Debye length

[paladin17]

Whether you wish to call it "relativistic" is irrelevant, the sun does indeed emit "cathode rays"/"electron beams" that stream away from the sun.

What I'm claiming here is that these beams are not driven by the Sun's electrostatic charge - since the charge would be screened by plasma anyway (the topic we're discussing here).
Rather, I currently think they are produced by a current-free double layer in the chromosphere (see Dreicer mechanism). Though I can think of other mechanisms (e.g. Compton scattering). See also more recent research on the topic.
In order to claim there is a net current, however, one has to count the total number of protons and electrons throughout the whole energy spectrum and in all directions (to exclude the bias from the current sheet, since latitudinally it's close to us). I doubt there is one.

[Michael Mozina]

Whether you wish to call it "relativistic" is irrelevant, the sun does indeed emit "cathode rays"/"electron beams" that stream away from the sun.

What I'm claiming here is that these beams are not driven by the Sun's electrostatic charge - since the charge would be screened by plasma anyway (the topic we're discussing here).

They were certainly driven by charge in Birkeland's working simulation. What however if it's ultimately also "driven" (at least partially a reaction to anyway) by the cosmic rays that constantly bombard our solar system at nearly the speed of light, which are *overwhelmingly* positively charged, and in some case with extreme amounts of kinetic energy contained in a single particle? Does it really have to be an either or proposition?

Rather, I currently think they are produced by a current-free double layer in the chromosphere (see Dreicer mechanism). Though I can think of other mechanisms (e.g. Compton scattering). See also more recent research on the topic.

I'll have to do some reading before I could comment on that topic.

In order to claim there is a net current, however, one has to count the total number of protons and electrons throughout the whole energy spectrum and in all directions (to exclude the bias from the current sheet, since latitudinally it's close to us). I doubt there is one.

I agree with your basic assessment, and I agree that we don't currently have the capacity to measure the flow of current between the solar surface and the heliosphere yet. According to Alfven, there should be current flow pattern that allow our sun to share it's circuit energy with the other suns, so it may not be uniform in every direction. In fact we know that it's not.

I think the most obvious "evidence" of electrical current in our solar system is staring solar physicists in the face in the form of 'coronal loops' that form all along the surface of the sun. As our satellites take ever improving images of the sun, we see that the solar atmosphere is *filled* with coronal loops both large and small that transfer electrical current from one area of the surface to the other.

We know from experiments with plasma on Earth that that the obvious way to sustain "hot" plasma over long periods of time is with the use of electrical current. While plasma is a nearly perfect conductor, it's still experiences resistance, and the resistance to that current is what is sustaining the coronal loops at *millions* of degrees for hours and days on end. Not coincidentally, current carrying plasma tends to form "helix like" structures (twisters) of moving plasma filaments which carrying current from one point to another.

Instead, astronomers try to claim "magnetic reconnection did it' without ever even bothering to try to demonstrate such a claim in a real lab experiment.

They have no explanation for cathode rays (strahl) coming from the sun, although Birkeland correctly 'predicted" it with his cathode model.

It seems to me that charge separation between various points on the surface of the sun, and to various locations in the heliosphere, drives the particle flow process in the solar atmosphere, but we wouldn't be able to accurately measure all of it's possible movement patterns without being able to measure every single area of the solar atmosphere simultaneously and continuously. Suffice to say, that's not going happen.

[jacmac]

paladin17:

What I'm claiming here is that these beams are not driven by the Sun's electrostatic charge - since the charge would be screened by plasma anyway (the topic we're discussing here).
Rather, I currently think they are produced by a current-free double layer in the chromosphere (

If the photosphere plasma of the sun does measurable work (heat and light),
and, if the sun is externally powered,
wouldn't the chromospher double layer plasma need to be a current carrying, Double Layer
to supply the photosphere with power ?
Also, doesn't the glow mode plasma of the chromosphere indicate the presence of electric current ?

Michael Mozina:

They were certainly driven by charge in Birkeland's working simulation.

The charge in Birkelands simulation and also in the Saphire project has been supplied by external mechanically connected voltages.
Our sun is not so charged. So, I would say the results would be perhaps similar, but different.

the sun does indeed emit "cathode rays"/"electron beams" that stream away from the sun.

If you refer to the solar wind, which mostly flows away from the sun; I basically think it is a feedback, or overflow, current going back to the heliopause.

Jack

[Michael Mozina]

Michael Mozina:

They were certainly driven by charge in Birkeland's working simulation.

The charge in Birkelands simulation and also in the Saphire project has been supplied by external mechanically connected voltages.
Our sun is not so charged. So, I would say the results would be perhaps similar, but different.

Different perhaps, but with a lot of similarity in terms of particle flow movements over time.

According to Alfven, all suns are effectively "wired together" in some way. Birkeland treated the sun as it's own generator however and even the mainstream assumes that the sun tends to do some amount of mass separation which creates a surface that is high in electron content if only due to convection.

the sun does indeed emit "cathode rays"/"electron beams" that stream away from the sun.

If you refer to the solar wind, which mostly flows away from the sun; I basically think it is a feedback, or overflow, current going back to the heliopause.

Jack

Actually, no "strahl" electrons (beams) travel faster than the surrounding solar wind, and cosmic ray bombard the whole solar system at the speed of light.

[paladin17]

They were certainly driven by charge in Birkeland's working simulation. What however if it's ultimately also "driven" (at least partially a reaction to anyway) by the cosmic rays that constantly bombard our solar system at nearly the speed of light, which are *overwhelmingly* positively charged, and in some case with extreme amounts of kinetic energy contained in a single particle? Does it really have to be an either or proposition?

Not quite. They were driven by external energy source, not by electrostatic charge.

According to Alfven, there should be current flow pattern that allow our sun to share it's circuit energy with the other suns, so it may not be uniform in every direction. In fact we know that it's not.

As far as I know, Alfven's model does not include other stars in the solar circuit. It's just the current sheet in one direction and polar currents in the other.

I think the most obvious "evidence" of electrical current in our solar system is staring solar physicists in the face in the form of 'coronal loops' that form all along the surface of the sun. As our satellites take ever improving images of the sun, we see that the solar atmosphere is *filled* with coronal loops both large and small that transfer electrical current from one area of the surface to the other.

My general comment made above applies to these as well. Coronal loops (as well as prominences, for example) are an electrodynamic feature, not electrostatic. The potential difference there arises due to the differential rotation of solar plasma in the solar magnetic field, not due to electrostatic charges.

They have no explanation for cathode rays (strahl) coming from the sun, although Birkeland correctly 'predicted" it with his cathode model.

I'm not sure he had any model of how these rays are produced. He certainly postulated that they are, but did he describe the mechanism?

If the photosphere plasma of the sun does measurable work (heat and light),
and, if the sun is externally powered,
wouldn't the chromospher double layer plasma need to be a current carrying, Double Layer
to supply the photosphere with power ?

If.

Also, doesn't the glow mode plasma of the chromosphere indicate the presence of electric current ?

There are currents between different latitudes on the Sun - nobody denies that. The Sun is magnetized and it rotates, hence there is a radial (with respect to the solar axis) electric field.

[Michael Mozina]

Not quite. They were driven by external energy source, not by electrostatic charge.

In Birkeland's model the sun itself would have an internal energy source, specifically what he called a "transmutation of elements". I'd imagine he'd embrace fusion today although his early writing would tend to suggest a fission oriented model.

As far as I know, Alfven's model does not include other stars in the solar circuit. It's just the current sheet in one direction and polar currents in the other.

Well, any excess current would have to connect to, and go somewhere, and they all ultimately would have to connect with the current flowing through the core of the galaxy.

My general comment made above applies to these as well. Coronal loops (as well as prominences, for example) are an electrodynamic feature, not electrostatic. The potential difference there arises due to the differential rotation of solar plasma in the solar magnetic field, not due to electrostatic charges.

True, but they are fundamentally driven by (sustained) electric fields, not "magnetic reconnection". The fact the mainstream refuses to "see" the obvious and continuous flow of current through a "magnetic rope" is simply mind boggling. It's obviously and fundamentally an electrically driven process and the resistance to the current is heat source of coronal loops.

I'm not sure he had any model of how these rays are produced. He certainly postulated that they are, but did he describe the mechanism?

He suggested that the sun was internally powered by "transmutation of elements". I'd guess from his various comments that he assumed it a was a fission oriented process, although I think he'd be more likely to embrace fusion today.

https://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/Birk ... keland.pdf

[paladin17]

Well, any excess current would have to connect to, and go somewhere, and they all ultimately would have to connect with the current flowing through the core of the galaxy.

No, Alfven's model of heliospheric circuit does not involve the Galaxy. It's just the Sun, heliospheric current sheet and polar currents. It's a closed loop.

[Michael Mozina]

Well, any excess current would have to connect to, and go somewhere, and they all ultimately would have to connect with the current flowing through the core of the galaxy.

No, Alfven's model of heliospheric circuit does not involve the Galaxy. It's just the Sun, heliospheric current sheet and polar currents. It's a closed loop.

If you think about it however, it would be physically impossible for it to be a completely closed loop, particularly since the universe is bombarding our solar system with positively charged particles that travel at nearly the speed of light.

[paladin17]

If you think about it however, it would be physically impossible for it to be a completely closed loop, particularly since the universe is bombarding our solar system with positively charged particles that travel at nearly the speed of light.

If you so desire, you might assume there is a reverse current at the heliospheric boundary that compensates for that. This current is small anyways - only some kA, i.e. 6 orders of magnitude weaker than the one in the solar circuit itself.

[Michael Mozina]

If you think about it however, it would be physically impossible for it to be a completely closed loop, particularly since the universe is bombarding our solar system with positively charged particles that travel at nearly the speed of light.

If you so desire, you might assume there is a reverse current at the heliospheric boundary that compensates for that. This current is small anyways - only some kA, i.e. 6 orders of magnitude weaker than the one in the solar circuit itself.

The issue ultimately comes back to whether or not a sun is a "net producer" of electrical current, in which case it has an excess of current to share with the rest of the circuity in space.

Birkeland *certainly* assumed the sun was a net producer of electrical current which physically interacts with a "net positively" charged "space" (cosmic rays).

I'm not sure how they'd all tie together except it does appear to be related to Birkeland currents in space, both large and small. The largest ones seem to able to measure involve 10^18 amps of current flowing through "jets" at the centers of galaxies.

[paladin17]

I'm not sure how they'd all tie together except it does appear to be related to Birkeland currents in space, both large and small. The largest ones seem to able to measure involve 10^18 amps of current flowing through "jets" at the centers of galaxies.

The galactic circuit proposed by Alfven and promoted by Peratt is analogous to solar one. And it indeed has such currents.

[Michael Mozina]

I'm not sure how they'd all tie together except it does appear to be related to Birkeland currents in space, both large and small. The largest ones seem to able to measure involve 10^18 amps of current flowing through "jets" at the centers of galaxies.

The galactic circuit proposed by Alfven and promoted by Peratt is analogous to solar one. And it indeed has such currents.

Essentially a galaxy is a few hundred homopolar generators sitting inside of a much more massive homopolar generator.

[antosarai]

Essentially a galaxy is a few hundred homopolar generators sitting inside of a much more massive homopolar generator.

Could anyone be able to delineate such circuit(s), characterize elements, conections, regulations and regulators, establish translations to termodynamic equations

Necessary and sufficient first steps for a true physics Theory of Universe Electrical

[Michael Mozina]

Essentially a galaxy is a few hundred homopolar generators sitting inside of a much more massive homopolar generator.

Could anyone be able to delineate such circuit(s), characterize elements, conections, regulations and regulators, establish translations to termodynamic equations

Necessary and sufficient first steps for a true physics Theory of Universe Electrical

Obviously my quote should have been "a galaxy is a few hundred *billion* homopolar generators....".

Alfven explained the application of 'circuit theory' to plasma in every high energy event from magnetosphere activity, to solar flares, to galaxies. Peratt took it to the next level by creating computer simulations.

I would say the necessary and sufficient "first steps" for a true physics "theory" of an electric universe is understanding even the *basics* of electrical activity in space, and the basics of the application of circuit theory to plasma. Since the mainstream isn't willing to even "go there", and take even the most rudimentary steps toward understanding the role of electricity in space, it's almost impossible to go the the next level and discuss the role of resistance in heating plasma inside of coronal loops for example.