Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[Reality Check]

Can you understand that the disk radius in RD images depends on solar activity

Just remember who told you how to find the disk and where you would find it in the RD images. That limb darkened region is the surface, and that is why I've been harping on the RD images.

I will address this part of your fantasy*.
It is not news to astronomers that RD images of the Sun show disks. It may be new to you.

First asked 4 May 2010
Michael Mozina,
Can you understand that the disk radius in RD images depends on solar activity?

The edge of the disk is a record of the changes in the original images. Where there are no changes there is no edge. Where there are changes there is an edge.
Thus a quiet Sun = a small radius, an active Sun = a bigger radius.

There is no "limb darkened region" in RD images. Limb darkening is constant in the original images and the RD process removes it.

If you are talking about a ""limb darkened region" in the SDO image then you are wrong: It is a processing artifact.


If you are talking about ordinary limb darkening then this disproves your iron crust fantasy*

• Can you explain why limb darkening does not diisprove your model?

* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.

 

[Michael Mozina]

First, I asked if you would agree that the SDO image doesn't provide support for the 4800 km layer of transparent neon. I was looking for a 'yes' or 'no,' I explicitly didn't ask you whether it disproved your conjectures, so your entire response is, well, nonresponsive.

Second, for the "I already admit the one image is not definitive proof" - how do you reconcile that with:

"Lo and behold however the first light SDO images demonstrate that your opaque math bunny is dead . . . I *NAILED* that 4800 Km figure! Your theory *FAILED* it's first critical observational test, and the "impossible" showed up in living color that is directly related to the iron line color scheme. The SSM is dead. "

(from post 2631)

The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.

When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.

If that limb lightened region wasn't relatively smooth, and had not worked out to the same number I got from Kosovichev, I would have a lot less confidence in the image. As it stands, I've been through the MDI images now on SDO. I"ve been through every single image I can get my hands on in fact. I'm sure now I'm right and that is why I predict the outcome of that RD images and and predict that same disk in both 171A and FeXX. The FeXX looks the most interesting to me personally and that's the one I would do first, but I need to compare the 171A LMSAL image to the SDO data eventually, so I'd do one at 171A too. I did my own RD images and looked at them very closely. I know the outcome.

 

[Reality Check]

If so, one long long cadence RD image at 171A aligned with the chromosphere should demonstrate that. If I'm right the edges of the RD image will align themselves with that limb darkened regions right under that glow in the dark photosphere.

You mean that glow in the dark photosphere that is a processing artifact producing a glow in the chromosphere in the one image ?

In that case you are so wrong that it deserves a ....

​

 

[Michael Mozina]

Oddly enough, this shows perfectly that one of my earlier posts i nthis thread was right on target.

MM did not do ANYTHING to verify his "findings" in the SDO image. NO effort was made to consider any alternative explanation, to rule out any experimental error..heck, he didn't even confirm the accuracy of the data he was using to prove his point.

Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number. I tried lots of stuff to "rule out" other options, including making up my own homegrown RD images. I have no doubt about the outcome of the "test" I have suggested. One test will confirm the accuracy of my prediction, one simple test.

 

[D'rok]

Too funny.

How many pages of victory declarations have we had to wade through based on this image?

You are one in a million, Michael.

 

[Michael Mozina]

You mean that glow in the dark photosphere that is a processing artifact....

How about you RC? You've heard GM's comments. Care to pony up some numbers for us and bet your public position on the outcome of the test I suggested?

 

[Tubbythin]

The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.

Michale. Its explicitly clear from that quote you thought it was the SDO image that nailed. No amount of backtracking is gonna remove what's in print. Your unwarranted arrogance has come back to haunt you.

When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.

Ok Michael. If a value is said to be 18 +- 3 with a one sigma, Gaussian error, how certain would you say you are the true value lies between 15 and 21?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Too funny.

How many pages of victory declarations have we had to wade through based on this image?

You are one in a million, Michael.

I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images. That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.

 

[Reality Check]

Where are your calculations that the SDO artifact has a width of *EXACTLY* 4800 km

The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.

You picked the point where the mass flow flows right through your iron crust fantasy*.

When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.

You have never shown any of these calculations but initially you stated that the SDO image processing artifact had a width of ~78,000 kilometers.

First asked 4 May 2010
Michael Mozina,
Where are your calculations that the SDO artifact has a width of *EXACTLY* 4800 kilometers?

Are your error bars +/-75,000 kilometers to include your inital calculation?

* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Michale. Its explicitly clear from that quote you thought it was the SDO image that nailed. No amount of backtracking is gonna remove what's in print. Your unwarranted arrogance has come back to haunt you.

It's only going to haunt me if it fails the next critical RD test.

 

[Tubbythin]

Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number. I tried lots of stuff to "rule out" other options, including making up my own homegrown RD images. I have no doubt about the outcome of the "test" I have suggested. One test will confirm the accuracy of my prediction, one simple test.

Visual confirmation that turned out to be completely, totally and utterly wrong.

 

[sol invictus]

Second, for the "I already admit the one image is not definitive proof" - how do you reconcile that with:

"Lo and behold however the first light SDO images demonstrate that your opaque math bunny is dead . . . I *NAILED* that 4800 Km figure! Your theory *FAILED* it's first critical observational test, and the "impossible" showed up in living color that is directly related to the iron line color scheme. The SSM is dead. "

(from post 2631)

Ouch.

 

[sol invictus]

I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number.

"Confirmation"?

 

[D'rok]

I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images.

Of that, no one has any doubt. Too bad you were a little too eager to find it.

That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.

But now that you realize that you were diligently counting pixels in a processing artifact, you will admit your error and retract your claims, yes?

 

[Reality Check]

How about you RC? You've heard GM's comments. Care to pony up some numbers for us and bet your public position on the outcome of the test I suggested?

Given your track record, there is no point.

Are you aware that you are displaying the symptoms of a crank?

Not realizing that they have to defend their fantasy* by actually doing some work. They usually try to get other people to do their work for them. They typically ignore the results and then expect other people not to notice this.
Michael Mozina did this with his constant shifting of the goalposts for sol victus's optical depth calculation. And he is deluded enough to think that this behavior will encourage other people to do he work for him, e.g.

Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Since you seem to disagree with my numbers and methods, put your own numbers on the table and ante up your public position. If you won't do that RC, you are not even in the game! Ante up.

 

[Tubbythin]

It's only going to haunt me if it fails the next critical RD test.

Well if I'd acted so arrogantly and been shown I was embarrasingly wrong I'd be hanging my head in shame. I guess some don't have any though.

Are you going to answer my errors question?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Of that, no one has any doubt. Too bad you were a little too eager to find it.But now that you realize that you were diligently counting pixels in a processing artifact, you will admit your error and retract your claims, yes?

I know it's hard to understand but that particular band was *THE* single most important "prediction" of a Birkeland solar model. There isn't a single more important prediction I could offer you. If it failed that test, it was all over. Since it did not fail that test, we can proceed to the RD phase and find out if it's a surface or a image artifact. First I needed to know the numbers and they are good.

 

[GeeMack]

Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number.

The visual confirmation you got from the SDO image was a gradient filter intentionally added to the image with a piece of software.

​

And you still haven't even tried to find some of the other pixel counting mistakes you've made. But give it a whirl. Since I have some expertise in image processing, I'll be glad to give you a couple of pointers, but you'll have to get started on your own.

 

[Reality Check]

Will you yank down your web site as promised after your prediction failed

I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images. That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.

First asked 4 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
It looks like somewhere, sometime you predicted that the SDO image would have a "smooth limb darkening" even before seeing it. Maybe even before SDO was launched!
But that prediction has failed since the "green line" in that image has been stated to be a processing artifact by the NASA SDO team.
And you have promised to yank "down my website in a heartbeat".

Will you yank down your web site as promised after your prediction failed?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Well if I'd acted so arrogantly and been shown I was embarrasingly wrong I'd be hanging my head in shame. I guess some don't have any though.

Are you going to answer my errors question?

I've been at this so long now it's not arrogance from my perspective, it's confidence. I've seen this model pass test after test after test that I have personally put it through in my search for internet images. I've poked through the heliosmology data looking for clues. I've been everywhere around the world on the web looking for the images I knew that I "should" find it this model had validity. Now that I've seen the first light of the SDO images, and I see that smooth ridge that works out to 4800Km +-1200, right where I thought I'd find it, I don't have any more doubts. Why do you think I've been after GM's scalp so hot and heavy?