|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
 Posted - 12/05/2005 : 13:54:25 [Permalink]
|
You do realise how big the sun is dont you? .005R is more than 2000 miles.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/compare/comp_atmos2_ans.html
This is a good diagram of the outer layer thickness. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 12/05/2005 13:57:54 |
 |
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 14:08:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
Here is an easy to understand site that discusses the the iron sun conjecture from the point of science and astronomy.
Yes, I'm well aware of Karen's presentation. We've emailed back and forth a few times over the way she presented information in the past. It's pretty much a "party line" response.
I assume when you say 'party line' you mean an evidenced based theory as opposed to your handwaving, 'gee, the surface looks solid', theory.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 14:23:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If it has a neutron core, it's probably closer to the bottom figure, maybe even lower.
If there was a neutron star at the core of the sun what possible force could keep the sun from collapsing into it? And why is there no magnetic field indicating a neutron star or the characteristic X-ray radiation of a neutron star?
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 16:51:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
You do realise how big the sun is dont you? .005R is more than 2000 miles.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/compare/comp_atmos2_ans.html
This is a good diagram of the outer layer thickness.
That isn't an answer to my question. Be specific. Which (SPECIFIC) layer within standard gas model theory are you claiming this stratified layer represents, because I see nothing in contemporary gas model theory that suggests anything like a stratified layer should exist at .995R. In fact I see nothing at all in standard gas model even close to being able to be applied to this layer. Nothing in standard gas model theories is even remotely like this layer in terms of positioning and "structure". |
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 12/05/2005 16:52:31 |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 16:57:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by furshur
I assume when you say 'party line' you mean an evidenced based theory as opposed to your handwaving, 'gee, the surface looks solid', theory.
No, when I say party line, I mean the when they say "pay no attention to that stratified layer at .995R even though it isn't predicted in gas model theory, and pay no attention to those running diffrence images that show structure and pay no attention to the doppler images that also so structure under the photophere. Even though it looks like a surface and reflects sound waves like a surface, and has a top and a bottom that change differently, just like a surface it cant' be a surface. Even though we can't explain it, and refuse to explain any of this stuff, we're still darn sure Michael can't be right, and that can't be a surface." That's what I mean by "party line". Let me show you what I mean:
Explain EXACTLY what that stratified layer is and what it represents in gas model theory. When you can actually do that, and be specific about it, then you can talk to me about handwaving. If you were REALLY good at what you did, you could also explain the light source and the cause of the structures in the first image on my website and you could explain why this isn't a surface even though it sure looks like a surface. I somehow doubt you'll do either of those things. You'd much rather believe a myth invented 400 years ago than believe what you can see with your own eyes.
|
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 17:00:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by furshur
If there was a neutron star at the core of the sun what possible force could keep the sun from collapsing into it? And why is there no magnetic field indicating a neutron star or the characteristic X-ray radiation of a neutron star?
Pressure from the force of the outpouring of neutrons from the star itself. There is a magnetic field around the sun. The shell blocks a lot of the x-rays associated with LARGER neutron cores, but we still see plenty of x-rays from our sun. |
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 12/05/2005 17:00:51 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26025 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 19:29:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
How does one keep a plasma mass-separated and have iron plasma arcs "insulated" by silicon at the same time?
The iron plasma inside the arcs/loops is insulated by the silicon plasma since electricty follows the path of least resistance and iron conducts electricity better than silicon. The silicon keeps the electrical arcs insulated from one another. The iron plasma conducts the electricy because it is a better conductor than silicon plasma. This is basic electronics.
Sigh. How can a iron plasma arc insulated by silicon 50,000 km high and piercing layers of calcium, neon, helium and hydrogen ions still be said to be "mass separated?" That's not "basic electronics." Neither are plasmas "basic electronics." What is the resistance of Silicon 14 as compared to Iron 9? Guess what? In a plasma, where outer electrons are stripped away, "basic electronics" flies out the window. You definitely need the advanced stuff to work out the issues.quote:
quote:
And just how will STEREO accomplish such things? I'm asking which instruments will be used to make such determinations? STEREO is flying SECCHI, SWAVES, IMPACT and PLASTIC instruments. As far as I can tell, none of them probe deeper into the Sun than the upper photosphere.
That is because you are "assuming" (just like they do) that anything in the 171A, 195A and 284A filters that represent temperature ranges of between 160K to 4M degrees must come from the lower corona.
No, I assumed no such thing. Instead, I looked at the specifications of the instrument package, and found that it will be taking images like this one, in which the Sun itself is purposefully blocked out of the image.quote:
They and you are evidently EXCLUDING the possiblity that *ELECTRICITY* is the heat source rather than the corona.
Since SECCHI will be taking images only of the corona, I really don't understand your complaint here.quote:
The SECCHI instrument will carry even more IRON ion filters than TRACE and these satellites will be able to image these iron ions in 3D and to observe the relationship between these emissions in relationship to the photosphere.
They'll be taking 3-D images of the corona of the Sun. They'll be doing a lot more than iron, too.
quote:
I predict one of their early finding will be that the CME's and iron ion emissions originate UNDER, not over the photosphere once they can actually see the relationship between these layers in true 3D. Right now we only have 2D images to work with and we have to GUESS at the relationship between the various layers.
And how do you propose they will do this, while blocking out the Sun itself from the images?quote:
quote:
That's right, they come from the corona (at least, that's where SERTS measured them).
No, that is simply not so. SERTS simply measured iron ion emissions from the sun in many different ways. The SERTS data says nothing about where these emission come from as it relates to the solar atmosphere. Even the limb measurements, that are specifically looking outside of the photosophere say nothing about where the iron originates, and in fact we know these loops originate UNDER the photosphere.
[Bangs head on desk.]quote:
The whole gas model is cludged together right now with bubble gum and bailing wire. After 400 years of research...
The current model of the Sun has far fewer than 400 years under its belt. This just reinforces the idea that you're arguing against Galilleo's naive construction, and not modern solar science.quote:
...the gas model can't even explain the mechnanisms that create coronal loops and fully explain their hight and heat signatures. It can't explain the cause of something as basic as a CME. Instead they give some "vague" explanation about "magnetic fluxes", and utterly ignore the driving force of these magnetic currents, namely *ELECTRICITY*.
And what creates the electricity? Can't be that electron/proton junk you fed me earlier, since an iron shell will stop protons dead. They won't travel through. They'd much prefer to just yank an electron off an iron atom and create hydrogen inside the shell. Of course, to do so, they'd need to be pretty energetic, and so would heat the shell from the inside. Oh, gee, that would negatively charge the inside of the shell, also, sucking electrons away from the outside of the shell where you say these "arcs" are occuring.
But nevermind all that. I'm still waiting for you to show me that solid, cold iron is reflective of 171 angstrom light. As you said before, if we can't agree on the "light source," we'll never be able to discuss this well. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 20:13:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Sigh. How can a iron plasma arc insulated by silicon 50,000 km high and piercing layers of calcium, neon, helium and hydrogen ions still be said to be "mass separated?"
Because the majority of the sun is always mass separated in every moment. There is surely movement in the atmosphere but the lighter elements are on top of the heavier ones by and large.
quote:
That's not "basic electronics." Neither are plasmas "basic electronics." What is the resistance of Silicon 14 as compared to Iron 9? Guess what? In a plasma, where outer electrons are stripped away, "basic electronics" flies out the window. You definitely need the advanced stuff to work out the issues.
You definitely need to do a little reading on my website and stop making me explain this stuff to you personally. The flow of electricity through the crust is caused by electrons flowing through solids. That solid surface is stripped away and pulled into the arc and it gets ionized along the way, much like iron is ionized in an arc welder. Have you ever used an arc welder before? Guess what? Electronics still applies.
quote:
No, I assumed no such thing. Instead, I looked at the specifications of the instrument package, and found that it will be taking images like this one, in which the Sun itself is purposefully blocked out of the image.
It is designed to take all kinds of image INCLUDING blocked out and direct images. The whole idea is to study CME's how the form and what causes them. That won't happen unless you look directly at the CME's with STEREO's iron ion filter.
quote:
Since SECCHI will be taking images only of the corona, I really don't understand your complaint here.
My complaint is your assertion that it's only capable of taking blocked out images. Where did you get that idea?
quote:
They'll be taking 3-D images of the corona of the Sun. They'll be doing a lot more than iron, too.
They will see where the iron ion photons originate. The currently ASSUME they will find this layer near the corona. They will not. As you point out, they can see many wavelengths and will be able to determine the relationship between the layers because of the array of filters it carries.
quote:
And how do you propose they will do this, while blocking out the Sun itself from the images?
Where do you get that idea?
quote:
The current model of the Sun has far fewer than 400 years under its belt. This just reinforces the idea that you're arguing against Galilleo's naive construction, and not modern solar science.
I'm just noting where the idea originated and who argued for it first. It's still a VERY naive construction, even if it's been filled in with a lot of math and theory. It's naive because no one has ever demonstrated that this theory actually relates to anything in reality based on direct observation. It's all theory and conjecture at this point.
quote:
And what creates the electricity? Can't be that electron/proton junk you fed me earlier, since an iron shell will stop protons dead.
Excuse me? What do you know about electricity? Electrons "flow", not protons. You'll only see protons during CME's when the surface ruptures.
quote:
They won't travel through. They'd much prefer to just yank an electron off an iron atom and create hydrogen inside the shell. Of course, to do so, they'd need to be pretty energetic, and so would heat the shell from the inside. Oh, gee, that would negatively charge the inside of the shell, also, sucking electrons away from the outside of the shell where you say these "arcs" are occuring.
Huh? I'm really tired of explaining every detail to you personally. Please do us both a favor and actually do some reading. The electrons flow freely and take the path of least resistance, making the lower elevations typically more negative than the higher elevations. When enough difference exists between the two, ZAP! Think arc welder and electrical potential.
quote:
But nevermind all that. I'm still waiting for you to show me that solid, cold iron is reflective of 171 angstrom light. As you said before, if we can't agree on the "light source," we'll never be able to discuss this well.
I already tried to explain to you that the surface itself is not homogenously iron. I don't know WHY you keep focusing on this issue since I explained that quite clearly on the very first page of my website. Why you think it has to reflect ONLY off iron is beyond me. |
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 12/05/2005 20:17:39 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26025 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 21:17:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
You definitely need to do a little reading on my website and stop making me explain this stuff to you personally. The flow of electricity through the crust is caused by electrons flowing through solids. That solid surface is stripped away and pulled into the arc and it gets ionized along the way, much like iron is ionized in an arc welder. Have you ever used an arc welder before? Guess what? Electronics still applies.
Ionized iron is not basic electronics.quote:
It is designed to take all kinds of image INCLUDING blocked out and direct images. The whole idea is to study CME's how the form and what causes them. That won't happen unless you look directly at the CME's with STEREO's iron ion filter.
Why don't you just tell me which imaging system does not have an occlusive disk, and I'll admit my mistake. I've been looking at the SECCHI web site, and can't find anything designed to image at less than 1.1R (stated in the specs), but I'm more than willing to admit that I can't say I've looked everywhere.quote:
I'm just noting where the idea originated and who argued for it first. It's still a VERY naive construction, even if it's been filled in with a lot of math and theory. It's naive because no one has ever demonstrated that this theory actually relates to anything in reality based on direct observation. It's all theory and conjecture at this point.
No, just planetary nebulae and the like. Just ignore them, though.quote:
Excuse me? What do you know about electricity? Electrons "flow", not protons. You'll only see protons during CME's when the surface ruptures.
Ah, I see now that I misread you when you said (on page 2), "The fission processes from the core release free electrons and free protons. The electrons take the path of least resistence through the iron shell. The lower, thinner areas of the surface will typically be the most negatively charged, while the thicker, higher regions of the surface will be more positively charged."
But, fission doesn't release electrons and protons, it releases neutrons and smaller nuclei.quote:
Huh? I'm really tired of explaining every detail to you personally. Please do us both a favor and actually do some reading.
What you've offered for me so far is still too cumbersome with typographic errors and leaps of logic that Dembski would be envious of. I require clarification of many of your ideas, and the best way is to just ask you.quote:
The electrons flow freely and take the path of least resistance, making the lower elevations typically more negative than the higher elevations. When enough difference exists between the two, ZAP! Think arc welder and electrical potential.
I am. I'm thinking that with 51% of the Sun's mass, the shell averages a thickness of just over 22,000 km (if it were solid iron, it gets thicker with lighter elements mixed in). But let's say that from minimum to maximum thickness, it goes from 1 km to 44,000 km. That's 43,000 km of height difference, which given iron's resistivity of 9.7×10-8 ohms/meter, offers a total resistance, top-to-bottom, of a whopping 4.171 ohms (a car-stereo speaker). Earlier, you proposed that the plasma above the iron, being made of iron, has the exact same electrical properties, and so would also present a resistance of 4.171 ohms across the same gap, but that's simply hogwash since iron's low resistance is due to its free electrons on the outside shell (stripped away in a plasma) and its crystaline arrangement of atoms (absent in a plasma). The plasma will, therefore, present more than 4.171 ohms of resistance, and so the least-resistant path is through the iron.
Plus, even if electrons travelled at a pathetic 0.01c through iron, they'd cross 43,000 km in 698 milliseconds. So when was there time for a significant potential to build up?quote:
I already tried to explain to you that the surface itself is not homogenously iron. I don't know WHY you keep focusing on this issue since I explained that quite clearly on the very first page of my website. Why you think it has to reflect ONLY off iron is beyond me.
Yes, yes, I mistyped. I apologize. Where is your evidence that this mixture of iron and whatever else is reflective to 171-angstrom light?
And how much pressure does it take to keep a 22,000-km thick (on average) shell from crashing together under its own gravity?
And from your other post:quote:
The iron layer formed as a result of the same processes that created the crust of all the inner planets. The iron originated in the same meteorites and dust clouds that formed everthing in the solar system. The core of any planetary or solar body is hot, while space is very cold. Somewhere, far from the core, the frigid nature of space will allow a surface to "cool", just like it does on every planet. There's nothing particularly unique about how the sun formed an iron crust.
Sure there's something unique: it's the only body in the solar system which you are positing is hollow. Before the iron layer was completely sealed together, how did the tiny fragments of iron and other stuff "float" at 0.995R? And what did they float on? Why didn't they just fall straight into the core? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 21:41:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Why don't you just tell me which imaging system does not have an occlusive disk, and I'll admit my mistake. I've been looking at the SECCHI web site, and can't find anything designed to image at less than 1.1R (stated in the specs), but I'm more than willing to admit that I can't say I've looked everywhere.
To me, this statement of yours says volumes. You made the statement, not me. I questioned you about it. Rather than point me toward the resource you used to make such a claim, you instead expect ME to dispove your statement of faith before you'll admit to making a mistake. I get the feeling you simply clicked the link to CME's on that website and just ASSUMED it must have a disk just like the photos on that page. I see nothing in the SECCHI tech specs that says anything at all about such a limitation, and every indicatation this imaging distance was imply "assumed" based on where they believe the transitional region sits in relationship to the photosphere. It does seem to suggest that their blue/red 3D lensing setup was optimized for this distance, but I saw nothing about an occlusive disk that would prevent STEREO from taking direct images just like SOHO and Trace.
I have to pack tonight so I'm headed home now. When I get back next week, I'm sure you'll have all sorts of data on the SECCHI's occlusive disk and how it prevents a straight look at a CME that is located in the center of the sun. Hopefully you'll have at least read my paper by then as well.
|
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 12/05/2005 21:44:48 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2005 : 23:23:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
To me, this statement of yours says volumes. You made the statement, not me. I questioned you about it. Rather than point me toward the resource you used to make such a claim, you instead expect ME to dispove your statement of faith before you'll admit to making a mistake. I get the feeling you simply clicked the link to CME's on that website and just ASSUMED it must have a disk just like the photos on that page. I see nothing in the SECCHI tech specs that says anything at all about such a limitation, and every indicatation this imaging distance was imply "assumed" based on where they believe the transitional region sits in relationship to the photosphere. It does seem to suggest that their blue/red 3D lensing setup was optimized for this distance, but I saw nothing about an occlusive disk that would prevent STEREO from taking direct images just like SOHO and Trace.
Uh, aren't you the one crowing about how the STEREO images will lend support for your theory? And you don't even know if they will include the entire sun or just the corona? Why shouldn't Dave assume it will have an occlusion disk if all the photos on that page use one? I should think you'd be really concerned about such a possibility.
I mean, Dave looked and he said he can't confirm your assumption that the STEREO images will actually image the whole sun, though he's willing to admit he hasn't looked everywhere. If you are correct about STEREO's mission, then no sweat. We can move on and wait for the pictures. But if you're wrong, then you will appear to be the world's biggest ass. How then could you justify the boldness of your predictions about this particular mission without checking whether or not they even had the possibility of being verified? It would be the sort of gross oversight no competent scientist could ever live down.
By the way, for future reference, questioning something you have said does not qualify as an "assertion." That Dave has doubts the STEREO mission can produce the data you claim it will provide means that it is your assertion which is being challenged. That you refuse to back up your claim "says volumes."
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 12/05/2005 23:28:42 |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2005 : 10:23:27 [Permalink]
|
http://wwwsolar.nrl.navy.mil/STEREO/assets/secchi.pdf
http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/img/stdt.pdf
Oh for goodness sake! Are you lazy or what? If you guys aren't going to read these papers, at least turn to page nine on the first link and notice that the EUVI and VMAG instruments are "full disk" views. The whole idea of the EUVI package is to look DIRECTLY at the sun just like SOHO and Trace, only these satellites have more filters and have 2048xx2048 resolution rather than the 1024x1024 pixels of SOHO and TRACE.
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2005 : 10:48:21 [Permalink]
|
| Calling him lazy, wow. You are the one rewriting physics textbooks without the math. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2005 : 11:58:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Calling him lazy, wow. You are the one rewriting physics textbooks without the math.
Without the math? You didn't see all that math in the heliosiesmology paper from Stanford? |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2005 : 14:13:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
...at least turn to page nine on the first link and notice that the EUVI and VMAG instruments are "full disk" views. The whole idea of the EUVI package is to look DIRECTLY at the sun just like SOHO and Trace, only these satellites have more filters and have 2048xx2048 resolution rather than the 1024x1024 pixels of SOHO and TRACE.
Great. No sweat. Now we can move on and wait for the pictures. See how easy that was?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
