Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Scientific criticism is one thing. Pure unadulterated insult is quite another. I've been involved with computer science now for over 20 years. I dont' have any "romantic" views about it.
|
Could you be more precise about the kind of computer science you're involved in, please?
Quote:
|
I spent MONTHS putting together a comprehensive model. I've spent YEARS studing the design of these satellites and the imagery they produce.
|
Then could you tell me what kind of filters and what kind of postprocessing have been used to take the image and the film you've posted here previously?
Quote:
|
What "background" does one need exactly to notice that an arc looks like an electrical arc, and running difference images of a ferrite layer rotate uniformly from pole to equator?
|
Well, the kind of background that teach an engineer the difference between "it looks like an electric arc" and "it is an electric arc". :wink:
More generally speaking, it is not a good ideea to extrapolate your daily experience here on Earth to a scale and an environment so radically different.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Also from dr. Manuel's site here ; I don't see how his theory is supporting yours since in his model neither the ferrite or neon layer (which seems to be essential to your model) don't exist.
|
http://web.umr.edu/~om/AASWashington2002.pdf
I take it you didn't read his later work? The ferrite certainly DOES make up the bulk of the sun according to his more recent work. The neon simply isn't as prevelent in comets or lunar soils. The SERTS data certain registers the presence of NEON.
|
No, I did not read his work. Actually I did not read your whole webpage. Don't forget that the peoples that are posting here are not doing it because they're experts in astronomy but mostly because they want to share and learn with the others. In fact I think that your expectations are highly unrealistic: after all you've spent years searching and analizing and now do you ask us to fully understand your model by just reading once your webpage?
I'm not trying to debunk your whole theory, mostly because I have not the necessary knowledge, but I still can point to its weaknesses based of my limited knowledge on the subject. And as you may see nobody here has claimed to be an expert in the field, therefore each one has adressed some specific issues that fit in his field of interest and/or knowledge.
By the way, in the dr. Manuel's article you've linked here I didn't find any reference to a ferrite or neon layer. 8)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Maksutov
This treatment is from Kleppner & Kolenkow, An Introduction to Mechanics (p. 101) and deals with the force between a point of mass m at radius r on the x-axis from a spherical shell centered at the origin:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Um, care to explain to me now how this explains the umbra layer and lit part of the penubmral filaments? It's a nice math proof and all, but you've not demonstrated HOW it applies to sunspots. How does that explain the flared pattern in the penubmral filaments? How does that explain the lack of light coming from the umbra?
|
That's exactly what I was talking about
: Maksutov didn't adressed the sunspot or penumbra problem, but instead he had show why the ideea of a solid ferrite crust (which is very important in your theory) is not pertinent. He's not explaining the sunspots, but is proving that the kind of layer you're talking about couldn't exist. :wink:
Edited to add: and PLEASE stop shouting at us! :-$