Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Baloo
First of all Michael I want to say that it becomes clear to me that you don't know how a scientific theory is developed.
|
Pure grandstanding IMO.
Quote:
|
Also you seems to believe that a theory is only completely right or wrong;
|
Followed by a strawman? We aren't off to a good start.
Quote:
|
well, that's not true, we are using today a lot of theories that we know to be incomplete, but as we are aware of their limitations we keep using them.
|
Yes, I realize that. That was my point with the neutrino thing, but that got blow ALL out of proportion. There was a point to be made however in that observation that relates back the gravity issue as it relates to a solid surface model. I don't intend to abandon my model only because it doesn't yet fit ONE meausement.
Quote:
|
Nobody could have from the first try a complete theory about something (be it astronomy, biology or else)
|
But you guys seem to DEMAND one from me that includes all kinds of predictions about things I have no clue about!
Quote:
|
but there are exactly the previous incomplete theories that let us know how the right theory should behave.
|
Then the gas model SHOULD behave with a pea sized amount of iron in the middle rather than a LAYER of iron that spans a whole surface.
Quote:
|
The best example is the general relativity: it is obviously better and explains a lot more than Newton, but this isn't mean that Newton was completely wrong. He was right within some limits.
|
Sure, and likewise Galileo was right about the PHOTOSPHERE, but wrong about what was underneath the visible photosphere.
Quote:
You keep saying that the sunspots are actually black and are not emitting any kind of light like in this film on your webpage here .
From the name of this film I assume that it was taken in the G-band (since you didn't specify anything about it on your page, which again is not scientific: you should always say how was obtained and analyzed a piece of information or image).
|
Forgive me. I've got limited time and I work on a budget.
Quote:
I didn't have any ideea what G-band is, so after a quick search I found this: "The G band 4305 A, width 10 A" (from here ).
So it seems that those images where highly monochtomatic with a 430nm wavelength . What this means? Well the mainstream theory says that a sunspot has 4200K and the surrounding areas 5800K.
Look here for the theoretical emissions of a 6000K surface and here for the emission of a 4000K surface. Look at the energy emission at 430 nm (where the images where taken) and you'll see that the emitted energy density is:
- 7*10^13 W/m^2 at 6000K
- 3*10^12 W/m^2 at 4000K
It seems clear to me that in your images the dark region is emitting in the g-band 10 time less energy than the bright region. Anybody with a minimum photographic experience will tell you that on an image exposed to see the bright region the dark region will be simply invisible.
So I'd say that the light intensity variations to be seen in the film are due to temperature variations that leads to different energy emissions in the 430 nm band and are not actually 'umbra' and 'penumbra'. (Anyway when you talk about 'umbra' regions you're implying a sort of exterior light source, which is not true since the sun is the only one available 8) )
|
I'll have to look at your links to respond to this. I will. What MATERIAL are you suggesting emits this light? Even if it can be explained one way, what makes you KNOW it's the right way? How do you know there isn't a better and more elegant way to explain the same phenomenon? How does your black body explanation explain the flare patterns and the flow patterns we see on this layer?
Quote:
Now you're saying that anybody that's using an arc welder becomes expert in electric arcs and therefore is able to say that a solar phenomena is an electric arc? Come on.... 
|
No, that is another of your strawmen.
I said that I've used an arcwlder before and worked with electricity all of my life and I know some things about electricity and I know how it SHOULD behave given specific conditions. I see every reason to believe from my experience with electricity that the sun is electric and the arcs we see are electrical in nature. Now could you explain to me how you know they are not electrical in nature?
Quote:
|
Oh, now I know how I'd missed it: you're not using properly the name of the thing. :wink:
|
Toche'. I'll use the term IRON. In fact it's been pointed out by a few folks that my use of the term "ferrite" is more confusing than helpuful. I was trying to be specific about it being a ferrite alloy, but instead that seems to cause confusion. I'll work on it for you.
Quote:
|
I assume that you're not talking about that: "magnetic ferrite, which has the general formula MOFe2O3, where M means some divalent metal ion (Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, etc)." (from here ), altough when you're mentioned some magnetic effects that are taken into account in your model due to this layer I was thinking that is exactly this kind of ferrite you are refering to.
|
I was trying to imply that the layer isn't simply made of iron, but rather it's a magnetic alloy, thus the term "ferrite".
Quote:
So what else is a ferrite? According to the same source citated above: " is the name metallurgists give to the body-centered-cubic phase of iron and it's alloys. The 'body-centered-cubic' phrase refers to the way the atoms are arranged in the lattice, to distinguish it from "austenite" which is the face-centered-cubic arrangement."
Now you see, a ferrite is a structured lattice and the fact that there are Fe ions in Sun doesn't mean that there is a ferrite also. There is also hidrogen and oxigen in sun, but no water. :wink:
|
Yes, but we see ions from IRON over an entire SURFACE. :wink:
Quote:
|
By the way, what is it in your opinion the temperature of the sun? Do you agree with the 'official' value for the mass of the sun?
|
I agree with the official value of the sun that is assigned to the photosphere on out. The silicon beneath the visible photophere is cooler than the neon layer. Sunspots typically realease cooler silicon from below. How "cool" is "cool" remains to be seen, but it need to be cool enough to support a ferrite alloy of some kind.
Quote:
|
Also you've said that the hidrogen is a product of the reactions inside the sun; what kind of reactions?
|
I don't really know yet. I've been talking to Oliver about it. I'm not sure just yet, but the BBSO images make it clear that the ions are originating between the calcium and ferrite layers.
Quote:
|
You're saying about this photo that is showing cracks; how do you now that these are really cracks in a solid surface? Just visual inspection or you have some other reasons?
|
Purely visual inspection of the pattern in the crack and the pattern in the penumbral filaments. They seem be very connected in pattern and shape.