Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[DeiRenDopa]

If that is true then those GIF's you mentioned would have to *BE ALIGNED CORRECTLY* and you still have a giant problem explaining the different diameters of the 1700A,1600A, and 4500A images. If they are not aligned properly then they can't align themselves to exactly the right point to verify the SSM. You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. If you believe the GIF's are properly aligned, then NASA's explanation is "correct". If they are aligned, then NASA has a bigger problem explaining why the 4500A, 1600A and 1700A all produce different sized disks. So can we compare those GIF's or not? If we assume they are aligned, then I have no reason to believe NASA's claim about the filter size is wrong. If we assume they are not correct, I have no reason to believe the photosphere would align to the horizon of the iron ion images. Which way do you want to go Zig?

False dichotomy. You seem to be saying that they are either aligned and scaled right and you can use them as-is, or they aren't and neither you nor NASA can use them. You're ignoring the option that they are not aligned and scaled properly but NASA knows how to adjust them and you don't because you haven't asked.

Everyone comfy? Drinks and snacks to hand? Good.

Let's begin today's scientific research.

Our topic is "how many teeth does a horse have?".

Before us we have a paper by A, who has considered the essence of horse, by sitting in his cave for a week without food or drink.

Then there's a paper by B, who went up the hill to visit the Oracle, and reports what it said.

Added to that there's C's weighty tome, the result of lifetime's work scouring ancient literature for metaphorical references to "horse", and reconstructing the animal by rhetoric.

And much, much more.

Shall we begin?

Oh, I almost forgot; we had someone barge their way in early this morning, proclaiming that the only way we could determine how many teeth a horse has is to go outside, find a horse, open its mouth, and count the teeth. Ridiculous! Preposterous!!

 

[GeeMack]

It seems we've at least gotten Michael to realize how a running difference image isn't really showing any sort of surface features. He'll probably be taking that huge blunder down from his web site soon because of course he wouldn't want to continue to post fraudulent "evidence".

​

Unless we want to say Jupiter has a solid cratered surface under that red spot.

 

[Michael Mozina]

It seems we've at least gotten Michael to realize how a running difference image isn't really showing any sort of surface features. He'll probably be taking that huge blunder down from his web site soon because of course he wouldn't want to continue to post fraudulent "evidence".

​

Unless we want to say Jupiter has a solid cratered surface under that red spot.

If and when you put up your public position on the outcome of the RD test, *AND* you're shown to be correct, *THEN* I'll be happy to take it down. (Actually I'll take it down when it can be shown to be incorrect even if you never bet anything). Until then, your little RD image of a planet only points out that we *CAN* figure out a diameter from a RD image and points out how unwilling you are to put your public position on the line over something you claim to be an "expert" at.

Out of curiosity did you even select images of a planet where atmospheric activity was present?

If you're so sure on the diameter of the RD disk, why aren't you willing to put up your position on the outcome of that test?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Well there's your problem right there. Your argument comes from trying to do science like a fourth grader. A stupid fourth grader.

Is that another example of what you consider "civil" conversation?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Nobody subtracted out anything from that image. Your qualifications to understand solar imagery of any type has been challenged

Not by you. You aren't even willing to bet a public change of position on the outcome of a RD test that falls right into your area of expertise. What's the hangup?

 

[Perpetual Student]

If and when you put up your public position on the outcome of the RD test, *AND* you're shown to be correct, *THEN* I'll be happy to take it down. (Actually I'll take it down when it can be shown to be incorrect even if you never bet anything). Until then, your little RD image of a planet only points out that we *CAN* figure out a diameter from a RD image and points out how unwilling you are to put your public position on the line over something you claim to be an "expert" at.

Out of curiosity did you even select images of a planet where atmospheric activity was present?

If you're so sure on the diameter of the RD disk, why aren't you willing to put up your position on the outcome of that test?

Again you continue all this blather about wagering! How could anyone bet someone who dismisses scientific evidence? On what basis could anyone possibly win? You do not have even the slightest understanding of the nature of scientific evidence, you don't understand the mathematics required to evaluate any evidence and you have a bias toward accepting only the mythology of your own
idiosyncratic observations!

 

[GeeMack]

Out of curiosity did you even select images of a planet where atmospheric activity was present?

​

Where atmospheric activity was present? It's freakin' Jupiter, Michael! It's god damned Jupiter! You can't possibly be that stupid. Can you?

 

[Michael Mozina]

False dichotomy. You seem to be saying that they are either aligned and scaled right and you can use them as-is, or they aren't and neither you nor NASA can use them. You're ignoring the option that they are not aligned and scaled properly but NASA knows how to adjust them and you don't because you haven't asked.

Maybe. Then again you'd have to believe that the original GIF images are *NOT* aligned, but somehow only the 4500A image of the photosphere aligns itself properly a the right size and shape. Meanwhile the other wavelengths associated with the photosphere come out to a radically different size.

I'm willing to concede that the GIF's 'could' be used to support NASA's positioning claim about the iron lines vs. the HeII emissions, and falsify parts of my theory. Then again, those very same images immediately falsify the standard model too.

You seem to want to ignore the implications of those three non iron line images having completely different diameters. I can see how the GIF's could falsify both solar models, or falsify neither solar model, but there is no way to verify NASA's position either way from the GIF's.

It seems hard to believe that the 4500A, comes out right in terms of the SSM. Everything else aligns to some other "surface".

 

[Michael Mozina]

​

Where atmospheric activity was present? It's freakin' Jupiter, Michael! It's god damned Jupiter! You can't possibly be that stupid. Can you?

More of your "civil" dialog I presume?

Just because it has a weather pattern doesn't mean you selected an image set that shows such a thing, or does so with enough resolution to see it.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Again you continue all this blather about wagering! How could anyone bet someone who dismisses scientific evidence?

I haven't dismissed any evidence. I've looked at all of it. The outcome has to be decided by work that is "published' by someone other than GM and myself based on SDO images. How is that complicated?

 

[DeiRenDopa]

It seems we've at least gotten Michael to realize how a running difference image isn't really showing any sort of surface features. He'll probably be taking that huge blunder down from his web site soon because of course he wouldn't want to continue to post fraudulent "evidence".

​

Unless we want to say Jupiter has a solid cratered surface under that red spot.

There's one important fact not yet addressed re the solid, cratered, surface of Jupiter.

MM's claims concerning the Sun, specifically the "iron" ones, arise from the fact that the Sun shows iron ion lines in its spectrum.

Now Jupiter's spectrum does not show iron ions (AFAIK), but methane and ammonia bands are prominent.

Therefore, Jupiter has a solid ammonia/methane (cratered) surface!

 

[Michael Mozina]

There's one important fact not yet addressed re the solid, cratered, surface of Jupiter.

MM's claims concerning the Sun, specifically the "iron" ones, arise from the fact that the Sun shows iron ion lines in its spectrum.

Now Jupiter's spectrum does not show iron ions (AFAIK), but methane and ammonia bands are prominent.

Therefore, Jupiter has a solid ammonia/methane (cratered) surface!

The only question is whether the iron line RD image has a larger or a smaller diameter than the photosphere.

 

[GeeMack]

Not by you. You aren't even willing to bet a public change of position on the outcome of a RD test that falls right into your area of expertise. What's the hangup?

For one thing, you're a proven liar, so it seems likely that your idea of a bet or test is quite different than it would be if you were an honest person.

For another, you haven't ever posed a test or bet in a way that anyone can actually understand. You've mixed up solar terminology that you do not understand with various units of measure. It's babbling, Michael. Every bet or test you've mentioned has been strings of somewhat related words that make no sense in the haphazard way you've assembled them.

For another thing, I've asked you a dozen times now which organization of professional astrophysicists you would have arbitrate the bet/test, and that question continues to be met with your abject ignorance.

For another, you're the one making a crackpot claim here. You keep asking other people to do your work for you, and that kind of argument is lazy, contemptible, and wholly unscientific.

Now if you'd like to start by phrasing your test/bet in a way that makes some sense, and specify the organization of professional astrophysicists that you would have arbitrate the results, acknowledge that you've been lying and maybe apologize for that, learn the terminology so when you use words like chromosphere, photosphere, and opaque, people can actually understand you, then we might be getting somewhere.

 

[Michael Mozina]

For one thing, you're a proven liar, so it seems likely that your idea of a bet or test is quite different than it would be if you were an honest person.

More of what you consider "civil" dialog I presume?

 

[GeeMack]

More of your "civil" dialog I presume?

Just because it has a weather pattern doesn't mean you selected an image set that shows such a thing, or does so with enough resolution to see it.

Again...

​

Did you ever notice that big red spot on Jupiter? You can see it with a toy telescope. Jesus H. Christ, we learned that stuff in fourth grade. Your qualifications to understand anything about science at a level of a fourth grade child has been challenged. I don't believe you will be able to demonstrate that you possess such qualifications.

Here, look again...

​

 

[Michael Mozina]

Again...

​

Did you ever notice that big red spot on Jupiter? You can see it with a toy telescope. Jesus H. Christ, we learned that stuff in fourth grade.

Your idea of "civil" conversation is unlike anyone else I've ever met in the whole of cyberspace, not only on this particular topic, but *ANY* topic. Were you raised in a barn?

Your qualifications to understand anything about science at a level of a fourth grade child has been challenged.

So continually comparing me to a forth grader is "civil" conversation?

Here, look again...

​

What does that prove? I see the spot. I don't see it moving but I haven't really looked at the image. Did you even select an image set that show movement in the atmosphere or a resolution that would allow us to see that change over time in the RD images?

 

[GeeMack]

The only question is whether the iron line RD image has a larger or a smaller diameter than the photosphere.

That running difference graph you post on the front page of your web site, the one showing the graph of images from the whole Sun, on my monitor is about 1/17209728800th the dimension of the commonly accepted diameter of the photosphere. It's smaller. Much, much smaller. Only a complete idiot wouldn't realize that.

 

[phunk]

Maybe. Then again you'd have to believe that the original GIF images are *NOT* aligned, but somehow only the 4500A image of the photosphere aligns itself properly a the right size and shape. Meanwhile the other wavelengths associated with the photosphere come out to a radically different size.

You lost me there, how can a single image be aligned? Aligned to what?

I'm willing to concede that the GIF's 'could' be used to support NASA's positioning claim about the iron lines vs. the HeII emissions, and falsify parts of my theory. Then again, those very same images immediately falsify the standard model too.

How so?

You seem to want to ignore the implications of those three non iron line images having completely different diameters. I can see how the GIF's could falsify both solar models, or falsify neither solar model, but there is no way to verify NASA's position either way from the GIF's.

I'm not ignoring any implications, I'm not the one making claims here. I'm pointing out the things that YOU are ignoring. You're making assumptions about all of the images rather than going to the source and asking.

It seems hard to believe that the 4500A, comes out right in terms of the SSM. Everything else aligns to some other "surface".

Again, how can a single image be the right scale and/or alignment. Neither of those measurements makes any sense on its own.

 

[Michael Mozina]

That running difference graph you post on the front page of your web site, the one showing the graph of images from the whole Sun, on my monitor is about 1/17209728800th the dimension of the commonly accepted diameter of the photosphere. It's smaller. Much, much smaller. Only a complete idiot wouldn't realize that.

So will the RD disk outline come out "smaller" than the outline of bottom of the corona, or larger? Pick a size, any size and post your answer in kilometers. I've already stated I believe it will come up 9600KM short in terms of diameter when compared to the bottom of the chromosophere (the outline of the opaque photosphere in your lingo).

 

[phunk]

So will the RD disk outline come out "smaller" than the outline of bottom of the corona, or larger? Pick a size, any size and post your answer in kilometers. I've already stated I believe it will come up 9600KM short in terms of diameter when compared to the bottom of the chromosophere (the outline of the opaque photosphere in your lingo).

Smaller of course, the chromosphere is in between the photosphere and the corona.