Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

[Michael Mozina]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXsvy2tBJlU

In no way does a solid surface imply a solid sun.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Actually, GeeMack is quite correct, and you are way wrong. Helioseismology is extremely supportive of the standard model.

You mean *EXCEPT FOR* that "subsurface stratification" where your gas model "predicted" an open and flowing convection zone?

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0510111

 

[Michael Mozina]

FYI, for anyone actually following this thread, the sun's atmosphere is "layered" into various elements with the hottest and least dense layers on the outside and the "coolest" (relative term mind you) layers underneath. That is why the neon photosphere is cooler and more dense than the helium chromosphere, and why the hydrogen corona is the hottest and least dense layer of the sun.

 

[The Man]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXsvy2tBJlU

In no way does a solid surface imply a solid sun.

It does however explicitly require a "solid surface". Care to explain exactly how your ferrite “solid surface” remains, well, solid?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Yes, it shows you the outside of the sun. The atmosphere.
But if you look at coronal loops you see iron plasma. Lot of it!! When you use 192,171nm light from this iron plasma you see structures under the photosphere. The coronal loop footprints are under the photosphere on the iron surface. The process that takes place is thermionic emission which gives you the ionized iron, electrons, protons and heavy ions.

Not to mention visible gamma rays from the discharge process, and fusion processes as well.

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a002700/a002750/

 

[Michael Mozina]

It does however explicitly require a "solid surface". Care to explain exactly how your ferrite “solid surface” remains, well, solid?

Certainly. It's surrounded by a relatively cool layer of plasma that keeps it "cool".

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/01/040122083025.htm

Keep in mind the crust is not "solid iron", and the melting point of various elements depend on the actual "conditions" unrelated to the melting point of iron in our atmosphere here on Earth.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Any of you plasma sun proponents care to explain even the very first LMSAL image on my website?

http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/TRACEpodarchive4.html

How about Kosovichev's video? What's that rigid outline on the left side of the epicenter of the tsunami? What set off the tsunami in the first place?

 

[Michael Mozina]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dzLGASozwM

Another thing the reader should be aware of is that wireless transfer of electricity isn't simply "fantasy", it's been empirically demonstrated and shows up in consumer products.

 

[GeeMack]

If only your plasma sun theory actually worked in real life and offered actual explanations for satellite observations. Alas, it doesn't, whereas a solar "crust" explain it rather nicely, volcanic activity and everything.

[qimg]http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/tsunami1.JPG[/qimg]

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/vquake1.avi

Yep. Looks like a bunny.

 

[GeeMack]

You mean *EXCEPT FOR* that "subsurface stratification" where your gas model "predicted" an open and flowing convection zone?

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0510111

You mean that stratification where mass is moving through your supposedly solid surface at speeds of over 1200 meters per second? Interesting and rather fluid properties for a solid, wouldn't you say?

 

[GeeMack]

[qimg]http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/171surfaceshotsmall.JPG[/qimg]

Any of you plasma sun proponents care to explain even the very first LMSAL image on my website?

http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/TRACEpodarchive4.html

Sure. I'm not a plasma Sun proponent, but I can easily explain the running difference graph. You take a series of images. You add 50% gray value to each pixel in the first image then subtract the value of each corresponding pixel in the second image. The result is a graph representing the change in the values of the pixels between the first and second image, or between successive images in the case of a running difference video.

There. Explained every single pixel. And quite simply I might add. It's a feat that most anyone could do. Oddly enough there is one person in all these years who has never attempted to explain every single pixel in that image. Uh, that would be you, Michael. Care to give it a shot yourself, or are we going to have to hear your 9 year old kid version of looks-like-a-bunny science again?

But of course you and I know this has been explained to you countless times over the past few years, and just like all those other times, I predict you will steadfastly maintain your ignorance again, probably throw another tantrum, badmouth and belittle me a bit, and change the subject so you don't have to actually address the dismal failure in your crackpot conjecture.

 

[Perpetual Student]

After his ignorance is exposed, as on other threads, MM will simply withdraw, only to later reappear on another thread starting the same "9 year old kid version of looks-like-a-bunny science" all over again.

 

[technoextreme]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dzLGASozwM

Another thing the reader should be aware of is that wireless transfer of electricity isn't simply "fantasy", it's been empirically demonstrated and shows up in consumer products.

We know that all ready. By the very definition of how the sun behaves it is in fact giant ball of electricity.

 

[sol invictus]

As for MOND, the primary reason you see lots of papers about MOND is because a lot of people just don't like the idea of dark matter. The issue at hand for them is gravity in the extremely weak field limit and whether or not Newtonian gravity is the correct weak field limit of general relativity.

That's not quite right. There is no question about whether Newtonian gravity is the weak-field limit of GR - it is.

MOND is an ad hoc proposal that succeeds rather well in explaining one set of observations (galaxy rotation curves and the Tulley-Fisher relation). However it fails completely to explain the recent bullet cluster observations, fails to have a consistent relativistic generalization (which means it cannot account for e.g. gravitational lensing), and has to a large extent been abandoned even by its past proponents.

