Problems With Magnetic Reconnection

michaelsuede

Graduate Poster
michaelsuede
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
1,565
I shall, in this article, attempt to illuminate the problems with current magnetic reconnection theory. In order to do that, I will first have to try and describe in layman’s terms just what the standard theory says occurs when magnetic reconnection takes place. The scientific press has been rather mute in portraying the problems with this theory.

For those of you who are totally unfamiliar with the topic, magnetic reconnection is claimed to account for sudden releases of kinetic energy within a field of plasma. Scientists presume these sudden releases of energy are caused by “reconnecting” magnetic field lines. This topic is vitally important in modern cosmology because “reconnection” plays a role in explanations of practically everything we observe in space. Magnetic reconnection is observed to occur on the Sun, in the auroras, in neutron stars, in comets, and practically every other place that matter in a plasma state exists.

Edited by kmortis: 
The rest is found here
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tl; dr. Let's skip the bluffing and go straight to the "tells".

In reality, such explanations are totally meaningless. It is meaningless to assert that a field line that was at A is now at B, because there is no way to identify or distinguish one magnetic field line from another in a vector continuum.
Click to expand...

Sure there is. Pick a unique point in space. Measure the B field direction. Take a differential step in that direction. Measure the B field direction, take another step. Etc. That traces out a line. This is the definition of a magnetic field line, it's perfectly clear, it ignores E fields by definition.

In any case, it doesn't matter. The "lines" aren't causing anything. Ions and electrons don't care where lines are, they care about local field vectors. If you want to talk about reconnection scenarios purely in terms of the fields, and never mentioning lines, you can do that---the physics is the same, you're just hobbling your ability to describe it to humans.

Since a magnetic field is an infinite continuum, there can be no splitting and reconnecting of field lines. In order for a field line (which is a mathematical construct used to describe the location of a magnetic field) to “reconnect” it would first have to be spliced in half.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. The line "crossing" happens at saddle points, i.e. at places where B=0, where it is perfectly reasonable, indeed necessary, for lines to meet. It does not require a monopole or any Maxwell's Equation violation. Examples are trivial to construct: quadrupole fields like {Bx,By} = {y, x} have "crossing" lines.

Let me give some advice.

  • If you want to make an informed critique of the CIA, don't give in to the urge to blame them for filling the WTC with thermite.
  • If you want to present your ideas for a non-dark-matter cosmology, don't give in to the urge to mention that the Twin Paradox proved Einstein is wrong.
  • If you want to tell the world about your new algorithms for SETI, resist the urge to mention (no matter how excited you are) the inexplicable Face On Mars, the alien-tech Pyramids of Giza, and the Cydonia civilization.
  • If you have a coherent theory of heating in the solar corona, don't append the stupid plasma-cosmology shibboleth that magnetic field lines don't exist and/or cannot cross
 
ben m said:
  • If you want to make an informed critique of the CIA, don't give in to the urge to blame them for filling the WTC with thermite.
  • If you want to present your ideas for a non-dark-matter cosmology, don't give in to the urge to mention that the Twin Paradox proved Einstein is wrong.
  • If you want to tell the world about your new algorithms for SETI, resist the urge to mention (no matter how excited you are) the inexplicable Face On Mars, the alien-tech Pyramids of Giza, and the Cydonia civilization.
  • If you have a coherent theory of heating in the solar corona, don't append the stupid plasma-cosmology shibboleth that magnetic field lines don't exist and/or cannot cross
Click to expand...

Did you come up with this list before visiting his site? Prescient. However, you forgot the whole global warming is a conspiracy thing.
 
ben m said:
tl; dr. Let's skip the bluffing and go straight to the "tells".



Sure there is. Pick a unique point in space. Measure the B field direction. Take a differential step in that direction. Measure the B field direction, take another step. Etc. That traces out a line. This is the definition of a magnetic field line, it's perfectly clear, it ignores E fields by definition.

In any case, it doesn't matter. The "lines" aren't causing anything. Ions and electrons don't care where lines are, they care about local field vectors. If you want to talk about reconnection scenarios purely in terms of the fields, and never mentioning lines, you can do that---the physics is the same, you're just hobbling your ability to describe it to humans.



Wrong again. The line "crossing" happens at saddle points, i.e. at places where B=0, where it is perfectly reasonable, indeed necessary, for lines to meet. It does not require a monopole or any Maxwell's Equation violation. Examples are trivial to construct: quadrupole fields like {Bx,By} = {y, x} have "crossing" lines.

Let me give some advice.

  • If you want to make an informed critique of the CIA, don't give in to the urge to blame them for filling the WTC with thermite.
  • If you want to present your ideas for a non-dark-matter cosmology, don't give in to the urge to mention that the Twin Paradox proved Einstein is wrong.
  • If you want to tell the world about your new algorithms for SETI, resist the urge to mention (no matter how excited you are) the inexplicable Face On Mars, the alien-tech Pyramids of Giza, and the Cydonia civilization.
  • If you have a coherent theory of heating in the solar corona, don't append the stupid plasma-cosmology shibboleth that magnetic field lines don't exist and/or cannot cross
Click to expand...

Throwing out a list of random stuff that has nothing to do with the topic does nothing to diminish the points made in my article.

1. MHD can not describe the double layer condition, which we know must exist between two differing plasma fields.

2. Magnetic reconnection theory does not incorporate a double layer, which we know must exist between two differing plasma fields.

3. Magnetic null points are an artifact of how MHD treats the plasma. As was stated, this treatment is wrong on several levels. Given that an intense electric field is generated along the boundary of two differing plasmas, there is no way that a magnetic null point can form.
 
dafydd said:
Haven't we been through all this before?
Click to expand...

