Primer on “Gas Discharges” (Plasmas)

Introduction

In the early and middle years of the twentieth century, electrical engineers were interested in using the nonlinear properties of electric plasma in circuits containing “gas tubes” to regulate currents and voltages in often quite clever ways1. After the advent of solid-state devices, however, the importance of gas tube technology dropped to almost zero. There are still Geiger counters and certain other specialized devices being produced and used, but the overall properties of electric discharges in gases (plasmas) has almost become a lost art – of historical interest only – except among those still seeking the elusive ‘continuous fusion reaction’ and the proponents of the Electric Universe.

So a main motivation for this article is that information on electrical discharges is not easy to find in current literature (in spite of its growing potential importance in many fields of physics, astrophysics, atmospheric electricity, and engineering). The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Physics has no entry for ‘electrical discharge’ or ‘electric arc,’ for example. The closest one can come at present are articles and books on ‘plasma physics’, which are almost exclusively mathematical and which contain little or no description of laboratory procedures or observations2.

Searching the Internet for descriptions of what constitutes a glow-mode plasma discharge yields very little information other than where to purchase certain devices that have nonlinear volt-ampere characteristics of one sort or another. What follows is a brief tutorial explanation of the inherent physical properties of a low-pressure gas when excited by an electrical current.

We first will discuss what a plasma discharge looks like in the laboratory. What do we see when we set up a typical experiment to observe a plasma’s physical structure?

As the second part of this primer we discuss the discharge’s electrical properties and attempt to show a relationship between these electrical measurements and what we have observed earlier about the plasma’s appearance.

The third and final part of this paper will attempt to relate our laboratory observations of part one, the measured electrical properties of part two, and what at least this author suspects is occurring on and around the Sun.

1. Visual Appearance of the Static Plasma Discharge

In the laboratory, applying a potential (voltage) difference between two electrodes placed inside a low-pressure gas can produce the phenomenon known as a plasma discharge. Electrons originating at the cathode and positive ions near the anode will be accelerated in opposite directions, collide, and transfer energy. J.H.W. Geissler3 performed the first known experiment of this kind in the early 1850’s. He was a glassblower by trade and quickly made his ‘Geissler tubes’ into sought after art objects. Later (1869-1875) Wm. Crookes4 developed his Crooke’s Tube which is sometimes erroneously credited as being the first plasma containing device. Actually the Crooke’s tube requires a heated

(thermionic) cathode to produce electrons, which are its exclusive charge carriers whereas in a Geissler tube both ions and electrons (a true plasma) are charge carriers.

Figure 1 shows the basic physical structure of a discharge. All of the component structures shown there are not always found in any given discharge, but depending on pressures, voltages, and dimensions, all have been observed in one discharge or another. There is a well-known relationship, called Paschen’s Law, between the separation distance between electrodes, the pressure, and the applied voltage that must be met in order to initiate the discharge. Changes in any of those variables, or the type of gas used in the tube, will alter the appearance of the discharge.

Once the requirements of initiating a discharge have been met, a pair of electrons will enter into the discharge from the cathode. One is accelerated toward the anode and one recombines with an approaching +ion. Near the anode the incoming electron will ionize

Aston DarkSpace

Negative Glow

Faraday Dark Space

Cathode GlowCathode

Dark Space

PositiveColumn

Anode Glow

Anode DarkSpace

Anode + Cathode -

Either+ or -

+

-

Ch

arg

e D

en

sity

(Co

ul /

m3 )

If ADS is +

If ADS is -

E-F

ield

(V

/m)

VAnodevoltage

or

Figure 1 (Top). The physical appearance of an archetypical gas discharge. (Below) Charge density, E-field, and Voltage distributions within the tube. The bottom three plots will be discussed in parts two and three of this paper.

2

a neutral atom by collision and both the original electron and the newly liberated electron will leave the discharge together, entering the anode. At both the cathode and the anode, then, it is electron pairs that enter and leave the discharge. In the central part of the discharge +ions are moving toward the cathode and electrons are moving toward the anode. Both these movements contribute to the total current in the discharge (which is equal to the current in the external circuit). Only electrons are free to move in the external circuit (wires). Positive ions are created at the anode and neutralized by recombination at the cathode. They remain inside the discharge. If the electric current created by the ion and electron flows is sufficiently high, the ionized gas (plasma) can emit visible light.

In laboratory experiments such as this, additional electrons are sometimes produced by secondary emission from the cathode. The major, observed, physical properties of a typical laboratory discharge are described below. These physical structures appear over a wide range of operating conditions. A typical set of operating conditions for a laboratory discharge might be a voltage of about 1 kV, a total current of about 0.1 A, through air or Argon at a pressure of 0.01 psi5 (~70 pascals). Our description of these structures starts at the cathode and proceeds toward the anode.

Also note there is an extremely low (but not zero valued) electric field throughout the positive column, Faraday dark space, and the negative glow region.

Cathode In a laboratory discharge, the cathode is an electrical conductor, usually a metal, with a secondary emission coefficient (it has the ability to emit electrons when bombarded by incoming positive ions). Of course in cosmic plasmas, no metal electrodes are present.

Aston Dark Space This is a thin region next to the cathode containing a layer of negative charge. It thus contains a strong electric field. Electrons are accelerated through this space away from the cathode. In this region stray initial electrons together with the secondary electrons from the cathode outnumber the ions. These electrons are too low density and/or energy to excite the plasma, so it appears dark.

Cathode Glow This is the next structure out from the Aston dark space. Here the electrons are energetic enough to excite the neutral atoms with which they collide. (In air, this region is usually red due to the emissions by the excited atoms sputtered off the cathode surface, or the positive ions moving toward the cathode.) The cathode glow has a relatively high ion density. The axial length of the cathode glow depends on the type of gas and the pressure. The cathode glow sometimes clings to the cathode and masks the Aston dark space.

Cathode (‘Crooks’, ‘Hittorf’) Dark Space This is a relatively dark region on the anode side of the cathode glow that has a moderately strong electric field and a relatively high ion density. It thus is a positive space charge layer. Thus, the cathode dark space, the cathode glow, and the Aston dark space constitute an effective double layer (DL) such that most of the remainder of the plasma experiences only low valued electric fields.

3

Negative Glow This region is the site of the brightest intensity of the entire discharge. The negative glow has a relatively low electric field, is long compared to the cathode glow, and is most intense on the end near the cathode. Electrons that have been accelerated in the cathode region to high speeds produce ionization, and slower electrons that have already had inelastic collisions produce excitations. These slower electrons are responsible for the negative glow. The electron number density in the negative glow discharge is typically about 1016 electrons/m3. As these electrons slow down, energy for excitation is no longer available and the Faraday dark space begins.

Glow Region

Faraday dark space The electron energy is low in this region. The electron number density decreases by recombination and diffusion to the walls, the net space charge is very low, and the axial electric field is small.

Positive Column This is the physically largest component of a normal discharge. The plasma is quasi-neutral. The electric field is weak, typically 1 V/cm (This is low considering that the terminal to terminal applied voltage can be of the order of 1000 V.) The electric field is just large enough to maintain a degree of ionization at its cathode end. The electron number density is about 1015 to 1016 electrons/m3, and the electron temperature is typically in the range of 1 to 2 eV. In air, the positive column plasma is pinkish blue. As the length of the discharge tube is increased at constant pressure, the length of the cathode structures remains constant, and the positive column lengthens. The positive column is a long, uniform glow mode discharge, except when standing or moving striations, or ionization (Alfvén) waves are triggered by a disturbance. All this, of course, is observed in the laboratory. In the case of the plasma surrounding the Sun, the solar corona is the positive column. The Faraday dark space extends out from the end of the corona to the heliopause (virtual cathode). A DL may exist between the positive column and the anode glow especially in a cosmic plasma such as the solar wind. This DL would occur only if the applied voltage were extremely high valued. A significant fraction of this high voltage would appear across this DL.

Anode Region

Anode glow This region is usually brighter than the positive column, and is not always present in laboratory experiments. This is the boundary of the anode sheath. ‘Anode tufting’ is said to have been observed in this region, although no photographs of this phenomenon seem to have survived.

4

Anode dark space The space between the anode glow and the anode itself is the anode sheath. It is a single layer of space charge. This layer can either be positive or negative depending on the size of the anode relative to the current density level it is carrying. There is a stronger electric field here than in the positive column.

Other Phenomena

Striations Moving or standing striations are traveling waves or stationary perturbations in the electron number density that occur in partially ionized plasmas. In their usual form, moving striations are propagating luminous bands that appear in the positive column. In reality many apparently homogeneous partially ionized plasmas have moving striations. Standing striations can be easily photographed.

Abnormal Glow Discharges In the normal glow mode, increasing current in a discharge tube leads to a very slow decrease in voltage. As will be discussed below, the current density to the cathode remains fairly constant. Beyond this normal glow range the current increases by covering a greater cathode region. Once the whole surface of the cathode is covered by the discharge, the only way the total current can increase further is to drive more current through the cathode by applying more voltage. This is called an abnormal glow discharge. The cathode voltage drop increases rapidly, and the dark space shrinks. Except for being more intensely luminous, the abnormal glow discharge appears very similar to the normal discharge. Sometimes the structures near the cathode blend into one another, providing a more or less uniform glow. As the voltage increases, the cathode current density also increases, ultimately heating the cathode and causing incandescence and thermionic emission. If the cathode gets hot enough to emit electrons thermionically, the discharge will transition into the arc mode.

2. How We Measure the Electrical Properties of a Gas Discharge Suppose we put a gas (typically neon, argon or one of the noble gasses) into a closed glass tube that has two electrodes inserted into it and apply a voltage across these two terminals (exposed ends of the two electrodes). The terminal to which the higher voltage is connected is the anode of the tube and the other terminal is the cathode. Positive charges (as do all physical quantities) tend to move from regions of high potential energy to regions of low potential energy. “Water flows down hill” is a well-known popular statement of that fundamental idea. Voltage is a measure of the potential energy possessed by a positive electrical charge. So positive charges will move along a path away from a point of high voltage toward a point that is at a low voltage. Consider the electrical circuit shown in figure 2 that contains a plasma tube. In this circuit, there is a voltage source whose voltage value, VS , we can choose (and vary). There is also a resistor, R, whose value we can choose (and vary). The purpose of the resistor is to limit (control) the value of the current, I, that will go through the plasma

5

tube. If we travel from the lower left-hand corner of the circuit up to the upper left-hand corner we will go through a voltage rise of Vs volts. So if Vs is a positive quantity (say +10V) then the voltage at the upper left hand corner is ten volts greater than the voltage at both lower corners.

Figure 2. Laboratory circuit used to measure the Volt-Ampere characteristic of a plasma. Terminals X-X connect the external excitation circuit on the left to the plasma on the right.

The current, I, has the same value in Amperes at every point all the way around the circuit (there are no exits from which charge can escape). Ohm’s Law tells us that the voltage rise across a linear resistor (in this case moving from the upper right-hand corner to the upper left-hand corner) is directly proportional to the current through that resistor. So mathematically we have RIVR (1) Also we notice that if the voltage at the upper left corner is +10 volts, it has to be that value whether we get there by going from the lower left to upper left corner or if we go in the counterclockwise direction around the loop to the right. In other words it is obvious that, summing voltage rises, RPS VVV (2)

or 0 PRS VVV , (3)

Demonstrating the fact that the sum of the voltage rises around any closed path in a circuit is zero. Equation 3 might also be written RSP VVV (4)

Or, using (1), RIVV SP (5)

SP VIRV (6)

6

This last equation (6) has the form of a straight line (y = mx + b) which is evident when we plot it on a VP vs I set of axes. Figure 3 is a graphical description of the behavior of the part of the circuit in figure 2 that lies to the left of the two terminals shown by the two small X’s in that figure. For example, if we raise the ohmic value of the resistor6, R, in figure 2, then, in figure 3, the intersection7 of the line with the horizontal axis (at I = VS / R) will move toward the left; and the line8 will become steeper.

VO

LT

AG

E, V

P ,

(V

)

CURRENT, I , (A)

VSEquation of a straight line isy = mx+bwhere m = the slope and b is the y-interceptSo Vp= - R I + VShas a slope = -R and y-intercept at VS. Also, when Vp= 0, I = VS/R.

VS/R

Slope = -R

Figure 3. Plot of equation 6.

Varying the value of the voltage source will vary both intersections (end points of the line). I is, of course, the value of the current leaving the top terminal, X toward the right in figure 2. Every point on this so-called ‘load-line’ represents a pair of values (VP, I ) that satisfy the requirements of the circuit to the left of terminals X–X.

Plasma Voltage - Current Characteristic The value of VP, the voltage across the plasma tube, is a highly nonlinear function of the current, I (charge flow), down through the tube. This is shown in figure 4. Every point on that plot represents a pair of values (VP, I) that satisfy the requirements of the circuit to the right of terminals X – X, the plasma contained within the tube. A straight line drawn from the origin of figure 4 up to any particular point on the curve, (VP, I), has a slope equal to VP /I which is the effective bulk resistance of the plasma when it is operating at that point. This reminds us that the curve plotted in figure 4 represents an infinite set of single points, each of which represent a pair of numbers that define the voltage across and the current through the plasma at any given instant. Such a point (at which the circuit operates) is called an ‘operating point’.

7

Bear in mind that the current, I, that is plotted on the horizontal axis in figure 3 is identically the current, I, that flows in the plasma and is plotted on the horizontal axis in figure 4. So the voltage, VP, in figures 3 and 4 is the same voltage; it is the voltage produced by the circuit to the left of terminals, X–X, and is also the voltage across the plasma tube. Therefore figures 3 and 4 have the same identical axes and thus both figures can be superimposed on top of one another on this one set of axes. This is shown in figure 5.

CurrentSaturation

TownsendDischarge

Glow-to-arctransition

A

B

CD

E

F

F G

H

I

J

K

VO

LT

AG

E (

V)

or

E-F

ield

(V

/m)

CURRENT (A) or CURRENT DENSITY (A/m2)

Dark Current Mode Glow Mode Arc Mode

Normal glow Abnormal glow

Figure 4 A typical static, plasma discharge, volt-ampere plot. It is obviously highly nonlinear. A similar plot for a linear resistor would be a straight line, starting at the origin (point A) and rising upward toward the right. The angle of the line would be determined by the ohmic value of the resistor. The slope of a line from the origin to any point on the curve = Vp /I = Rp of the plasma.

Any point(s) of intersection of the load-line plot and the nonlinear volt-ampere plot of the plasma indicates possible pairs of (VP , I) values at which the circuit might operate. Only at such intersection points are the requirements on the simultaneous values of VP and I by both halves of the circuit satisfied. These are called “operating points”. Figures 4 and 5 are plotted with current on the horizontal axis. This is the opposite of the standard way VI plots are made in modern electronics. The original investigators of ‘electric discharges in gasses’ (plasmas) presented their results with current or current density plotted on the horizontal axis because it is the value of applied current density that uniquely determines the mode of operation of the plasma, rather than the applied voltage9. Clearly, in figure 5, the two points defined by letters D and G are each possible operating points. Which one will actually be chosen by the circuit will depend on the past history of how the circuit has been excited, but either one is theoretically possible. Sometimes an

8

unpleasant surprise happens when the investigator is hoping for one operating point and the circuit jumps to the other.

CurrentSaturation

TownsendDischarge

Glow-to-arctransition

A

B

CD

E

F

F G

H

I

J

K

VO

LT

AG

E (

V)

or

E-F

ield

(V

/m)

CURRENT (A) or CURRENT DENSITY (A/m2)

Dark Current Mode Glow Mode Arc Mode

Normal glow Abnormal glow

VS

VS / R

Figure 5. The plot of figure 3 superimposed onto figure 4. Obviously, the value of the current density determines in which mode the plasma will operate. Voltage across the tube has little effect.

Consider what would happen if we now maintain the source voltage, VS , constant but increase the value of the resistance, R. The intersection of the straight “load-line” with the horizontal axis would move toward the left while the load-line’s intersection with the vertical axis remains fixed. In that way the operating point might be repositioned, for example, to point C, and this would be the only possible location at which the circuit could operate – there being only one intersection between the load-line and the plasma VI plot for those values of VS and R. Conversely, lowering the ohmic value of R might result in point J becoming a possible operating point. In fact, because plasmas will attempt to lower the force on each charged particle, point J would be the probable result. If the electrodes were not designed to withstand a current of this magnitude, a melt-down of the tube might well occur. By judiciously varying the VS and R values, an investigator can trace out the entire non-linear plasma characteristic plot. (Remembering always not to select values that might unintentionally locate an operating point in the arc range.) If conditions within the plasma are maintained such that only one plasma cell exists within the tube then no double layers divide the plasma into different cells. Under these conditions the general shape of this plot is the same for both external measurements (voltage applied across the electrodes vs. terminal current) and internal measurements (E-field strength at a point in the plasma vs. current density at that point). For this reason both axes in figures 3 and 4 carry two labels. Of course numerical values would be different depending on which quantities are being presented:

9

1. Overall quantities: VP, the terminal voltage across the tube, vs. I, the total current (in Amperes) through the tube.

2. Point quantities: E, the electric field at a point in Volts per meter, vs. J, the current density in Amps per square meter of cross-section of the discharge.

The electrical characteristics of the discharge such as the breakdown (‘sparking’) voltage at which the discharge becomes visible, the overall shape of the volt - ampere characteristic, and the structure of the discharge (described in the previous section) all depend on the geometry of the electrodes, the shape of the vessel, the particular gas used, its pressure, temperature, and the electrode material. The shape and properties of the discharge volt-ampere plot in its various ranges are discussed below. Usually three general regions (modes) can be identified as shown in figures 4 and 5: the dark current mode, the glow mode, and the arc mode. Notice that no point(s) on the curves plotted in figures 4 and 5 touch the horizontal axis. Every point in a plasma discharge requires a non-zero valued electric field strength to maintain the discharge. A typical charge carrier will act as shown in figure 6. An average velocity of that type of carrier will result that is proportional to the strength of the applied E-field. Thus vAv = μE where μ is the ‘mobility’ of that type of charge carrier.

Figure 6. A constant strength electric field (force per unit charge) creates a constant acceleration. The velocity of each carrier will increase linearly with time until it collides with another particle. This produces an average velocity value, vAv that is proportional to the applied field.

Dark Current Mode The region of the plot between A and E in figures 4 and 5 is termed the dark current mode because, except for Townsend ‘corona’ discharges and the breakdown itself, the discharge remains invisible to the eye. The upper layers of Earth’s atmosphere are dark-mode plasma. Radio frequency waves are refracted back down to the surface by this plasma. But it normally emits no visible light.

10

A to B In this low-current stage of the process, the electric field applied along the axis of the discharge tube sweeps out the ions and electrons created by ionization from background radiation. Background radiation from cosmic rays, naturally radioactive minerals, or other sources, produces a constant and measurable degree of ionization but not enough to make the plasma visible to the human eye. The ions and electrons drift to the electrodes in the weak applied electric field producing a weak electric current. Increasing the applied voltage sweeps out an increasing fraction of these ions and electrons. B to C If the voltage between the electrodes is increased enough, eventually, at point B, all the available electrons and ions are being swept away, and the current ‘saturates’ (does not increase further even though an increasing voltage is applied). The value of the current, when it saturates, depends linearly on the radiation source strength – this is a property used in some radiation counters. A charged particle that penetrates into the inter-electrode space will cause an abrupt (transient) change in the current, I, that can be sensed by an external ammeter. C to D If the voltage across the tube is increased beyond point C, the current will again rise. The electric field is now strong enough so that the electrons initially present in the plasma can acquire enough kinetic energy, before reaching the anode, to ionize neutral atoms. This region of increasing current is called the Townsend discharge region. D to E ‘Corona10’ discharges occur in this Townsend region due to high electric field strengths near sharp points, edges, or wires just prior to electrical breakdown (transition from dark to glow mode). If the current level is high enough, corona discharges are actually dim glow discharges – visible to the eye. For low current levels, the entire corona is dark, as appropriate for the dark mode. Related phenomena include the silent electrical discharge, an inaudible form of filamentary discharge, and the brush discharge, a luminous discharge in a non-uniform electric field where many Townsend-type discharges are active at the same time and form streamers through the plasma. When observed at the mastheads of sailing vessels, such visible Townsend discharges are called St. Elmo’s Fire. E As the electric field becomes ever stronger, a liberated electron may also ionize another neutral atom leading to an avalanche of electron and ion production. Electrical breakdown (transition from dark to glow mode of operation) can occur. At this breakdown (‘sparking’) voltage, VB, the current may increase by a factor of 104 to 108, and is usually limited only by the internal (ballast) resistance of the power supply connected across the electrodes. If this resistance has a comparatively high ohmic value11, the discharge tube cannot draw enough current to break down the gas, and the tube will remain in the Townsend region with small ‘corona points’ or ‘brush dischargebeing evident on the electrodes. If the internal resistance of the power supply is relatlower, then the plasma will break down and move into the normal glow discharge mode. The breakdown (or ‘sparking’) voltage for a particular gas and electrode material depends

s’ ively

11

on the product of the pressure and the distance between the electrodes as expressed in Paschen’s law (1889).

Paschen’s Law As discussed above, in order to ionize the neutral atoms within the tube, an electron must acquire a certain minimum energy (the ionization energy). It does this by falling through a sufficiently large voltage drop and thus attaining a required velocity. If it collides with anything before attaining this velocity, it will not have the required kinetic energy to perform the ionization. So the discharge tube length (distance between electrodes) must be larger than the ‘mean free path’ (average distance between collisions) of the electrons in the discharge. By lowering the pressure in the tube we can remove potential collision candidates. Of course if the pressure is lowered too far, there will be nothing left to collide with after the ionization energy has been attained. Paschen’s Law quantifies the trade-off among the three determining quantities: distance between electrodes, applied voltage, and pressure in the tube. For example, if the applied voltage is fixed, then there is an optimum value of the product, pd, where p is the pressure and d is the distance between electrodes.

Glow Mode The glow discharge mode owes its name to the fact that the plasma becomes luminous. The plasma glows because the electron energy and number density are high enough to generate visible light by excitation collisions and recombinations. The applications of glow discharge include TV displays, fluorescent lights, dc parallel-plate plasma reactors, magnetron discharges used for depositing thin films, and electro-bombardment plasma sources. The auroras observed in Earth’s (and other planet’s) polar regions are plasma in the glow mode. So are neon advertising signs. The solar corona is a glow mode discharge. It is essentially completely ionized. F to G (Normal Glow Mode) After a discontinuous transition from E to F, the plasma enters the ‘normal glow’ region, in which the voltage is a slightly decreasing function of the current. This is thus a region of negative dynamic resistance. In this range, plasma can decrease the E-field strength at any given point inside it by increasing the current density (using less than the full cross-section of the tube). This moves the operating point toward the right, squeezing the plasma discharge down into filaments, and it will do so. The filaments observed in the outer, low current density region of the solar corona are examples of this effect. The electrode current density is independent of the total current in this mode. This means that the plasma is in contact with only a part of the electrode surfaces at low currents in this range. As the current density is increased from F toward G, the fraction of the cathode occupied by the plasma increases, until plasma covers the entire cathode surface at point G. G to H (Abnormal Glow Mode) In the ‘abnormal glow’ range (to the right of point G), the voltage increases with increasing current in order to force the electrode current density above its natural value to provide the required current.

12

Hysteresis at the Glow / Dark Mode Transition Starting at point G and reducing the value of current or current density (moving to the left on the plot), a form of hysteresis is observed in the volt-ampere characteristic. On the way back down, the visible glow discharge maintains itself at considerably lower currents and current densities than at the original point F and only then, at a new point F, makes a transition back up to the Townsend region at point D.

Arc Mode H to K At point H, the electrodes become sufficiently hot that, in the lab, the cathode emits electrons thermionically. If the DC power supply has a sufficiently low internal resistance, the discharge will undergo an abrupt glow-to-arc transition. In cosmic plasma there is no metal cathode and so arc mode is achieved via an avalanche increase in the total number of current carriers. Arc mode emission is characterized by copious amounts of intense ultra-violet light as well as brilliant broad-spectrum EM radiation including visible light. Arc mode plasma is orders of magnitude more radiant than glow-mode. I to J The arc regime, from I through J is one where the discharge voltage decreases steeply as the current increases (negative dynamic resistance). This causes filaments to form in the lower current density region of the arc mode. Natural lightning is clearly one example of such filamentation. Negative dynamic resistance occurs until a sufficiently large current level is achieved (point J). Above that point, the voltage increases slowly as the current increases. In this higher current density arc mode range, the discharge is not filamented.

3. Space Plasmas vs. Laboratory Experiments Several of the component structures observed in laboratory plasmas are in one-to-one correspondence with observed solar and cosmic phenomena. But there are at least two significant differences that must be recognized.

1. The single most important difference between the laboratory plasma described above and that which surrounds the Sun is that in the laboratory, the tube containing the plasma usually has a cylindrical shape with the anode and cathode being almost the same size. However, the solar plasma is spherical. This has several effects: The vector calculus mathematics used in Maxwell’s equations to describe

the electric field in such plasmas gives different results depending on the morphology (cylindrical or spherical) of the discharge. See: On the Sun's Electric Field .

Because of the spherical geometry of the heliosphere, the current density is much higher in the neighborhood of the Sun’s anode than it is at the (virtual) cathode (the heliopause). The ratio of cathode area to anode area is proportional to the square of the ratio of the radius of the heliopause to the radius of the Sun: (radius of the heliosphere/radius of the Sun)2 = (1.8x1013/4x108)2 ~2x109. So the heliosphere’s surface area is 2 billion times the area of the Sun’s surface. Therefore, extremely relatively high

13

current density occurs at the anode. This puts the anode ‘glow’ discharge of the photosphere into the arc mode.

The Sun emits power at a rate of approximately 65-million watts/sq meter from its photospheric surface. This is equivalent to a power output of 42 kW from each square inch of that surface. It is difficult to imagine that a plasma discharge in anything other than arc mode could radiate 42 kW of power from each square inch of its surface area. The light from over forty

1000-watt light bulbs radiating from a one square inch area must come from a continuous arc-mode plasma. Some people may think the word ‘arc’ is synonymous with ‘lightning bolt’ – a jagged, often branching, and randomly shaped discharge. It is not. The word ‘arc’ refers only to the mode in which a given plasma can be. Often, continuous, steady-state plasma is in arc mode.

Figure 7. A continuous high current density arc-mode plasma.

2. There are no metal electrodes anywhere in space and this includes the solar plasma discharge. The cathode is a virtual one and is at a vast distance from the anode (the body of the Sun). This is not unique. For example, the St. Elmo’s Fire discharges sometimes visible at the mastheads of sailing vessels and along power transmission cables have no real cathode. Their electric paths spread out and end on negative charges located at remote distances – at virtual cathodes. In a thunderstorm, a cloud electrode may simply be a region of excess charge distributed over a volume. In cosmic plasmas (including the ‘solar wind’) because there are no material cathodes, some of the phenomena described above such as thermionic or secondary emissions from a (metallic) cathode are impossible and thus are not present.

Conclusion The author hopes this relatively brief primer on the visual appearance, structure, and electrical properties of plasma may answer some questions and/or eliminate some confusion about this important and still emerging area of physical engineering-science. Much of it has been gleaned from what are now historical scientific books and papers. The empirical scientific method has three components: observation, hypothesis making, and experimental testing. Mathematical derivations should not replace observations made in the laboratory. But the observations discussed here seem to have faded into the obscurity of time while mathematical derivations multiply unboundedly. There is arguably a need to reproduce some or all of these observations in order to be able to judge what are and what are not viable explanations for observed cosmic phenomena.

D. E. Scott

14

15

1 See: Mulder, J.G.W., Gas-Discharge Tubes, http://www.electricstuff.co.uk/ch1.pdf 2 A case in point: One of the most highly recommended modern texts on plasma physics is Paul M. Bellan’s Fundamentals of Plasma Physics. Its index makes no mention of: glow or dark modes, Paschen’s Law, Townsend discharge, anode glow, or the name Birkeland. It does contain: action integral in Lagrangian formalism, dielectric tensor elements, Grad-Shafranov equation, Vlasov equation, Sweet-Parker reconnection, and the Yukawa solution, (among many other similar entries). See: http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Plasma-Physics-Paul-Bellan/dp/0521528003/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347127180&sr=1-2-fkmr0&keywords=Bellan%E2%80%99s+Fundamentals+of+Plasma+Physics. 3 See: Geissler tubes: http://www.crtsite.com/page6.html 4 See: Crookes’ tubes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_tube 5 A bewildering variety of different units are used to describe the pressure of a contained gas. For example: 1Atm = 101,325 P = 29.92 inch/Hg = 1013 millibar = 760 torr; 1 millibar = 100 P; 1 P = 10 dyne/cm2; 1 inch/Hg = 3386 P; 1lb/in2 = 6895 P = 51.7 torr… etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseum. The SI unit is the pascal. 6 This resistor is often called the “ballast resistor” or just the “ballast.” 7 This value of current can be found by setting V = 0 in equation 6. This is equivalent to placing a short circuit across terminals X-X in figure 2. The resulting value of current is therefore called the ‘short-circuit current.’ 8 Such a plot, which is due to all parts of the circuit except the plasma tube itself, is called a “load-line.” This is because electrical engineers think of everything that is not the active device being studied as constituting a “load” on that device. The nomenclature is counter-intuitive, but widely accepted. 9 See: http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Electric+Discharge+in+Gases especially figure 3. 10 This nomenclature was used historically to describe the unusual shape of this kind of discharge. It should not be confused with the Sun’s corona, which is an altogether different plasma phenomenon. 11 Very high values of both VS and R result in a steeply inclined load-line approximating a current source that enables the investigator to limit the operating point to a range that does not get outside the range D to E in figure 4. References: Calvert, J.B., Electrical Discharges, Available: http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/dischg.htm#Intr Emeléus, K.G., The Conduction of Electricity Through Gases, Methuen’s Monographs On Physical Subjects, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Third Ed. 1951 Scott, D.E., The Electric Sky, pp 102-103, Mikamar, Portland, OR. 2006 Scott, D.E., On the Sun’s Electric Field, Available: http://electric-cosmos.org/SunsEfield92210.pdf Scott, D.E., The Sun, Available: http://electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

822 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 35, NO. 4, AUGUST 2007

Real Properties of Electromagnetic Fields andPlasma in the Cosmos

Donald E. Scott

Abstract—A majority of baryons in the cosmos are in the plasmastate. However, fundamental disagreements about the propertiesand behavior of electromagnetic fields in these plasmas existbetween the science of modern astronomy/astrophysics and theexperimentally verified laws of electrical engineering and plasmaphysics. Many helioastronomers claim that magnetic fields canbe open ended. Astrophysicists have claimed that galactic mag-netic fields begin and end on molecular clouds. Most electricalengineers, physicists, and pioneers in the electromagnetic fieldtheory disagree, i.e., magnetic fields have no beginning or end.Many astrophysicists still claim that magnetic fields are “frozeninto” electric plasma. The “magnetic merging” (reconnection)mechanism is also falsified by both theoretical and experimentalinvestigations.

Index Terms—Magnetic fields, Maxwell equations, merging,plasmas.

I. INTRODUCTION

P LASMA cosmology was formally introduced more than25 years ago by Alfvén [1]–[3]. This paper was based on

his earlier experimental investigations and those of Birkelandand Langmuir. They, in turn, had been motivated by the con-cepts embodied in Maxwell’s equations. This compact set ofrelations codifies the results of a long series of experimentsthat were performed by the founders of electrical science. Thus,plasma cosmology is not based simply on deductive reasoningand mathematical formalisms, but rather on verified laboratoryevidence.

For example, an indication of the dominance of the magneticforce is demonstrated by a ball bearing on a table. All of Earth’sbaryonic mass exerts a gravitational pull on the bearing, pre-venting it from lifting off the table. Yet, the smallest horseshoemagnet easily snatches it away. On a cosmic scale, magneticenergy density can also exceed gravitational energy density. Forexample, in the local supercluster, the magnetic field energydensity exceeds the gravitational energy density by at least anorder of magnitude [4].

The local interstellar medium has an estimated ion–electronpair concentration in the range of 0.01–1/cm3. Thus, the vol-ume between the Sun and its nearest neighbor contains some6 × 1054 ion–electron pairs. However, quantitative calculationsbased on simple electrostatic forces between such particleslead to erroneous conclusions. This is because double layers(DLs) separate cells of plasma in space (e.g., heliospheres)

Manuscript received September 8, 2006; revised October 11, 2006.The author, retired, was with the Department of Electrical and Computer

Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003 USA (e-mail:dascott3@cox.net).

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPS.2007.895424

such that electrostatic forces between bodies that are eachsurrounded by such DL-bounded plasma cells are negligiblyweak. Homogeneous models often are found to be misleadingand should be replaced by inhomogeneous models, with theinhomogeneities being produced by filamentary currents andDLs that divide space into cells [5]. Space in general has acellular structure.

Theoretical analyses based on the classical plasma theoryoften fail to correspond to real results that are obtained viadirect observation. On the other hand, simulations on super-computers and actual laboratory experiments provide accuratedescriptions of the behavior of such cosmic plasmas. Rotationis an inherent result of interacting electric currents in plasma.Computer models of two current filaments interacting in aplasma have accurately reproduced details of spiral galaxyrotation profiles [6]. Plasma cosmology also offers [1] a modelthat predicted the existence of galactic jets and the behavior ofdouble-radio-source galaxies prior to their observation.

It is clear that a rigorous understanding of the real physicalproperties of magnetic fields in plasmas is crucial for astro-physicists and cosmologists. Incorrect pronouncements aboutthe properties of magnetic fields and currents in plasma will becounterproductive if these conceptual errors are propagated intopublications and then used as the basis of new investigations.There are some popular misconceptions.

1) Magnetic “lines of force” really exist as extant entities in3-D space and are involved in cosmic mechanisms whenthey move.

2) Magnetic fields can be open ended and can release energyby “merging” or “reconnecting.”

3) Behavior of magnetic fields can be explained without anyreference to the currents that produce them.

4) Cosmic plasma is infinitely conductive, so magnetic fieldsare “frozen into” it.

II. MAGNETIC LINES OF FORCE

Since the 1950s, some solar astrophysicists have asserted thatthe interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) is really open ended [7],with one end “anchored” to the Sun and the other waving in thesolar wind. Open field lines supposedly connect to the polarregions of the Sun and define the polar coronal holes that areprevalent at solar minima [8].

“The IMF originates in regions on the Sun where the mag-netic field is ‘open’—that is, where field lines emerging fromone region do not return to a conjugate region but extendvirtually indefinitely into space [9].”

0093-3813/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE

SCOTT: REAL PROPERTIES OF ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND PLASMA IN THE COSMOS 823

Although it is well understood among the space physicscommunity that the divergence of magnetic fields in space iszero valued (B is “solenoidal”), some recent statements areequivocal on this point.

“Magnetic field lines can exist in two types: closed and open.A closed magnetic field line is anchored at two points in thephotosphere and extends into the corona as a loop or arch. Thisexplains the shape of solar prominences. Open field lines areonly anchored at one point in the photosphere, and they extendout into interplanetary space; it is in these open field linesthat the corona can expand outward in the form of the solarwind [10].”

“An ‘open’ field line is defined as being one upon whichthe solar wind flows. As Parker predicted, the solar wind flowsfaster than the critical speed, and hence the field line does notreturn to the Sun locally [11].”

If it is well understood that the “open” field lines are actuallyclosed loops and eventually return to the Sun, how and atwhat location does the matter in the solar wind get off theclosed path?

“Field lines intersecting the photospheric boundary are saidto be anchored and the point of intersection is termed a foot-point. Field lines anchored at both ends to the photosphericboundary are said to be closed. Closed field lines appear toaccount for the majority of an active region’s corona. Open fieldlines, such as in coronal holes, are those with one footpointin the photosphere and the other end in the source surface orextending to infinity [12].”

Regarding the end that is supposedly anchored in the Sun, towhat kind of entity does the magnetic field line attach itself?These questions are important in cosmology because the Sunis a typical star, and all stars in the cosmos must have at leastsomewhat analogous characteristics.

The notion that magnetic field lines can be open ended isimpossible to reconcile with Maxwell’s simple and universalequation, i.e.,

∇ · B = 0 (1)

or in integral form (Gauss’ law for magnetism) given by

∮

A

�B · d �A = 0 (2)

and the vast body of experiments that led to it. At any instant oftime, the net sum of all magnetic flux entering any closed sur-face A is zero. The closed surface can be of any size or shape.Therefore, there can be no beginning or end to a magnetic fieldanywhere. Whatever magnetic flux enters the closed surfacealso leaves it. There is no way to store magnetic flux inside thevolume that is defined by the closed surface. Every magneticfield is a continuum, i.e., a vector field. Each of the infiniteand uncountable points in this continuum has a magnitude anda direction that is associated with it. This continuum is notcomposed of (does not contain) a set of discrete lines. Linesare sometimes drawn on paper to describe the magnetic field(its direction and magnitude). Where the field is strong, such asat the poles of an electromagnet, the lines come close together.

However, the lines themselves do not actually exist in reality.They are simply a visualization device, i.e., a useful way tounderstand the properties of a vector field. The loci are alwaysendless (closed) loops. There is only one “type of magnetic fieldline.” They are useful abstractions and nothing more.

III. DOUBLE HELIX NEBULA

Another misleading statement surfaced regarding the prop-erties of magnetic fields in the search for an explanation of adouble-helix-shaped plasma near the center of the Milky Waygalaxy [13]. Investigators have attempted to describe this objectin terms of twisted magnetic flux tubes and Alfvénic magneticwaves. Yet, it is obviously a galactic Birkeland current. It canclearly be seen as a pair of helical current filaments in a plasma.One attempt with which the author is familiar is being made tomodel its twisted shape as being caused by the rigid connectionsof a magnetic field to a pair of counterrotating molecularclouds, with one at each of its “ends.” A supercomputer study isbeing conducted using a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) modelto explain the “kinks” (plasma instabilities) in the object. ThisMHD model is based on a nonresistive plasma, which is anotion that Alfvén showed decades ago that is a purely mythicalconcept.

The point is that nothing can be explained by assuming thatan open-ended magnetic field has rigid connections either to theSun, which is a star, or a rotating molecular cloud at one or bothof its ends. Magnetic fields do not have ends.

The phrase “magnetic lines of force,” as coined by Faraday,is misleading. The only force that is uniquely associated with amagnetic field is the one that is applied to a compass needle toforce it to align with the field’s direction. If and when electricalcharges pass through a magnetic field, other types of forcesresult, but these are due to the interaction between these movingcharges and the field, as described by the equation of motion ofLorentz, i.e.,

d

dt(mv) = q(E + v × B). (3)

This relationship accurately describes the cause of synchrotronradiation and the spiral paths that are taken by currents inmagnetized plasma.

Many astrophysicists, when presented with these ideas, willacknowledge that magnetic lines of force are only abstrac-tions and not real-world extant objects. However, there is nojustification for statements such as “For many years [theselines] were viewed as merely a way to visualize magneticfields, and electrical engineers usually preferred other ways,mathematically more convenient. Not so in space, however,where magnetic field lines are fundamental to the way freeelectrons and ions move. These electrically charged particlestend to become attached to the field lines on which they reside,spiralling [sic] around them while sliding along them, likebeads on a wire [14].” This erroneous concept becomes doublydangerous when the magnetic field lines themselves are alsothought to be able to move, as in magnetic reconnection.

824 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 35, NO. 4, AUGUST 2007

Fig. 1. Concept of magnetic reconnection: magnetic merging at an X-typeneutral line. The solid lines are the magnetic field lines, whereas the dashedlines are the plasma flow lines.

IV. MAGNETIC RECONNECTION

In 1961, Dungey proposed magnetic reconnection, an ideathat Giovanelli conceived in 1946 to explain solar flaring. It hasbecome widely accepted among astronomers that when moreor less oppositely pointing field lines approach each other, theycan abruptly “short circuit,” “merge,” or “reconnect.” In thisreconnected configuration, the field lines are bent tightly likethe elastic strings of a catapult. When the field lines suddenlystraighten, they supposedly fling out plasma in opposite direc-tions. The reason that they suddenly straighten is assumed to bethe second term in the MHD pressure equation, i.e.,

∇(p + B2/2µo) − (B∇)B/µ0 = 0. (4)

Alfvén addressed this point [5] by noting that the second termin (4) is equivalent to the pinch effect that is caused by electriccurrents.

The standard explanation of reconnection (Fig. 1) is thatmagnetic field lines 1 and 2 move in from the left and from theright, and eventually come together (short circuit) at the centralpoint. There they change their structure: The two top halvesjoin (reconnect) and move up, ultimately reaching the positionof line 3, while the two bottom halves join and form the linethat later moves to position 4.

However, lines 1, 2, 3, and 4 are magnetic field lines and,as such, cannot move or “reach the neutral line.” In addition,there must be currents or current sheets that are not shown inFig. 1 since curved magnetic fields cannot exist without them(see Section V). An additional error is made in assuming thatplasma is “attached” to those lines and will be bulk transported,as shown by the dashed paths in Fig. 1, by this movement of themagnetic lines.

Although the proposed reconnection mechanism changes thetopology of the magnetic field, it does not explicitly reducethe strength of any part of the magnetic field. Thus, it cannotliberate magnetic energy that is stored in that field.

One source explains reconnection as being caused by thebreaking of magnetic field lines. “Magnetic reconnection isa fundamental physical process occurring in a magnetizedplasma, whereby magnetic field lines are effectively broken

Fig. 2. Two parallel electric currents that are directed away from the viewershowing the resulting magnetic field. The central box in this figure is shown inFig. 1. The dashed lines are “separatrix loci” that come into contact along a linecentral to and parallel with the currents.

and reconnected, resulting in a change of magnetic topology,conversion of magnetic field energy into bulk kinetic energyand particle heating [15].”

Proposing that magnetic field lines move around, break,merge, reconnect, or recombine is an error based on the falseassumption that the lines are real entities in the first place.This is an example of reifying an abstract theoretical concept.Field lines are not real-world 3-D entities and thus cannot doanything. Like mathematical singularities, field lines are pureabstractions and cannot be reified into being real 3-D materialobjects.

The central point in Fig. 1 from which energy is supposedlyreleased by magnetic reconnection (merging) is a neutral point,one at which the magnetic field strength is zero valued.

Fig. 2 provides a simple example that demonstrates how sucha neutral point can be created. The field structure that is shownin Fig. 1 lies within the small rectangle at the center of Fig. 2.The two dark circles with central Xs in Fig. 2 represent twostraight equal-amplitude electric currents I flowing away fromthe viewer (into the page). A clockwise-directed magnetic fluxwill therefore encircle these currents. Each of the dashed linesin this figure is a “separatrix.” Inside these dashed lines, themagnetic field links only one current. Outside the separatrix,the magnetic field links both currents. The two separatrix lociintersect at the neutral point, which, in this 3-D case, is actuallya neutral line.

The magnetic field strength vector at any point in the planeof the figure is the vector sum of all component fields that areproduced by all differential current segments in the vicinity. Atthe neutral point (or line), the current on the right produces amagnetic field strength vector that is vertically upward. Simi-larly, the current on the left produces a magnetic field vectorthat is vertically downward at that point. Therefore, these twofield strength vectors sum to zero at the center of the figure, andthe strength of the B field at such a neutral point is identicallyzero. Additional currents AND/OR current sheets can be addedto this diagram. Doing so will alter the topology of the magneticfield, possibly introducing additional neutral points or lines andseparatrices.

Note that no electric currents exist near or at the neutral point.If they did, the point would no longer be magnetically neutral.

SCOTT: REAL PROPERTIES OF ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND PLASMA IN THE COSMOS 825

The energy that is stored at any point in a magnetic field isproportional to the square of the magnitude of the magnetic fluxdensity at that point, i.e.,

WB =1

2µo

∫B2

I dv (5)

where BI is the magnitude of the magnetic field, and dv is asmall volume element. Thus, if BI = 0 at any given point, thenthe stored energy there would be WB = 0. No energy is storedat a neutral point; this is why it is called a neutral or null point.

No energy release can occur from any point at which noenergy is stored.

However, a large amount of energy can be stored in andreleased from the surrounding field structure but only if eitheror both currents I take on lower values. This is easily demon-strated in the example in Fig. 2, which is given in the following.

The total energy that has been delivered to an electricalelement (e.g., a unit length of the conductors that are shownin Fig. 2) by time t0 is given by [16]

W (t0) =

t0∫−∞

v(t)i(t)dt. (6)

For the case of the flux-linked conductors in the example,i(t) = 2I , and v(t) is the voltage drop across a unit lengthof the conductor in the direction of i(t). Faraday’s law indi-cates that

v(t) =dφ(t)

dt(7)

where φ is the total magnetic flux that links the conductors.Thus, the energy that is stored in the magnetic field thatsurrounds the conductors at time t0 is given by

W (t0) =

t0∫−∞

dφ

dti(t)dt =

φ(t0)∫

φ(−∞)

idφ (8)

where the total magnetic flux depends on the current’s ampli-tude, i.e.,

φ(t) = Li(t). (9)

The constant of proportionality L is called the inductance,which may be a constant or a function of φ. When a cur-rent flows in large regions, this single inductance element Lshould be replaced by a transmission line, and the situation isthen more accurately (but less intuitively) described by partialdifferential equations [1]. Equations (6)–(9) demonstrate thebasic principle that the total energy that is stored magneticallyin the infinite volume surrounding the conductors completelydepends on the current. That is, using (9), (8) may be writtenas an integral in terms of only the current. The total energythat will be released from this volume over any time interval isthus clearly a function of the change in current amplitude overthat interval.

The diagram in Fig. 2 approximates a cross section of a cos-mic Birkeland current pair. If these twin currents are disrupted(e.g., by an exploding DL in their path), the field will quicklycollapse and liberate all of the stored magnetic energy that isgiven by (8).

Investigators [15], [17]–[20] who prefer to avoid explicitmention of electric current as a primary cause of cosmic energyreleases fall back on magnetic reconnection as an explanation.In certain situations, magnetic reconnection supposedly directlyconverts magnetic energy into kinetic energy in the form ofbidirectional plasma jets. The process is initiated in a narrowsource region that is called the “diffusion region.” Accordingto the theory, both resistive and collisionless processes caninitiate reconnection. One of the key predicted signatures ofcollisionless reconnection is the separation between ions andelectrons (plasma) in the diffusion region. This separation issaid to create a quadrupolar system of Hall currents and,thus, an associated set of Hall magnetic fields. Even herehowever, it is understood that any released energy comes notfrom neutral points, lines, or surfaces, where no energy isstored, or bulk movement of plasma but from the surroundingmagnetic field structure that depends on those Hall currents forits existence.

The crucial difference between the two explanations is thequestion of which quantity (time-varying electric current ormoving magnetic “lines”) causes energy release from the mag-netized plasma.

Alfvén [1] was explicit in his condemnation of the recon-necting concept: “Of course there can be no magnetic mergingenergy transfer. The most important criticism of the mergingmechanism is that by Heikkila [21], who, with increasingstrength, has demonstrated that it is wrong. In spite of allthis, we have witnessed, at the same time, an enormouslyvoluminous formalism building up based on this obviouslyerroneous concept.

I was naïve enough to believe that [magnetic recombination]would die by itself in the scientific community, and I con-centrated my work on more pleasant problems. To my greatsurprise the opposite has occurred: ‘merging’ . . . seems to beincreasingly powerful. Magnetospheric physics and solar windphysics today are no doubt in a chaotic state, and a majorreason for this is that part of the published papers are scienceand part pseudoscience, perhaps even with a majority in thelatter group.”

V. ROLE OF ELECTRIC CURRENTS IN THE COSMOS

No real magnetic field can exist anywhere without an associ-ated moving charge (electric current). Conversely, any electriccurrent will create a magnetic field. The applicable Maxwellequation describes this inherent interrelationship, i.e.,

∇× H = j + εdE

dt(10)

where j is the current density, and the second term on theright is the displacement current, which is often neglected.However, it is sometimes convenient to account for the kinetic

826 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PLASMA SCIENCE, VOL. 35, NO. 4, AUGUST 2007

energy of a magnetized plasma by introducing the effectivepermittivity, i.e.,

ε ⇒ ε[1 + (c/VMH)2

](11)

where c and VMH are the velocities of light and of hydrody-namic waves. If this is done, the displacement current can belarge [1]. In any event, all terms in the equation are expressedin amperes per square meter. Magnetic flux density B = µH(where µ is the magnetic permeability of the medium). Equa-tion (10) defines the inherent coupling of magnetic fields andelectric currents. The classroom interpretation of this relation-ship is called the “right-hand rule.” Point your right thumb inthe direction of the current density vector; your fingers showthe direction of the magnetic field (and vice versa). Althoughmagnetic fields are often included in astronomical hypotheses,the inherently associated electric currents are rarely mentioned.In addition, as is true in the proposed reconnection mechanism,the behavior of cosmic magnetic fields and the release of energyfrom those fields can only be understood by referencing thebehavior of their causative electric currents.

VI. FROZEN-IN MAGNETIC FIELDS

Astrophysicists often assume that plasmas are perfect con-ductors, and as such, any magnetic field in any plasma must be“frozen” inside it. (This rigid attachment is assumed in the mag-netic reconnection mechanism that is discussed in Section IV.)Indeed, it was plasma pioneer Alfvén who first proposed thisidea. It was based on the observation that, since plasmas werethought to be perfect conductors, they cannot sustain electricfields.

Alfvén’s original motivation for proposing “frozen-in” fieldsstemmed from another one of Maxwell’s equations, i.e.,

∇× E = −dB

dt. (12)

This implies that if the electric field in a region of plasma isidentically zero valued (as it would have to be if the mediumhad zero resistance—perfect conductivity), then any magneticfield within that region must be time invariant (must be frozen).Thus, if all plasmas are ideal conductors (and thus cannotsupport electric fields), then any magnetic fields inside suchplasmas must be frozen in, i.e., cannot move or change in anyway with time.

The electrical conductivity of any material, including plasma,is determined by two main factors, namely: 1) the density of thepopulation of available charge carriers (free ions and electrons)in the medium and 2) the mobility of these carriers. Most,if not all, cosmic plasmas are magnetized (contain large andlong internal magnetic fields). In any such plasma, the trans-verse (perpendicular to this field) mobility of charge carriersis severely restricted because of the spinning motion that isimposed on their momentum by Lorentz force (3). Mobilityin the parallel (and antiparallel) direction, being unaffected bythis transverse force, is extremely high because electrons and

ions have long mean-free paths in such plasmas. However, thedensity (the number per unit volume) of these charge carriersmay not be at all high, particularly, if the plasma is a verylow pressure (diffused) one. Therefore, conductivity is less thanideal, even in the longitudinal direction, in cosmic plasma.

Laboratory measurements demonstrate that a nonzero-valuedelectric field in the direction of the current (Eparallel > 0)is required to produce a nonzero current density within anyplasma no matter what mode of operation the plasma is in.Negative-slope regions of the volt-ampere characteristic (neg-ative dynamic resistance) of a plasma column reveal the causeof the filamentary properties of plasma, but all static resistancevalues are measured to be > 0.

Thus, although plasmas are excellent conductors, they are notperfect conductors. Weak longitudinal electric fields can and doexist inside plasmas. Therefore, magnetic fields are not frozeninside them.

When, in his acceptance speech of the 1970 Nobel Prize inphysics, Alfvén pointed out that this frozen-in idea, which hehad earlier endorsed, was false, many astrophysicists chose notto listen. In reality, magnetic fields do move with respect tocosmic plasma cells and, in doing so, induce electric currents.This mechanism (which generates electric current) is one causeof the phenomena that is described by what is now calledplasma cosmology.

Alfvén said, “I thought that the frozen-in concept was verygood from a pedagogical point of view, and indeed it becamevery popular. In reality, however, it was not a good pedagog-ical concept but a dangerous ‘pseudo pedagogical concept.’By ‘pseudo pedagogical’ I mean a concept which makes youbelieve that you understand a phenomenon whereas in realityyou have drastically misunderstood it.”

Now, we know that there are slight voltage differences be-tween different points in plasmas. Many astrophysicists are stillunaware of this property of plasmas, and so, we often stillread unqualified assertions such as “Once a plasma containsmagnetic fields, they move with the plasma as if the magneticfield lines were frozen in [18].”

In addition, “. . . plasmas and magnetic fields interact; theybehave, approximately, as if they are ‘frozen’ together [19].”

“. . . fields that are ‘stuck’ inside conductors take a long timeto diffuse out (i.e., the magnetic flux is frozen into the movingplasma) [20].”

VII. CONCLUSION

Maxwell showed that magnetic fields are the inseparablehandmaidens of electric currents and vice versa. This is astrue in the cosmos as it is here on Earth. Those investigatorswho, for whatever reason, have not been exposed to the nowwell-known properties of real plasmas and electromagneticfield theory must refrain from inventing “new” mechanisms inefforts to support current-free cosmic models. “New science”should not be invoked until all of what is now known aboutelectromagnetic fields and electric currents in space plasmahas been considered. Pronouncements that are in contradictionto Maxwell’s equations ought to be openly challenged byresponsible scientists and engineers.

SCOTT: REAL PROPERTIES OF ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND PLASMA IN THE COSMOS 827

REFERENCES

[1] H. Alfvén, “Double layers and circuits in astrophysics,” IEEE Trans.Plasma Sci., vol. PS-14, no. 6, p. 788, Dec. 1986.

[2] H. Alfvén, Cosmic Plasma. New York: Reidel, 1981.[3] H. Alfvén and C. G. Falthämmer, Cosmical Electrodynamics. London,

U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 1963.[4] E. J. Lerner, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics, West Orange, NJ. private

communication, Jun. 2005.[5] H. Alfvén, “Model of the plasma universe,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci.,

vol. PS-14, no. 6, pp. 631–632, Dec. 1986.[6] A. L. Peratt, Physics of the Plasma Universe. New York: Springer-

Verlag, 1992, pp. 120–122. 285-303.[7] D. P. Stern and M. Peredo, The Magnetopause. Washington, DC:

NASA. [Online]. Available: http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wmpause.html

[8] M. Banaszkiewicz, W. I. Axford, and J. F. McKenzie, “An analytic solarmagnetic field model,” Astron. Astrophys., vol. 337, no. 3, pp. 940–944,1998.

[9] Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF), San Antonio, TX: Southwest Res.Inst. [Online]. Available: http://pluto.space.swri.edu/image/glossary/IMF.html

[10] L. Anderson and S. Young, Effects of Solar Wind on the Near-EarthGeospace and Magnetosphere, Montana State Univ. [Online]. Available:http://www.cem.msu.edu/~cem181h/projects/97/solar/index.htm

[11] H. Hudson and A. Takeda. (2001, Nov. 16). “A skinny but robust coronalhole,” Science Nugget. [Online]. Available: http://solar.physics.montana.edu/nuggets/2001/011116/011116.html

[12] D. W. Longcope, Topological Methods for the Analysis of Solar MagneticFields, Dept. Phys., Montana State Univ. [Online]. Available: http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrsp-2005-7/

[13] M. Morris, Astronomers Report Unprecedented Double Helix NebulaNear Center of the Milky Way, Los Angeles, CA: Dept. Phys. andAstronomy, UCLA. [Online]. Available: http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6903

[14] Magnetic Field Lines. Washington, DC: NASA. [Online]. Available:http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wfldline.html

[15] P. Sullivan, Magnetic Reconnection. Hanover, NH: Dept. Phys. andAstronomy, Dartmouth Univ. [Online]. Available: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~bpsullivan/recon.html

[16] D. E. Scott, An Introduction to Circuit Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987, pp. 127–130.

[17] M. Øieroset et al., “Wind’s encounter with the collisionless magneticreconnection diffusion region in the Earth’s magnetic tail,” in Proc. Amer.Geophys. Union Fall Meeting, 2001, abstract #SM42C-01.

[18] K. Dolag, M. Bartelmann, and H. Lesch, Magnetic Fields in GalaxyClusters, Garching, Germany: Max Planck Inst. for Astrophysics.[Online]. Available: http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/HIGHLIGHT/1999/highlight9909_e.html

[19] S. Cowley, “A beginner’s guide to the Earth’s magnetosphere,” EarthSpace, vol. 8, no. 7, p. 9, Mar. 1996.

[20] I. G. Furno et al., Research Highlights “Magnetic Reconnection” StudiesConducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory. [Online]. Available:http://www.lanl.gov/p/rh03_intrator.shtml

[21] W. J. Heikkila, “Astrophys,” Space Sci., vol. 23, p. 261, 1973.

Donald E. Scott received the Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from the Univer-sity of Connecticut, Storrs, and the Ph.D. degree from Worcester PolytechnicInstitute, Worcester, MA, all in electrical engineering.

He was with General Electric (LSTG) in Schenectady, NY, and Pittsfield,MA (Lightning Arrester Division). From 1959 to 1998, he was a memberof the faculty of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,University of Massachusetts, Amherst. He was, at various times, an AssistantDepartment Head, the Director of the undergraduate program, the GraduateAdmissions Coordinator, and the Director of the College of Engineering’sVideo Instructional Program. In 1984, he was a Guest Lecturer in the Schoolof Engineering, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez. He is the author of AnIntroduction To Circuit Analysis—A Systems Approach (McGraw-Hill BookCompany, 1987) and The Electric Sky—A Challenge to the Myths of ModernAstronomy (Mikamar Publishing, 2006). This latest work details and expandson the theme of this paper, and addresses the legitimacy of many of theassumptions, hypothetical entities, and forces that are required by presentlyaccepted nonelectrical gravity-only-based theories of astrophysics.

Dr. Scott was the recipient of several good-teaching awards.

On the Sun’s Electric-Field

D. E. Scott, Ph.D. (EE)

Introduction

Most investigators who are receptive to the Electric Sun Model agree that the Sun is

electrically charged to a high voltage and acts as the anode in a plasma discharge. The

Sun’s corona is the most visible part of that plasma. The cathode in this discharge is a

virtual cathode – a surface located at a large distance from the Sun, several times the

distance of the outermost planets. The entire volume from the Sun out to the cathode

contains plasma. Thus the name solar plasmasphere is (ought to be) used to describe it.

The outer surface of the plasmasphere is called the heliopause and is probably a plasma

sheath (possibly a single or double layer (DL) of electrical charge). This layer is the

virtual cathode.

The structure of the plasma inside the solar plasmasphere is akin to the electric plasma

discharge seen in a Crooke’s Tube. In the laboratory this is often in the form of a glass

cylinder with an anode (high voltage electrode) at one end and a cathode (low – or

reference voltage anode) at the other. The tube is filled with low-pressure gas, a voltage

is applied from one electrode to the other, and an electric plasma discharge takes place

inside the tube.

This discharge can be in the dark mode, glow mode, or arc mode depending on the values

of several variables, notably the strength of the electric current density that exists within

the plasma.

Unfortunately the cylindrical shape of the Crooke’s tube is quite different from the

spherical shape of the plasma surrounding the Sun. The purpose of this paper is to

investigate the consequences of that spherical geometry especially in regard to the

possible electric field strength distributions within the solar plasma (inside the

plasmasphere).

Assumptions

1. The solar plasma is generally quasi-neutral, which means that the number of free

electrons and the number of positive ions within any reasonably sized volume

(1m3

to 1km3) are equal. This is not to say that quasi-neutrality is strictly adhered

to within every region of the solar plasmasphere. It clearly is not.

2. The solar plasma (as any plasma) is not an ideal, zero-resistance entity. However,

plasma generally cannot support high-valued electric fields (large voltage drops

between two closely spaced points). In the event a high-valued voltage drop is

imposed between two points in plasma, a DL will form somewhere between the

points such that the greater part of the applied voltage drop will occur inside this

DL. Because of this effect, only low-valued electric fields can and do exist within

the solar plasmasphere (along with one or more DLs).

2

3. The Sun is not an isolated point charge within a vacuum. So the application of

classical electrostatic analyses to the solar plasma is inappropriate, Maxwell’s

equations can be used productively in limited and well-defined ways – especially

in regions of non-quasi-neutrality.

The Sun’s E-field

The Sun is an electrically charged sphere. We can apply Maxwell’s equations to this

geometry. One of those equations states the primary property of any electric field: the

divergence of the electric intensity, D = εE, at any point is equal to the charge density, ρ,

at that point. The quantity ε is the permittivity1 of the medium.

)()( rrEdiv (1)

or )()( rrE (2)

This can also be written in integral form as

QdSE (3)

This states that the total electrical flux emerging perpendicularly from the surface

surrounding a closed volume is equal to the net electrical charge enclosed within that

volume. In other words, electric fields begin on positive charges and end on negative

charges. A total charge, Q, within a spherical volume whose surface area is S, will

produce an electric field external to S. Because the surface area of a sphere is 24 r , we

have from expression 3

QRE S 24 (4)

where RS is the radius of the Sun’s anode surface (the radius of the effective radial limit

of the Sun’s internal electric charge distribution).

or 24 SR

QE

(5)

The value given by expression 5 is the strength of the Sun’s outwardly directed electric

field immediately above its surface. We know little or nothing about the strength of this

field because we have no way of calculating the value of Q (the total electrical charge on

the Sun) nor any ability to measure it directly. In writing the above expressions, we are

assuming that the electric field strength has no altitudinal or azimuthal variation – it is

isotropic, being a function only of r, the radial dimension. This is probably not the case

along the polar axis external to the Sun’s surface.

What is the strength of the E-field at some point farther out from the surface? If the Sun’s

surroundings contain no net electrical charge, then we can answer, similarly as in

expression 5:

24

)(r

QrE

(6)

But, r is now the radius of an imaginary sphere that is larger than the Sun (r > RS). Of

course this larger sphere still only contains the original amount of charge, Q, that is inside

the Sun. Expression 6 tells us that as long as there is no additional net charge located

outside of the Sun’s anode surface, the strength of the electric field emanating from it,

decreases inversely as the square of the radial distance at which it is measured. This is the

classical electrostatic result proclaimed by those who ignore electric charge densities

3

within the Sun’s surrounding plasma. This represents an over-simplification and, as such,

yields an erroneous result. It ignores the fact that a great amount of electric charge exists

in the solar plasma and that some of that is probably in the form of layers – DLs.

For example, suppose there is a layer (shell) of charge density beginning out at some

distance, r1. Can the ‘point’ forms of this Maxwell equation (expressions 1 and 2) tell us

anything about the resulting E-field in this case? Yes, provided the applicable geometry is

used. The general expression for divergence in spherical coordinates is

D

rD

rDr

rrDdiv r

sin

1sin

sin

11 2

2 (7)

where D = εE. Assuming an isotropic spherical geometry (in which there is no azimuthal

nor altitudinal variation) the last two terms on the right have zero value and so expression

7 simplifies to the ordinary differential equation:

)()(1 2

2rrEr

dr

d

r (8)

By referencing the structure of typical laboratory plasma discharges, it is well known that

the first layer above the anode surface called the anode dark space (ADS) can contain

either positive or negative charge. In either event, the charge density in this space is

essentially a constant, ρADS. Thus, for values of r in that region, we have

ADSrErdr

d

r )(

1 2

2 (9)

This is satisfied by

rrE ADS

3)( (10)

The E-field in this layer is thus a ramp function (of radial distance) whose slope depends

on the value (and algebraic sign) of ρADS. Thus, within a layer of uniform positive space

charge density, the electric field strength will increase linearly with increasing altitude

(distance from the Sun). Within a region of uniform negative space charge density, the

electric field strength will decrease linearly with increasing r. The Sun’s E-field cannot

be discontinuous in regions where there are only finite charge densities. With this

knowledge, we can plot an approximation of the strength of the Sun’s electric field within

a charge layer situated above the solar surface.

Above the anode dark space there are several different charge shells (layers). All of these

are assumed to contain either positive, negative, or zero (quasi-neutral) valued charge

densities and expression 10 is valid. Note that r is measured outward from the Sun’s

center.

In general, equation (8) is valid for a variety of charge density distributions within the

solar plasma whose density varies with increasing r. In this expression, ρ(r) is the

‘excess’ charge density distribution. If the plasma is truly quasi-neutral, then ρ(r) = 0. If

there are more positive ions than electrons in a given region, then ρ(r) > 0. If there are

more electrons than +ions, ρ(r) is a negative quantity (ρ(r) < 0).

4

Let us postulate several different functions for E(r) and determine what, if any, ρ(r)

function is required to create each of them. For example, the following table lists five

pairs of E(r) and ρ(r) functions that are mutually consistent within the constraints of

equation 8.

E(r) ρ(r)

1. 0 0

2. 20

r

E 0

3. r

E0 20

r

E

4. 0E

rE02

5. rE0

03 E

In these pairs of functions r > RS and 4

0

QE such that expression 5 obtains when r =

RS.

The first function is simply a special case of #2 where 0E = 0. This is the case of an

uncharged (non-electric) Sun.

The second function is the classic isolated charged Sun not surrounded by any kind of

charge layers as described in expression 6.

Pairs #3 and #4 suggest that, if there are more positive ions than electrons in the

atmosphere of the Sun, that the electric field would be stronger farther out from the Sun

than in case #2. In fact, in case #4, we see that an excess charge density that tapers off

inversely as the first power of distance, will produce a constant strength E-field

(independent of distance). It is often the case in electrical discharges that a somewhat

higher density of positive charge is found near the anode, so these cases (#3 and #4) are

of more than just academic interest.

The fifth pair of functions is a restatement of expression 10. Consider that the heliopause

(the outer edge of the solar plasmasphere) serves as the virtual cathode for this overall

discharge. We often find an excess of (secondary) electrons near the cathode of a

discharge. And we realize that the solar electric field must end on a shell of electrons. For

a long distance inside the heliopause, as we travel outward from the Sun, the solar plasma

is probably fairly quasi-neutral. The excess charge density has been zero-valued.

Therefore, according to function pair #2, the E-field has been decreasing as the square of

radial distance.

If the heliopause (virtual cathode of the solar plasma discharge) consists of a layer of

electrons whose density, ρ(r), is a constant (negative value) for some distance beyond its

5

inner edge. This corresponds to the 5th

pair of functions but with E0 being a negative

constant. Thus we see (again) that the electric field in that region would be negative and

would increase in strength with increasing distance, r. This increasing negative E-field

would represent an inward force on any positively charged space probe approaching it

from the inner plasmasphere. Such a force might be observed as an ‘anomalous’ effect on

the craft’s velocity.

Conclusion

The application of Maxwell’s equations to the correct spherical geometry of the Sun’s

environment suggests a set of self-consistent, non-zero-valued electric-field functions and

space-charge distributions that EU theorists have long felt existed, but have not

previously been described quantitatively. These variations in the electric field suggest a

possible explanatory mechanism for the here-to-fore ‘inexplicable, anomalous behavior’

of space probes in the vicinity of the heliopause.

1 Permittivity of a region of plasma is a function of the velocity of hydromagnetic waves in that medium. In

a spherical geometry (one in which the excess charge density may change with r), this factor may not be a

constant – further complicating the analysis.

180 The Open Astronomy Journal, 2011, 4, (Suppl 2-M3) 180-184

1874-3811/11 2011 Bentham Open

Open Access

Electric Currents Key to Magnetic Phenomena

Donald E. Scott*

University of Massachusetts/Amherst, USA

Abstract: Including the effects of electric currents in any description of the origin, shape, or motion of cosmic

magnetized plasma is crucial for understanding many observed astronomical phenomena. The Maxwell (Heaviside)

equations are based on real experimental measurements. These fundamental expressions clearly link electric current

densities, magnetic flux densities, and electric fields into a unified conceptual whole. Examples are presented to

demonstrate the pitfalls of omitting the contribution and effects of currents from descriptions of the behavior of magnetic

fields. An example suggests a possible electrical explanation of the enigmatic cyclical reversal of magnetic polarities near

sunspots and demonstrates the unique insight afforded by including the causal effects of currents.

Keywords: Plasma, electromagnetism, reversing solar magnetic field, solar and cosmic electric currents, magnetic

reconnection.

I. INTRODUCTION

Ever since Gauss, Faraday, and others1 provided the ex-

perimental measurements that J. C. Maxwell and Oliver

Heaviside codified into their four basic equations, there have

been two different methodologies advanced in astrophysics

for explaining and predicting the behavior of cosmic mag-

netic phenomena. One of these involves the explicit inclu-

sion of causal electric currents and one shuns any mention of

them.

The two Maxwell curl equations provide the basis of this

dichotomy.

B = μ0J +μ0 0

E

t (1)

and

E =B

t (2)

where B is the magnetic flux density (Webers/m2), J is

the electric current density (Amps/m2), E is the electric field

(V/m or Newtons/Coulomb); 0

μ and 0

are, respectively,

the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity of

free space. All the upper case symbols in (1) and (2)

represent vectors. The second term on the right in (1) is

called the displacement current and is often ignored in order

to simplify the equation. However it is sometimes

convenient to account for the kinetic energy of magnetized

plasma as being

*Address correspondence to this author at the University of Massachu-

setts/Amherst, USA; Tel: (480) 688-4414; E-mail: dascott3@cox.net. #Retired

1 In 1821 Hans Christian Øersted in Denmark found, that an electric current caused a

compass needle to move. An electric current produced a magnetic force. Andre-Marie

Ampere in France soon unraveled the meaning. The fundamental nature of magnetism

was not associated with magnetic poles or iron magnets, but with electric currents. The

magnetic force was basically a force between electric currents.

= 0 1+ c VMH( )2

(3)

where c and VMH are, respectively, the velocities of light and

hydromagnetic waves [1]. (If this formulation is used, the

displacement current is often large.) And therein lies the rub.

II. AVOIDING CURRENTS

Those who prefer to avoid explicit mention of electric

currents solve the simplified form of (1) for the quantity J

(using B( ) / μ0 in its place). This is acceptable in describ-

ing a number of phenomena:

Magnetic fields by themselves are measured more

easily than are currents.

Magnetic fields by themselves are basic to the

study of plasma anisotropy and high-energy par-

ticle motion.

Magnetic fields by themselves provide a good de-

scription of some waves in plasma.

However, use of magnetic fields without consideration of

electric currents, cannot provide clear understanding of:

The formation of double layers.

Explosive events such as solar flares, and mag-

netic substorms.

Formation of filaments in the solar atmosphere

(corona) and the plasmasphere of Venus.

Other phenomena that are mentioned below and

are the main purpose of this paper.

Equation (2) above implicitly involves electric current in

that it is the compact mathematical statement of the observa-

tion that any closed conducting loop that is linked by a time-

varying magnetic field will carry an induced current in the

direction that opposes the growth of that magnetic flux. (If

the loop is cut, a voltage will appear across the terminals

thus created). Therefore, (1) states that any current (or time

Electric Currents Key to Magnetic Phenomena The Open Astronomy Journal, 2011, Volume 4 181

varying electric field) will produce a magnetic field; (2)

states that any time varying magnetic field that links a closed

conducting path (conducting loop) will produce a voltage

rise which in turn creates an electric current in the loop.

Magnetic fields that obey equation (1) cannot exist in the

absence of the current density, J, which is their cause. The

only magnetic fields that do not obey equation (1) are pro-

duced by bar magnets. There are no bar magnets in space.

III. ENIGMATIC PLASMA MOTIONS

In descriptions that ignore the involvement of currents in

plasma phenomena several questions always remain unasked

(and therefore unaddressed). Basically, we must ask what

causes magnetic fields to move or change strength? For ex-

ample, in attempts to explain the cause of solar flares and

coronal mass ejections (CMEs), ‘magnetic reconnection’ is

usually invoked. But what is magnetic reconnection [2, 3].

Usually explanations of magnetic reconnection start off

by saying, “Two magnetic lines of force approach each

other, touch, and then separate in orthogonal directions.” But

the first, most basic question that must be answered is what makes those two lines move toward each other in the first

place? There is no known mechanism that can grab hold of

two adjacent ‘lines of force’ in a magnetic field and push

them together. So how (why?) do they do this? Magnetic

fields do not have the ability of self-initiated volition. It is

impossible to answer basic questions such as this without

making reference to the time varying electric currents

(charge flows) that determine the shape and strength of the

involved magnetic fields.

An example of an appalling lack of knowledge about

how magnetic fields originate is the following extract from

an article in New Scientist [4]:

Relatively confined magnetic fields like those in the

Earth and Sun are generated by the turbulent mixing of con-

ducting fluids in their cores. But large-scale fields tangled

within galaxies and clusters of galaxies are harder to explain

by fluid mixing alone.

Where did this writer ever get the idea that the mixing of

conducting fluids creates magnetic fields? What Department

of Physics teaches this?

One can take salt water (a conducting fluid) or blood (a

very conductive fluid), mix it, whip it, homogenize it, boil it,

pour it from great heights or even centrifuge it, or try to

compress it – no magnetic fields will result from any of these

actions. Magnetic fields are only created by and moved

around by electric currents or other magnetic fields – but

nothing else, certainly not by mixing conductive fluids.

Another example – this excerpt is taken from an article

entitled Possible Origin Of Magnetic Fields In Space Un-covered [5]:

The data suggest that the ghost cavities are filled with

magnetic fields, which are released into the cosmos when the

cavities burst apart. This could explain the strong magnetic

forces that make up the structure of galaxy clusters, accord-

ing to the astronomers.

“We’ve known for the past 15 to 20 years that magnetic

fields exist, but we didn’t understand how they got there,”

said McNamara, an associate professor of physics and as-

tronomy in the College of Arts and Sciences whose research

is funded by NASA. “This could be a viable mechanism.”

[Emphasis added.]

This writer seriously suggests that the origin of magnetic

fields is “ghost cavities that burst apart in the cosmos.”

One more example (hundreds of such are easily obtain-

able via an Internet search on the topic: What causes mag-

netic fields?): in 2008 a NASA report contained the follow-

ing [6]:

NASA's five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a

breach in Earth's magnetic field ten times larger than any-

thing previously thought to exist.

The magnetosphere is a bubble of magnetism that sur-

rounds Earth and protects us from solar wind. The event be-

gan with little warning when a gentle gust of solar wind

delivered a bundle of magnetic fields from the Sun to Earth.

Like an octopus wrapping its tentacles around a big clam,

solar magnetic fields draped themselves around the magne-

tosphere and cracked it open. [Emphasis added.]

Magnetic fields are not delivered in bundles. And the so-

lar wind does not move them around. Magnetic fields are

created by and moved around by electric currents – nothing

else.

IV. MAGNETICALLY STORED ENERGY

FARADAY’S LAW – The formal statement of Faraday’s

Law is, “The induced electromotive force or EMF in any

closed circuit is equal to the time rate of change of the mag-

netic flux linking the circuit.” This is a restatement of ex-

pression (2) above. In the case of a coil of wire wrapped

around a material core carrying magnetic flux, B, the voltage

across the terminals of the coil is given by

v =dn

dt (4)

where is the total magnetic flux in Webers (which is B, the

flux density in Webers per square meter integrated over the

cross-section of the coil). But in any electrical element that

has voltage, v, across it and current, i, through it, the energy

stored in that element is

W(t0 ) = v(t)i(t) dtt0

(5)

thus, for a constant number of turns, n, we have

W(t0 ) =d n( )dt

i(t) dtt=

t=t0 (6)

= ni d( )

(t0 ) (7)

If the relationship between the magnetic flux and the

applied ampere-turns, ni, is linear

t( ) = k ni (8)

then (7) becomes

182 The Open Astronomy Journal, 2011, Volume 4 Donald E. Scott

W(t0 ) = nikn di( )

(t0 ) (9)

or W(t0 ) =kn2

2i t0( )

2= 1

2k( )t0( )

2 (10)

The energy stored in the magnetic field structure at any

instant, t0, is proportional to the square of the current, i(t0). Similarly, the total energy stored in the magnetic field at any

time, t0, is proportional to the square of the total magnetic

flux at that instant, (t0). If the current is reduced to zero

value, all the energy previously stored in the field is released.

V. MAGNETIC CIRCUITS

Equation (8) suggests that application of the forcing

function, ni, to a magnetically linear material (free space, air)

results in the production of a magnetic flux, , in much the

same way that the application of a voltage, v, across a resis-

tor produces a flow of charge, i.

For simplicity in the example sketched in Fig. (1), both

n1 and n2 are set to unity. The input current, i1, produces flux,

. The linear relationship between those quantities implies

that if i1 increases, then will increase at an equal rate.

If i1 is held constant (is time-invariant), then will also

be time-invariant, and there will be no current induced in the

second winding (so i2 will be zero valued). Equations (2) and

(4) state that only a time varying magnetic field can induce a

non-zero valued i2. What (2) and (4) actually say is that, if

we cut the conducting loop, n2, creating two terminals, a

voltage, v2 will be measured across those terminals that

would force current i2 to flow in a resistor connected to those

terminals. The minus sign in equation (2) indicates that the

induced (secondary) current will be in a direction that tends

to oppose the growth of the magnetic flux. So the strength of

i2 is determined by the time rate of growth of .

Consider a slight extension to the first example. See Fig.

(2). Suppose the input current, i1 is now a time varying signal

– one that never reverses direction, but can get stronger and

weaker.

As a result of the variation in i1, the magnetic flux, , will

also strengthen and weaken accordingly. If i1 does not re-

verse its direction, neither will 1. But, because of its

strengthening and weakening, the time rate of flux growth,

1/ t, will alternate in sign. Therefore, i2, which at every

instant flows in a direction to oppose the growth of 1, will

also reverse its direction. This causes 2 to reverse its direc-

tion.

The conclusion that can be drawn from these examples is

that a unidirectional current, i1, if it varies in strength over

time, can produce a magnetic flux, 2, that reverses direc-tion. This effect is utilized in the electric power industry in

transformers and so is called transformer action.

VI. MAGNETIC FIELDS THAT REVERSE THEIR POLARITY

Are there any examples of astronomical magnetic fields

that occasionally reverse their direction? And, if so, do we

know what causes them to do that?

Eugene N. Parker [7] correctly calls coronal loops

‘bulges’ in the Sun’s magnetic field. He states: “The bulges

emerge through the surface of the Sun, forming bipolar mag-

netic regions, or magnetically active regions, with lengths up

to 200,000 km. The bipolar fields have opposite signs on

opposite sides of the equator, and the algebraic signs of the

fields reverse from one 11-year [sunspot] cycle to the next.”

[Emphasis added]

This remains, for Parker, an enigmatic observation. Per-

haps if he were more amenable to consideration of an elec-

tric current causality, a clearer understanding might dawn. In

light of the previous example, we offer a possible explana-

tory mechanism in Fig. (3), below.

According to Alfvén’s stellar circuit [1], an electric cur-

rent (charge flow) enters or leaves each pole of the Sun.

n1i1 n2i2

Fig. (1). A simple magnetic circuit.

n1i1 n2i2

1

1

2

2

Fig. (2). Two magnetic paths linked by an induced secondary current.

Electric Currents Key to Magnetic Phenomena The Open Astronomy Journal, 2011, Volume 4 183

Making use of the right-hand rule we can visualize the direc-

tions of the encircling magnetic field created by that current.

If the strength of this current is increasing, the magnetic field

will strengthen as well. Such time varying magnetic fields

can induce secondary currents2 as shown in the earlier ex-

amples and also in Fig. (3). The secondary current will only

exist (have non-zero value) when the magnitude of the pri-

mary magnetic field is growing or shrinking.

If a secondary current filament is flowing southward

from near the Sun’s north pole and it is on or just beneath the

Sun’s surface, a looping magnetic field will emerge to the

east of the current creating a north magnetic pole there.

(Right thumb directed toward the south, fingers emerging up

out of the surface on its east side.) The loop will move out

above the Sun’s surface and then return down into the sur-

face forming a south magnetic pole to the west of the cur-

rent. Recall that a ‘north magnetic pole’ is a region where the

magnetic flux emerges from a solid.3 In the Sun’s southern

hemisphere, the secondary surface current is flowing north-

ward toward the solar equator. The resulting magnetic field

will emerge (north magnetic pole) to the west of the current

and return down to the surface (forming a south magnetic

pole) to the east of the current.

2 A secondary current will always flow in a direction that tends to oppose the growth of

the magnetic field that induces it. This relationship can be seen in figures 2 and 3. 3 The end of a compass needle marked “N” is indeed a north magnetic pole. It points

almost toward Earth’s north pole. Thus, the region near Earth’s North Pole (toward

which the compass points) is, in reality, a south magnetic pole. A magnetic field is

leaving the compass needle and flowing into the earth near the north geographic pole.

That field then comes out of the Earth near the geographic south pole (creating there a

north magnetic pole) and then flows into the end of the compass needle marked “S”.

Regardless of the direction of the main driving current

coming into the Sun, the eleven-year reversal of the mag-

netic loops can be explained by transformer action as shown

above. If the main magnetic field that induces the surface

currents is growing in strength, the surface current will point

in one direction. If the main magnetic field starts to weaken

in intensity, the secondary (surface) current will reverse di-rection. Consequently the magnetic polarity of the Omega

loops will also reverse. Notice that this mechanism does not

require the main solar driving current itself to reverse direc-

tion, only to vary in amplitude. Thus the action described by

Parker (“The bipolar fields have opposite signs on opposite

sides of the equator.”) follows directly from Alfvén’s circuit.

The presence of sub-surface electric currents on the Sun

is not just mere speculation. In August 1997, scientists at

Stanford University [8] announced that, using the joint

European Space Agency (ESA)/NASA Solar and Helio-

spheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft, they had discovered

‘jet streams’ or what they called ‘rivers of hot, electrically

charged gas’ (plasma) flowing beneath the surface of the

Sun. They also found features similar to trade winds that

transport this ‘gas’ below the Sun's surface. Flows of electric

charges such as these are, by definition, electric currents.

The image [9] that accompanied the press release has an al-

most one-to-one correspondence with Fig. (3).

So these reversing magnetic fields on the Sun’s surface

provide an archetypical example of an observed phenomenon

that cannot be understood without reference to the electric

currents that cause it. And even though data supporting the

electrical model proposed here were published as long ago as

Fig. (3). Primary and secondary electric currents in the Sun.

184 The Open Astronomy Journal, 2011, Volume 4 Donald E. Scott

1997, mainstream astronomers have not yet begun to ac-

knowledge the importance of electric currents – neither on

the Sun, or anywhere else for that matter.

VII. CONCLUSION

The well-known inter-relationships between electric cur-

rents and magnetic fields so succinctly described a century

ago by Maxwell, together with the analytical tools of modern

circuit analysis, now offer investigators in astrophysics an

expanded set of techniques and concepts by which they can

advance their understanding of what otherwise will remain,

for them, ‘enigmatic’ observations. The obstinate refusal of

astrophysicists to acknowledge the efficacy of electric cur-

rents in the cosmos is a self-imposed obstacle to their future

progress. They would do well to remove it.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

None Declared.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None Declared.

REFERENCES

[1] Alfvén H. Double layers and circuits in astrophysics. IEEE Trans

Plasma Sci 1986; vol. PS-14: pp. 779-793

[2] Scott DE. Special issue on space and cosmic plasma. IEEE Trans

Plasma Sci 2007; 35(4). http://members.cox.net/dascott3/IEEE-

TransPlasmaSci-Scott-aug2007.pdf

[3] Scott DE. The Electric Sky. Portland: Mikamar Publishing 2006.

[4] http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8544-how-the-universes-

first-magnetic-field-formed.html

[5] http://www.unisci.com/stories/20021/0109021.htm

[6] http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-

nasa/2008/16dec_giantbreach

[7] Parker EN. The physics of the sun and the gateway to the stars.

Phys Today 2000; 53: 26-31.

[8] http://soi.stanford.edu/press/ssu8-97/ssu.html

[9] http://solar-center.stanford.edu/images/plasmacom.jpg

Received: April 21, 2011 Revised: May 19, 2011 Accepted: May 19, 2011

© Donald E. Scott; Licensee Bentham Open.

This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the

work is properly cited.

The Electronic Sun Summary Notes

Donald E. Scott, Ph.D. (EE)

Part I.

Why the Lower Corona of the Sun Is Hotter Than the Photosphere

Figure 1 Temperature vs Altitude Above the Sun’s Surface.

The temperature profile of the Sun shown in figure 1 resists simple explanation. Of all the ideas offered up as being a possible cause of the extreme temperature (more than 2 million Kelvin) measured in the lower corona of our Sun, the simplest is that electrically accelerated, high velocity, positive ions are colliding with relatively static ions and neutral atoms in that location. The resulting chaos of Brownian motion produces the high temperature that is measured at that level. See the right hand side of figure 1. The electrical properties of the Photosphere / Chromosphere / Lower corona region of the Sun’s visible boundary are described in Juergens Electric Sun model as being dominated by a double layer (DL) of electrical chargei. This double charge layer is shown in the middle plot in figure 2 (below). This DL is responsible for accelerating +ions outward, up from the Sun’s surface. The basic mechanism is described as follows. Positive ions in the photospheric plasma do not experience external electrostatic forces when they are within the photosphere (region a to b in figure 2). Only diffusion motion (response to a concentration gradient) and random thermal (Brownian) movement occurs there. Temperature is simply the measurement of the violence of those random movements. The photosphere is where the Sun’s low ~5800 K surface temperature is measured. Figure 2 shows a cross-section through a photospheric granule (anode tuft).

a b c dEn

erg

y p

er u

nit

ch

arg

e (V

olt

s)

Photosphere

Lower Corona

Chrom

osphere

RadialDistance (r)

Ou

twar

d E

lect

ric

Fie

ld, E

Fo

rce

per

un

it c

har

ge

(

Vo

lts

per

met

er)

RadialDistance (r)

Maximum outwardforce = Max outwardacceleration of +ions.

RadialDistance (r)

Region of turbulence.Max Brownian motionMax temperature.

Ou

twar

d V

elo

city

of

a P

osi

tive

Ion

(m

/s)

Point of maximum acceleration

a b c d

Region ofLaminar Flow

Positive chargelayers

Negative chargelayer

DL

Figure 2. The double layer of electrical charge in the Electric Sun’s chromosphere accelerates positive ions outward, away from the Sun.

Top: Electrical energy (voltage) of a positive ion as a function of its position. Middle: Outward force on a positive ion as a function of its position. Bottom: Outward velocity of a positive ion as a function of its position.

The top voltage plot in figure 2 shows that positive ions have their maximum electrical potential energy when they are in the photospheric plasma. But their mechanical (kinetic) energy (temperature) is relatively low. At a point just to the left of the right hand edge of the photospheric energy plateau (point b), any random movement toward the right (radially outward) that carries a +ion even slightly over the edge will result in its being swept away, down the energy hill, toward the right. The middle plot in the figure above shows the strength of the E-field (voltage gradient) consistent with this spatial voltage distribution. The charge density layers that produce this electric field are superimposed on this plot. The E-field is the force per unit charge that will be applied to any +ions in this region. In region b to d, this force accelerates each such +ion in the outward direction. This acceleration reaches a maximum at point c, and the +ions’ outward velocity reaches a maximum value near point d. As these positive ions accelerate down the steep potential energy drop (b to d), they exchange the high (electrical) potential energy they had in the photosphere into kinetic energy – they gain

2

extremely high outward radial velocity and lose side-to-side random motion. Thus they become ‘de-thermalized.’ This is because in this region of high radial acceleration, the movement of these ions becomes extremely organized (parallel). Their temperature, which is just a measure of their random motion, drops to a minimum. When these rapidly traveling +ions pass beyond the reach of the intense outwardly directed E-field force (at point d) that has been accelerating them, they have reached the bottom of the hill and are moving much faster than when they were at the top. Because of their high kinetic energy, any collisions they have at this point with other ions or neutral atoms are violent. This creates high-amplitude random motions, thereby ‘re-thermalizing’ the ions and atoms in this region (shown in red in figure 2) to a much higher temperature. The sparkling x-ray emissions that have been observed here in the lower corona are undoubtedly due to these collisions. Ions above (in the diagram, to the right of) point d are reported to be at temperatures of one to two million K. Nothing else but exactly this kind of result could be expected from the Electric Sun model. The ions proceed off to the right and become the major constituent of the solar wind. The re-thermalization takes place in a region analogous to the turbulent white water that boils up at the bottom of a smooth laminar water slide. In the fusion model no such (water slide) phenomenon exists – and therefore neither does any simple explanation of the observed temperature discontinuity. Notice that no mention has been made in this process of ‘flux-tubes’ or magnetic reconnection or, in fact, of any magnetic mechanism whatsoever. Strictly electrical forces that occur within the charge layers above the Sun’s surface cause the observed temperature inversion phenomenon. So, the Electric Sun model straightforwardly predicts and explains the existence of the observed temperature profile. In fact, if there were no temperature discontinuity, this would pose a problem for the Electric Sun hypothesis. However, until now, certain other observed characteristics of the Sun’s atmosphere have eluded explanation. One such problem in solar astronomy is: What mechanism can vary the strength of the solar wind (outward flow of +ions) and even shut it completely off for a period of two days as happened a few years ago? Oftentimes in the history of science a seemingly intractable problem finds its resolution when someone recognizes that the solution to a different but analogous problem already has been discovered. As described in the following section, it appears that the charge layers in the Juergens Electric Sun model described above constitute a direct one-to-one analogy of a bipolar junction transistor mechanism that is fully capable of regulating, controlling, or varying the solar wind’s volume and intensity.

Part II.

Transistor Analog of the Sun’s Surface

A bipolar junction transistor is a three terminal active device wherein a weakly varying voltage is able to control the amplitude of a large current. The following few paragraphs contain a basic description of how that occurs. Inserting certain impurities into either a pure silicon or germanium crystal makes it n-type or p-type material. A bipolar transistor is a three-part sandwich: either pnp or npn.

3

Figure 1. An unbiased npn transistor. The vertical axis is electric potential energy per unit charge (Volts).

(Credit: The Scots Guide to Electronicsii)

In n-type material, electrons move freely within the conduction energy band (upper band in figure 1). In p-type material holes move in the valence energy band (lower band in figure 1). Where two such different materials join, a depletion zone (location shown by the two vertical red lines in figure 1) forms due to recombination. The lack of charge carriers in those zones is sufficient to prevent current (charge flow) crossing those two boundaries. If an external voltage is applied (see figure 2) between the base and collector terminals, then the height of the base-to-collector voltage drop can be increased. In this case the positive terminal of a 10V battery is applied to the n-type collector and the negative side of the battery is applied to the p-type base. This is called “back biasing” the base-collector junction. In the collector, electrons are attracted toward the collector terminal and away from the base. In the base, holes are attracted away from the collector. Both these actions widen the b-c depletion zone and increase the height of the b-c voltage drop.

Figure 2 Back biasing the collector-base junction increases the height of the c-b barrier. (Credit: The Scots Guide to Electronicsiii)

4

Figure 3 Forward biasing the emitter-base junction reduces the height of the e-b barrier. (Credit: The Scots Guide to Electronicsiv)

Normal operation

Forward-biasing the e-b junction while maintaining the back bias voltage across the b-c junction provides the voltage profile shown in figure 3. This reduces the height of the e-b barrier and electrons flow from the emitter, diffuse across the base and fall into the collector. A slight change in the e-b voltage produces a large change in the amount of current reaching the collector. This is the normal operating mode of a bipolar transistor. It is important that we recognize the similarity between the shape of the voltage profile in this figure and the voltage profile in Part I’s figure 2. The collector current is analogous to the outward drift of +ions in the solar wind. A similar mechanism (varying the height of the voltage barrier between the anode-Sun and its photosphere) would be able to control the strength of the solar wind. If the Sun's voltage were to decrease slightly, say because of an excessive flow of outgoing +ions, the voltage rise (the energy barrier) from the origin up to point a in the energy diagram of figure 2 (Part I) would increase in height. This would reduce the number of ions able to escape from the Sun’s interior into the photosphere (thus decreasing the solar wind flux). Such an effect provides a negative feedback effect (one that would tend to hold the solar wind constant). The solar/transistor analogy lies in recognizing the fact that the body of the Sun serves as the emitter of a transistor-like structure. The photosphere serves as the base, and the lower corona serves as the collector. In the case of a transistor, the controlled flow is the collector current. In the Sun, the controlled flow is the stream of +ions that becomes the solar wind. Both these flows are controllable by relatively small variations in the height of voltage barriers. A diagram describing the analogy is given in figure 4, below. As with any analogy, broad similarities are revealing. Exact correspondences are not necessary. The transistor/Sun analogy is clearly not one-to-one in every respect. But generally similar causes and effects in radically different applications do offer insights into conceptual similarities that are otherwise elusive. The ability of digital transistor circuits to “cut-off” collector currents and the ability of the layers of charge above the Sun’s surface to cut off the solar wind is an example of such a similarity. The solar wind did indeed completely cut off for two days several years ago. When this occurred it came as a shock to solar astronomers. The standard solar model is incapable of explaining how or why this might have occurred. An unpredicted rise in the tufts’ barrier voltage could have easily been the cause.

5

En

erg

y p

er

un

it

ch

arg

e (

Vo

lts)

a b c d

Photosphere

Lower Corona

Chrom

osphere

RadialDistance (r)

Ou

twa

rd E

lectr

ic F

ield

, E

Fo

rce p

er

un

it c

ha

rge

(Vo

lts p

er

mete

r)

RadialDistance (r)

Maximum outwardforce = Max outwardacceleration of +ions.

RadialDistance (r)

Region of turbulence.Max Brownian motionMax temperature.

Ou

tward

Velo

cit

y o

fa P

osit

ive I

on

(m

/s)

Point of maximum acceleration

a b c d

Region ofLaminar Flow

Positive chargelayers

Negative chargelayer

DL

Emitter Base Collector

Vol

tage

(V

)

+ions+ions diffuse across this base region

This voltage risedetermines the strength of the ion flow

This voltage dropdetermines the velocity of the ion flow.

(How many ions are released from the Sun).

Figure 4 The transistor analog of the electrical mechanisms at work at the solar surface.

a b c dEn

erg

y p

er u

nit

ch

arg

e (V

olt

s)

Photosphere

Lower Corona

Chrom

osphere

RadialDistance (r)

Ou

twar

d E

lect

ric

Fie

ld, E

Fo

rce

per

un

it c

har

ge

(

Vo

lts

per

met

er)

RadialDistance (r)

RadialDistance (r)

Region of turbulence.Brownian motionHigh temperature.O

utw

ard

Vel

oci

ty o

fa

Po

siti

ve Io

n (

m/s

)

Point of maximum acceleration

a b c d

Figure 5 Punch-through effect of solar +ions flooding out from sunspots at which DLs are not present. (Credit: SOHO-MDI/EIT Consortiums, Yohkoh/SXT Project)

6

Punch-through and sunspots

In bipolar transistors a phenomenon called punch-through can be observed. If the collector-base junction is back-biased to an excessive degree, the c-b depletion zone will be made so wide that the base region may disappear altogether. In this event there will be no restraint to hold back emitter carriers from flooding directly across into the collector. There is no effective emitter-base barrier. An analogous phenomenon is observed above sunspots where there are no anode tufts. So, at those locations no transistor-like mechanism is there to provide effective control of outward flowing +ions. See figure 5 and figure 6.

Photosphere

Chromosphere

Lower Corona

Figure 6. The solar equivalent of transistor punch-though where +ions flood outward unconstrained by the photospheric transistor-like barrier that is normally at work in the granules (anode tufts).

The Solar Transistor Model Explains Why coronal hotspots appear in the lower corona above sunspots. Why the corona changes shape from times of active to quiet Sun. The solar wind’s flow rate depends on the voltage (energy) rise from the Sun’s interior up

to the photospheric tufts. The initial velocity (and temperature) of the solar wind ions depends on the voltage

(energy) drop from the tufts down to the lower corona. That transistor action can cut off the solar wind flow.

The Solar Transistor Model Is an extension of Juergens’ electric Sun model. Is additional evidence the ES model is valid. Small voltage variations control large current (flows) both in normal transistors and on the

Sun. No other mechanism capable of controlling, varying, or completely cutting off the solar

wind has yet been proposed.

7

8

Summary

An electric circuit is one that contains resistors, inductors, capacitors, sources, and perhaps transformers. An electronic circuit also contains active elements such as transistors that provide amplification of the signals (small variations in one variable producing large changes in another). The Electric Sun model pioneered by C. E. R. Bruce, Ralph Juergens, Wal Thornhill and indirectly by Hannes Alfvén is now extended to an Electronic Sun model via the analogy between its surface phenomena and the action of a junction transistor. The efficacy of a relatively weak voltage barrier in controlling large currents apparently occurs both in transistor circuits and also just above the surface of the Sun.

i Juergens, R. The Photosphere: Is It The Top Or The Bottom Of The Phenomenon We Call The Sun?, Kronos Vol. IV No. 4, 1979 http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/1979-photosphere-juergens.pdf ii http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~jcgl/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm iii http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~jcgl/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm iv http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~jcgl/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm

Solar Electron Flux

Updatedi2012

Dark Electrons Found by NASA (Alternate Title)

In the late 1970’s Ralph Juergens investigatedii how (or whether) the Sun could be obtaining its energy via an externally supplied flow of electrical power. He attempted to estimate the number of available incoming electrons which, coupled with an estimated voltage of the Sun, would be sufficient to supply the power we know the Sun is emitting. Now, in late 2011 and early 2012, we find that, because of data recently recovered by the Voyager I space probe, Juergens’ estimate of the number of available incoming electrons was far too conservative (too low). Also the radius of the heliosphere is over three times what he thought it might be. As a result of this new data Juergens’ initial estimate of the Sun’s required cathode drop (voltage) was far too high.

The NASA release entitled NASA’s Voyager Hits New Region at Solar System Edgeiii provides the following important updates to the information Juergens used in making his estimate:

1. Voyager I is now approaching the heliopause (the outer surface of the Sun’s plasmasphere). It is approximately 16 to 24 billion kilometers (~2x1013m) from the Sun. The probe has not yet crossed the boundary into interstellar space so this is a minimum estimate of the radius of the heliosphere.

2. Voyager has detected a 100-fold increase in the intensity of high-energy electrons entering our solar system from elsewhere in the galaxy. The original estimate was 100,000 free electrons per cubic m. Thus the updated figure is ~107 /m3.

3. The probe has been measuring the speed of the solar wind and for the first time in its journey, the wind now “blows back at us.”

Using this new data we can recalculate Juergens’ estimate of how many incoming electrons

are available to the Electric Sun model. The ‘solar constant’, defined as the total radiant energy at all wavelengths reaching an area of one square centimeter at the Earth's distance from the Sun, is about 0.137 watts per square centimeteriv. It works out, then, that the Sun must be emitting about 6.5x107 watts per square meter of solar (photospheric) surface, and therefore the total power output of the Sun is approximately 4x1026 watts.

The hypothetical electric input must then provide a power of 4x1026 watts. Juergens posited that the Sun's cathode drop is of the order of 1010 volts. In that event, the total power input divided by that voltage is 4x1016 amperes. The velocity of the interstellar winds is estimatedv at 200 – 1000 km/s. This is in the range 2x105 and 106 m/s. So let us suppose that the effective velocity of a typical interstellar electron is at least 105 m/s.

At the time Juergens made his calculation (1979), current estimates of the state of ionization of the interstellar gas were that there should be at least 100,000 free electrons per cubic m. But in light of the new update (see #2 above), this is now increased 100 fold to 107/m3. The random electric current of these electrons would be Ir = Nev where N is the electron density per cubic meter, e is the electron charge in coulombs, and v is the average velocity of the electrons (in m/s). Using these values, we find that Ir = Nev = 107electrons x 1.6x10-19Coulombs/electron x 105m/s so the random electric current density is about 1.6x10-7 Amp per square meter through a surface oriented at any angle.

The total electron current that can be drawn by the solar discharge is the product of this random current density and the surface area of the sphere occupied by the cathode drop. We now (see update #1 above) have a better measurement of how large this sphere is. Its radius is approximately 2x1013 m, so its spherical boundary must have a collecting surface area of something greater than 5x1027 square meters.

Such a surface would then collect a current of interstellar electrons amounting to approximately 1.6x10-7 Amp per square meter x 5x1027 square meters = 8x1020 A. (Some 20,000 times the number needed!). Of course this calculation involves many estimated quantities, but they are the best estimates available to science today (Spring 2012).

This calculation makes it clear that it is not reasonable to conclude that there are not enough electrons entering the Sun’s environment to power it. In fact, in light of the new NASA data, it is now possible to reduce our estimate of the Sun’s voltage to 1010/16,000 = 0.5 million volts which, relatively speaking, is not extremely large. There are commercial transmission lines here on Earth using higher voltages.vi

NASA’s observation (#3 above) that the direction of the solar wind actually reverses (begins

to flow sunward) out near the heliopause is further confirmation that the analogy between the behavior of the Sun’s surrounding plasma and what is observed in laboratory “gas” (plasma) discharge tubes is a valid one. Near the cathode of such a tube, a layer of electrons is often observed. Such a layer creates a reversal in the direction of the electric field (force per unit charge) applied to the positive charge carriers (+ions in the solar wind). The heliopause is a virtual cathode for the Sun’s plasma discharge.

A standard (hackneyed) criticism from skeptics of Juergens’ Electric Star hypothesis has always been, “where are all the necessary incoming relativistic electrons?” First of all, the incoming electrons do not have to be (will not be) relativistic. Secondly, it appears NASA is in the process of finding them. Perhaps Electrical Universe theoreticians should issue a press release entitled “Dark electrons found by NASA.” For this reason this article carries that alternate title.

The Electric Sun hypothesis seems to be increasingly vindicated with each new bit of data NASA releases. D. E. Scott i From Appendix C of The Electric Sky, Scott, D.E., Mikamar 2006. ii Available: http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/k0801-electric-i.htm and http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/k0802-electric-ii.htm or http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/1982-electric-solar-energy-juergens.pdf iii Available: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-372 iv R.C. Wilson, Journal of Geophysical Research, 83,4003-4007 1978. v Peratt, A. Physics of the Plasma Universe, Springer-Verlag, 1992. vi Highest transmission voltage (AC): 1.15 MV on Powerline Ekibastuz-Kokshetau (Kazakhstan) See: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091022010949AAIY7dZ

News Release 10/9/2012

Voyager I Sees Solar Wind Blocked On Oct. 9, 2012, the following report was published regarding the most recent data received from the Voyager I space probe. I have added emphasis where it is important. This new data is completely consistent with (and explained by) the Electric Sun / plasma model. Space.com

Did NASA's Voyager 1 Spacecraft Just Exit the Solar System? Natalie Wolchover, Life's Little Mysteries Staff Writer Date: 09 October 2012 Time: 09:57 AM ET

It will be another giant leap for mankind when NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft becomes the first manmade object to venture past the solar system's edge and into the uncharted territory of interstellar space. But did this giant leap already occur?

New data from the spacecraft indicate that the historic moment of its exit from the solar system might have come and gone two months ago. Scientists are crunching one more set of numbers to find out for sure.

Voyager 1, which left Earth on Sept. 5, 1977, has since sped to a distance of 11.3 billion miles (18.2 billion kilometers) from the sun, making it the farthest afield of any manmade object. (It has 2 billion miles on its twin, Voyager 2, which took a longer route through the solar system.) Still phoning home (via radio transmissions) after 35 years, the Voyagers are the longest operating spacecraft in history.

For two years now, data beamed back to Earth by Voyager 1 has hinted at its close approach to the edge of the solar system, a pressure boundary called the heliopause. At this boundary, the bubble of electrically charged particles blowing outward from the sun (called the heliosphere) exactly counterbalances the inward pressure of the gas and dust from interstellar space, causing equilibrium between the two. But scientists have had trouble figuring out what, exactly, happens at or near this boundary — making it hard to tell whether Voyager has crossed it.

In 2010, Voyager passed the point where the solar wind, a stream of charged particles flowing outward from the sun, seemed to reach the end of its leash. The probe's detectors indicated that the wind had suddenly died down, and all the surrounding solar particles were at a standstill.

This "stagnation region" came as a surprise. Scientists had expected to see the solar wind veer sideways when it met the heliopause, like water hitting a wall, rather than screech to a halt. As Voyager scientists explained in a paper published last month in Nature, the perplexing collapse of the solar wind at the edge of the heliosphere left them without a working model for the outer solar system.

"There is no well-established criteria of what constitutes exit from the heliosphere," Stamatios Krimigis, a space scientist at Johns Hopkins University and NASA principal investigator in charge of the Voyager spacecraft's Low-Energy Charged Particle instrument, told Life's Little Mysteries. "All theoretical models have been found wanting."

However, Ed Roelof, also a space scientist at Johns Hopkins who works with Voyager 1 data, said that in any model of the heliopause, an object exiting through it should experience three changes: a sharp rise in

the number of collisions with cosmic rays (high-energy particles from space), a dramatic drop in the number of collisions with charged particles from the sun, and a change in the direction of the surrounding magnetic field.

Based on two of those criteria, Voyager 1 looks as if it passed through the heliopause at the end of the summer. Since May, the spacecraft has experienced a steady rise in the number of collisions with particles whose energies are greater than 70 Mega-electron-volts, indicating they are probably cosmic rays emanating from supernova explosions far beyond the solar system. The level of these cosmic ray collisions jumped significantly in late August.

As first reported by Houston Chronicle science blogger Eric Berger, that jump coincided with another change in late August: The spacecraft also experienced a dramatic drop in the number of collisions with low-energy particles, which probably originated from the sun. [See graph]

Rate at which Voyager 1 is being bombarded by particles such as protons. CREDIT: NASA View full size image In short, in late August, cosmic ray collisions sharply rose, and solar particle collisions sharply fell: two indicators of a transition through the heliopause.

"Most scientists involved with Voyager 1 would agree that [these two criteria] have been sufficiently satisfied," said Ed Roelof, also a space scientist at Johns Hopkins who works with Voyager 1 data.

2

To officially declare Voyager's crossing, the scientists need to check if the third condition holds. "Point 3 (the change in magnetic field direction to that of the interstellar field beyond the influence of the sun) is critical because, even though there is debate among astrophysicists as to what direction the field will lie in, it seems unlikely that it is the direction that we have been seeing at Voyager 1 throughout the most recent years," Roelof wrote in an email.

"That is why we are all awaiting the analysis of the most recent magnetic field measurements from Voyager 1. We will be looking for the expected change to a new and steady direction. That would drop the third independent piece of evidence into place — if indeed that's what will be seen," he said.

The scientists could not say when the magnetic field analysis would be finished. But when it is — and if it also indicates that the field's direction recently underwent a change — the world will know. "Once we have a consensus within the team we will inform NASA for a proper announcement," Krimigis said.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

In my Primer on Gas Discharges, there was a sketch of the typical structures often observed in a laboratory plasma. That diagram is repeated below for reference.

Aston DarkSpace

Negative Glow

Faraday Dark Space

Cathode GlowCathode

Dark Space

PositiveColumn

Anode Glow

Anode DarkSpace

Anode + Cathode -

Either+ or -

+

-

Ch

arg

e D

en

sity

(Co

ul /

m3 )

If ADS is +

If ADS is -

E-F

ield

(V

/m)

VAnodevoltage

or

Figure 1. Classic structure of a plasma discharge in a laboratory setting.

3

The various structures near the cathode (such as the cathode dark space and the cathode glow) are there primarily because +ions cannot enter the cathode. Only electrons move in the wires of the external circuit. In space there is no metal cathode – just a virtual cathode consisting perhaps of a simple shell (layer) of electrons. It is instructive to restate the mathematical relationships among the three plots in figure 1. We assume the four charge density layers shown in the first plot are there because they can be measured in the laboratory. The second plot, the electric E-field, is the integral with respect to distance of the charge density plot. This is a direct application of Maxwell’s equation that states the divergence of D or εE equals the charge density, or, Div E = ρ(r)/ε. So if we come along from the left, accumulating the area under the charge density curve, that accumulation (integral) is as shown in the E-field plot. The E-field is, of course, the force experienced by a unit +charge when it is in a region of varying electrical potential energy, V(r). The electric field is the negative of the slope of the electric potential energy plot.

dr

dVE (1)

So, we can plot V(r) by taking the integral of the E(r) plot and then inverting the result. The reader should verify these relationships in figure 1. When we consider the plasma structure that exists around the Sun, we note that the cathode effects shown in figure 1 are not there. An equivalent set of plots is shown below: Figure 2. A similar set of plots to figure 1 with all cathode phenomena replaced by a single, simple, layer of negative charges (electrons) as would occur near a cathode. Notice that, near the anode, nothing has changed except that various structures within the plasma are now named properly, i.e., the anode glow is the photosphere, and the positive column is the Sun’s corona. At a distance of 18 billion km a single negative charge layer consisting of electrons is postulated to exist. If that layer does indeed exist,

4

5

o ld,

ions.

then the two lower plots show (by the same mathematical procedure as was used tderive the corresponding plots in figure 1) an increasingly strong negative electric fieand a voltage barrier for + The previously (closer to the Sun) outward flow of solar wind +H ions will encounter this barrier and be stopped in their tracks. From the latest report this is exactly what has been observed. Note that the Space.com report included at the top of this report states that, “This ‘stagnation region’ came as a surprise.” And also, “the perplexing collapse of the solar wind at the edge of the heliosphere left them without a working model for the outer solar system.” This result is not at all ‘surprising’ to plasma cosmologists and EU investigators. It is a direct, simple, application of the laboratory observations that have been made in electrical plasma laboratories for over 100 years. D. E. Scott

Albuquerque, NM 2012 PROCEEDINGS of the NPA 1

An Electric Universe View of

Stellar and Galactic Formation Donald E. Scott, Ph.D.

The formation of stars and galaxies has long been assumed by electrical theorists to result from pinch ef-

fects in cosmic electric (Birkeland) currents. The exact details of these pinches and the mechanisms involved

have remained obscure even though various laboratory experiments have been done in the past. These details

are now clarified by relating the mechanisms of Marklund convection and the double plasma focus experiments

of W. Bostick. The observed ubiquitous ‘hour-glass’ shapes of planetary nebulae are shown to be fundamental

to this process. The major difference between the formation of stars and of galaxies is simply a matter of scale –

the processes are essentially identical.

1. Introduction

Attempts to describe the formation of stars and galaxies by

processes that utilize only the gravitational force have been and

continue to be elusive. No successful simulation of galaxy or stel-

lar formation using only the purely gravitational ‘accretion disk’

mechanism has ever been accomplished.[1] Inclusion of plasma

into simulations has yielded somewhat better results.

The purpose of this paper is to apply to the known properties

of cosmic Birkeland currents, the mechanism called the Dual

Plasma Focus Device, the process called Marklund convection,

and the recent observations of planetary nebulae.

2. Cosmic (Birkeland) Currents

In the Electric Universe (EU) model, twisting streams of elec-

trons and ions form filaments that span vast regions of space.

Where pairs of these spaghetti-like structures interact, the parti-

cles gain energy and, at narrow pinch regions (called z-pinches),

produce the entire range of galaxy types as well as the full spec-

trum of cosmic electromagnetic radiation.[2]

3. Plasma Focus Device

On December 12, 1956, the front page of the New York Times

announced[3]: "Physicist 'Creates' Universe in a Test Tube; Atom

Gun Produces Galaxies and Gives Clues to Creation". Dr. Win-

ston Bostick had used a pair of plasma focus devices to create

tiny galaxy shaped plasmoids. The device is shown below.

Figure 1. Plasma focus device

A capacitor bank is discharged through two coaxial cylindri-

cal electrodes forming a plasma current sheath between the inner

and outer electrodes. The annular shaped discharge moves to-

ward the open end of the device where the inner radius of the

discharge rounds the end of the inner electrode and forms a co-

lumnar pinch or ‘focus’ on-axis. The outer surface of the dis-

charge moves beyond the end of the device and takes on a para-

bolic shape (not unlike an opened umbrella). Not shown in the

figure is a jet of plasma containing protons, electrons, and neu-

trons that extends out along the axis. This jet forms when the

central electrode is positive with respect to the outer cylinder.

Figure 2. Evolution of the pinch.

Bostick conducted an experiment (1956-1957) wherein two

plasma focus devices were fired at each other across a magnetic

field.

The shapes of the resulting plasmoids are suggestive of em-

bryonic galaxies. A. Peratt later reproduced the shapes seen here

via particle in cell (PIC) simulations on super-computers.

Figure 3. W. Bostick and his plasmoids generated via dual

plasma focus guns.

4. Marklund Convection

When a pinch in a Birkeland current occurs in cosmic space

the magnetic flux tubes are not directly observable themselves,

Scott: An EU View of Stellar and Galactic Formation Vol. 9 2

but the associated plasma filaments can often be observed by the

radiation they emit.”[4]

When several different chemical elements are contained with-

in such a region of compression, they do not mix homogeneous-

ly. Rather, they tend to distribute themselves radially according

to their ionization potentials. This effect was studied by G.T.

Marklund[5] and is now called Marklund convection.

While discussing Marklund convection, Peratt[6] also says,

“The most abundant elements of cosmical plasma can be divided

into groups of roughly equal ionization potentials as follows: He

(24eV); H, O, N (13eV); C, S (11eV); and Fe, Si, Mg (8eV)…. These

elements can be expected to form hollow cylinders whose radii

increase with ionization potential. Helium will make up the most

widely distributed outer layer; hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen

should form the middle layers, while iron, silicon, and magnesi-

um will make up the inner layers. Interlap between the layers can

be expected and, for the case of galaxies, the metal-to-hydrogen

ratio should be maximum near the center and decrease outward-

ly…. Mirabel and Morras[7] (1984) have detected the inflow of

neutral hydrogen toward our own galaxy.”

Any time charges are accelerated (as they are in the case of a

Birkeland current) “synchrotron” electro-magnetic radiation at

various frequencies occurs – typically from microwaves through

hard x-rays.

Figure 4. Elements form into concentric cylinders in a

Birkeland current. Radii are proportional to their ionization

voltage.

Thus, a Birkeland current performs a scavenging effect, gath-

ering and concentrating whatever (neutral or ionized) elements it

passes near. The result is analogous to a cosmic coaxial cable

transmission line.

5. Magnetic Pinch

When electric current passes axially along a cylindrical con-

ductor, a magnetic field is created that surrounds the conductor

and tends to crush the cylinder. This effect is called the magnetic

pinch and is commonly seen in the laboratory.

If the conductor is a multi-layered collection of concentric cyl-

inders, this crushing effect can produce a discharge between two

or more layers of the structure.

Figure 5. Magnetic pinch causes reduced spacing between

inner and outer conductors thus initiating an annular plas-

ma discharge.

The effect is similar to two oppositely directed plasma focus

devices. Two oppositely directed axial jets of ions, electrons and

neutrons can be generated. The result is as shown in figure 6.

Figure 6. Dual opposed plasma focus devices.

A typical planetary nebula is shown in figure 7. Notice the

dual concentric cylinders that form the Birkeland current. Dual

jets extend axially in both directions from the pinch. These flows

each produce at least two visible double layers. The parabolic

shapes of the plasma discharges are apparent.

Figure 7. A typically observed planetary nebula.

6. Other Examples

There are literally dozens of objects that exhibit this shape.

Figure 8. Planetary nebula

MyCn 18.

Many instances have re-

cently been reported of stars

exhibiting surrounding rings.

The bright star Fomalhaut has

now been discovered to have

one. Another classic double

hourglass structure is visible in

images of the object called the

Southern Crab Nebula. It is a

well-known property of plas-

ma that it can operate in two

visible modes (arc and glow) and one invisible mode (dark

Albuquerque, NM 2012 PROCEEDINGS of the NPA 3

mode). So in some objects all of the structure described above

presents itself. In others parts of the plasma composition are in

dark mode and so are not visible. For example in the object

shown in figure 9, the outer, larger extent of the plasma is very

diffuse – the electric current density being insufficient to illumi-

nate it as well as the inner regions shown in the lower right of

that figure.

Figure 9. Planetary nebula He2-104.

7. Conclusion

The dual hourglass shape that appears to be almost ubiqui-

tous in the case of planetary nebulae was predicted by Hannes

Alfvén in both his stellar and galaxy models. The fact that there is

now a combination of well-understood electro-magnetic plasma

mechanisms that can densely compress matter in the cosmos in

order to create a star or a galaxy, exposes the extent of the failure

of standard explanations. For example, the official Hubble site

which produced the image of MyCn 18 seen above in figure 8

offers the following as an explanation:

The results are of great interest because they shed new light on the poorly understood ejection of stellar matter which accompanies the slow death of Sun-like stars. In previous ground-based images, MyCn18 appears to be a pair of large outer rings with a smaller cen-tral one, but the fine details cannot be seen.

According to one theory for the formation of planetary nebulae, the hourglass shape is produced by the expansion of a fast stellar wind within a slowly expanding cloud which is more dense near its equator than near its poles. What appears as a bright elliptical ring in the cen-ter, and at first sight might be mistaken for an equatorially dense re-gion, is seen on closer inspection to be a potato shaped structure with a symmetry axis dramatically different from that of the larger hour-glass. The hot star which has been thought to eject and illuminate the nebula, and therefore expected to lie at its center of symmetry, is clearly off center. Hence MyCn18, as revealed by Hubble, does not fulfill some crucial theoretical expectations.

It is suggested that the reader compare this ‘explanation’

with the process of formation presented in this paper. It is sug-

gested that the z-pinch (plasma focus) mechanism may be of

primary importance in the formation of all stars and galaxies.

References

[.1.] S. A. Balbus and J. F. Hawley, A Powerful Local Shear Instability in Weakly Magnet-

ized Disks 1991, ApJ 376, 214)

[.2.] A. L. Peratt, Plasma Cosmology, Feb. 1992, Sky & Telescope (pp. 136-140)

[.3.] See: www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/080124bostick.htm

[.4.] A. L. Peratt, Physics of the Plasma Universe, 1992, Springer Verlag, (pp. 165-166)

[.5.] G.T. Marklund, Plasma Convection in Force-Free Mgnetic Fields as a Mechanism for

chemical Separation in Cosmical Plasmas, Nature, 277 370 (1979).

[.6.] A. L. Peratt, Op. cit. pp 167-168.

[.7.] Mirabel and Morris,. Evidence for High Velocity Inflow of Neutral Hydrogen Toward

the Galaxy, Astrophysics J. 279 86 (1984).