Generation of large scale electric fields in coronal flare circuits

Submission August 6, 2009

“A large number of energetic electrons are generated during solar flares. They carry a substantial part of the flare released energy but how these electrons are created is not fully understood yet. This paper suggests that plasma motion in an active region in the photosphere is the source of large electric currents. These currents can be described by macroscopic circuits. Under special circumstances currents can establish in the corona along magnetic field lines. The energy released by these currents when moderate assumptions for the local conditions are made, is found be comparable to the flare energy. ”

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813

“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.

“Here, the electric field accelerating the charged particles derives from plasma moving across the earth’s dipole magnetic field lines many earth radii into the magnetosphere.”

It was in the section: Electric Currents and Transmission Lines in Space, at the subsection: Electrical Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

http://plasmascience.net/tpu/elec_currents.html

After carefully reviewing the above section, I stand corrected:

The section makes this statement: “All plasma clouds may be considered a system: they are coupled by electrical currents (charged particles beams) they induce in each other. These beams are the source of energy transfer from large, slow moving plasma to smaller plasma regions that may release the energy abruptly or cause local plasmas to pinch to the condense state.”

I take this statement to mean that the plasma flow, itself, while emanating a magnetic field, “…the motion of charged particles produces a self-magnetic field…”, does not express an electric current, rather, the contact of “plasma clouds” with differing physical properties causes electric currents, which in turn will effect the “contacting” plasma regions, “clouds” because of the generation of electric currents.

I was in error.

However, Dr. Peratt points out, “The acceleration of a charged particle is achievable only by means of an electric field.”, this would suggest that the electric field is the driver of so-called “magnetic reconnection.

Magnetic fields increase the current density and presumably plasma flow velocity (which would seem to contradict the above statement).

Dr. Anthony Peratt, per the website, “Except in very limited circumstances, all cosmical plasmas carry electric currents that constitute the sources of the magnetic field.”

This seems contradictory.

But perhaps, this phrase needs to be looked at: “All plasma clouds may be considered a system: they are coupled by electrical currents (charged particles beams) they induce in each other.”

Almost all plasma regions are “coupled” with other plasma regions with differing physical properties, therefore, there will be electrical currents in the plasma regions as a result of their interaction at the point of physical contact.

And these induced electrical currents can have wide-ranging impacts far from the source of the induced electrical currents.

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…

“We show that a strong toroidal magnetic field stored at or below the overshoot part of the tachocline leads to a pileup of fluid at high latitude, owing to the poleward magnetic curvature stress which has to be balanced by an equatorward latitudinal hydrostatic pressure gradient.”

Prolateness of the Solar Tachocline Inferred from Latitudinal Force Balance in a Magnetohydrodynamic Shallow-Water Model (Mausumi Dikpati et al 2001)

http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0004-637X/552/1/348/52682.html

Now, I’m goin out on a limb here, but I would think that multi-decadal variances of poloidal convection, especially in reference to diverging with and running under the tachocline region, would make plasma ebb and store more greatly. I would further rationalize that magnetic flux being regenerated and the release of the fluid involved would also increase the storage above and below the convection zone, creating a bulge, so to speak.
I say this because I would think the return of flux through the hydromagnetic dynamo would be a greater factor than the return of magnetic flux, back to the surface.
Anyone care to share on this?

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.

If someone is an idiot (probably me), the data or the argument will show it. Let that speak for itself.

That’s where this country is going, pure nastiness. Two people of differing political views (or scientific for that matter) can’t even sit at the same table and have a discussion regarding differing beliefs. It used to be in this country, that people respected differing views…not belittled them. Snip if you like, but you should really tell ALL involved and instigating parties to tone it down, regardless of perceived status.

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.

James F. Evans (12:08:25) :
No, it is not possible because moving plasma ALWAYS emanates a magnetic field.

“Assuming that ‘emanate’ you mean ’cause’, the reply is ‘no’, because there is no current.”

I understand what you are saying, that external magnetic fields cause a current in plasma, so this is a little confusing (From WIki):

“But the existence of charged particles causes the plasma to generate and can be affected by magnetic fields.”

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?

So, Dr. Svalgaard compares the CME circuit to the Van Allen belts which has an “electric current”, imagine that.

When you don’t understand what goes on, you trip up. The mirroring bounce that goes on in the Van Allan Belts and the CME is not an electrical current, because the bounce goes both ways at the same time [thus also not an AC current]. The Ring current comes about by the particles drifting [due to gradient and curvature] in longitude around the Earth. The CMEs do not drift around the Sun, so no ‘ring current’ in them.

Dr. Svalgaard responds: “Assuming that ‘emanate’ you mean ’cause’, the reply is ‘no’, because there is no current.”

“Cause”, or “emanate”, I suggest is quibbling over semantics.

Sure, charged particles in motion cause a magnetic field. But another way to think about it, is that as the charged particles are in motion they emanate a magnetic field.

Take your pick.

As for Dr. Svalgaard’s assertion that “no”, charged particles in motion don’t cause magnetic fields, it’s ludicrous on its face:

Charged particles when not in motion, at rest, don’t generate, cause, or “emanate” a magnetic field. There is no dispute about that.

Dr. Svalgaard forgets his physics causation principle: But for the motion of the charged particles there would be no magnetic field, ergo, charged particles in motion cause magnetic fields.

Dr. Svalgaard is flying without a net. He has no authority, save for his own tattered credibility that is being shredded by independent outside citations to authroity that directly contradicts his assertions.

Everybody is lying except Dr. Svalgaard.

Pathetic.