Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PatKelley
No, it's based on the mass calculated for the sun divided by the volume. It is not based on the "GAS" model; it is a simple ratio. Based on this simple ratio, the density of the sun (1.4 g/cm^3) is too low to be silicon (2.33 g/cm^3) much less "ferrite" (Iron, Ferrosilicon - 6.984 g/cm^3), so for the sun's surface to be composed of ferrite, it would seem that there has to be a compensatory area of lower density beneath this layer which implies a hollow sun. Assuming, of course, your model for the surface is correct.
|
I think you are again jumping to conclusions until we understand the implication of "universal acceration" as it relates to the density of the sun. I can't make such assesments from the observational evidence I have obtained to this point in time, and I make no such statement of faith.
Quote:
|
Doesn't matter. Mean density is 1.4. The density of ferrite alloys is around 6.5 to 6.7. That means the layer is either not very thick (microns, perhaps?), or the sun is hollow.
|
It DOES matter, as does the SOURCE of the acceleration of our universe. Until we understand the implications of an iron sun and the source of acceleration, it's WAY premature to make such a statement IMO.
Quote:
|
But that's just it. These aren't a huge aggregation of emission spectra- the solar spectra has emmission lines, but for your model to be correct, Neon would have to be the strongest, and our sun would be pink.
|
No, actually I'd expect a spike in the oxygen/neon range, and/or the helium/hydrogen/neon ranges. It depends on how all these layer interact. I'm still learning as as I go. I'm checking into that idea now, but it will take a while.
Quote:
|
Irrelevant, but to put a fine point on it: because you find an element is present (such as iron in a supernova) - does it imply a solid shell of iron? No, not really.
|
Then why does Chandra record a LAYER of iron in the Cassiopiea A remnants? (you'll find an example on my evidence page)
Quote:
|
Besides which, iron is the last phase of fusion - products above iron require energy to fuse, rather than the other way around with hydrogen on up. Iron is the break-even, and the fusion-to-iron point is very fast and incredibly energetic, part of the reason for the energy release in a supernova, and the resulting iron content.
|
That is ONE possibility of course, but then we also must allow for the possibility that the iron has ALWAYS been present, and hydrogen is merely a by-product of the electrical activity between that calcium and metal layers of the sun. According to Hubble, Iron and silicon and neon have been present in our universe as far back in time as we can currently see. Care to explain that in terms of a gas model? Why is there so much iron in only 1 Billion years if everything began as an explosive singularity?
How do we know the BB was an "explosive singularity" in the first place as opposed to say a galaxy like collision between intersecting universes, where some matter interacts and some does not?
Why does Chandra find so much ferrite rotating around black holes?
There are SO MANY assumptions that cannot be simply taken for granted as they are today. We must ask some important questions based on this satellite imagery and the work of Dr. Oliver Manuel. There is no reason not to explore this stuff unless we are just too myopic to notice the evidence we see to suggest that the sun has a ferrite layer. I'm not closed minded. Are you?
Quote:
|
No, no-- what gives it the energy? Where does this energy to heat the Neon plasma come from? If I turn off a stove the glowing filament cools rapidly. What is heating your solar filament, or rather keeping it heated?
|
There are two possibilities and two likely influences. The first likely possibility is that the CORE of the sun does indeed produce fusion reactions which release free posititrons and electrons. The other possiblity is based upon magneto affects of having a solid ferrite surface rotating within a universal magnetic field. They math BOTH be power sources for all I know.