Math Bunnies
We notice throughout this, and all other conversations that Mozina takes part in, a sincerely derisive tone, and curt dismissal, whenever the word "math", or anything synonymous with it, appears in the conversation. This attitude is simply stupid. The reality is that physics & math are synonymous in any meaningful application, and most certainly they are synonymous in the context of this discussion. One cannot do meaningful physics without math; no math, no physics, end of story. Mozina constantly claims to fully understand the true workings of the sun, but it is in fact Mozina who, without any question,
always ignores the physics entirely. Everyone reading this must clearly understand that while Mozina claims to understand the physics of the sun, he in fact
ignores the physics entirely, and does so always, in all cases. You can see this clearly just by following what he says and how he says it. Just ask yourself, "Where's the physics?" Understanding the sun, or any other star, requires a significant level of understanding of physics, and anyone who does not understand physics does not understand the sun, vociferous claims to the contrary not withstanding. Mozina in fact does not understand physics, math, or the sun.
Image Bunnies
Since bunnies seems to be a popular metaphor, I'll keep the title. Of course we can all
see the same image, and indeed the green places and the red places & etc. are there for everyone to see. However, interpreting the physical significance of what you see is quite another thing. In this case, the interpretation Mozina give is
nothing but imagination, with nary a shred of physics, or any other science in sight. I have been involved in the analysis and interpretation of astronomical imagery for many years. The group I worked with at
JPL devised a new algorithm for enhancing the resolution of astronomical images by compressing the point spread function using fast Fourier transforms. The method has the advantage of being very fast by comparison with other methods, but you do have to watch out for artifacts. Still, all things considered, it has been something of a success so far (see
Velusamy, et al., 2008;
Backus, et al., 2005;
Stapelfeldt, et al., 2004). I know something about scientific image analysis, and I dare say I know far more about the topic than does Mozina.
There are basically two kinds of images that scientists in general, and astronomers in particular, deal with:
science images and
publicity images, the latter commonly called
PR images, short for "public relations". A science image is a picture often does not look like much, but is a visual image made directly from science data, usually the intensity at a given wavelength, or in a given wavelength band, as recorded by the observing instrument, but by no means limited to that. Scientists do look at the images, and can learn quite a bit by doing that, but image analysis is
never done by looking at a picture. It is done by examining in great detail (using mathematics I might add) the digital information used to create the picture. That digital data is the image. That's an important distinction to make: The picture you look at with your eye is
never the science image, but rather the digital data from which that picture is made is
always the science image (this is the case in my discipline of digital astronomical image analysis). On the other hand, a PR image, while based on science image data, is created by artists for the specific purpose of looking good and attracting attention. The PR image is divorced from the underlying science data, except for whatever the caption might tell you. Usually a color vs wavelength guide is given, but the intensity scale is unknown, and the color scheme & stretch are designed to please the eye, not relay information. A PR image is, in short, a propaganda instrument for the program that published it, and must be clearly understood as nothing more than that.
Now pay close attention to what Mozina does: He looks at the pictures. That's
all he ever does. Look at his posted messages. Where does he ever do anything except look at the propaganda pictures, the PR images, with his own eyeballs? He does not even deal with science images, but only with PR images, better known as "pretty pictures".
That's all he ever does. All of his allegedly "scientific" arguments stem from his looking at a "pretty picture", and interpreting what he sees strictly in terms of what he assumes in advance must be there. Real scientists study the images carefully and let the image tell them what's there. Mozina looks at the picture ans tells it what it must be. You don't need me to tell you this, you can watch him do it right here in front of you.
All of Mozina's "iron sun" ideas are the product of his imagination, and
his imagination only. There is not one shred of valid science to be found anywhere in all of Mozina's posts. Nothing but "it must be so because I say it must be so". You don't need me to tell you that either, just read his posts and see for yourself. For instance ...
How does one look at this image (
SDO Full Disk Image) and
know that what he is seeing is "the delineation between the photosphere and chromosphere"? The answer is that one does not know any such thing, and neither does Mozina. He assumes that's what it is, because that's what he wants it to be. There is no other reason, none at all. Look at the pictures yourself. How would you know? What makes him think he knows?
So ask yourself, is this the intelligent way to study the sun? Is this the intelligent way to determine the temperature structure of the solar atmosphere? Remember, that's exactly what Mozina is doing. He is looking at the PR picture and deciding that the transition region is below the photosphere, and that extreme ultraviolet emission comes from below the photosphere. He is ignoring the direct observations of the temperature structure that are available, from instruments designed specifically for that purpose, and instead substituting his own subjective interpretation of the colors in a PR image in their place. Science data would appear to be neither of interest or of use to Mozina, since he ignores it relentlessly.
You, the reader, can decide for yourself who and/or what you think. But I will tell you for myself that the Mozina "iron sun" hypothesis has no scientific value at all, How he can waste so much of his life on such a relentlessly stupid idea is far beyond my comprehension. I may be a mad scientist, but I am not that insane (yet).
!) and predicts absolutley nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 50 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
