Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michael, it isn't a question of "personal put downs". It's just that the rest of us are shocked over and over when we discover that you don't know even the most basic facts about physics.

You've apparently been studying the sun for years. It would be all but impossible to read and understand any paper about the sun (or any other star) if you didn't know what "photosphere" means, or what "opacity" means. And yet, it has now become obvious that you don't know what those two terms mean. I suspected that when I was trying (and failing) to get you to answer my question about optical depth, but I didn't realize it was this bad.

Suppose someone on an internet forum were arguing that they had a much better way to treat AIDS than is currently available, based on the fact that the mainstream understanding was entirely wrong. You might be intrigued. But how would you react when you discovered that this person didn't know what "diagnosis" means, and had never heard of viruses?

One thing you could conclude is that the person had either not read or not understood almost any of the literature about the disease, or about any other disease or medical condition, for that matter. Now let me ask you a question - what would you conclude about the person and about the worth of conversing with them? How would you react?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Logically we have to start somewhere.
Click to expand...

And we start with defining our terms. When you contradict definitions, you're wrong from the start. Observational evidence can NEVER rescue you from being wrong by definition. Which you are right now.

A photosphere is opaque by definition. If something is not opaque, it is not a photosphere, by definition. You can contest whether or not the sun even has a photosphere, how deep it is, etc, and all of that will depend on observational evidence. But whether or not the photosphere is opaque is not even a question, because it's defined as being opaque.
 
sol invictus said:
Michael, it isn't a question of "personal put downs". It's just that the rest of us are shocked over and over when we discover that you don't know even the most basic facts about physics.

You've apparently been studying the sun for years. It would be all but impossible to read and understand any paper about the sun (or any other star) if you didn't know what "photosphere" means, or what "opacity" means. And yet, it has now become obvious that you don't know what those two terms mean.
Click to expand...

Knowing what it means and agreeing with it are two separate issues. I agree that there is a surface of something you call a photosphere. I don't have any evidence at all that it is "opaque" to even white light to at least the depth of the penumbral filaments.
 
Michael Mozina said:
That is why I asked "which part". The 3D aspects of the sunspot however really isn't a "debate" among most gas model theorists.
Click to expand...

It's not a gas it'sa plasma!

That used to be a MM claim, whenever any mainstream person would say that the sun a a ball of hot gas .............
 
Ziggurat said:
And we start with defining our terms.
Click to expand...

Your terms make it impossible to communicate effectively because you *ASSUME* things in your terms that simply are not true. There is a visible bright plasma surface that we all seem to agree is there. What shall we call it then?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma? That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?

Start with some real numbers here for us. Where (how deep) in the atmosphere does this magic refrigeration process occur?
Click to expand...


Who was it that said?...

Michael Mozina said:
[...] with the express intent of changing the subject.
Click to expand...


The photosphere is the region in the Sun's atmosphere where the density of the plasma goes from being transparent to being opaque.

Once more. Repeat after me: The photosphere is the region in the Sun's atmosphere where the density of the plasma goes from being transparent to being opaque.

Do you get it yet? Everyone here is using that definition. Everyone at LMSAL, NASA, Stanford, everyone who works in the field of astrophysics or is even a remotely serious student of astrophysics, at least those who speak English, anywhere on the planet. Thousands of people. Dozens of thousands of people. Maybe even hundreds of thousands of people.

Michael, nobody is going to change that definition of commonly used terms on your whim. If you want to discuss solar physics it might be a good idea for you to actually understand the pieces and parts of the Sun, what they're called, and have at least a rudimentary understanding of how those terms are defined. If you'd like some titles of some grade school level or junior high school level books on the subject of the Sun, just say so.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Knowing what it means and agreeing with it are two separate issues.
Click to expand...

But, as Zig points out, you plainly don't know what these terms mean.

I agree that there is a surface of something you call a photosphere. I don't have any evidence at all that it is "opaque" to even white light to at least the depth of the penumbral filaments.
Click to expand...

Those two statements directly contradict each other.

It's like saying - "I agree with you this glass is full of water. I don't have any evidence at all that it contains dihydrogen oxide."

Will you answer my question about the AIDS poster?
 
Last edited:
sol invictus said:
But, as Zig points out, you plainly don't know what these terms mean.
Click to expand...

Pure baloney. I just don't agree that the surface of the layer of what you call a "photosphere" is "opaque".

What shall we call that bright shiny surface we see in Gband while we debate it's "opacity" then?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Knowing what it means and agreeing with it are two separate issues. I agree that there is a surface of something you call a photosphere. I don't have any evidence at all that it is "opaque" to even white light to at least the depth of the penumbral filaments.
Click to expand...


You don't need any evidence that the photosphere is opaque other than the definition of the word "photosphere". Not only has that definition been provided many times here, you seem to want to take issue with that definition without being willing to offer your own.

Would you suggest we just toss that word out of the glossary? And if we do, what word should we use to describe the region in the solar atmosphere where the density of the plasma goes from being transparent to being opaque? Seriously. What word do you think we should use for that?

And why should hundreds of thousands of people change a perfectly good, perfectly simple word that they all understand just because you alone refuse to accept the definition? Seriously.
 
GeeMack said:
You don't need any evidence that the photosphere is opaque other than the definition of the word "photosphere".
Click to expand...

Then we A) need a new word to describe the plasma surface seen in Gband, or B) you'll have to pull you head of your definition and get over the notion that the "photosphere" is "opaque" from my perspective. Take your pick.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Pure baloney. I just don't agree that the surface of the layer of what you call a "photosphere" is "opaque".
Click to expand...

Michael, the photosphere is opaque by definition. Look it up!

You obviously didn't know that. You also obviously didn't - and probably still don't - know what "opacity" even is. These aren't small details, these are absolutely central to your claims (which is why I tried to get an answer for you regarding the optical depth to your putative iron surface).

My example of debating AIDS for years and yet not knowing what "diagnosis" or "virus" means are pertinent. I'll ask once more - how would you react to someone like that? Would you take them seriously? Bother to argue with them?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Oh, you mean the *CRUST* in my model?
Click to expand...


Are you now defining your "crust" as the region in the solar atmosphere where the density of the plasma goes from being transparent to being opaque? Your crust now has a variable level of opacity throughout? I though you said it was solid, like as any normal English speaking person would use the term "solid". Now you're saying your solid stuff is plasma, transparent at the top and opaque at the deepest point? Seriously?

Do you ever wonder why nobody understands what you're trying to say? :rolleyes:
 
sol invictus said:
Michael, the photosphere is opaque by definition. Look it up!
Click to expand...

I don't debate that that is the definition. I simply do not believe anything other than the solid surface is "opaque" to every wavelength under the sun.

What shall we call that bright shiny surface in gband then for the purposes of communication since I will not and do not agree that it is "opaque"?
 
Michael Mozina said:
I don't debate that that is the definition.
Click to expand...

And yet you apparently didn't know that it was. Either that, or you deliberately misused the term in a way guaranteed to cause confusion.

What shall we call that bright shiny surface in gband then for the purposes of communication since I will not and do not agree that it is "opaque"?
Click to expand...

I don't know, because I have no idea what "bright shiny surface" you're talking about. And it isn't relevant - you're the many-year AIDS denier who, after accidentally revealing he doesn't know what viruses are or what "diagnosis" means, tries to change the subject back to the fact that a guy he once met that had AIDS was wearing a green shirt, and so green shirts must cause AIDS.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma?
Click to expand...

The plasma is cooled from the top down as it radiates heat into the space above it, just like all the rest of the convecting plasma in the photosphere. The difference is that it its convection is reduced so it can't be refreshed from below like the rest of the photosphere.

That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?
Click to expand...

It DOES pick up radiated heat from the surrounding plasma. But there are 2 heat inputs, convection and radiation. In a normal convection cell, both are free to work. In a sunspot, one is inhibited. That means less heat entering the sunspot, but it's free to radiate as much as anything else. If you can't understand how this would cool it, I don't know how to help you.

Remember that cool is relative here. A sunspot is still brighter than an arc welder.
 
We have reached a milestone. After over five years of Michael talking all sciency and making fantastical, unsupportable claims about solar physics, he finally, just within the past hour, may have finally learned the meaning of the term "photosphere"!

Oh glorious day!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom