Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
D'rok said:
And who decides which interpretation, yours or GeeMack's, is correct? You?
Click to expand...

Any kid should be able to do it. That red/orange ring in the still image is the photosphere/chromosphere boundary. The RD images tend to have crisp outlines that are very visible in RD images. They will consistently be inside that red-orange border. If it's on the inside it's on the inside. If it's on the outside, it's on the outside. Anyone should be able to tell the difference between inside and outside.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Any kid should be able to do it. That red/orange ring in the still image is the photosphere/chromosphere boundary. The RD images tend to have crisp outlines that are very visible in RD images. They will consistently be inside that red-orange border. If it's on the inside it's on the inside. If it's on the outside, it's on the outside. Anyone should be able to tell the difference between inside and outside.
Click to expand...
You, in other words. Why on earth would GeeMack consent to be bound by your interpretation of the features of any solar image?
 
This is just more misdirection anyways. Since you have finally made your flimsy excuse for why you wont let Sol help you test your ideas, how about at least doing him the courtesy of acknowledging his request for you to address Ben's posts?
 
Michael having read this tiresome thread. I'm willing to make a bet with you. I'll bet you 47 US cents that your head is a 10.1 on the Mohs scale.
 
Michael Mozina said:
It HAS to have a highly ionized atmosphere sol. There's no other way that the opaque limb in iron ion wavelengths can reside inside of the chromosphere/photosphere boundary!
Click to expand...

I agree. The conclusion, since the atmosphere is bloody obviously not highly ionized (the photosphere's spectrum is that of a 6000K, weakly-ionized plasma) is that the atmosphere is NOT transparent. Therefore the iron ion emissions you're seeing are NOT coming from behind the atmosphere. Like we've been saying.

You still don't even have a GUESS about what the geometry of this emission is, do you? Your idea that "it's behind the photosphere" is based on some bizarre form of inference that works in the Mozina Visual Cortex and nowhere else.

Don't get me started. Electricity is *KNOWN AND DEMONSTRATED* to ionize matter.
Click to expand...

Electricity is NOT known to ionize matter without heating it up.

Electricity is not known to magically pick out ionization states one at a time; it is known to heat up matter, and a higher-temperature Saha equation includes a broader (and higher) range of ionization states.
 
D'rok said:
You, in other words. Why on earth would GeeMack consent to be bound by your interpretation of the features of any solar image?
Click to expand...

The only 'feature' I'm asking him to commit to is 'inside" or "outside". How much commitment can that be if the photosphere is "opaque" to these wavelengths in 3.5 meters?
 
Michael Mozina said:
The only 'feature' I'm asking him to commit to is 'inside" or "outside". How much commitment can that be if the photosphere is "opaque" to these wavelengths in 3.5 meters?
Click to expand...

You're also asking him to commit to your definition (whatever it is) of the photosphere and where and how you can "see" it and see through it in these images. Read ben's post just above, for example.
 
D'rok said:
This is just more misdirection anyways. Since you have finally made your flimsy excuse for why you wont let Sol help you test your ideas, how about at least doing him the courtesy of acknowledging his request for you to address Ben's posts?
Click to expand...

I haven't given up trying to answer sol's question. I'm trying to figure out a logical way to answer it based on real physical evidence that I can cite that are based on solar spectrum characteristics. I can't figure out how to do that. If I had some clue as to why the 94A images are unique, I might be able to figure out a way to do it. Birkeland already gave his own answers that you can find in that NY Times article. If you want any old number, I'd start with his numbers.
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
I haven't give up trying to answer sol's question. I'm trying to figure out a logical way to answer it based on real physical evidence that I can cite that are based on solar spectrum characteristics. I can't figure out how to do that.
Click to expand...
Then quit claiming that the solar atmosphere is transparent.
 
D'rok said:
You're also asking him to commit to your definition (whatever it is) of the photosphere
Click to expand...

We can agree (or disagree) right now that the inside surface of the red/orange ring in the still image is the surface of the photosphere for purpose of our wager. We can likewise commit that any iron wavelength will do except 94A. How is this difficult if neither of us can create the image?

and where and how you can "see" it and see through it in these images. Read ben's post just above, for example.
Click to expand...

No emissions in these wavelengths can occur below the surface of the photosphere according to their theory. All emissions should occur "outside" the photosphere/chromosphere boundary. Any 'running differences' of this activity would also necessarily need to occur "outside" of the photosphere.

On the other hand, if the iron ions originate under the photosphere, then the 'running differences' must also occur under the photosphere.

It's really a simple wager and if the photosphere is "opaque" and the lines originate above the photosphere they can't lose.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Look folks, you have to commit to something. We could go on forever and ever and ever if you aren't willing to bet something, if only a public change of opinion on the topic. I'm willing to bet. I'm willing to make some predictions related to the SDO images. I'm willing to bet on the neon issue as well. If you're not prepared to bet something, what's the point of continuing the conversation at all?
Click to expand...

You're willing to bet? Are you serious about that? Serious to the point of putting the money in escrow with a 3rd party arbiter to decide on payout? How much are we talking about, ballpark?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Inside or outside ladies and gentleman? Wager up! (Only GM is wagering his hair). :)
Click to expand...


So you're still not making any sense. You want to bet that NASA and/or LMSAL and/or Stanford will agree with/disagree with your interpretation of where the photosphere becomes opaque?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Inside or outside ladies and gentleman? Wager up! (Only GM is wagering his hair). :)
Click to expand...

Here's a prediction for SDO, Michael. SDO will show something similar to what TRACE has been showing for the past decade.

It will produce a 2-dimensional image with various 2-D features. Some of the features will be centerwards of the edge of the 2D disk, others will be distal to the edge of the 2D disk. This will be true in all wavebands.

How's that for a prediction?

I can also how you predict how you interpret it. If you see a feature proximal to the edge, you'll say "it's coming from BELOW the surface SO I'M RIGHT" You will not produce a diagram showing any 3D understanding of this at all.

If you see a feature distal to the edge, you'll label the "feature" itself as the "surface", you'll label the edge itself as "the iron", and you'll declare that you're seeing right through the space in between. You will not produce a diagram showing any 3D understanding of this at all.

Therefore: if SDO shows features anywhere near the edge of its 2D disk image, either distal or proximal to other features, you will interpret those features as confirming your model. Just as you did with the first light image, and just as you could presumably do with the entire TRACE archive. Do I have that right?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Inside or outside ladies and gentleman? Wager up! (Only GM is wagering his hair). :)
Click to expand...

Michael, why are you ignoring the roughly 15 posts over the last day that point out to you that finding the brightest ring in a 171A image inside the edge of the photosphere disk is perfectly consistent with the standard solar model? Why do you think anyone would make a bet against their own preferred model?

I'm more than willing to bet with you, but it has to be on something where the SM disagrees with you. There are plenty of such things, believe me - that just isn't one.
 
sol invictus said:
You're willing to bet? Are you serious about that? Serious to the point of putting the money in escrow with a 3rd party arbiter to decide on payout? How much are we talking about, ballpark?
Click to expand...


He bet the farm back in 2006 that the STEREO program would bring in the data to vindicate his crazy conjecture. He was betting six packs of beer on some image issues, too, but never was willing to follow up for some reason. As I recall I offered to pay his tuition at a community college if he took a physics course and got an A. Now he wants to bet a head shaving that the scientists working on the SDO program will agree that he's seeing 4800 kilometers into the photosphere. With history as our guide, I'm pretty sure Michael will not put his money where his mouth is.
 
D'rok said:
Then quit claiming that the solar atmosphere is transparent.
Click to expand...

I have figured out a way to make it transparent. All I have to do is ionize it to a specific energy state. A steady flow of current will do, but the numbers have to work out in terms of thermodynamics, densities, temperatures, all of which can be different depending on which layer we're talking about. If I had some physical piece of evidence to point me in the right direction, I might be able to better isolate a number but Birkeland's number are in that article and he's welcome to start with that. I simply have no idea because everything depends on voltage and I'm clues at the moment as to what it might be. That doesn't mean I haven't figured out a way to make the atmosphere "transparent". I have, and after looking at the SDO images, I'm also certain that it *IS* transparent to every iron wavelength except one, namely the 94A wavelength. Whatever is unique about that wavelength might point us in a better direction than the one Birkeland himself provided, but right now his number are your best bet at a "wild guess".
 
Michael Mozina said:
We can agree (or disagree) right now that the inside surface of the red/orange ring in the still image is the surface of the photosphere for purpose of our wager. We can likewise commit that any iron wavelength will do except 94A. How is this difficult if neither of us can create the image?



No emissions in these wavelengths can occur below the surface of the photosphere according to their theory. All emissions should occur "outside" the photosphere/chromosphere boundary. Any 'running differences' of this activity would also necessarily need to occur "outside" of the photosphere.

On the other hand, if the iron ions originate under the photosphere, then the 'running differences' must also occur under the photosphere.

It's really a simple wager and if the photosphere is "opaque" and the lines originate above the photosphere they can't lose.
Click to expand...

Round and round we go. You get to define the boundaries of the photosphere. You will claim to see something below that boundary. And then people will remind you that you are ignoring solar geometry amongst a host of other omissions, and that "below the photosphere" is nonsensical anyways because it is defined as the region in which plasma becomes opaque. If you are seeing an emission, you aren't seeing below the photosphere, whatever the depth.

This is a fool's bet, and, unfortunately for you, GeeMack is no fool.

Now, shouldn't you be getting busy gathering actual evidence for your claims?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom