Electric suns, solar flares and coronal mass ejections.

[Michael]

Michael does not know the difference between a plasma and a solid (comet nucleus)!

You're nothing but a two bit liar.

 

[Michael]

Michael has never produced an reference to any scientific literature that states that the actual electrical discharges (i.e. lightning) that his idea includes are possible in plasma.

Another outright lie:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7620486-30/#post61757292

Every single author claimed that electrical discharges occur in plasma and in solar flares! Case in point:

E. Ya. Vil'koviskii (1974)
A section title "Electrical dicharge in the chromosphere" which not enough to tell whether this is Dungey's usage. The assumption of existing curents supports this. No astronomer would be stupid enough to think that there is lightning on the Sun so it is either Dungey's usage or their own.

Of course it's the same as Dungey's use of the term "electrical discharge". Wow! Pure denial on your part. The author's statement "Electrical discharges in the chromosophere" automatically falsifies your claim that electrical discharges are impossible in plasma! Do think there is no plasma in the chromosphere RC? No astronomer would be stupid enough to think that electrical discharges are impossible in plasma. Only one single ignorant IT guy makes such stupid and irrational statements. That's why the ignorant IT guy cannot produce a single published astronomer's paper that claims that electrical discharges are impossible in plasma!

 

[Michael]

Anthony Peratt's definition of electrical discharges in plasma:

1 .5 Electrίcal Discharges in Cosmic Plasma

An electrical discharge is a sudden release of electric or magnetic stored energy. This generally occurs when the electromagnetic stress exceeds some threshold for breakdown that is usually determined by small scale properties of the energy transmission medium. As such, discharges are local phenomena and are usually accompanied by violent prαesses such as rapid heating, ionization, the creation of pinched and filamentary conduction channels, particle acceleration, and the generation of prodigious amounts of electromagnetic radiation. As an example, multi-terawatt pulsed-power generators on earth rely on strong electrical discharges to produce intense particle beams, Χrays, and microωανes . Megajoules of energy are electrically stored in capacitor banks, whose volume may encompass 250 m^3 . This energy is then transferred to a discharge regίοn, located many meters from the source, viα a transmission line.
The discharge region, or load, encompαsses at most a few cubic centimeters of space, and is the site of high-variability, intense, electromagnetic radiatιοη (Figure 1 .2) .On earth, lightning is another example of the discharge mechanism at work where electr-o-static energy is stored in clouds whose volume may be of the order of 3,000 km3. This energy is released in a few cubic meters of the discharge channel.
The aurora is a discharge caused by the bombardment of atoms in the upper atmosphere by 1–20 keV electrons and 200 keV ions spirιlling down the earth's magnetic field lines at high latitudes . Here, the electric field accelerating the charged particles derιves from plasma moving across the earth's dipole magnetic field lines many earth radii into the magnetosphere.

 

[Michael]

Who is the guy who who still thinks that there is a solid iron surface inside the Sun even after it was pointed year ago that this surface would have boiled?

It can't boil. I pointed out to you that the surface is only about 1200K and it therefore isn't gong to "boil" or "melt" or do any such thing. You aren't interested in my answers of course, and I'm equally disinterested in the opinions of a guy who's never read a book on MHD theory and who intentionally ignores and misrepresents my answers. Go get a REAL (non hater) life RC. If you won't read a textbook on MHD theory, you're simply ignorant by choice.

 

[davidbilby]

It can't boil. I pointed out to you that the surface is only about 1200K and it therefore isn't gong to "boil" or "melt" or do any such thing. You aren't interested in my answers of course, and I'm equally disinterested in the opinions of a guy who's never read a book on MHD theory and who intentionally ignores and misrepresents my answers. Go get a REAL (non hater) life RC. If you won't read a textbook on MHD theory, you're simply ignorant by choice.

Whoah. Hold on a second. I really don't care too much about your sun ramblings, but you seriously have a sun model with a 5800K plasma photosphere DIRECTLY ABOVE a 1200K supposedly solid iron surface, and you can keep a straight face whilst talking about it?

The boiling point of iron is what, 3100K? How the heck would that iron shell not boil off after a reasonably short period of time cosmologically, sitting essentially inside a blazing furnace of plasma? Did you read anything about basic thermodynamics before your precious plasma books?

That's the most ludicrous thing (of the many ludicrous statements) you've made in the two threads I've really read.

 

[Michael]

Whoah. Hold on a second. I really don't care too much about your sun ramblings, but you seriously have a sun model with a 5800K plasma photosphere DIRECTLY ABOVE a 1200K supposedly solid iron surface, and you can keep a straight face whilst talking about it?

The boiling point of iron is what, 3100K? How the heck would that iron shell not boil off after a reasonably short period of time cosmologically, sitting essentially inside a blazing furnace of plasma? Did you read anything about basic thermodynamics before your precious plasma books?

That's the most ludicrous thing (of the many ludicrous statements) you've made in the two threads I've really read.

Woah. The mainstream model has a million degree corona sitting on top of a 20,000K chromosphere, sitting on top of 5800K photosphere and you can keep a straight face talking about it?

 

[davidbilby]

Woah. The mainstream model has a million degree corona sitting on top of a 20,000K chromosphere, sitting on top of 5800K photosphere and you can keep a straight face talking about it?

That isn't an answer. Forget the mainstream model. I'm talking about your model, and only your model right now. If you have an objection to the above on thermodynamic grounds then the same objection holds for your model with solid iron immediately inside a 5800K plasma "oven". The question still stands.

 

[Michael]

That isn't an answer. Forget the mainstream model. I'm talking about your model, and only your model right now. If you have an objection to the above on thermodynamic grounds then the same objection holds for your model with solid iron immediately inside a 5800K plasma "oven". The question still stands.

I do not have any particular "objection" to the "observation" that lighter, hotter plasma layers sit above thicker, cooler plasma layers in the solar atmosphere. IMO that observation is due to the constant flow of current through all the plasma layers of the solar atmosphere.

The only thing really different about the 'exterior' of my model is that has additional thicker, cooler double layers in the solar atmosphere than the standard model. The photosphere is simply another 'double layer' of predominantly Neon plasma that sits above a much thicker, and cooler silicon plasma double layer.

At the "base" of that silicon layer sits a solid cathode surface.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Woah. The mainstream model has a million degree corona sitting on top of a 20,000K chromosphere, sitting on top of 5800K photosphere and you can keep a straight face talking about it?

It is the observations of the Sun that have a million degree corona sitting on top of the transition region (20,000K to million K), sitting on top of the 20,000K chromosphere, sitting on top of the 4000K temperature minimum, sitting on top of the 5800K photosphere.

The mainstream model of the Sun applies to the body of the Sun. The coronal heating problem is a separate topic:

The coronal heating problem in solar physics relates to the question of why the temperature of the Sun's corona is millions of kelvin higher than that of the surface. The high temperatures require energy to be carried from the solar interior to the corona by non-thermal processes, because the second law of thermodynamics prevents heat from flowing directly from the solar photosphere, or surface, at about 5800 K, to the much hotter corona at about 1 to 3 MK (parts of the corona can even reach 10 MK).
The thin region of temperature increase from the chromosphere to the corona is known as the transition region and can range from tens to hundreds of kilometers thick. An analogy of this would be a light bulb heating the air surrounding it hotter than its glass surface. The second law of thermodynamics would be broken.

 

[RealityCheck01]

You're nothing but a two bit liar.

You are nothing but a two bit ignoramus because you have not retracted your citation of a paper that is about electrical discharges in comet nuclei as stated in Michael does not know the difference between a plasma and a solid (comet nucleus)!

Come on Michael, show that you can understand English and retract the citation of S. Ibadov (2012)
This is double layers induced at the comet having an "electrical discharge potential". However double layers are "destroyed" rather than "discharged". And the abstract says this happens inside the nucleus not in plasma.

I was tempted to report the post but I will give you another chance to actually read and understand the abstract:

Problems connected with mechanisms for comet brightness outbursts as well as for gamma-ray bursts remain open. Meantime, calculations show that irradiation of a certain class of comet nuclei, having high specific electric resistance, by intense fluxes of energetic protons and positively charged ions with kinetic energies more than 1 MeV/nucleon, ejected from the Sun during strong solar flares, can produce a macroscopic high-voltage electric double layer with positive charge in the subsurface zone of the nucleus, during irradiation times of the order of 10–100 h at heliocentric distances around 1–10 AU. The maximum electric energy accumulated in such layer will be restricted by the electric discharge potential of the layer material. For comet nuclei with typical radii of the order of 1–10 km the accumulated energy of such natural electric capacitor is comparable to the energy of large comet outbursts that are estimated on the basis of ground based optical observations. The impulse gamma and X-ray radiation together with optical burst from the comet nucleus during solar flares, anticipated due to high-voltage electric discharge, may serve as an indicator of realization of the processes above considered. Multi-wavelength observations of comets and pseudo-asteroids of cometary origin, having brightness correlation with solar activity, using ground based optical telescopes as well as space gamma and X-ray observatories, during strong solar flares, are very interesting for the physics of comets as well as for high energy astrophysics.

(emphasis added)

You may also want to try understanding this sentence: Michael has never produced an reference to any scientific literature that states that the actual electrical discharges (i.e. lightning) that his idea includes are possible in plasma.
I have highlighted the bit that you seem unable to understand.

 

[RealityCheck01]

That's not even a rational answer!
...usual rant and insults snipped...

For the ninth time in simple English, the actual rational answer is

As stated before on 4th December 2012 (35 days and counting!)
The irrelevance of the inane demand that I read Peratt's book): When we get to discussing real MHD (plasma physics) rather than one section in one book !​

 

[RealityCheck01]

It can't boil. I pointed out to you that the surface is only about 1200K and it therefore isn't gong to "boil" or "melt" or do any such thing.
... usual intuits snipped...

That is a lie - you never explained that or else you would link or quote the explanation.
As far as this thread that is a complete lie - just serach for 1200.

You have just pulled this number of 1200K out of thin air.

You asserted this based on your complete denial of the laws of physics involved, e.g. the 2nd law of thermodynamics which means that the interior of the Sun is at a temperature of at least its surface temperature of ~5700K:
Michael's iron surface idea completely debunked!

Any one with high school physics (second law of thermodynamics + temperature of the Sun) can see that Michael's iron surface idea is a fantasy:
8th July 2009: Your hypothetical solid iron surface has been in thermal contact with at least one object that has consistently had a temperature large enough to vaporize iron for about 4.57 billion years.
17th April 2010: Why this iron crust thermodynamically impossible
17th April 2010: Iron Sun Surface Thermodynamically Impossible IV

 

[RealityCheck01]

Michael, you are persiting in the ludicrous citation of the papers that state that solar flares are magnetic reconnection events thus debunking your own claim!
Michael cites papers that state that solar flares are magnetic reconnection, thus debunking his own idea!

 

[RealityCheck01]

Updated Actual electrical discharges are impossible in plasma, etc.

E. Ya. Vil'koviskii (1974)

A section title "Electrical dicharge in the chromosphere" which not enough to tell whether this is Dungey's usage. The assumption of existing curents supports this. No astronomer would be stupid enough to think that there is lightning on the Sun so it is either Dungey's usage or their own.
Michael has now stated that this is Dungey's usage of the words 'electrical discharge' for large current densities which is an option I list above!
I will mention that this is part of the ridiculous act of Michael cites papers that state that solar flares are magnetic reconnection, thus debunking his own idea!

 

[Michael]

For the ninth time in simple English, the actual rational answer is

As stated before on 4th December 2012 (35 days and counting!)
The irrelevance of the inane demand that I read Peratt's book): When we get to discussing real MHD (plasma physics) rather than one section in one book !​

Yawn. It's been two years and counting and you still haven't read a relevant textbook on MHD theory. When might I hope for you to actually properly educate yourself on this topic?

 

[Michael]

Solar Variability and Terrestrial Climate - NASA Science

Of particular importance is the sun's extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation, which peaks during the years around solar maximum. Within the relatively narrow band of EUV wavelengths, the sun’s output varies not by a minuscule 0.1%, but by whopping factors of 10 or more. This can strongly affect the chemistry and thermal structure of the upper atmosphere.

I think the best hope for solar physics research is with the folks that study the sun/Earth weather connections. They do seem to understand and appreciate the importance of the solar EUV variability and it's effects on the magnetosphere and other areas of the Earth's atmosphere.

These EUV changes are directly related to the larger number of "active regions" that form in the solar atmosphere during the active part of the solar cycle, and the "electrical discharges" associated with these processes. Sooner or later the climatologists are bound to come out of the closet over the electrical aspects of solar physics.

 

[Michael]

Michael, you are persiting in the ludicrous citation of the papers that state that solar flares are magnetic reconnection events thus debunking your own claim!

You still haven't figured out that an 'electrical discharge' in plasma is defined as a fast release of stored electric or magnetic energy. Electrical discharges are *inclusive* of all sorts of fast releases of magnetic field energy, including induction, and what you're calling "reconnection", a process that Alfven called "pseudoscience" till they day that he died. Alfven's double layer paper makes the whole reconnection concept irrelevant and obsolete. It's still a fast release of stored magnetic energy either way, and therefore it still an *electrical discharge* in plasma as Dungey and Peratt explained.

 

[Michael]

For the ninth time in simple English, the actual rational answer is.....

A rational answer would be something like:

"You're right Michael. If I expect to understand PC theory, and if I intend to crusade around the internet trying to "debunk" PC theory in public, it would be helpful and insightful to actually read a book on MHD theory. I'll do that and then we'll talk more about it."

In your case however, two full years have gone by while you've pretended to "debunk" electric universe theory all over the internet, and yet you still know absolutely nothing about it. You refuse to study plasma physics/cosmology theory with any scientific integrity. You refuse to even accurately represent the precepts and tenets of PC theory correctly. You don't even accept or understand the *bear minimum* requirements, specifically how it relates to MHD theory, or the fact that electrical discharges are defined as a fast release of stored EM energy, not a breakdown of a dielectric!

I might as well be trying to discuss quantum mechanics on the internet with a belligerent cat.

 

[Michael]

Solar Variability and Terrestrial Climate - NASA Science

Of particular interest are the faculae. While dark sunspots tend to vanish during solar minima, the bright faculae do not. This may be why paleoclimate records of sun-sensitive isotopes C-14 and Be-10 show a faint 11-year cycle at work even during the Maunder Minimum.

Those bright faculae on the surface of the photosphere are caused by the million degree coronal loops as they rise up and through the surface of the photosphere, and dive back through the surface of the photosphere. The coronal loops are filled with current carrying plasma in the multimillion degree range. They carry heat into the upper atmosphere and heat up the upper atmosphere just as they heat up the surface of the photosphere.

The coronal loops are 'current carrying' circuits of flowing hot plasma. As they pass through the photosphere (up or down) they leave "bright spots" on that surface, and magnetic field alignments on that surface that are directly related to the flow of current through the loop at that location.

If one overlays a magnetogram image with either a 1600A or 1700A SDO image, one can see that the bright faculae are aligned perfectly with the bright and dark magnetic field alignments on the same photosphere surface. That is directly related to the behaviors of the largest coronal loops as they traverse that surface.

The sunspots themselves only form over the 'most active' active areas, whereas every "large" coronal loop leaves bright faculea "footprints" on that surface for as long as the loop pierces that surface. Some loops can persist for days and weeks.

 

[Michael]

I should also point out that the bright faculae occur around "active regions" regardless of whether or not a sunspot has formed in the photosphere. Active regions produce large loops that traverse the surface of the photosphere, but only the most active regions generate enough energy for sunspots to form in the photosphere. There are many active regions in the solar atmosphere that show no corresponding sunspots.