Electric suns, solar flares and coronal mass ejections.

[Michael]

FYI...

For the 100th time (or so).....

It is *not* thermodynamically impossible for lighter, hotter layers to sit above cooler, more dense layers in the solar atmosphere. Rather it is *observed fact* that the solar layers are arranged with the hottest, lightest layers sitting above cooler, more dense layers of atmospheric plasma. The wispy thin, million degree hydrogen corona sits above a thicker helium chromosphere that is radiates at around 20,000 Kelvin. That chromosphere sits on top of a relatively "thicker" and "cooler" photosphere that radiates at approximately 5800K. Underneath of that predominantly Neon photosphere sits a relatively thick, cooler layer of silicon that is much thicker and much cooler where it meets up with the relatively cool "surface" of the sun. The surface itself is only about 1200 degrees Kelvin.

The excess heat is carried into the upper atmosphere by "coronal loops", the largest of which traverse the *entire* atmosphere, from surface to corona.

Birkeland even documented the discharge process in the lab, and created his own version of 'coronal loops', going from one area of the solid surface to another, and traveling high into the atmosphere around the terrella before returning to another point on the surface.

 

[RealityCheck01]

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?

Yawn. It's been two years and counting and you still cannot understand the one section in the one textbook on MHD theory that we have been taking about.
For the tenth 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]

You still haven't figured out that an 'electrical discharge' in plasma is defined as a fast release of stored electric or magnetic energy.

You still haven't figured out that an 'electrical discharge' in plasma has never been defined as anything.

You still haven't figured out that an 'electrical discharge' defined as a fast release of stored electric or magnetic energy is idiotic because that includes things that are obviously not an 'electrical discharge' such as light.

From Actual electrical discharges are impossible in plasma, etc.
You still haven't figured out that
13th January 2011: Dungey's and Peratt's definition of discharge are different!

You still haven't figured out that
18th October 2011: Dungey's 'electric discharge' = high current density in magnetic reconnection

You still haven't figured out what an idiotic act citing papers that say that you are wrong is !
8th November 2011: Citing Dungey means that cause of solar flares is magnetic reconnection!

 

[Michael]

Yawn. It's been two years and counting and you still cannot understand the one section in the one textbook on MHD theory that we have been taking about.

You mean the textbook that I read along with 4 other textbooks on plasma physics? You mean Peratt's book that you have refused to read for two years? The textbook that clearly states that electrical discharges *do* occur in plasma? That textbook?

You are not capable of giving a rational answer RC. You have no rational basis for playing "Anti-PC creator" because you don't understand MHD theory, and you refuse to study MHD theory. Like I said, I might as well be having a QM conversation with an angry cat.

"Meow, meow, angry meow".

 

[Michael]

You still haven't figured out that an 'electrical discharge' in plasma has never been defined as anything.

I have figured out that you are incapable of telling the truth.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7620486-69/#post62015533

 

[RealityCheck01]

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."

That is a completely irrational answer because

1. We are talking about your fantasies about the Sun which have nothing to do with a 'PC theory': Michael's iron surface idea completely debunked!
2. I do not intend to crusade around the internet trying to "debunk" PC theory in public. 'PC theory' does that quite well by itself, e.g. by not existing!
3. 'PC theory' has little to do with MHD.
4. 'PC theory' does not exist.
   There is an invalid scientific theory called Plasma Cosmology.
   There is the invalid crackpot plasma cosmology theory (note the small p and c).

 

[Michael]

That is a completely irrational answer...

...only to a hater who has no real interest in *learning* anything. You're only interest in this thread is to "hate", specifically hate directed at me personally. That's quite obvious from your stalker behavior, and your unwillingness to learn anything. You don't know the first thing about Birkeland's electric sun theory and you don't wish to learn anything about it.

 

[RealityCheck01]

You mean the textbook that I read along with 4 other textbooks on plasma physics?

Duh - so what?
We are not discussing plasma physics. We are discussing that one section that you cannot understand.
13th January 2011: Dungey's and Peratt's definition of discharge are different!
18th October 2011: Dungey's 'electric discharge' = high current density in magnetic reconnection
8th November 2011: Citing Dungey means that cause of solar flares is magnetic reconnection!

As stated before on 4th December 2012 (37 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 !

 

[Michael]

That is a completely irrational answer because]

We are talking about your fantasies about the Sun which have nothing to do with a 'PC theory':

False

I do not intend to crusade around the internet trying to "debunk" PC theory in public. 'PC theory' does that quite well by itself, e.g. by not existing!

False on both counts. You stalked me here to Christian Forums and of course PC theory is the main opposition theory to mainstream theory.

'PC theory' has little to do with MHD.

Hysterically false.

'PC theory' does not exist.

False.

There is an invalid scientific theory called Plasma Cosmology.

False

There is the invalid crackpot plasma cosmology theory (note the small p and c).

False again.

Every single statement you make is a complete lie and it's entirely based upon denial and "self imposed ignorant anger".

Since you refuse to read a book on MHD theory, you seem to have no idea how to even conceptualize PC theory and how it even relates to MHD theory. Wow!

 

[Michael]

Duh - so what?
We are not discussing plasma physics.

Yes, we are. That's the problem. I'm talking physics with a hater who remains ignorant of the basics by choice.

We are discussing that one section that you cannot understand.

I understand it perfectly and my understanding is perfectly congruent with Dungey's use of terms along with every other author I cited on solar physics. Only the one ignorant IT guy "doesn't get it" because he refuses to read the book!

Your denial process is like any other hater denial song and dance routine. You *refuse* to read any relevant materials and yet you act like an 'expert" anyway! You're only an expert at *irrational unrelenting hate*, specifically hate directed at one individual.

 

[RealityCheck01]

...usual rant and insults snipped...
You don't know the first thing about Birkeland's electric sun theory and you don't wish to learn anything about it.

I would love to learn about Birkeland's electric sun theory.
Now point me to the literature on it. Maybe a current textbook. There must be many, many papers and textbooks about Birkeland's electric sun theory since it is a century old!

Whoops: You cannot because from Michael's iron surface idea completely debunked! :
Errors in Michael's site IX (No Birkeland electrical model of the sun)!
What we have from you is his analogy between lab images and solar imahes and a newpaper report about a lecture !
And: Errors in Michael's site X (Birkeland was mostly wrong)!

 

[Michael]

I would love to learn about Birkeland's electric sun theory.

I've talked to you online for two years are you *still* cannot *correctly* describe the Birkeland solar model I've described on my website and that I've talked about in cyberspace. You don't have any desire to *learn* at all. You refuse to even produce a single author that backs up any of your erroneous claims. Never have you produced a published work that claims that electrical discharges are impossible in plasmas. You keep citing yourself over and over and over again. It's irrational nonsense.

Now point me to the literature on it. Maybe a current textbook. There must be many, many papers and textbooks about Birkeland's electric sun theory since it is a century old!

arXiv.org Search

There you go. I've done something you'll never do, namely *publish* relevant materials. Haters can't handle reality.

Let me guess: You'll keep linking to yourself and never provide any *external* support for your erroneous nonsense?

 

[Michael]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7620486-71/#post62154194

That post sums up our entire conversation RC. I'm talking physics with a hater that doesn't have a clue, and who has no desire to learn.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Solar Variability and Terrestrial Climate - NASA Science
...

Mostly correct except:

• All plasma is 'current carrying'.
• You provide no citations to support your assertion of a flow of current through the loop.

 

[Michael]

Mostly correct except:

• All plasma is 'current carrying'.
• You provide no citations to support your assertion of a flow of current through the loop.

Have you read *any* of Alfven's actual writings related to coronal loops?

 

[RealityCheck01]

FYI...It is *not* thermodynamically impossible for lighter, hotter layers to sit above cooler, more dense layers in the solar atmosphere.

FYI...
For the 100th time (or so)..... You really need to stop stating the obvous and demonstrating an abysmal ignorance of solar phsyics !


It is *observed fact* that the solar atmosphere consists of

• the temperature minimum (about 500 km aboove the photosphere, ~4000 K)
• the chromosphere (4000-20,000 K),
• the transition region (20,000 K to ~ 1 million K),
• the corona (1 - 20 million K),
• and the heliosphere.

Each of these regions (calling them layers is really bad since it implies a shell which the corona definitely is not) is hotter and lighter than the one below.

The main ignorance is that the the photosphere is part of the solar body not the solaratmosphere.

The rest of the post is just a fantasy (Michael's iron surface idea completely debunked! ) which adds to your ignorance - the outer 70% of the Sun is the convection zone where convection mixes up the plasma. We can even see the top of the convection cells in the photsphere that are mixing up the plasma. You have even cited a paper measuring the convecation currents mixing the plasma up.

With that 1200 K figure appreaing out of thin air yet again!
Michael:
Show your calculation that there is a surface at~1200 K inside the solar body.
First asked 11 January 2013.

 

[Michael]

FYI...
For the 100th time (or so)..... You really need to stop stating the obvous and demonstrating an abysmal ignorance of solar phsyics

Gee, another personal insult (personal hate) from a guy that refuses to read a book on plasma physics.

Haters never read relevant materials when they can simply insult the individual and cite themselves over and over again. Yawn. Nothing that comes out of your mouth is true. It's all based on willful ignorance of even the most basic of concepts of MHD and PC theory.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7620486-71/#post62154194

It's like trying to have conversations about QM with angry cats....

 

[RealityCheck01]

Have you read *any* of Alfven's actual writings related to coronal loops?

I have read all of Alfven's actual writings related to coronal loops that I can access.
I hope that you do not have the delusion that his use of the circuit model technique to describe standard coronal loops and solar flare means that there are actual resistors, wires, etc on the Sun !

You till have provided no citations to support your assertion of a flow of current through the loop. So Michael:

Citations to support your assertion of a flow of current through coroanl loops.
​

These will be things suach as actual measurements of the currents.
First asked 11 January 2013.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Gee, another personal insult (personal hate) from a guy that refuses to read a book on plasma physics.

Gee, another rant from a guy who has an inane demand that I read books on topics that we are not talking about.
Gee, another rant from a guy who cannot tell the difference between a statement of fact (you writing posts that demonstrate ignorance about solar physics) and insults.
Gee, another rant from a guy who is so ignorant that he does not know the structure of the Sun or what the convection zone is.

the solar atmosphere consists of

• the temperature minimum (about 500 km aboove the photosphere, ~4000 K)
• the chromosphere (4000-20,000 K),
• the transition region (20,000 K to ~ 1 million K),
• the corona (1 - 20 million K),
• and the heliosphere.

....
The main ignorance is that the the photosphere is part of the solar body not the solaratmosphere.

...
the outer 70% of the Sun is the convection zone where convection mixes up the plasma. We can even see the top of the convection cells in the photsphere that are mixing up the plasma. You have even cited a paper measuring the convecation currents mixing the plasma up.

With that 1200 K figure appreaing out of thin air yet again!

And no answer to: Show your calculation that there is a surface at~1200 K inside the solar body
First asked 11 January 2013. 0 days and counting.

 

[Michael]

I have read all of Alfven's actual writings related to coronal loops that I can access.

Then you answered your own last question!

I hope that you do not have the delusion that his use of the circuit model technique to describe standard coronal loops and solar flare means that there are actual resistors, wires, etc on the Sun !

You don't have the "delusion" that this is either a civil or a "scientific' conversation do you? You haven't read a relevant textbook so it's certainly not a 'scientific' conversation.

You till have provided no citations to support your assertion of a flow of current through the loop.

You either did not read or did not understand Alfven's work if you actually read it. If you did understand it, you'd realize how ridiculous that false statement is. Since you cannot or will not accept published papers and books as "evidence", what is there to actually discuss with you? Oh ya, you'll just spew ad hom attacks.