You’d think the science on the Van Allen Radiation belts was long ago considered “settled science”. Nope. And yet, while we discover new things like this, some insist we fully understand all aspects of the workings of Earth’s climate.
Instruments detect never-before-seen phenomenon in Earth’s Magnetosphere
The belts are a pair of donut shaped zones of charged particles that surround Earth and occupy the inner region of our planet’s Magnetosphere.
LOS ALAMOS, N.M., March 1, 2013—U.S. researchers, including a trio from Los Alamos National Laboratory, have witnessed the mysterious appearance of a relatively long-lived zone of high-energy electrons stored between Earth’s Van Allen radiation belts.
The surprising findings, discovered by NASA’s Van Allen Probes (formerly known as the Radiation Belt Storm Probes), were outlined Thursday in Science Express and during a press conference at NASA headquarters in Washington, D.C. The research was led by Dan Baker of the University of Colorado, Boulder, Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics.
“Nature keeps on surprising us by producing long-lived harsh environments in space in regions not previously considered,” said Los Alamos plasma physicist Reiner Friedel of LANL’s Intelligence and Space Research Division. “This finding may impact the planning of future space missions.”
The Van Allen radiation belts — named in honor James Van Allen, who discovered them nearly 50 years ago — are a pair of donut shaped zones of charged particles that surround Earth and occupy the inner region of our planet’s Magnetosphere. The outer belt contains extremely high-energy electrons, while the inner belt is comprised of energetic protons and electrons. The belts have been studied extensively since the dawn of the Space Age, because the high-energy particles in the outer ring can cripple or disrupt spacecraft. Long-term observation of the belts have hinted that the belts can act as efficient and powerful particle accelerators; the recent observations by the Van Allen Probes—a pair of spacecraft launched in August 2012—now seem to confirm this.
Shortly after launch, the spacecraft activated their Relativistic Electron-Proton Telescope (REPT) instruments to measure particles within the belts and their immediate environs. The instrument immediately detected on September 1, 2012, the presence of a stable zone of high-energy electrons residing between the belts. This donut-shaped third ring nestled between the belts existed for nearly a month before being obliterated by a powerful shockwave of particles emanating from center of the solar system.
Such a distinct, long-lasting ring of high-energy electrons had never before been seen by any prior instrument in space or on Earth. The findings suggest that the Van Allen Belts somehow capture and store energetic electrons in a circular path around our home planet, perhaps in much the same way as a cyclotron can capture and store charged particles here on Earth.
“One of the main reasons the Van Allen Probe instruments are seeing these new features are their unprecedented sensitivity and rejection of backgrounds,” Friedel said. “As the mission proceeds, we expect further surprises that will challenge our conventional wisdom on the transport, loss and energization processes in these highly energetic electron radiation regions.”
In addition to Friedel, Los Alamos research team members include Geoffrey D. Reeves and Michael G. Henderson. The research team is also represented by the Goddard Space Flight Center, University of New Hampshire, The Southwest Research Institute, Dartmouth College, the University of California—Los Angeles, University of Iowa, and The Aerospace Corporation.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Alberta Slim says: March 5, 2013 at 8:48 am
“Did you get 100% on all your exams you ever took?”
lsvalgaard says: March 5, 2013 at 5:22 pm
“Better: I have played a leading role in modern science’s understanding of the Sun and the Earth’s magnetic field.”
Alberta Slim, perhaps you would like some salt and pepper to make the foot that is in your mouth taste a little better. Or better yet, you should simply read here: http://www.leif.org/research/
1phobosgrunt says:
March 5, 2013 at 8:09 pm
But doesn’t the rate of reconnection change, when the solar N. pole is negative, like the Earth’s negative N. pole.
It doesn’t matter as that change cannot be communicated back to the Sun. It is like trying to communicate back to base by throwing out bottles with messages inside from a boat going down a fast flowing river…
Here are some of claims that ‘little guy’ makes:
#1- An aether powered iron sun is necessary to explain the activity that we see on the solar surface.
To all here that’s an obvious, desperate and sad attempt at smearing EU theory. You are doing yourself no credit in front of your WUWT audience Leif. Your good friend Hannes showed you where the sun might get some of its energy from, and its not the aether. Astronomers observe AGNs to have similar magnitudes of power output as the rest of their galaxy, and are able influence physics several galactic radii from the AGN. Alfvén hypothesized a galactic circuit electrically connecting the AGN with the rest of the galaxy was possible. He drew a diagram to describe this which can be seen in the link. With this electrical connection, the stars in the galaxy can be powered externally by a galactic current where the AGN power source is recognised by all to be of sufficient power. Svalgaard and other conservatives were able to ignore Alfvén’s hypothesis for the last 50 years by assuming the electric current generated by an AGN is zero.
Does that sound like a reasonable assumption to anyone here? Or is it possible Svalgaard is trying to hide an embarrassing blunder?
http://electric-cosmos.org/galaxies.htm
Oh and btw, the engineering work of the Focus Fusion Society is based Alfvén’s galactic electric circuit theory. They are recreating the physics of Active Galactic Nuclei in the lab by modeling AGN’s as plasmoids. Since plasma physics are scalable, the same patterns observed at the galactic scale can be recreated in the lab on a smaller scale. They’ve demonstrated bipolar jets to have strong electric currents caused by intense electric fields as the plasmoids decay.
This lab physics is already a couple of decades old.
Learner calls his his device ‘ a quasar in a box ‘
The lectures on these results are fascinating, and I think explain some of the greatest results of science ever achieved.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 3:26 am
“#1- An aether powered iron sun is necessary to explain the activity that we see on the solar surface.” … To all here that’s an obvious, desperate and sad attempt at smearing EU theory.
Indeed, it is showing some of the absurd claims adherents of EU make. Do you also think that the Sun is a hollow iron shell?
Since plasma physics are scalable>
Most cosmic phenomena cannot be reproduced in the laboratory because the necessary magnetic field strength is way beyond what we can make in the lab.
lsvalgaard says:
March 4, 2013 at 10:45 pm
No, that is not how things work. The ‘reconnection’ is a magnetic phenomenon. The substorms are not caused by energetic particles from the sun, but by storage of magnetic field in the ‘tail’ of the Earth’s magnetosphere. Such stored magnetic field energy is unstable
http://iopscience.iop.org/0741-3335/27/12A/010
“The author studies the concept of plasma relaxation by magnetic reconnection which has been applied to many laboratory plasmas, but whose origin lies in observations on the Toroidal Pinch. This is one of the simplest of plasma confinement systems. In essence, it involves only a toroidal vessel in which a toroidal magnetic field B0 is first created by external coils then, after a suitable ionizing process, a toroidal current I is induced. It is this current which is responsible for plasma heating, compression, and confinement”
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/12/31/electric-disconnection/
Lars P. says:
March 6, 2013 at 5:39 am
“The author studies the concept of plasma relaxation by magnetic reconnection which has been applied to many laboratory plasmas, but whose origin lies in observations on the Toroidal Pinch.
That is still not the way the aurorae and the Sun work.
Leif,
The model you are gleefully pointing to is not the most used one amongst EU proponents. If you want to criticise EU theory please criticise Alfvén’s model instead of ‘using the back door’ by sticking on one of the more speculative theories.
Do you also think that the Sun is a hollow iron shell?
Hang on, what are you 1st suggesting I think? Are you trying to press onto the whole EU community that we are believe in stars powered by an aether? Where have I written that?
If you read my post to you, I mentioned Alfvén’s work because I base by understanding of cosmic electricity on his model.
And no, I’m not convinced by the hollow iron shell model for the Sun.
Most cosmic phenomena cannot be reproduced in the laboratory because the necessary magnetic field strength is way beyond what we can make in the lab.
