Oops!

Or you can accept a more mundane explanation, such as me being away from home, and not having taken my WP PW with me (and so having had a need to create a new account …).

Both of those articles refer to a super-massive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way galaxy. So there!

Here's a more detailed article linked at the bottom of the Wikipedia article:
Double Helix Nebula Near Center of the Milky Way.

"Nereid2"? Twin brother of Nereid?

Anyway, I think that this is what Anaconda is referring to: Double Helix Nebula.

[me] what examples can you give (at least one please) of “currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances” in astronomy?

[Anaconda] The double helix that comes out of the Milky Way’s Active Galactic Nucleus.

I was not aware that the Milky Way has an AGN; may I ask if you made this up, or you read it somewhere? If the latter, would you be kind enough to provide the source?

What is "The double helix"?

How did you conclude that this thing is “current(s) which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances”?

The double helix that comes out of the Milky Way's Active Galactic Nucleus.

Nereid asks: "Why do you think this is equivalent to the statement you gave earlier (supposedly by Alfvén)?"

Simple, that's what "electric cables" do, they transfer electrical energy over large distances, it's an analogy.

At the moment I can’t find the “electric power cables in space” quote from Hannes Alfven, but I do have this one that is an equivalent:

“In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents. Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents. The latter are likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular structure.” — Hannes Alfven, plasma physicist, 1970 Nobel Prize winner

Source: Wikipedia, foot noted for source of above quote.

Why do you think this is equivalent to the statement you gave earlier (supposedly by Alfvén)?

@ Nereid:

What Hannes Alfven and others focussed on was the electron/ion electricity dynamic.

That should be clear to you, now, but I see you still are into passive/aggressive questions.

I am much more clued up now, Anaconda … it seems that much of what you write is simply your own, personal, ideas, formed in part by applying a narrow selection of stuff that you mis-remember from your school days, and using faulty logic (the fallacy of false dichotomy, for example).

In any case, what examples can you give (at least one please) of "currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances" in astronomy? Please, exclude the solar system.

I think you have some questions to answer first. Like some quantifiable EU/PC models that can be compared to astronomical observations. Currently the consensus is that such models are lacking despite the hupla you and other proponents have been making.

"Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances."

What does that mean to you?

Your humor is juvenile and can be fun at times, but your scientific penetration is limited.

Must everything have sexual connotations with you, Anaconda?

What Hannes Alfven and others focussed on was the electron/ion electricity dynamic.

That should be clear to you, now, but I see you still are into passive/aggressive questions.

Your humor is juvenile and can be fun at times, but your scientific penetration is limited.

At the moment I can't find the "electric power cables in space" quote from Hannes Alfven, but I do have this one that is an equivalent:

"In order to understand the phenomena in a certain plasma region, it is necessary to map not only the magnetic but also the electric field and the electric currents. Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents. The latter are likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular structure." — Hannes Alfven, plasma physicist, 1970 Nobel Prize winner

Source: Wikipedia, foot noted for source of above quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannes_Alfv%C3%A9n

*Crickets*

As Hannes Alfvén, the Nobel Prize winner stated: Birkeland currents are the electric cables in space, which transport electrical energy over long distances.

Nereid:

Oh, and do you have a source for this? Specifically, in which publication did Alfvén state this…?

We know very well where the source for that and other stuff that Anaconda quotes; I just wonder if he remembered to wash his hands afterwards?

As Hannes Alfven, the Nobel Prize winner stated: Birkeland currents are the electric cables in space, which transport electrical energy over long distances.

(bold added)

Oh, and do you have a source for this? Specifically, in which publication did Alfvén state this (or, if at a conference, what conference)?

I presume that my harmonious associates will concur when I request that you eschew obfuscation and espouse elucidation.

Is light "a subset of electromagnetism"?

Is the photoelectric effect either "ELECTROMAGNETISM" or "a subset of electromagnetism"?

Is the Compton effect either "ELECTROMAGNETISM" or "a subset of electromagnetism"?

Is synchrotron radiation either "ELECTROMAGNETISM" or "a subset of electromagnetism"?

Review the schematic.

Notice the spirals that are labled, "Flux Transfer Events", this is simply another name for Birkeland currents.

The title of the post calls them magnetic tornadoes.

They are a filamentary flow of electric currents constrained by tubular magnetic fields generated by the electric currents.

Remember, you can't have "magnetic" without the "electro"

Obviously, electromagnetism is a broad general term.

Nereid states: "If I may, here’s what I think your general idea of “ELECTROMAGNETISM” is: * a flow of charged particles in the IPM. If so, then that seems to me to be just another name for 'the solar wind'."

Not exactly. The solar wind is a subset of electromagnetism. Birkeland currents are a subset of electromagnetism. The solar wind and Birkeland currents are two seperate electromagnetic phenomena, although, related.

The solar wind is the general tenuous flow of charged particles from the Sun in all directions possibly concentrated at the Sun's heliospheric current sheet often times referred to as the Parker spiral. Birkeland currents as stated, above, are a concentrated filamentary flow of electric currents constrained by tubular magnetic fields generated by the electric currents.

Nereid asks: "To what extent are Birkeland currents an essential part of your concept of 'ELECTROMAGNETISM'?"

They are a basic component because they are a transport mechanism of electric currents in space. As Hannes Alfven, the Nobel Prize winner stated: Birkeland currents are the electric cables in space, which transport electrical energy over long distances.

Nereid asks: "To what extent is the interaction of the solar wind with planetary magnetospheres and/or surfaces an essential part of your concept of 'ELECTROMAGNETISM'?"

"Essential" would not be the word I would employ. Rather, the interaction of the solar wind with planetary magnetospheres and/or surfaces (and the Birkeland currents as well) is a process of electromagnetism which as the, above, schematic shows, can be divided into further processes and phenomena.

Nereid asks: "Finally, is your concept of “ELECTROMAGNETISM” restricted to the solar system?"

No.

Unfortunately, I don't understand what you wrote:

What do I mean by electromagnetism?

That charged particles, electrons and ions, plasma, flow from the Sun to (in this case) Mercury, via Birkeland currents and once at Mercury interact with Mercury’s magnetosphere and surface in various processes as labled on the schematic in this post.

If I may, here's what I think your general idea of "ELECTROMAGNETISM" is:

* a flow of charged particles in the IPM.

If so, then that seems to me to be just another name for "the solar wind".

But your comment also includes mention of Birkeland currents, and interactions with planetary magnetospheres and surfaces.

To what extent are Birkeland currents an essential part of your concept of "ELECTROMAGNETISM"?

To what extent is the interaction of the solar wind with planetary magnetospheres and/or surfaces an essential part of your concept of "ELECTROMAGNETISM"?

Finally, is your concept of "ELECTROMAGNETISM" restricted to the solar system?

What do I mean by electromagnetism?

That charged particles, electrons and ions, plasma, flow from the Sun to (in this case) Mercury, via Birkeland currents and once at Mercury interact with Mercury's magnetosphere and surface in various processes as labled on the schematic in this post.

Pretty simple.

Oh, almost forgot and, of course, this is all entirely consistent with the tenents of Plasma Cosmology.

Even if it does give you and others a case of indigestion