tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post1627499640526813627..comments2023-11-19T19:19:12.773-05:00Comments on Dealing with Creationism in Astronomy: Scott Rebuttal. IV. 'Open' magnetic field linesW.T."Tom" Bridgmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10889134728080314165noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-9866638851299950562015-11-14T13:52:38.899-05:002015-11-14T13:52:38.899-05:00Clearly Anonymous does not understand the mathemat...Clearly Anonymous does not understand the mathematics of electromagnetism and resorts to playing word games trying to change the definitions of the scientific terms.<br /><br />The ‘div’ in div(B) = 0 is a differential operator (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergence" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia: Divergence</a>) so saying 'div is infinity' is a statement which makes no mathematical sense. Div(B)=0 means that all 'flows' going into a volume, go out of the volume, there are no field line ‘sources’ within the volume. This is contrary to electric fields and classical gravitational fields, where the 'flow lines' of the vectors connect on charges and masses respectively, so div(E) and div(g) can be non-zero.<br /><br />Changing the definition of a ‘closed’ field line does not make it valid. A field line being ‘closed’ does not mean connecting to a body. As noted above, a field line does not ‘connect’ to a body as a magnetic field line has no source (divergence-less). A closed field line means it connects to itself, like a circle or loop. Magnetic fields lines do not even need to ’connect’ to the current sources. The magnetic lines of force around a straight wire form loops around the wire. The do not need to even connect to it.<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_line" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia: Field Line</a><br /><a href="http://web.mit.edu/6.013_book/www/chapter2/2.7.html" rel="nofollow">MIT: Visualization of Fields and the Divergence and Curl<br /></a><br /><br />Space is electrically neutral in general. Electric fields can form in areas with strong gradients in plasma density, temperature, or gravitational influence, which are commonly boundaries between different regions (solar wind and magnetosphere, stellar ‘surfaces’, etc.) (see <a href="http://dealingwithcreationisminastronomy.blogspot.com/2012/02/365-days-of-astronomy-electric-universe.html" rel="nofollow">Real Electric Universe</a>). These fields are hypothesized to be the sources of the ‘seed currents’ that start a magnetic field by mechanisms such as the Biermann battery (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biermann_battery" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a>).<br /><br />Magnetic fields can exist in regions with no net current. A photon, consisting of oscillating electric and magnetic fields, can continue to propagate until it is absorbed, scattered, etc. LONG after the current that created it has stopped. That’s how an antenna works. This is because Maxwell’s equations have an extra term, sometimes called the ‘displacement current’ created by a changing electric field. This ‘displacement current’ can exist in regions where a REAL current is not flowing (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia: Maxwell’s Equations</a>). Once a magnetic field gets started, it can persist for a very long time under the right conditions, even when J=0. <br /><br />The commenter, like so many Electric Universe supporters, has a very incomplete understanding of electromagnetism. And also like so many cranks, instead of learning the facts, they just make stuff up thinking that their ‘notions’ must be correct.W.T."Tom" Bridgmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10889134728080314165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-11860999026631906272015-11-03T10:54:51.772-05:002015-11-03T10:54:51.772-05:00"div(B)=0 by itself says the lines can never ..."div(B)=0 by itself says the lines can never have an endpoint. This means either closed or infinite."<br /><br />since div(B)=0 is false when div is infinity I would think that means magnetic field lines are closed, at least technically.<br /><br /> <br />"The 'open' field lines of the Sun may connect to other 'open' field lines of the general galactic magnetic field, or even other stars, but they don't connect back to the Sun."<br /><br />That would make them closed. Closed is closed. A north connects to a south and vise-versa. No matter if it is another star, planet etc... <br /><br />Physicists are funny, You don't have an issue with magnetic fields that extend to infinity when it suits; but you hold fast to the conviction that space is electrically neutral? It's all gravity baby! all that magnetic field flying around space but no current is moving? lol... really.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-17773499560537342752009-11-02T20:00:00.850-05:002009-11-02T20:00:00.850-05:00div(B)=0 by itself says the lines can never have a...div(B)=0 by itself says the lines can never have an endpoint. This means either closed or infinite.<br /><br />If you make the domain the <i>entire</i> universe then conditions change. If the Universe is finite, there may be an additional closure condition, but it is not part of Maxwell's equations. If the Universe is infinite (a popular idea in Plasma Cosmology) then then lines may be forever open.<br /><br />However, since Scott's examples of his claim are always in regards to finite systems (geomagnetic field, solar magnetic field, etc.), he appears to have an issue with option 2 as well. The 'open' field lines of the Sun may connect to other 'open' field lines of the general galactic magnetic field, or even other stars, but they don't connect back to the Sun. <br /><br />As I state above, professionals recognize that 'open' field lines almost certainly eventually connect to <i>something</i> so they often enclose the term in quotes.W.T."Tom" Bridgmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10889134728080314165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-80925107785306767592009-11-02T10:24:00.987-05:002009-11-02T10:24:00.987-05:00And just to be clear, we're saying that the er...And just to be clear, we're saying that the erroneous claim is that field lines can not be open (1) in reality, or (2) represented as open.<br /><br />Option 1 implies that the universe may include open field lines? Option 2 is a matter of convenience?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-69686826910621758842009-11-01T18:30:59.663-05:002009-11-01T18:30:59.663-05:00The erroneous claim is that field lines cannot be ...The erroneous claim is that field lines cannot be open. <br /><br />That div(B)=0 allows a constant field which is <i>all</i> open field lines is part of the evidence that the claim is wrong.W.T."Tom" Bridgmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10889134728080314165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2361412992308994774.post-33246087493849696902009-11-01T18:00:00.934-05:002009-11-01T18:00:00.934-05:00Scott's IEEE paper mentions that:
"The n...Scott's <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4287080" rel="nofollow">IEEE paper</a> mentions that:<br /><br />"The notion that magnetic field lines can be open ended is impossible to reconcile with Maxwell's simple and universal<br />equation ∇B = 0"<br /><br />Is this the statement you say is the "fundamentally erroneous claim into the IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science"?<br /><br />If not, which statement?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com