Electric universe theories here.

Michael Mozina · Aug 7, 2009

Reality Check said:
First asked 7 August 2009
Michael Mozina, Your Iron Sun model has

(I assume that sunspot is actually photosphere).

Sunspots form *in* the photosphere.

Sunspot activity cycles about every eleven years. This is explained conventionally by magnetic fields starting with the Babcock Model in 1961.

How does the Iron Sun idea explain the sunspot cycle?

Every eleven years or so the sun experiences an uptick in the atmospheric electrical activity. When the coronal loop action increases, so do the number of visible sunspots. You will not find sunspots in the absence of active areas that produce high energy wavelengths. The increase in coronal activity leads to an increase in sunspot activity. For instance, if you look at SOHO and STEREO images today, there are no active regions facing the Earth and no particularly active areas can be seen in the STEREO behind images. The likelihood of sunspot activity today is virtually zero. The only way a sunspot might form is if we *FIRST* see an uptick in 195A activity compared to what we see today. Unless we do see a significant change in the 195A activity, no sunspots will form on our side of the sun for at least the next week and half.

sol invictus · Aug 7, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Well, light comes from all the plasma in and around the sun, no simply a single surface.

OK, let me break it down even more. Stop me when there's something you don't agree with:

Every solar photon arriving at earth originated (or last scattered) somewhere in or near the sun.

Suppose we determine that location and scatter-plot it for many photons. The surface I referred to is really the (thick) layer in which (say) 95% of those photons originated.

That thickness of that layer is directly related to the transparency (or optical depth) of the material or plasma making it up.

Given the way I've defined it, the layer is almost perfectly opaque (95%, more or less).

All the material or plasma in the layer must be at or near thermal equilibrium at ~6000K. We know that because the spectrum of sunlight (above the atmosphere) is extremely close to a black body spectrum at that temperature, and only substances at thermal equilibrium emit black body radiation:

So, I'm afraid we're stuck again. If the iron surface is above that layer, it would either be vaporized or block the light from it. If it's below that layer, it's invisible, because the layer is opaque.

Michael Mozina · Aug 7, 2009

sol invictus said:
OK, let me break it down even more. Stop me when there's something you don't agree with:

Every solar photon arriving at earth originated (or last scattered) somewhere in or near the sun.

Hmmm. I would say that this statement is "mostly true" (maybe all true depending on what you mean by "near"). By "in", you mean the photons originate inside the photosphere. That is mostly true even in this model. As you know, some photons however originate in the chromosphere at a much higher temperature than photons from the photosphere. Some photons come from coronal loop activity up in the corona, and also under the photosphere. I suppose we could agree that these emissions are "near" the photosphere.

So, I'm afraid we're stuck again. If the iron surface is above that layer, it would either be vaporized or block the light from it. If it's below that layer, it's invisible, because the layer is opaque.

You're going to have to let me chew on that graph for awhile. The surface is certainly located *UNDER* the photosphere and it radiates at a low temperature compared to the 'surface' of any other plasma layer in the solar atmosphere. All the extra "heat" is released into the solar atmosphere as a result of the electrical discharge processes. The analogy here that applies is Birkeland's sphere. Yes the sphere itself emitted photons. The total photon count however at the glass was not completely related to the sphere, but rather from the discharge processes inside the experiment. The electrons and protons emit light in the atmosphere due to the current flow.

The only plausible way that this solar model could work is if the plasma layers under the photosphere are cooler than the photosphere, just as the photosphere is cooler than the chromosphere and corona. That implies that the photosphere is not actually "opaque". It also implies that the heating mechanisms that heat the chromosphere and corona are also responsible for heating the photosphere too. It logically requires that thicker, more dense and cooler layers of plasma reside underneath the photosphere and sit between the photosphere and the surface. Kosovichev's mass flows under the sunspot were more or less vertical to a depth of 4800KM but flatten out in all directions at that particular depth. That would imply (to me at least) that the neon photosphere is pretty "thin", the silicon layer is rather thick and any calcium layers would likely be rather thin too. I suppose the mass flow changes could denote a significant change in plasma density (like a thicker calcium layer) rather than the surface itself, but that 4800 figure must relate to some significant change in density and/or temperature.

sol invictus · Aug 7, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Some photons come from coronal loop activity up in the corona, and also under the photosphere. I suppose we could agree that these emissions are "near" the photosphere.

You're going to have to let me chew on that graph for awhile.

OK. I'd rather avoid terms like "photosphere", because I'm not sure we mean the same thing by them, and because I think your idea is impossible at a level so basic it doesn't require knowing anything about the structure of the sun other than what can be inferred from that spectrum.

Here's what I claim we can conclude from the graph: that almost all the photons making up that spectrum must be coming from some layer of ~6000K stuff, and moreover that layer must be opaque. That much is basic thermodynamics, and it's the first thing to get straight.

The surface is certainly located *UNDER* the photosphere and it radiates at a low temperature compared to the 'surface' of any other plasma layer in the solar atmosphere.

OK, good to know.

That implies that the photosphere is not actually "opaque".

Well, I'm not sure about the reasoning that led you there, but I agree that's a necessary component of your scenario. You claim you can image your solid surface, right? That is obviously only possible if the layer emitting the ~6000K radiation, which you tell me is above the surface, is fairly transparent.

So one thing (among many) that's necessary for your idea to work is that it's possible to have a layer of plasma which emits a near-perfect black body spectrum at around 6000K and which is NOT opaque. It sounds like you agree with that, so let's move ahead.

sol invictus · Aug 7, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
That implies that the photosphere is not actually "opaque".

OK, so let's proceed with this. It sounds like you agree that your model requires that the sun has a layer emitting something very close to a black body spectrum which is quite transparent (since you claim to be able to see through it and image details of the surface below).

Question: is it possible to have a transparent black body radiator?

Answer: We'll start with a toy version of the situation, where we have two surfaces, one at temperature T1 and one at temperature T2, and assume the first surface is completely opaque, and the second one is completely transparent, and that T1>T2. We'll try to derive a contradiction. If we succeed we've proven transparent black body radiators are impossible. OK?

Arrange the surfaces edge-on like this: m T1 T2 m, where "m" is a reflective surface (a mirror). What happens? Well, the surfaces at T1 and T2 radiate thermal black body radiation. Since T2 is transparent, it absorbs nothing. But since T1 is opaque, it absorbs all the radiation from T2. As a result, T1 gets hotter and T2 gets colder.

But that is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics, because the entropy of the system is spontaneously decreasing (to see that remember that dS = dQ/T, and heat is flowing from low temperature to high temperature). That's a contradiction; therefore a transparent black body radiator violates the laws of physics and is impossible.

What about a partially transparent one? That violates them too, but I'll stop here for now and see if you agree with what I've said so far.

Reality Check · Aug 8, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Every eleven years or so the sun experiences an uptick in the atmospheric electrical activity.

What causes the "uptick in the atmospheric electrical activity"?
Can you show us the mathematical model of this (the electrrical equivalent of the Babcock Model)?

Michael Mozina said:
When the coronal loop action increases, so do the number of visible sunspots. You will not find sunspots in the absence of active areas that produce high energy wavelengths. The increase in coronal activity leads to an increase in sunspot activity. For instance, if you look at SOHO and STEREO images today, there are no active regions facing the Earth and no particularly active areas can be seen in the STEREO behind images. The likelihood of sunspot activity today is virtually zero. The only way a sunspot might form is if we *FIRST* see an uptick in 195A activity compared to what we see today. Unless we do see a significant change in the 195A activity, no sunspots will form on our side of the sun for at least the next week and half.

In other words:
"The only way a sunspot might form is if Michael Mozina *FIRST* sees an uptick in 195A activity compared to what Michael Mozina sees today."
Citations for the "uptick in 195A activity" (coronal loops?) before sunspot formation please.

Sunspot

Sunspots, being the manifestation of intense magnetic activity, host secondary phenomena such as coronal loops and reconnection events. Most solar flares and coronal mass ejections originate in magnetically active regions around visible sunspot groupings. Similar phenomena indirectly observed on stars are commonly called starspots and both light and dark spots have been measured.[4]

(emphasis added)
and Coronal loop

Coronal loops populate both active and quiet regions of the solar surface. Active regions on the solar surface take up small areas but produce the majority of activity and are often the source of flares and Coronal Mass Ejections due to the intense magnetic field present. Active regions produce 82% of the total coronal heating energy.[2] Coronal holes are open field lines located predominantly in the polar regions of the Sun and are known to be the source of the fast solar wind. The quiet Sun makes up the rest of the solar surface. The quiet Sun, although less active than active regions, is awash with dynamic processes and transient events (bright points, nanoflares and jets).[3] As a general rule, the quiet Sun exists in regions of closed magnetic structures, active regions are highly dynamic sources of explosive events. It is important to note that observations suggest the whole corona is massively populated by open and closed magnetic fieldlines.

But that is Wikipedia so:
Please provide a citation to a paper or textbook that states that sunspots are created by coronal loops.

Reality Check · Aug 8, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
You'll notice in the animation that as the loop passes the photosphere it creates the sunspot in the photosphere, in fact two of them where the loops comes up through and back again. That's not actually how it works. The loops generate heat that ultimate lead to sunspot activity, but a the loops pass through the photosphere they actually tend to 'light it up' around the loop or sheet.

You'll notice that the animation is an animation of sunspots beng created by magnetic fields.

These magnetic fields are not electrical arcs (actually corquet hoops according to you).
These magnetic fields are not coronal loops until they ar filled with plasma.
NASA may be simplifying things for the animation.

Sunspot

Although the details of sunspot generation are still somewhat a matter of research, it is anticipated that sunspots are the visible counterparts of magnetic flux tubes in the convective zone of the sun that get "wound up" by differential rotation. If the stress on the flux tubes reaches a certain limit, they curl up quite like a rubber band and puncture the sun's surface. Convection is inhibited at the puncture points, the energy flux from the sun's interior decreases, and with it the surface temperature.

Michael Mozina said:
Whatever the heating mechanism might be, it occurs low in the loop, and the loops are hot over the entire length of the loop. This is not unlike any normal electrical discharge.

Wrong. As LMSAL have shown loops are hot over most of the length of the loop above the photosphere. Most is not Entire.

My impression is that electrical arcs have the same temperature along their entire length.
Please cite the paper or textbook that states that a "normal electrical discharge" is hot over most of the length of the arc.

Michael Mozina said:
The are not any more knowledgeable than you. They can't answer these questions either. Those that can or might are prevented from discussing the actual "cause", because 'electricity' is the forbidden heresy that may not be discussed.

That is a typical crackpot remark. Aren't you ashamed to fall to their abysmal level MM?
You know very well that electricity is discussed in solar physics.
Electrical arcs are dismissed because there is no mechanism to create them.

They do not happen on the required scales in solar plasmas.
Thermodynamics rules out the possibility of a solid surface from which they could be produced.

Dancing David · Aug 8, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
No, they most likely get the "GeeMack treatment" were they are verbally abused and ostracized.

Um, so ignore or put on IGNORE.

Michael Mozina · Aug 8, 2009

Dancing David said:
Um, so ignore or put on IGNORE.

Unfortunately David, not everyone is a real "scientist" like you. It's not just a *single* individual that hurls the personal insults unfortunately. I experience a constant barrage of personal attacks about being "deluded", "crazy", etc. from more than a single individual.

Much of that 'resistance' and hostility is directed not *just* at the notion of solid surface sun, which even I would admit is a 'tough sell', but rather it is directed at *all* EU oriented ideas and theories. I certainly did expect a reaction to the solid surface part of these theories. I did *not* expect that kind of hostility to be directed and coronal loop theories and solar discharge theories. Many papers and books by Birkeland, Alfven and Bruce have been written on these topics. They all include the math, the physics and they were written by very reputable scientists.

Now of course I don't personally give a damn one way or the other. I doubt however that most people have as thick of a skin as I do, and my livelihood is in no way connected to the outcome of these debates. Were my livelihood at stake, would I be able to put up with this sort hostile attitude forever? Even I can't honestly answer that question because I do have a family to feed and a bills to pay. The ugly side of this process is the level of hostility that is directed at *individuals*, not just at the ideas themselves. That makes the conversation many times more difficult and it necessarily generates hard feelings.

Dancing David · Aug 8, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Unfortunately David, not everyone is a real "scientist" like you. It's not just a *single* individual that hurls the personal insults unfortunately. I experience a constant barrage of personal attacks about being "deluded", "crazy", etc. from more than a single individual.

Much of that 'resistance' and hostility is directed not *just* at the notion of solid surface sun, which even I would admit is a 'tough sell', but rather it is directed at *all* EU oriented ideas and theories. I certainly did expect a reaction to the solid surface part of these theories. I did *not* expect that kind of hostility to be directed and coronal loop theories and solar discharge theories. Many papers and books by Birkeland, Alfven and Bruce have been written on these topics. They all include the math, the physics and they were written by very reputable scientists.

Now of course I don't personally give a damn one way or the other. I doubt however that most people have as thick of a skin as I do, and my livelihood is in no way connected to the outcome of these debates. Were my livelihood at stake, would I be able to put up with this sort hostile attitude forever? Even I can't honestly answer that question because I do have a family to feed and a bills to pay. The ugly side of this process is the level of hostility that is directed at *individuals*, not just at the ideas themselves. That makes the conversation many times more difficult and it necessarily generates hard feelings.

Hi, I am not a scientist, I am a lab aide at a grade school.

The reason people don't support your ideas is...um.well.

Remember what Thumper's mother said?

And perhaps your lack of ability to unbderstand the models that you claim to refure causes problems as well.

Michael Mozina · Aug 9, 2009

Reality Check said:
You'll notice that the animation is an animation of sunspots beng created by magnetic fields.

They are caused by "coronal loops", AKA "magnetic ropes".

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0384

I magnetic rope is simply a current carrying filament.

These magnetic fields are not electrical arcs (actually corquet hoops according to you).

Actually they are "electrical arcs".

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813

These magnetic fields are not coronal loops until they ar filled with plasma.

The electric field fills them with plasma.

Wrong. As LMSAL have shown loops are hot over most of the length of the loop above the photosphere. Most is not Entire.

Which part is not "hot" compared to the photosphere and why do those 1600A images show hot loops coming up and through the photosphere?

My impression is that electrical arcs have the same temperature along their entire length.

They are "electrical arcs" and they are quite hot.

That is a typical crackpot remark. Aren't you ashamed to fall to their abysmal level MM?

No, I'm ashamed for websites like BAUT that actually have *different* rules for EU theories. I'm ashamed at US publications related to astronomy that simply *REFUSE* to publish any material related to Alfven's theories. I'm ashamed that we're falling so far behind in the sciences in this country.

You know very well that electricity is discussed in solar physics.

Not in major US astronomy publications. Evidently we have to go to Russia or Europe to get any real information about solar activity.

Electrical arcs are dismissed because there is no mechanism to create them.

Read those papers and then tell me there's no mechanism. That's simply not true I'm afraid.

They do not happen on the required scales in solar plasmas.

Yes, evidently they do.

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
They are caused by "coronal loops", AKA "magnetic ropes".

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0384

I magnetic rope is simply a current carrying filament.

Wrong. A coronal loop is a magnetic flux tube that contains plasma.

Michael Mozina said:
Actually they are "electrical arcs".

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0813

Wrong. They are not the electrical arcs as defined by you as comiing from an thermodynamically impossible iron surface/crust.

Now who said this:

Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
The are not any more knowledgeable than you. They can't answer these questions either. Those that can or might are prevented from discussing the actual "cause", because 'electricity' is the forbidden heresy that may not be discussed.

(emphasis added)
and then cited this?

A large number of energetic electrons are generated during solar flares. They carry a substantial part of the flare released energy but how these electrons are created is not fully understood yet. This paper suggests that plasma motion in an active region in the photosphere is the source of large electric currents. These currents can be described by macroscopic circuits. Under special circumstances currents can establish in the corona along magnetic field lines. The energy released by these currents when moderate assumptions for the local conditions are made, is found be comparable to the flare energy.

How did this paper pass the censors :eye-poppi

!

Michael Mozina said:
The electric field fills them with plasma.

The magnetic field fills them with plasma.

Michael Mozina said:
Which part is not "hot" compared to the photosphere and why do those 1600A images show hot loops coming up and through the photosphere?

The part that is ~15,000 km above the photosphere.
They do not show "hot" loops - they are really cold conpared to the coeona's 1 million degrees.
As any intellegent person knows the 1600A images show loops rising up above through the photosphere that are hotter than the the surrounding photosphere. That means a maximum temperature of 10,000 K.

Michael Mozina said:
They are "electrical arcs" and they are quite hot.

You cannot anser the actual question? Then I will put into another post.

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

How does the temperature vary along electrical arcs

Michael Mozina
First asked 9 August 2009
You keep on stating that coronal loops are the same temperature along their entire length:

Michael Mozina said:
Whatever the heating mechanism might be, it occurs low in the loop, and the loops are hot over the entire length of the loop. This is not unlike any normal electrical discharge.

This is after refering to the LMSAL image caption where they state that the coronal loops in their image vary little over much of the loops from 15,000 km above the photosphere. The loops are 120,000 km high.
So the variation of temperature is unknown for half the length of the loop (inside the photosphere) and is about 1 million degrees from 15,000 km above the photosphere.
The paper is probably:
"D.D. Lenz, E.E. DeLuca, L. Golub, R. Rosner, and J.A. Bookbinder, "Temperature and Emission-Measure Profiles Along Long-Lived Solar Coronal Loops Observed with the Transition Region and Coronal Explorer," Astrophys. J., 517, L155, 1999."

This does not look temperature profile of an electrical arc to me. I would think that it would be constant (disregarding radiation and conductive losses).

How does the temperature vary along electrical croquet hoops?
Please provide citations.

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by unsupported assertions (new questions in green)

What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected? First asked 6th July 2009
A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona. First asked 6th July 2009
From tusenfem:
Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book? First asked 7th July 2009
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun). First asked 7th July 2009
Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible? First asked 8 July 2009
See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
Coronal loops are electrical discharges? First asked 10 July 2009
This is an updated question with a couple of "answers" from MM.
Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009
More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth First asked 13 July 2009
Formation of the iron surface First asked 13 July 2009
How much is "mostly neon" MM? First asked 13 July 2009
Just how useless is the Iron Sun model? First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested? First asked 14 July 2009
Is Saturn the Sun? First asked 14 July 2009(Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina First asked 14 July 2009MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model? First asked 17 July 2009
What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
(MM states that it is not the photosphere) First asked 18 July 2009
Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles? First asked 18 July 2009
How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for
Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009
Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves? First asked 22 July 2009
Seems to think that 3 pixel differences (full Sun image) or 10's of pixels (limb image) are not detectable. Astronomers would disagree.
Evidence for the existence of "dark" electrons First asked 28 July 2008
MHD also treats plasmas as particles and circuits according to Alfven First asked 29 July 2009Can you give a citation to where Alfven states that he derives the equations of MHD from collections of particles rather than a fluid?
Why neon for your "mostly neon" photosphere? First asked 30 July 2009
Where is the "mostly fluorine" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for "mostly Li/Be/B/C/N/O" layers? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for the "mostly deuterium" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
Explain the shape of your electrical arcs (coronal loops) First asked 2 August 2009
What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:

Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Michal Mozina:

How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
First asked 23rd June 2009
So far just that astronomers have got the visible masses of galaxies wrong (and another reply with his usual "if we cannot detect it on Earth then it does not exist" non-science).
Now he is on about dark electrons (see above) as an example of matter that cannot be detected!
Why do the composition of the "mostly neon" photoshere and the corona differ?
First asked 22nd July 2009
It is "mass separation" - no actual physics cited or experiments. No understanding of the consequences - see the questions about layers.

Michael Mozina · Aug 9, 2009

Reality Check said:
Wrong. A coronal loop is a magnetic flux tube that contains plasma.

No. Here is how Alfven defined them in Cosmic Plasma

"However, in cosmic plasmas the perhaps most important constriction mechanism is the electromagnetic attraction between parallel currents . A manifestation of this mechanism is the pinch effect, which was studied by Bennett long ago (1934), and has received much attention in connection with thermonuclear research. As we shall see, phenomena of this general type also exist on a cosmic scale, and lead to a bunching of currents and magnetic fields to filaments or `magnetic ropes' . This bunching is usually accompanied by an accumulation of matter, and it may explain the observational fact that cosmic matter exhibits an abundance of filamentary structures (II .4 .1) . This same mechanism may also evacuate the regions near the rope and produce regions of exceptionally low densities."

Wrong. They are not the electrical arcs as defined by you as comiing from an thermodynamically impossible iron surface/crust.

You're ignoring the key point. This paper *explains* coronal loops as discharge processes just like Bruce and Alfven explained them. In fact this paper cites Alfven. The important aspect here is that is *IS* an electrical discharge! You guys can't just ignore this point.

Now who said this:

(emphasis added)
and then cited this?

How did this paper pass the censors !

They were not published in the US! Evidently the only way to talk about electricity in space is to go to Russia or Europe.

The magnetic field fills them with plasma.

That doesn't fly because it would not heat them to millions of degrees and even individual loops reach millions of degrees. I'm afraid you'll need an actual energy source that works for a single loop and there isn't one besides "electricity" that is known to do what we observe.

The part that is ~15,000 km above the photosphere.
They do not show "hot" loops - they are really cold conpared to the coeona's 1 million degrees.
As any intellegent person knows the 1600A images show loops rising up above through the photosphere that are hotter than the the surrounding photosphere. That means a maximum temperature of 10,000 K.

Since the loops are visible in 171A as well, they radiate at a million degrees or more *BEFORE* they even reach the photosphere. The are not "heated" somewhere else high in the atmosphere, they are heated by the current running through them and they are hot by the time they pass the photosphere!

You cannot anser the actual question? Then I will put into another post.

Oh for God sake you still have number seven on your list? Hoy.

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Oh for God sake you still have number seven on your list? Hoy.

Oh for God sake you still have not answered number seven on my list? Hoy
Coronal loops are electrical discharges? First asked 10 July 2009
This is an updated question with a couple of "answers" from MM.
ETA actually not - I thought that I had added the non-answers from you. I will do it now. (Done).

Oh for God sake you still have not answered number 1 on my list? Hoy
Oh for God sake you still have not answered number 2 on my list? Hoy
...
Oh for God sake you still have not answered number 31on my list? Hoy

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by unsupported assertions (new questions in green)

What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected? First asked 6th July 2009
A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona. First asked 6th July 2009
From tusenfem:
Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book? First asked 7th July 2009
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun). First asked 7th July 2009
Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible? First asked 8 July 2009
See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
Coronal loops are electrical discharges? First asked 10 July 2009
This is an updated question with a couple of "answers" from MM.
Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009
More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth First asked 13 July 2009
Formation of the iron surface First asked 13 July 2009
How much is "mostly neon" MM? First asked 13 July 2009
Just how useless is the Iron Sun model? First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested? First asked 14 July 2009
Is Saturn the Sun? First asked 14 July 2009(Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina First asked 14 July 2009MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model? First asked 17 July 2009
What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
(MM states that it is not the photosphere) First asked 18 July 2009
Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles? First asked 18 July 2009
How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for
Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009
Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves? First asked 22 July 2009
Seems to think that 3 pixel differences (full Sun image) or 10's of pixels (limb image) are not detectable. Astronomers would disagree.
Evidence for the existence of "dark" electrons First asked 28 July 2008
MHD also treats plasmas as particles and circuits according to Alfven First asked 29 July 2009Can you give a citation to where Alfven states that he derives the equations of MHD from collections of particles rather than a fluid?
Why neon for your "mostly neon" photosphere? First asked 30 July 2009
Where is the "mostly fluorine" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for "mostly Li/Be/B/C/N/O" layers? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for the "mostly deuterium" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
Explain the shape of your electrical arcs (coronal loops) First asked 2 August 2009
What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:
Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Michal Mozina:

How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
First asked 23rd June 2009
So far just that astronomers have got the visible masses of galaxies wrong (and another reply with his usual "if we cannot detect it on Earth then it does not exist" non-science).
Now he is on about dark electrons (see above) as an example of matter that cannot be detected!
Why do the composition of the "mostly neon" photoshere and the corona differ?
First asked 22nd July 2009
It is "mass separation" - no actual physics cited or experiments. No understanding of the consequences - see the questions about layers.

Michael Mozina · Aug 9, 2009

Reality Check said:
Oh for God sake you still have not answered number 1 on my list? Hoy

FYI, when I actually do answer your questions it's appropriate to remove them from your list. If you continue to keep them on your list even after I have answered them, as you keep doing, it makes the list longer of course (which is evidently your intent), but it also makes you look rather silly.

Notice that you didn't once even admit that coronal loops can be expressed as electrical discharges even after I handed you work from 4 or 5 different authors? What exactly do you expect me to do anyway?

Reality Check · Aug 9, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
FYI, when I actually do answer your questions it's appropriate to remove them from your list. If you continue to keep them on your list even after I have answered them, as you keep doing, it makes the list longer of course (which is evidently your intent), but it also makes you look rather silly.

When you finally give a valid answer to any question then I will move it to the actually answered section.

I think that the fact that the list is just getting longer makes the Iron Sun idea seem sillier and sillier. What this reflects about you as the author of the Iron Sun idea is up to readers of this thread to decide.

Michael Mozina said:
Notice that you didn't once even admit that coronal loops can be expressed as electrical discharges even after I handed you work from 4 or 5 different authors? What exactly do you expect me to do anyway?

As far as I remember no author that you have cited treats coronal loops as electrical discharges from a hypothetical, thermodynamically impossible iron surface/crust.
If my memory is wrong then please refresh it.

Some authors (Alfven for example) describe coronal loops using closed electrical currents (see Fig 4 in Alfven's paper) rather than the equivalent method of using closed magnetic fluxes. Alfven states the primary restriction in this treatment - the methods are only equivalent for "stationary or slowly varying phenomena". He also states the reason that most astronomers use the magnetic field method - magnetic fields are much easier to measure than electrical fields (at least in 1966).

Michael Mozina · Aug 11, 2009

Reality Check said:
When you finally give a valid answer to any question then I will move it to the actually answered section.

Simply *AMAZING*. I provided you with two *NEW* papers on electrical discharge process in the solar atmosphere and you utterly ignored them. What kind of weird game are you playing? What's the point of even having a conversation with you?

Zeuzzz · Aug 11, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Simply *AMAZING*. I provided you with two *NEW* papers on electrical discharge process in the solar atmosphere and you utterly ignored them. What kind of weird game are you playing? What's the point of even having a conversation with you?

I find the best method to employ michael is that if Rc is going to continually post pejorative outdated information that you do the same back, just copy and paste the reponces you have given in reply instead of getting frought about re-answering already answered questions.

Reality Check · Aug 11, 2009

Zeuzzz said:
I find the best method to employ michael is that if Rc is going to continually post pejorative outdated information that you do the same back, just copy and paste the reponces you have given in reply instead of getting frought about re-answering already answered questions.

That is a general thing. If someone cannot remember the information you told them min a long thread like this then a reminder is in order. A link to the actual posts rather then just stating that you supplied the information is handy.

So MM where is the post with these 2 new papers on your Iron Sun idea?

ETA
I do hope that you do not mean
Eruptions of Magnetic Ropes in Two Homologous Solar Events on 2002 June 1 and 2: a Key to Understanding of an Enigmatic Flare
Generation of large scale electric fields in coronal flare circuits
There are no Iron Sun electrical discharges in these papers. Just standard solar physics.

sol invictus · Aug 11, 2009

Michael, I'm still waiting to find out what you think of my last post.

Do you agree that ideal blackbody radiators can't be transparent? If so the next step is showing that they can't even be translucent - they must be perfectly opaque. The argument is only slightly different from the one I already gave.

Michael Mozina · Aug 12, 2009

sol invictus said:
Michael, I'm still waiting to find out what you think of my last post.

Do you agree that ideal blackbody radiators can't be transparent? If so the next step is showing that they can't even be translucent - they must be perfectly opaque. The argument is only slightly different from the one I already gave.

Sol, I believe that your intent is honorable, and your question deserves a thoughtful response with a bit of detail. Unfortunately I've been focused on programming this week, and I'm leaving early tomorrow to do a training.

Let me respond for the time being in this way. I think that it is a *huge* (and I mean huge) mistake, and a gross oversimplification, to attempt to think of a the sun as a single surface at a single temperature. It is composed of many layers at many different temperatures and the flow of particles from the sun creates a "river of heat" that comes off the sun in "waves". I know that sounds rather vague, but it will have to do for the time being. I have some actual work deadlines at the moment, and I will need to complete these projects before I have the luxury of more fully explaining myself.

Suffice to say, I think that Birkeland's terella is the best example I can think of. The "heat" from the coronal loops plays a significant role in the total energy from the sun. I should also note that iron ion wavelengths like we observe in SOHO and STEREO images cover the full surface of the sun. The "surface' itself is "relatively dark" and also relatively cool. The plasma atmosphere is separated into various plasma layers as described by this diagram from my website:

IMO, the outer atmosphere is mass separated by the element, with protons and electrons flowing from the surface, just like Birkeland's model. Just like Birkeland's model, the total energy output depends on the total circuit energy not simply upon the temperature of any given "surface". The denser layers near the surface are "cool" (say under 1500 Kelvin) and provide a layer of "insulation" that helps keep the crust from melting The upper layers are thinner and progressively hotter. The silicon layer that meets up with the neon photosphere is "thicker" than any of the other plasma layers and makes up the bulk of the 4800 KM between the surface of the neon photosphere and the actual surface of the sun.

The "total" energy output must match, but the idea of a pure (or even close) black body spectrum is a gross oversimplification IMO. Those two or three molecules you mentioned really don't take into account the FE IX ions, or those heavily ionized Nickel ions and they won't fit properly into that black body spectrum for obvious reasons. The sun is not a pure "black body" and it is meaningless to treat it that way IMO.

Ziggurat · Aug 12, 2009

Michael will never acknowledge that not only are blackbodies perfectly opaque, but anything approximating a blackbody must necessarily be close to opaque.

But what I'm wondering is why Michael thinks neon plasmas are white.

Michael Mozina · Aug 12, 2009

Ziggurat said:
Michael will never acknowledge that not only are blackbodies perfectly opaque, but anything approximating a blackbody must necessarily be close to opaque.

But what I'm wondering is why Michael thinks neon plasmas are white.

The photosphere is not pure neon. It has virtually every other element running through it and many molecules as well. The sun is a very dynamic environment and although the plasmas are mass separated to a great degree, and it is "ionized" to some degree, there are particles flowing in and through every layer of the solar atmosphere, including the neon photosphere.

Michael Mozina · Aug 12, 2009

Zeuzzz said:
I find the best method to employ michael is that if Rc is going to continually post pejorative outdated information that you do the same back, just copy and paste the reponces you have given in reply instead of getting frought about re-answering already answered questions.

Thanks for the advice.

Reality Check · Aug 12, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
The photosphere is not pure neon. It has virtually every other element running through it and many molecules as well. The sun is a very dynamic environment and although the plasmas are mass separated to a great degree, and it is "ionized" to some degree, there are particles flowing in and through every layer of the solar atmosphere, including the neon photosphere.

