Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michael Mozina said:
I am specifically trying to remove any "camera yada yada yada" from the conversation by using a RD image.
Click to expand...

Can you tell us why you think using a RD image will help with the "camera yada yada yada"?

If as the mainstream suggests, all the emissions begin above the surface of the photosphere, then the shell created by the RD image has to have larger diameter than the photosphere.
Click to expand...

We disagree. Can you explain? And can you please respond to ben's post?
 
I predict it will not matter which iron ion that is used (with the exception of 94A) that any RD iron line image will produce a rough textured sphere that will rotate inside the diameter of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary about 4800KM under the photosphere on each side.
 
I predict that you will never substantiate your claim that you can see 4800km under the photosphere.
 
Michael Mozina said:
I predict it will not matter which iron ion that is used (with the exception of 94A) that any RD iron line image will produce a rough textured sphere that will rotate inside the diameter of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary about 4800KM under the photosphere on each side.
Click to expand...


So can we take it that after all your belligerent blustering, including the name calling, taunting, and badgering, you no longer have the confidence in your claim and you're going to ignore that bet?
 
Michael Mozina said:
I predict it will not matter which iron ion that is used (with the exception of 94A) that any RD iron line image will produce a rough textured sphere that will rotate inside the diameter of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary about 4800KM under the photosphere on each side.
Click to expand...

First: There's a nice ASCII picture somewhere, I swear, that would make this 3D model easier to comprehend. It will also aid you in telling us FOR THE FIRST TIME what you think this looks like in 2D projection.

Second: Wait a second, that's the OPPOSITE of what you were saying about the SDO first light image. In the SDO image, the "green band" was supposedly an iron-line band (not a "rough-textured sphere) whose emissions came from everywhere BETWEEN the projected edge and the projected 4800-km-deep level. Now you're saying that outermost edge of the iron lines should come from the projected 4800-km-deep level, and the "sphere" will appear in projection centerwards of that? Good, that's falsified by the SDO image a few posts back.

Before you tell me I'm confused about your model: YES I AM INDEED, AND BOY O BOY IT WOULD HELP IF YOU WOULD MAKE A 3D DIAGRAM AND USE IT TO EXPLAIN THE DEPTHS AND THE PROJECTIONS.
 
D'rok said:
I predict that you will never substantiate your claim that you can see 4800km under the photosphere.
Click to expand...

Um, if that won't do it, what exactly will? What other solar model you know of that predicts that we will find a rotating sphere under the photosphere, with 4800KM on each side of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Um, if that won't do it, what exactly will? What other solar model you know of that predicts that we will find a rotating sphere under the photosphere, with 4800KM on each side of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary?
Click to expand...


So after all your belligerent blustering, including the name calling, taunting, and badgering, have you lost confidence in your claim so you're going to ignore that bet?
 
GeeMack said:
So as for the success or failure of your bet that you can see 4800 kilometers into the photosphere in an SDO image, you'll accept the judgment of Dr. Pesnell, senior project scientist with the SDO program? After all, he's not even just any kid. He's an expert in the science of the SDO.
Click to expand...

No, just the images, and just accuracy of the "prediction". Appeals to authority are irrelevant. I made a quantified prediction about the edges of the opaque limbs in an iron line RD movie with respect to the chromosphere/photosphere boundary.

Do you wish to make any specific scientific prediction, because if not, you're not even in the game. Ante up.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Um, if that won't do it, what exactly will? What other solar model you know of that predicts that we will find a rotating sphere under the photosphere, with 4800KM on each side of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary?
Click to expand...
You have yet to demonstrate that you can see beneath the photosphere in any image. In fact, it has been conclusively demonstrated that you cannot. This, of course, is why you ran away from Sol's opacity calculations. This is why you won't touch solar geometry with ben.

Your prediction is meaningless unless your method is based on something other than looking at images. Will you be trying to show us this green sphere under the photosphere in an image? Or do you have something else in mind?
 
Michael Mozina said:
No, just the images, and just accuracy of the "prediction". Appeals to authority are irrelevant. I made a quantified prediction about the edges of the opaque limbs in an iron line RD movie with respect to the chromosphere/photosphere boundary.

Do you wish to make any specific scientific prediction, because if not, you're not even in the game. Ante up.
Click to expand...


I thought you were betting you could see 4800 kilometers deep into the photosphere in the SDO imagery. Apparently not.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Um, if that won't do it, what exactly will? What other solar model you know of that predicts that we will find a rotating sphere under the photosphere, with 4800KM on each side of the photosphere/chromosphere boundary?
Click to expand...

Under? Under what? Surely you mean "centerwards of on the 2D projection"? In that case, I ALREADY GAVE YOU A MODEL. An optically-thin *absorbing* layer in the corona gives you a dark feature just centerwards of the edge of a 2-D projection.

"2D projections? What's that? A very curious thread indeed, so many confusing concepts and ... what were we talking about? Oh yes, how right I am. 2D projections? I dare say that rings a faint bell but I'd rather talk about my being right. Excuse me? Did someone say "two bee prow ejections" or something---must have been the wind, tra la! But I'm simply fascinated by how right I am about everything."
 
ben m said:
Under? Under what? Surely you mean "centerwards of on the 2D projection"? In that case, I ALREADY GAVE YOU A MODEL. An optically-thin *absorbing* layer in the corona gives you a dark feature just centerwards of the edge of a 2-D projection.
Click to expand...

I think that's to the left....
 
D'rok said:
You have yet to demonstrate that you can see beneath the photosphere in any image.
Click to expand...

That is the point of putting a "quantified" prediction on the table. You won't get them to do those kinds of things because their model is hopelessly broken and it cannot be fixed. If they do put some actually numerically quantified prediction on the table, it will fail.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Apparently you're a coward. Ante up with a quantified prediction.
Click to expand...


Your inability to be civil and polite notwithstanding, I thought you were betting you could see 4800 kilometers deep into the photosphere in the SDO imagery. Have you decided to back out on that bet?
 
Michael Mozina said:
That is the point of putting a "quantified" prediction on the table. You won't get them to do those kinds of things because their model is hopelessly broken and it cannot be fixed. If they do put some actually numerically quantified prediction on the table, it will fail.
Click to expand...

If I predict that the Cardinals do win the World Series, and they don't, does that mean the Earth is a black hole?
 
GeeMack said:
Your inability to be civil and polite notwithstanding, I thought you were betting you could see 4800 kilometers deep into the photosphere in the SDO imagery. Have you decided to back out on that bet?
Click to expand...

Do you have a quantified prediction to offer us related to RD images? You've been claiming for years to be an "expert" on the topic. I'm not afraid to put my theory to the test with a numerically quantified prediction. For year's you've been bitching at me for not quantifying anything. I just did. Your turn.
 
Michael Mozina said:
The surface of the sphere will be centered in the photosphere/heliosphere boundary with 4800Km on each side.
Click to expand...

That was a joke, Michael (at your expense I'm sorry to say).

I was referring to Ben's speculation on the reason why you have so far failed to reply to any of around 20 posts explaining to you that your assertions about what the SM predicts for the bright rings in VUV band images are incorrect, and requesting that you respond to Ben's post and fill in his ASCII diagram.

Let me also repeat my question from before - are you serious about making a bet? There's a long tradition of wagers in science, as perhaps you are aware. I'm willing to bet with you under the right set of conditions, some of which are:

1) that we find something to bet on (something we disagree on, that is), perhaps an NeV line. The radius of the 171A ring doesn't qualify.

2) that the amount be large enough to be worth my time.

3) that the bet be arranged so that there is no backing out after the fact. That would probably involve an escrow account and an arbiter, which means some legal expense (see #2).

What do you say?
 
Michael Mozina said:
The surface of the sphere will be centered in the photosphere/heliosphere boundary with 4800Km on each side.
Click to expand...

So a slice through the image, you say, looks like this:

outer space (band 1)
---------------- (edge 1)
a 4800km wide stripe (band 2)
--------------- (edge 2)
another 4800km wide stripe (band 3)
-------------- (edge 3)
The rest of the Sun's disk (disk 4)

Is that right? Is Band 2 bright or dark? Is band 3 bright or dark?

Boy, I wish I didn't have to guess wildly at this crap. If you drew a 3D diagram, of course, I wouldn't have to. God forbid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom