From Columbia University
Astronomers find clues to decades-long coronal heating mystery
Drs. Michael Hahn and Daniel Wolf Savin, research scientists at Columbia University’s Astrophysics Laboratory in New York, NY, found evidence that magnetic waves in a polar coronal hole contain enough energy to heat the corona and moreover that they also deposit most of their energy at sufficiently low heights for the heat to spread throughout the corona. The observations help to answer a 70-year-old solar physics conundrum about the unexplained extreme temperature of the Sun’s corona – known as the coronal heating problem.
Hahn and Savin analyzed data from the Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrometer onboard the Japanese satellite Hinode. They used observations of a polar coronal hole, a region of the Sun where the magnetic fields lines stretch from the solar surface far into interplanetary space. The findings were published on September 30th in the October 20th edition of The Astrophysical Journal.
To understand the coronal heating problem, imagine a flame coming out of an ice cube.
A similar effect occurs on the surface of the Sun. Nuclear fusion in the center of the Sun heats the solar core to 15 million degrees. Moving away from this furnace, by the time one arrives at the surface of the Sun the gas has cooled to a relatively refreshing 6000 degrees. But the temperature of the gas in the corona, above the solar surface, soars back up to over one million degrees. What causes this unexpected temperature increase has puzzled scientists since 1939.
Two dominant theories exist to explain this mystery. One attributes the heating to the loops of magnetic field which stretch across the solar surface and can snap and release energy. Another ascribes the heating to waves emanating from below the solar surface, which carry magnetic energy and deposit it in the corona. Observations show both of these processes continually occur on the Sun. But until now scientists have been unable to determine if either one of these mechanisms releases sufficient energy to heat the corona to such high temperatures.
Hahn and Savin’s recent observations show that magnetic waves are the answer. The advance opens up a realm of further questions; chief among them is what causes the waves to damp. Hahn and Savin are planning new observations to try to address this issue.
This research has been supported by the National Science Foundation Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences through the Solar, Heliospheric and Interplanetary Environment program.
john robertson says:
October 17, 2013 at 12:58 pm
But do we have the technology to discern core effects,crust effects and surface effects from each other?
That technology [and the conclusion to draw from it] was developed in the 1830s by Carl Friedrich Gauss….Almost all the magnetic field we measure at the surface comes from the core of the Earth.
But … but … but … how can that be? That must mean there is a constant current of electricity from the Earth’s core, through the Earth along iron or copper plasma fields, probably, and then through the air through some unknown medium until the electric current hits the magnetic compass needle you hold in your hand.
/s
Christoph Dollis says:
October 17, 2013 at 2:54 pm
“Almost all the magnetic field we measure at the surface comes from the core of the Earth.”
But … but … but … how can that be? That must mean there is a constant current of electricity from the Earth’s core, through the Earth along iron or copper plasma fields, probably, and then through the air through some unknown medium until the electric current hits the magnetic compass needle you hold in your hand.
No, you can feel a magnetic force at a distance [in this case of 3000 km], no currents needed. Your little ‘/s’ is easily lost on gullible souls.
I notice in the registry information under Aliases it does not report a ‘Dr. Oliver…..’. I’m inclined to think then that the two are not the same. Go back to 2008 here at WUWT and Leif and Oliver went around and around ad exhaustion. Oliver’s idea was based on a theorized answer to the purported ‘missing neutrino’ problem. He was given permission by an act of Congress to study NASA moon rocks but he basically re-asserted his challenged (and some say debunked) theory without introducing anything new and didn’t seem to realise he was not convincing (to those that know the difference). Anytime anything remotely Solar came up; a important aspect of our inquiry here at WUWT into where the Global warming could be coming from, bang came OKE with the same cut-and-paste theory. DID not take heed of Anthony’s repeated warnings to desist and so was banned.
I know they’re the same because they held the same positions in the same universities, johnny. Further, their pictures.
@ur momisugly Isvalgaard 2.20pm
Thank you, is there a plain english site/text of the conclusions to be drawn from Gauss’s 1830 technology? Googling did not get me far.
As this has been understood since the 1830s, is there an estimation available of the heating effect upon earth, from the electromagnetic effect of orbiting the sun?
And an estimation of the change in this heating effect caused by a fluctuation in the suns magnetic strength?
Or is there no measurable heating effect?
lsvalgaard says:
October 16, 2013 at 6:21 pm
Papers that explain coronal heating appear from time to time all purporting to be THE answer. This new paper is no exception. It has long been clear that some kind of waves steepening into shocks [because of the rapidly decreasing sensity] were responsible, much like the crack of the bullwhip.
———–
I’ve seen them referred to as Rossby waves, similarily to those created in Earths atmosphere.
But been messing around with, “Warps, Bending and Density Waves Excited by Rotating
Magnetized Stars: Results of Global 3D MHD Simulations”
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.1161.pdf
But the models were using tilted magnetic dipoles with respect to rotational axis. And modeling accretion rates with respect to inclination of current sheets.
When I came across this.
“The Tilted Solar Dipole as Observed and Modeled during the 1996 Solar Minimum”
http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/682/2/1306/fulltext/73868.text.html 2008
A. A. Norton, N.-E. Raouafi, and G. J. D. Petrie
During solar minimum, the polar dipole term was always strongest in the sense of g^{0}_{1} being larger than any other term. We were surprised during these times at the influence of the higher order terms on the neutral line. Perturbations of the dipole by higher order terms seem to be most obvious around the equator, where a polar dipole field is weakest. If the quadrupolar terms were about as strong as the polar dipole, we would have a more complex structure, with multiple neutral lines. However, we were surprised to find the dipole perturbed and the neutral lines warped to such an extent.
The polar caps exhibit a tilt with values ranging from 1° to 10°, with an average value of about 4°-6°. Although the polar hole geometries do not maintain a stable phase in azimuth over the entire time period CRs 1900-1932, a consistent azimuthal phase is found for several successive CRs (e.g., 1911-1919). The azimuth angles during this period decreases 8° per CR, indicating that the pattern moves more slowly than the CR rate. Note in Figure 10 that the north and south polar caps COG are offset 145° in azimuth, not the 180° expected for hemispheric symmetry. The instability of the COG phase in longitude during other time periods may be dominated by equatorial extensions of the polar caps. The dipole tilt of the two-sector heliospheric current sheet is consistently predicted to have a 5°-10° inclination during solar minimum; see, e.g., the work of Zhao et al. (2005), whose calculations of the N-S displacement of the current sheet include a careful analysis of the magnetic dipole tilt. Our results are consistent with the 5°-10° inclination.
The 4°-6° value of the dipole tilt is an acceptable amplitude to result from the MHD instability of the toroidal bands. The stability of the azimuthal phase for CRs 1911-1919 indicates that the mechanism may be present. However, without polar cap geometries determined from the unipolar magnetic regions as seen in surface flux (and not just as determined from the polar hole locations), the viability of the proposed mechanism for creating a nonzero magnetic dipole tilt at solar minimum remains in question……….
So now I am wondering why the inclination of the helio current sheet doesn’t hit zero when the the polar fields do? And how does it the ‘heliocurrent sheet’ hits its maximum extent with such low polar field values and lack of solar activity?
john robertson says:
October 17, 2013 at 5:31 pm
Thank you, is there a plain english site/text of the conclusions to be drawn from Gauss’s 1830 technology? Googling did not get me far.
Here is a [lengthy] discussion of this subject: http://www.reeve.com/Documents/SAM/GeomagnetismTutorial.pdf
It may be a bit more technical than you would like, but it is hard to explain complicated things in a sentence or two.
As this has been understood since the 1830s, is there an estimation available of the heating effect upon earth, from the electromagnetic effect of orbiting the sun?
As the Earth orbuts the Sun it receives a lot of electromagnetic radiation [we call it ‘light’] which has the effect of raising the Earth’s temperature 252 degrees centigrade.
And an estimation of the change in this heating effect caused by a fluctuation in the suns magnetic strength?
Those fluctuations heaths the Earth by about a tenth of a degree in a cyclic fashion as the number of sunspots vary in their 11-yr cycle.
Or is there no measurable heating effect?
That one-tenth of a degree is barely measurable among the noise and other general natural variation of the temperature.
Carla says:
October 17, 2013 at 7:00 pm
So now I am wondering why the inclination of the helio current sheet doesn’t hit zero when the polar fields do? And how does it the ‘heliocurrent sheet’ hits its maximum extent with such low polar field values and lack of solar activity?
The inclination [tilt] of the current sheet is lowest when the polar fields are strongest. The the polar fields go away [as now] the tilt is maximal.This is explained in: http://www.leif.org/research/A%20View%20of%20Solar%20Magnetic%20Fields,%20the%20Solar%20Corona,%20and%20the%20Solar%20Wind%20in%20Three%20Dimensions.pdf
@Isvalgaard 7.10, double thankyou , just skimmed the tutorial, will read over weekend I hope, just what I hoped to be directed to.
However Light does not answer the question I thought I was asking, sorry ignorance and poor choice of words.
Are there estimates of the heating effects from the magnetic field interactions?
As in heat generated by this iron cored orb travelling thro the magnetic fields of the sun?
If its in the tutorial feel free to ignore this question.
Appreciate your help.
john robertson says:
October 17, 2013 at 7:52 pm
Are there estimates of the heating effects from the magnetic field interactions?
There is a little bit of heating of the upper atmosphere [above 100 km altitude], but since the atmosphere up there is a million to a billion times thinner at the surface, the higher temperature does not translate into a lot of energy, so ho measurable effect at the surface.
As in heat generated by this iron cored orb travelling thro the magnetic fields of the sun?
The magnetic effect of the Sun does not penetrate that deep into the Earth.
since the atmosphere up there is a million to a billion times thinner than at the surface
As this has been understood since the 1830s, is there an estimation available of the heating effect upon earth, from the electromagnetic effect of orbiting the sun?
I think you’r talking about the sun earth system modeled as a homopolar electric generator. Seems Leif thinks you are talking about this too, he’s familiar with the concept because his friend Hannes Alfven proposed such a model for the sun & earth ( and for the galaxy too ). It shows in his reply to you because he was obviously deliberately obtuse ( he hates the idea of electricity in space ) by erroneously going off about about sunlight heating the Earth, which is completely separate physics and not what you wanted to talk about.
Here’s a proper answer :
Yes, the Earth is a conductor traveling thru a magnetic field and highly conductive medium ( interplanetary space ), so it should generate and receive electricity, similar to aeroplanes as they travel thru the Earth’s atmosphere which generate voltage on themselves ( they can’t conduct much electricity cos air is a insulator )
Now for the sorry part :
Despite such physics being tenable and approachable since the understanding of electrodynamics of the 19th century, its hasn’t been properly investigated. In the last few decades the idea electricity can flow in space has been suppressed by the Chapmaniacs such as Leif. However we know something is heating the interior of the Earth to very high temperatures. There’s a tremendous power supply somewhere.
Leif could roughly calculate the homopolar voltage generation for you if he wanted to. He knows the IMF strength, the velocity of Earth thru the medium, the mass of earth, he can have a good guess of the conductivity of Earth.
In a previous post when I mentioned the Earth had an electric field Leif just said ” lightning is the cause of the Earth’s electric field ” as if lightning just happens for no reason at all and required no further explanation. If he ever dare have a go at calculating the homopolar e.m.f of the Earth he would find lightning isn’t just a act of god. But he’s been refusing to do such a calculation since at least 1981 when Alfven drew the circuit diagram for him.
meemoe_uk says:
October 17, 2013 at 8:37 pm
However we know something is heating the interior of the Earth to very high temperatures. There’s a tremendous power supply somewhere.
Yes, indeed there is: it is called radioactivity. Uranium [and Thorium] turning into Lead.
Leif could roughly calculate the homopolar voltage generation for you if he wanted to.
Ah, the difference between us is that I can, but that you cannot.
My calculation is spelled out in the appendix of my 40-year old paper http://www.leif.org/research/Geomagnetic-Response-to-Solar-Wind.pdf
Almost everything of interest is caused by electric currents [so your idea that astronomers hates currents and try to suppress mention of them is dead wrong]. Those electric currents are generated by changing magnetic fields in accordance with Faraday’s law http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html
In a neutral plasma with near infinite conductivity no electric field exists in the reference frame of the plasma as Alfven was at pains to point out.
Now all this has been explained to you many times, so you seem to have a severe learning disability. Take this opportunity to improve on that.
From lsvalgaard on October 17, 2013 at 9:31 pm:
But Leif, meemoe_uk is so entertaining and informative just as he/she/it is. Why so far at the lightning thread, I’ve learned the energy for Electric Universe comes from solar fusion and the Milky Way’s Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN), except “AGN” is when lots of mass is dropping into the super-massive central black hole and our GN hasn’t been A in about a million years or so, however black holes are a myth of astronomers to cover their ignorance, thus there are still nuclear reactions going on in the core generating the Electric Universe energy but they’ve gone “dark” rather than “bright” thus we know they’re there even though we don’t.
And as you use the flawed solar core fusion model which is obviously wrong thus Electric Universe must be true (it cannot be A thus it must be B as we don’t acknowledge any other choices, etc), you’re not aware of the solar fusion happening exclusively in the rarefied solar corona which is driven by the galactic electric circuit which is transporting enough energy to instantly vaporize whole moons yet does so completely undetected by conventional science through electrically-insulating vacuum, due to a “pinch” of that circuit that somehow drives only the corona to fusion, much like “Z-pinch” fusion devices on Earth which have such a promising record of delivering limitless fusion energy in the near future.
Such obvious fusion spontaneously occurring due to such “tight spots” in these electric circuits is why Io, a volcanic moon of Jupiter heated externally by tidal forces, is actually heated by fusing oxygen into sulfur, which requires temperatures greater than a billion Kelvins, which is evidenced by Io being coated in sulfur dust, even though Sulfur-32 is the tenth most abundant isotope in the Solar System, sulfur is the tenth most common element in the Milky Way galaxy, fifth most common element in the Earth’s composition, etc.
Really Leif, why would you want interrupt such entertaining and enlightning displays of the intellect of a die-hard Electric Universe scholar?
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
October 17, 2013 at 10:41 pm
Really Leif, why would you want interrupt such entertaining and enlightning displays of the intellect of a die-hard Electric Universe scholar?
It i rather obviously the lack of intellect that is at display here. As to its entertainment value: we also laugh at Bozo, the clown, and a good laugh has value in itself, but the credibility of WUWT takes a hit every time we laugh.
From lsvalgaard on October 17, 2013 at 10:46 pm:
But that we are willing to entertain even “banned” topics every once in a while actually lends itself to WUWT’s credibility, when compared to the outright total censorship elsewhere. Prohibition is encouragement of exploration somewhere else. Here we can point out the fallacies and inconsistencies.
Although I was taken aback at reading so much odd stuff above. But then it is the Northern Hemisphere fall season, lots of nuts falling out of the trees all over. Seriously, it’s hardhat time out there, protect your brain from accidental injury by dense objects.
Okay then, I guess you are sure about it.
I had no idea whatsoever which is why I was taken aback by the news. I apologize for amping up the discussion.
Yeah, me too.
except “AGN” is when lots of mass is dropping into the super-massive central black hole and our GN hasn’t been A in about a million years or so
You need to chuck all that out when trying to understand EU theory. No blackholes and galaxies are always actively maintaining their electric circuit regardless of whether the current produced is in dark ( inactive by conventional theory ) or glow mode ( active ).
Electric Universe energy but they’ve gone “dark” rather than “bright” thus we know they’re there even though we don’t.
Yes because electricity can travel without glowing or arcing. You know this from the +200 years knowledge of electricity.
due to a “pinch” of that circuit that somehow drives only the corona to fusion
Well what do you expect? Heat induced fusion from the galactic current in places where there’s no current?
much like “Z-pinch” fusion devices on Earth which have such a promising record of delivering limitless fusion energy in the near future.
A bit like the blackhole devises with there promising record, except they don’t exist.
yet does so completely undetected by conventional science through electrically-insulating vacuum
You can detect the galactic current with your eyes. Look up at a stary sky. The light from the stars is energy from the galactic current. Conventional science detects it but misinterprets it.
…even though Sulfur-32 is the tenth most abundant isotope in the Solar System,
Correct. Just because something is common doesn’t stop nature from making more of it. Take helium for example. Thats the 2nd most abundant element in the universe. It’s also the most commonly produced element at the current time*. In fact there’s a good correlation – The more there is of something, the more its being produced by nature. Sulphur is common because oxygen and electrical discharges around oxygen are common.
Yes, indeed there is: it is called radioactivity. Uranium [and Thorium] turning into Lead.
I don’t like that theory
Uranium 235s 704MY half life is to short. If it was a factor now it would have kept the Earth’s surface molten up to around 500MYa.
Thorium 232 has a long enough half life, but then we have to think we got lucky, just the right amount to keep a very thin crust solid with a molten layer just underneath. All other rocky planets got lucky too and don’t have a molten surface due to too much thorium. Since most other planet and moons are thought to have inert cores the Earth has a close shave in that it seem to have a heck of a lot more thorium than most planets, but not quite enough to melt the surface.
It doesn’t explain enough, and makes the Earth too special. Prefer the extra-terrestrial current theory myself.
My calculation is spelled out in the appendix of my 40-year old paper
Nice, but that’s for the solar wind. Why not do one for the IMF? There’s a clue in your calcs thats there’s another source of voltage ; since you are getting answers on the magnitude of millivolts per meter due to the solar wind while the Earth’s voltage per metre is around 100 to 400 V/m. i.e there’s something around 10,000 times more powerful that the solar wind acting electrically on the Earth.
meemoe_uk says:
October 18, 2013 at 2:37 pm
I don’t like that theory
You don’t seem to know it:
Uranium 235s 704MY half life is too short.
But U238 and K40 are not and they produce most of the heating.
just the right amount to keep a very thin crust solid with a molten layer just underneath.
Except that the crust+mantle overlying the core is not very thin, but 2900 km thick.
My calculation is spelled out in the appendix of my 40-year old paper
Nice, but that’s for the solar wind. Why not do one for the IMF?
It was for the IMF carried by the solar wind.
while the Earth’s voltage per metre is around 100 to 400 V/m.
As we have discussed, that voltage is generated and maintained by thunderstorms originating right here on the Earth [not Thunderbolts from the intergalactic space]: http://dev.space.fmi.fi/~makelaa/fairw.html
Now, I did not see any calculations by you [or other adherents] about this. Come to think about, I have NEVER seen any calculations based on EU. Care to link to any?
They don’t believe in math, Leif. It’s elitist or something.
I’d really like to see the math for the intergalactic and intragalactic electric currents powering the Sun, including on the efficiency of transmission over those distances, and an explanation of how the electron flow works exactly.
At least the iron sun proponents can offer something resembling a model.
Except that the crust+mantle overlying the core is not very thin, but 2900 km thick.
you’re evading the point, the argument works for the mantle and U238.
How come the Earth got lucky and got a very thin crust ontop on its interior >99% of its radius which is >700K due to radioactive decay? How come every other rocky planet and moon also got lucky? We’re assuming the Venusian surface temp is due to solar heating and thick atmosphere, unless you want to propose that its due to internal radioactive decay.
It was for the IMF carried by the solar wind.
In that case u’ve shown there’s something other than the solar wind and IMF powering the Earth electrically.
As we have discussed, that voltage is generated and maintained by thunderstorms originating right here on the Earth
Don’t believe it. Evaporating and convecting water can’t create such giant charge separation. The charging of water clouds is an effect not a cause of charge separation. The cause is much grander but I’m not totally sure what it is yet. Could be a direct effect of the solar corona and galactic current.
Now, I did not see any calculations by you [or other adherents] about this. Come to think about, I have NEVER seen any calculations based on EU.
Science doesn’t need to be quantitative. It’s nicer and more accurate, but it’s not mandatory. I admit my quantitative analysis isn’t up to scratch yet. But that of others is. You have seen quantitative analysis but you dismiss it. Prof Scott, guest EU lecturer at NASA does some. http://electric-cosmos.org/ . Peratt does some. Here’s bunch of about 2 dozen technical papers. http://www.electricuniverse.info/Peer_reviewed_papers
You could join in too! All you need to do is chuck out that old stellar core fusion model and the bigbang model and accept the electric induced fusion model you could start contributing to the EU model and the demise of 20th century cosmology.
meemoe_uk says:
October 19, 2013 at 7:49 am
“Except that the crust+mantle overlying the core is not very thin, but 2900 km thick.”
you’re evading the point, the argument works for the mantle and U238.
How come the Earth got lucky and got a very thin crust ontop on its interior 99% of its radius which is greater than 700K due to radioactive decay?
The thin crust and the thick mantle have nothing to do with getting lucky. From the known contents of U238, Th232, U235, and K40 we can calculate how much heat should be generated. The crust is hot too at depth.
How come every other rocky planet and moon also got lucky?
They also did not get lucky, most are also hot at depth. Even the Moon has a small partially molten core.
It was for the IMF carried by the solar wind.
In that case u’ve shown there’s something other than the solar wind and IMF powering the Earth electrically.
Nothing of the sort is needed. Radioactive decay does a fine job already in heating the interior and thunderstorms do a fine job of charging the atmosphere..
As we have discussed, that voltage is generated and maintained by thunderstorms originating right here on the Earth
Don’t believe it. Evaporating and convecting water can’t create such giant charge separation. The charging of water clouds is an effect not a cause of charge separation. The cause is much grander but I’m not totally sure what it is yet. Could be a direct effect of the solar corona and galactic current.
The galactic current is very good then to find a thundercloud and charging it to create lightning. Perhaps some aliens put a little beacon on each storm to guide the current…
Science doesn’t need to be quantitative.
A hallmark of good science is that we can predict quantitatively what will happen. If not it is not science, but hand waving.
You could join in too!
Sounds like I’m invited to join a cult. As such there is no hope for you. The deeper your science illiteracy is, the easier it is for you be beguiled by pseudo-scientific quacks. They have their hook deep in, I can tell.