IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 24th November 2022, 01:29 AM   #3121
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Well, there is no radial electric field, so ....

Thermal energy only to accelerate ions and electrons to the same speed and tempreture then?


Nothing about plasma moving across magnetic fields giving rise to electric fields?

I do see NASA (Experts?) update their Sun page from
Quote:
The sun is a star, a hot ball of glowing gases at the heart of our solar system. Its influence extends far beyond the orbits of distant Neptune and Pluto.
to
Quote:
The Sun — our closest star — is made of super-hot ionized gas called plasma. The Sun's surface and atmosphere change constantly, driven by the magnetic forces generated by this churning plasma.

driven by the magnetic forces generated by this churning plasma. but not electric fields?

Maybe not radial in the electrostatic pith ball type model but most definatly electric fileds involved in the solar current sheet the comet moves thru.

Again, nice confabulation using semantics.

Quote:
We show that: 1) both the axial and azimuthal magnetic and current density components cyclically reverse their directions with radial distance from the central axis of the current; 2) the magnetic field extends farther from the central axis within a force-free field than it would if produced by a current in a long straight conductor. The total magnetic field magnitude and current density are shown to vary
inversely as the square root of r. For large r, outside the plasma, the azimuthal magnetic field is shown to vary as 1/r. These results are shown to be consistent with laboratory and astronomical observations.
Don Scott


Consistant with the observation and the model proposed by J. F. Drake

Quote:
5 Discussion

We have presented simulations of interchange reconnection between open and closed flux in the low corona that reveal the formation of flux ropes that are ejected with high velocity outward in the corona (see Fig. 3). Cuts through the flux rope reveal that a strong axial magnetic field is wrapped by magnetic flux and exhibit the characteristic reversal in the radial magnetic field as documented in switchback observations in the solar wind. The flux rope model maintains the direction of the electron strahl with respect to the local magnetic field as seen in the data.
Beautiful!

__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator

Last edited by Sol88; 24th November 2022 at 01:32 AM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 01:32 AM   #3122
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,085
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
In Sol’s world calculations and measurements are “mathemajicks” and bad, but words-only contents are good. Words like “electrical”, or “plasma” are good, but “gas” or “fields strength” are bad.
Nevertheless, all papers that he seems to believe (coz them use da rite worts) are full of fricking math !
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 01:39 AM   #3123
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Nevertheless, all papers that he seems to believe (coz them use da rite worts) are full of fricking math !
Well pick Don Scotts Apart.

Where is the error in his calculation?

Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model

do you agree with J. F. Drake's maths?

Bit hard to cut n paste equations.

Whats the difference between the two sets of math.


Both describe the same thing?

Enjoying the holiday I hope? Was meant to travel to the Netherlands again this year but unfortunately things are turning crap. Seems the farmers are a bit upset.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 02:17 AM   #3124
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,182
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well pick Don Scotts Apart.

Where is the error in his calculation?

Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model

do you agree with J. F. Drake's maths?

Bit hard to cut n paste equations.

Whats the difference between the two sets of math.


Both describe the same thing?

Enjoying the holiday I hope? Was meant to travel to the Netherlands again this year but unfortunately things are turning crap. Seems the farmers are a bit upset.
Why the hell should anybody take the trouble to explain things to you? You won't understand the explanations, and you won't care. You will just continue to pick interesting words and post them in some random order.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 08:13 AM   #3125
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,620
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Thermal energy only to accelerate ions and electrons to the same speed and tempreture then?
If ions and electrons are at the same temperature, they will NOT be at the same velocity.

This is really basic physics, and you continue to fail at it.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 08:53 AM   #3126
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,642
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well pick Don Scotts Apart.
J F Drake et al. kinda did that in their abstract.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
do you agree with J. F. Drake's maths?

Looking only at the abstract, I think I'm already seeing a fundamental disagreement between Donald Scott and J F Drake. With my highlighting:

Originally Posted by J F Drake et al.
The structure of magnetic flux ropes injected into the solar wind during reconnection in the coronal atmosphere is explored with particle-in-cell simulations and compared with in situ measurements of magnetic “switchbacks” from the Parker Solar Probe. We suggest that multi-x-line reconnection between open and closed flux in the corona injects flux ropes into the solar wind and that these flux ropes convect outward over long distances before eroding due to reconnection. Simulations that explore the magnetic structure of flux ropes in the solar wind reproduce the following key features of the switchback observations: a rapid rotation of the radial magnetic field into the transverse direction, which is a consequence of reconnection with a strong guide field; and the potential to reverse the radial field component. The potential implication of the injection of large numbers of flux ropes in the coronal atmosphere for understanding the generation of the solar wind is discussed.

Isn't Donald Scott one of the EU folks who denies the very existence of magnetic reconnection?
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 03:24 PM   #3127
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If ions and electrons are at the same temperature, they will NOT be at the same velocity.

This is really basic physics, and you continue to fail at it.
Then why use it for “magnetic reconnection”?

See below…
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 03:25 PM   #3128
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
J F Drake et al. kinda did that in their abstract.




Looking only at the abstract, I think I'm already seeing a fundamental disagreement between Donald Scott and J F Drake. With my highlighting:




Isn't Donald Scott one of the EU folks who denies the very existence of magnetic reconnection?
Of course that’s what you’d think…it’s what your incorrect model tells you.

Snappy field lines…



Children might believe it but then I’m not sure if you understood the words, not the math they used, to prove to field lines snap and release energy but the understanding of the model of magnetic reconnection?

Tusenfem, I think, was pretty clued up on the topic.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator

Last edited by Sol88; 24th November 2022 at 03:36 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 03:51 PM   #3129
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Quote:
Magnetic Reconnection

When the magnetic field lines on the sun snap apart and violently reconnect, they can release enormous amounts of energy that trigger geomagnetic storms. Those storms can disrupt cell phone service, damage satellites and blackout power grids. But how this process, known as magnetic reconnection, transforms magnetic energy into explosive particle energy remains a major unsolved problem in plasma astrophysics that PPPL scientists are addressing.
. https://www.pppl.gov/research/plasma-science-and-technology

Yes, ziggurat? It’s how it’s understood to work, so I’ve read.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 05:23 PM   #3130
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,620
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Then why use it for “magnetic reconnection”?

See below…
What the hell are you talking about? I can't see anything there about electrons and ions having both the same temperature and the same velocity.

And you are talking about thermal velocities, are you not? Do you not know how thermal velocity relates to temperature? Are you unaware of the roll mass plays in that relationship?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 08:16 PM   #3131
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
What the hell are you talking about? I can't see anything there about electrons and ions having both the same temperature and the same velocity.

And you are talking about thermal velocities, are you not? Do you not know how thermal velocity relates to temperature? Are you unaware of the roll mass plays in that relationship?
I'm talking your standard snappy magnetic field line explanation, the one the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE mobs indeed says is a load of fish heads left in a bucket in the sun.

The problem is your model, it failed. It's not the EU's fault you've used the wrong model.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 09:53 PM   #3132
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,620
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I'm talking your standard snappy magnetic field line explanation, the one the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE mobs indeed says is a load of fish heads left in a bucket in the sun.
Why do I care what they say? They don't know what they are talking about, and have not formed a coherent objection.

And YOU made a claim about temperature and velocity. That claim was wrong.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 10:49 PM   #3133
lauwenmark
Scholar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
You never come up with a why, except some vague mathamagicians drivel plugged into an incorrect model, you don’t believe your lying eyes?
The purpose of science is not to find a 'why'. It isn't meant to find a purpose in the universe. Its goal is to answer 'how' - that is, how the universe is working.
'Why' is actually a question of faith and religion.

So, you are finally admitting that you are interested in faith and not science?

And scientists don't blindly believe 'their lying eyes', because they can be so easily fooled, and don't provide enough data to measure most things.

But your theories never ever measured anything, right?

And even if we believe in what we see, that's only the first step of science: observation. Then comes the main challenge: explaining what we saw, and provide ways that could be used to evaluate, quantify, predict.

But your theories never ever predicted or quantified anything, right?

Tell me, what makes your theories different from a religious cult?
lauwenmark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 10:53 PM   #3134
lauwenmark
Scholar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 99
Oh, yeah, and still no answer to those, Sol? Trying to make them forgotten? Are you so embarrassed to admit you cannot answer them?

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
1) What ARE "mainstream electric universe ideas"?

2) How do they differ from the current paradigm?

3) What observations do they explain better than the current paradigm?

4) What evidence exists to support them?

If you can't provide sensible and relevant answers for this, there is nothing to discuss.

Hans
lauwenmark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:19 AM   #3135
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by lauwenmark View Post
The purpose of science is not to find a 'why'. It isn't meant to find a purpose in the universe. Its goal is to answer 'how' - that is, how the universe is working.
'Why' is actually a question of faith and religion.
Confabulation!

The "why" is why is Don Scotts MATH wrong?

Not enough snapping filed lines of magnets? magnetic reconnection as peddled here is a BUST!

Is there are problem with the mathematical solution the Don Scott, Why? not how but why.

Quote:
The fundamental vector calculus definition of a force-free, field-aligned current in space is expanded in cylindrical coordinates to directly obtain the Bessel partial differential equation that specifies the magnetic field created by such a current. This result is often called the Lundquist solution. A simple but detailed derivation is included here.
Flux Tubes, FAC's, Birekland Currents, magnetic flux ropes... all are electric currents.

The Universe is full of electric fields driving electric currents completing electric curcuits, you know the ELECTRIC Universe stuff.

https://phys.org/news/2022-11-rocket...it-powers.html
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:44 AM   #3136
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Stand down mystery solved...its all electric!

Solving a Plasma Physics Mystery: Magnetic Reconnection

Quote:
Magnetic reconnection is a process that occurs nearly anywhere there's plasma. The fourth state of matter, plasma, is gas made up of unbound ions and electrons. As plasma makes up the stars and 99 percent of the visible universe, magnetic reconnection is quite common. However, it is poorly understood. Scientists at universities, research institutes, the Department of Energy Office of Science's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL), and NASA are coming close to mapping the process of magnetic reconnection. With the help of modeling, experimental, and observational data, they think their most recent theory may provide the definitive map to guide scientists through this fundamental phenomenon.
Oh..PLASMA!

ok, keep going, seem important
Quote:
Magnetic reconnection is one of the most important phenomenon throughout the whole universe," said Jim Burch, Vice President of the Southwest Research Institute and principal investigator of NASA's Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission.
Quote:
At first, scientists assumed they could explain magnetic reconnection using the standard theory that explains how fluids affected by magnetic fields behave. That didn't work. When scientists used this theory to calculate how quickly a solar flare develops, the answer was a million years. In reality, solar flares develop in only a few minutes.
Listnen up, mob here comes the oompf!

Quote:
But Did It Work?
This back-and-forth led to a new theory: two-fluid reconnection. Unlike previous theories, it modeled electrons and ions like two fluids that move separately from one other.
further

Quote:
But two-fluid theory still had a hole. The theory explains reconnection in small and medium plasmas but doesn't explain how reconnection happens in very large plasmas that have few interactions between their particles. As these plasmas make up much of the universe, it was a big gap
Enter the Plasmoid

Talk about cumm'n tusenfem you 'ol dog, ay!


Quote:
In 2007, Nuno Loureiro, then a postdoctoral researcher at PPPL and a participant of the DOE Center for Multiscale Plasma Dynamics at the University of Maryland, developed what might be the final piece of the map. It was a new theory that became known as the plasmoid instability. It connects the Sweet-Parker and two-fluid models into a single theory. Later work at PPPL has expanded on his initial idea.

Like Sweet-Parker, the plasmoid instability model starts with a stretched-out, thin sheet of electrical current with an accompanying magnetic field. Like the two-fluid model, it assumes the electrons and ions that flow along the magnetic field lines break away at different times.

What makes this model different is that it is based on the fact that the sheets of electrical current are extremely unstable. As the sheets stretch, they break and form new ones, each thinner than the original. As these sheets separate, chains of magnetic bubbles (plasmoids) form between them. While previous theories had described these bubbles, no one had provided a good explanation of how and why they form.

The theory proposes that as more bubbles form and sheets break up, the magnetic lines crash into each other and break. The lines disconnect from the ions first, then the electrons. The breaking feeds magnetic energy into the particles, heating them up and accelerating them. As time goes on, the whole process becomes faster and faster. It creates a runaway effect — fast reconnection.

Unlike Sweet-Parker, this model provides the "oomph" to give fast reconnection its speed. Unlike the two-fluid theory, it illustrates why and how the process starts after that initial sheet of strong electric current forms.

So, not snapping field lines but electric currents, plasmoids
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:48 AM   #3137
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Instability of current sheets and formation of plasmoid chains

You'll have to give ma bit to brush up on new theory that is the plasmoid instability.

Snappy filed lines....ooooh boy that was a doozie.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 02:11 AM   #3138
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
Sounds a lot like your turbulent cascade dissipation of energy, tusenfem, that you wrote some time with regard to current sheets n what not.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 03:00 AM   #3139
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,865
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Sounds a lot like your turbulent cascade dissipation of energy, tusenfem, that you wrote some time with regard to current sheets n what not.
Similar mathematically, or if you do a keyword search?
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 03:17 AM   #3140
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,853
As described.

Could dig out. Better to ask the super duper space plasma physicist that modeled it.

Knows it better than me.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 04:05 AM   #3141
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,865
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
As described.

Could dig out. Better to ask the super duper space plasma physicist that modeled it.

Knows it better than me.
You want me to ask the writer of this paper why Sol88 thinks it sounds similar to what tusanfem wrote 'with regard to current sheets n what not'?

How would they know why you think it's similar?
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 04:41 AM   #3142
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,085
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Nothing about plasma moving across magnetic fields giving rise to electric fields?
why would that give rise to electric fields?

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I do see NASA (Experts?) update their Sun page from to
We do not see you update your knowledge.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
driven by the magnetic forces generated by this churning plasma. but not electric fields?
Why not first try to understand how the solar dynamo works?

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Maybe not radial in the electrostatic pith ball type model but most definatly electric fileds involved in the solar current sheet the comet moves thru.
Really, Scott shows that? He just copy-pasted introductory space plasma physics and makes his readers believe it's all his idea.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Again, nice confabulation using semantics.
There is nothing new new in Scott's "paper", and he did not discover the solar wind sectors, heck there is not even data in his paper.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 05:30 AM   #3143
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,085
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Sounds a lot like your turbulent cascade dissipation of energy, tusenfem, that you wrote some time with regard to current sheets n what not.
Fresh-up my memory.
This is supposed to link to the Loureiro et al. paper? (djeez! so much mathamajics in it.)
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.