How exactly did you show his analysis of coronal loops to be "incorrect". Be specific.
I did not show it to be incorrect, I said that it did not describe a flare. If you would please look at Michael Raadu's monograph (which I am sure you have) at the figure I mentioned, you see that Alfvén's model is the release of the circuit energy (most likely through a double layer) and does not include the ejection of part of the loop into interplanetary space.
So according to Alfven, the base of the loops would be emitting photons due to current flow. Do you agree with that assessment? He also stated that the loops would come from under the photosphere and have current flowing through them *UNDER* the photosphere. Do you agree or disagree? Have you looked at the DVD images I have cited that show these loops coming up through the photosphere?
According to mainstream the base of the loops light up too, because of the high energy electrons in the loops, they are very present in X-rays because of bremsstrahlung.
As the currents cannot just disappear, they have to flow somehow below the photosphere. I have no idea where this agree/disagree stuff comes from, not from my discussion of Alfven's work, which was only discussing that he discusses a different process that may or may not occur on the Sun (I personally have always had some difficulty with the magnetic field unwinding in the double layer at the "top" of the loop, see Raadu).
That is absolutely false. There can be no "frozen" plasma in an environment that is composed entirely of light plasma and where coronal loops are current carrying plasma filaments. How do you get "frozen" anything in a environment that is composed of moving particles that cruise through the whole atmosphere at over a million miles per hour?
Djezus frakking klyst! Can't you READ!?!?!??!!?!?!?!?!?
Was I talking about the sun? NO, I was talking in general terms. The EU community just throws out the frozen-in condition, because Alfven said it was wrong. I say, it is not wrong, you have to know when you can or cannot applie frozen-in condition. It was probably to subtile for you to understand.
And from your comment "how do you get frozen-in" shows that you have not got the foggiest what the "frozen-in" condition is. Could you write it down for us please? And where does this rediculous million miles per hour come from? I guess from the solar wind or something, and that is
exactly where current papers have discussed, using measurments, when the frozen-in condition holds and when not.
Actually he's very clear about where the has merit (like dense plasma), vs. the places it does not apply like the light, current carrying plasma we find in the solar atmosphere.
What the heck is a "light" plasma, that term does not even have a physical definition (yeah I know a plasma with less density then a heavy plasma, gimme a break!)
And actually, in a "light" plasma it would be
easier to have frozen in field, because there the conductivity with be much much higher then for a "heavy" plasma, but I doubt that will get across to you, as you don't know what the frozen-in condition actually is, like so many other plasmaphysical processes you don't understand.
The current is consistently responsible for those million degree coronal loops. That "pinch" and these emissions are a direct result of the currents that flow through the loop.
This is just random ranting, which does not have
anything to do with what I commented on. You were talking about a "current carrying Bennet pinch" and I explained that that specification "current carrying" does not make sense, as without a current a Bennet pinch cannot happen. I did not say it did not happen, and in a pinch the heating of plasma is possible yes. I have no idea what exactly you are complaining about here, apart from the fact that you just want to complain, when I made a valid point.
At the point of "short circuit" (not magnetic reconnection) the TOTAL circuit energy determines the amount of energy released at the point of the short circuit. It is not driven by "magnetic reconnection" because the magnetic field drops to zero at a null point and the magnetic field has absolutely no energy whatsoever at a null point. The only thing that could or would release high energy particles at a any short circuit point in the loop the *CURRENT FLOW* that is running through those filaments.
I was not talking about magnetic reconnection, you might have noticed, I was just complaining about the ill-defined term "total circuit energy" (which again you did not define here, but anywhooooooo).
The fact that I was talking about magnetic tension is because in the loop the magnetic field lines are ... looping, and thus there is magnetic tension (even in Alfven's theories there is magnetic tension) and I was just saying that that probably does not get into the calculation of the "circuit energy." That was all, nothing more nothing less.
Next to your misunderstanding of reconnection, there is indeed a small region which is a null point, but then in a much much larger region there are bent field lines, which have tension, but that is all besides the point that I was discussing.
So please go to the
Raadu monograph and look at the difference between the Alfven & Carlqvist model for energy release and e.g. the Kaastra model for energy release. It is two very different processes.
.
