Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:08 am

Robert:
sunspot groups appear at preferred longitudes, they appear at mid to high latitudes in varying numbers (50 degrees N and S) and migrate across the solar surface toward the solar equator (the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn are inclined no more than 6 degrees to the solar equator)
I understand your point about sunspots being as high as 50 degrees on the sun
vs the Jupiter orbit inclined only 6 degrees to the solar equatorial plane.

However, those numbers can be misleading.
For example:
The orbit of Jupiter is, on average, 484 million miles.
The sin of 6 degrees is .1045.
(484 x .11045 = 50.58)
The distance of Jupiter above the sun's equatorial plane can be as high as 50 million miles,
more than ten times the solar radius.
Therefore, Jupiter would be easily high enough to temporarily connect with the sun
at a solar latitude of 50 degrees.
And high enough to sustain a connection(sunspot at base) as the sunspot rotates with the sun.

Jack

Ps. From its max above to its max below the solar equatorial plane, Jupiter moves a total of over 100 million miles. A lot more than the 6 degree figure would indicate and a lot more than visual representations of the solar system present.

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:10 am

Counter Rotation of the Solar Surface- Evidence for Birkeland Currents?

In a previous post I suggested that sunspots were footprints of counter-rotating filamentary Birkeland Currents.

Professor Don Scott’s work highlighted the counter-rotating nature of Birkeland Currents, (1) if such currents provide the Sun with its radiant energy we would expect to find evidence of counter-rotation on the solar surface and not just in sunspots; studies have now revealed just such subtle counter-rotation of the solar surface.

“The presence of zonal flows was first deduced from surface Doppler measurements. A long-period oscillation, dubbed the “torsional oscillation,” was identified by Howard & Labonte (1980). It consists of alternating latitude bands of slightly faster and slower rotation migrating equatorward as the solar activity cycle progresses. These were confirmed by Ulrich et al. (1998, 2001). Poleward meridional circulation was detected at the surface using direct Doppler measurements (Labonte & Howard 1982; Hathaway et al. 1996)”. (my emphasis) (2)

Studies spanning some 30 years revealed bands of ‘rotation’ migrating equatorward and poleward, a cyclical pattern connected to the sunspot cycle.

A recent study has attributed the phenomena to internal ‘plasma jets’. The question that presents itself is- internal ‘plasma jets’ or external Birkeland Currents? (3)

"Our study probes only the near-surface bands of faster and slower rotation. However, the current consensus is that magnetic fields that form sunspots are created deeper inside the sun. It is extremely intriguing, therefore, that the sunspot cycle asymmetry is mirrored across the vast depth of the sun's convection zone linking the deep and the near-surface layers of the sun". (4)

It is intriguing but not for the conclusion reached by the authors- the sunspot cycle is not mirrored across the vast depth of an imaginary convection zone but rather across the vast distance of the heliosphere.

I wish to draw the readers’ attention to Figure 11 of the paper ‘Evolution of Near-Surface Flows Inferred from High-Resolution Ring-Diagram Analysis’, from this figure during Carrington Rotations 2100 to 2102 (2010 August 9 to 2010 October 3) during the very early rising phase of Solar Cycle 24 a spiral shaped negative zonal flow anomaly can clearly be seen; the spiral pattern waxes and wanes as the solar cycle progresses and “…there is little evidence of tightening of the spirals from one rotation to the next.” Closer to the poles the researchers noted: “One notable feature in the highlatitude patterns of the meridional flows is that rather then (sic) being organized into spiral structures, the (sic) tend to exhibit simply a single-celled azimuthal asymmetry. This is what would be expected if there were a cross-polar flow.” (5)

The overall pattern is very similar to the pattern of auroral currents in Earth’s atmosphere (6).

The researchers continued noting that: “…the anomalies in CR 2109 can be readily identified with AR 11190, 11193, 11195, 11199, 11203, and 11204, while those in CR 2136 are associated with AR 11731 and 11734–11736”. (7) Here we see an association of active regions (sunspots) with flow anomaly zones.

In both referenced studies the researchers suggest internal processes, namely convective cells or jets of plasma but is it possible that the real nature of these features is evidence of the very Birkeland Currents powering the solar discharge?

