Stig Lundquist, the author printed as S. Lundquist, reported an early laboratory test in 1949. The apparatus used mercury in a stainless-steel cylinder, a vibrating disk, and a floating mirror to indicate the motion at the liquid surface. The reproduced apparatus drawing also shows a scale; the accompanying account gives an applied magnetic field of .[ref]
The imposed magnetic field ran along the cylinder, while the bottom disk oscillated to excite azimuthal motion. Varying the drive frequency sought a standing wave resonance. A later authored experimental account describes this as an early hint: the resonance peak was not reached, and magnetic damping was substantial.[ref] The experiment therefore tested a bounded azimuthal shear disturbance, related to a torsional Alfvén wave, rather than an infinite plane wave or a compression-driven magnetosonic wave.
Figure 1.
Functional chain of Lundquist's early mercury Alfvén-wave test
. An original functional schematic of the mercury vessel, axial magnetic field, bottom disk excitation and surface mirror readout. It is not a dimensional reconstruction. The frequency scan sought a standing wave resonance; the early experiment did not establish a resolved peak. Details.
The magnetic field provides the controlled physical parameter: the ideal Alfvén wave prediction makes a propagation speed proportional to its strength, while a resonance also depends on the vessel's boundary conditions. A quantitative test must compare the driven response with finite-electrical conductivity theory and account for mechanical coupling and wall losses. An observed surface motion alone cannot distinguish all these mechanisms. The reproduced apparatus account gives neither a numerical drive frequency nor a field-off comparison. Lundquist's paper itself calls the experiment preliminary and proposes further investigations.[ref]
Finite electrical conductivity allows magnetic diffusion, with magnetic diffusivity . In the same uniform, unbounded geometry as the Linear Alfvén wave equations, neglect viscosity but add to induction. For real and time dependence , elimination gives
Thus weak magnetic diffusion, , gives an amplitude decay rate . For , both temporal roots are purely decaying; they no longer describe an oscillating traveling mode. This temporal calculation at fixed real wavenumber is different from a driven vessel at fixed real frequency, where a complex spatial wavenumber describes penetration and attenuation. Viscosity also dissipates kinetic energy, and walls introduce transverse gradients and additional losses.
For an axial length , comparing the magnetic diffusion time with the transit time gives the ratio . A large value favors propagation before diffusion, but a narrow vessel can introduce a shorter transverse diffusion scale. In the actual 1949 analysis, finite electrical conductivity and vessel dimensions restrict the useful frequency interval; above its upper limit the response becomes a skin wave.[ref]