Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is interesting and quite telling that MM was not the person here who contacted the SDO science team at NASA. His willingness to uncritically accept the pretty picture and his fanciful interpretation without any further analysis tells us that he has a very impoverished notion of the nature of scientific methods and scientific evidence.
 
Last edited:
Perpetual Student said:
Could you explain the nature of this test? Does it involve comparing or superimposing a RD image over some other image of the sun, as you have said? Since no one here agrees with your interpretation of RD images, how will that accomplish anything? For what purpose and to demonstrate what?
Click to expand...

Well the purpose is to demonstrate a prediction->verification chain of events. All scientific theories are judged on how well they can "predict" the outcome of various scientific tests. I can think of one scientific way to "test" to see whether those darkening limb lines are an optical illusion or an actual surface horizon via use of the RD imaging process. I feel like I'm spamming the board now with that RD disk image, so I'll spare you the image, but when you run a long duration RD image it creates a rough textured "disk" around the sun. If the electromagnetic lines do originate along that darkened limb line, the long cadence RD image should align itself nicely with that limb darkening and we should see the electromagnetic lines all around that 'surface'. I'm certain the 171A will work, so I would start there, but to my evidently useless eyeball, the FeXX wavelength looks to be a "better" light source. I think you might even get crisper lines on that wavelength.

If I have any credibility whatsoever as an "expert" in RD images, that must be what we see. If not, this solar theory is falsified. That's the "best" scientific test I can think of at the moment.
 
Last edited:
sol invictus said:
"Confirmation"?
Click to expand...

Ya. In my eyes at least those green lines on the horizon, and the depth at which the limb dimming occurs was a direct confirmation of something I predicted years ago based on the best available evidence I could think of at the time (Kosovichev's heliosiesmology data). The limb darkening is right where it should be, confirmed right down to the error bars to the best of my ability in a jpg image. If the theory holds up, that RD process should reveal that the rough outline of the RD disk sits nicely inside the red chromosphere boundaries and lines up nicely with that limb darkened region.

It should work very well in 171A, but it may work best in FeXX. There is a green image in the SDO movies that is breathtakingly spectacular IMO and looks to be the clearest of the bunch.
 
Last edited:
FYI sol, I'm still chomping on the 94A wavelength info. I think that's what I need to give you some better information, but I need some time to think about it. I thought it awfully lucky that all the iron ion wavelengths went through the neon unscathed, and that bit of information might help me explain how heat is transferred from the surface, through the silicon, to the neon, and away from the surface. I think that Tim provided us with a very important key, but I need time to really think about it. You have to admit that it is a logical prediction of this theory. Some amount of high energy light should be absorbed by the neon layer (not photosphere) and that 94A wavelength might be the energizing wavelength that reheats the neon as it cools at the chromosphere and starts sinking back into the neon. That has to be an important clue that can lead us to a real temperature, but I admit I am a bit out of my league on the thermodynamic aspects in such a highly electrically conductive environment. Energy states in this environment are baffling to me. It does however make logical sense to me that some of the 94A light would be absorbed by the cooling neon. That's pretty much the clue I've been looking for, but I'm not sure what to do about it yet.
 
Last edited:
Tim Thompson said:
So now we see that the "gap", which Mozina claims to be the chromosphere below the photosphere, thus falsifying all standard solar physics, is nothing more than an image processing artifact.
Click to expand...

If that is true then the long cadence RD image at 171 will not align itself with the limb darkened region. If it does align itself along that limb darkened line however, and we see electromagnetic flow patterns starting from that point, then what? Will any of you ever ante up your public position on any of these "predictions" I'm putting on the table? I can't keep coming up with new predictions every day you know, and this story needs to have a happy ending (for someone). I can only predict so many things you know. :)

I'm trying Tim, I really am. I'm willing to stick my neck out on the disk size of the long cadence RD image. Are you?

I'm not certain but I believe our beloved Mr. Spock has a side bet the circumference of the outline following the contours of that chromosphere boundary. I hope he'll fascinated by the results of the RD images. :)
 
Last edited:
A layman's question ...

Although I have a good scientific background, it's mostly to do with creatures. So please forgive the naive question. Also the thread is 70+ pages long....

Returning to the famous image with the 'green band' *, would it be fair to say that MM views the dark area as the solid surface, while the green stuff is akin to a glowing atmosphere ? And that the brightness is proportional to the depth of 'atmosphere' we are looking through?

* now reported to be a processing artefact, I see. But never mind.

[relurk]
 
Michael Mozina said:
Ya. In my eyes at least those green lines on the horizon, and the depth at which the limb dimming occurs was a direct confirmation of something I predicted years ago based on the best available evidence I could think of at the time (Kosovichev's heliosiesmology data). The limb darkening is right where it should be, confirmed right down to the error bars to the best of my ability in a jpg image. If the theory holds up, that RD process should reveal that the rough outline of the RD disk sits nicely inside the red chromosphere boundaries and lines up nicely with that limb darkened region.

It should work very well in 171A, but it may work best in FeXX. There is a green image in the SDO movies that is breathtakingly spectacular IMO and looks to be the clearest of the bunch.
Click to expand...

The problems with your fantasy* is that
  1. Kosovichev's heliosiesmology data proves that your iron crust fantasy* does not exist since it shows flows of plasma travelling at 1300 kilometer per seconds through your thermodynamically impossible iron crust.
  2. Your prediction was wrong because you did not have the intelligence to realize that you were looking at a PR image created by an artist to look pretty.
    The SDO image"green line" is a processing artifact as confirmed by the NASA team.
  3. Given tyour track record of ignorance abiut RD movies and blunder about the SDO image articfact I expect more "I see bunnies in the pretty pictures" non-science for you aboutthe green image public relations SDO movie which was also created by an artist to look pretty.
P.S.
Will you yank down your web site as promised after your prediction failed?
:dl:​

* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been totally debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Ya. In my eyes at least those green lines on the horizon, and the depth at which the limb dimming occurs was a direct confirmation of something I predicted years ago based on the best available evidence I could think of at the time (Kosovichev's heliosiesmology data).
Click to expand...

Michael, according to GeeMack's communication with NASA that strip is a processing artifact. And yet you trumpeted the success of your prediction before he revealed that, and now you still seem to be claiming it confirms a prediction you made.

Did you predict that NASA would process PR images in such a way that they would leave a strip that wide?
 
GlennB said:
Returning to the famous image with the 'green band' *, would it be fair to say that MM views the dark area as the solid surface, while the green stuff is akin to a glowing atmosphere ? And that the brightness is proportional to the depth of 'atmosphere' we are looking through?

* now reported to be a processing artefact, I see. But never mind.

[relurk]
Click to expand...

One of the truly surreal things about this is that not one of us knows exactly what Michael's model is. We know it's supposed to have a solid iron surface. We know it has a layer above that of ~5000km of plasma that's supposed to be transparent to ultra high frequency UV radiation, but which is producing the visible part of the sun's light. The UV radiation we've been discussing, like the 171A band, is I believe supposed to be produced in that plasma layer by some kind of discharge from the iron surface. Apparently these discharges do not extend past the plasma layer.

The trouble is, even if we assume all those statements are correct, as far as I can tell the predictions do not coincide with what Michael seems to believe they do (or with any of the images I've seen).

And of course then there's the fact that one would have to believe at least six impossible things (before breakfast) to accept the premises in the first place.
 
Still ignoring that measurements show the chromosphere, etc. above the photosphere

Michael Mozina said:
If I have any credibility whatsoever as an "expert" in RD images, that must be what we see. If not, this solar theory is falsified. That's the "best" scientific test I can think of at the moment.
Click to expand...
That is easy: You have no credibility whatsoever as an expert in RD images due to your idiocy in imagining "mountain ranges" below the photosphere in an RD movie created from images of the corona.
Thus whatever you say will be just another part of your fantasy.

This has already been done for several decades and measurements of the Sun clearly show the chromosphere, etc. above the photosphere.
Your solar fantasy* is falsified.
No RD images are needed.


