This thread should pertain strictly to the formation and structure of jets.

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

Do you mean strictly in the EU cosmology (such as cometary jets), or do you accept postings about mainstream research about jets caused by material inflow into highly massive objects with strong magnetic fields?

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

1) What is a Birkeland current?

2) What is the role of Birkeland currents in the structure & formation of a jet?

3) Do Birkeland currents function as outlined in (2), at all size & time scales? In other words, can they explain jets on both stellar & extragalactic scales?

4) How does the EU explanation differ from the standard, mainstream explanation?

5) Why is the standard, mainstream explanation so poor as to require replacement?

__________________
The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it. -- Bertrand Russell

So the mainstream interpetation of intergalactic jets is that they carry an electric current from the source, central BH, to the lobes, emitting radiation and pinching along the way.
So would the MS also say there is an electrical circuit?

Also, everything I've seen on blackholes recently indicates streams of electrons and protons a TEv energies going away from the blackhole. Jets are definately powered by the central object. But its not a blackhole.

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

Post anything relating to jets, both mainstream and ATM.
The idea is to understand jets because you can see them clearly as opposed to trying to figure out our local circuit, which has proven to be difficult.

Here is M87.
http://www.astronet.ru:8105/db/msg/1172631/eng

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

From wikipedia "A Birkeland current generally refers to any electric current in a space plasma,"

But originally referred to the currents that powered the aurora.

The jets could be considered a large Birkeland current that transfers kinetic energy from the plasma flow and electrical energy from the field aligned currents.

They would be able to explain any collimated or striated plasma structures.

THe EU explanation clearly states that the jets are a result of a Birkeland current structure, and that there is collimation and pinching from the magnetic fields developed by the field aligned currents.

Not from the twisting of the central blackhole.

A Birkeland current is an effect that can be separated from the central BH object, and now you just have to worry about how that thing in the center is generating a stream of particles(hyper-pinch?), and it explains other filament like structures that have been discussed.

I have been following the Arp discussion with interest. A plasma universe would provide an explanation for the departure from the Hubble relation.

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

Could you please point out to us, then:
1.) How you think Birkeland currents (BCs) can create jets? Or do you mean that the BCs only collimate the jet, which is created by a central object?
2.) Do the BCs generate all the magnetic fields in the jets, or do the magnetic fields come from somewhere else, another generator region?
3.) What effects have the BCs on the magnetic field of the jet, if the magnetic field is not generated by the BCs?

__________________

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)

Mainstream would say, there have to be field aligned currents in the jets to explain the twisting magnetic fields, because only currents can change the direction of the magnetic field throught the beautiful formula:

rot(B) = mu0 J

__________________

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)

And you base your opinion on this on what??
Just because both positive and negative particles are accelerated away in the jet, from the BH region?
It has been shown clearly that such jets are created by the interaction of a black hole, and accretion disk, magnetic field and rotation. I would have to look up for references, but I think you can use Tim Thompson's referece in the 'table of content' thread.

Just because it is a black hole, does not mean that nothing can escape. Only at reaching the event horizon a particle is lost to our side of the event horizon, everything outside of the event horizon still has a chance of escaping.

__________________

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)

if i may intercede.

why is it "clear" that a blackhole is involved at all??

I guess just because the mass of the central object is very high and the size is very small. Just your regular neighbourhood AGN black hole.

__________________

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)

Well, this paper and this paper give all the specifics, along with references to other papers for your perusal. What I find especially interesting, is that the papers talk about the interaction of gravitational, plasma, and EM reactions and effects. The last two, the plasma and EU folks usually claim the mainstream doesn't pay any attention to.

Now would either you or upriver care to link to anything explaining how plasma or EU ideas show the jets are formed? And please have those links and papers show the mathematical and physical detail that is in the references I provided.

