"Magnetic reconnection is (even still) pseudoscience." Alfven
What most do not understand is MR is a problem because of the MHD models used by astrophysicists are incomplete. Because MHD cannot predict or account for fundamental aspects of plasmas such as the double layers (DL), electric currents and the energy transfer they perform the phenomena must be described in terms of magnetism. All own needs to do to confirm this statement is read any study about MR to see if there is any mention of DL's, electric currents, or the circuitry that must exist in the plasma. What astros seemingly want to ignore is the magnetic fields are the hand maidens of electric currents. The solar wind doesn't "carry" magnetic fields along, the solar wind is an electric current which creates the magnetic fields.
As Alfven claimed decades ago, particle and circuit models must be employed to describe these phenomena. Here is an engineering description of plasma

http://electric-c...OAAJ.pdf

What most do not understand is MR is a problem because of the MHD models used by astrophysicists are incomplete.

@cantdrive or think
and what YOU need to do is GO BACK TO SCHOOL because it was PLASMA PHYSICISTS WHO ARE PUBLISHING THE MAGNETIC RECONNECTION

http://www.pppl.g...nnection

with that single link, which YOU have referred to in the past, we can see that all your BS conjecture above is filled with pseudoscience and fallacious comments because it is PLASMA physicists publishing a KNOWN CONCEPT with regard to PLASMA PHYSICS
so all you have done is PROVE that you know NOTHING about modern physics and are unable to LEARN, which means you're stupid!

another link just for good measure http://web.physic...nnection

and your link is to a KNOWN PSEUDOSCIENCE SITE and therefore constitutes spam, trolling and promoting PSEUDOSCIENCE

nice try retard. now try posting REAL physics!

You are so ignorant of the statement it's beyond your capability to even grasp what Alfven is saying. As they say, "ignorance breeds ignorance", which says much of yourself and your entire family tree. The first sentence of your linked page...

"Magnetic reconnection (henceforth called "reconnection") refers to the breaking and reconnecting of oppositely directed magnetic field lines in a plasma."

That statement is a perfect example of pseudoscience. Real slowly now, field lines are not real structures, there is no physical object that is a "field line". An analogy of what is being claimed is the lines on a topological map create the peaks and valleys of Earth, when in reality they are mere representations of the mathematical equations that describe them. Sure, they study them at the PPPL, but does not change the fact it is pseudoscience. Yes, there is a process that takes place, yet that does not change the fact that the hypothetical process called MR is pseudoscience.

An analogy of what is being claimed is the lines on a topological map create the peaks and valleys of Earth, when in reality they are mere representations of the mathematical equations that describe them

@cd
glad you put it that way. the lines on a TOPO represent a REAL ITEM and YOU CAN DESCRIBE A TERRAIN with those lines, showing a draw, point (or finger) as well as a cliff, because those lines represent REAL POINTS CONNECTED IN REAL LIFE TO A REAL SITUATION/TERRAIN
therefore, you can call them "unicorn turds" for all it really matters, and as long as EVERY ONE ELSE knows what is going on, then EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE
therefore, calling it PSEUDOSCIENCE is only showing where you have your head stuck up your backside in a severe case of cranial-rectal inversion
this communication is about building a lexicon in order to facilitate ideas that would be obscure without first hand observations. When a physicists say Magnetic Reconnection, it means something SPECIFIC, which is a REAL EVEN in a real way, much like when we call you a PSEUDOSCIENCE spamming troll.

Real slowly now, field lines are not real structures, there is no physical object that is a "field line"

@cd
and again... real slowly now... field lines are not the issue. the issue is MAGNETIC RECONNECTION. and it doesn't matter if you call them "fairy farts" or "field lines", they represent a point connected like the TOPO does,
IOW - READ THOSE LINKS
magnetic reconnection is more real than your electric sun, has more empirical data and experimental evidence than your EU pseudoscience, and is based upon plasma physics that you tend to tout so loudly when you OBVIOUSLY dont know WTF you are talking about.
saying field lines don't exist is like saying TOPO lines don't exist. it is a philo argument that means NOTHING to the argument of the experimental and empirical evidence shown above called magnetic reconnection.

Therefore, YOU PROMOTE PSEUDOSCIENCE that is based upon PHILOSOPHY, and has no basis in REALITY

Yeah JackA.., I went hiking the other day and I was tripping over topo lines left and right.

Yeah JackA.., I went hiking the other day and I was tripping over topo lines left and right.

and I see communication is not very high on your list of things to learn either.
re-read... crackpot

topo lines represent a line of similar points of elevation on a topo map, which means you tripped over elevation, misplaced or misrepresented elevation or your own feet, (guess you couldn't read that map very well.. more communication problems eh?) which is NOT surprising given your inability to comprehend REAL SCIENCE

just because you don't like it and it makes you look like an idiot, doesn't mean it isn't true.
take your lumps and move on to other crackpot pseudoscience spamming troll claims

You're the one insisting these mathematical reifications are real, in other words a crackpot not so pseudomoron.

You're the one insisting these mathematical reifications are real, in other words a crackpot not so pseudomoron.

@cd-moron
uhm... YOU are the one that brought up field lines and TOPO maps ... guess you are not Mensa level... probably not sharp crayon level, either given your postings to date.

Field lines are no different than TOPO lines. THEY REPRESENT SOMETHING WHICH ALLOWS PEOPLE WHO COMPREHEND BASIC SCIENCE AND THE LEXICON OF THE PHYSICS FIELD TO COMMUNICATE AN IDEA AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEING SAID...
which is why YOU think they are pseudoscience... because YOU DON'T COMPREHEND REAL PHYSICS

I would tell you to keep studying but I can see it is not possible for you to learn anything that does not jibe with your preconceived notions. real physics be damned, you're going to believe in EU no matter how impossible it is in reality!

nice chatting with you, crackpot. It's good to see you've been getting out of your mom's basement, even if you trip over your own feet!

I know this is beyond you, but the fact of the matter is, field lines don't move, break, twist, or otherwise have their own volition and to claim they do is pseudoscience. In other words, MR is still pseudoscience.

http://onlinelibr...0002/pdf

BTW, it was your link which referred to "breaking" field lines.

field lines don't move, break, twist, or otherwise have their own volition and to claim they do is pseudoscience

@cd
by this definition, the arabic numerals you use in mathematics are also pseudoscience then... as well as letters

and it still boils down to empirical evidence, too. You said

In other words, MR is still pseudoscience

to which I give EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE PROVING YOU WRONG, which proves you an idiot as well as pseudoscience crackpot, and you can view it again here:
http://www.pppl.g...nnection

http://web.physic...nnection

even though it is only 2 schools, it still shows that MAGNETIC RECONNECTION is real and experimentally validated, no matter how much you cry and whine and quote dead guys that were wrong!

Sorry cant-think... you lose on this one. get out of your basement and smell the PLASMA PHYSICS...

check mate, tinkerbelle

Linking to a couple websites promoting pseudoscience is not EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. You obviously didn't read the link, and you still don't understand what Alfven was saying. Dense as the mythical neutron star stupid!

In other words, MR is still pseudoscience.

@cd the pseudoscience moron
here are some video's of that magnetic reconnection that doesn't exist... which takes place all the time as well as being EXPERIMENTALLY VALIDATED IN PLASMA PHYSICS LABORATORIES which makes you look stupid and illiterate... especially as yoru EU relies heavily on PLASMA PHYSICS

http://on.aol.com...17865737

http://www.scienc...d-138171

http://www.nasa.g...e-orbit/

Linking to a couple websites promoting pseudoscience is not EMPIRICAL EVIDENC

@cd
this is the funniest thing you have EVER posted!
I linked to the sites of schools where there are PLASMA PHYSICS labs, which is where the EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE resides. This would be considered Empirical evidence as well, since you can look up the data and papers there at the site. This means that you (as well as anyone else) can get the data for yourself, which means I proved the point.

it also means YOU ARE WRONG!
it also means that you rely heavily on a dead guy who was WRONG and is PROVEN WRONG (unless of course you are misrepresenting his words)
it also means that it is YOU who is

Dense as the mythical neutron star stupid!

and it only gets worse the more you post!

also, since the only thing that you CAN do for evidence is

Linking to a couple websites promoting pseudoscience

then I suggest that YOU try to

read the link

that I posted. it might help you learn

goodnight cant-think... you are too stupid to continue arguing with tonight. You cannot even comprehend basic English, nor can you learn. This makes for a dangerous combination. go back to your moms basement and cry.

enjoy some more NASA magnetic reconnection vid's
http://www.nowthi...nection/

cry all night, maybe it will be cathartic and you can learn real physics tomorrow.
i suggest going here: http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

maybe you can learn something

MORON, I never claimed MR doesn't exist. What Alfven is claiming is the EXPLANATION of the process which these people claim is MR is pseudoscience. Of course there is a physical process, one which was explained decades earlier by the particle/circuit models promoted by Alfven and used by nuclear physicists still to this day. You still don't understand the difference between the models used by real plasma physicists and those used by astrophysicists in their theoretical dreamland. We know from in situ research that double layers are present in every astrophysical plasma we have directly measured, yet in direct conflict with this knowledge astros insist on modeling the plasma with "ideal MHD" which does in fact require MR due to it's shortcomings. As I said, not questioning whether it exists, just agreeing with Alfven the explanation is pseudoscience.

Cantdrive +Stumpy
What you both are going on about? Simple direct conversation without name calling belittling or other such derogatory remarks are what the scientific process is about. It is well you both state and identify your ideas with links et cetera, however, you both fail to work things out as adults.
Just an empirical observation btw... Candrive seems to have grabbed this debate in the end brahski...again empirical ...

If you've been around this site for a while you know cantdrive85 as an annoyingly persistent promoter of the "electric universe" pseudo-science, along with several other peculiar beliefs. One of many cranks who, unable to gain traction among actual researchers, hang out here for reasons that I doubt even they understand. Captain Stumpy's repudiations are uniformly entertaining, and debate-wise, hard to rebut. That cantdrive85 got the last word in - meah.

glad you put it that way. the lines on a TOPO represent a REAL ITEM and YOU CAN DESCRIBE A TERRAIN with those lines, showing a draw, point (or finger) as well as a cliff, because those lines represent REAL POINTS CONNECTED IN REAL LIFE TO A REAL SITUATION/TERRAIN

@ Captain-Skippy, finally I get to say something I really do know about. You are exactly right on that one podna. It is the same with the nautical charts and pilot instructions for boat navigation. The lines being good pictures of the real bottom I mean. Well most of the time, sometimes they get out date because the bottom can change a lot or not so much a lot depending on where it is and what the currents are doing. Without those lines telling you what the bottom is like just ahead on the river, then you be in the real big trouble if the boat's Captain-Skippy don't make those lines a part of what his plans are. Sometimes REALLY BIG TROUBLE, ol Ira has "been there, done that" thing, Glad I was not driving me.

Cantdrive +Stumpy
What you both are going on about? Simple direct conversation without name calling belittling or other such derogatory remarks are what the scientific process is about. It is well you both state and identify your ideas with links et cetera, however, you both fail to work things out as adults.
Just an empirical observation btw... Candrive seems to have grabbed this debate in the end brahski...again empirical ...

Don't mind them Cher, that is how they talk to each other whenever the Really-Skippy isn't around to tell them how the real scientist Skippys are suppose to talk to each other.

They don't mean nothing by it, well other than cantdrive-Skippy don't seem to be able to learn new stuffs, but they both do good for the forum page. Captain-Skippy shows how to figure out when a not so smart-Skippy makes up stuff and the cantdrive-Skippy shows what one of those not so smart-Skippys looks like him.

MORON, I never claimed MR doesn't exis

@cd
technically, by you commenting

MR is still pseudoscience

&

the hypothetical process called MR is pseudoscience

and your amazingly stupid comment that a link to Princeton Plasma Physics Lab is

Linking to a couple websites promoting pseudoscience

then we can conclude, at that point, that you are saying that MR does not exist

You still don't understand the difference between the models used by real plasma physicists and those used by astrophysicists in their theoretical dreamland

again with this blatant lie? did you miss that whole PRINCETON PLASMA PHYSICS LAB link? here: http://www.pppl.g...nnection

TRY READING IT this time, stinkerbelle

not questioning whether it exists

so you are saying creation "science" exists then? given that it is ALSO pseudoscience, like EU philosophy...

you really need to get a life, basement boy. I am sure your mom would agree

Simple direct conversation without name calling belittling or other such derogatory remarks are what the scientific process is about

@colinclunas
I can agree with this statement, except that cd and I passed this point long ago. When a person willfully ignores empirical data, as well as posts the same lie over and over again, then it is NOT a scientific discussion at that point, it is a person who is a religious fanatic pushing an agenda that has no empirical evidence for support, which is what cd does with his EU religion

Candrive seems to have grabbed this debate in the end brahski

all he did was continue to push the same lie. try reading some of his links in the past. you will find out that cd presents as much REAL science a hooker presents cash at a confessional

Captain Stumpy's repudiations are uniformly entertaining

@alfie_null
Thanks. I appreciate that
:-)

It is the same with the nautical charts and pilot instructions for boat navigation. The lines being good pictures of the real bottom I mean

@Uncle Ira
too right!
I've used TOPO all my life, and still do. (and I've worked for ACBL for a short time)
it is easier to download a TOPO of a strange place and plan a route than read from scratch. terrain can be well hid by flora.

cantdrive-Skippy don't seem to be able to learn new stuffs, but they both do good for the forum page. Captain-Skippy shows how to figure out when a not so smart-Skippy makes up stuff and the cantdrive-Skippy shows what one of those not so smart-Skippys looks like him.

well said!
sometimes seeing a pseudoscience idiot at work can teach you a lot about how crazy they are! and they DO repeat stuff over and over again, as well as share idiot ideas with others
look at cd and alfven, for instance!

so you are saying creation "science" exists then? given that it is ALSO pseudoscience

No, I don't believe in the Big Bang, nor god for that matter.

technically, by you commenting

There is a physical process, yes. There is energy release, yes. Does it involve magnetic "field lines", no. That's what makes it pseudoscience. Is there real science taking place, yes, but when you include "actions" by a nonentity such as a unicorn or "field lines" in this instance, you crossover into pseudoscience. Clearly you don't understand magnetic fields nor the analogy I used, and still you are not grasping the difference between the two lines (electric discharge in plasma and theoretical idealized ionized gases) of research Alfven discussed in his Nobel lecture. I sadly, you probably never will.

(and I've worked for ACBL for a short time)

Hey Neg, you joking with me? Captain-Skippy that who I did for too up until about four or three year ago. I worked with that company over 10 years me. Good company and used to pay good. They got bad with the union troubles a couple times long ago, so I was not to happy for last four years there, but that mostly had to do with their Jeffboat outfit. I am not sure they never did sort him out completely no. That union busting rigging mess is something I don't think much of. Before American I worked on harbor tugs in New Orleans and in Galveston.

Now I work for the IBCO that's the Ingram Barge Company. They happy with me and I'm happy back at them. So I'm not planning no move again soon.. How about that thing Skippy? I guess they right when they say the little world thing they say.

Does it involve magnetic "field lines", no.

@cd
when you hike, and you are watching the TOPO and reading the lines, they represent what? altitude. they are a series of points that are the same connected to show a similar event: meaning similar altitude. WHEN those lines form certain shapes on the map, are they CREATING THE PHYSICAL FORMATION or are they representing something that is already there and exists?
thats right... they are representing something that is already there and exists, but we use the lines as a WHAT? a physical representation so that our symbolic mind can try to find a cogent pattern or series of information points for a logical interpretation of events. we use shapes and forms to represent mathematical numbers/events/whatever in order to more clearly see what is going on.

IOW - I understand it just fine. it is YOU who clings to the pseudoscience
this is a well known phenomenon, and you are a religious acolyte supporting a failed dogma

I sadly, you probably never will.

@cd
actually, the sad thing is that you will never LEARN. you will never progress beyond the point where you are at right now out of fear and self loathing, and a hope that reality will regress into a more primitive state and you will become a leader of men through percieved intelligence...
too bad this is reality and you will fail. maybe you can become the first martyr of your EU cause.

you joking with me?

@Ira
Never... I worked the chemical barges up and down the Ohio. We were the expedite boat pushing chemicals from the big muddy to the great lakes... I've locked so many times I can do it in my sleep! LOL
small world... look me up at LinkdIn, scienceforums.net or scienceforums.com...

I can't remember the name of the boat, sorry... but I've seen the IBCO boats before... left Jeffboat/ACBL in 2000... only worked long enough to get $$$$ to buy property and raise some wolves. 6 months. :-)