Try reading some of the science that you are ignoring:
* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been totally debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
Last edited:
Mister Earl said:
I'm coming in a little late on this one. Is he saying that the sun has a solid iron surface, or a mix of stuff that is mostly iron? Is the shape alone of this spherical shell of iron supposed to hold it up against gravitational collapse? I would think that the heat and pressure applied to a spherical, hollow iron shell would immediately rupture and dissolve it, causing the iron to sink into the core.
What mechanism do you propose that would both support a shell like this, and also prevent heat from causing it to lose its rigidity? How think would this shell have to be, and how does that measure up against the known mass of the sun?
Click to expand...

Hi, I may be doing as some one else has done:

MM's model is a variant of the 'electric sun' model, it also features a sort of solid iron crust, which is hollow and filled with plasma. On top of it is a sorted array of various plasma layers of different elements.

It is mainly based upon, the viusal appearance of certain feature MM claims support his model.

ETA: here there be dragons:
http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/
 
Last edited:
GeeMack said:
I have contacted the SDO science team at NASA and have received word back on the image that occupied pretty much all of Michael's attention for the past week. Since he first started crowing about his discovery, over a thousand posts have gone by. During that time Michael has been insulting, belligerent, ignorant of relevant questions, badgering, uncivil, and treated pretty much everyone in this discussion like crap.

Here's the word straight from NASA. When they map the color values, the behavior of the pixels outside the limb is treated differently than the portion of the image over the disk. A gradient filter is applied to the image so the off-disk area will be enhanced to bring out details. That filter causes a discontinuity at the apparent limb because of a slight inequality of the radius of the filter and the solar image.

[qimg]http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/1843/sdoapodcolorcomp.jpg[/qimg]​

The green line is there because of the processing. In this image, which I sent along with my communication in order to get a definitive reply, you see arrow "A" pointing to the edge of the filter applied in the image processing software. The arrow "B" is pointing to what amounts to the actual limb of the Sun. The apparent roughness of that "B" edge is due to the emissions picked up by the three filters used to make the composite, all of which are coming from above the photosphere.

A week of Michael's uncivil tantrums, bullying, whining, taunting, and complaining. Over a thousand posts exchanged. And the SDO science program at NASA says Michael is wrong.
Click to expand...

Whats that sound?

The march of the math bunnies, chanting "I respect the science that makes the instruments,"
 
Mister Earl said:
Wouldn't Helioseismology pretty much rule out an iron crust right off the bat?
Click to expand...

Hi, this is hard to explain, there is a layer where certain changes occur in the transition layers shown by helioseismology, I am not sure exactly what but for MM they demonstrate that his iron shell is at this very high R, like .995 R (where R is the solar radius). So this transition boundary in the shock waves or convection shows to him where the 'semi-solid' or 'rigid' surface is. Now the fact that it is so far from teh center just makes it thinner and more unstable.

This also I believe corresponds to the 3,000 km. depth that MM also references, which is where the whole question of plasma opacity comes in (for reference in teh standard model the opace layer is ~400 km -450 km.).

Just for reference here is the quote from MM's webpage
There is a problem however with gas model theory, and it begins at .995R, or just under the visible photosphere. At this depth, contemporary gas model theory runs headlong into a stratification layer, a layer of solid material where sound waves begin to travel faster than they travel through plasma. This is a layer that holds the three dimensional shapes like we see in the gold image on the right. These structures are visible over timeframes of many hours. Only through surface erosion do these structures ultimately begin to change. The change recorded in this stratification layer is very unlike the changes seen at the surface of the photosphere where granules are created and destroyed every eight minutes.
Click to expand...
http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm
 
Michael Mozina said:
Well the purpose is to demonstrate a prediction->verification chain of events. All scientific theories are judged on how well they can "predict" the outcome of various scientific tests.
Click to expand...


Among many, many other things. They are also judged on whether they depend on impossible physics, misunderstood and fabricated "evidence", and ignorance of glaring contradictions to reality, as your solid iron surface does.

I can think of one scientific way to "test" to see whether those darkening limb lines are an optical illusion or an actual surface horizon via use of the RD imaging process. I feel like I'm spamming the board now with that RD disk image, so I'll spare you the image, but when you run a long duration RD image it creates a rough textured "disk" around the sun. If the electromagnetic lines do originate along that darkened limb line, the long cadence RD image should align itself nicely with that limb darkening and we should see the electromagnetic lines all around that 'surface'. I'm certain the 171A will work, so I would start there, but to my evidently useless eyeball, the FeXX wavelength looks to be a "better" light source. I think you might even get crisper lines on that wavelength.
Click to expand...


Word salad again. Barely anything in that mish-mash of words and phrases makes sense.

If I have any credibility whatsoever as an "expert" in RD images, that must be what we see. If not, this solar theory is falsified. That's the "best" scientific test I can think of at the moment.
Click to expand...


(a) You have no credibility as an expert in running difference imagery. Your qualifications to understand solar imagery of any sort have been challenged and you've failed completely to demonstrate that you possess any such qualifications. You don't understand how or why they're made, or where the data comes from, and you see things in them that aren't really there. There is no "must be what we see" to it. Your argument is based on your misunderstanding. It is about what you see. And what you see has been shown to be wrong.

(b) You will not consider your crackpot conjecture falsified no matter what sorts of images come from the SDO program, not matter how they're processed, and no matter what the actual experts determine.

(c) If that's the best scientific test you can think of at the moment, after preaching this nonsense for five years, obviously your argument is scientifically worthless. Better, more realistic, more scientific tests have been offered, time and time again, and you've rejected them at every turn, only to fall back on your own arguments from incredulity and ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
Ya. In my eyes at least those green lines on the horizon, [...]
Click to expand...


What is in your eyes is irrelevant. Your expertise has been challenged and you have been found unqualified to make such an assessment. Those green lines on the horizon have been explained by the good folks on the SDO team at NASA, the folks who created the image. Those green lines on the horizon are the result of placing a round gradient filter over the composite image to enhance the regions outside the limb. Simple PhotoShop stuff. It was done to make the picture pretty, and unfortunately you wasted a week of tantrums and badgering because you were fooled into believing it was scientifically significant. This has, of course, been explained in detail. For you to claim that it means any more than that is dishonest. Your use of that argument has been rejected in whole by everyone in this discussion.
 
Pardon me for lightly skimming several tens of pages, but is this really an argument about interpreting a feature on the sun which, in reality, turns out to be the edge of a dark filter added to the picture by NASA?

Just want to be sure I'm not hallucinating.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Pardon me for lightly skimming several tens of pages, but is this really an argument about interpreting a feature on the sun which, in reality, turns out to be the edge of a dark filter added to the picture by NASA?

Just want to be sure I'm not hallucinating.
Click to expand...
You betcha. For the last 15-20 pages or so. But there's way more silliness here than just that. Enjoy.
 
sol invictus said:
One of the truly surreal things about this is that not one of us knows exactly what Michael's model is. We know it's supposed to have a solid iron surface. We know it has a layer above that of ~5000km of plasma that's supposed to be transparent to ultra high frequency UV radiation, but which is producing the visible part of the sun's light. The UV radiation we've been discussing, like the 171A band, is I believe supposed to be produced in that plasma layer by some kind of discharge from the iron surface. Apparently these discharges do not extend past the plasma layer.

The trouble is, even if we assume all those statements are correct, as far as I can tell the predictions do not coincide with what Michael seems to believe they do (or with any of the images I've seen).

And of course then there's the fact that one would have to believe at least six impossible things (before breakfast) to accept the premises in the first place.
Click to expand...

Ah, then I begin to understand your problem in arguing with him. Thanks.

In my innocence I'd drawn two concentric circles on a scrap of paper, some parallel lines representing lines of sight to the disk and was scratching my head in bewilderment at how the green band image could represent actual e-m emissions of any kind, no matter what the transparency of the 'glowing layer'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom