Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Van Rijn
Other basic misunderstandings seem to include relative elemental availability and the sun's density. He has wildly huge amounts of solar silicon, neon and iron, and probably plenty of other elements. He doesn't seem to understand why the sun's formation could be different from the earth's. When presented with physical evidence his response is that it is all based on the "gas model."
|
What EVIDENCE did you present to DEMONSTRATE that the sun does not contain the silicon and ferrite that the SERTS program reveals again? What EVIDENCE did you present to explain ANY Of the pages on my website again? |
I've already presented evidence that hydrogen and helium dominate. In any event, you are the one making the claim. What is your evidence that the sun contains large percentages of "ferrite," silicon, and neon?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Michael, you'll probably take it the wrong way, but along with astronomy, I'd suggest you study up on thermodynamics too. Why don't you google on "black body temperature" and "black body spectrum" and report back on what you find?
|
I have studied the idea, and I don't see how it fits. |
You may have an alternate explanation, but if you do understand the subject, you should know how it fits. Please explain it in your own words. It has been pretty well spelled out in other entries and links in this thread anyway.
Quote:
|
You have INNER temps that SHOULD exceed outer temps,
|
Why should they exceed "outer" temps?
Quote:
|
and INNER AREAS should radiate even if the outer layer did not. You have NO visible light coming from these locations
|
Please explain why all the provided references that demonstrate that these "inner areas" do exactly this are wrong, or retract this assertion.
Quote:
|
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.
|
So in addition to your solid sun proposal, are you also proposing an alternate gravity "theory"? What is this proposal exactly and what evidence do you have for it? Do you agree that mainstream theory does not allow for a solid sun?
Quote:
|
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.
|
So in addition you are also proposing a novel form of long term energy generation? What are the details of this proposal and what is your evidence?
By the way, do you have relatives in Australia? You remind me of someone ...