 

[GeeMack]

After his ignorance is exposed, as on other threads, MM will simply withdraw, only to later reappear on another thread starting the same "9 year old kid version of looks-like-a-bunny science" all over again.

We have a list of questions from late 2005 through 2006 still waiting for answers on another forum. He even "bet the farm" that his crackpot notion would be shown to be correct with the data acquired from the STEREO solar exploration program. And to nobody's surprise, it didn't happen. When his tactic of changing the subject stops working and people start to actually press him for answers to their legitimate questions about his nutty claim, he walks. Ignorance has been a pretty effective strategy. Not scientific by any stretch of the imagination. But effective for his purpose.

 

[Dancing David]

FYI, for anyone actually following this thread, the sun's atmosphere is "layered" into various elements with the hottest and least dense layers on the outside and the "coolest" (relative term mind you) layers underneath. That is why the neon photosphere is cooler and more dense than the helium chromosphere, and why the hydrogen corona is the hottest and least dense layer of the sun.

And again you are violating the laws of photon irradiation. You can not have a solid iron surface kept magically cool by some unknown process, under a layer hot enough to melt said surface.

I know you wave you words and pretend that is not a problem, but it is Michael, just like the neutral material in the solar wind.

 

[Dancing David]

Certainly. It's surrounded by a relatively cool layer of plasma that keeps it "cool".

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/01/040122083025.htm

Keep in mind the crust is not "solid iron", and the melting point of various elements depend on the actual "conditions" unrelated to the melting point of iron in our atmosphere here on Earth.

Funny how you post an irrelevant link Michael, you do not have a mechanism to keep your 'crust' from melting. Now please squirm and redefine 'crust' for us. And show us how the pressure at the earth is related at all to the density in the sun.

Your terms Michael, you call it a crust and you call it solid. And you pretend that a giant hollow sphere is not unstable.

 

[The Man]

Certainly. It's surrounded by a relatively cool layer of plasma that keeps it "cool".

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/01/040122083025.htm

Keep in mind the crust is not "solid iron",

So now your “solid surface” isn’t all that solid or just isn’t mostly iron?

and the melting point of various elements depend on the actual "conditions" unrelated to the melting point of iron in our atmosphere here on Earth.

Hence my question about if you would

Care to explain exactly how your ferrite “solid surface” remains, well, solid?

That you imagine it is kept “cool” by some “cool layer of plasma” that you imagine hardly constitutes an explanation, just your speculation and most of us would have already surmised that you think it is cooled somehow. Explaining where and how the heat is generated and how it is lost would be a start. The particular branch of physics in this case would be thermodynamics (as mentioned before).


Based on the article you cited are you claiming your ferrite “curst” is under some similar type of pressure? Are you aware of the relationships between pressure, volume, heat energy and temperature?

 

[The Man]

Certainly. It's surrounded by a relatively cool layer of plasma that keeps it "cool".

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/01/040122083025.htm

Keep in mind the crust is not "solid iron",

So now your “solid surface” isn’t all that solid or just isn’t mostly iron?

and the melting point of various elements depend on the actual "conditions" unrelated to the melting point of iron in our atmosphere here on Earth.

Hence my question about if you would

Care to explain exactly how your ferrite “solid surface” remains, well, solid?

That you imagine it is kept “cool” by some “cool layer of plasma” that you imagine hardly constitutes an explanation, just your speculation and most of us would have already surmised that you think it is cooled somehow. Explaining where and how the heat is generated and how it is lost would be a start. The particular branch of physics in this case would be thermodynamics (as mentioned before).


Based on the article you cited are you claiming your ferrite “curst” is under some similar type of pressure? Are you aware of the relationships between pressure, volume, heat energy and temperature?

 

[HansMustermann]

Sure. I'm not a plasma Sun proponent, but I can easily explain the running difference graph. You take a series of images. You add 50% gray value to each pixel in the first image then subtract the value of each corresponding pixel in the second image. The result is a graph representing the change in the values of the pixels between the first and second image, or between successive images in the case of a running difference video.

There. Explained every single pixel. And quite simply I might add. It's a feat that most anyone could do. Oddly enough there is one person in all these years who has never attempted to explain every single pixel in that image. Uh, that would be you, Michael. Care to give it a shot yourself, or are we going to have to hear your 9 year old kid version of looks-like-a-bunny science again?

But of course you and I know this has been explained to you countless times over the past few years, and just like all those other times, I predict you will steadfastly maintain your ignorance again, probably throw another tantrum, badmouth and belittle me a bit, and change the subject so you don't have to actually address the dismal failure in your crackpot conjecture.

I should add, just in case that's not already clear for someone, the very fact that there is a delta there implies some kind of change. If it's a solid surface, well, congrats, then we have a solid which is in the middle of swirling like a fluid.