Wrong. You haven’t kept up to date with the developments of Focus Fusion Science. They recreated the essential aspects of the highest energy cosmic events, by, amongst other things, reproducing the necessary high magnetic field strengths. This is something the tokamak scientists have failed to do so far, so if you are only following tokamak progress you will have missed it.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 8:03 am
If you want to criticise EU theory please criticise Alfvén’s model instead of ‘using the back door’ by sticking on one of the more speculative theories.
Show me a link to Alfven proposing that the Sun is powered by external currents rather than by internal fusion.
It is telling that when Brant produced his outrageous comment, you were quiet.
I mentioned Alfvén’s work because I base by understanding of cosmic electricity on his model.
EU refuses to accept models and only to rely on observations. Alfven’s work was theoretical.
Focus Fusion Science. They recreated the essential aspects of the highest energy cosmic events, by, amongst other things, reproducing the necessary high magnetic field strengths.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_scaling : “The first thing to notice is that many cosmic phenomena cannot be reproduced in the laboratory because the necessary magnetic field strength is beyond the technological limits. Of the phenomena listed, only the ionosphere and the exosphere can be scaled to laboratory size. Another problem is the ionization fraction. When the size is varied over many orders of magnitude, the assumption of a partially ionized plasma may be violated in the simulation.”
Nobody has produced magnetic fields of gazilions of Gauss.
The problem with EU is that it is of the ‘not even wrong’ class. Basically trying to set science back a 100 years.
[i]>Show me a link to Alfven proposing that the Sun is powered by external currents rather than by internal fusion.[/i]
You seem to be obfuscating at every opportunity. I said Alfven hypothesized a galactic electric circuit. I’m not sure if he then went onto say that circuit powered the stars, that I think is further hypothesis under consideration at the moment.
EU refuses to accept models and only to rely on observations.
Not by me it doesn’t.
Who says? You? or some mistaken EU hobbiest you are cherry pick-quoting?
wiki is wrong on its claim that cosmic level magnetic field strength is beyond technological limits. the FFS have produced and used such magnetic fields for over a decade. If you won’t follow the links I provide I could write a letter on your behalf to the Focus Fusion Society and tell them Svalgaard refuses to believe their results and is refusing to follow links provided or do his own net-research on focus fusion, please confirm your results to him.
I just need to get my account approved by an administrator there.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 9:37 am
I said Alfven hypothesized a galactic electric circuit. I’m not sure if he then went onto say that circuit powered the stars, that I think is further hypothesis under consideration at the moment.
You are evading the issue. So Alfven did not claim that the sun is powered from the outside. Do you believe that it is?
EU refuses to accept models and only to rely on observations.
Who says? You? or some mistaken EU hobbiest you are cherry pick-quoting?
Just scan through the comments here. But are you saying that those people are mistaken EU hobbists? If so, I agree.
wiki is wrong on its claim that cosmic level magnetic field strength is beyond technological limits. If you won’t follow the links I provide I could write a letter on your behalf to the Focus Fusion Society a
You did not provide any links to the Focus Fusion Society. Just to some pseudo-scientific nonsense.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 9:37 am
If you won’t follow the links I provide I could write a letter on your behalf to the Focus Fusion Society
Luckily Google can find the FFS, here is what FFS has to say:
“Aneutronic fusion could provide that new source of energy, if it is successfully developed.
Aneutronic fusion is nuclear energy with no radioactive waste. It uses the same process that
gives light to the Sun and other stars—nuclear fusion—to derive huge amounts of energy from
tiny amounts of non-radioactive fuels such as hydrogen and boron
FFS just supports standard solar physics – the same process .. nuclear fusion – nothing about EU.
“The AFC’s electric current of four amperes generated a magnetic field that, despite being relatively weak, was still able to manipulate FF-1’s main electric current pulse of over a million amps.”
Nothing about gazillion Gauss magnetic fields. You have been had.
You are evading the issue. So Alfven did not claim that the sun is powered from the outside. Do you believe that it is?
Huh? since when is a single EU hobbyist personal beliefs the issue? What I believe is what I would like to evidence or counter evidence. Yes I do think the sun is powered externally to a significant degree. Alfven gave us a hypothesis that hasn’t been falsified. You’ve ignored it for 50 years. I’ve built on it.
If so, I agree.
Good, now please go back and address my reference to Alfven’s galactic electric circuit without decoying. What do you think to Alfven’s galactic circuit and its application to powering stars? If you think it couldn’t, why not?
You did not provide any links to the Focus Fusion Society. Just to some pseudo-scientific nonsense.
“pseudo scientific nonsense?” Lulz. You are referring to Prof D.E. Scott’s website and a focus fusion lecture given by Eric Lerner.
If I give a link to the FFS you will retract all your rejection of EU theory? Starting with your refusal to accept that they’ve got cosmic level intensity magnetic fields?
Well, here it is…
http://focusfusion.org/
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 11:50 am
Yes I do think the sun is powered externally to a significant degree. Alfven gave us a hypothesis that hasn’t been falsified. You’ve ignored it for 50 years. I’ve built on it.
Numerically what degree? 1%, 10%, 50%, 100%? Alfven never pushed the idea that the Sun was externally powered, so nothing to falsify.
What do you think to Alfven’s galactic circuit and its application to powering stars? If you think it couldn’t, why not?
Because it is not powering the Sun. Nuclear fusion is. Gravity compresses the Sun to the temperature needed to achieve fusion and also provides the confinement needed. To yank your chain a bit: gravity is ultimately the cause of everything. One more yank: for 379,000 years after the Big Bang the Universe was a plasma, opaque to radiation. What we see in the Cosmic Microwave Radiation is the essentially the radiation field at that time. Then, as Universe continued to cool, the temperature fell below the value needed to ionize Hydrogen and protons and electrons found each other and formed atomic Hydrogen which is transparent, as which point we could actually see across the Universe. For the next billion years there was essentially no plasma in the Universe. Only after enough stars had formed and their UV-radiation had re-ionized the Hydrogen was there again plasma in the Interstellar/intergalactic medium, so now plasma makes up about 5% of the Universe. /end-yank
“pseudo scientific nonsense?” Lulz. You are referring to Prof D.E. Scott’s website and a focus fusion lecture given by Eric Lerner.
Yep, precisely!
Starting with your refusal to accept that they’ve got cosmic level intensity magnetic fields?
FFS says they have achieved magnetic fields just a little bit stronger than that of an ordinary compass. Granted that that is a million times stronger than the interstellar magnetic field, it is also a trillion times weaker than that of the average neutron star.
As I said, you have been had in a big way.
Nope I don’t think so.
http://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/1078/
Lawerenceville plasma physics Inc recently announced they’d achieved their key goal of 1.8 billion degrees Celsius, hot enough to fuse boron11 and hydrogen. This was the goal of a plan that required creating giga-gauss magnetic fields. Shouldn’t be suprising they’d been reporting incrementally improving results like this for years.
Their results have been accepted in the ‘physics of plasma’ journal ( Published by the American Institute of Physics,) and are expected to be published in that journal in the next few weeks.
This is a goal stated in the abstract of a paper by LPP back in 2011 where they are outlining the work ahead of them….
” to achieve the high magnetic fields (>1 GG) needed for the quantum magnetic field effect”
…which they apparently now have achieved.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10894-011-9385-4
It would make it more of an event if you threw you big name into the ring by announcing pubically to people in the plasma community, at the physics of plasma jounal that you think Eric Lerner’s lectures are “pseudo scientific nonsense”. Instead of just me mentioning it to them.
Numerically what degree? 1%, 10%, 50%, 100%? Alfven never pushed the idea that the Sun was externally powered, so nothing to falsify.
I don’t know I haven’t quantified it yet. I would guess 10 to 50%. He pushed the idea of a galactic electric circuit. That’s something to falsify. What do you think to the galactic electric circuit he proposed ? ( for the 3rd time of asking -_- )
@leif You mean you don’t know about the last time. Take the current solar cycle 24. It is the lowest in a 100 years as I and colleagues predicted almost a decade ago.
Totally irrelevant, not even science. Because you havent told us WHY. Science is based on expanding actual explanatory power. Just doing stats on solar observations, doesn’t tell us anything useful at all, AND there is no means to know if your prediction is based upon a correct understanding or not, you may have made a lucky guess. Sorry if my engineers point of view expects too much of you poor scientists, but I like to know how things work.
I find the proposals for the electric circuit of the sun fascinating, the fact it can behaves like a transistor, and the solar wind can turn off. Incredible, and now I know why. The fact that some 17 features of the sun that are mysteries to the orthodoxy, have been explained by engineers, with actual detailed, technically interesting and are useful for predictions, now that is science!
@leif said this is the madness EU traps you in.
What absolute rubbish. I have been interested in the EU theory for a number of years and I have never even heard of any of those items you list (re. Brant). You have just picked a straw man, to deride, when most of us who are familiar with the EU, never even knew this particular strawman existed.
So there is no trap, actually we appear to have a forum in which some free thinking is actually taking place, and you came across some of it, big deal. It is actually a healthy thing to find someone thinking outside of the box for a change.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 2:16 pm
This is a goal stated in the abstract of a paper by LPP back in 2011 where they are outlining the work ahead of them…. ” to achieve the high magnetic fields (>1 GG) needed for the quantum magnetic field effect” …which they apparently now have achieved.
Yet, they claim that they only need a field a bit stronger than an ordinary compass. Perhaps you should read their published reports. E.g. http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/fofu_1_x_rays_show_effectiveness_of_axial_field_coil
“This first unambiguous demonstration of the Axial Field Coil (AFC) shows that small magnetic fields—just a few times greater than those that sway a compass needle—can magnify the x-ray and fusion energy output of FF-1, LPP’s fusion energy research device. The AFC’s electric current of four amperes generated a magnetic field that, despite being relatively weak, was still able to manipulate FF-1’s main electric current pulse of over a million amps.”
I don’t know I haven’t quantified it yet. I would guess 10 to 50%.
You base your scientific view on a guess of something you don’t know…?
What do you think to the galactic electric circuit he proposed ? ( for the 3rd time of asking -_- )
It isn’t here and you gloss over the follow-up: what effect it would have on powering the stars. As I have already explained: ‘none’.
keith says:
March 6, 2013 at 2:20 pm
Because you havent told us WHY.
Certainly have, e.g. http://www.leif.org/EOS/Choudhuri-forecast.pdf The theory goes back to Babcock and Leighton in the 1960s.
The fact that some 17 features of the sun that are mysteries to the orthodoxy, have been explained by engineers, with actual detailed, technically interesting and are useful for predictions, now that is science!
Good for you to have found something to believe in, right or wrong. Belief is everything. I’m a bit puzzled why only 17 features have been explained. Perhaps you could expand on your understanding of the 17 and outline a way forward for more entertaining stuff.
keith says:
March 6, 2013 at 2:28 pm
I have never even heard of any of those items you list (re. Brant).
Brant posted in this very thread, and you did not check on what he said, nor object to his absurd claims. Now, for another absurd claim: that currents from the Galaxy cross the solar system and power the Sun. Are you also a believer of this? If not, please list the claims that EU makes and you do not believe in.
Yet, they claim that they only need a field a bit stronger than an ordinary compass.
For the early conditions of the pulse, yes. For the end result, a giga-gauss magnetic field is required and has been achieved.
Perhaps you should watch the googletechtalk lecture I linked to.
You base your scientific view on a guess of something you don’t know…?
It’s a hypothesis. You are acting so nieve.
It isn’t here
Well done. You managed to answer. Not a well explained answer, but considering how coy you’ve been getting round to answering, I’d already guessed you didn’t have much to offer.
I don’t agree btw. I don’t think you’ve looked for Alfven’s galactic current, so you’re not in a position to say “it isn’t here”.
you gloss over the follow-up: what effect it would have on powering the stars. As I have already explained: ‘none’.
1 step at a time.
A galactic yotta amp current would have no effect on powering the stars as it passed thru the galaxy? How has that been evidenced if we assume that ‘it isn’t here’?
Sounds to me you are ad-lib cooking up unsupported assertions on the spot.
meemoe_uk says:
March 6, 2013 at 4:13 pm
For the end result, a giga-gauss magnetic field is required and has been achieved.
point me too a link that substantiates that.
“You base your scientific view on a guess of something you don’t know…?”
It’s a hypothesis. You are acting so nieve.
So, how does the hypothesis work? you say up to 50% is from external current. What is the remaining 50%?
I don’t think you’ve looked for Alfven’s galactic current, so you’re not in a position to say “it isn’t here”.
Better: I have discussed the matter with Alfven. There is no such current. There are no unicorns either. When did you last look for unicorns? Have you ever?
A galactic yotta amp current would have no effect on powering the stars as it passed thru the galaxy?
Is that what you claim? no effect? I can believe that.
How has that been evidenced if we assume that ‘it isn’t here’?
Easy, it hasn’t. Does it power the stars or not?
Sounds to me you are ad-lib cooking up unsupported assertions on the spot.
Well, if you can fall for the EU stuff, you can dream anything up. Of course, I answer on the spot, based on extensive knowledge.
Interesting interview with one of the scientists.
http://www.sciencefriday.com/playlist/#play/segment/9057
point me too a link that substantiates that.
http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=63&Itemid=81
“Experiments have already demonstrated 0.4 giga gauss fields, and DPFs with smaller electrodes and stronger initial magnetic fields can reach as high as 20 giga-gauss, Lerner calculates. This should be achievable in the next round of LPP’s experiments.”
The 0.4 GG LPP has achieved is 14 times greater than the value wiki asserts as the strongest magnetic field ever achieved, and they’ve done it with a DPF instead of using explosives or destroying their lab.
I’m pretty sure ‘the next round of LPP experiments’ has now been completed, the results will be in physics of plasma journal soon, where the team will announce >1 GG.
That Lerner’s team has replicated and harnessed the magnetic field strength and the features of astro physical jets in the lab using electric universe theory is very strong evidence supporting EU. Lerner is of course a leading proponent of EU theory who thinks conventional gravity cosmology and the big bang is nonsense.
Despite my efforts to save you, looks like you are yet another victim of advancing science in the way planck described
“A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. “
You pecking my ideas and selecting out weaker EU theories to mock isn’t going to stop Lerner’s team from setting a revolutionary precedent of application of EU theory in the lab and in a few years on the energy market, heralding the capitulation of 20th century cosmology to electric universe theory in the 21st century. Your best bet for now on your crusade to preserve your dying religion a few extra years it to insist Lerner’s DPF has zero to do with EU theory or that it has zero physics in common with astro physical jets. But the voice of Lerner and his community will soon be too loud to ignore, and more physics students will be pulled towards EU theory and away from 20th century cosmology. The dam is busted. I watch with amusement as you try hopelessly to patch it up.
I now offer you the last comment in this exchange.
meemoe_uk says:
March 7, 2013 at 4:17 am
I’m pretty sure ‘the next round of LPP experiments’ has now been completed, the results will be in physics of plasma journal soon, where the team will announce >1 GG.
OK, so they have achieved a field 10,000,000 weaker than needed to scale to the interstellar medium.
Lerner’s DPF has zero to do with EU theory
Precisely.
Now, you are still evading the issue: what powers the Sun? Will you agree with the FFS that the Sun is powered by nuclear fusion?
@DesertYote First of all, singularities are mathematically constructable.
What is, in reality a point? Does a point exist? Does a line exist in reality. Basically no.
So if you cant get a “real” point, a singularity is perhaps a point tooo far.