Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[Michael Mozina]

t....

In his book, Birkeland calculates that there is more mass between the stars in the form of iron than exist in the stars themselves.

A) Where did he figure all that iron came from in his calculations?

B) How did the iron he used in his calculations get out of the gravity well of the star in the first place?

 

[Tubbythin]

The terms Michael uses, the definitions of which he clearly does not understand include, but are not limited to:

• photosphere
• chromosphere
• opaque
• limb darkening
• idiosyncratic
• empirical
• solar model
• blackbody
• rigid
• sputtering
• gravity
• cathode
• current flow
• nuclear chemistry

Astronomy, cosmology, probably cathode.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Astronomy, cosmology, probably cathode.

Before you add cathode to the list, could you answer parts A) and B) for tusenfem?

 

[tusenfem]

No. I only reject "pseudoscience" and "non physics", as in things that fail to show up in controlled experimentation.

Somewhere along the line, your industry forgot that an honest "I don't know" is better than simply "my magic dark math bunny did it". Somewhere along the way, it will have to work it's way back to 'empirical physics" and that will lead you right back to Birkeland and all his physical experiments with electricity and cathode solar models.

dark energy and lamda-cmb etc is NOT my industry.

I do plasma(astro)physics and space physics in the good tradition of Birkeland and Alfvén, sending satellites into space and to planets (Earth, Venus, Jupiter, Mercury) and measuring the magnetic field (variations) and the plasma properties and come to a coherent view of what is happening. You can't get any more empirical than that, e.g. measuring when and where the frozen in condition in a plasma breaks down. Or how currents flow in the magnetosphere that have direct impact on the observed aurora, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Reality Check]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9A00E0DA133BE633A25750C2A9649C946296D6CF

Bull!

Bull!
There is no such thing as a Birkkeland solar model that supports your fantasy*. That news article jaw-dropp) states the Birkeland has the opoinion (not a scientific model) that the Sun was charged to 600,000,000 volts. We now know that that means that the Sun just exploded!

* 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.

 

[dasmiller]

Somewhere along the line, your industry forgot that an honest "I don't know" is better than simply "my magic dark math bunny did it".

And yet, the astrophysics community openly admits that coronal heating isn't well-understood. Why didn't they make up something to cover that?


AFAIK, no reputable scientist is using any dark matter or dark energy to explain anything about the sun (with the possible exception of "why is it's orbiting around the center of the galaxy so fast?").

Since this thread is about the sun, and nobody (not us, not you) believes that dark matter or dark energy are relevant to describing the sun, why do you keep bringing it up?

 

[tusenfem]

I think you need to do some reading and take up French if necessary. He wrote all about this t, and how it all applied to his experiments, including the coating of materials from the surface of the sphere at a great distance from the sphere. If you never read any of his work, you'll keep stating the same false statements over and over again. He *VERIFIED* this stuff in a lab t, it's not "speculation".

Oh I can read French allright, just give me the links.
And I have done experiments in the lab on plasmas so ...
And how can you say I never read his work? I frakking went through a whole chapter here in this thread.

 

[Reality Check]

Gravity.

Wrong
According to Birkeland and physics, the Sun does not exist. Are you Ok with that

 

[Tubbythin]

Actually you cannot demonstrate they are not related. You claim "dark energy" makes up 70% or the universe and causes acceleration. The solar wind is accelerating. Is that "dark energy" too?

Of all the ridiculous statements MM has made, this is near the top.

 

[tusenfem]

t....

In his book, Birkeland calculates that there is more mass between the stars in the form of iron than exist in the stars themselves.

A) Where did he figure all that iron came from in his calculations?

B) How did the iron he used in his calculations get out of the gravity well of the star in the first place?

WHERE in his book.
If you "quote" Birkie, then at least tell us where in his tome, just like I did when I discussed his work.

 

[Tubbythin]

Before you add cathode to the list, could you answer parts A) and B) for tusenfem?

No. I don't know how he did his calculations.

 

[Ziggurat]

Could you please explain to me how you figure it is "civil" conversation to refer to Birkeland as a "moron' and a clueless "bozo"

Because he's dead, so he can't get offended.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Yeah, Mikey, we know this technique. Just because you (also) don't like dark energy and lambda-cmd etc. you just reject all of physics, even though all that you need was long developed before any of that stuff was thought about.

You only need Maxwell, Newton, maybe a wee bit of Alfvén, to work your electric sun model. That is all empirical work, but you won't go there, because if you really did go there, you would find that it all does not work. Just like you backed away further and further in the opacity discussion when you found you were falsified how ever you turned and twisted.

Your model of the iron Sun is dead, Mikey, forget about it, it is useless. Now maybe dark energy will also be shown to be rubbish, but that will not show your model right, when DE is wrong.

So put up your ante, Mikey, show us something significant. Don't hide behind Birkie, do the math, I have gone through it waaayyyy back in this thread. But you, you won't touch it, you only take a pic and say ohhhh prettyyyyyy, me likes pretty picsies.

(bold added)

[MM mode]

But tus, Maxwell, and even my second hero Alfvén, is full of math bunnies!

I mean, all those upside-down-triangly thingies, and the drunken letter d's, and all that nonsense about B being a totally different thing than B. I mean, get real!

Now if Maxwell had "taken" some nice piccies of solar wind acceleration, or limb dimming at "171 nm", now that I'd be interested in!

Besides, DRD already did the math for me, on my Birkie's "cathode" solar model, and as far as I can tell it's perfect (I didn't need to know anything about upside-down-triangly squiggles, and although it took me a full hour to work out what v was from the equation*, I got it in the end. And wow! I never realised that the electrons would zip along so fast! 700 million metres per second! That's, gosh, more than a trillion miles an hour, isn't it!)

[/MM mode]
* 1/2 mv^2 * Ne = 3.8 x 10^26 (Ne = 1.8 x 10^41; m = 9.1 x 10^-31)

 

[Ziggurat]

(ETA: the filter is editing out the name of Adolph ****, spelled Foxtrot India Charlie Kilo)

That's Foxtrot India Charlie Kilo'ed up.

 

[nescafe]

Actually you cannot demonstrate they are not related.

Current models show that dark energy does not apply to any gravitationally bound structure. Any structure the size of a galactic supercluster or smaller is gravitationally bound, and effectively not affected by dark energy. Stars (including the Sun!) are much, much smaller than galactic superclusters. QED.

You claim "dark energy" makes up 70% or the universe and causes acceleration.

Accelerated expansion of spacetime. Not really the same thing as acceleration in the usual sense.

Since spacetime in our local vicinity is not expanding (that whole gravitationally bound thing, ya know), dark energy is irrelevant when talking about the Sun.

The solar wind is accelerating. Is that "dark energy" too?

Nope, radiation pressure and the antics of the Sun's magnetic field (said antics not fully understood yet) should be sufficient explanations for the solar wind, including whatever acceleration it has.

 

[Michael Mozina]

And yet, the astrophysics community openly admits that coronal heating isn't well-understood. Why didn't they make up something to cover that?

A better question is: "Why don't you use Birkeland's suggestion and solve your solar wind problem while you're at it?". I can tell you the answer too. You're all petrified to publish anything related to electricity in space.

Hoy.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Current models show that dark energy does not apply to any gravitationally bound structure.

Then it has no business being stuffed into a GR formula now does it?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Oh I can read French allright, just give me the links.
And I have done experiments in the lab on plasmas so ...
And how can you say I never read his work? I frakking went through a whole chapter here in this thread.

Find your own links, but answer parts A) and B) please.

 

[Reality Check]

A better question is: "Why don't you use Birkeland's suggestion and solve your solar wind problem while you're at it?". I can tell you the answer too. You're all petrified to publish anything related to electricity in space.

Hoy.

A better question is: "Why don't you use Birkeland's suggestion and really solve our solar wind problem when the Sun turns out to not exist?".

Another question: "Why are you ignorant of the fact that astronomers often publish papers related to electricity in space?"

Hoy

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Then it has no business being stuffed into a GR formula now does it?

Yeah, can we please - pretty please? - stop talking about opacity, 2D and 3D geometry, light neon plasmas, blackbody radiation, the photosphere, image artifacts, rigid RD movies, the Sun, ... ?

The sooner we skedaddle away from that topic, the better IMO ...