Recovered: Iron Sun Theories

[bboyer]

Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michael Mozina"

http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg
http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg

Here's an example of an event that I believe is volcanic in origin.

If you watch the first video on the 15th's and notice the area just the left of center and just above the equator, you'll see a bright area start to develop at the end of that day. If you then watch the following day's images, that region becomes highly electrically active. Prior to the flare up, the surface area in that region is reasonable quiet. Once the eruption begins however, the volcanic process sets off an atmospheric discharge event that grows rather dramatically in the span of just a few hours. I believe that these types of flare up are due to the spewing of ash and magma into the solar atmosphere.

[bboyer]

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:09 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "upriver"

http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg
http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg

Here's an example of an event that I believe is volcanic in origin.

If you watch the first video on the 15th's and notice the area just the left of center and just above the equator, you'll see a bright area start to develop at the end of that day. If you then watch the following day's images, that region becomes highly electrically active. Prior to the flare up, the surface area in that region is reasonable quiet. Once the eruption begins however, the volcanic process sets off an atmospheric discharge event that grows rather dramatically in the span of just a few hours. I believe that these types of flare up are due to the spewing of ash and magma into the solar atmosphere.

They were talking nickel and sulfur ions.

We both agree that electrical processes take place on the sun.
We both agree that the surface is iron.

So if electrons are leaving that surface, it is thermionic emission like in a vacuum tube, and its associated processes.

Nuclei of iron have some of the highest binding energies per nucleon, surpassed only by the nickel isotope 62Ni. The universally most abundant of the highly stable nuclides is, however, 56Fe.

"its core nuclear burning progressed beyond helium (He) fusion. After acquiring fusing much of its helium into carbon (C) and oxygen (O) "ash," the core contracted and heated to even higher temperatures until its carbon and oxygen ignited. Their fusion yielded such elements as neon (Ne), magnesium (Mg), silicon (Si), and sulfur (S). Eventually, core silicon and sulfur ignited to form iron, nickel, and other elements of similar atomic weight, so that the star's internal structure resembled an onion, which deeper shells burning heavier elements, until a central core of iron is created."

So there is the mainstream fusion chain, this can happen in a pinch of high enough energy......

So when iron is made you would expect some nickel and sulfur to be in there.

So now, when an active area lights up, what is happening?
There is a current flow from the surface into the plasma, as this happens the surface heats up like an electrode with too much current flowing through it.
As it does this, in true EU fashion you get "electrical discharge machining" on a massive scale(too much current in your filament), just as Birkeland described in his experiments, at the loop footprints. This ionization of the surface in an active area leads to a rise in sulfur and nickel ions.

A paper on iron-sulfur-nickel system.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/c52 ... lltext.pdf

Formation of iron-sulfur clusters in bacteria: an emerging field in bioinorganic chemistry.
Frazzon J, Dean DR.

Department of Food Sciences, ICTA, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Allegre, RS, 91051-970, Brazil. 12472689@vortex.ufrgs.br

Biological iron-sulfur clusters are chemically versatile inorganic structures that are attached to many proteins. These clusters are intimately involved in the functions of their partner proteins and they are required to sustain life on earth. Recent work has demonstrated that, in spite of their simple structures, the assembly and insertion of iron-sulfur clusters into their protein partners is a complex biological process. This complexity is probably related to the cellular toxicity of iron and sulfur in their free forms.

PMID: 12714048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

_________________
Ron Paul Forum.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

SOS Save Our Science.

[bboyer]

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:50 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michael Mozina"

http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg
http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil/daily_mpg ... it_195.mpg

Here's an example of an event that I believe is volcanic in origin.

If you watch the first video on the 15th's and notice the area just the left of center and just above the equator, you'll see a bright area start to develop at the end of that day. If you then watch the following day's images, that region becomes highly electrically active. Prior to the flare up, the surface area in that region is reasonable quiet. Once the eruption begins however, the volcanic process sets off an atmospheric discharge event that grows rather dramatically in the span of just a few hours. I believe that these types of flare up are due to the spewing of ash and magma into the solar atmosphere.

They were talking nickel and sulfur ions.

We both agree that electrical processes take place on the sun.
We both agree that the surface is iron.

So if electrons are leaving that surface, it is thermionic emission like in a vacuum tube, and its associated processes.

Nuclei of iron have some of the highest binding energies per nucleon, surpassed only by the nickel isotope 62Ni. The universally most abundant of the highly stable nuclides is, however, 56Fe.

"its core nuclear burning progressed beyond helium (He) fusion. After acquiring fusing much of its helium into carbon (C) and oxygen (O) "ash," the core contracted and heated to even higher temperatures until its carbon and oxygen ignited. Their fusion yielded such elements as neon (Ne), magnesium (Mg), silicon (Si), and sulfur (S). Eventually, core silicon and sulfur ignited to form iron, nickel, and other elements of similar atomic weight, so that the star's internal structure resembled an onion, which deeper shells burning heavier elements, until a central core of iron is created."

So there is the mainstream fusion chain, this can happen in a pinch of high enough energy......

So when iron is made you would expect some nickel and sulfur to be in there.

So now, when an active area lights up, what is happening?
There is a current flow from the surface into the plasma, as this happens the surface heats up like an electrode with too much current flowing through it.
As it does this, in true EU fashion you get "electrical discharge machining" on a massive scale(too much current in your filament), just as Birkeland described in his experiments, at the loop footprints. This ionization of the surface in an active area leads to a rise in sulfur and nickel ions.

A paper on iron-sulfur-nickel system.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/c52 ... lltext.pdf

Formation of iron-sulfur clusters in bacteria: an emerging field in bioinorganic chemistry.
Frazzon J, Dean DR.

Department of Food Sciences, ICTA, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Allegre, RS, 91051-970, Brazil. 12472689@vortex.ufrgs.br

Biological iron-sulfur clusters are chemically versatile inorganic structures that are attached to many proteins. These clusters are intimately involved in the functions of their partner proteins and they are required to sustain life on earth. Recent work has demonstrated that, in spite of their simple structures, the assembly and insertion of iron-sulfur clusters into their protein partners is a complex biological process. This complexity is probably related to the cellular toxicity of iron and sulfur in their free forms.

PMID: 12714048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

It's pretty clear to me that the stratification subsurface is more dense than the plasma of the solar atmosphere. That much does not seem to be very debatable IMO. The only real issue here is whether that dense layer is made of a more dense plasma or it's a solid crust. The lifetime of the "structures" in that stratification subsurface, though long by photosphere standards, is not very long compared to planetary crust standards. Either it's very volcanic and very electrically eroded over time, or it's just a more dense layer of plasma that change over time.

The presence of sulfur in the atmosphere could be considered evidence of volcanic activity, but as you point out, it could also be at least partially due to some kind of fusion process in the solar atmosphere. It could even be due to a combination of both volcanic activity and fusion for that matter.

From the SERTS data alone, we couldn't really be sure which process(es) are responsible for the sulfur, all we can do is note that sulfur is more common during the active phases.

Here's were some other images would really be handy. I pointed out Kosovichev's green video that shows an upwelling of heavier material that seems to "flow back down" along the sides of what appears to be a structure that sits at a higher elevation, and the material slides down along the sides. It's also possible to "interpret" that image from a purely plasma orientation however, and suggest you simply are looking at a central flow point (like a sunspot) in a more dense layer and it flows outward just as material flows outward once it reaches the top of a sunspot. That one image is therefore not decisive.

In my case, it's been a series of images that make me lean toward a solid surface with volcanic activity, not a single image. I need to post a few more images so you see what I mean. One solar "phenomenon" that pushes me toward volcanic activity is the observed "outbreak" of high electrical activity at a localized area of the surface. Here on Earth, when there is a large volcanic event, it typically involves discharges in the upper Earth's atmosphere as the ash and the other material are ejected into the atmosphere. I think that is the same process we observe in these massively electrically active areas that pop up out of nowhere and suddenly become highly electrically active.

The "SeaHorse" flare is also an image that I think would be worth looking at again. It seems to show a high temperature "magma' that cools down over time. It can't really explain the jagged edges of that "structure" in terms of plasma, whereas I can explain that kind of jagged outline in a solid crust that has fractured along weak points.

It's really been a series of images that have led me to conclude that the structures at .995R are solid rather than plasma, but IMO this is still an issue of debate, and even I realize it's an issue of debate. I've personally tried to stay fairly neutral and entertain both options, but I do tend to lean toward a solid volcanic surface rather than the sun being composed of a series of concentric plasma layers.

Last edited by Michael Mozina on Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:34 am; edited 1 time in total

[bboyer]

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:28 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Mo"

If the surface of the Sun was solid, and there were volcanos,
would not electrical activity continually occur at such locations ?
Mo

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:07 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "redeye"

Shouldn't the sun be under immense tidal stress through it's satellites?

It seems like this would be more pronounced with a solid surface rather than a plasma.

I agree with Earl's point. It would be interesting to see if these "volcanoes" align to the planets in any way. Perhaps supplying the electric current for those magnetic ropey things Nasa have discovered between the Earth and the Sun!

It would also be interesting to see if there were any corresponding antipodal effects related to these "volcanoes".

Cheers!
_________________
And now you see the light. Stand up for your right!
B. Marley

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:21 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michael Mozina"

If the surface of the Sun was solid, and there were volcanos,
would not electrical activity continually occur at such locations ?
Mo

Yes, they would, and I think they do, which is why I posted those SOHO 195A images earlier. There are frequent large "outbursts" (I don't know what else to call them) of electrical solar activity on the surface. IMO these represent areas where volcanic activity is taking place, and the magma is being ionized in the atmosphere.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:26 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michael Mozina"

Shouldn't the sun be under immense tidal stress through it's satellites?

It seems like this would be more pronounced with a solid surface rather than a plasma.

I agree with Earl's point. It would be interesting to see if these "volcanoes" align to the planets in any way. Perhaps supplying the electric current for those magnetic ropey things Nasa have discovered between the Earth and the Sun!

It would also be interesting to see if there were any corresponding antipodal effects related to these "volcanoes".

Cheers!

Thus far I've not stumbled upon any particular planetary alignment that seems to be related to these high energy (sudden) discharge events. There seem to be more of them during the solar maximum part of the cycle, but I've not seen any particular alignment of planets that seems to trigger them.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:13 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "upriver"

If the surface of the Sun was solid, and there were volcanos,
would not electrical activity continually occur at such locations ?
Mo

Yes, they would, and I think they do, which is why I posted those SOHO 195A images earlier. There are frequent large "outbursts" (I don't know what else to call them) of electrical solar activity on the surface. IMO these represent areas where volcanic activity is taking place, and the magma is being ionized in the atmosphere.

Assuming a solid iron surface, the sun is operating in abnormal glow mode.
This is where the plasma(gas) pressure and voltage are such that the arcs (coronal loops, etc) are spontaneous, transitory, and self extinguishing.

"Child's Law"
Consider a planar interface between a "metal" (x < 0) and "vacuum" (x greater than 0)". Electrons form a cloud of escaped electrons surrounding the hot metal filament (called the cathode, which we take to be at zero potential). Thus the "vacuum" adjacent to the metal is not empty, rather it is filled with electrons (with number density n(x)|i.e., a space charge).
A positive potential, VA, on the anode plane located at x = b provides a force pulling these electrons from the vicinity of the cathode towards the anode. The negatively charged electrons moving to the right constitute a steady electric current density to the left, i.e., a steady electric current from the anode to the cathode: J = -en(x)v(x) = -JA (4.2) where v(x) is the electron velocity. Since the electrons leave the metal with (nearly) zero speed at zero potential,...."
http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/370/thermionic.pdf

This would explain your observation of ionization above the surface.
It would also explain the photosphere's distance from the surface.
As the electrons leave the surface at "zero" velocity, they accelerate.
At some point they have enough energy to ionize elements at a certain energy level(distance from the surface), as opposed to just dragging "blobs" of material along.

Thermionic emission. Electrons leaving a hot metal surface. Think of the sun as exactly in Birkelands experiments, a metal cathode.
As the current flow increases, the surface heats up and pieces of it flow upward with the electron stream.
_________________
Ron Paul Forum.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

SOS Save Our Science.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:16 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Mo"

Yes, they would, and I think they do, which is why I posted those SOHO 195A images earlier. There are frequent large "outbursts" (I don't know what else to call them) of electrical solar activity on the surface. IMO these represent areas where volcanic activity is taking place, and the magma is being ionized in the atmosphere. MM
But is there evidence that these places of 'outburst' are
permanent spots ? ie when the Sun comes around again
the same spot on the surface outbursts ?
Mo

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "upriver"

So do the periodic oscillations of the sun come from the fact that iron is magnetostrictive?
_________________
Ron Paul Forum.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

SOS Save Our Science.

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "lk"

My Questions Below.
[1]:

It's pretty clear to me that the stratification subsurface is more dense than the plasma of the solar atmosphere. That much does not seem to be very debatable IMO. The only real issue here is whether that dense layer is made of a more dense plasma or it's a solid crust. The lifetime of the "structures" in that stratification subsurface, though long by photosphere standards, is not very long compared to planetary crust standards. Either it's very volcanic and very electrically eroded over time, or it's just a more dense layer of plasma that change over time.

[2]:

The presence of sulfur in the atmosphere could be considered evidence of volcanic activity

[3]:

It's really been a series of images that have led me to conclude that the structures at .995R are solid rather than plasma

- Re [1], at http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=x50hfzxa Thornhill said:
- The simplest way to explain stellar flattening due to swift rotation would be if the star were more homogeneous in density.
- The second serious challenge to the standard solar model comes from solar oscillations. In the 1970’s, the Sun was unexpectedly found to ring like a bell. In 1976 Severny, Kotov & Tsap discovered a dominant 160-minute ringing mode of the Sun. They wrote, "The simplest interpretation is that we observed purely radial pulsations. The most striking fact is that the observed period is almost precisely... the value if the Sun were to be an homogeneous sphere. ... We have investigated two possible solutions to this dilemma. The first alternative is that nuclear... reactions are not responsible for energy generation in the Sun. Such a conclusion, although rather extravagant, is quite consistent with the observed absence of appreciable neutrino flux from the Sun, and with the observed abundance of Li and Be in the solar atmosphere."
- The result in 1981 was that the original oscillation was found to be the highest peak in the power spectrum, and "one may conclude that 160-min oscillation shows mostly radial motion."
- The question of what is ringing the stellar bell has not been satisfactorily answered. It should be noted that the size of an electric star is determined by the degree of electric stress it suffers. And since the electric Sun forms part of a galactic circuit, it will exhibit resonant effects. The Sun is an electric bell as well as an electric light! It seems particularly significant that the 160-minute oscillation also appears with high statistical significance in the solar intensity, infra-red, radio and radio polarization (connected with the solar magnetic field). All of these effects are to be expected in an electric star model because they are driven by the same resonant electrical power circuit.
- At http://www.holoscience.com/news/puzzle.html Thornhill said:
- The large difference in the weight of the proton, 1836 times heavier than the electron, ensures that in the Sun's strong gravity hydrogen atoms will form weak electric dipoles with their positive poles aimed at the Sun's center. (At temperatures near that of the Sun's surface, hydrogen is only weakly ionized). And since the electric force outguns gravity to the tune of 39 powers of 10, its omission from the Standard Solar model renders that simple gas model unrealistic. The effect of the radially aligned atomic dipoles is to propel free electrons in the plasma toward the Sun's surface, leaving behind an excess of positive charge. As we know, like charges repel, so the interior of the Sun will simply resist compression due to gravity. In other words, the electric force will tend to compensate for gravitational compression and make the Sun more homogeneous, with presumably a small core. In fact, the Sun is about the size expected if its hydrogen were not compressed by gravity! So it is not necessary for an internal nuclear furnace to bloat the Sun to the size we see.
- measuring small solar surface oscillations, or helioseismology, supports a homogeneous model of the Sun [re] In 1976 the discoverers of a dominant 160 minute radial pulsation of the Sun.... ... Meanwhile, most of the complex oscillation overtones have been fitted to Standard Solar models. But that is not surprising given the many degrees of freedom to tweak those mathematical models.

-My Questions & Comments:
- [1]: How can there be stratification, if the sun is largely homogenous according to the evidence of the stellar flattening [egg shape] and the dominant 160 minute oscillation of the sun that Thornhill references?
- [2] Jupiter's moon Io is an icy moon covered with much sulphur, which Thornhill considers to be a product of transmutation of oxygen from the water molecules of ice by the power of the electric currents from Jupiter. The sulphur geysers on Io, mistakenly called volcanoes, move around on Io's surface. I think the sun's sulphur is likely to be from similar geysers, which move around. Could the sun be a ball of water or ice?
- [3] If a thunderstorm is plasma and it can contain gases, liquids and solids [air, water, ice, sand, dust] then could the sun be both solid and plasma? What defines plasma? Does it have to involve flow or fluid motion instead of being rigid? Would the solid portion of Birkeland's terella be considered mere solid? Or could an electrified solid be considered a solid plasma? Or would the plasma just be flowing through the solid structure?

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:44 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michael Mozina"

But is there evidence that these places of 'outburst' are
permanent spots ?

In the sense that we can predict with a high probability that we will observe high energy discharges in 195A images in that same spot after a full rotations, yes. Sunspots however are simply a function of the atmospheric activity above and active region. A region can be moderately active as seen in 195A images of coronal loops, but still not generate an obvious sunspot on the photosphere.

ie when the Sun comes around again
the same spot on the surface outbursts ?
Mo

Yes. In fact a very active region just went over the SOHO horizon recently and I'm certain it will come around again. It's been extremely active now for several rotations.

Keep in mind however that volcanic activity changes the surface features over time, and the electrical errosion processes also tend to change surface features over time. The crust becomes polarized over time and reacts violently as the internal polarization of the spinning core (made of iron/nickel plasma or neutron material) slowly rotates over time inside the shell. The "active" phases of the sun tend to change the surface much more rapidly than during it's quiet phases. It is however a much more dynamically changing surface than the surface of most planets so there are limits on how many comparisons we can make, particularly as it relates to surface structure longevity issues.

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Michaell Mozina"

My Questions Below.
- Michael Mozina said [1]:

It's pretty clear to me that the stratification subsurface is more dense than the plasma of the solar atmosphere. That much does not seem to be very debatable IMO. The only real issue here is whether that dense layer is made of a more dense plasma or it's a solid crust. The lifetime of the "structures" in that stratification subsurface, though long by photosphere standards, is not very long compared to planetary crust standards. Either it's very volcanic and very electrically eroded over time, or it's just a more dense layer of plasma that change over time.

[2]:

The presence of sulfur in the atmosphere could be considered evidence of volcanic activity

[3]:

It's really been a series of images that have led me to conclude that the structures at .995R are solid rather than plasma

- Re [1], at http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=x50hfzxa Thornhill said:
- The simplest way to explain stellar flattening due to swift rotation would be if the star were more homogeneous in density.
- The second serious challenge to the standard solar model comes from solar oscillations. In the 1970’s, the Sun was unexpectedly found to ring like a bell. In 1976 Severny, Kotov & Tsap discovered a dominant 160-minute ringing mode of the Sun. They wrote, "The simplest interpretation is that we observed purely radial pulsations. The most striking fact is that the observed period is almost precisely... the value if the Sun were to be an homogeneous sphere. ... We have investigated two possible solutions to this dilemma. The first alternative is that nuclear... reactions are not responsible for energy generation in the Sun. Such a conclusion, although rather extravagant, is quite consistent with the observed absence of appreciable neutrino flux from the Sun, and with the observed abundance of Li and Be in the solar atmosphere."
- The result in 1981 was that the original oscillation was found to be the highest peak in the power spectrum, and "one may conclude that 160-min oscillation shows mostly radial motion."
- The question of what is ringing the stellar bell has not been satisfactorily answered. It should be noted that the size of an electric star is determined by the degree of electric stress it suffers. And since the electric Sun forms part of a galactic circuit, it will exhibit resonant effects. The Sun is an electric bell as well as an electric light! It seems particularly significant that the 160-minute oscillation also appears with high statistical significance in the solar intensity, infra-red, radio and radio polarization (connected with the solar magnetic field). All of these effects are to be expected in an electric star model because they are driven by the same resonant electrical power circuit.
- At http://www.holoscience.com/news/puzzle.html Thornhill said:
- The large difference in the weight of the proton, 1836 times heavier than the electron, ensures that in the Sun's strong gravity hydrogen atoms will form weak electric dipoles with their positive poles aimed at the Sun's center. (At temperatures near that of the Sun's surface, hydrogen is only weakly ionized). And since the electric force outguns gravity to the tune of 39 powers of 10, its omission from the Standard Solar model renders that simple gas model unrealistic. The effect of the radially aligned atomic dipoles is to propel free electrons in the plasma toward the Sun's surface, leaving behind an excess of positive charge. As we know, like charges repel, so the interior of the Sun will simply resist compression due to gravity. In other words, the electric force will tend to compensate for gravitational compression and make the Sun more homogeneous, with presumably a small core. In fact, the Sun is about the size expected if its hydrogen were not compressed by gravity! So it is not necessary for an internal nuclear furnace to bloat the Sun to the size we see.
- measuring small solar surface oscillations, or helioseismology, supports a homogeneous model of the Sun [re] In 1976 the discoverers of a dominant 160 minute radial pulsation of the Sun.... ... Meanwhile, most of the complex oscillation overtones have been fitted to Standard Solar models. But that is not surprising given the many degrees of freedom to tweak those mathematical models.

-My Questions & Comments: [1]: How can there be stratification, if the sun is largely homogenous according to the evidence of the stellar flattening [egg shape] and the dominant 160 minute oscillation of the sun that Thornhill references?

oscillation of the sun that Thornhill references?

Let's start with that observation of a stratification subsurface has been observed and it is located at .995R in our own sun based on heliosiesmology studies. Note that this heliosiesmology data (and all such data) is predicated on the sun acting like a resonance cavity that can reflect sound waves on many wavelengths. How are those various sound waves being reflected in the first place if the surface of the photosphere is many times less dense than the plasma inside of an ordinary plasma ball? How are sound wave reflected in the first place if there is no solid surface before we reach the edge of the photosphere? You wouldn't get sound wave oscillations over many wavelengths without a decent resonance cavity. That crust acts as the resonance cavity that makes heliosiesmology theory viable. The satellite data only confirms what we already know from heliosiesmology studies. There is something at .995R that is more dense than the photosphere and experiences greater longevity than the photosphere.

With respect to an artists impression of a squashed star that lacks any heliosiesmology studies, I can really only speculate. It could be that the shape of this star is extremely unique, in fact it seems to be unique, so it would be premature to draw a lot of conclusions from this one observation from a great distance. It could be that the shape is due to unusual EM influences or unusual gravitational influences, but without some heliosiesmology data, it's tough to speculate.

It could very well be that the internal structure of the sun is mostly homogenous between the crust and the core, but I suspect there is a dense core in there somewhere that rotates over a five minute interval which is a noted (and unexplained) cycle of the sun.

Wal would be correct about the fact that there are EM tensions that influence the sun, even in the model that Hilton, Oliver and I presented. Some external influence would likely be required to hold that crust at such a large distance from core and something has to keep the whole thing from imploding. Wal is definitely on the right track as it relates to electrical influences in solar activity, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to comment much about a sun I can't really know much about. I can at least poke and prod a bit into the atmosphere of our own sun, and I can see for myself that there is a more dense layer under the photosphere that probably acts like the resonance cavity that makes the whole field of heliosiesmology work right in the first place.

Somewhere on my website is a link to a video from NASA that shows how surface tension of water and EM fields in space ultimately can create "spheres" that have a lighter material in the middle (in this case air) that is surrounded by a much more dense material (in this case water). I would have to assume that the sun has similar properties.

In that sense Wal is definitely correct that EM fields influence the shape of objects in space. Beyond that obvious issue, it's hard to comment about the makeup and structure of the one exception that lies a very great distance away from me.

- [2] Jupiter's moon Io is an icy moon covered with much sulphur, which Thornhill considers to be a product of transmutation of oxygen from the water molecules of ice by the power of the electric currents from Jupiter. The sulphur geysers on Io, mistakenly called volcanoes, move around on Io's surface. I think the sun's sulphur is likely to be from similar geysers, which move around. Could the sun be a ball of water or ice?

Someone else (can't remember who now) sent me a paper suggesting such a thing a few years ago. All I can say is that based on what I see in surface fracture type events I've seen, and based on what what look to be volcanic events on the sun, I would have to say no, it's not likely to be a ball of water in the middle. I see evidence of magma in some of the Trace/Rhessi composite images.

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a0 ... 40x480.mpg

- [3] If a thunderstorm is plasma and it can contain gases, liquids and solids [air, water, ice, sand, dust] then could the sun be both solid and plasma?

The tornadoes in the solar atmosphere probably are composed of all of these things. The atmosphere however becomes a lot more dense at the bases of those tornadoes.

http://trace.lmsal.com/Public/Gallery/I ... 991127.mov

No in theory, that dense layer at the base of the tornadoes that we observe in heliosiesmology studies and that we observe in satellite images could still be composed of a double layer of heavier plasma. That Rhessi/Trace composite image tends to make me lean toward a solid crust rather than dense layer of plasma, as do the Nickel Doppler images.

What defines plasma?

Well, that is actually a good question. Plasma by definition can contain non ionized particles "dust". There is however an understanding that a "true plasma" (TM) is ionized in some way. In real life however plasmas tend to be a mixture of gas and plasma. The sun's atmosphere, particularly the lower atmosphere contains at least some percentage of non ionized particles in whatever state they may be in.

Does it have to involve flow or fluid motion instead of being rigid?

I think it's more constructive to look at rigidity as a necessary requirement to explain the observations. That rigidity might be provided by a solid surface and it might be provided by a much more dense layer of relatively "stiff" (?) plasma, but IMO a plasma well tend to "flatten out" rather than retain a specific shape while rotating inside an EM field.

Would the solid portion of Birkeland's terella be considered mere solid?

Yes. IMO I see myself as a Birkeland "purist". In other words Birkeland's terella experiments contained a hollow sphere with a solid metallic surface. I am proposing that the sun has a mostly metallic crust. In that way it is exactly like Birkeland's model. The magnetic core that Oliver proposed many decades ago would also tend to align with Birkeland's powerful EM core inside his terella. It's pretty much Birkeland's model, from the magnetic core to the solid surface to the plasma atmosphere that electrically interacts with the ISM. It's pretty much a pure Birkeland model.

Or could an electrified solid be considered a solid plasma? Or would the plasma just be flowing through the solid structure?

I would think that most people would think of the wire as a solid that conducts a plasma stream of electrons. In the case of solar activity it's just plasma streams of electrons flowing through various ions that serve the same function as the wire.

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:41 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "junglelord"

Interesting discussion. Could it be possible that Telsa Impulse Longitudinal Magneto Electric Energy could be providing the outward radiating pressure that you are searching for? Since I just found out that Tesla made and tested the first Z Pinch devices years ago and discovered Longitudinal Energy from said machine.



If the sun is a big Z Pinch and solid as you claim then the Tesla Z Pinch is even more critical to the equation as the Z Pinch they run now does not entirely resemble Teslas. You are a Birkeland purist. I am a Tesla Purist. The solid sphere is consistent with both experiments run by Tesla or Birkeland. I am now at the point where I cannot think of electricity unless I think of the four attributes of electric theory as described by Dollard when speaking of Tesla. Now realizing this just today has brought me even closer to the actual model. Tesla is the key and his Z Pinch experiments provide much more fundamental proof that we need to do a thorough research of his work to fully understand the Z Pinch, the Sun, and the EU.
_________________
Peace, Live Long and Prosper.

Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality. But there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real, but not as brightly lit... a Darkside."

[bboyer]

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:22 am Post subject: Reply with quote
OP "Solar"

Tesla made and tested the first Z Pinch devices years ago

You wouldn't happen to have some linkage for that would you JL? Or do you reference Tesla coils?