|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
 Posted - 12/15/2005 : 14:50:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
You know, the more times I see Mozina use the phrase "stratified layer," the more I think he thinks it means "solid layer," when in reality it means "layered layer." Yes, "stratified" means "in layers," which is why I've found the redundant "stratified layer" so amusing.
Take it up with Stanford and UCLA. I just used their verbage. In this case I do think that the "stratification" is a solid surface, since it exhibits all the same features of our own crust here on earth. You seem to interpret this "stratification" in some other way, but in WHAT way? WHAT causes this stratification? What is "stratifying"?
quote:
The fact is, that helioseimology article assumed the presence of density stratifications under the surface. As such, it didn't confirm any layers, stratified or otherwise. The density stratitications are what the researchers used to measure the expansion and contraction of the Sun.
Actually, they didn't assume anything. Their equipment simply revealed a stratification point in the data. They "confirmed" my prediction of a "stratification" at a relatively shallow depth under the photosphere, something no gas model has ever predicted. Why is that Dave? Where's the prediction in gas model theory that shows this stratification at this depth?
quote:
The fact is, solar scientists are very aware of density stratification throughout the Sun, from the wispy corona to the ultra-dense core.
So where did they predict this layer, and what does it represent in gas model theory?
quote:
The idea that such an object would have a smoothly-changing density throughout is absurd, especially in light of the rather obvious stratification which exists at the surface, and also the convection currents swirling about.
That is true. Then again, I never claimed gas model theory didn't include the notion of stratified layers. I'm simply noting that nowhere does it predict this one at this depth. This is supposed to be the convection zone where heat is rising to the surface of the photosophere. What's a strafied layer doing sitting smack dab in the middle of the convection zone?
quote:
Examination of the atmosphere (or lithosphere) of any other planet is favorable to the idea that density stratifications abound within any significantly massive object.
You also see a lot of solid surfaces on these bodies as well. :) |
 |
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 15:00:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
The plasma is dynamic, yes, but the resolution of the image is poor.
Water is also dynamic, but the waves on a lake aren't visible on satellite photos.
When every pixel of the sun cover an area several hundred squere kilometres, you can't expect to pick up detatils.
While I agree that our resolution is somewhat limited, we can easily see visual changes to the photosophere in these resolutions over these timeframes. The photosphere convects heat at the surface, and has the appearance of a boiling liquid at the surface. Sunspots move around in this gooey "sea" of boiling plasma.
The images returned by the iron ion filters of the TRACE and SOHO satellites tell a very different story. While the coronal loops coming from this region are quite dynamic, the "structures" seen in these images is not changing anywhere near as rapidly as the photosphere at these resolutions, and it is supposedly sitting ON TOP of this ever changing photosphere according to NASA. Something here doesn't add up. If the photosphere moves and changes rapidly, now do these structures remain visible over hours and days? Why does this layer rotate uniformly, quite unlike the rotation pattern seen in the photosphere?
quote:
And how can you tell 3D structures from images taken by satellites? What do you use for depth-reference?
In this case the light is coming from the arcs. The patterns these create across the landscape are measurable in terms of shadows. In that gold Lockheed image, you can see definite shadows to the left side of that upper little bump in the terrain in the top portion of that image. The shadows it casts give us some idea of depth. It's a tad primative at the moment, but there is depth to be seen in this layer. STEREO will allow us to measure these with 4 times the image precision (1 megapixel resolution vs. 4 megapixel resolution), and using a technology that is ideally suited to give us exact distances. |
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 12/15/2005 15:05:37 |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 15:04:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
Just to mention that this thread is past the 15 page limit.
I feel pretty complete at this point in time unless anyone has more to add. It seems to me that STEREO will confirm or invalidate this theory within a year. I doubt we'll see any drastic changes of scientific opinion between now and then. If however STEREO can demonstrated by triangulation techniques that the photosphere is sittng on top of what Lockheed calls the "transitional region", it's going to get very interesting indeed. Stay tuned! :) |
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 15:26:36 [Permalink]
|
BigPoppaSmurf
Congrats on a K of posts... secondary in significance only to the legendary and much-loathed post number 666! However, RE the golden 200-room palace... cmon' man- let's exercise critical thinking here... Sadaam and Castro demonstrated multiple palaces and some look-alikes is the way to go. Gotta' be realistic about these things. |
Ron White |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 16:40:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
Just to mention that this thread is past the 15 page limit.
I feel pretty complete at this point in time unless anyone has more to add. It seems to me that STEREO will confirm or invalidate this theory within a year. I doubt we'll see any drastic changes of scientific opinion between now and then. If however STEREO can demonstrated by triangulation techniques that the photosphere is sittng on top of what Lockheed calls the "transitional region", it's going to get very interesting indeed. Stay tuned! :)
Typically, threads 15 pages are locked due to length then a new thread is started. That's all I meant. :-) |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 18:46:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
It seems to me that STEREO will confirm or invalidate this theory within a year. I doubt we'll see any drastic changes of scientific opinion between now and then. If however STEREO can demonstrated by triangulation techniques that the photosphere is sittng on top of what Lockheed calls the "transitional region", it's going to get very interesting indeed. Stay tuned! :)
I predict that STEREO will not detect a solid surface, and I further predict, that this will fail to deter you from believing in your theory. I hope that you prove me wrong about the second part.
PS: I suppose that this won't matter to you. But take a look at some of the other listings that are rated "Crankier" and see if you think you're in good company.  |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 18:58:50 [Permalink]
|
Oooops…
This thread is locked to length.
I have started up a new thread for you to continue this debate, here.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2005 : 19:57:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
I feel pretty complete at this point in time unless anyone has more to add.
Yeah, I do, but Kil forgot that I said I was going to lock this thread soon. My reply can be found in the continuation thread. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