References:

1. Scott. Donald. E. 2015, Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model, Progress in Physics Vol. 11 No. 2 (April 2015)
2. Bogart. Richard. S. et al. 2015, Evolution of Near-Surface Flows Inferred from High-Resolution Ring-Diagram Analysis, The Astrophysical Journal 807:125, 2015 July 10 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.10 ... /807/2/125
3. https://phys.org/news/2018-07-plasma-je ... heres.html
4. Ibid
5. op. cit. 2
6. Figure 2. https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eopo ... s/a/ampere
7. op cit. 2

Post Script

In an aside to the main body of this post my thoughts recently drifted to the nature of the ‘real’ solar surface as opposed to the visible photosphere, something I have not given too much consideration previously. For whatever reason an image formed in my mind- it was an image of Comet 67P, perhaps it was because this quote by Dr Earl Milton was on my mind: “In Juergens' picture the Sun's properties come from without; they arise from where the Sun is located, from the space with which it is interacting. The Sun is visible where the galactic current impinges upon it. The cosmos squeezes the Sun into a particular volume. Cosmic electrical pressure is attempting to squeeze the Sun's matter to the same electrical density as that in the distant space surrounding the Sun. It cannot succeed because the Sun has far too few electrons in its matter, and so the solar energy output which sustains our lives continues”. The electric star hypothesis would suggest that stars are composed of heavy elements and not purely hydrogen and helium. Are elements such as iron, silicon, carbon and oxygen being machined from the ‘real’ solar surface? Furthermore, during periods of increased electrical stress electric stars are thought to fission into two or more bodies to relieve the electrical stress. During such a process would the parent star take on a ‘rubber duck’ appearance similar to Comet 67P in the final moment before fissioning?

Maybe such musings deserve a new thread- or quietly forgotten?

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Sat Jul 21, 2018 7:49 am

Robertus Maximus:
In a previous post I suggested that sunspots were footprints of counter-rotating filamentary Birkeland Currents.

Professor Don Scott’s work highlighted the counter-rotating nature of Birkeland Currents, (1) if such currents provide the Sun with its radiant energy we would expect to find evidence of counter-rotation on the solar surface and not just in sunspots; studies have now revealed just such subtle counter-rotation of the solar surface.
I agree the evidence of counter rotation on the solar surface is evidence of external Birkeland currents providing the Sun with its radiant energy. This evidence is solar surface wide and is there all the time on a quiet sun or on a surface with spots.
I think the sun spots are anomalous events which interfere with, or break through, the quiet sun surface condition.
If the spots are footprints of Birkeland currents connected to the planets they too would have counter rotation properties.
I suggest that both your description of the source of the solar energy ( Birkeland currents from outside the solar system) and my description of the nature of sun spots ( Birkeland currents involving the planets) are happening at the same time. They are the same in their nature only different in their size and frequency and duration.

celeste
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by celeste » Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:09 pm

jacmac wrote:Robertus Maximus:
In a previous post I suggested that sunspots were footprints of counter-rotating filamentary Birkeland Currents.

Professor Don Scott’s work highlighted the counter-rotating nature of Birkeland Currents, (1) if such currents provide the Sun with its radiant energy we would expect to find evidence of counter-rotation on the solar surface and not just in sunspots; studies have now revealed just such subtle counter-rotation of the solar surface.
I agree the evidence of counter rotation on the solar surface is evidence of external Birkeland currents providing the Sun with its radiant energy. This evidence is solar surface wide and is there all the time on a quiet sun or on a surface with spots.
I think the sun spots are anomalous events which interfere with, or break through, the quiet sun surface condition.
If the spots are footprints of Birkeland currents connected to the planets they too would have counter rotation properties.
I suggest that both your description of the source of the solar energy ( Birkeland currents from outside the solar system) and my description of the nature of sun spots ( Birkeland currents involving the planets) are happening at the same time. They are the same in their nature only different in their size and frequency and duration.
More please? There are a large number of properties that can be explained if the whole solar system is “strung” on a large scale interstellar filament. But also properties that can be only explained if we have electric discharges on the interplanetary scale. Would you care to make some predictions of what we should see on each scale? A list would be fine. Just allow me to pick your brain here, if you don’t mind.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Thu Jul 26, 2018 9:55 pm

I will not be able to make a list, certainly not tonight, but here is:
Point 1.
Robertus offered this basis for the generation of the solar cycle from a helical external Birkeland current. :
Due to the helical nature of Birkeland currents any point of contact between the current and the heliosphere will be a varying one (see: below).

Galactic Tilt D.jpg


Now, from this illustration we can see that relative motion between the Sun/heliosphere and a (rotating?) helical Birkeland current (helicity of which is represented by zigzag or saw-tooth line) will vary cyclically. At one point of the cycle the local current will impinge on the heliosphere at an angle that is not too dissimilar to the Sun’s equatorial plane. As the cycle progresses current flow will impinge on the heliosphere at increasingly high solar latitudes, eventually the current will once again be focused at the equatorial regions, having passed through every angle in-between.
For starters I don't know how to copy the diagram from Roberts first post in this thread. The one under the CURRENT FILAMENTS paragraph. If someone can stick it in under this post, great!

I do not see the basis for the zig zag line which is used to demonstrate or suggest a cycle, which then is associated with the solar sun spot cycles. A stretched 3D slinky can be represented by a 2D zig zag line which might suggest a cycle of changing direction of current, or changing direction of interaction.
relative motion between the Sun .....and a helical Birkeland current.....will vary cyclically.

BUT:
nothing really changes.
Imagine you are driving your car in a very large tunnel with helical art all around you
You see all the ZIG lines out the right window, parallel at an angle going forward and UP.
You see all the ZAG lines out the left window, parallel at the same angle but going forward and DOWN.
They stay that way. The up and down are part of the same helix. There is no angle change. You are in a continuous tunnel(Birkeland Current) helix.
The solar system is the car, Birkeland current is the tunnel helix.
The interaction of the two is always the same. IMO.
(Other variables not considered now.)

I do enjoy these discussions.
Thanks,
Jack

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:26 am

celeste wrote:
jacmac wrote:Robertus Maximus:
In a previous post I suggested that sunspots were footprints of counter-rotating filamentary Birkeland Currents.

Professor Don Scott’s work highlighted the counter-rotating nature of Birkeland Currents, (1) if such currents provide the Sun with its radiant energy we would expect to find evidence of counter-rotation on the solar surface and not just in sunspots; studies have now revealed just such subtle counter-rotation of the solar surface.
I agree the evidence of counter rotation on the solar surface is evidence of external Birkeland currents providing the Sun with its radiant energy. This evidence is solar surface wide and is there all the time on a quiet sun or on a surface with spots.
I think the sun spots are anomalous events which interfere with, or break through, the quiet sun surface condition.
If the spots are footprints of Birkeland currents connected to the planets they too would have counter rotation properties.
I suggest that both your description of the source of the solar energy ( Birkeland currents from outside the solar system) and my description of the nature of sun spots ( Birkeland currents involving the planets) are happening at the same time. They are the same in their nature only different in their size and frequency and duration.
More please? There are a large number of properties that can be explained if the whole solar system is “strung” on a large scale interstellar filament. But also properties that can be only explained if we have electric discharges on the interplanetary scale. Would you care to make some predictions of what we should see on each scale? A list would be fine. Just allow me to pick your brain here, if you don’t mind.
celeste, I am unable to speak on behalf of Jack whose view is included in the quote above as our respective views on the nature of sunspots differ somewhat but I will say that when it comes to picking my mind there’s not that much to pick!

The motivation for the most recent post: ‘Counter Rotation of the Solar Surface- Evidence for Birkeland Currents?’ viewtopic.php?f=3&t=16299&start=210#p125143
was a picture of Earth’s global weather system or to be more precise wind system.
Prevailing Winds
Prevailing Winds
The global system of winds displays zones of counter rotation as we move from either rotational pole toward the equator. Birkeland Currents preferentially arrive at the Earth’s poles, Don Scott has commented on counter-rotation in auroral displays but what if such currents extended to the equatorial regions affecting the atmosphere? Counter-rotating prevailing winds perhaps.

As Earth’s magnetic poles do not ‘flip’ due to Birkeland Currents being focussed at the polar regions the zonal wind system is relatively steady and/or fixed.

This is not true for the Sun, the Sun’s magnetic poles do ‘flip’ which I attribute to external rotating Birkeland Currents, any counter-rotating pattern on the solar surface would be more complex, less obvious and would need prising out of the observational data- hence the afore mentioned post.

Counter-rotation does appear to be a common phenomenon whether planetary atmospheres, retrograde orbits of natural satellites even up to the galactic scale. Perhaps such a wide variety of behaviour has its explanation in Birkeland Currents?

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:15 am

Celeste, my mind is probably less productive for picking than Roberts.
Thinking how to respond to "more please", tonight I wandered off into the world of planetary
Synodic relationships. This is where I wound up.
http://www.jupitersdance.com/

I was most interested in this section:
http://www.jupitersdance.com/thefinalwaltz/

I had been thinking of the word topography as the planets move above, then below, a changing
heliospheric current sheet.
Then I found this:
There also remain viable alternative theories relating to the magnetic pull on the Sun’s core and the ability of the planets to affect the Solar Cycle due to their latitude above or below the Solar plane.
There is also information about other researchers for follow up reading.
Ray Tomes is mentioned.
I remember him on a discussion panel at an EU conference a few years ago.
And this to close for now:
Whilst the foregoing work implicates the collective motion of the planets in the solar cycle I have made no reference to what the process of interaction might be. The main contenders under consideration have been tidal effects, changed movement around the solar system barycentre and an electromagnetic connection via the Interplanetary Magnetic Field. Or, indeed, a combination of these elements.
I would say the evidence for the planets is substantial.

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Sat Aug 04, 2018 1:27 am

To see a Sun in a grain…

One of Robert Johnson’s original critical points of the JMST Electric Sun hypothesis was that the ‘EU model’ was self contradictory:

“The EU model is based on the work of Hannes Alfvén and Ralph Juergens who both argued that electric currents are important in the Solar System, but both had differing views on where those currents flow. Alfvén suggested that the Heliospheric Current Sheet is part of a circuit in the heliosphere. Near the Sun, the current splits into North and South components which then flow along the meridians towards the poles.

“Birkeland Currents flow from each pole, and the circuits close at some unspecified distance from the Sun. Alfvén’s current does not enter or leave the photosphere and the direction of the current changes in alternate solar cycles.

“In contrast, Juergens argued that the photosphere is a region of anode tufting and therefore current must always be flowing through the photosphere into the body of the Sun, which he identified as the anode.” (1)

It is the premise of this thread that the two dissimilar models, those of Alfvén and Juergens, can be reconciled. I have suggested that the solar cycle is a product of varying Birkeland Currents focussed on the Sun producing a pseudo-Alfvén circuit and a Juergens circuit. New evidence offers the prospect that such a proposal is not contradictory and contrary to Robert Johnson’s assertion that “…Judged by any reasonable criterion, the model is dead”, the JMST Electric Sun hypothesis is very much alive. (2)

From rice grains to granules

Forty years ago Ralph Juergens provided a brief description of the origin of the term granule, now commonly used to describe features of the photosphere: “For some years this puzzling, composite quality of the photosphere was referred to as its "rice-grain structure". From this evolved the more prosaic terms granulation — used with reference to the overall graininess — and granule — the designation for an individual "rice grain" or puff of plasma. So, now one speaks of a photosphere that exhibits granulation in its texture, or consists of millions of individual granules.” (3)

Until recently granulation was believed to be a feature uniquely identified with the photosphere, new data now suggests otherwise.

Woodgrain and STEREO-A

A recent paper documents a study of the solar corona by the STEREO-A spacecraft, the study has revealed a corona far more complex than the researchers could imagine, so much so they contemplate “…unresolved physics in the vicinity of 10RS from the Sun.” (4)

The new study spans a three day period in April 2014 during solar maximum, what is interesting is that image processing revealed “…a highly filamentary and intermittent fine-scale structure within the coronal streamers.” (5) I have used such terminology before, at solar maximum current is no longer focussed at the Sun’s polar regions and becomes highly filamentary at lower latitudes.

The authors noted: “A striking aspect…is the ultra-fine radial structure of the outer corona, which contains both the familiar striae on 1-2 degree scales in the position angle…and also far finer striae, with the anisotropic appearance of grain in a rip-cut hardwood board. The large-amplitude portion of this structure is apparent in…but the “woodgrain” appearance extends to yet smaller scales”. And “We infer that the fine-scale (“woodgrain”) structure…is real and not modified noise, and reflects highly inhomogeneous density structure in the outer corona, with fluctuations of the order of 10× the average density on scales below 0.2 degrees of azimuth. This structure has not been visible in prior studies, primarily because it exists well below the noise floor of most coronagraph images”. (6)

This is not the first time ethereal structures have been found in the solar corona, four years ago a group led by the new report’s lead author found “…myriad diffuse inbound features in the lower corona…” (7) The earlier study took place around solar minimum, in April 2007 and it was found that “…Superposed on the large-scale pattern is a lower amplitude, more complex background signal that is present at all azimuths…this background signal is present both in the streamer belts and in the coronal holes…the background signal, which has a complex character that at first glance is difficult to distinguish from noise. There is a strong characteristic speed to the background, as evidenced by the long, narrow appearance of individual fluctuations. These have a characteristic inbound speed of 40-90 km/s…” (8)

Inbound features in coronal holes are somewhat of a puzzle as inbound features were thought to be associated with the streamer belt, as expected magnetic reconnection comes to the rescue: “…reconnection inside coronal holes in the outer reaches of the corona has been recently invoked by Tenerani et al. as an explanation for inbound features seen in this altitude range”. (9)

From woodgrain to rice-grain

STEREO-A has revealed the corona to be far more complex than previously thought plus a possible connection with the photosphere itself. “…We observed a continuous azimuthal spectrum of radially aligned density structures down to scales of approximately 20Mm at 10RS. With direct radial expansion, such structures would correspond to 2Mm (∼2–3 granule) magnetic domains at the surface of the Sun… This implies source structures in the chromosphere no larger than 300 km, or under half a granule, in scale. If in fact these smallest observable outer-coronal structures are directly connected to individual granules, changes on the granulation timescale ought to be directly observable; contrariwise, if chromospheric and coronal effects dominate the connectivity, the granulation timescale should not be particularly special”. (10)

The ethereal filamentary structures in the outer corona may be directly connected to individual granules in the photosphere, “In the case of the outer corona, these individual dense strands are small enough that they could, in principle, correspond to individual granules or individual intergranular flux concentrations…” (11)- if this is so it would, indeed, appear to be a Juergens type circuit.

Magnetic Carpet ride

The structure of the outer corona appears highly filamentary: “This implies that the solar wind passing through the outer corona is far from homogenized; individual magnetic flux systems may carry different, nearly uncoupled streams of solar wind even as far out as 10–15RS, providing a myriad of possibilities…”, so much so that “…the very fine woodgrain structure, support a magnetic picture of the young solar wind as a “mat” of tangled magnetic carpet flux structures, each carrying relatively independent streams into the heliosphere, rather than as a smooth flow through the outer corona”. (12)

We can now picture the pseudo-Alfvén circuit and the Juergens circuit. The very interstellar currents which provide the Sun with its radiant energy arrive preferentially at the Suns polar regions (13) the currents become increasingly filamentary as they approach the solar surface taking on fractal characteristics- showing more and more structure at smaller and smaller scales. Away from the polar coronal holes we see the same picture for the Juergens circuit, again filamentary currents in the corona become increasingly filamentary, again showing more and more structure as they approach the solar surface.

This phenomenon was observed at both solar minimum and solar maximum. As acknowledged by the authors of the paper the woodgrain structures of the corona may very well correspond to the rice-grain structures of the photosphere, if so we would have a direct link between the Sun and its environment, the environment from which it derives its characteristics.

With the JMST Electric Sun hypothesis very much alive we await the next generation of spacecraft to study the Sun in ever increasing detail…

References:

1. Johnson. Robert. 2013. The Nature of the Sun reconsidered. Electric Universe 2013: The Tipping Point, Albuquerque, New Mexico 3-6 January 2013.

2. Johnson. Robert. 2017. The source of the sun’s electrical activity. SIS Autumn Meeting, 7 October 2017. http://www.sis-group.org.uk/event/2017- ... eeting.htm

3. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1979. The Photosphere is it the top or the bottom of the phenomenon we call the sun? Kronos. Volume 4, Number 4. 1979

4. DeForest. C. E. et al. 2018. The Highly Structured Outer Solar Corona. The Astrophysical Journal, 862:18, 2018 July 20. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.38 ... ac8e3/meta

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. DeForest. C. E. et al. 2014. Inbound Waves in the Solar Corona: A Direct Indicator of Alfvén Surface Location. The Astrophysical Journal, 787:124, 2014 June 1. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.10 ... 2/124/meta

8. Ibid.

9. op cit. 4.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. at Solar Minimum.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:35 am

2. Johnson. Robert. 2017. The source of the sun’s electrical activity. SIS Autumn Meeting, 7 October 2017. http://www.sis-group.org.uk/event/2017- ... eeting.htm
This talk is an excellent summary and critique of electric sun ideas by Bob Johnson.
Thanks Robert.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Sat Aug 04, 2018 11:51 am

Some more random thoughts:

I agree with Robertus Maximus that external Birkeland currents power the sun.
However, that only works for the "quiet" sun. IMO
We know the sun is fully functional in the quiet state.
Sometimes for long periods of time.

I agree with Bob Johnson that the photosphere is not an electric DISCHARGE.
The photospheric plasma might be glowing like an arc discharge, however, it is trapped below the chromosphere double layer and returns inward. It seems like a major recycling situation. It reminds me of the hot coals of a wood fire that are maintained in a wood stove all night by closing off the oxygen. Just a reminder.

Most discussions about an external solar power source (including Bob Johnson's) mix in discussion about sun spots.
I think this confuses the issues.
For me the sun spots are anomalies to the regular and normal operation of our sun.
I think they are a result of the changing local solar environment.
The most obvious changes are the orbits, thus the positions, of the planets.

These planet positions moving above, then below, the heliospheric current sheet with a mixture of the
randomness and complexity of the heliospheric current sheet's angular positions, and the orbital regularity of the planets, present to the sun opportunities for a more direct electric connection to its environment. These connections may or may not happen based on other complex conditions. But the end result is the Butterfly sun spot patterns.

celeste
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by celeste » Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:09 pm

jacmac wrote:Some more random thoughts:

I agree with Robertus Maximus that external Birkeland currents power the sun.
However, that only works for the "quiet" sun. IMO
We know the sun is fully functional in the quiet state.
Sometimes for long periods of time.

I agree with Bob Johnson that the photosphere is not an electric DISCHARGE.
The photospheric plasma might be glowing like an arc discharge, however, it is trapped below the chromosphere double layer and returns inward. It seems like a major recycling situation. It reminds me of the hot coals of a wood fire that are maintained in a wood stove all night by closing off the oxygen. Just a reminder.

Most discussions about an external solar power source (including Bob Johnson's) mix in discussion about sun spots.
I think this confuses the issues.
For me the sun spots are anomalies to the regular and normal operation of our sun.
I think they are a result of the changing local solar environment.
The most obvious changes are the orbits, thus the positions, of the planets.

These planet positions moving above, then below, the heliospheric current sheet with a mixture of the
randomness and complexity of the heliospheric current sheet's angular positions, and the orbital regularity of the planets, present to the sun opportunities for a more direct electric connection to its environment. These connections may or may not happen based on other complex conditions. But the end result is the Butterfly sun spot patterns.

“It seems like a major recycling situation”. That is what gravitational charge segregation does at the sun’s surface ( and why we don’t want to ignore gravity).

Very simply, if all matter ( at every scale) was electrically neutral, we should get collapse into into neutron stars, etc. However, neutral matter does get torn apart by gravitational fields (once the differential pull on a more massive proton and less massive electron, becomes stronger than the electrostatic forces holding them together, we get repulsive forces between like charged objects. An oversimplified ( but educational ) picture, is to think of neutral matter falling in to a gravitational field, being ripped apart, then the component pieces being repelled, and rising. Then recombining and collapsing into the gravitational field. But it IS dynamic.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:27 am

celeste:
That is what gravitational charge segregation does at the sun’s surface ( and why we don’t want to ignore gravity).
I am unfamiliar with gravitational charge segregation at the sun's surface.
I would think electromagnetic forces in the plasma of the photosphere would dominate.
And:
However, neutral matter does get torn apart by gravitational fields
I really don't understand why this would happen.
Would not gravity attract neutral matter in its entirety ?

My words:
“It seems like a major recycling situation”
The granulated surface of the sun seems to rise up, roll over, and go back down.
I do suggest this is therefore not a true,or complete, DISCHARGE per se but a plasma that is trapped, at least partially, by the Double Layer that is above and below the chromosphere.

I don't wish to get too far from Roberts thread on reconciling Alfven and Juergens.
But I am offering an alternative view that the solar system is not powered by a "circuit", as we know them,
with the requisite anode and cathode, power source and load.

If the sun(solar system) is externally powered I believe it is like a very giant CELL that separates itself electrically from it's environment at the heliosphere; and what we call the sun is a nucleus of self collected, concentrated, and organized electric energy.

celeste
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by celeste » Sun Aug 12, 2018 9:02 am

jacmac wrote:celeste:
That is what gravitational charge segregation does at the sun’s surface ( and why we don’t want to ignore gravity).
I am unfamiliar with gravitational charge segregation at the sun's surface.
I would think electromagnetic forces in the plasma of the photosphere would dominate.
And:
However, neutral matter does get torn apart by gravitational fields
I really don't understand why this would happen.
Would not gravity attract neutral matter in its entirety ?
.
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2 ... ah2649.pdf
This article again, for a start. All we have to keep in mind, is that a strong enough gravitational field can help keep things ionized since more massive ions should “sink” more deeply than electrons in that gravitational field. The article was written to remind the mainstream of the electric field at the sun’s surface, but we need to read it the other way, and remember the extreme strength of gravity at the sun’s surface. Too often, in the EU, we tend to think that since the electrostatic force is so many orders of magnitude stronger than gravity, we can ignore gravity. This is not the case at the solar surface.

The question this answers, is why (considering either Alfven or Juergens), the sun has exactly the diameter it does. Neither electric model alone or together can address that point. Specifically, the nearly constant radius of the sun, no matter how varied the activity during the solar cycle.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:19 am

celest:
The question this answers, is why (considering either Alfven or Juergens), the sun has exactly the diameter it does. Neither electric model alone or together can address that point. Specifically, the nearly constant radius of the sun, no matter how varied the activity during the solar cycle.
Without being able to follow the math and physics of all the forces involved, I do agree about the mass of the sun effecting the electric properties of the sun with its gravity.
The stability of the size of the solar photosphere while surrounded by a very variable electric plasma environment is yet to be explained, that I know of, by our EU community.

My guess is that the inner sun is a solid body.
It's size might be as small as the Tachocline radius, or as large as Michael Mozina has suggested.
This stable mass might explain the stable size of the electric photosphere due to the gravity influence you discuss, or perhaps an upper limit on a charge this body might be able to hold, as a capacitor.
Probably both is a good place to start.
Also I have said that perhaps this solid inner body of the sun might have an oblate shape causing the differential rotation of the photosphere.

The electric nature of the photosphere holds it in a sphere while an unequal distance from the inner body could alter its rotation properties at different latitudes.

jacmac
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Alfven and Juergens Circuits, a Reconciliation? 2.0

Unread post by jacmac » Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:30 pm

A special detail follow up for Robertus Maximus and celeste:

Here is a little table of distances (in MILLION miles) of the planets above or below the Solar Equatorial plane
at each planets Aphelion( max distance from sun).

planet--------Aphelion--------Angle to Solar Equator---- Max distance above or below Solar Equator

Mercury----------43.4 ----------- 3.38-----------------------2.56
Venus------------67.7------------ 3.86-----------------------4.56
Earth-------------94.5------------ 7.15----------------------11.85
Mars-------------154.9 -----------5.65----------------------15.32
Jupiter----------507.4------------6.09----------------------54.1
Saturn-----------941.1------------5.51----------------------90.7
Uranus---------1866.4------------6.48--------------------211.98
Neptune-------2824.4----------- 6.43--------------------318.30

As you can see the planets move some considerable distances above and below the Solar equatorial plane
and therefore above and below the Heliospheric current sheet which is approx. 6,000 miles thick (at one AU ).
I suggest these planetary movements into the alternating north and south polar fields as they orbit
might have considerable influence on the solar cycles.

Although we have different ideas, I value your feedback.
Thanks,
Jack

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests