in 1958 by James Van Allen of the University of Iowa) is trapped within 4000 miles or or so of the Earth’s surface. It consists mainly a high-energy protons (10-50 MeV) and is a by-product of the cosmic radiation, a thin drizzle of very fast protons and nuclei which apparently fill all our galaxy.”
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970228a.html
However, It is misleading to think of these as “radiation belts”. Radiation, as most people think of it are electromagnetic waves, visible light, X-rays, and Gamma rays, and so forth, but these are really plasma belts that circle the Earth in a torus or donut shape.
Dr. Svalgaard presents Evans’ statement: “Yes, the twisted magnetic field definitely propagates the electric current flow in a duelistic synergy of positive feedback.”
And Dr. Svalgaard responds: “No, again wrong. It is the plasma movements that twist the magnetic field.”
Ah, Dr. Svalgaard does acknowledge that the magnetic fields do not have “supremacy”, rather, the “plasma movements”, aka, the motion of the charged particles, the free electrons & ions, control the magnetic field. But I will quibble with Dr. Svalgaard, and even partly acknowledge Dr. Svalgaard’s earlier claims: The magnetic field in tandem with the electric field and the electrons & ions, all working together, result in the twisted magnetic field that is observed & measured in these coronal mass ejections.
Dr. Svalgaard wrote: “The energy in the magnetic field is trillions of times larger than in the electric field [as I have shown repeatedly] and that settles the supremacy issue.”
Sorry Dr. Svalgaard, it doesn’t matter how many times you wrote, that doesn’t dictate physical reality. The physical reality is that if there is NO electric field, then the process doesn’t function. So, if all individual elements ARE REQUIRED then talk of supremacy is meaningless.
So much for detente.

An addendum on the Van Allen radiation belts per Wikipedia entry:
“The Van Allen radiation belt is a torus of energetic charged particles (plasma) around Earth, which is held in place by Earth’s magnetic field. This field is not uniformly distributed around the Earth. On the sunward side, it is compressed because of the solar wind, while on the other side it is elongated to around three earth radii.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt
Further from Wikipedia:
“It is split into two distinct belts, with energetic electrons forming the outer belt and a combination of protons and electrons creating the inner belt. In addition, the belts contain lesser amounts of other nuclei, such as alpha particles. The Van Allen belts are closely related to the polar aurora where particles strike the upper atmosphere and fluoresce.”
If I gave the impression that there is no radiation, i.e., electromagnetic waves, because there is radiation in the Van Allen belts, then my apologies.
More: “Prior to the Space Age, the possibility of trapped charged particles had been investigated by Kristian Birkeland, Carl Størmer, and Nicholas Christofilos.”
And more: “The trapped particle population of the outer belt is varied, containing electrons and various ions. Most of the ions are in the form of energetic protons, but a certain percentage are alpha particles and O+ oxygen ions, similar to those in the ionosphere but much more energetic. This mixture of ions suggests that ring current particles probably come from more than one source.”
The Van Allen belts as, above, suggests are a “ring current”, that is, the charged partles flow in a ring.
Wikipedia entry for ring current:
“Earth’s ring current is responsible for shielding the lower latitudes of the Earth from magnetospheric electric fields. It therefore has a large effect on the electrodynamics of geomagnetic storms. The ring current system consists of a band, at a distance of 3 to 5 RE,[1] which lies in the equatorial plane and circulates clockwise around the Earth (when viewed from the north).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_current
Wikipepedia:
“A ring current is an electric current carried by charged particles trapped in a planet’s magnetosphere. It is caused by the longitudinal drift of energetic (10–200 keV) particles.”
So, Dr. Svalgaard compares the CME circuit to the Van Allen belts which has an “electric current”, imagnine that.
More Wikipedia:
“The particles of this region produce a magnetic field in opposition to the Earth’s magnetic field and so an Earthly observer would observe a decrease in the magnetic field in this area.”
Why?
Because the charged particles are in motion, thus, a magnetic field emanates from charged particles.
Also, the outer belt is predominately electrons because when electric double layers, aka, “magnetic reconnection” happens in the magnetotail, the electrons are primarily accelerated toward Earth into the outer Van Allen belt and the ions are primarily accelerated out toward space — further down the magnetotail.
Of course, all the above discussion goes to show that electric fields, magnetic fields, electric currents, and electrons & ions and their motions must be taken into account to fully describe and explain the phenomenon.

Magnetic, electric fields, currents, particles, etc, can be measured. That’s what satellites and probes are for, it is supposed to be (as Lief reminds us) the subject of this thread. No need to be starting new religions about electricity healing your varicose veins. “Moving charged particles means electric current”? Not necessarily. It helps if there are more positive than negative particles, or vice versa.

Leif Svalgaard (19:37:55) :
Glenn (18:37:51) :
So does the technology exist to directly test if a moving stream of charged particles produces no current in the absence of a magnetic field?
“Of course it does, you can buy it at radioshack.”
(I’ll read the rest of your post later, first one thing at a time)
Does this mean that you agree that a moving stream of charged particles does produce an electrical current without external magnetic field influence? Or that a direct test exists. I’m just trying to get you to say what you mean straight out.
What can be had at radioshack that shields a moving plasma from all magnetic fields? I’m curious, sounds like a good science project, maybe I could figure out how to harness nuclear fusion or something.

Entrenched positions in science never lead to progress, instead belief systems take over and each side defends their model violently as if they were defending some sort of quasi-religious cult.
This thread is a classic example of two entrenched positions being defended. The laws af physics are clear. a conductor moving through a magnetic field produces an electric current, conversely an electric currant moving through a conductor produces a magnetic field. Both aspects need to be considered before any physical process can be understood. A blinkered approach will always fail – as in all areas of science, the observers position is crucial to a full understanding of events.
However, we still have much to learn about magnetism and electricity. We still have no real understanding of the mechanism of gravity, and I have a hunch that only by understanding how these three forces interact will real progress be made.

Yes, I read the Yamada paper, but I don’t see where it adds to the other “magnetic reconnection” papers (if there are specific issues, please raise them).
We still have four elements addressed:
Electric field
Magnetic field
Current density
Plasma flow velocity
Failure to address any one of these elements leads to a failure to explain the physical reality in total.
Here is an abstract of a paper that backs my position.
Driving Currents for Flux Rope Coronal Mass Ejections
“We present a method for measuring electrical currents enclosed by flux rope structures that are ejected within solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs). Such currents are responsible for providing the Lorentz self-force that propels CMEs. Our estimates for the driving current are based on measurements of the propelling force obtained using data from the LASCO coronagraphs aboard the SOHO satellite. We find that upper limits on the currents enclosed by CMEs are typically around $10^{10}$ Amperes. We estimate that the magnetic flux enclosed by the CMEs in the LASCO field of view is a few $\times 10^{21}$ Mx.”
http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.4210
So, my explanation is not hanging out there by itself.
Dr. Svalgaard presents this statement: “the electric field accelerating the charged particles derives from plasma moving across the earth’s dipole magnetic field lines”
And attributes it to Dr. Anthony Peratt’s website:
http://plasmascience.net/tpu/TheUniverse.html
Problem is I can’t locate the quote.
The closest I can find is this:
Electric Fields
Electric Fields—The Source of Particle Acceleration in Cosmic Plasma
“The acceleration of a charged particle is achievable only by means of an electric field. An electric field can arise from a number of processes that include the motion of plasma across magnetic fields lines, charge separation, and time varying magnetic fields.”
http://plasmascience.net/tpu/elec_fields.html
Perhaps it is in another location on the website, but I was unable to locate after searching.
Dr. Anthony Peratt, per the website: “Regardless of scale, the motion of charged particles produces a self-magnetic field that can act on other collections of particles or plasmas, internally or externally.”
http://plasmascience.net/tpu/elec_currents.html
Gosh, I sure would like to track down that quote Dr. Svalgaard provided…

Tenuc (02:04:49) :
“Entrenched positions in science never lead to progress, instead belief systems take over and each side defends their model violently as if they were defending some sort of quasi-religious cult.
This thread is a classic example of two entrenched positions being defended. The laws af physics are clear. a conductor moving through a magnetic field produces an electric current, conversely an electric currant moving through a conductor produces a magnetic field. Both aspects need to be considered before any physical process can be understood. A blinkered approach will always fail – as in all areas of science, the observers position is crucial to a full understanding of events.
However, we still have much to learn about magnetism and electricity. We still have no real understanding of the mechanism of gravity, and I have a hunch that only by understanding how these three forces interact will real progress be made.”
tenuc, I associate with your comment and to the extent that I fell afoul of its injuctions, I was in error.