Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[Dancing David]

Just did in the last post.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/3307756.html?page=1&c=y

The whole thing has hills and valleys and "depressions" galore.



The Gband and CA images all show a clear pattern of termination at a specific 'depth" related to the "layer" that emits visible light and/or CA/H light. Both show the same exact patterns of the penumbral filaments extending "deep" into the umbra.

I'm specifically ignoring the other "depth" questions until we resolve the "depth" of that "depression" and the material that makes up the photosphere vs. the material that makes up the umbra, and the mass flows related coronal loop activity. I've noticed too that if I don't keep things focused on *ONE* topic, you guys go all over the board and go nuts on the homework assignments with the express intent of changing the subject.

Um, I asked you a specific question that would support your idea that the sunspot is a silcon area pushing into the neon layer, if that was the case , it should show in the spectroscopy.

And sure, ignore the depth question, I am not all over the place, I am not rude to you, nor have I been rude to you.

I asked a simple question about the opacity of the photosphere and at what depth you believe it becomes opaque.

I have not assigned you any homework, so your almost rant makes little sense.

However if plasma does have an opacity and your 'solid surface of iron' is below that opacity, it does present some problems for your interpretation of the RD images.

So please ignore all you want. It makes your premise look much worse.

 

[Dancing David]

Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma? That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?

Start with some real numbers here for us. Where (how deep) in the atmosphere does this magic refrigeration process occur?

MM, take a moment , relax, breath.

Your post above is not really very good, perhaps you need to take a break?

There is an inner source of heat, generally believed to be mostly the fusion of hydrogen into helium.

The plasma is not totally opaque so IR and all sorts of other frequencies will travel outwards through the plasma. Some will stay inside for a very long time, as it bounces around , is emitted and reabsorbed.

So you have interior layers that transmit energy to the outer layers, now in the photosphere, more of the energy radiates away because much of the energy rises above the 450 km depth and therefore much of it will not be reabsorbed but transmitted outwards. The energy at 450 km is likely to be reabsorbed, but energy that moves outwards is more likely to not be reabsorbed, so as energy moves up higher it will reach a level where 50% is being radiated outwards.

So your story about cooling is silly, the inner layers transmit energy to the outer layers all the time. The very center of the sun is very hot and so each layer is cooler as we bprogress outwards, there is no cooler layer under a hotter layer.

Now if you are asking why the chromosphere and the corona are higher temperatures than the photosphere, that is a good question.

Now TT talked about some possible mechanisms for why the corona heats to a higher temperature.

 

[Dancing David]

Let's hear you quantify the refrigeration process for us. How far under the surface of the photosphere does this plasma cool to say 4000K? How long does it take for that cooled plasma to reach the surface, and why doesn't it pick up heat from the plasma above, below, and all around the cooler plasma? Your 'opacity' seems to work in your favor when you want it to, but you ignore it when it's convenient too. You folks bitched at me about the flow of heat from the photosphere surface flowing back into the sun, but now you're utterly ignoring the transfer of heat problem you've created. What's up with that?

Michael, it moves from the interior outwards, there is also small scale convection.

The photosphere roughly radiates at 5505 °C, 9941 °F or ~5700 K.

So in the standard model, there is no layer in the interior that would be cooler than that. All the inner layers would have higher temperatures.

If one does not beleive in a solid iron surface then it is not an issue. That is your idea.

 

[Dancing David]

Knowing what it means and agreeing with it are two separate issues. I agree that there is a surface of something you call a photosphere. I don't have any evidence at all that it is "opaque" to even white light to at least the depth of the penumbral filaments.

Which was not my question at all MM, nor is it the one most of us have been asking.

I am asking because I believe that your RD images can not show any features at the depths of yoru alleged iron surface.

So how deep do you feel the penumbral filiments visibly extend?

 

[Dancing David]

Your terms make it impossible to communicate effectively because you *ASSUME* things in your terms that simply are not true. There is a visible bright plasma surface that we all seem to agree is there. What shall we call it then?

So that area ranges from 450km deep on upwards?

 

[Dancing David]

Oh, you mean the *CRUST* in my model?

Well that is the rub MM, if your crust is way below the area where any light can directly travel from, then you are seeing things that can not be seen.

So I ask again, how opaque do you beleive the plasma is, do you beleive that it is transparent to some degree to the iron surface your hypothesize?

 

[Dancing David]

I don't debate that that is the definition. I simply do not believe anything other than the solid surface is "opaque" to every wavelength under the sun.

What shall we call that bright shiny surface in gband then for the purposes of communication since I will not and do not agree that it is "opaque"?

For posterity MM!

 

[Reality Check]

Not necessarily. It depends on a lot of factors including the energy source(s) and whether it's an internal or external energy source.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0511379

That is a really silly presentation at a conference.
For example it repeats your fantasy that the TRACE RD movie shows "rigid structures".

 

[Michael Mozina]

Nice rant MM,

Ya, sorry about that too. You of all people really didn't deserve it. A long busy day at work and semantic filled nonsense on the boards can get me grouchy sometimes. Sorry.

1. What is the opacity of the photosphere?

I can't believe that it took me all these years, and all these debates to figure it out, but I finally understand the Achilles heel of mainstream solar theory.
http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/070321Flare/SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg

That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.

I'm taking a deep breath, grabbing a cup of coffee and then I'll be back.....

 

[Reality Check]

Calculation for the depth of the SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg filament

I can't believe that it took me all these years, and all these debates to figure it out, but I finally understand the Achilles heel of mainstream solar theory.
http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/070321Flare/SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg

That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.

Massive Flare on 13 December 2006

SOT images in Ca II H spectral line shows separating flare ribbon in the chromosphere. Fine structure of flare loops are also noticed. The field of view is 216" by 108" corresponding to 1.6×10^5km by 7.9×10^4km on the Sun.

That little plasma filament threading it's way across the umbra is the totally standard arrow that supports the defintion of opacity used in physics, the solar theories, and confirms that you are obsessed with bunnes!
Yet again:

1. There is no way that you can tell from looking at this movie whether the fliament moving across the center of the sunspot is descending or rising.
2. You have presented no calculation of how much the filament is descending or rising.

There is no "claim" about opacity. It is a really simple physical fact to comprehend (except for you as your continued ignorance shows ):

• Light travels in a straight line.
• When it hits an atom it is scattered.
• Hit enough atoms and light cannot through the material.

First asked 22 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
Show your calculation for the depth to which the filament in SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg descends (or the height to which it rises).

P.S. There are over 40 outstanding questions in Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
There are a number more to add from the last day or so - you had better get working !


Of course an honest person would answer most of the questions quite simply:

• I (Michael Mozina) was wrong in asserting that Birkeland stated X is his book (X = high speed solar wind, etc.)
• I (Michael Mozina) should not and will never again misrepresent Birkeland's Saturn analogy image for an image of the Sun.
• There is no phyiscal evidence for my ideas about the sun (What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009

 

[Tim Thompson]

Sunspot Cooling II

Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma? That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?

Start with some real numbers here for us. Where (how deep) in the atmosphere does this magic refrigeration process occur?

Again, Mozina rants & talks trash, but has nothing intelligent to say. The ability of magnetic fields to inhibit convective heat transport is well known & well established, and indeed fairly obvious: Plasma does not cross magnetic field lines. The physics is well described in any number of sources, e.g., Solar Astrophysics by Peter Foukal (Wiley-VCH, 2004 2nd revised edition), section 8.2.2 "Why Spots Are Cool" ...

The most promising explanation of the spots coolness, and the fate of the missing energy, seems to lie in the blocking of convection by intense vertical magnetic fields. This explanation was first put forward by Biermann in 1941, and some recent evidence tends to strengthen the argument. The basic idea is that the horizontal motions of overturning convection are inhibited by the magnetic volume force jxB in the presence of a strong vertical magnetic field. ... In this explanation of the spot coolness, an equilibrium would be reached in which the convective heat flux blocked below the spot would simply flow around it ...
Solar Astrophysics, Peter Foukal, 2nd ed. 2004, page 250. See the book for complete details.
​

The hot plasma around the sunspot does put heat in, that's why the umbra still sports a temperature about 3000 Kelvins. It's not "magic", it's physics, but then you wouldn't understand about that anyway.

 

[X]

FYI, the shell isn't solid iron IMO, it's a standard volcanic 'crust' like the Earth, or like Mercury in terms of overall composition. It's probably more metallic than either the Earth or Mercury, but it's not likely to be made of solid iron IMO and it has "plasma pressure" inside the shell. Just an FYI....

But wasn't your cohort saying it was?

Already done, though that was quite a few pages ago.

I know. I remember that post.
But it wasn't for 90 km thick iron.
Actually, it looks independent of thickness.
My bad.

I wonder how big (diameter) a 90 km thick iron shell could be before collapsing under it's own weight.
(Factoring in (forthcoming) pressure values from either Mozina or Brant will add to the "realism".)

As before, I wonder, but not enough to be bothered plugging out the math myself. This thread is purely idle entertainment for me.

 

[Tim Thompson]

No little plasma filament

That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.

There is no little plasma filament threading its way into the umbra in the movie you present. You can't even even figure out a picture.

 

[Michael Mozina]

But wasn't your cohort saying it was?

That's possible. You may want brantc to clarify his position. Please also take the time to understand my position and not confuse the two.

 

[Michael Mozina]

There is no "claim" about opacity. It is a really simple physical fact to comprehend (except for you as your continued ignorance shows ):

That line sounds remarkably like that line from the Wizard of Oz: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

You folks have an emotional and mathematical NEED for that surface to be "opaque" when clearly it's not "opaque" to even white light to the bottom of the penumbral filaments which themselves cannot possibly be "500 KM". Your downfall is that opacity claim because it fails every observational "test" we put it to.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Just before I started my pot of coffee my daughter came in the room and asked me what I was looking at. Instead of telling her, I asked her what she though it was. She said she thought it was clouds with a "hole in the clouds, with stuff falling into the hole". Nice. Even she's more attentive to detail than you guys.

 

[X]

That's possible. You may want brantc to clarify his position. Please also take the time to understand my position and not confuse the two.

I didn't confuse anyone's position.
I responded to one of BenBurch's posts that caught my eye.

I didn't specify anyone in particular. I merely made a general observation.
So please don't go chastising me for "misunderstanding your position", when plainly I did not.

 

[temporalillusion]

Wow. Just... wow.

Cmon, white light and how the electromagnetic spectrum really is are right next to each other on the keyboard, totally is a typo.

 

[Michael Mozina]

I didn't confuse anyone's position.
I responded to one of BenBurch's posts that caught my eye.

I didn't specify anyone in particular. I merely made a general observation.
So please don't go chastising me for "misunderstanding your position", when plainly I did not.

I'm not chastising you nor blaming you in any way. Sorry if that's how it sounded.

 

[Michael Mozina]

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/CSR.htm

FYI, for anyone interested in the technical specifications of SDO, this link is pretty helpful IMO. Evidently the AIA package has two continuum channels capable of imaging the photosphere and 6 iron ion channels, a He II channel like SOHO and TRACE and a Carbon IV ion channel. It has a 16 megapixel resolution capability and a 10 second cadence (way cool) that evidently can be sped up if necessary during flare type events. I'm still wading through the information since it is quite long, but I'm finding the link to be very informative and quite helpful.