Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eta C
Oh Mike, don't be disingenuous.
|
The only one being disingenuous here is you Eta. You keep sticking words in my mouth and keep building rediculace strawmen out of my statements. That is very disingenuous behavior on your part, and a terrible debate tactic. I expected something a bit more mature from this crowd.
Quote:
|
Read the papers. They describe their procedure in some detail. Basically the non-solar neutrino flux is constant, isotropic, and fairly small in comparison to the solar flux. The background is observed and measured at the same time that the solar neutrinos are. The background can then be subtracted out when doing the analysis. In any case, when the main source of events is always coming from the direction of the sun, it's fairly obvious that the sun is that source.
|
No, it's not completely obvious that the sun isn't focusing background neutrinos in some way, and the presense of neutrinos coming from the sun would not, under any circumstance, falsify my model to begin with. What I resent is you claiming that I questioned their findings. I did not question their work. I question YOUR interpretation of their work and YOUR suggestion this work somehow falsifies my model, or validates ONLY the gas model. See that distiction now?
Quote:
|
OK, I'll drop the rhetoric and stick to the science. You state that your model predicts the existence of free electrons from fusion at the core. This fusion should also produce neutrinos. What flux does your model predict?
|
I don't know. I would assume it would be much the same as a gas model since I'm counting on fusion to release positrons and electrons in my model, just like the gas model is depending on fusion for it's energy source. The only thing I've added to the mix is the magneto idea. In that sense, I might expect the neutrino count to be "slightly"less, but the power generation will likely release neutrinos in either model.
How does the gas model explain solar moss? How does the gas model explain my sunquake page? How does the gas model explain the shock wave page? How does the gas model explain Hubble finding iron and silicon and neon as far back in time as we can see? Care to address any of THESE isssues?
Quote:
|
Your model, if it is to be considered a viable alternative, must do the same.
|
For your beloved gas model to be considered viable, you must also explain solar moss, and 11 year cycles and explain the observed phenomenon on my website. Get busy.