Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Van Rijn
Funny, I don't see anything in that article about a ferrite layer. In fact, it seems to be talking about something quite different:
Quote:
"With this discovery, we are beginning to resolve the Sun's mysterious transition region, a thin region in the solar atmosphere where the temperature soars from ten thousand to millions of degrees," said Dr. Thomas Berger of the Lockheed-Martin Solar and Astrophysics Lab (LMSAL), Palo Alto, Calif.
[snip]
It also helps us understand how the large magnetic loops in the Sun's outer atmosphere, the corona, form out of the highly intermittent magnetic fields on the Sun's surface. Studying the solar moss may ultimately shed light on the long-standing problem of how the corona is heated to million-degree temperatures."
|
|
Well, I've also emailed them several times. I assure you I asked them about their layering system specifically and why they put the 'ferrite' layer where they did. That is the reasoning they used. It is a layer that is known to contain iron ions and they know this.
Quote:
|
So it is primarily about the corona and transition layer.
|
The corona is WAY too hot to explain these solid surfaces. It's way too light in composition to hold up a layer of iron, and there is utterly NO consideration for heat in this model. In other words this model would simply melt the ferrite layer instantaneously rather than ripping pieces off the surface like it does.
Quote:
|
It refers to those magnetic loops that have been discussed here before.
|
You have never identified the carrier particles to convey or carry these magnetic loops, so your model is utterly incomplete, whereas my model explains the carrier particle and the cause of them. What's carrying the magnetic field in the loops?
Quote:
|
Also, there is quite a bit more in the article that fits with what folks here have been trying to explain to you. So where are the solid layers?
|
Look at the photo on that page again. You have a solid surface with pieces being ripped from it slowely but surely. Look at the video I provided. This electrical erorsion is SLOW compared to the thickness of the layer itself. They even talk about a "mysterious transition layer". It's a lot less mysterious when you recognize its a ferrite surface.
Quote:
|
Michael, these are some of those fundamental errors the BA was talking about. The "structures" are a very thin plasma in a magnetic loop.
|
That gold video I showed you of solar moss activity shows NO signs whatsoever of this being a "very thin plasma" as you aledge. You are utterly ignoring the ridges in this video. Why? What keeps them there? What keeps that whole layer intact? Your answer is WAY too simplistic to explain these images and it has exactly NO observational evidence to support the notion that this layer it "thin plasma". That's a false belief. Period. You can tell from the video and the composit shot from Trace and Yokhoh that this layer is SOLID and sits UNDERNEATH the visible photosphere. It's not "thin" at all or SOHO wouldn't show this layer rotating uniformly day after day and keeping the same basic "structures" day after day after day. Your answer doesnt' jive with the observational evidence and neither does their answer.
The worst part is this not only defies the laws of gravity, but such a layer would simply block visible light entirely.
Quote:
|
The iron in the corona is way beyond melted.
|
Not according to the video I just posted. I see nothing "melted" about those obvious ridges you keep ingoring. I see nothing "melted" about the structures that SOHO records day after day after day. PROVE to me now via observation that these are MELTED structures.
Quote:
|
Ionized iron can exist at those temperatures.
|
Even still, it would not float on helium as NASA believes. Gravity would pull that layer to the bottom. It wouldn't magically float on helium.
Quote:
|
Nor does iron "float on helium," but is mixed along with it, somewhat like mineralized water (and, of course, there is much more hydrogen than helium).
|
Prove that statement with observation for me. I see nothing MIXED in that video I posted. I see nothing MIXED about the structures I see in SOHO images that rotate uniformly from pole to equator. If this was somehow connected to the corona, and changed dynamically, then we would simply not see such rigidly defined structures rotating uniformly over the surface day after day after day after day. That answer simply does not jive with ANY observational evidence.
Quote:
|
I'm glad you're interested in the subject, but as I said before, you really, really need to do some studying. Add plasma physics to the list.
|
Your condescending attitude is exactly what's wrong with astrophysics today. You can't hear me because you THINK you know more than I do about this subject but you can't explain ANYTHING we see in these images. Your answers simply do NOT jive with observational evidence, in fact they CONFLICT with observational evidence. It's YOU that need to do some studying and show me observational evidence of your claim that this is a thin plasma via satellite imagery since I see exactly ZERO evidence to support that idea and you've never supported that statement observationally. If you can't do that I'm going to assume you are simply resting on your laurels and hiding behind a ridicule routine rather than addressing this issue scientifically.