Not with me you haven't.

I'm specifically looking for an explanation as to why two differing plasma fields should not have a double layer boundary.

The lack of such a boundary is required for MHD models have any validity at all.

Astrophysicists are basically denying that double layers exist between differing plasmas by ignoring them.

Either circuit theory is wrong and there is no such thing as a double layer, or MHD reconnection is wrong.

One or the other.

Chose which theory to mock.
 
Last edited:
michaelsuede said:
Not with me you haven't.

I'm specifically looking for an explanation as to why two differing plasma fields should not have a double layer boundary.

The lack of such a boundary is required for MHD models have any validity at all.

Astrophysicists are basically denying that double layers exist between differing plasmas by ignoring them.

Either circuit theory is wrong and there is no such thing as a double layer, or MHD reconnection is wrong.

One or the other.

Chose which theory to mock.
Click to expand...

And you make this point by making points about magnetic reconnection that are wrong... interesting tactic.
 
Tubbythin said:
And you make this point by making points about magnetic reconnection that are wrong... interesting tactic.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything wrong.

When a plasma is moving, taking snap shots of the B field and integrating it across time and space while ignoring the parallel electric field, which by necessity is not zero, is meaningless.

Fälthammar explains:
http://plasma.colorado.edu/phys7810/articles/Falthammar_MovingFieldLines_2007.pdf

It's a totally pointless exercise used to hide what is really going on.
 
Last edited:
michaelsuede said:
I didn't say anything wrong.

When a plasma is moving, taking snap shots of the B field and integrating it across time and space while ignoring the parallel electric field, which by necessity is not zero, is meaningless.

Fälthammar explains:
http://plasma.colorado.edu/phys7810/articles/Falthammar_MovingFieldLines_2007.pdf

It's a totally pointless exercise used to hide what is really going on.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should respond to Ben's points then, rather than pretending they're irrelevant.
 
ben m said:
Wrong again. The line "crossing" happens at saddle points, i.e. at places where B=0, where it is perfectly reasonable, indeed necessary, for lines to meet. It does not require a monopole or any Maxwell's Equation violation. Examples are trivial to construct: quadrupole fields like {Bx,By} = {y, x} have "crossing" lines.
Click to expand...

Indeed. In fact, we can produce reconnection with only a slight modification. If you use the field

{Bx,By} = {b*y, a*x}

then when you change the ratio a/b, you will reconnect points, as shown below:

1192499b6711ad5d6.gif


So the math clearly works. One may dislike the terminology all one wants to, but that's irrelevant. The term is well-defined, and actual magnetic fields which satisfy Maxwell's equations (you can check) fit the description.
 
Ziggurat said:
Indeed. In fact, we can produce reconnection with only a slight modification. If you use the field

{Bx,By} = {b*y, a*x}

then when you change the ratio a/b, you will reconnect points, as shown below:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/1192499b6711ad5d6.gif[/qimg]

So the math clearly works. One may dislike the terminology all one wants to, but that's irrelevant. The term is well-defined, and actual magnetic fields which satisfy Maxwell's equations (you can check) fit the description.
Click to expand...

B is an infinite vector field.

Therefore for a magnetic null point to exist, the field would have to produce a null point singularity.

Impossible.
 
michaelsuede said:
I didn't say anything wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did. Your article is wrong.

"In reality, such explanations are totally meaningless. It is meaningless to assert that a field line that was at A is now at B, because there is no way to identify or distinguish one magnetic field line from another in a vector continuum that is moving."

False.

" The only way that the integration even comes close to being valid is when the parallel electric field (the electric field component parallel to the magnetic field line) is zero. This condition is not satisfied in standing theories of magnetic reconnection."

False.

"Since a magnetic field is an infinite continuum, there can be no splitting and reconnecting of field lines."

False.

"In order for a field line (which is a mathematical construct used to describe the location of a magnetic field) to “reconnect” it would first have to be spliced in half. This splicing creates what is tantamount to a magnetic monopole, which we know do not exist."

False.

"It is impossible for a magnetic field line to ever have an end-point. It is no more possible for a field line to have an end point than a contour line on a topographical map to have an end point."

Contour lines on a map of a changing landscape can reconnect for exactly the same reason magnetic field lines can - at a point where the gradient is zero.
 
sol invictus said:
Yes, you did. Your article is wrong.

"In reality, such explanations are totally meaningless. It is meaningless to assert that a field line that was at A is now at B, because there is no way to identify or distinguish one magnetic field line from another in a vector continuum that is moving."

False.

" The only way that the integration even comes close to being valid is when the parallel electric field (the electric field component parallel to the magnetic field line) is zero. This condition is not satisfied in standing theories of magnetic reconnection."

False.

"Since a magnetic field is an infinite continuum, there can be no splitting and reconnecting of field lines."

False.

"In order for a field line (which is a mathematical construct used to describe the location of a magnetic field) to “reconnect” it would first have to be spliced in half. This splicing creates what is tantamount to a magnetic monopole, which we know do not exist."

False.

"It is impossible for a magnetic field line to ever have an end-point. It is no more possible for a field line to have an end point than a contour line on a topographical map to have an end point."

Contour lines on a map of a changing landscape can reconnect for exactly the same reason magnetic field lines can - at a point where the gradient is zero.
Click to expand...


Great points you made there.

Now tell me why there is no double layer at the boundary of differing plasmas.
 
michaelsuede said:
B is an infinite vector field.

Therefore for a magnetic null point to exist, the field would have to produce a null point singularity.
Click to expand...

Gibberish. Zig just gave you an example of a B-field that reconnects. It's right there in black and white (or whatever colors you have your display set to).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom