Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

sol invictus said:

That makes everything very clear for any newbies that happen to read it. But I'm not sure the message they'll get is quite the one you intended to communicate, Michael.

Click to expand...

You're probably right about that. It's not exactly a newbie friendly topic, and math bunnies is a lingo related to other parts of the conversation.

Let's try GM's lingo then.

GM believes that the RD images are a "pie charge of temperatures" that relate directly to an "opaque photosphere, which relates to the inside surface of that red/orange chromosphere.

IMO it is a "pie chart of temperatures" that relate to a solid surface, that is 4800Km inside the chromosphere. When we run a RD image, we should see that the diameter of the round part of the pie, comes up 4800Km short of the chromosphere all along every limb (9600km total difference in diameter).

The LMSAL gold imaging technique is as a "faster cadence" RD image, that looks to be "averaged" in some way as the various dots fill themselves in over time. That particular 'technique" produces very high resolution images of the "surface of the sun" that is located about 4800KM inside the chromosphere, underneath of a highly ionized atmosphere that is not "opaque", but relatively transparent to these specific wavelengths of light.

GM's pi * d (inside edges of the chromosphere) circumference will come out quite differently than my predicted pi * d (limb darkened areas in the original image), not because pi is different, but because d is different.

Is that any better?

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_044515/f_211_193_171.jpg

Is there anyone here that really cannot find the "opaque" limb of the sun in the iron ion wavelengths in a multiple color/wavelength image?

Does anyone actually believe it cannot be found in *EVERY* iron ion wavelength?

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_013015/f_094_335_193.jpg

Here's another combo of of three iron ion wavelengths. The limb darkening is quite clear all along a jagged limb, and the the region above that limb darkening is "colored" by the electromagnetic lines that discharge through the atmosphere. The various wavelengths of light glow in various colors and they "mix" very clearly just above the limb darkened region. The mixture of various colors creates beautiful colors along the limbs.

You can go back any iron ion wavelength and find that same limb dimming all along the limb.

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_013015/f0193.gif

That "feature" is not an "artifact", it's found in every single SDO iron ion wavelength that's been published to date!

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/sdo/447006main_fulldiskmulticolor-orig_new1_full.jpg

Now go back to the composite image again and look at the limb dimming again. It's *INSIDE* of the chromosphere, not outside of that boundary. The only way that this image is even possible is if the atmosphere around that opaque disk/sphere is highly ionized. Not only did the SSM get falsified in that first composite image, all "non electric" solar theory got falsified by that same image.

Michael Mozina said:

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/sdo/447006main_fulldiskmulticolor-orig_new1_full.jpg

Now go back to the composite image again and look at the limb dimming again. It's *INSIDE* of the chromosphere, not outside of that boundary. The only way that this image is even possible is if the atmosphere around that opaque disk/sphere is highly ionized. Not only did the SSM get falsified in that first composite image, all "non electric" solar theory got falsified by that same image.

Click to expand...

Again, Michael, does it not strike you as odd that in the composite image, the inner edge of the chromosphere is perfectly smooth and quite sharp, while there's no such smooth, sharp edge in the 193 and 171 angstrom pictures you linked? Or that the inner edge of the chromosphere isn't quite concentric with the rougher, blurrier edge that you believe you're seeing through your neon layer?

Michael Mozina said:

What disk? From SDO's perspective the sun is a giant "disk" in the sky. That disk! This disk in a long cadence RD image:

Click to expand...

Your qualifications to communicate in a sane, rational, and intelligent manner on the subject of solar physics has been challenged. Your continuous misuse of terms shows that you don't possess any such qualifications.

The red/orange flaming ring is the chromosphere in SDO.

Click to expand...

Grade school children do science that way.

The limb darkening is *INSIDE* of the chromosphere. Likewise the RD image will reside *INSIDE* of that chromosphere. If we were to look at a full disk image, it will show up inside that red/orange region with 4800KM to spare. It will be physically and directly related to that limb darkening region.

Click to expand...

Limb darkening doesn't mean what you think it means. And your argument by grade school coloring book descriptions is, well, what we might expect out of a grade school kid.

Let's recap for the newbies now. You have a green "opaque" math bunny problem in the SDO images. If I had access to the FITS files, I would/could turn off the blue iron line in the original release image and demonstrate to you that you have a yellow math bunny problem. I'd then turn the blue line back on and demonstrate your bunny turns green again. I would then turn off the yellow line and turn your bunny blue. I would then turn the yellow line into a red line and make your bunny glow a pretty purple. Alas I can't play with your color bunnies because I can't access the FITS files yet.

Click to expand...

Coloring book science. Fun. Well, for children.

The more "decisive' way to demonstrate this point is with the RD images. If the SSM is correct, all those iron line emissions *MUST* start above the chromosphere ring, and the RD image outline should end up right along that red orange ring. If however the iron emissions start at the limb darkened region as I believe they do, then the RD image will show a disk that fits nicely inside that red/orange ring with 4800 KM to spare.

Click to expand...

Running difference graphs are simply graphical representations of a series of mathematical computations. It has already been demonstrated that you don't understand them, therefore any arguments you make with references to running difference imagery are worthless. Given that misunderstanding and your reference to limb darkening, which you also don't understand, plus the addition of some grade school kid coloring book science, your above argument is gibberish.

There are technically two different RD techniques we might use. We could use a longer cadence version to find the edge of the disk to see if aligns itself with the chromosphere or the limb darkened region. The second and "better" way to go about it IMO would be to round up the higher cadence/averaged RD process that created this image:

Click to expand...

Technically you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about when it comes to running difference images. Your qualifications to communicate in a rational, understandable way on that issue have been challenged and you have failed to show that you possess any such qualifications.

Apply that process to the 171A channel of SDO. Then lay that chromosphere on top of that image. That will/would be one of *THE* most spectacular images of the sun for all time IMO. It will also demonstrate that the iron line emissions originate in the limb darkened areas, not at the chromosphere boundary. Of course those green bunny problems should have already told you all of this, but then denial seems to be the name of the game around here. "What disk"?

Click to expand...

It wouldn't demonstrate any such thing. You are not using the term limb darkening in an understandable way.

dasmiller said:

Again, Michael, does it not strike you as odd that in the composite image, the inner edge of the chromosphere is perfectly smooth and quite sharp,

Click to expand...

No, that's pretty easy to explain. They simply "subtracted out" the white light photosphere from the HeII image. If you look very closely around the edges, you'll see white light from material of the photosphere coming up through that edge. You really need to get into the image at the pixel level to see these details, but even "ctrl"-Mouse-scroll-wheel forward" will provide enough resolution on a windows platform in the Firefox web browser. I'm not sure about other browsers.

while there's no such smooth, sharp edge in the 193 and 171 angstrom pictures you linked?

Click to expand...

There are hardly *ever* "smooth edges" in an iron ion wavelength. That' is not only true of SDO, but true of TRACE limb images as well. There are literally pieces of iron flying through the atmosphere. There are "tornadoes" that can be seen in TRACE limb images.

http://trace.lmsal.com/Public/Gallery/Images/movies/T171_991127.mov

It's a *highly* active atmosphere.

Or that the inner edge of the chromosphere isn't quite concentric with the rougher, blurrier edge that you believe you're seeing through your neon layer?

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that that there are powerful "mass flows" related to coronal loop and discharge activities. Those mass flows come up and through and then down and through the various layers. It's not likely to be "smooth" or "crisp" everywhere, but overall, we should see atmosphere that is about 4800KM thick.

DeiRenDopa said:

Taking up an idea someone made, earlier in this thread (accurate attribution welcome): if I, or someone else, could find a sequence of images of Jupiter, or Saturn, could GM (or anyone else!) produce an RD movie from them? And from that movie, could one image be colourised using a scheme similar to the one used in his 'rugged mountains on the Sun' fave?

Jupiter has, of course, many persistent features, some more or less stable over several centuries (e.g. the Great Red Spot). When Shoemaker-Levy 9 hit it, there were many features which persisted, with changes, over several Jovian days. I for one would be curious to know what a suitably colourised RD movie of Jupiter would look like.

Click to expand...

Well I have made some running difference images of clouds and of water vapor satellite images of the Earth. They look a lot like those optical illusions Michael so badly misunderstands when he stares at the running difference graphs from the solar imagery. Of course you can't see Kalamazoo through the clouds by making those graphics any more than you can see several thousand kilometers through opaque plasma by making a running difference graph using thermal data taken from several thousand kilometers above.

It's reasonably easy to make a running difference graph from any two images. Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that they wouldn't even have to be related, like a couple of pictures of different people's faces.

If I can find some sequential images of Jupiter I'll make up a couple frames and post them. For a video I'd need to find a reasonable length series. Typical video might be from 15 to 60 frames per second, so even 30 frames would only be a couple of seconds of video.

Michael Mozina said:

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_044515/f_211_193_171.jpg

Is there anyone here that really cannot find the "opaque" limb of the sun in the iron ion wavelengths in a multiple color/wavelength image?

Does anyone actually believe it cannot be found in *EVERY* iron ion wavelength?

Click to expand...

Nobody here is quite clear on what you're talking about. Your use of the standard terminology of solar physics is so badly convoluted that your arguments amount to piles of gibberish.

Michael Mozina said:

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_013015/f_094_335_193.jpg

Here's another combo of of three iron ion wavelengths. The limb darkening is quite clear all along a jagged limb, and the the region above that limb darkening is "colored" by the electromagnetic lines that discharge through the atmosphere. The various wavelengths of light glow in various colors and they "mix" very clearly just above the limb darkened region. The mixture of various colors creates beautiful colors along the limbs.

You can go back any iron ion wavelength and find that same limb dimming all along the limb.