Have you changed your mind again?

From the list of unanswered questions:

How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for
Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009

Reality Check · Aug 12, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Thanks for the advice.

Maybe you did not notice my reply:
That is a general thing. If someone cannot remember the information you told them min a long thread like this then a reminder is in order. A link to the actual posts rather then just stating that you supplied the information is handy.

So MM where is the post with these 2 new papers on your Iron Sun idea?

ETA
I do hope that you do not mean
Eruptions of Magnetic Ropes in Two Homologous Solar Events on 2002 June 1 and 2: a Key to Understanding of an Enigmatic Flare
Generation of large scale electric fields in coronal flare circuits
There are no Iron Sun electrical discharges in these papers. Just standard solar physics.

sol invictus · Aug 12, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
Sol, I believe that your intent is honorable, and your question deserves a thoughtful response with a bit of detail.

OK, I'll wait for your response.

Let me respond for the time being in this way. I think that it is a *huge* (and I mean huge) mistake, and a gross oversimplification, to attempt to think of a the sun as a single surface at a single temperature.

That's fine (in fact I agree with you).

The "total" energy output must match, but the idea of a pure (or even close) black body spectrum is a gross oversimplification IMO. Those two or three molecules you mentioned really don't take into account the FE IX ions, or those heavily ionized Nickel ions and they won't fit properly into that black body spectrum for obvious reasons. The sun is not a pure "black body" and it is meaningless to treat it that way IMO.

You lost me. You can just point an instrument at the sun and measure its spectrum. Forget theory, forget models - just look at sunlight (preferably above the atmosphere so it doesn't get in the way). I showed a plot of the result a while back. It's very close to a blackbody spectrum. I'm pretty sure you're not denying that - so I'm not sure how to interpret the first sentence in the quote above.

And that's where I want to start - I just want to use that piece of information (that the spectrum of sunlight is close to a pure blackbody) and see how far it can take us. But I want to do so step by step, with your acknowledgment at each one.

Ziggurat · Aug 12, 2009

Michael Mozina said:
The photosphere is not pure neon.

I'm not talking specifically about the photosphere, and purity is irrelevant to this question. You have claimed before that neon is white. Why do you think this?

Reality Check · Oct 29, 2009

Outstanding questions for Michael Mozina

Michael Mozina has started another thread so maybe he has had time to find answers to these outstanding questions.
These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by unsupported assertions (new questions in green)

What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected? First asked 6th July 2009
A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona. First asked 6th July 2009
From tusenfem:
Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book? First asked 7th July 2009
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun). First asked 7th July 2009
Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible? First asked 8 July 2009
See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
Coronal loops are electrical discharges? First asked 10 July 2009
This is an updated question with a couple of "answers" from MM.
Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009
More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth First asked 13 July 2009
Formation of the iron surface First asked 13 July 2009
How much is "mostly neon" MM? First asked 13 July 2009
Just how useless is the Iron Sun model? First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested? First asked 14 July 2009
Is Saturn the Sun? First asked 14 July 2009(Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina First asked 14 July 2009MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model? First asked 17 July 2009
What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
(MM states that it is not the photosphere) First asked 18 July 2009
Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles? First asked 18 July 2009
How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for
Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009
Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves? First asked 22 July 2009
Seems to think that 3 pixel differences (full Sun image) or 10's of pixels (limb image) are not detectable. Astronomers would disagree.
Evidence for the existence of "dark" electrons First asked 28 July 2008
MHD also treats plasmas as particles and circuits according to Alfven First asked 29 July 2009Can you give a citation to where Alfven states that he derives the equations of MHD from collections of particles rather than a fluid?
Why neon for your "mostly neon" photosphere? First asked 30 July 2009
Where is the "mostly fluorine" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for "mostly Li/Be/B/C/N/O" layers? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for the "mostly deuterium" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
Explain the shape of your electrical arcs (coronal loops) First asked 2 August 2009
What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:

Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Michal Mozina:

How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
First asked 23rd June 2009
So far just that astronomers have got the visible masses of galaxies wrong (and another reply with his usual "if we cannot detect it on Earth then it does not exist" non-science).
Now he is on about dark electrons (see above) as an example of matter that cannot be detected!
Why do the composition of the "mostly neon" photoshere and the corona differ?
First asked 22nd July 2009
It is "mass separation" - no actual physics cited or experiments. No understanding of the consequences - see the questions about layers.

Zeuzzz · Oct 29, 2009

Someone has a lot of time on their hands.

Would that post be similar to the numerous posts that I frequently used to post with dozens of links in them, and thus can be dismissed as spam that no-one has the time to read like people used to?

Maybe picking one or two questions would be a better idea instead of that huge wall of text and links.

Reality Check · Oct 30, 2009

Zeuzzz said:
Someone has a lot of time on their hands.

Actually not - the list was gathered over a period of months.

Zeuzzz said:
Would that post be similar to the numerous posts that I frequently used to post with dozens of links in them, and thus can be dismissed as spam that no-one has the time to read like people used to?

No. This is a list of questions for MM specifically. The links are to the posts that posed the questions.

Zeuzzz said:
Maybe picking one or two questions would be a better idea instead of that huge wall of text and links.

Been there, done that, for example:

From the list of unanswered questions:

How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for

Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009

The advanatge of having all the unanswered questions in one post is that it is easy to see how hopeless MM is at answering the questions that arise from his idea.

Reality Check · Dec 26, 2009

How do MM's "layers" survive the convection currents in the Sun

First asked 26 December 2009
How do your layers survive the convection currents in the Sun?

Reality Check · Dec 30, 2009

These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by unsupported assertions (new questions in green)

What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected? First asked 6th July 2009
A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona. First asked 6th July 2009
From tusenfem:
Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book? First asked 7th July 2009
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun). First asked 7th July 2009
Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible? First asked 8 July 2009
See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
Coronal loops are electrical discharges? First asked 10 July 2009
This is an updated question with a couple of "answers" from MM.
Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009
More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth First asked 13 July 2009
Formation of the iron surface First asked 13 July 2009
How much is "mostly neon" MM? First asked 13 July 2009
Just how useless is the Iron Sun model? First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009
Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina First asked 13 July 2009He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested? First asked 14 July 2009
Is Saturn the Sun? First asked 14 July 2009(Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina First asked 14 July 2009MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model? First asked 17 July 2009
What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
(MM states that it is not the photosphere) First asked 18 July 2009
Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles? First asked 18 July 2009
How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light? First asked 19 July 2009
Now retracted for
Entire photon "spectrum" is composed of all the emissions from all the layers First asked 3 August 2009
Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves? First asked 22 July 2009
Seems to think that 3 pixel differences (full Sun image) or 10's of pixels (limb image) are not detectable. Astronomers would disagree.
Evidence for the existence of "dark" electrons First asked 28 July 2008
MHD also treats plasmas as particles and circuits according to Alfven First asked 29 July 2009 Can you give a citation to where Alfven states that he derives the equations of MHD from collections of particles rather than a fluid?
Why neon for your "mostly neon" photosphere? First asked 30 July 2009
Where is the "mostly fluorine" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for "mostly Li/Be/B/C/N/O" layers? First asked 30 July 2009
What is your physical evidence for the "mostly deuterium" layer? First asked 30 July 2009
Explain the shape of your electrical arcs (coronal loops) First asked 2 August 2009
What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009
How do MM's "layers" survive the convection currents in the Sun? First asked 26 December 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:

Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Michal Mozina:

How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
First asked 23rd June 2009
So far just that astronomers have got the visible masses of galaxies wrong (and another reply with his usual "if we cannot detect it on Earth then it does not exist" non-science).
Now he is on about dark electrons (see above) as an example of matter that cannot be detected!
Why do the composition of the "mostly neon" photoshere and the corona differ?
First asked 22nd July 2009
It is "mass separation" - no actual physics cited or experiments. No understanding of the consequences - see the questions about layers.

brantc · Dec 31, 2009

8 Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009

Isnt a RD image just a form of compression??
It will show you everything that changes from frame to frame kinda like Indeo Video compression. Its so you dont have to send the whole frame every time.

GeeMack · Dec 31, 2009

brantc said:
8 Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question? First asked 10 July 2009

Isnt a RD image just a form of compression??
It will show you everything that changes from frame to frame kinda like Indeo Video compression. Its so you dont have to send the whole frame every time.

The running difference images Michael refers to are created by starting with two images of a particular area of the Sun taken at different times. A software program is then used to compare these images pixel by pixel. Each pixel in the first image is compared to the corresponding pixel in the second image. The result is a third image, the running difference image, where a new pixel is placed in each same space as the corresponding pixels from the original images. The new pixels have brightness values based on the difference between the brightness of the pixels compared from the two original images.

The running difference output becomes a graphic representation of the comparison, not an actual image of anything. There is no light source in a running difference image, no shadows, no mountains, valleys, or surfaces. The brighter pixels are created by the software, as are the darker pixels. This is done exclusively as a means of graphically showing the differences between two original images. And a running difference video is simply made up of a series of sequential running difference images, nothing more.

brantc · Jan 2, 2010

GeeMack said:
The running difference images Michael refers to are created by starting with two images of a particular area of the Sun taken at different times. A software program is then used to compare these images pixel by pixel. Each pixel in the first image is compared to the corresponding pixel in the second image. The result is a third image, the running difference image, where a new pixel is placed in each same space as the corresponding pixels from the original images. The new pixels have brightness values based on the difference between the brightness of the pixels compared from the two original images.

The running difference output becomes a graphic representation of the comparison, not an actual image of anything. There is no light source in a running difference image, no shadows, no mountains, valleys, or surfaces. The brighter pixels are created by the software, as are the darker pixels. This is done exclusively as a means of graphically showing the differences between two original images. And a running difference video is simply made up of a series of sequential running difference images, nothing more.

"The new pixels have brightness values based on the difference between the brightness of the pixels compared from the two original images."

Depending on what the difference(adding to previous value?) is between then you would have a pixel that is slightly brighter than the previous frame.

And this would happen globally. So it would be the same image of a different brightness than the source images depending on the algorithm.

As long as the individual pixels were not processed in some way, that this process happened globally, then you would have an video that just made up the brightness differences between snapshots, or a simple form of compression.

I thought that the data was transmitted from TRACE? as running difference images. That would make sense. Why post process as RD images??

Dancing David · Jan 2, 2010

Why conclude they show mountain ridges in an iron crust and volcanic activity?

Electric universe theories here.

Banned

Philosopher

Banned

Philosopher

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Muse

Banned

Muse

Penultimate Amazing