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

Okay, I am no expert on jets, but let me make the following model of what I think is happening, with a view from the early nineties

A supermassive object (black hole) is surrounded by an accretion disk. In this disk there is very turbulent plasma, because of differential rotation in the disk the mechanism of the so-called alpha-dynamo works very well. Strong magnetic fields are created, that are transported inwards, but will also balloon above the disk, creating a "magnetosphere".
Now the mass from the accreation disk crossing the last stable orbit will spiral into the supermassive object, but because of spin and whatever-you-got (guess I should read Tim Thompson's quoted paper and the ones by Tensor) instead of falling into the object, the mass (neutral magnetized plasma) is ejected away from the central object along its axis of rotation.
Note, that there is no reason why the magnetic field in the plasma that gets ejected should be "self-contained", it can easily be that there is a magnetic loop on the disk of which only one footpoint crosses the last stable orbit. This means that one side of the magnetic loop is flying away along the rotational axis of the system and the other side remains in the disk, rotating with it.
This rotation of the one side gets communicated to the other side by e.g. Alfven waves, which makes the field lines bend around. (Experiment take very looooong spaghetti, cooked, and hold one end up and let someone else rotate the hanging end, and see how the rotation takes time to reach your hand.) Now, the funny thing is, that magnetic field lines are not corpuscular, they are just mathematical objects that follow the direction of the magnetic field. So, the magnetic field needs to be changed direction, and in this case in the direction perpendicular to the magnetic field itself. The only way to do that is to have currents along the magnetic field (field aligned current, and if you really need to hear it Birkeland currents, although I consider the last to exist only in planetary magnetospheres). So the fact that the magnetic field gets twisted because of the rotation of the accretion disk, from which the magnetic field stems, causes magnetic field aligned currents to exist.
Now, it totally depends on what the jet does at its end. Usually there is a very turbulent region at the end, and a definite answer to what closes the current circuit I cannot give here. But there, I may point to the observations of the current with the VLBA that is mentioned somewhere above.

So, astrophysics says that the parallel currents are needed to twist the field lines. Now, I think biknewb in the "table of content" thread supposed that electrical engineers assume there is just a blow out of hot gas, ionized in jets, and that a possible difference in velocity in the positiv and negative particles is the cause of current and will confine the jet. However, I have trouble to see here how he creates the magnetic field along the jet in this fashion, it can only create "strapping" magnetic field circling around the jet.

__________________

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)

Wow, Tussenfem this image of magnetic field lines twisting an turning is somewhat beyond my current level of understanding. I'd have to study that.
I would like to clarify what I said (had to look for my post in the multithreaded environment):
Electrical engineers do not think about blowing gas. They see a current so they assume a potential difference as cause of the current. No blowing, just current flowing.
The controversial part is the assumed electric potential as opposed to the mainstream's assumed gravitational potential.

gerards regards

__________________
Es gibt keine Tatsachen, es gibt nur Interpretationen. (There are no facts, only interpretations.) Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

Guess I got the quote wrong then, I could not find it anymore, but I do remember reading it. Sorry that I misquoted you biknewb.

__________________

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)

No problem, Tussenfem. It looks like the original thread was under electrical stress and gave birth to a second one, to share the load. It took some posts with it.

gerards regards

__________________
Es gibt keine Tatsachen, es gibt nur Interpretationen. (There are no facts, only interpretations.) Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

The EU model is pretty simple.
In the Galactic Center there is a structure that is a plasma emitter in that it emits or accelerates protons(ions) and electrons. See attachment.
There seems to be a preferential direction of emission.
As the plasma is moving it will naturaly form a filament as it collimates from the magnetic field generated by the electric field from the moving plasma. It is self generating in that the more plasma that flows the longer and more collimated the Birkeland current will be from the stronger electrc field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current


Here is the latest mainstream article I could find on blackhole jets.

" For Immediate Release
April 24, 2006 "
" The study results, which will appear in an upcoming issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, also shed new light on how black holes so efficiently produce such particle jets. A significant portion of the gas pulled into black holes must approach the event horizon where it is used with high efficiency to produce the jets.

"Though we don't definitely know the mechanism by which these jets are produced, our findings are supportive of the idea that magnetic field lines interact in a way that causes them to work like the elastic bands of a giant sling shot throwing incoming material back out from the black hole," said Reynolds."
http://www.newsdesk.umd.edu/scitech/...ArticleID=1257

No where do they even mention plasma, and we all know there is probably not much "gas" around a "blackhole".

And the only way I could think of moving magnetic fields is with an electric current.

Have you ever played with a bar magnet and iron filings. The magnetic field never twisted but the filings looked liked it did because they did not move perfectly with the magnetic field.



Here is the conclusion of the latest observations for the galactic center.
I agree with what they say. No where in their paper is there anything that leads me to believe there is a black hole in the GC. Only a high energy particle source.

"To be faced with data from observations that cannot be readily explained nor understood is stimulating and inspiring. This is the kind of puzzle that we face in trying to understand the nature of the emission detected from the direction of the Galactic nucleus with Integral and Hess."

"A Persistent High-Energy Flux from the Heart of the Milky Way : Integral's view of the Galactic Center"
"These observations lend crucial support to the idea that acceleration of particles to very high energies is taking place at the gc (Crocker et al. 2005). Furthermore, all of them agree on the apparent absence of variability from the central source. "
http://clusterlaunch.esa.int/science...bjectid=37891#
Link at bottom of page for full article.

SO that leads us to jets. As this paper says there is no way you can have a column of plasma without the pinch effect.

"High Energy Hadronic Acceleration in Extragalactic Radio Jets"
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0106/0106530.pdf
See attachment for circuit diagram.

And here is the other one again.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986ApJ...306..451B

At this point I think that the Eu model has shown that it has a viable jet model based on simple, known, experimental plasma physics.

Attached Thumbnails

   

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

Upriver, have you even read the whole discussion since your last message?

As I have already mentioned above, in this way you only get a current in the direction of the jet, and you cannot generate the guiding field that you need for your jet, and which is observed by the way.

Ah, now we are doing science again using press releases, which we know you have to take with a handfull of salt. No, they will not use the word plasma because, like it or not, most people have no idea what a plasma is (apart from blood plasma) and calling a plasma a gas is no problem, it still adheres to a lot of gas laws, only the adiabatic constant is not 5/3 but 4/3 (if I remember correctly).

And what is with the bar magnet and the magnetic field never twisting? Sure, playing with a bar magnet and filings will not generate currents (well not on an observalble scale). But take e.g. a look at the magnetic field of the Earth in the magnetotail, and you will see that the field is not nicely dipolar (like a bar magnet) but stretched, tilted, twisted, etc. And every change in magnetic field is created by the appropriate currents.

And I think the EU plasma emitter (that you forget to define!) is just the magnetic slingshot effect of main stream physics, which then basically turns the whole of the EU view of jets to regular main stream physics (apart from that you doubt that there is a black hole, but that is an aside, because we are dealing with jets).

__________________

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)

First, I applaud upriver's initiative in starting this thread, specifically on jets and Birkeland currents in the EU idea.

Now that it's gone on for 17 posts, I think it's time to insist on the basic minimums required of such focussed EU threads.

Per the requirements for continued discussion of EU ideas:Here's what I understand upriver (and other EU proponents) have done so far, in terms of meeting these guidelines:

* Yes, this thread is about an EU idea that has no new physics.

* No, upriver has not provided any summary of previous (EU) work. That there is such work is implied in upriver's own words (in post #6): "THe EU explanation clearly states that the jets are a result of a Birkeland current structure, and that there is collimation and pinching from the magnetic fields developed by the field aligned currents."

So, first request: please provide a summary of the EU idea wrt jets and Birkeland currents, and what (public) sources there are (where the idea is elaborated).

* It's unclear whether this idea has any theory or models. In post #17, upriver stated: "the Eu model has shown that it has a viable jet model based on simple, known, experimental plasma physics."

So, second request: please provide links (or references) to (publicly available) material which details the model.

* Despite upriver's assertion, I suspect that this EU idea is, in fact, not quantitative. If so, then, third request: please provide a summary of how the idea could be tested, in principle, using today's technology.

Now to post #17.What is this "plasma emitter"?
How much plasma does it emit?
How did you determine that it is accelerating "protons(ions) and electrons"?What are OOM values of R_Hotspot, R_Jet, L_Jet, and I?What is the strength of the electric field?
the magnetic field?
How fast is the plasma moving?Is I "the Birkeland current"?
If not, what is?This seems to be OT ... how does it relate to the EU idea of jets?What, in the EU idea, generates the high energy particles?Just so that I'm clear about this, you are claiming that the Schopper et al. paper is "the Eu model" of jets?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

That may be so but in this instance it has ionized constituants which allows it to carry a current which a gas does not.
Also when you squirt gas from a nozzle there are immediate eddies on the side.

What I was trying to say is that the magnetic field was not twisting. It was the particles that were not following the magnetic field well so that it looks like the magnetic field is twisting. Same thing with the black hole description. The magnetic field would not twist, the plasma would not follow the field lines very well giving the appearance of twisting, if thats what was happening.

Yes the moving magnetic fields follow the moving plasma as electric currents are going through it. The magnetic fields move because the plasma is moving.

What I mean by plasma emitter is whatever is in the GC's emitting plasma(charged particles(ions)). You can call it a blackhole or what ever.
But it still is not the sling shot effect.

The emission of particles is a separate process from the Birkeland current forming. It takes a large emission of particles to form a jet(Birkeland current)


Slightly OT.
I have even entertained the idea that free space is a ground completing the circuit. The reason for this is that space has permeability, permeability etc which would actually be proprerties of the ether.

As I have said before, it looks like a plasma process at the GC.
This thing emits protons and electrons. Kinda like the solar wind except on a larger scale with Quasars being even bigger versions. So there is somthing to that particular type of plasma flow.

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

1. What I was trying to say was that you need in your plasma acceleration mechanism at the center a magnetized plasma, that, when accelerated, pulls along the magnetic field in a direction parallel to the rotation axis of the object. These rototion axis aligned fields are observed. Then you can have your field aligned currents, that you need for the twisting of the magnetic field in the jet, which then may lead to pinching of the jet. And the source of these aligned fields is located in the central object, most likely the accretion disk (see my post # 13)

2. True and false. The physics of fully ionized gasses, as plasma physics used to be called (Lyman Spitzer) does in corporate gas laws, only the adiabatic constant is smaller. Next to that there is also the possibility that the ionized gas carries currents, like you say. But the plasma pressure, e.g. is still calculated using normal gas laws P = 1.5 N k T. And if you squirt a magnetized plasma out of a nozzle you get the same effects as when you do a gas, but the magnetic field is working against it, because it takes more power to start magnetic eddies on the boundary between the gas and the outside.

3. Sorry, but you are totally wrong here! With the bar magnet there are no currents flowing so the field lines are just the nice dipolar field lines as expected. That the filings do not follow the field lines when you move the bar magnet is because of the inertia of the filings and the sticking together. Saying that that is the same as in a jet is absurd, especially when you want to use your Birkeland currents to pinch the field, and what would this pinch be other then a kind of twisting of the magnetic field. Your field aligned current sets up circular magnetic loops around the axis of rotation. Now magnetic fields add up, so you have your axis aligned field and your loops and these add up to form a spiral.

4. Magnetic fields, when frozen in, always follow the plasma, just a natural consequence of being force free (E + vxB = 0), this has nothing to do with whether currents flow in the plasma or not.

5. So I assume you have no idea of what the emitter is.

6. And I have no idea how you do your emission of the plasma and then set up your Birkeland current. You may want to sit down and write up some model how the plasma get ejected along the rotational axis. And then how the axis aligned field is created, what makes Birkeland currents flow, how these currents twist and pinch the jet.

OT make a model but be sure to consider that both ions and electrons make up the current, and free floating charge in space usually is not such a good idea.

7. Well, I think the whole mainstream thinks it is some kind of plasma effect, because the plasma generates the magnetic field. Why don't you read the paper that Tim Thompson quoted in the "table of content thread", which gives a review about jets. It was published in the 80s so basically from the time that the EU/PU proponents take their literature.

__________________

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)

interesting but i think what is missing in this thinking is this;

in my thinking any galatic core is of high energy plasma, (which causes rotation of the galaxy), which therefore produces an electric current, which therefore causes a magnetic field. now the strength of the galatic core magnetic field causes a "gap of proximity" meaning that at no point within the core do the magnetic fields "touch". this then causes a "hole" within the core, or at least a "rarefaction" within the core, which extends to the poles of the galaxy, which allow jets to become, in the form of Birkland currents. for the flow of plasma is in a core-pole to pole loop.

now i think that the "purpose" of the jets is to "spout-off" excess energy by the galaxy in order to balance itself, plasma is less dense,the "gap of proximity" closes, rotation slows, jets dissipate.

I have a problem with the use of magnetic field lines as if they were physical items. Field lines are not tangible, they are usefull thougt constructs to help think about magnetic forces, but they are no more real than lines of latitude and longitude in geography.
Even the lines seen in iron filings around a bar magnet are not field lines. The lines you see are magnetized iron filings clinging together in the vicinity of a magnet in the most convenient way. Mathematically they do describe one of the possible field lines. But these lines are not "real".

gerards regards

__________________
Es gibt keine Tatsachen, es gibt nur Interpretationen. (There are no facts, only interpretations.) Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

Alternative;

what if there is no "proximity gap"?

the plasma magnetic fields within the galatic core do touch!! hmmm.......

if that were the case, that the magnetic fields within the galatic core do touch( actually i can see this more clearly) what could be the implications?

perhaps this;


because of the rotation of the galaxy, which of course implies a plasma core, which means that the plasma core itself is moving in a circular motion. the magnetic field (produced in this circular motion,in the core) expands( because of ,rotation, plasma-density(electrons and protons)). (this is also the place in which the plasma magnetic field originates in what is considered to be the middle of the galatic core. and this is the place of the highest magnetic field strength). therefore the magnetic field produced by the core is already rotating, the center radis( where all magnetic fields, within touch at once,center), is on the whole equidistant from all points on the circumfrance of the core of the galatic center.

when the "center radis" is produced , it causes the plasma and magnetic fields( magnetic fields can be rotated, because it is the plasma which is the essence of the magnetic field and plasma can be rotated) to move though the poles( which are caused by the core and rotation) perhaps Birkland Currents.

jets.

It seems that Jets are driven by a Black Hole. Even if I do not believe in a classic Black Hole every Gravastar (neverless what is inside) has extreme gravity.

Every BH rotates and there are Rotating BH (Kerr metric) with an ergosphere. It is clear , I think.

The problem is how to fall down into this rotating Black Hole.
It is almost impossible to reach its Equator from an accretion disc. It is possible for a star only. A gas or dust can't. Such a star become neutron star and then is torn in the extreme gravity nearly an Event Horizon..

What falls under an Event Horizon it stays in the BH (in Gravastar is it not 100 % closed).

Not everything falls perpendicular to the Equator of the BH. The remnants of the star (dust, gas) is repelled by BH rotation energy in ergosphere and spirals around BH towards its pole. The velocity become near a speed of light because the enrgy of the gravitational and EM field.

In gravitational field reach the electron and proton identical velocity.

In EM field the electron is faster because the same energy but less inertia then a proton.

We may suppose there is a charge imbalance ( a voltage) in the plasma jet because the faster electrons. This imbalance may pull the protons behind the faster electrons and the rotating jet is narrow then.

The electrons interact with a Background radiation photons and give them the energy back (synchrotron radiation). The electrons become even slower then protons and we observe Cosmic Rays as protons mainly.

This differency in a velocity of the electron and proton helps to create a narrow jet and all currents in the space.

The Cosmic Rays (protons) leave the galaxy after some millions years and create intergalactic charge imbalance.

This imbalance is not very strong perhaps but it is enough to create a current in plasma . The particles are moving usually with some hunderts or thousands kilometers/sec in the intergalactic space.

I would like to remind BAUT members that this thread is about the EU idea, how it addresses jets, and the role of Birkeland currents in such jets, per the OP.

This thread is not a place to discuss your own, non-EU ATM ideas - please restrict such discussions to threads which are so focussed.

If you are a proponent of the EU idea, and willing to present (and defend) the EU case for jets and the role of Birkeland currents, you are welcome to do so here ... whether in support of what upriver has posted already or not.

If you wish to challenge the presentation of the EU idea, as it relates to jets and Birkeland currents, from the perspective of mainstream astrophysics, you are also welcome to do so. However, I would ask that you restrict such challenges to what has already been presented or claimed by EU supporters, here in this thread.

If you wish to review the EU case, as presented so far here in BAUT's ATM section, please read the Electric Universe Model thread; there is also a thread that is intended to provide a link summary of the 2300+ post EU thread.

Okay, I have taken both models of North and combined them into this post. Although the Birkeland currents only appear at the end, I do think we can give North some leeway here, as he seems to be interested to explain the reason for jets and field aligned currents. Although, in my opinion his model is rather obscure and a lot of questions are left open.

Well I guess there are not going to be many objections on the presumption that there is highly energetic plasma in the center of the galaxy. But then you will have to explain how, if there is only this plasma and no supermassive black hole, this causes the rotation of the galaxy. I have an idea that you will want to use magnetic fields to let the galaxy turn, but then your sentence is wrong, because you let it rotate, which generates currents, and those generate magnetic fields. It might be nice to get some more details in how you envision this. How can an energetic plasma set a galaxy to rotate? How do you generate the currents from the rotating galaxy?

How strong is this magnetic field and how big is this hole or “gap of proximity” that you are proposing here? And why would you get a “rarefaction” in the core, when at the center of where you generate the magnetic field the field should be strongest.
So, if I understand correctly, you have this hole in the center of the galaxy (size please!) and this extends to the poles of the galaxy and for some reason this creates the jets that we see coming from AGNs, and these jets totally consist of Birkeland currents? I do not understand how you envision this, so please more details, and please if possible, check what you write first, because I do not really understand what I bolded in the quote of yours.

Well, this naturally directly asks for the question: if the jets are energy drains, where and how is the excess energy generated?

Okay, your second option, no “proximity gap”

Why does the rotation of the galaxy imply a plasma core?
Why does the magnetic field expand because of rotation and plasma density? Would not any magnetic field expand no matter what, after it has been generated?
I would guess that if the magnetic field is generated in the center of the galaxy, it would immediately imply that it would be equidistant of the circumference of the galaxy, because that is the definition of a center.
What is a radis? Or do you mean radius?

I have difficulty following your ideas. Maybe that is because of the use of so many sentences in brackets and brackets in brackets. But to write your last sentence (bolded above) again in my edit:

A central region consisting of plasma and magnetic field is produced in the center of the galaxy. The plasma and the magnetic field rotate. This rotation forces the plasma and the magnetic field to escape from the center along the rotational axis of this central region, the poles if you like to call them that. This escaping plasma and magnetic field are then the jets and probably because the center rotates, this causes field aligned currents to be created, which you call Birkeland currents.

That still leaves out the mechanism why the plasma and the magnetic field must escape along the “poles.” What is driving this process? And how heavy is this central plasma region?

And I guess you have to chose eventually if you want to use model 1 or model 2. Which one do you think is more in correspondence with observations?

__________________

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)

Why does this thread exist? Our friend upriver started it off by saying "This thread should pertain strictly to the formation and structure of jets." I boldly presume, since we are in the ATM section, that the EU interpretation of jets should be front & center.

Let us start at the beginning. All jets must have a source. What is the EU interpretation of "source"? Once again, upriver provides us with some feedback: "In the Galactic Center there is a structure that is a plasma emitter in that it emits or accelerates protons (ions) and electrons." and "What I mean by plasma emitter is whatever is in the GC's emitting plasma (charged particles (ions)). You can call it a blackhole or what ever." Meanwhile, north is of this opinion: "in my thinking any galatic core is of high energy plasma, ...", and the plasma is the ultimate source of the jet.

So, upriver leaves the question unanswered, except that he does say "But it still is not the sling shot effect.". Well, I might ask, if we don't know what it is, and therefore we don't know how it works, then how can this be said with any confidence? How do we know that it is not a "sling shot effect" (whatever that is), if we don't know what it is at all? And north puts the cart before the horse, so to speak. Where does the high energy plasma get its high energy? It seems to me that we should start the chain of reasoning with the source of that energy, and not with the already energized plasma.

The bottom line here is that, so far as I can see, the EU offers no reasonable explanation or identification of the original source of energy for the jet. This would seem to cast the EU in an inferior light, as compared to the mainstream identification of the source, namely a rotating massive object with an asociated magnetic field. This is something that can be studied in detail, and not left to mystery. And detailed studies reveal that this explanation makes physical sense.

So what if we just ignore the source of energy, and assume there is a jet. How does the EU description of the jet differ from the mainstream dscription? Upriver says "The EU explanation clearly states that the jets are a result of a Birkeland current structure, and that there is collimation and pinching from the magnetic fields developed by the field aligned currents. Not from the twisting of the central blackhole." If the jet is the result of a Birkeland current, rather than being itself the Birkeland current, then where does the Birkeland current come from? A "field aligned current" is one that flows along a megnetic field line, but we are told that the collimation comes from the magnetic field that is generated by the current, as opposed to the field along whose lines the current already runs, and which should therefore be the collimating field. This does not make sense to me, and leaves wide open the question of where the magnetic field comes from, along which the current is field aligned.

On the other hand, the mainstream physics of the situation, while certainly quite complicated, is also worked out in considerable & testable detail. The many papers & textbooks on the subject make it fairly obvious that theory passes the test of observation. The jets are surely field aligned, at least in that respect perhaps the EU & mainstream do not differ much. But the spatial scale makes clumping via a pinch effect highly unlikely, since the pinch force can't be that large. But variations in density at the source are certainly not an unreasonable explanation.

Now I am forced to wonder, where does this leave us, in considering EU vs mainstream in the jet business? What problems unsolved by mainstream explanations are now solved by the EU? None that I can see. Indeed, it seems to me that the EU raises many new questions & problems, without any compensation in terms of old problems solved. Any new theory should be at least as explanatory as the current theory, and preferably more so. I think that the EU hypothesis fails that simple test thus far.

__________________
The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it. -- Bertrand Russell

In the past couple of weeks I have learned alot about jets and galaxies.
The hard thing is that this discussion really crosses over into a lot of areas since we are talking about circuits, and dissipation and power sources.
Every astrophysical object in the universe has a heliosphere.

I would say that Peratt is supporting the PU. If you look at what he presents, you get the idea they the structures are not really jets but large Birkeland currents that extend through a cloud of plasma. Jets is incorrect because that implies squirting from the base. They are more like filaments in a plasma globe.
Peratt talks about Birkeland currents is this paper. In section 7 he talks about quasars and jets(sheet beams). There must also be invisible Birkeland currents. Dark Birkeland currents.
http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/do...att86TPS-I.pdf
Its all standard physics.

And here are some current MS observations of some of the afore mentioned phenomena.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_011003.html


I love this image. Its big, but it shows the end of a Birkeland current with double layers dissipating energy.
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/...eic0206c_D.jpg

As far as what is in the center of our galaxy.
I stick by the "highly compressed plasma pinch". It fits. Look at this article about the largest reconnection captured. Its known as a x-pinch. Look at the jet configuration. Reconnection describes what happens afterward, pinch describes what the process is.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0113113635.htm

The Cygnus A pic that I have attached, I think speaks volumes.
The jet is the Birkeland current.
You can see the circuit. The jet is collaminated by the current that flows from the center of the galaxy to the heliosphere. There are 2 sets of currents that flow in the jet. The main current from the central object to the lower potential hot spot where the jet meets the heliosphere. The other set is the magnetic curl that flows around the jet to collaminate it.

The galaxy gets its rotation from the rotation of the magnetic curl surrounding the jet.

As far as what is in the center of the galaxy that powers the jet, Tim is right.
Alot of scientists have invested alot of time in blackhole calculations.
And I still dont see anything that proves its a black hole.

If you look at this picture of NGC 4261 , that is not a black hole in the center. You can see that the jet starts some ways away from the central object.
http://www.geocities.com/q17320508/f...planetary1.jpg

In my other attachment you can see the area that I marked up showing some kind of structure at the core of NGC 4261.

Here a a paper that talks about the gap in NGC 4261.
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJ/...201312.web.pdf


I think the DNA nebula is a "baby" jet. In other words it is the the same as a jet just lower power.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...na_nebula.html

I think if you were to look in the center of every galaxy you would see some kind of DNA nebula structure.

Now here is a puzzling thing.
Jets turn out to be rich in silicon but poor in iron, whereas the plasma around the central object is rich in iron. Knowing that I would say the jets are feeding the central object to fuse the silicon into iron, but they are supposedly going in the wrong direction??? Unless the central object is a plasma separator???
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/04_...ss_082304.html

Also silicon is a semiconductor, so with different dopants you would get different types of current modulations. The voltage would build up and then the Birkeland filament would conduct, current would flow leading to pulsating plasma, blobs, etc.

Here is an aproximate model from the Sloan Survey.
http://www.bathsheba.com/crystal/largescale/

From the large scale structure of the universe there are currents big enough to power our galaxy.

Is it true that MHD does not simulate synchrotron radiation?

Interesting software, Focus corrector.
http://139.134.5.123/tiddler2/c22508/focus.htm

So again they are not really jets. They are Birkeland currents.

Attached Thumbnails

   

__________________
"Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible." - M. C. Escher

"Freedom is popular." -Ron Paul

Well, technically speaking only the sun (helios) has a heliosphere, but that is only nitpicking.

So, Peratt calls then “jets” but they are actually not jets, but Birkeland currents. And then you quote observations, where it is said that These observations confirm what theorists had expected should happen. But "this is the first time we've actually seen a jet slowing down," said Philip Kaaret of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. So, how do you put one and one togethere here?

Lovely picture, but how on Earth do you know that this is a the end of a Birkeland current, and how do you think you can see double layers from an optical picture?

A plasma pinch with reconnection in the center of the galaxy. Then you have a jet again, and not a birkeland current because the reconfigured magnetic field will shoot away and drag with it both ions and electrons.

Care to explain what the magnetic curl is? Do you mean a twisting of the currents around the jet, or do you mean curl as in the derivative operator “nabla”, j = curl B?

Care to give an estimate on the total power that is needed to set the galaxy spinning just by the “magnetic curl” of the jet (which you do not believe in)?

Amazing what you can do with computer software, but does that make it correct (focus correction)?


And the gap in the jet is explained as absorption by the accretion disk.


Call me unimpressed. I have no time to go in all the other stuff now. But pray, explain why there can not be a jet and a Birkeland current in the jet. That would be the most probable thing. Especially, because you want to have reconnection in your plasma pinch at the center. (BTW what is the mass of the center, and can it continue to be a plasma with that mass?) Then the mass is catapulted away from the center in the form of a high velocity outflow region, or in solar wind terminology an exhaust. Sounds a lot like a jet to me, your model.

__________________

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)