Originally posted by ngchunter
If the wind is slower in some regions and the sun is polar, why doesn't the sun attract electrons out of the solar wind, thereby reducing their ratio
to protons in the wind?
well electron halo shows depletion due to that very point as seen by Ulysses. The general electron density increases towards the Sun I believe.
The solar wind is quasi neutral but constitutes a small net charge.
Additionally, it should accelerate protons away from itself to be faster than the electrons that do escape. Why don't we see this? We don't even
need to be able to see "slow drift" electrons to see that slightly faster electrons aren't being affected by anything.
Fellow pc'ers can correct me on this but, the solar plasma like any other will organize itself into filaments, the transmission lines. The streams of
protons accelerated in the electric field would drag local electrons along for the ride, neutralize some that could then go either way, but their
direction would be a result of their charge, This is the quasi neutral state that has been observed.
It makes for a weak but immense electric field. This weak field is responsible for the drift. As Dr Scott says electrons measured in a current
carrying copper wire is in the cm/hr.
Zuezz explains this better a few pages back I believe.
We know all the electrons are not being accelerated away because the sun maintains a electron halo, solar scientists presume from backscattered back
streaming electrons this makes sense as it completes circuits with the other interplanetary bodies. The article describes the usual two types of
suprathermal electrons that of the strahl and that of the halo. so despite what your trying to say, which I think I understand, electrons do travel
against the solar wind. Have a good read of that link above, also see the "waving good buy" article for another example of electron beam entering
From what I understand of the plasma glow discharge model this is accurate and from all the other observations the slow drift is highly likely and may
be responsible for the depletion. If you look at just the data in the above link, and not the basic flaw of magnetic field lines without mentioning
the electric currents that MUST be creating them.
It appears to me this may be a part of the missing piece but more data is needed. This is not the official view I think, but my own.
Additionally, just what makes you think that slower electrons stand a chance going upstream in the solar wind for millions upon millions of
These observations provide strong evidence that the antisunward-directed portion of the electron halo at times results primarily from mirroring
inside 1 AU of backscattered strahl and/or heated electrons from far out in the heliosphere rather than from scattering out of the strahl inside 1
There you go, they believe these electrons are coming from as far out as the sun's virtual cathode, the heliosphere. Rather than scattering off the
strahl more locally. Traveling back along field lines from other stronger magnetic forces somewhere else other than the observer!
Well I was a little wrong after all.
Once again one of the fundamental flaws in modern astronomy is so simple, one that Hannes Alfven warned about. There are no frozen in magnetic fields,
electricity and only electricity creates magnetic fields.
The 90° PA depletions on open field lines are most logically interpreted in terms of adiabatic focusing and mirroring associated with field
line connections to regions of stronger magnetic fields than at the observers location.
I think the problem is thinking of the solar wind as an actual wind, there is no wind in space, and the astronomers use mechanical bow shock mechanism
to attempt to explain a much more complex plasma process. Completely ignoring Langmuir and Alfven.
So you admit you were nitpicking with exceptions to the rule that don't even support electric universe theory? Nice.
I admit I was nitpicking, In retrospect it would make me just as guilty as the arrogance displayed by the astronomical community. So I do regret
But the observations DO support the theory despite the interpretation.
I'm fallible but the theory is extremely solid. If I make mistakes it's due to my comprehension of the theory.
Nice prominence animation by the way. I see gas rising up even as it falls back down. This is a common hedgerow prominence and it originated from
the sun to begin with.
I do see my fuel prices rising even though crude oil falls.
Yes origin the sun, not gas, plasma under the influence of magnetic fields, only electricity can create magnetic fields, no exceptions to the rule.
Nice try, next time don't try to pass off common phenomenon as evidence your theory holds an ounce of water.
First off it's not my theory, it began around a hundred years ago in essence , and second for the last time! That link had nothing to do with the
electron thing just simply to highlight the solar wind is not blasting everything away like it's name would imply, it's not wind. Sheesh.
The theory is in full support of the observations, and to a certain degree has been tested in the lab over a hundred years ago by a scientist, he was
considered a crank also, only to be vindicated over 70 years later by confirming his auroral theory based on the same basic premise. Obviously he
didn't get to see his vindication.
Then you might look at Robert E.R. Bruce, member of Royal Astronomical Society, the Institute of Physics, the Institution of Electrical Engineers, and
was a member of the Electrical Research Association.
And that of Ralph Juergens who followed his ideas.
And Hannes Alfven can't be left out.
Birkeland simulated the solar plasma torus, corona, flares, sunspots and more, I seriously doubt that is a coincidence. It's so obvious it's
Cathode rays through plasma on a magnetized globe.
Even managed to replicate some comets as well. The same rules apply, finally something cohesive that can explain what we see instead over overly
complex mathematics and obscure and invented forces. We already have most of the physics right now to better understand space. We took a horrible
wrong turn at the beginning of the 20th century and ignored scientist like Birkeland and Tesla. Both have there ideas claimed by others and haven't
received the credit they deserve.
I'm really not an A,hole all the time, I just get ticked off when valid ideas are ridiculed on the basis of extremely shaky scientific dogma.
[edit on 3-10-2008 by squiz]