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlight/20100408_013015/f0193.gif

That "feature" is not an "artifact", it's found in every single SDO iron ion wavelength that's been published to date!

Click to expand...

The green strip around the edge of the SDO image you were so ecstatic about (until you found out how wrong you were) is an artifact of processing. NASA said it is, and being qualified as somewhat of an expert in image processing, I say it is.

GeeMack said:

Your qualifications to communicate in a sane, rational, and intelligent manner on the subject of solar physics has been challenged.

Click to expand...

You're not a challenge GM. I already put up my numbers and I await the outcome. History is the only thing "challenging" this solar model at the moment. You're an insignificant player IMO.

I have clearly explained to you how to create the definitive RD image. Go round up that RD imaging technique that produced this specific RD image:



http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/TRACEpodarchive4.html
http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/movies/T171_000828.avi

Run the 171A channel of SDO through that *EXACT* same software program. Take that image and overlay the chromosphere on that image. That composite RD/chromosphere image will demonstrate my point in vivid gold color for you. With all your contacts on the inside, that should be a piece of cake for you.

I've clearly explained now how to find that limb darkened region in two different RD techniques. If you can't find the 'disk" in a RD image after all those explanations, you must not speak English as your native language.

GeeMack said:

The green strip around the edge of the SDO image you were so ecstatic about (until you found out how wrong you were) is an artifact of processing. NASA said it is, and being qualified as somewhat of an expert in image processing, I say it is.

Click to expand...

Then the two different RD techniques that I suggested should demonstrate that you are correct. Go get SOMEONE OTHER THAN YOU to make them for us and publish them.

Michael Mozina said:

Keep in mind that that there are powerful "mass flows" related to coronal loop and discharge activities. Those mass flows come up and through and then down and through the various layers. It's not likely to be "smooth" or "crisp" everywhere,

Click to expand...

But in the composite image, the lower edge of the chromosphere (in your interpretation) is, in fact, perfectly smooth and crisp.

but overall, we should see atmosphere that is about 4800KM thick.

Click to expand...

But in the composite picture, your 4800 km atmosphere is completely absent along the right side of the image.

Follow the following steps GM.

Step 1: Go get the software that produced the high cadence/averaged RD image that is the first image on my website.

Step 2: Run the 171A channel of SDO through that routine.

Step 3. Take a HeII ion SDO image and subtract out the while light photosphere as was done in the composite image.

Step 4 overlay the remaining HeII image on the RD image just as was done with the published composite image.

Step 5: Count the pixels between the disk borders and the inside edge of the chromosphere.

Step 6: Publish the results.

Is that clear enough for you?

If the edge of the gold disk isn't 4800Km inside of the chromosphere, this solar model goes down in flame. If it does show up along those limb darkened areas, 4800 km inside that chrmosophere, then the SSM is falsified and you'll need electricity to fix it. What a hell of a dilemma for you guys. You *HATE* EU theory with a passion, but the only way to fix *any* plasma solar theory is going to require that you add electrical current to your theory. Wow. That's going to be quite the ego fry for you.

Michael Mozina said:

You're probably right about that. It's not exactly a newbie friendly topic, and math bunnies is a lingo related to other parts of the conversation.

Let's try GM's lingo then.

GM believes that the RD images are a "pie charge of temperatures" that relate directly to an "opaque photosphere, which relates to the inside surface of that red/orange chromosphere.

IMO it is a "pie chart of temperatures" that relate to a solid surface, that is 4800Km inside the chromosphere. When we run a RD image, we should see that the diameter of the round part of the pie, comes up 4800Km short of the chromosphere all along every limb (9600km total difference in diameter).

The LMSAL gold imaging technique is as a "faster cadence" RD image, that looks to be "averaged" in some way as the various dots fill themselves in over time. That particular 'technique" produces very high resolution images of the "surface of the sun" that is located about 4800KM inside the chromosphere, underneath of a highly ionized atmosphere that is not "opaque", but relatively transparent to these specific wavelengths of light.

GM's pi * d (inside edges of the chromosphere) circumference will come out quite differently than my predicted pi * d (limb darkened areas in the original image), not because pi is different, but because d is different.

Is that any better?

Click to expand...

You completely misunderstand solar physics in general, and you've misrepresented my position in particular. But your qualifications to communicate in a sane, rational, intelligent, and honest way about solar physics have been challenged. And you haven't demonstrated that you have any such qualifications. So another strawman or two and some more lies is what we have come to expect from your arguments.

Oh, and the diameter of a circle times pi is the circumference of that circle. It's geometry. You don't get to take liberties with math simply because you don't have the qualifications to understand it.

GeeMack said:

Well I have made some running difference images of clouds and of water vapor satellite images of the Earth. They look a lot like those optical illusions Michael so badly misunderstands when he stares at the running difference graphs from the solar imagery. Of course you can't see Kalamazoo through the clouds by making those graphics any more than you can see several thousand kilometers through opaque plasma by making a running difference graph using thermal data taken from several thousand kilometers above.

It's reasonably easy to make a running difference graph from any two images. Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that they wouldn't even have to be related, like a couple of pictures of different people's faces.

If I can find some sequential images of Jupiter I'll make up a couple frames and post them. For a video I'd need to find a reasonable length series. Typical video might be from 15 to 60 frames per second, so even 30 frames would only be a couple of seconds of video.

Click to expand...

Try this one: http://www.sai.msu.su/apod/ap070312.html (Jupiter, from New Horizons)

SL9 impact: http://zebu.uoregon.edu/images/r.mpg (may not be suitable without quite a bit of processing to register the individual frames).

For visual effect, I think it is very important to colourise the RD images (a linear grey scale will, of course, contain all the data, but since the sole basis for MM's nonsense claims is qualitative, visual impressions ...)

Michael Mozina said:

You're not a challenge GM. I already put up my numbers and I await the outcome. History is the only thing "challenging" this solar model at the moment. You're an insignificant player IMO.

I have clearly explained to you how to create the definitive RD image. Go round up that RD imaging technique that produced this specific RD image:

[qimg]http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/171surfaceshotsmall.JPG[/qimg]

http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/TRACEpodarchive4.html
http://trace.lmsal.com/POD/movies/T171_000828.avi

Run the 171A channel of SDO through that *EXACT* same software program. Take that image and overlay the chromosphere on that image. That composite RD/chromosphere image will demonstrate my point in vivid gold color for you. With all your contacts on the inside, that should be a piece of cake for you.

I've clearly explained now how to find that limb darkened region in two different RD techniques. If you can't find the 'disk" in a RD image after all those explanations, you must not speak English as your native language.

Click to expand...

Why on Earth do you keep asking other people to do your work?

Michael Mozina said:

Then the two different RD techniques that I suggested should demonstrate that you are correct. Go get SOMEONE OTHER THAN YOU to make them for us and publish them.

Click to expand...

No, really, why is it you keep asking other people to do your work?

dasmiller said:

But in the composite image, the lower edge of the chromosphere (in your interpretation) is, in fact, perfectly smooth and crisp.

Click to expand...

That is because the white light photosphere from one of the two channels that is sensitive to that surface was simply 'subtracted" from the HeII image. Since the white light surface is relatively smooth, so is the underside of that HeII image. Since the mass flows tend to flow up and through that point, all the mass flows coming up from the surface create those jagged edges that look like flames.

The rest of the composite image is simply the iron ion light from the sun. The green color is directly related to the colors assigned to each wavelength, and the blending of light that occurs between the various wavelengths. Whatever color scheme we select for the ions, we should see a blending of those colors along the horizon just as it becomes opaque. That's where the most light shines from each of the wavelengths (other than the active regions of course). That blending of colors is a critical clue, as is the RD outline. The RD outline is more conclusive IMO because it really leaves no room for any more doubt. If the light originates along the darkened limb lines (as it must) then the RD disk outlines must also follow that same line. The circumference of the RD image is going to match that 4800 limb darkened area, not the inside of the chromosophere as would be true if the SSM were correct.

But in the composite picture, your 4800 km atmosphere is completely absent along the right side of the image.

Click to expand...

It's not actually "absent" if you take the image apart, but I'm not publishing any more solar images EVER. I'm done. You can do it for yourself if you like. The reason it looks to be absent in that one image is because of the high amount of activity in that region that is "in front of" that part of the limb. If we simply used a 193A image, it would probably come out a lot more clear, but since they used so many different wavelengths, and there is so much light in that region, it's harder to see the border. It's possible to see it by playing around with color schemes, but like I said, I'm done publishing images that I personally created. I refuse to be called a fraud over a solar image ever again.

I'll be happy to create a host of predictions, all related to the 4800Km limb darkened region, but someone besides GM and me will have to create them.

Michael Mozina said:

Follow the following steps GM.

Step 1: Go get the software that produced the high cadence/averaged RD image that is the first image on my website.

Step 2: Run the 171A channel of SDO through that routine.

Step 3. Take a HeII ion SDO image and subtract out the while light photosphere as was done in the composite image.

Step 4 overlay the remaining HeII image on the RD image just as was done with the published composite image.

Step 5: Count the pixels between the disk borders and the inside edge of the chromosphere.

Step 6: Publish the results.

Is that clear enough for you?

If the edge of the gold disk isn't 4800Km inside of the chromosphere, this solar model goes down in flame. If it does show up along those limb darkened areas, 4800 km inside that chrmosophere, then the SSM is falsified and you'll need electricity to fix it. What a hell of a dilemma for you guys. You *HATE* EU theory with a passion, but the only way to fix *any* plasma solar theory is going to require that you add electrical current to your theory. Wow. That's going to be quite the ego fry for you.

Click to expand...

And once more, is there some particular reason you are completely unwilling to do your own homework? A little graphics processing or some simple math too difficult?

Michael Mozina said:

That is because the white light photosphere from one of the two channels that is sensitive to that surface was simply 'subtracted" from the HeII image. Since the white light surface is relatively smooth, so is the underside of that HeII image. Since the mass flows tend to flow up and through that point, all the mass flows create the jagged edges that look like flames.

Click to expand...

You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. That argument is so completely wrong there's not even a way to repair it. Of course your qualifications to understand any sort of solar imagery have been challenged and you haven't been able to show that you have any such qualifications. But for you to keep putting forth these crap arguments that you're making up from scratch is just a ridiculous and dishonest ploy.

GeeMack said:

And once more, is there some particular reason you are completely unwilling to do your own homework? A little graphics processing or some simple math too difficult?

Click to expand...

I already did all that. I put my numbers on the table. I "guess" I finally got you do to that today, but I've yet to hear you even bet your public opinion on the outcome. Are you even willing to go that far?

GeeMack said:

Michael Mozina said:

http://aia.lmsal.com/public/firstlig...11_193_171.jpg

Is there anyone here that really cannot find the "opaque" limb of the sun in the iron ion wavelengths in a multiple color/wavelength image?

Does anyone actually believe it cannot be found in *EVERY* iron ion wavelength?

Click to expand...

Nobody here is quite clear on what you're talking about. Your use of the standard terminology of solar physics is so badly convoluted that your arguments amount to piles of gibberish.

Click to expand...

I'll second GM's comment.

Does anyone know if MM has ever - here in this thread, in other JREF threads, in other fora - provided a detailed, objective, quantitative method by which anyone could (in principle) independently "find the "opaque" limb of the sun in the iron ion wavelengths in a multiple color/wavelength image"? If so, where?

Now MM is well-known for his use of double quotes around key terms (" "opaque" ", for example). The usual meaning of such an orthographic device is something like "the term here is used with a non-standard meaning", and is usually followed (or preceded) by a careful definition of what that non-standard meaning is.

As opaque is rather important to MM's idea, one would expect that he has carefully defined it, preferably in quantitative terms.

Does anyone know if MM has, in fact, done that?

GeeMack said:

You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. That argument is so completely wrong there's not even a way to repair it.

Click to expand...

If that is all true, then the LMSAL RD technique that created that first gold RD image on my website will show show it conclusively in the SDO images. Go use your inside contacts for something constructive that will actually "settle" our debate. I'm tired of arguing with you and one test is worth a thousand expert opinions. All you have to do is run the 171A channel of SDO through the LMSAL RD technique I cited. Overlay that image and HeII ring from the composite image. That will tell us everything we need to see in a single composite image. If you're correct, then the outlined RD disk will align itself with the underside of the chromosphere. If I am correct, it will come up 4800KM short of that line all along the limb.

If you want to "challenge" me any further on RD images, we need someone other than you and me to settle it based on the 6 steps I outlined. Are you willing to abide by the results of that "test", yes or no?

GeeMack said:

Michael Mozina said:

That is because the white light photosphere from one of the two channels that is sensitive to that surface was simply 'subtracted" from the HeII image. Since the white light surface is relatively smooth, so is the underside of that HeII image. Since the mass flows tend to flow up and through that point, all the mass flows create the jagged edges that look like flames.

Click to expand...

You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. That argument is so completely wrong there's not even a way to repair it. Of course your qualifications to understand any sort of solar imagery have been challenged and you haven't been able to show that you have any such qualifications. But for you to keep putting forth these crap arguments that you're making up from scratch is just a ridiculous and dishonest ploy.

Click to expand...

I can't be sure, but if MM is referring to the SDO First Light Image, GM's comment is spot on.

That image was processed from data received from the AIA, specifically, from three (or four?) EUV channels.

Does anyone know if MM has ever backed up his multi-wavelength (channel) image interpretations with references to the published specifics of the image processing that was done to produce the composites?

Is anyone here going to bet their public position on the outcome of the 6 step process that I just outlined, yes or no?

Michael Mozina said:

It's not actually "absent" if you take the image apart, but I'm not publishing any more solar images EVER. I'm done. You can do it for yourself if you like. The reason it looks to be absent in that one image is because of the high amount of activity in that region that is "in front of" that part of the limb.

Click to expand...

Sooooo . . . there's more solar activity in the image on the right than there is in the image on the left? It's sort of . . . invisible activity in the nearly-transparent chromasphere, and it blocks all light that comes through the limb but doesn't block light that skims in just above the limb? Because the limb is still perfectly sharp and smooth, despite all of this activity.

Also, in the image on the left (particularly the top left) - how can the prominences come up through the atmosphere without disturbing the atmosphere? Shouldn't the top of the atmosphere be ruffled rather than smooth?

GeeMack said:

Michael Mozina said:

Follow the following steps GM.

Step 1: Go get the software that produced the high cadence/averaged RD image that is the first image on my website.

Step 2: Run the 171A channel of SDO through that routine.

Step 3. Take a HeII ion SDO image and subtract out the while light photosphere as was done in the composite image.

Step 4 overlay the remaining HeII image on the RD image just as was done with the published composite image.

Step 5: Count the pixels between the disk borders and the inside edge of the chromosphere.

Step 6: Publish the results.

Is that clear enough for you?

If the edge of the gold disk isn't 4800Km inside of the chromosphere, this solar model goes down in flame. If it does show up along those limb darkened areas, 4800 km inside that chrmosophere, then the SSM is falsified and you'll need electricity to fix it. What a hell of a dilemma for you guys. You *HATE* EU theory with a passion, but the only way to fix *any* plasma solar theory is going to require that you add electrical current to your theory. Wow. That's going to be quite the ego fry for you.

Click to expand...

And once more, is there some particular reason you are completely unwilling to do your own homework? A little graphics processing or some simple math too difficult?

Click to expand...

OMG, is this what MM thinks constitutes a valid test?!?!?

Am I the only one who has no idea what MM means, in nearly every step here?

For example:
* "Run the 171A channel of SDO through that routine" - what is "the 171A channel of SDO"?!?

* "Take a HeII ion SDO image" - what, any one of my choosing? One taken three months later perhaps?

* "subtract out the while light photosphere" - and how, exactly, does one do that?!?

* "as was done in the composite image" - which "composite image"? Where is the reference to how it "was done in the composite image" in the first place?

* "the inside edge of the chromosphere" - and one determines this ... how, exactly?!?

(where's the ROTFL icon?)

dasmiller said:

Sooooo . . . there's more solar activity in the image on the right than there is in the image on the left?

Click to expand...

There is more coronal loop activity on the right than on the left, at least along the limb lines.

It's sort of . . . invisible activity in the nearly-transparent chromasphere, and it blocks all light that comes through the limb but doesn't block light that skims in just above the limb? Because the limb is still perfectly sharp and smooth, despite all of this activity.

Click to expand...

The light from the limb is simply "drowned out" by the light in the forefront part of the image. If we happened to run that same image say a week later, it would be easy to spot the same limb darkening feature. It's only because there is so much activity and light from in front of that limb that it makes it so difficult to observe. If however you look at my blog, I selected three different points around the clock that all show the same 4800Km gap between the bottom of the chromosphere and the limb darkened areas.

Also, in the image on the left (particularly the top left) - how can the prominences come up through the atmosphere without disturbing the atmosphere? Shouldn't the top of the atmosphere be ruffled rather than smooth?

Click to expand...

Actually some parts are "ruffled up" quite a bit, particularly around the left side where the flare/CME is occurring. You'll also notice the distinct twisting effect of a "Birkeland current" in that large twister coming off the limb. That twisted shape is a direct result of the "current flow" through that plasma.

Am I the only one who finds MM's proposed test, um, bizzare?

Step 1: Go get the software that produced the high cadence/averaged RD image that is the first image on my website.

Step 2: Run the 171A channel of SDO through that routine.

Step 3. Take a HeII ion SDO image and subtract out the while light photosphere as was done in the composite image.

Step 4 overlay the remaining HeII image on the RD image just as was done with the published composite image.

Step 5: Count the pixels between the disk borders and the inside edge of the chromosphere.

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, MM is trying to show that the "171A" diameter of the Sun is less than its "chromosphere" diameter.

And he is trying to do with via a series of image subtractions (more later), rather than directly measuring those diameters!

In Step 1+2 position uncertainties are doubled (differencing is used, rather than stacking).

In Step 3 position uncertainties are again doubled.

In Step 4 an unknown - and possibly unknowable - uncertainty is introduced (MM appears to be unaware of the need for registration)

Step 5 is purely subjective (the two key terms - "the disk borders" and "the inside edge of the chromosphere" are undefined).

Perpetual Student said:

So, after that rather verbose preamble, my real purpose here is to speculate a little about what it would be like to spend a few hours or even days in person with some of the professionals here along with Michael Mozina regarding the subject of this thread. Would such a head-to-head environment be helpful for MM to better understand.....

Click to expand...

What an interesting question.

Until the SDO program, I would have thought such an undertaking would be pointless. I have in fact gone down to LMSAL to a meeting on STEREO. It certainly didn't change my opinions any.

With SDO, however, I believe I could satisfy my own curiosity with a few hours or days of access to the full streaming video and that software routine from LMSAL that created the gold RD image on my website. That "equipment" and software routine would either convince me that I'm right, or it would convince me that I'm wrong, but it probably wouldn't even require any else to do it for me per se. I need to "see" to believe. That RD image will tell me one way or the other.

If after a couple of days of trying to convince others of the validity of this model based on the SDO images, I could not convince some folks at NASA to rethink their position, I'd be very surprised. I think that particular piece of gear might help make a difference, but "personal opinions" probably won't cut it from either side IMO.

There are however a number of scientific "tests" that might falsify this model for me, but I'd have to run them myself, or have someone at NASA help me run them in real time to change my mind.

IMO the RD process I cited, the one that uses the same technique used to create the gold RD image on my website is "the" definitive image. If the disk size is not smaller in diameter than the chromosphere diameter, it's curtains for the Birkeland solar model. If however the outline is smaller than the chromosphere diameter, it's curtains for the SSM model. IMO one test falsifies one of two solar models, and does so rather definitively. That's the "test" I need to see with my own eyes.

DRD is absolutely correct about one thing, there appears to be a fundamental philosophical difference between how the astronomy industry as a whole approaches astronomy and how I approach that topic or any scientific topic for that matter. From my perspective, regardless of the scientific topic that we happen to be discussing, the scientific process is supposed to work something like:

Observation->Need To Understand That Observation->Empirical Idea->Empirical Experimentation->Numerical Prediction->Observation To Falsify Or Verify Numerical Prediction->Lather Rinse Repeat Until Quantification Agrees With Observation.

You folks however have a philosophical, emotional, and actually a professional “need” to quantify anything and everything that you see in space, regardless of the empirical validity of your theories, and regardless of how well they actually jive with the observations. You’re definitely headed for a scientific disaster as I see things.

The mainstream’s order of “science” in astronomy today appears to go something like:

Observation->Need To Understand That Observation->Need For Quantification->Quantify Any Way Possible->Create Ad Hoc Entities And Skip Empirical Steps Altogether If Necessary->Ignore Observations In Conflict With Quantification If Necessary->Lather rinse repeat.

If you folks can’t explain an observation, say an observation of acceleration with known forces of nature, just make em up as you go and add math! Viola.

dasmiller said:

Plus - for him, a little math doesn't help. He knows that if he learns a formula or two, and shows them off here, we're likely to jump all over him for getting the units wrong, applying it where it doesn't apply, using completely wrong inputs, misinterpreting the results, etc. And we probably would, too.

So, he's stuck. He can't prove to the scientific community that he's right without math, but math is his critics' home turf.

Click to expand...

In any war, or on any battlefield, “strategy” is everything. Sun Tzu would absolutely disapprove of me playing into your collective mathematical strengths. Trying to bark math on command around here would be like me trying to do a tap dance with everyone shooting at the ground beneath my feet. Sooner or later someone is definitely going to score a direct hit and make me look like a fool. That type of strategy would be an absolute disaster. Since no scientific theory rises or falls on my personal math skills anyway, what would that actually demonstrate even if you folks did score a direct hit or two? That’s a terrible strategy IMO and it produces nothing useful in the end in terms of knowledge for either you or for me.

If I want to win over the long haul, I cannot afford to foolishly play into your mathematical strengths. I need you to eventually play into my strengths, specifically the power of “pure observation” in satellite imagery. This particular crew seems to have forgotten all about the need for observation and the role of observation in science. SDO has provided me with a truly golden opportunity to test my theory for real and to make my case, and I intend to “seize the day” to the best of my abilities.

You folks seem to mistakenly believe that I personally am required to recreate a similar sized train load of math that you’ve come up with to describe the SSM to compete with the SSM. What you don’t seem to realize yet is that I personally do not have to do anything of the sort. All I actually have to do is pick off that opaque math bunny that you keep talking about in SDO observations. If I can disprove that one single math bunny, then your entire train load of SSM math becomes absolutely meaningless to you, and in fact it begins to work against you. You will eventually end up trying to use that train full of broken math to explain what cannot be explained with your broken math. It will only make the flaws in your math show up all that more obviously as we get into the observations. Those observations will falsify the SSM based on your own mathematical models. If that opaque math bunny goes down, the math related to the SSM becomes its own noose. It turns into a math bunny train wreck and I can just sit back and enjoy it. How nice is that?

If I had access to the FITS files at the moment, I could easily take that first light image, change the yellow ion setting to the color red and make your green limb line math bunny glow in pretty purple. I could do all kinds of color changes to the iron lines and we could watch those color changes play out inside your glowing math bunny disaster region. That would be really fun.

The other (more decisive) visual way to demonstrate the flaw in your math bunny is to use that RD technique which I have already mentioned to show that the outline of the RD disk matches up with that limb dimming region in the original 171A images, not the outline of the chromosphere. There are at least two good ways I can think of to finish off that math bunny.

DeiRenDopa said:

Try this one: http://www.sai.msu.su/apod/ap070312.html (Jupiter, from New Horizons)

SL9 impact: http://zebu.uoregon.edu/images/r.mpg (may not be suitable without quite a bit of processing to register the individual frames).

For visual effect, I think it is very important to colourise the RD images (a linear grey scale will, of course, contain all the data, but since the sole basis for MM's nonsense claims is qualitative, visual impressions ...)

Click to expand...

Yes. We've discovered that Jupiter has a solid iron surface!


(Or maybe this just goes to show that only a true dyed-in-the-wool crackpot would fall for the optical illusion created by the dark light pixel arrangement in a running difference graph.)

Michael Mozina said:

In any war, or on any battlefield, “strategy” is everything. Sun Tzu would absolutely disapprove of me playing into your collective mathematical strengths.

Click to expand...

This is basically an admission that you're not interested in the truth, you're only interested in "winning".

Trying to bark math on command around here would be like me trying to do a tap dance with everyone shooting at the ground beneath my feet. Sooner or later someone is definitely going to score a direct hit and make me look like a fool.

Click to expand...

You look like a fool anyways. But if you did a bit of math, maybe you'd actually discover something.

Since no scientific theory rises or falls on my personal math skills

Click to expand...

They don't. But they DO rise or fall on math. Physics is a quantitative science. You can't do physics if you can't quantify it. Numbers matter.

If I want to win over the long haul, I cannot afford to foolishly play into your mathematical strengths.

Click to expand...

No, Michael. Over the long haul, you will win if you're right. Doing the math will help show you if you're right. Your refusal demonstrates that you don't care about being right, you only care about winning. Basically, it's an attempt to justify your dishonesty.

I need you to eventually play into my strengths

Click to expand...

No, Michael. You need to eventually discover the truth.

You folks seem to mistakenly believe that I personally am required to recreate a similar sized train load of math that you’ve come up with to describe the SSM to compete with the SSM.

Click to expand...

No, Michael. It takes very little math to examine the basic parameters of your own model. Your refusal to do so indicates that you don't care about the truth. That is FAR more damning than any possible math mistake you could ever make.

Michael Mozina said:

DRD is absolutely correct about one thing, there appears to be a fundamental philosophical difference between how the astronomy industry

Click to expand...

There is no such industry in the world.

You folks however have a philosophical, emotional, and actually a professional “need” to quantify anything and everything that you see in space, regardless of the empirical validity of your theories, and regardless of how well they actually jive with the observations.

Click to expand...

This is gibberish. How is somebody meant to test how well theories agree with experiment without quantifying both?

Observation->Need To Understand That Observation->Need For Quantification->Quantify Any Way Possible->Create Ad Hoc Entities And Skip Empirical Steps Altogether If Necessary

Click to expand...

Erm what? Step 1) "Observation" leads eventually to step 5) "Create Ad Hoc Entities And Skip Empirical Steps Altogether If Necessary". Michael how can step 5 possibly follow step one when state 5 says step 1) was ignored? The observation is the empirical step!

If you folks can’t explain an observation, say an observation of acceleration with known forces of nature, just make em up as you go and add math! Viola.

Click to expand...

Double bass.

GeeMack said:

Yes. We've discovered that Jupiter has a solid iron surface!

​

(Or maybe this just goes to show that only a true dyed-in-the-wool crackpot would fall for the optical illusion created by the dark light pixel arrangement in a running difference graph.)

Click to expand...

That is impressive, I can't help thinking of the possibilities.
Turning the technique on earth would give a whole new meaning to the term "iron grey clouds".

It also means that the stars are all fake, it is simply holes in the rotating iron shell, and space is really quite bright.
The sun is just a bigger hole, and this disproves that silly idea of the sun existing and much less having a iron shell.

Michael Mozina said:

There is more coronal loop activity on the right than on the left, at least along the limb lines.

Click to expand...

You're asserting that the entire length of the limb in the right image has more coronal loop activity than ANY portion of the left image? The green line is visible along the entire limb in the left image, and nowhere in the right.

The light from the limb is simply "drowned out" by the light in the forefront part of the image.

Click to expand...

If it's being drowned out by light, then the region in question should be brighter. But it's darker. At the bottom of the left image, there is, in fact, an area where the light green is nearly drowned out by foreground activity. And it's brighter, not darker.

If we happened to run that same image say a week later, it would be easy to spot the same limb darkening feature.

Click to expand...

Your speculation about what another picture might look like is NOT evidence.

It's only because there is so much activity and light from in front of that limb that it makes it so difficult to observe.

Click to expand...

Again, the sort of light that makes the image darker?

If however you look at my blog, I selected three different points around the clock that all show the same 4800Km gap between the bottom of the chromosphere and the limb darkened areas.

Click to expand...

Those locations do not explain the 50 deg segment of the limb that lacks the green band.

Actually some parts are "ruffled up" quite a bit, particularly around the left side where the flare/CME is occurring.

Click to expand...

No. The thing that you think is the bottom of the chromasphere is perfectly smooth over the entire 360 deg, including the region under the big flare.

Michael Mozina said:

In any war, or on any battlefield, “strategy” is everything. Sun Tzu would absolutely disapprove of me playing into your collective mathematical strengths.

Click to expand...

Wow. Just wow. When I originally posted that, it never occurred to me that you would actually defend ignorance of mathematics and physics as being a virtue when it comes to understanding the universe.

GeeMack said:

Yes. We've discovered that Jupiter has a solid iron surface!

​

...

Click to expand...

That explains the big spot of rust.