Yep, you're in denial of English and specifically the *currents* running through his non empty vacuum which *move* (are "drawn nearer") as a result of 'reconnection'. You keep trying to ignore the transfer of magnetic field energy in particle kinetic energy.
RC, what don't you understand about Somov's *non empty* vacuum? It *includes* plasma in the form of two "currents", and plasma particle movement, and it's therefore perfectly congruent with WIKI's description of "magnetic reconnection".
Magnetic reconnection - Wikipedia
Magnetic reconnection is a physical process in highly conducting plasmas in which the magnetic topology is rearranged and magnetic energy is converted to kinetic energy, thermal energy, and particle acceleration.
Apparently your grasp of the English language fails you the moment you read "in highly conducting plasmas", and the moment you read "and magnetic energy is converted to kinetic energy". What do those bolded parts mean to you RC?
You also failed to acknowledge Somov's use of the English term *currents* (another English term you evidently don't understand) and the term "drawn nearer".
Since you don't have any plasma in your *empty* vacuum contraption, nothing is drawing nearer and there is no possible way to convert field energy into particle acceleration, so you go into pure denial of those English terms and sentences.
The textbook physics includes two very important things that you left out which make Somov's example consistent with WIKI, A) plasma in the form of current, and B) the transfer of field energy into particle acceleration as described by the term "drawn nearer". It's hard to imagine how you can be so utterly ignorant of basic English RC. How can you miss the phrase "in highly conducting plasmas" in that sentence?
the repeated idiocy of a Wikipedia article on MR in plasma (I am tempted to edit it to add a section on MR in vacuum!)
LOL! You already did that once at JREF to the magnetic field description during our conversation because I kept pointing out that magnetic lines have no beginning or ending, so you removed that part from WIKI! LOL! When you can win, you simply cheat.
and an over 6 years old and counting lie of plasma in an example that does not have plasma
!
You're lying because Somov's vacuum is *not* empty like your vacuum. It contains two currents which are "drawn nearer", satisfying the WIKI definition of the process occurring in plasma and the transfer of field energy into particle acceleration. You however left out the plasma and the transfer of energy.
I have added text from Somov's section in MR in vacuum
Of course you did because you can't win without blatantly cheating. That's why you want to change the WIKI definition too.
(the Google Books link is to his book with the entire section and the following one), the post where I pointed out there is no plasma over 6 years ago, and other literature on MR in vacuum.
You flat out lied because 4.2.2 isn't an "empty" vacuum. It's got current and therefore plasma, and plasma particle displacement as the currents "draw nearer". You better erase the diagram in 4.2.2 and just make it a blank diagram too.
When might I see your missing math formula to express a non-zero rate of "reconnection' without plasma or plasma particle movement? What's it been now, 7 years?
I'll never see it, and we both know it.
You literally cannot tell the physical difference between ordinary magnetic flux in a vacuum, and the process in *plasma* known as "magnetic reconnection" where field energy is converted in to particle acceleration.
But you go ahead and put words in Somov's mouth that he didn't say, just like you put words in Scott's mouth that he didn't say (no neutrinos), and you put words in my mouth that I didn't say because that's what you do: you cheat.
I love how you want to rewrite the WIKI page only because it blows your claims out of the water.
That's hysterical.
