Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[brantc]

And the currents for the sun come from where?

Conceptually its a pretty simple idea.

A sphere the size of the sun has the ability to focus a lot of energy in the center if it were to act like an antenna.
If it were an spherical antenna that received "aether"(insert "some universal energy") and acted like a transformer and then turned it into electrons which then flowed in the shell to produce the current driving the effects we see.

Kinda like a sphere when it gets statically charged except in this case the charge is huge.

 

[BenBurch]

The density of the sun, computed from its gravity and diameter is about 1.4 g/cm**3.

The density of iron in the normal solid state is 7g/cm**3.

Simplifying greatly, an iron sun would weigh 5 times more than a gaseous one.

But really it would be much higher as the iron would be under such pressure at the center that in fact it would be a neutron star...

 

[Michael Mozina]

Here's a short article that might be useful as a starting point.

You evidently read only one half of the article and missed the rest, the part where he explains its a "shallow" phenomenon:

He points out that sunspots appear dark because they are about 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit cooler than their surroundings. As expected, analysis of the June 1998 sunspot revealed that sound waves travel about 10 percent slower at the surface where temperatures are lower, and maintain this relatively slow pace as they begin moving toward the interior of the sun. When the sound waves reach a point about 3,000 miles below the surface, however, their speed increases significantly, indicating that the roots of a sunspot are hotter than their surroundings.

``This means that sunspots are cool only to depths of about 3,000 miles - a relatively shallow layer considering that it`s about 430,000 miles from the surface to the center of the sun,`` Kosovichev explains.

Emphasis mine. The *ROOTS* are HOTTER and the "tornado" in the atmosphere is a relatively "shallow" event at which point by the way, all the movements of plasma flatten out and go horizontal.

All you're observing is twisters in the atmosphere where they eventually touch down at the surface and the movements of plasma (air in the case of a planet) follow the contours of the surface again. The photosphere "surface" is not the surface I'm talking about. What Kosovichev is ultimately describing is this:

http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/movies/T171_991127.mov

It's the same image I posted for Tim yesterday. Those twisters follow along the "surface", the rigid surface under the photosphere, not the surface of the photosphere that Kosovichev is describing.

That "subsurface stratification" sticks out like a giant, dense, rigid sore thumb inside what is supposed to be an open convection zone of upwelling superheated plasma in gas model theory.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510111

You're simply "misrepresenting" what he said in terms of heliosiesmology and how it applies here. Nobody claimed the photosphere was "rigid", and you missed the whole "shallow phenomenon" aspect of his comments.

 

[Reality Check]

From TRACE you can see the surface at 1200.
...

From TRACE you can see the surface at 1200 what?
The 1213 A passband corresponds to temperatures of 10-30 thousand K.
Once again your surface vaporizes!

What relevance has an elevated temperature at the limb above the photosphere have?
There is a measured temperature increase with depth that is found from the limb darkening of the Sun below the photosphere.
The observations show that the average measured temperature of the photosphere at its top is ~6000 K and that it increases to ~9400 K at about 500 km below this.

Iron has the very interesting property of what is termed "Magnetostriction."
...

Solid iron (in your idea) has the interesting property that it stops plasma from flowing through it.
The scientific evidence is that plasma has no problem flowing in the Sun at velocities of over 1300 meters per second.

The surface can be seen with the light from the surface.

A surface that does not exist cannot emit or reflect light.
Your thermodynamically impossible surface does not exist.

 

[Michael Mozina]

The density of the sun, computed from its gravity and diameter is about 1.4 g/cm**3.

The density of iron in the normal solid state is 7g/cm**3.

Simplifying greatly, an iron sun would weigh 5 times more than a gaseous one.

But really it would be much higher as the iron would be under such pressure at the center that in fact it would be a neutron star...

I assume you're saying all of this for Brantc's benefit not mine because I personally am definitely not suggesting that the sun is made of solid iron.

The sun's overall composition is pretty much what we find in ordinary meteorites IMO, but the overall mass is exactly the same as standard theory. There's simply a different arrangement of elements and a different composition of elements in the solar models I have proposed. The overall mass need not be, and is in fact not different than standard theory IMO. It is therefore impossible IMO for the sun to be "solid iron".

 

[Reality Check]

You evidently read only one half of the article and missed the rest, the part where he explains its a "shallow" phenomenon:

You evidently cannot understand the article (Scientists produce first detailed image of the inside of a sunspot)

• The *ROOTS* at a depth of ~3000 miles are HOTTER THAN THEIR SURROUNDINGS. Their surroundings are the photosphere. The temperature of the photosphere increases with depth and is ~9400 K at 500 km. So at ~3000 miles the *ROOTS* are even HOTTER than 9400 K.
• There is no mention of a flattening out or going hoizontal in the article.
• They measured the flow down to a depth of ~10,000 miles. No iron crust seen.

Changes in the subsurface stratification of the Sun with the 11-year activity cycle is an interesting paper that shows stratification in plasma. If there was a thermodynamically impossible iron crust then IMO they would have detected its effect on the sound waves. If their model excludes the possibility of a thermodynamically impossible iron crust then their results have no application to your fantasy.

 

[Michael Mozina]

From TRACE you can see the surface at 1200. But the actual temperature is an average of the surface conditions; look at this HINODE map. This shows the expansion of the iron plasma. It cools and then is accelerated(heats).
http://hinode.nao.ac.jp/news_e/20100309_press_e/

Click on the bottom picture.
See how the footprints expand outward as the magnetic field climbs. That is the reason for the appearance of the elevated temperature at the limb. Because you are looking at a combination of hot footprints(molten to FeIV) and cold surface.

Keep in mind that the "surface" seen in Hinode images (CA/H filters at least) is the photosphere and you can watch the stuff come flying up and through that layer in Hinode movies.

http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/061127PressConference/movie/SOT_ca_061120_0715.mpg

This one's about 26MB, but gives you some of idea of what the satellite observes. It's primarily observing the upper atmosphere of the sun, but the CA/H sensitive filters can pick up a large region of the solar atmosphere.

http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/061127PressConference/movie/xrt_pfi_20061113red.mpg

This closeup x-ray image gives you another angle on those 'ELECTROmagnetic' features. The discharges in the atmosphere are move obvious in the higher energy wavelengths. Hinode's view is simply amazing. I have about a week of downloading of SSDDB files to do before I can process the Hinode images myself, but I'm looking forward to it.

Pretty much everything the mainstream describes as a "magnetic" structure is actually an "electromagnetic discharge". The discharge creates the field.

 

[Reality Check]

Keep in mind that the "surface" seen in Hinode images (CA/H filters at least) is the photosphere and you can watch the stuff come flying up and through that layer in Hinode movies.

How do you know this MM?
According to you the 171A images are made of light from your iron crust and so you imagine mountain ranges in RD movies. Apparently the photosphere and corona emit no significant light in this wavelength .

So why are these images not also from your iron crust?

 

[Michael Mozina]

You evidently cannot understand the article (Scientists produce first detailed image of the inside of a sunspot)

Oh boloney. You'll even find the images and movie that go with that article on my website somewhere. I saw them and read them years ago.

So at ~3000 miles the *ROOTS* are even HOTTER than 9400 K.

There a million degrees or more actually. The discharge loops are not limited to photosphere temperatures.

There is no mention of a flattening out or going horizontal in the article.

No but you'll find more images by Kosovichev on my website on the Blog page near the bottom that demonstrate that effect from another paper.

They measured the flow down to a depth of ~10,000 miles. No iron crust seen.

They call it a "subsurface stratification".
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510111

If there was a thermodynamically impossible iron crust then IMO they would have detected its effect on the sound waves.

They do. Read the article and notice what happens to all the sound waves at approximately .997-.995R. Why does that happen?

 

[Michael Mozina]

First asked 15 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
Since you are an expert on the running difference process, perhaps you can answer the question implicit in GeeMack's post


Why does the apparent height of your "mountain ranges" depend on the selection of source images for the RD process?

First answer:

And the obvious rebuttal:

This has nothing to do with actually measurig the heights.
This is the fact that by changing the amount of time between the source images, the apparent height of the mountains changes.
In other words

• Your light sources remain the same regardless of how the images are processed. They may move. They may brighten or darken.
• Your "mountains" remain the same regardless of how the images are processed. They may be made of some magical material that moves along your crust or changes height during the.
• Create 2 RD movies. The apparent heights change.

But your light sources have not changed between the movies. Your "mountains" not changed between the movies. Thus their apparent height should not change between the movies.

So here is the question a bit clearer:

First asked 15 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
Since you are an expert on the running difference process:

Why does the apparent height of your "mountain ranges" depend on the timing of source images for the RD process when the light sources and mountains in the images are the same?
​

It really is pointless to answer your questions because you don't listen to my answers and you repeat the same strawman of a question over and over again like a parrot until it gets move to one of your "lists".

I have *NEVER* claimed anyone could measure the height of mountains in RD solar images. That is your own strawman.

 

[Michael Mozina]

http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/061127PressConference/movie/xrt_pfi_gband_20061113.mpg

Check out this Hinode image Brantc. The xrays from the coronal loops can be seen rising up along side of the penumbral filaments in the gband overlay of the photosphere. You can literally see how the coronal loops help to generate the very patterns of the sunspot on the surface of the photosphere as they rise up through the photosphere.

 

[Reality Check]

Why are the coronal loops in the RD images aligned your "mountain ranges"

First asked 15 April 2010
Micheal Mozina,
From what I understand of your fantasy of a thermodynamically impossible iron crust, you think that coronal loops are electrical disharges.


Any one with a basic knowledge of physics knows that this is physically impossible because

1. Your iron crust does not exist because it would have to be at a temperature of over 9400 K (the temperature of the photosphere at a depth of about 500 km).
2. Electrical discharges result from the breakdown of an insulating material. There is no such material available in the Sun. Your iron crust is surrounded by highly conductive plasma.

But there is another property of electrical discharges that you are ignoring - in general they arc from high spots to high spots. So a prediction of your idea could be that the "mountain ranges" that you imagine seeing in RD movies would be the source of the coronal loops, i.e. in the original images the coronal loops would extend from one mountain to another (or maybe sometimes the same one).

Why are all of the coronal loops in the TRACE 171A RD images aligned along the tops of your "mountain ranges"?
IMO most of them should extend between the "mountain ranges".

The correct explanation is that there are no "mountain ranges" and the coronal loops are not electrical discharges. There is only the illusion of mountain ranges. These are caused by areas of cooling plasma on one side of the loop with areas of heating plasma on the other side of the loop. The RD process then produces a light area adjoined by a dark area which fools ignorant minds are into thinking there are mountains there.

 

[Michael Mozina]

One more thing.

If the Sun were Iron, its Mass would be much larger.

Therefore the Gravity would be much higher.

Therefore, to orbit the Sun in 365.25 days, the Earth would have to be much farther out than it is.

Q.E.D. the sun cannot be solid iron.

I agree but that's not what I'm personally suggesting by the way. The overall abundance figures that Manuel provides simply tell us the composition. The mass is still the same, the elements are simply arranged differently, and heaviest elements cannot be inside the core:

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=cXsvy2tBJlU&feature=related

 

[Reality Check]

It really is pointless to answer your questions because you don't listen to my answers and you repeat the same strawman of a question over and over again like a parrot until it gets move to one of your "lists".

I have *NEVER* claimed anyone could measure the height of mountains in RD solar images. That is your own strawman.

I have never claimed that you *EVER* claimed anyone could measure the height of mountains in RD solar images. That is your own strawman.

I expect that astronomers can measure the height since they seem to be able to meaaure the height of the features in the many images.

Now answer the question:
Why does the apparent height of your "mountain ranges" depend on the timing of source images for the RD process when the light sources and mountains in the images are the same?

N.B. For the second time: No measurement of the height of the mountains is needed. Just explain why they change according to how you do the RD process.

 

[Michael Mozina]

First asked 15 April 2010
Micheal Mozina,
From what I understand of your fantasy of a thermodynamically impossible iron crust, you think that coronal loops are electrical disharges.


Any one with a basic knowledge of physics knows that this is physically impossible because

1. Your iron crust does not exist because it would have to be at a temperature of over 9400 K (the temperature of the photosphere at a depth of about 500 km).
2. Electrical discharges result from the breakdown of an insulating material. There is no such material available in the Sun. Your iron crust is surrounded by highly conductive plasma.

But there is another property of electrical discharges that you are ignoring - in general they arc from high spots to high spots. So a prediction of your idea could be that the "mountain ranges" that you imagine seeing in RD movies would be the source of the coronal loops, i.e. in the original images the coronal loops would extend from one mountain to another (or maybe sometimes the same one).

Why are all of the coronal loops in the TRACE 171A RD images aligned along the tops of your "mountain ranges"?
IMO most of them should extend between the "mountain ranges".

The correct explanation is that there are no "mountain ranges" and the coronal loops are not electrical discharges. There is only the illusion of mountain ranges. These are caused by areas of cooling plasma on one side of the loop with areas of heating plasma on the other side of the loop. The RD process then produces a light area adjoined by a dark area which fools ignorant minds are into thinking there are mountains there.

No, the "correct explanation" is that these are typically discharge processes that are directly related to volcanic activity, or they are related to induction processes as plasma sweeps past the rigid, sometimes metallic surface features. The CME event was certainly related a volcanic event so the center of that activity is located at the main volcanic vent that dumps solids into the plasma atmosphere and sets off a firestorm of electrical activity in the plasma atmosphere.

 

[Ziggurat]

I assume you're saying all of this for Brantc's benefit not mine because I personally am definitely not suggesting that the sun is made of solid iron.

The sun's overall composition is pretty much what we find in ordinary meteorites IMO, but the overall mass is exactly the same as standard theory. There's simply a different arrangement of elements and a different composition of elements in the solar models I have proposed. The overall mass need not be, and is in fact not different than standard theory IMO. It is therefore impossible IMO for the sun to be "solid iron".

You are correct that the problem with your model is not the total mass. But your arrangement of that mass is still impossible. I've already provided you with calculations demonstrating this. You have no response, no way to resolve the fact that the pressures this would create are so large that any solid material would fail, leading to collapse of your shell. Your appeal to a water bubble only demonstrates your profound ignorance of the scaling laws of gravity.

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

Conceptually its a pretty simple idea.

A sphere the size of the sun has the ability to focus a lot of energy in the center if it were to act like an antenna.
If it were an spherical antenna that received "aether"(insert "some universal energy") and acted like a transformer and then turned it into electrons which then flowed in the shell to produce the current driving the effects we see.

Kinda like a sphere when it gets statically charged except in this case the charge is huge.

Count the unfounded assumptions in this post. Here's a big clue. If your model requires a rewrite of all science as we know it, it's very very unlikely to be true.

Point by point:

That's not how antennas work.

Aether is a discredited concept. No such thing. The experiments that disproved it can be replicated by talented amateurs, so no excuse for reviving this one.

No mechanism to act like a transformer.

No solid shell. If your model requires it, that's a flaw in your model.

This thread just keeps getting deeper and deeper.

A

 

[Ziggurat]

You're also basing your assumption of the abundance of various elements on your faith in a non mass separated model that can't possibly work, where iron supposedly stays mixed with hydrogen and helium stays mixed with lead and nickel.

You mean to tell me no heavy ions come from the sun?

He did predict all types of ions, both positive and negative would come from the sun, including but not limited to heavy ones.

So heavy ions are present in the solar wind... but not in the corona or photosphere. That's a neat "mass separation" trick you've got there, Michael. Sounds like you're either proposing teleportation, or you just contradicted yourself.

 

[tusenfem]

[qimg]http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/birkelandyohkohmini.jpg[/qimg]

Hey look, it's Birkeland trying to explain the rings of Saturn using his terrella emitting white light and a picture of the sun taken in X-ray.

Yeah, that's really the same!

 

[Ziggurat]

Iron has the very interesting property of what is termed "Magnetostriction."
When current is passed through iron it acts like a piezoelectric electric crystal in that it contracts and expands. See Terfenol-D.

Bwahahahahaha! You really need to read up on terms before you use them. Magnetostriction is a change in lattice constant in response to a change in magnetization, not current or electric field. And the effect is pretty small. ESPECIALLY if you're not well below the Curie temperature, and even you haven't been willing to claim the surface is that cold. There's not a chance in hell you could generate those kinds of velocities with magnetostriction, not even with pure Terfenol-D. Which, according to you, the sun is not. Hell, your own model of mass separation pretty much prohibits any of that stuff from forming, given the mass disparity between iron and the lanthanides.

Yet another epic fail of physics ignorance.