Is it fair to describe the Solar Wind as an electric current, after all, it is a movement of charge particles?

Regards,
Ian Tresman

I don't think so, because as far as I know the solar wind is neutral, which would mean equal amounts of positive and negative moving at the same speed, ergo no current

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

How would you go about determining that it is (or isn't)?

In more detail: what - in as much detail as you can - would be the observations (or experiments) that you could perform (even if only in principle) that would provide you good data that could help you reach even a tentative conclusion?

That's a good question. And having read the following two explanations, I'm not sure the answer is that easy:

• Electric Current (a definition)
• Which way does the Electricity really flow?

Regards,
Ian Tresman[/quote]

Ian, I know what I'd be fishing for here; and that's falsifiability.

Is there a test you can propose that would work in one manner under current (no pun intended) understandings of the solar wind, but would work differently under the solar-wind-as-current model?

SWAC would have _____ at _____ given element _________.
Current theory would not.

the solar wind carries a Pos charge, it is well known and it is high.

the wind could not be considered an electric current, since it is not electrons giving off an inductive field, but is instead a large current of positively ionized atoms and ionizing radiation, from uv. to protons and anti-electrons(positrons).
there maybe electrons and nuetrons, but the overall charge is POS, thus a lack of electrons generally.
so.. it may be considered a current of positive ions, but since it doesnt follow any specifc path, it would seem.. "wind", is the best word.
-MT

Care to elaborate on this with some references?

this does not make sense, the PU/EM theories assume (I hope) that the electrodynamics as set up by Maxwell is still valid. If there would be this high positive charge flowing outward (radially) then at some point the sun would become so negatively charged that the wind would stop, or more likely, the electrons will move along with the ions.
A quick look in "Introduction to Stellar Winds" by Lamers and Cassinelli (two very good solar physicist) does not give any info of the solar wind to be charged. It is a plasma and plasmas tend to be (quasi-)neutral.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

Just to clarify, I'm not particularly trying to get an "electric universe" angle on whether the Solar Wind is an electric current. Just whether it is considered to be so.

I think the answer is yes, the Solar Wind is an electric current, that can supply kinetic energy, but not supply an electromotive force (EMF).

Regards,
Ian Tresman

No, I think normally the solar wind is not considered to be a current, because the the number of positive and negative ions are thought to be equal. So there's no net charge.

I think the question is whether that is really true. How would we know whether the number of protons and electrons in the solar wind is equivalent? It should be testable, and I presume that the reason people conclude it isn't charged it because this has been tested. But it might just be an assumption.

The thing, though, is that one would presume that if only electrons are given out, for example, then eventually the charge would get positive and the electrons would be pulled back in. Unless there is some process that keeps producing a charge, i.e. electrons are coming in from another dimension or something like that. But they you get into unknown physics.

But if you can show that the solar wind is charged, I'd like to hear about it.

__________________
As above, so below

How can the solar wind be an electric current when the plasma is neutral and ions and electrons move in the same direction (i.e. away from the sun)?
I think you can better compare it with the "current" of a river, which indeed has a lot of kinetic energy. e.g. 350 km/s with density of ~10 protons per cubic centimeter.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

I think, you miss something. A wind on the Earth is a movement of particles , which are in electric equilibrium. Every proton has its own electron just around.
The solar wind as a plasma is a movement of particles tend to reach an equilibrium. The proton hasn’t an electron around, they are seeking each other all the time.

A plasma is neutral as whole but electrons and protons move separately, that way there is a magnetic current and energy is carried too.

An alternating current is neutral as whole system, the electrons move forth and back relatively to protons. The energy of the alternating current depends on the voltage and amount of the free electrons. The direction of the electrons is not important.

What is the energy of the plasma ?
The amount of free electrons has their temperature and we may count out the voltage too. U=v^2m/2e .
We can separate electrons from protons in a magnetic field – in normal wind is it not possible.
The radius of the electron is different as of the proton r =mv/eB and the frequency is f =eB/2pi m.
So then, the solar wind might be a cloud moving very fast in the magnetic field with very high oscillate electric current inside.

I guess you could look at it that way if you really want. The fact is that the temperature of the particles (electrons and ions) is so high that the stable orbit for the electron at 13.6 eV cannot be entered. The electrons just have too much energy and fly away. The plasma is a whole system, which is in equilibrium (in the restrframe of the plasma) and (quasi-)neutral. I write quasi here, full knowing that this might be misinterpreted, but on small scales there may be slight discrepancies.

The electrons and protons move at the same speed, a neutral cloud of plasma passes by the Earth and there is no electric current, let alone a magnetic current.

That makes it rather difficult to light your desklamp, if the direction of the electron is not important. I guess you think here about an electric wire. In space plasma's there are basically only DC currents, unless you want to regard plasma oscillations at the plasma frequency an AC current.

Well, put in numbers and tell us how very high this current is, and look up in a plasma physics book or in "Classical Electrodynamics" by Jackson, if this happens.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

There is no net electric current (direct current) of course, there are only micro oscillations much more frequent then in our fluorescent lamp.
But, if fluorescent lamp do not shine without electric current, then we can’t see an aurora without electric current too.
A direct current is different then alternating current but both of them are electric currents.

I have to laugh. When I did compare a plasma with a hurricane wind it was bad, but if you compare a plasma of solar wind with an earthly wind it is right.

The currents that create the aurora are not currents flowing in the solar wind, but are created by accelerated particles in the Earth's magnetosphere, for example, when a substorm occurs in the magnetotail.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

Of course, I didn't write the Earth's aurora is created by currents in the solar wind. The solar wind is neutral as whole, but beautifully interact with Eart's magnetic field.

the solar wind..... is not nuetral, since it's cheif component is the same material that makes up the suns corona cloud...

and what is that material???? POS-pions.. positrons.
being constantly and steadily expelled from the sun...?
and why??? because the sun has a POS core.


-MT

also.. it is a fact that if you connect a conductor to the earth, and attach it to the bottom plate of a capacitor, and attach the top plate to a wire.. that as we extend the wire up into the sky, the measurable voltage which exists in the air, rises about 50v peer foot or meter, i forget.

so much so, that if we could but reach the upper atmoshphere, we could charge our capacitor to literally millions of volts, over and over again, and get free energy in vast amounts...

but doing so.. does one thing.. it brings electrons from earth.. to the upper atmoshpere.. and they don't come back.

i believe that lightning is involved with this natural process of depletion of electrons, with the help of the mysterious sprites.

all of which suggest, that what we call ground, is actually negatively charged.

-MT

Well, positron are ocasionally measured in the sun's corona during large solar flares.

High-Resolution Measurement of the Solar Positron-Electron Annhilation Line

But they are not there all the time, if they were they'd be easy to spot.

(edit to fix grammar)

then what prey tell is the corona cloud compossed of?

-MT

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qsolwindcomp.html

The solar wind is a collection of streams of energetic particles that originate on the Sun. You can think of the particles of the solar wind as nothing less than the solar corona itself.[Noyes] This is because the distant corona expands outwards due to not enough restraining force from gravity, or from the pressure of the interstellar gas, to confine the distant corona. The solar wind escapes through the coronal holes at supersonic speeds. As the outer corona disperses, it must be replaced by gases welling up from below (lower corona).

The composition of the solar wind is a mixture of materials found in the solar plasma, composed of ionized hydrogen (electrons and protons) with an 8% component of helium (alpha particles) and trace amounts of heavy ions and atomic nuclei: C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Si, S, and Fe ripped apart by heating of the Sun's outer atmosphere, that is, the corona.

SOHO also identified traces of some elements for the first time such as P, Ti, Cr and Ni and an assortment of solar wind isotopes identified for the first time: Fe 54 and 56; Ni 58,60,62 [Galvin].

Note that although the solar wind is electrically balanced, the solar wind consists almost exclusively of charged particles (stripped away nuclei from atoms) and is an excellent electrical conductor. These electrically conducting particles is technically known as a plasma, so it may be misleading to think of the solar wind as like Earth "winds".

(Edit to emphasize point)

Shockingly enough, a copper wire is also an electrical conductor. Is this proof that it carries an electrical current? It only says that it can.

There is a small leap to make, that would be measuring actual current rather than saying it could exist. If it's real and it's there, it should have an observable effect. Absent that, it's just potential.

Mosheh is completely wrong. The solar wind is neutral overall. There is a website attached to this bulletin board (with links to real data).

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

This is a quote from one of those links. It's only a paragraph, so I hope it's OK to quote it.

This seems confusing to me. On one hand, it's saying that there are no negative ions. But then it says that the "plasma that makes up the solar wind" has free electrons. And that the solar wind is electrically neutral. How is the solar wind neutral if it is 95% H+, 4% He+2 and 1% minor ions?

__________________
As above, so below

The free electrons' negative charge balances things. The net charge is neutral.

I guess what's difficult to understand is the distinction between the "solar wind" and the "plasma of the solar wind." Are there two distinct things? I.e., is there a solar wind, which does not contain electrons, and then something else, which is at the same place as the solar wind, but isn't the solar wind, and which contains electrons?

__________________
As above, so below

I took the composition as being by mass. Protons and neutrons are heavy compared to electrons.

With the solar wind being basically the same composition as its source, the sun, it is electrically neutral, and is 99.9+% protons and neutrons.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

One of the links in the page linked to above has this:

Source: http://www.oma.be/BIRA-IASB/Public/R...nSpace.en.html

Now, at risk of putting my foot in my mouth yet again, this appears to me to indicate there are electric currents in the Solar Wind, and at least in principle it should be possible to make reasonable magnitude estimates if enough solar magnetic field and particle density measurements are available.

__________________
Carl Smith
The land of Oz

At first, I was thinking the same thing, that it was mass. But one of the sentences in the passage I quoted reads:

So it seems they're saying that there are no electrons, not that the electrons are light and so can be ignored from the mass.

__________________
As above, so below

i would be willing to accept that the any two points in space in the wind... as if we could attach an insulated conductor to any two points in the wind, from center sun and out.. and or from the left side of the sun to the right side.. that indeed the potential we would read across our meter in the center would probubly be zero.


but.. IS it not true that the solar wind charges the upper atmoshpere Pos relative to the earth.. which is then... in a relative sense.. negative.

now.. sir.. in all your wisdom.. is that not true?

-MT

Huhm? No. Electrons aren't ions, but are elementary particles. As you quoted earlier:

(bolding added) Mass is a separate issue from charge, of course.