Plasma, magnetic fields, and back EMF

Posted: July 19, 2010 by tallbloke in solar system dynamics

Regulars Adolfo Giurfa and Tenuc drew my attention to a chapter in a discussion paper on NASA’s website which is of great interest I think. This diagram particularly drew my attention.

FIGURE 15.3.4. – a) in a magnetic field which has a downward bend, charged particles shot parallel to the field will follow the bend. If instead a plasma beam is shot, one would expect either that it (b) produces an electric polarization so that it cam continue along a straight line, (c) follows the bend as m (a), or (d) continues to move straight forward bringing the “frozen-in”, field lines with it. (e) in the quoted experiment the plasma does not obey any of these theories; instead, the plasma bends m the opposite direction to that of the magnetic field. In hindsight, this is easily understood as being due to an electric field transmitted backward by fast electrons (Lindberg and Kristoferson, 1971.) (My emphasis)

If you have been following the line of thinking developed on my recent posts concerning the nature of the feedback from the planets to the Sun, you will appreciate why this might be important.The Sun is diffusing plasma outwards into the solar system, and the heliospheric current sheet has bends in it.The Sun is tilted over at ~7 degrees to the planetary orbital plane. I know that the solar wind interacts with the planetary magnetospheres in such a way that ‘plasmoids’ are formed in the magnetotails. Could these form turbulance in the interplanetary magnetic field behind the planets which produces a sunward electro-motive force?

I’ll confess to being out of my depth here, maybe P.G. Sharrow or others could offer to help us understand how we might see a back EMF headed sunwards from the interaction of the plasma and the magnetic fields present in interplanetary space.

Another table presented on the same NASA pag compares two approaches to understanding plasmas, one ‘classical’, the other ‘Alfvenic’:

Maybe this is a neat summation of why the ‘classical’ astophysicists and the ‘Electric Universe’ proponents had a parting of the ways? 🙂

Comments
  1. Perhaps the same Holoscience people will clarify this for us:
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/plasma-magneti-fields-and-back-emf/
    I am just writing Prof.Wallace Thornhill.

  2. Tenuc says:

    The NASA document mentioned is a mine of information about a modern understanding of plasma physics as observed in space and other solar related issues – link to document index here:-

    http://history.nasa.gov/SP-345/contents.htm

    I’m not an expert in this field, but speculate that electrostatic double layers play an important role in the delivery energy to earth and other planets via the spiralling Birkland currents and associated magnetic fields.

    These ‘connection’ events happen several times a day and perhaps when the connection drops, a large back EMF will be sent back to the sun. Not sure how the differing planetary alignments effect the size of the back EMF or how the suns dynamo(s) is/are affected?

  3. tallbloke says:

    Tenuc, I’m not sure anyone is an expert in this field. It’s wide open for people with bright ideas. Adolfo, good idea, I hope Wal replies. If we can get him interested, some progress may be made. I think he is interested in the solar system electrical field, I remember reading one of his articles about cometary tails.

  4. orkneylad says:

    Plasma Physics’ Answers to the New Cosmological Questions by Dr. Donald E. Scott 1 of 7:

  5. Ray Tomes says:

    I would also not discount standing waves between the Sun and each planet. The distances of the outer planets in return light times are multiples of 160 minutes or in Jupiter’s case 1/2 that. The period of 160 minutes is a solar oscillation period. According to Kotov (Russian astronomer) the 160 minute period also shows up as a preferred fraction and multiple of binary star period, and in galaxy nuclei. It shows up in many ways in the solar system such as the orbital time at a planetary surface tends to be a multiple of a little over 80 minutes.

    The whole solar system is ringing with these frequencies. If you look at solar x-rays and other energetic phenomena, they bursts (100 times and more increases) often at regular intervals of 160 minutes. I think these are resulting in bouncing of e/m waves between Sun and Planets.

  6. tallbloke says:

    Ray, thanks for finding a moment in your busy schedule. Yes, these harmonic frequencies are evident. How do we get a handle on what sort of energy amplitudes might be transferred by these waves from planets to the Sun though?

    Clearly, if the orbits of the planets sit on nodes of this frequency, there must have been plenty of energy going from Sun to planets in the past. Solar Physicist Leif Svalgaard says in earlier epochs, the angular momentum transferred from the Sun to the planets via the magnetic fields in the solar wind was considerable.

    My alternative way of considering how planets might affect the sun is not by directly transferring energy to it, but simply by aligning in the course of their orbits and causing the sun to stream more energy by providing a more attractive ‘grounding’ point.
    Recent work by Gray Stevens indicates that the motion of planets from perihelion to aphelion is important too, and may affect the ‘strength’ of alignments. Maybe this has something to do with the proximity of planets to the resonant frequencies which interact with the Sun’s internal frequencies at different points in their orbits.

    Thoughts?

    PS: the orbital time at a planetary surface tends to be a multiple of a little over 80 minutes.

    Do you mean the rotation period of the planets?

  7. Ulric Lyons says:

    @tallbloke says:
    July 20, 2010 at 8:21 am
    “Recent work by Gray Stevens indicates that the motion of planets from perihelion to aphelion is important too, and may affect the ‘strength’ of alignments.”

    Apart from radial positions, I pay attention to when the inner planets are on the same plane (eg transits), this does seem to intensify the syzygies or stelliums a little. This would tend to be nearer the semi-major axis and so not near apogee and perigee.

  8. tallbloke says:

    Ulric, a timely reminder that the solar system is in three dimensions. Ray did the pioneering work on the z axis which I extended with my LOD correlation. Gray also considers latitude. Since latitude and perihelia are linked, there may well be a confounding issue here.

  9. tallbloke says:
    July 20, 2010 at 10:22 am
    As professor Scott says in his disertation, the sun´s magnetic field driving “solar wind” it does not conforms like an open “mini skirt” but a closed three dimensional “skirt” with a backwards emf.
    Then, as I.Charvatova says: The results indicate that `solar dynamo’ that was long sought in the solar interior, operates more likely from the outside, by means of the varying planetary configurations
    So the famous Sun´s “timing belt”,now a bit loosen.

  10. Forgot I.Charvatova´s paper can be found here:

    Click to access charvatova.pdf

  11. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Adolofo. I’ll be putting up a post with some thoughts on the timings and modes of solar activity later tonight.

  12. DirkH says:

    Thanks for the Scott video. I found out it’s from 2009; it’s great to see that the plasma scientists keep on explaining their ideas. It would be great if we somehow could get out of this dark matter-dark energy-black hole conundrum; it’s gotten too complex to be sensible 😉

  13. tallbloke says:

    OL, I just watched the Scott video. Very interesting, thanks for that.

  14. tallbloke says:

    Dirk, someone needs to tell them: When you find yourself at the bottom of a black hole holding a Neutronium shovel, stop digging.

  15. DirkH says:

    Watched some more videos about the Electric Universe… decided to google for “cometary appearance of Venus”. Found this:

    http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf005/sf005p06.htm

    Maedler Phenomenon, an unexplained observation from 1833 by a German astronomer known for his meticulous work, and thus accepted as real.
    About Maedler:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maedler

  16. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Due to its’ 7 degree tilt to the planetary orbital plane, the sun sees the planets occupying 14 degrees of its horizon. These are seen as a load on, or in, its’ created fields. When an EMF field is created in an environment a counter EMF field is also created as a resistance to the field creation. This counter field also is the cause of the energy kickback in a primary field collapse. The energy put into the field has to go somewhere. The planets are a load or short in the EMF field of their region of space. As such the planets are tied to the suns’ EMF apron strings as surely as by the gravitational ones. This EMF load will slow down or load the suns’ EMF activities. As to the planets’ EMF creation effecting the suns’ behavior, that would be very tiny in my opinion, a bit more then none.

    All environments have a magnetic component, space is considered a “1” as it has no effect on the local count of lines of force per unit area. A “1+” that has concentration of lines of force is magnetic, and diamagnetic if the lines of force are reduced to less then “1”. If the material creates its’ own field then it is called ferromagnetic. Metals are generally magnetic more or less, although bismuth is quite diamagnetic. Water and most organics are diamagnetic.

    I don’t think you should get too tied up with electron flows as that is a local thing that is caused by EMF magnetic components acting on the local materials. No electrical current connection is needed to transfer huge amounts of energy, just EMF coupling. I hope this does not add to the confusion. pg

  17. tallbloke says:

    “No electrical current connection is needed to transfer huge amounts of energy, just EMF coupling.”

    Please expand on that PG. I know Tesla was playing with transmission of electrical energy through the air, and I know the Chinese are playing with it, but I don’t know the principles behind it.

    Post on Tesla coming up soon.

  18. Tenuc says:

    P.G. Sharrow says:
    July 21, 2010 at 6:39 am

    “…I don’t think you should get too tied up with electron flows as that is a local thing that is caused by EMF magnetic components acting on the local materials. No electrical current connection is needed to transfer huge amounts of energy, just EMF coupling…”

    Thanks for some useful thoughts,PG. However, perhaps at this stage we do not understand how the link between sun and planets works, so could be too early to write off any possible avenue to explore.

    The sun can be thought of as an electric generator consisting of a power source and one or more dynamos. If the planets are construed as the circuit load, then a sudden drop in demand, as is seen in connection events, could damage the dynamo’s power source. Perhaps the varying planetary configurations effect the likelihood or this type of event?

  19. DirkH says:

    tallbloke says:
    July 21, 2010 at 7:16 am
    ““No electrical current connection is needed to transfer huge amounts of energy, just EMF coupling.”

    Please expand on that PG. I know Tesla was playing with transmission of electrical energy through the air, and I know the Chinese are playing with it, but I don’t know the principles behind it.”

    Well, inductive coupling; resonance. What happens in a transformator, for instance. You move the energy from one coil to the other.

    The tricky part is doing this over a distance. There are already electrical vehicles used in factory halls that get their energy directly from a wire or coil in the floor, but the distance is in this case a few centimeters. Still, it might be possible to use that on roads.

    By using resonance – i.e. coils on both sides that have the same resonant frequency – you can vastly increase the field coupling – just like the sound of a guitar string is vastly amplified by the resonant body of the guitar.

    I think the MIT guys who try to implement a system to power small appliances and gadgets this way are still having only 70% efficiency; and you also have to consider possible side effects like warming of human tissue; examine whether you have long time side effects like cancer…

    The resonant field coupling happens in the near field where transmitter and receiver influence each other. See:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_and_far_field

  20. DirkH says:

    The terms near field and far field are to be understood with respect to the wave length. “the region extending farther than 2 wavelengths away from the source is called the Far-Field” (from the wikipedia article)

    You might have heard about these fancy metamaterials used to make stuff invisible; they’re bending and diffracting waves and operate in the near field of the corresponding wave phenomenon. An interesting application is using concrete masts to reduce the impact of ocean waves:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080926184626.htm

  21. Tenuc says:

    Thanks all for the excellent stuff on this thread!

    Here’s some info on gravitomagnetism, which could be another contender for gravity linked solar effects. The NASA satellite, Gravity Probe B, is currently trying to confirm the existence/size of the gravitomagnetic effect, although it seems they could have been beaten to the punch.

    “…in a lab in Austria, Martin Tajmar and his team have already succeeded in detecting a faint signal that seems to be due to this elusive component of gravity. A reason for celebration? Not quite. Puzzlingly, the force they seem to have generated is vastly more powerful than anyone else expected.”

    New Scientist magazine, 11 November 2006 – “Gravity’s Secret”

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225771.800-gravitys-secret.html?page=1

  22. tallbloke says:

    Tenuc, have you read Miles Mathis’ stuff on gravity?
    http://milesmathis.com
    Interesting. Especially as he has made a better job of Bodes law with it than Bode could.
    http://milesmathis.com/bode.html

    I’ve exchanged quite a few emails with Miles. He’s a great guy.

  23. Remarkable that Miles Mathis paper on Bode’s Law.

  24. tallbloke says:

    Another thought on planetary orbit spacings comes from Ray Tomes:
    Tomes Spacings

  25. The “Music of the Spheres” again, and all that is needed to test it: The humble Pitagorean mono chord

  26. Tenuc says:

    Thanks for the Ray Tomes chart. From this it looks like the positions of the planets are at specific harmonic nodes. Interestingly, the visible universe appears to be fractal in nature, with a dimension between 2 and 3. I wonder if, in addition to planets, all bodies orbiting the galaxy are scale invariant? If so this would be a big blow to the ‘Big Bang’ hypothesis.

  27. tallbloke says:

    Ray Tomes says:
    July 20, 2010 at 8:07 am (Edit)

    I would also not discount standing waves between the Sun and each planet. The distances of the outer planets in return light times are multiples of 160 minutes or in Jupiter’s case 1/2 that. The period of 160 minutes is a solar oscillation period. According to Kotov (Russian astronomer) the 160 minute period also shows up as a preferred fraction and multiple of binary star period, and in galaxy nuclei. It shows up in many ways in the solar system such as the orbital time at a planetary surface tends to be a multiple of a little over 80 minutes.

    The whole solar system is ringing with these frequencies. If you look at solar x-rays and other energetic phenomena, they bursts (100 times and more increases) often at regular intervals of 160 minutes. I think these are resulting in bouncing of e/m waves between Sun and Planets.

  28. tallbloke says:

    “Remarkable that Miles Mathis paper on Bode’s Law.”

    Yes. His paper on the optical equivalence of the Sun and Moon is well worth a read too.
    http://www.milesmathis.com/third9.html

  29. @Tenuc: The sun can be thought of as an electric generator ….
    What if our “blink of an eye” would be of a thousand years?, we would see something like a “Ruhmkorff coil”…