Funny story about the sun needed..

Hello again Eric,

"Eric Crew" wrote in message
news
In article , George Dishman
writes
...
Note that in the book, this is further emphasised.
According to Körtvelyéssy the solar wind carries
away electrons from the surface in vastly greater
numbers than the more massive positively charged
ions. The result is a net current of -10^14A leaving
the Sun continuously (Fig I.4, page 21).

The surface of the Sun is a conductive plasma so we
can model it as an isolated conductive sphe

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...capsph.html#c2

For a radius of 6.96e8m, the capacitance of the Sun
is 0.077 Farad. The potential would therefore rise
at 12.9 V/s per Amp or over 10^15 Volts per second.

Körtvelyéssy claims the electrons are emitted at
750km/s and I'll leave the interested reader to
calculate how long it would take to build up
sufficient field outside the Sun to stop the flow.

Since the current is a flow of electrons, the Sun
is of course positively charged. However, in chapter
2.02 and 2.03, he describes how the _negatively_
charged Sun attracts _positively_ charged cosmic
rays "from lightweeks away".

A similar problem applies to the model of the core
and surface which he claims aree separated by an
_insulating_ plasma so would behave as a spherical
capacitor:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ic/capsph.html

The book is beautifully produced and I must thank
Dr Körtvelyéssy for the copy, but I'm afraid that
the electrostatics it contains is badly flawed.
...
We have discussed this at length before and it seems to me that your
calculations do not account for the increasing number of observations
about the occurrence of electrical discharge jets in astronomy.

You miss the point, I was quite willing to discuss ways
in which the flow of electrons could be balanced, and in
fact suggested some during our chats, but Laszlo's book
is quite clear that there is a _net_ current of 10^14A.
In other words any current carried by jets from the Sun
is exceeded by the current in the solar wind by that
amount, it is a measure of the overall imbalance. Look
again at the diagram on page 21.

This isn't a misunderstanding on my part either because, as
I quoted above, Laszlo uses this charge in discussing the
effect on cosmic rays and inter-galactic forces. In fact
it is a key part of his ideas.

This
indicates that your analysis must be much too simple.

It is an indication that you missed an important
part of his ideas. If you introduce jets to balance
the current, then my objections disappear, but so
does most of the reasoning in the book.

However, if you think there is a flaw in my argument,
go ahead and point it out. I have been waiting a very
long time.

You did not
dispute that the 'generally accepted miraculous magnetism' theory cannot
explain the observations

I have never accepted that there is any problem with
the conventional mechanism for accelerating charged
particles by magnetic fields although some of the
details may be vague. There is nothing 'miraculous'
about it, the same effect occurs in every electric
motor. As for the mechanism of the 'solar dynamo',
as I said last time we discussed this, I have not
studied astrophysics to the level where I am able
to comment. I'll leave that to others and hope to
learn from them if they care to reply.

and you still criticise the 'electrical
discharge' theory published in refereed journals by C E R Bruce and
myself, which have been subsequently strongly supported by the work of
Körtvelyéssy.

I have not criticised the work of Bruce since I
haven't read it, nor have I criticised any of
Laszlo's other work in connection with thermo-
electric generators. What I have done is point
out that the unbalanced current he says applies
to the Sun contradicts basic electrostatics,
which is still my position. On page 70, he shows
a diagram of a thermocouple producing 40mV of
potential difference. The voltage rises until
the resulting field balances the thermal force
and the result is a stable voltage. This is a
perfectly conventional illustration of dynamic
equilibrium. The same thing should apply to the
Sun where a net current in the solar wind should
produce only sufficient potential to balance the
flow of positive and negative charge. Neither
you nor he has ever addressed that criticism
despite my numerous requests that you do so,
instead preferring to avoid the subject with
comments like this:

Are you still unable to suggest another theory which does
give a reasonable explanation for the evidence?

Whether other explanations exist or not is
irrelevant to answering the fundamental
impossibility of Laszlo's model. You cannot
have a perpetual current from a capacitor
without a corresponding change of potential,
and you cannot have a flow of electrons away
from the Sun which leaves it negatively
charged.

George