NASA is trying to figure out why when magnetic field lines containing charged particles cross on the sun, things go “boom”. In earth’s magnetic field, we get “magnetic portals” to the sun. Sounds like a movie.
From NASA Science News
August 31, 2009: Magnetic reconnection could be the Universe’s favorite way to make things explode. It operates anywhere magnetic fields pervade space–which is to say almost everywhere. On the sun magnetic reconnection causes solar flares as powerful as a billion atomic bombs. In Earth’s atmosphere, it fuels magnetic storms and auroras. In laboratories, it can cause big problems in fusion reactors. It’s ubiquitous.
The problem is, researchers can’t explain it.
The basics are clear enough. Magnetic lines of force cross, cancel, reconnect and—Bang! Magnetic energy is unleashed in the form of heat and charged-particle kinetic energy.
Right: A cartoon model of magnetic reconnection on the sun. [more]
But how? How does the simple act of crisscrossing magnetic field lines trigger such a ferocious explosion?
“Something very interesting and fundamental is going on that we don’t really understand — not from laboratory experiments or from simulations,” says Melvyn Goldstein, chief of the Geospace Physics Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.
NASA is going to launch a mission to get to the bottom of the mystery. It’s called MMS, short for Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission, and it consists of four spacecraft which will fly through Earth’s magnetosphere to study reconnection in action. The mission passed its preliminary design review in May 2009 and was approved for implementation in June 2009. Engineers can now start building the spacecraft.
“Earth’s magnetosphere is a wonderful natural laboratory for studying reconnection,” says mission scientist Jim Burch of the Southwest Research Institute. “It is big, roomy, and reconnection is taking place there almost non-stop.”
In the outer layers of the magnetosphere, where Earth’s magnetic field meets the solar wind, reconnection events create temporary magnetic “portals” connecting Earth to the sun. Inside the magnetosphere, in a long drawn-out structure called “the magnetotail,” reconnection propels high-energy plasma clouds toward Earth, triggering Northern Lights when they hit. There are many other examples, and MMS will explore them all.
The four spacecraft will be built at the Goddard Space Flight Center. “Each observatory is shaped like a giant hockey puck, about 12 feet in diameter and 4 feet in height,” says Karen Halterman, MMS Project Manager at Goddard.
Above: An artist’s concept of the four MMS spacecraft flying in formation through the space around Earth. [more]
The mission’s sensors for monitoring electromagnetic fields and charged particles are being built at a number of universities and laboratories around the country, led by the Southwest Research Institute. When the instruments are done, they will be integrated into the spacecraft frames at Goddard. Launch is scheduled for 2014 onboard an Atlas V rocket.
Any new physics MMS learns could ultimately help alleviate the energy crisis on Earth.
“For many years, researchers have looked to fusion as a clean and abundant source of energy for our planet,” says Burch. “One approach, magnetic confinement fusion, has yielded very promising results with devices such as tokamaks. But there have been problems keeping the plasma (hot ionized gas) contained in the chamber.”
“One of the main problems is magnetic reconnection,” he continues. “A spectacular and even dangerous result of reconnection is known as the sawtooth crash. As the heat in the tokamak builds up, the electron temperature reaches a peak and then ‘crashes’ to a lower value, and some of the hot plasma escapes. This is caused by reconnection of the containment field.”
Right: Inside a tokamak. Image credit: Lawrence Berkeley Labs [more]
In light of this, you might suppose that tokamaks would be a good place to study reconnection. But no, says Burch. Reconnection in a tokamak happens in such a tiny volume, only a few millimeters wide, that it is very difficult to study. It is practically impossible to build sensors small enough to probe the reconnection zone.
Earth’s magnetosphere is much better. In the expansive magnetic bubble that surrounds our planet, the process plays out over volumes as large as tens of kilometers across. “We can fly spacecraft in and around it and get a good look at what’s going on,” he says.
That is what MMS will do: fly directly into the reconnection zone. The spacecraft are sturdy enough to withstand the energetics of reconnection events known to occur in Earth’s magnetosphere, so there is nothing standing in the way of a full two year mission of discovery.
Learn more about the mission at the MMS Home Page.
In the case of the iron filings, each filing is has its own field and so is repelling filings on either side. It looks like lines. This is not an argument that the magnetic field is not a continuum. Nor does it demonstrate that there are such things as magnetic field lines. I am not saying that this was your argument; I am simply pointing out that each filing becomes a bar magnet.
How about this angle. Are there many instances in which oppositely directed magnetic fields meet, and do not explosively “reconnect”? For example, in the “separatrix” beween two parallel conducting wires? How does that affect the theory?
If magnetic field lines are no more real than latitude and longitude lines on a globe, then the point is this: NASA needs to have a plan to send back a lot of hard data that can be broadly interpreted from many perspectives, including from the perspective that magnetic reconnection is not occuring.
This is costing us all a lot of money, so as taxpayers, we would expect as many sensors and instruments as possible to be jammed on these hockey pucks bound for space. We should not be simply told that a non-detection of magnetic reconnection is actually a success, and that they will do better next time.
As my comment about a simple magnet holding onto a metal door is only tangentially related to the post I have just been reading the comments and not responding. I am interested in all the comments, however.
Thanks, John
What do we have in the magnetotail at the location of the energy release in question?
We have a magnetic field generated remotely from the field, the dipole magnetic field of the Earth, presumably generated in the Earth’s core by molten iron in motion (molton iron is a form of plasma, its electrons are free to flow over the mass of iron atoms).
We have the magnetic field generated remotely from the Sun (a weaker magnetic field than the Earth’s at the location the Sun’s magnetic field impinges the Earth’s magnetosphere.)
We have the magnetic fields generated from the charged particles, plasma, in the solar wind in the plane of the solar current sheet.
We have the magnetic fields from the charged particles from the solar wind as the charged particles impinge the Earth’s magnetosphere and slip around the magnetosphere into magnetotail.
Do the remote magnetic fields influence the charged particles within the Earth’s magnetosphere?
Yes.
Do the proximate magnetic fields generated by the charged particles moving within the Earth’s magnetosphere influence the magnet fields generated remotely, but also present within the magnetosphere?
Yes.
what do are these magnetic fields act on within the Earth’s magnetotail?
The plasma, the charged particles, electrons and ions.
Ultimately without the plasma, the charged particles, there would be no expression of energy release, as the energy is released as heat, radiation, and kinetic energy generated by themovement of the charged particles.
This leads to a very complex electromagnetic environment in the Earth’s magnetotail.
Dr. Svaalgard’s appeal to what came first at the beginning of the Universe, electric current or magnetic fields gives up the game.
Electric currents and magnetic fields are reciprical forces.
Yes, chemical batteries demonstrate the electromotive force.
The ions and electrons exchange between the two dissimilarl metal plates based on electromotive force.
No magnetic field is present which initiates the battery chemical reaction, electromotive attaction initiates the chemical battery reaction (ordered movement of charged particles which generates an electric field and a magnetic field).
Which came first?
The electromotive force which caused the chemical – electric reaction or the magnetic field.
So cause and effect are hard to discern, but here’s a clue: The fundamental force this refers to is called electromagnetism.
There is no magnetic without the electro
Nogw (16:36:48) :
Do you remember Alexander Volta?
Preciously few frog legs in space….
Some people need to make a “reconnection” with common sense and a much more elemental and simple reality.
There are 10^57 protons in the Sun. The fraction of nuclei with energies above 1 MeV to start a nuclear reaction, from the classical view, is ~1.6 x 10^-434; so there is not a single proton in the Sun which could enter into nuclear fusion reaction without the influence of an external operator. It could be electricity or quantum tunneling. To work like an external operator, the electricity must to have been produced by a body located externally with respect to the solar system, the solely and feasible existent option is quantum tunneling.
Now that we are immersed in quantum mechanics waters, let’s take into consideration the next facts taken from the real nature:
Bipolar magnetic fields disappear at energies above 10^16 GeV (energy necessary for turning on a 100 W light bulb during four hours); consequently, there are not magnetic monopoles in the Sun, yet, but bipolar magnetic fields. Magnetism in iron bars apparently disappears at T = 1041.15 K. I said ”apparently” because as a matter of fact the magnetic field and the magnetic property of the material doesn’t vanish in the emptiness, but it is conserved as paramagnetism which is fostered by stronger external magnetic fields.
For the electromagnetic field disappears in the Sun, we must concentrate E = 10^16 GeV in a single particle in every particle constituting the mass of the Sun. Nevertheless, a single particle in the Sun actually can contain only ~1 keV and the temperature at the interior of the Sun is ~1.6 x 10^7 K. So the solar electromagnetic field is present over there.
Whether you like it or not, from a QM viewpoint, the magnetic field of the Sun requires the existence of electric fields, i.e. macroscopic electric currents. The origin of those macroscopic electric currents is the dynamo effect of the inner materials of the Sun and the nuclear activity. Find the subjacent cause of sunspots and you’ll find the answer to the origin of the electric currents in the Sun which are generating the Sun’s magnetic field. 😉
Nasif Nahle (09:43:14) :
The fraction of nuclei with energies above 1 MeV to start a nuclear reaction, from the classical view, is ~1.6 x 10^-434; so there is not a single proton in the Sun which could enter into nuclear fusion reaction without quantum tunneling.
While true, this is completely irrelevant to anything even remotely associated with the topic. Gamow realized that tunnelling was needed in the Sun’s core, because the typical thermal energy in the core is a factor of 1000 smaller than the Coulomb barrier.Therefore two protons will stop at a distance of a factor 1000 larger than the touching distance, so no thermonuclear reactions can occur classically. The exponential tail in the Maxwellian distribution is exp(−1000) = 10^−434 [which is where your number comes from – might be interesting to see which PS-site you have cut-and-pasted it from – please provide link].
Magnetism in iron bars apparently disappears at T = 1041.15 K. I said ”apparently” because as a matter of fact the magnetic field and the magnetic property of the material doesn’t vanish in the emptiness, but it is conserved as paramagnetism which is fostered by stronger external magnetic fields.
There are no stronger external magnetic fields and the ‘iron’ is a complete straw man. The phenomenon of paramagnetism is not evidence of an ‘iron sun’.
Again, you are out on the uttermost fringe of the worst pseudo-science dressed up with words and concept you apparently do not understand. A shame.
REPLY: Leif, I’ve asked Nasif to agree to disagree and to just step back from this argument. I’d ask you to do the same and to not engage in it any more. The labeling coming from both sides serves no value to further any understanding here. – Anthony Watts]
“”” Zeke (19:14:15) :
In the case of the iron filings, each filing is has its own field and so is repelling filings on either side. It looks like lines. This is not an argument that the magnetic field is not a continuum. Nor does it demonstrate that there are such things as magnetic field lines. I am not saying that this was your argument; I am simply pointing out that each filing becomes a bar magnet.
How about this angle. Are there many instances in which oppositely directed magnetic fields meet, and do not explosively “reconnect”? For example, in the “separatrix” beween two parallel conducting wires? How does that affect the theory? “””
Well the problem is that magnetic field lines (or electric field lines) have no real existence; they are simply a product of a mathematical representation of the Vector forces that act on magnetically susceptible materials. The action of the iron filings in the high school experiment, is as was suggested, that each filing acts as a miniature bar that can physically align itself to the lowest local energy state in the force field that surrounds the “magnet” or charged body, in the case of electric fields. It is important to remember that the field lines are a purely fictional creation of our imagination; just as isobars, and isotherms, are fictional representations of weather data.
But what is important to remember about magnetic and electric fields, is that these are vector quantities, which have, a point of action, magnitude, direction, and sense of direction; like all vector quantities. The second important point is that electric and magnetic fields are single valued functions. Since fields from multiple sources simply add vectorially, all four attributes of the resultant vector are single valued; they cannot have two different values at any point in the field, at the same time.
It’s an elementary deduction from that simple fact, that field lines cannot cross; since that must imply two different directions for the vector at a single point. And we know that is physically impossible, since points themselves exist nowhere in the real universe (nor do ANY of the other trappings of mathematics) it is all fictional stuff that we made up out of whole cloth to describe (often exactly) the behavior of our models of reality, which also are a complete fiction.
The real universe is far to complex and chaotic for us to ever explain; and the best we can do is concoct fictitious models that appear (with our current state of knowledge) to emulate what we observe the real universe to be doing. In that sense, our models, and the theories that describe the rules for manipulation of those models (mathematics); are merely tools that help us visualize why our real observations are what they seem to be.
That is why we can have valid multiple models of the same phenomenon; such as the dual wave/particle descriptions of electromagnetism. In Maxwell’s representation of “electromagnetic fields”, the magnetic “lines of force”, and the electric “lines of force” are always everywhere perpendicular to each other, and also perpendicular to the direction of energy flow; which would be the ray direction in classical ray optics, or the photon direction in the particle model. Something tells me that direction is the “Poynting Vector”; but I’m 50 years rusty on this stuff so I would have to defer to Phil or Leif on that.
So that cartoon above is truly a cartoon; since those apparently intersecting field lines cannot exist. the crossing point is a singularity where the vector has two different directions; which is silly.
And none of that says anything about whether “reconnection” is real or not; I have to plead complete ignorance on that one.
George
“Since fields from multiple sources simply add vectorially, all four attributes of the resultant vector are single valued; they cannot have two different values at any point in the field, at the same time.” ~George Smith
“Ultimately without the plasma, the charged particles, there would be no expression of energy release, as the energy is released as heat, radiation, and kinetic energy generated by themovement of the charged particles.” ~James F Evans
It seems to me both of these statements argue against magnetic fields having the power stored within them to release any explosive ejections. Not at any one or two particular points, that is. And you have to have lines and points to have magnetic reconnection.
We can let our children play with magnets still, right?
[snip – Nasif, no more of this sort of labeling and name calling. If you want to argue the science fine. But I’m not going to allow such labeling here. Your commentary is becoming a significant workload, I suggest that you just agree to disagree and step back. – Anthony Watts]
I was not the first who throw attacks. Leif is saying on each one of my posts it is pseudoscience and that I copied and pasted from a source. If Leif is sure it is pseudoscience, he must to demonstrate what he said.
Thank you!
REPLY: I agree with Leif, there’s no “iron sun” and it is pseudoscience. Quit while you are ahead. I don’t want any further discussion of this topic. Take it offline if you want to argue it with him. All further posts on it go straight to the bit bucket. Pick a new topic. – Anthony
“”” Zeke (12:48:10) : “””
Zeke, I believe I did say, that I have no knowledge of reconnections or what they even are.
As to lines and points; perhaps a reading of the definitions in some rigorous mathematical text would explain that.
A point (in mathematics) has no dimensions, simply a position. No such thing exists in the real world; and it is simplest to invoke Heisenberg’s Principle of “Unbestimheit” (mit ein umlaut) or uncertainty as we translate in English. Anything occupying a point of zero dimension, would necessarily be spread over an infinitely wide spectrum in momentum, since Heisenberg says dx X dPx > h/2pi.
And if it is spread over an infinitely wide momentum spectrum, it would have zero detectable signal at any wavelength you tried to observe the point.
Likewise:- x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2 is the equation of a sphere. Nowhere in that equation is there any provision for 8km high mountains on the surface of a sphere the size of the earth; ergo, the earth is not a sphere; nor is anything else in the universe.
Nasif Nahle (13:20:17) :
my posts it is pseudoscience
Your posts speak for themselves.
Zeke (12:48:10) :
“Ultimately without the plasma, the charged particles, there would be no expression of energy release”
We can let our children play with magnets still, right?
Yes, turning a toy magnet in air [a non-conductor] changes the magnetic topology and neutral points all the time around the magnet, but no explosive reconnections take place. What makes all the difference is that moving the magnet in a plasma creates currents and those blow up. So the energy release is mediated by strong currents created by the moving magnet [or moving plasma].
Geo. E Smith
I know! I don’t like the language any more than you do! But there it is,
“Magnetic lines of force cross, cancel, reconnect and—Bang! Magnetic energy is unleashed [at some location?] in the form of heat and charged-particle kinetic energy.”
&
“But how? How does the simple act of crisscrossing magnetic field lines trigger such a ferocious explosion?”
Although, isn’t that an argument for the Big Bang? If the Universe is
expanding, it may be worked back to a point, or location, where the explosion occured. So we are occasionally asked to believe in points.
“What makes all the difference is that moving the magnet in a plasma creates currents and those blow up. So the energy release is mediated by strong currents created by the moving magnet [or moving plasma].” ~Dr Svalgaard
You make a better case than the popular presentations of this phenomenon.
Plasma seems to be the wild card here. It is known to have other properties than just carrying the current.
It arranges itself in many configurations, including Double Layers. Hannes Alfven apparently thought that these exploded quite often in space. It is another possibility if the magnetic field lines don’t work out.
Talking about portals (doors/gates):
The french mathematician Rene Guenon, in his, “Symbols of the sacred science”
speaks of two portals: The “Asura loka”: the devils´portal and the “Deva Loka”: the “saints´portal”, which one do you choose to pass through when dying.?
However, it is not a matter of choosing, but having enough energy to pass through one of the other…one goes down to the moon, the other goes up to the sun, it depends if you follow entropy of negentropy…
[ snip – Nasif, you are done with this topic. ]
References to my post on electromagnetism:
Guth, Alan H., Lightman, Alan P. The Inflationary Universe: The Quest for a New Theory of Cosmic Origins. Perseus Books Group, 1997, New York, New York.
Randall, L., Soljacic, M., and Guth, Alan H. (MIT). Supernatural Inflation: Inflation from Supersymmetry with No (Very) Small Parameters. 1996, Nuclear Physics B472, 377-408.
Zee, A. Einstein’s Universe: Gravity at Work and Play. McMillan Publishing Company Inc., 1998, New York, New York.
Wilson, Jerry D. College Physics-2nd Edition; Prentice Hall Inc. 1994.
Maoz, Dan. Astrophysics. 2007. Princeton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey.
http://books.google.com/books?id=qCRWBqxrGJkC&pg=PR9&lpg=PR9&dq=Massive+neutrinos+in+physics+and+astrophysics+By+Rabindranath+Mohapatra,+Palash+B.+Pal&source=bl&ots=drAkWtH_bN&sig=ig6w70_pjJCvSPP4DVT1QjKy9ig&hl=en&ei=rvWaSoTgNIfysQPZuvGSDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=v_6PbAfapSAC&dq=frank+h.+shu+the+physical+universe&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=oopjnWeeeJ&sig=HnG9zK2A4H6Ovr8b14LHM5FBQPM&hl=en&ei=v2ugSpXkNZH2sQP9w8GNDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Nogw (16:25:10) :
Talking about portals (doors/gates):
The french mathematician Rene Guenon, in his, “Symbols of the sacred science”
speaks of two portals: The “Asura loka”: the devils´portal and the “Deva Loka”: the “saints´portal”, which one do you choose to pass through when dying.?
However, it is not a matter of choosing, but having enough energy to pass through one of the other…one goes down to the moon, the other goes up to the sun, it depends if you follow entropy of negentropy…
What about SG-1? 🙂
Magnetic monopoles detected in a real magnet for the first time
http://www.physorg.com/news171209923.html
“Magnetic monopoles are hypothetical particles proposed by physicists that carry a single magnetic pole, either a magnetic North pole or South pole.[…] There are several theories that predict the existence of monopoles. Among others, in 1931 the physicist Paul Dirac was led by his calculations to the conclusion that magnetic monopoles can exist at the end of tubes – called Dirac strings – that carry magnetic field. Until now they have remained undetected.”
REPLY: Now THAT is something I thought I’d never see. – Anthony
Dear Anthony and moderators
Why are you victimizing Dr Nahle?
It is plain that it is Svalgaard who is palming the readers off here with pseudoscience and then accusing those who challenge him of his own crime.
I’m still waiting for Svalgaard to respond to a previous post on the Scafetta thread where I went some way to show that he is almost completely ignorant of thermodynamics and quantum theory, including a list of just some of the many errors of his that can be found on just that one thread.
Franky, it beggars belief that you allow Svalgaard’s ad hominen laced gibberish through while censoring comments which challenge him with perfectly well supported and reasoned arguments.
tom:
I know that Anthony will allow quite a lot of “shots” through at Dr. Svalgaard if there is a modicum of support for the characterization.
How do I know that?
Because I delivered the “shots”.
Dr. Svalgaard is a big boy.
Challenge his basic assumptions and you’re likely to get a rather stern putdown (whether he is right about his basic assumptions is another matter entirely).
Take for example his dogmatic assumptions about magnetic fields and what comes first, electric currents or magnetic fields?
Maxwell’s equations are reciprical — no hiarchy of cause and effect is expostulated — yet, Dr. Svalgaard chooses to see magnetic fields as causing electric current, as do most astrophysicists.
This position allows them to mostly ignore electric currents in space or claim they “don’t do anything”.
Yet, when the “battery” example is given, where no initiating magnetic field is present or required to initiate an electric current, all you get is a putdown in return:
Leif Svalgaard (23:12:25) :
“Nogw (16:36:48) :
Do you remember Alexander Volta?
Preciously few frog legs in space….”
The battery, chemical/electric reaction is something he knows blows his argument out of the water and actually suggests that indeed electric currents are the cause and magnetic fields are the effect which agrees more with quantum mechanics (but not entirely) .
But will he do the scientific thing and acknowledge the “battery reaction” as a contradicting piece of evidence.
No, you get a snarky putdown.
So, I suggest, Dr. Svalgaard is his own worst enemy, who reveals his biases in how he responds and his lack of acknowledgment of basic physics.
Let Dr. Svalgaard continue his dogmatic showcase — it diminishes his credibility.
Post script:
In the battery chemical electric reaction two dissimilar metal plates are placed in an acid solution, which causes free ions and free electrons to be released into the solution.
It is the electromotive force that causes the electrons and ions to move within the solution between the two plates generating an electric current.
The electromotive force is 39 orders of magnitude stronger than gravity.
Most astrophysicists hold that gravity is the dominant and organizing force in the Universe.
However, Nature, it has been shown time after time, employs the most efficient means to drive its processes, thus, as the electromotive force is by far the strongest force in the Universe at a distance, it follows that Nature employs this force to drive it’s large scale processes and structures.
Why astrophysicists have a hard time seeing this is an artifact of the historical development of astronomy, an inertia of opinion that still constricts their field of vision.
This is an extract from another discussion forum, where subject was considered ( lsvalgaard vs. vukcevic):
Einstein in his theoretical analysis of Brownian motion on the atomic and molecular level has shown, the kinetic theory implies that particle of different size will move differently; differentiation in velocity between heavy positive particles (protons and He ions) and super-light negative charged electron. If these differences exist even on micro scale, than the Maxwell’s equations (conservation of electric charge) imply that gradient of charge density at any point in space is directly related to the current density and vice versa. Electric current is nothing more than a spatial and temporal displacement of charge. So if there is temporal change in charge balance within a volume, than the current flowing into or out of a specified volume has to be equal the time-derivative of charge inside this volume ( div I = dq/dt ).
Conclusion: No initial magnetic field required, however appearance of the electric current will generate magnetic field.