Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
GeeMack said:
Here's the word straight from NASA. When they map the color values, the behavior of the pixels outside the limb is treated differently than the portion of the image over the disk. A gradient filter is applied to the image so the off-disk area will be enhanced to bring out details. That filter causes a discontinuity at the apparent limb because of a slight inequality of the radius of the filter and the solar image.

[qimg]http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/1843/sdoapodcolorcomp.jpg[/qimg]​

The green line is there because of the processing. In this image, which I sent along with my communication in order to get a definitive reply, you see arrow "A" pointing to the edge of the filter applied in the image processing software. The arrow "B" is pointing to what amounts to the actual limb of the Sun. The apparent roughness of that "B" edge is due to the emissions picked up by the three filters used to make the composite, all of which are coming from above the photosphere.
Click to expand...
That should terminate this entire contretemps.

Thanks, GeeMack.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
That should terminate this entire contretemps.

Thanks, GeeMack.
Click to expand...

Oh no. I made a very specific "prediction" about that region in question as it relates to RD images. *IF* and only if you can falsify that prediction will that terminate anything. I never claimed one image was definitive, but I did tell you *EXACTLY* how to find the borders of the surface in Birkeland's solar model. If it doesn't show up in the RD images right along that same limb darkened region, then I'll switch positions. I'd sure like to hear some of you commit to switching positions if I am correct.
 
GeeMack said:
I have contacted the SDO science team at NASA and have received word back on the image that occupied pretty much all of Michael's attention for the past week. Since he first started crowing about his discovery, over a thousand posts have gone by. During that time Michael has been insulting, belligerent, ignorant of relevant questions, badgering, uncivil, and treated pretty much everyone in this discussion like crap.

Here's the word straight from NASA. When they map the color values, the behavior of the pixels outside the limb is treated differently than the portion of the image over the disk. A gradient filter is applied to the image so the off-disk area will be enhanced to bring out details. That filter causes a discontinuity at the apparent limb because of a slight inequality of the radius of the filter and the solar image.


The green line is there because of the processing. In this image, which I sent along with my communication in order to get a definitive reply, you see arrow "A" pointing to the edge of the filter applied in the image processing software. The arrow "B" is pointing to what amounts to the actual limb of the Sun. The apparent roughness of that "B" edge is due to the emissions picked up by the three filters used to make the composite, all of which are coming from above the photosphere.

A week of Michael's uncivil tantrums, bullying, whining, taunting, and complaining. Over a thousand posts exchanged. And the SDO science program at NASA says Michael is wrong.
Click to expand...
Thanks GeeMack for resolving the issue.
I was wondering why that edge was so rough. I was thinking that it should be as smooth as the surface of the photosphere. I forgot that it was because the emissions were coming from above the photosphere.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Oh no. I made a very specific "prediction" about that region in question as it relates to RD images. *IF* and only if you can falsify that prediction will that terminate anything. I never claimed one image was definitive, but I did tell you *EXACTLY* how to find the borders of the surface in Birkeland's solar model. If it doesn't show up in the RD images right along that same limb darkened region, then I'll switch positions. I'd sure like to hear some of you commit to switching positions if I am correct.
Click to expand...

The reason you made the prediction has been shown to be bunk. Why are you still holding to it? The only justification you had for saying it is gone.
 
Perpetual Student said:
Great Job, GeeMack!
Isn't it amazing that anyone could think he could make new scientific discoveries by looking at pictures and not having any idea of the processing involved? When such "scientific discoveries" contradict mainstream science, it is even more astonishing that anyone would be so foolish!
Click to expand...

Just remember who told you how to find the disk and where you would find it in the RD images. That limb darkened region is the surface, and that is why I've been harping on the RD images. In order to be absolutely certain, someone needs to run long cadence RD images to see if they align themselves with that limb darkened region. I don't have access to that kind of data (yet) but someone inside NASA and LMSAL must be able to do that. It can be anyone except GM.
 
Michael Mozina said:
I never claimed one image was definitive
Click to expand...

*CHOKE*

Wh...what?

So those three or four pages of you claiming over and over that the standard solar model was done, on the ropes, finished, etc, etc, etc...all surrounded by an enormous amount of gloating, was someone else using your account?

I guess history is whatever you imagine it to be, huh?
 
Michael Mozina said:
... Birkeland's solar model.....
Click to expand...
And the stupidity of defaming of Birkeland's good name continues :jaw-dropp !

Michael Mozina,
Birkeland was a more than competent scientist. He certainly knew about the laws of thermodynamics and would understand that a ~6000 K photosphere rules out an iron crust below the photosphere.
I suspect that he would be appalled at you attributing any part of your fantasy* to him. Especially since you cannot even read his book:
  1. Where is the solar model that predicts the SDO images in Birkeland's book? (really a follow on to questions dating from July 2009)
  2. Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkeland's book?
  3. Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source"
  4. 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).
  5. Is Saturn the Sun?
* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
That should terminate this entire contretemps.

Thanks, GeeMack.
Click to expand...

Michael Mozina said:
Oh no. I made a very specific "prediction" about that region in question as it relates to RD images. *IF* and only if you can falsify that prediction will that terminate anything. I never claimed one image was definitive, but I did tell you *EXACTLY* how to find the borders of the surface in Birkeland's solar model. If it doesn't show up in the RD images right along that same limb darkened region, then I'll switch positions. I'd sure like to hear some of you commit to switching positions if I am correct.
Click to expand...
You should learn the difference between "should" and "will".
 
Hellbound said:
*CHOKE*

Wh...what?

So those three or four pages of you claiming over and over that the standard solar model was done, on the ropes, finished, etc, etc, etc...all surrounded by an enormous amount of gloating, was someone else using your account?

I guess history is whatever you imagine it to be, huh?
Click to expand...

Have you ever sat down and counted all the images on my website? I haven't. I know it's more than one. I have heliosiesmology data galore. I have SERTS data, I have tons of other pieces of supporting data. The whole point of me predicting the outcome of the RD images is to remove all doubt about the nature of that limb. If it's the surface, the the edge of the RD disk will appear at that location. If it is not the surface, then edge of the RD disk will appear in the red. It's as simple as that.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Oh no. I made a very specific "prediction" about that region in question as it relates to RD images.
Click to expand...


You made a "specific prediction" about that SDO image itself. You counted the pixels and stated unequivocally that the offset between the actual limb and the gradient filter somehow showed your fictional solid surface. Any argument you make to the contrary is a lie.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Have you ever sat down and counted all the images on my website? I haven't. I know it's more than one. I have heliosiesmology data galore. I have SERTS data, I have tons of other pieces of supporting data. The whole point of me predicting the outcome of the RD images is to remove all doubt about the nature of that limb. If it's the surface, the the edge of the RD disk will appear at that location. If it is not the surface, then edge of the RD disk will appear in the red. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...


Your "specific prediction" was about that SDO image itself. You counted the pixels and stated unequivocally that the offset between the actual limb and the gradient filter somehow showed your fictional solid surface. Any argument you make to the contrary is a lie.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Have you ever sat down and counted all the images on my website? I haven't. I know it's more than one. I have heliosiesmology data galore. I have SERTS data, I have tons of other pieces of supporting data. The whole point of me predicting the outcome of the RD images is to remove all doubt about the nature of that limb. If it's the surface, the the edge of the RD disk will appear at that location. If it is not the surface, then edge of the RD disk will appear in the red. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...

Well, if all of them were as well analyzed as the SDO and RD images you've shown here, then we can safely discount them.
 
Michael Mozina said:
If so, one long long cadence RD image at 171A aligned with the chromosphere should demonstrate that. If I'm right the edges of the RD image will align themselves with that limb darkened regions right under that glow in the dark photosphere. :)
Click to expand...


Your claim about the location of the photosphere has been shown to be wrong. Any argument you continue to make that contradicts that is a lie.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Oh, I already admit the one image is not definitive proof of either position at the moment. That was my whole point of predicting the outcome of the RD images at different iron ion wavelengths and predicting the color schemes, etc. We'll need more than one image to get a definitive answer. I just claimed Birkeland's solar model passed the first test and offered a 2nd more definitive test that might help us decide.
Click to expand...

First, I asked if you would agree that the SDO image doesn't provide support for the 4800 km layer of transparent neon. I was looking for a 'yes' or 'no,' I explicitly didn't ask you whether it disproved your conjectures, so your entire response is, well, nonresponsive.

Second, for the "I already admit the one image is not definitive proof" - how do you reconcile that with:

"Lo and behold however the first light SDO images demonstrate that your opaque math bunny is dead . . . I *NAILED* that 4800 Km figure! Your theory *FAILED* it's first critical observational test, and the "impossible" showed up in living color that is directly related to the iron line color scheme. The SSM is dead. "

(from post 2631)
 
Last edited:
Hellbound said:
Well, if all of them were as well analyzed as the SDO and RD images you've shown here, then we can safely discount them.
Click to expand...

Oh, you can discount them all you like but you can't change the outcome of that RD test I suggested. Time is on my side. The fact I see any light there at all was the key. If I was wrong, it would have been definite in that image. The horizon line would not be that smooth and consistent over the whole disk.
 
Oddly enough, this shows perfectly that one of my earlier posts i nthis thread was right on target.

MM did not do ANYTHING to verify his "findings" in the SDO image. NO effort was made to consider any alternative explanation, to rule out any experimental error..heck, he didn't even confirm the accuracy of the data he was using to prove his point.

The "science" MM does is like someone sitting in a windowless room. Every now and then a picture or a page of numbers is slipped under the door, at which point he considers it until he finds out how he can interpret it to fit his theory...regardless of the num ber of contortions and exceptions to the laws of physics that requires.

This is not science.
 
Can you understand that the disk radius in RD images depends on solar activity

Michael Mozina said:
Just remember who told you how to find the disk and where you would find it in the RD images. That limb darkened region is the surface, and that is why I've been harping on the RD images.
Click to expand...
I will address this part of your fantasy*.
It is not news to astronomers that RD images of the Sun show disks. It may be new to you.

First asked 4 May 2010
Michael Mozina,
Can you understand that the disk radius in RD images depends on solar activity?

The edge of the disk is a record of the changes in the original images. Where there are no changes there is no edge. Where there are changes there is an edge.
Thus a quiet Sun = a small radius, an active Sun = a bigger radius.

There is no "limb darkened region" in RD images. Limb darkening is constant in the original images and the RD process removes it.

If you are talking about a ""limb darkened region" in the SDO image then you are wrong: It is a processing artifact.


If you are talking about ordinary limb darkening then this disproves your iron crust fantasy*
* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
dasmiller said:
First, I asked if you would agree that the SDO image doesn't provide support for the 4800 km layer of transparent neon. I was looking for a 'yes' or 'no,' I explicitly didn't ask you whether it disproved your conjectures, so your entire response is, well, nonresponsive.

Second, for the "I already admit the one image is not definitive proof" - how do you reconcile that with:

"Lo and behold however the first light SDO images demonstrate that your opaque math bunny is dead . . . I *NAILED* that 4800 Km figure! Your theory *FAILED* it's first critical observational test, and the "impossible" showed up in living color that is directly related to the iron line color scheme. The SSM is dead. "

(from post 2631)
Click to expand...

The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.

When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.

If that limb lightened region wasn't relatively smooth, and had not worked out to the same number I got from Kosovichev, I would have a lot less confidence in the image. As it stands, I've been through the MDI images now on SDO. I"ve been through every single image I can get my hands on in fact. I'm sure now I'm right and that is why I predict the outcome of that RD images and and predict that same disk in both 171A and FeXX. The FeXX looks the most interesting to me personally and that's the one I would do first, but I need to compare the 171A LMSAL image to the SDO data eventually, so I'd do one at 171A too. I did my own RD images and looked at them very closely. I know the outcome.
 
Michael Mozina said:
If so, one long long cadence RD image at 171A aligned with the chromosphere should demonstrate that. If I'm right the edges of the RD image will align themselves with that limb darkened regions right under that glow in the dark photosphere. :)
Click to expand...
You mean that glow in the dark photosphere that is a processing artifact producing a glow in the chromosphere in the one image :jaw-dropp ?

In that case you are so wrong that it deserves a ....
:dl:​
 
Hellbound said:
Oddly enough, this shows perfectly that one of my earlier posts i nthis thread was right on target.

MM did not do ANYTHING to verify his "findings" in the SDO image. NO effort was made to consider any alternative explanation, to rule out any experimental error..heck, he didn't even confirm the accuracy of the data he was using to prove his point.
Click to expand...

Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number. I tried lots of stuff to "rule out" other options, including making up my own homegrown RD images. I have no doubt about the outcome of the "test" I have suggested. One test will confirm the accuracy of my prediction, one simple test.
 
Too funny.

How many pages of victory declarations have we had to wade through based on this image?

You are one in a million, Michael.
 
Michael Mozina said:
The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.
Click to expand...
Michale. Its explicitly clear from that quote you thought it was the SDO image that nailed. No amount of backtracking is gonna remove what's in print. Your unwarranted arrogance has come back to haunt you.

When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.
Click to expand...
Ok Michael. If a value is said to be 18 +- 3 with a one sigma, Gaussian error, how certain would you say you are the true value lies between 15 and 21?
 
D'rok said:
Too funny.

How many pages of victory declarations have we had to wade through based on this image?

You are one in a million, Michael.
Click to expand...

I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images. That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.
 
Where are your calculations that the SDO artifact has a width of *EXACTLY* 4800 km

Michael Mozina said:
The 4800Km figure is what "nails" it. I got that number from Kosovichev's heliosiesmology studies of sunspot activity. I picked the point where the mass flow turned horizontal in line with the concept of "current flow" through the crust.
Click to expand...
You picked the point where the mass flow flows right through your iron crust fantasy*.

Michael Mozina said:
When I worked myself methodically around that limb I found it works out to *EXACTLY* (including the error bars and all) to the number I got from Kosovichev's data.
Click to expand...
You have never shown any of these calculations but initially you stated that the SDO image processing artifact had a width of ~78,000 kilometers.

First asked 4 May 2010
Michael Mozina,
Where are your calculations that the SDO artifact has a width of *EXACTLY* 4800 kilometers?

Are your error bars +/-75,000 kilometers to include your inital calculation?

* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 60 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
Last edited:
Tubbythin said:
Michale. Its explicitly clear from that quote you thought it was the SDO image that nailed. No amount of backtracking is gonna remove what's in print. Your unwarranted arrogance has come back to haunt you.
Click to expand...

It's only going to haunt me if it fails the next critical RD test.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number. I tried lots of stuff to "rule out" other options, including making up my own homegrown RD images. I have no doubt about the outcome of the "test" I have suggested. One test will confirm the accuracy of my prediction, one simple test.
Click to expand...

Visual confirmation that turned out to be completely, totally and utterly wrong.
 
dasmiller said:
Second, for the "I already admit the one image is not definitive proof" - how do you reconcile that with:

"Lo and behold however the first light SDO images demonstrate that your opaque math bunny is dead . . . I *NAILED* that 4800 Km figure! Your theory *FAILED* it's first critical observational test, and the "impossible" showed up in living color that is directly related to the iron line color scheme. The SSM is dead. "

(from post 2631)
Click to expand...

Ouch.
 
Michael Mozina said:
I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images.
Click to expand...
Of that, no one has any doubt. Too bad you were a little too eager to find it.
That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.
Click to expand...
But now that you realize that you were diligently counting pixels in a processing artifact, you will admit your error and retract your claims, yes?
 
Michael Mozina said:
How about you RC? You've heard GM's comments. Care to pony up some numbers for us and bet your public position on the outcome of the test I suggested?
Click to expand...
Given your track record, there is no point.

Are you aware that you are displaying the symptoms of a crank?
Not realizing that they have to defend their fantasy* by actually doing some work. They usually try to get other people to do their work for them. They typically ignore the results and then expect other people not to notice this.
Michael Mozina did this with his constant shifting of the goalposts for sol victus's optical depth calculation. And he is deluded enough to think that this behavior will encourage other people to do he work for him, e.g.
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Since you seem to disagree with my numbers and methods, put your own numbers on the table and ante up your public position. If you won't do that RC, you are not even in the game! Ante up.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Michael Mozina said:
It's only going to haunt me if it fails the next critical RD test.
Click to expand...

Well if I'd acted so arrogantly and been shown I was embarrasingly wrong I'd be hanging my head in shame. I guess some don't have any though.

Are you going to answer my errors question?
 
D'rok said:
Of that, no one has any doubt. Too bad you were a little too eager to find it.But now that you realize that you were diligently counting pixels in a processing artifact, you will admit your error and retract your claims, yes?
Click to expand...

I know it's hard to understand but that particular band was *THE* single most important "prediction" of a Birkeland solar model. There isn't a single more important prediction I could offer you. If it failed that test, it was all over. Since it did not fail that test, we can proceed to the RD phase and find out if it's a surface or a image artifact. First I needed to know the numbers and they are good.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Huh? I have been harping on that 4800 Km figure for *years* now. SDO simply provided me with the visual confirmation of that number.
Click to expand...


The visual confirmation you got from the SDO image was a gradient filter intentionally added to the image with a piece of software.

:dl:​

And you still haven't even tried to find some of the other pixel counting mistakes you've made. But give it a whirl. Since I have some expertise in image processing, I'll be glad to give you a couple of pointers, but you'll have to get started on your own.
 
Will you yank down your web site as promised after your prediction failed

Michael Mozina said:
I've been at this for five years now D'rok. I knew *exactly* what I was looking for in the images. That's the image I needed. If there had been no smooth limb darkening right where I predicted it, I would have yanked down my website in a heartbeat. The fact it matches Kosovichev's numbers perfectly means it can only be Birkeland's surface. One test is all it's going to take and I even clearly explained how to go about it.
Click to expand...

First asked 4 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
It looks like somewhere, sometime you predicted that the SDO image would have a "smooth limb darkening" even before seeing it. Maybe even before SDO was launched!
But that prediction has failed since the "green line" in that image has been stated to be a processing artifact by the NASA SDO team.
And you have promised to yank "down my website in a heartbeat".

Will you yank down your web site as promised after your prediction failed?
 
Tubbythin said:
Well if I'd acted so arrogantly and been shown I was embarrasingly wrong I'd be hanging my head in shame. I guess some don't have any though.

Are you going to answer my errors question?
Click to expand...

I've been at this so long now it's not arrogance from my perspective, it's confidence. I've seen this model pass test after test after test that I have personally put it through in my search for internet images. I've poked through the heliosmology data looking for clues. I've been everywhere around the world on the web looking for the images I knew that I "should" find it this model had validity. Now that I've seen the first light of the SDO images, and I see that smooth ridge that works out to 4800Km +-1200, right where I thought I'd find it, I don't have any more doubts. Why do you think I've been after GM's scalp so hot and heavy? :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom