Coronal gasses and the spread of light

[Jaseli]

Hi I wonder if anyone can help with a question.

I recently asked a physics teacher to explain why the sun has a Corona and their answer was to say that it is due to thinly spread gasses distributing light?

Does this actually make sense?

Cheers

[solrey]

No, that makes no sense at all. The corona is over a million degrees, therefore it is plasma. It also emits EM radiation in all wavelengths up to and including x-ray energies.

The Suns Corona

One of the most puzzling features of the Sun is what has been dubbed "the solar corona problem." There is a region around the Sun, extending more than one million kilometers from its surface, where the temperature can reach two million degrees. This region, called the solar corona, is where the solar wind originates. The corona has been found to emit X-ray radiation (the corona is a plasma; at temperatures greater than a million degrees a plasma will radiate a lot of X-rays).

Three-dimensional magnetic field topology in a region of solar coronal heating

Flares and X-ray jets on the Sun arise in active regions where magnetic flux emerges from the solar interior amd interacts with the ambient magnetic field. The interactions are believed to occur in electric current sheets separating regions of opposite magnetic polarity. The current sheets located in the corona or upper chromosphere have long been thought to act as an important source of coronal heating,requiring their location in the corona or upper chromosphere. The dynamics and energetics of these sheets are governed by a complex magnetic field structure that, until now, has been difficult to measure. Here we report the determination of the full magnetic vector in an interaction region near the base of the solar corona. The observations reveal two magnetic features that characterize young active regions on the Sun: a set of rising magnetic loops and a tangential discontinuity of the magnetic field direction, the latter being the observational signature of an electric current sheet. This provides strong support for coronal heating models based on the dissipation of magnetic energy at current sheets.

Actually, the existence of the suns corona is still an ongoing mystery to mainstream physicists, but at least they recognize that it is an energetic plasma.

Electric Universe sees it as an anode coronal glow discharge where the inflowing and outflowing electric current/charged particles and associated EM fields interact and become more concentrated.

Thinly spread gases distributing light

That answer from this physics teacher is childish and wrong. Another example of the sorry state of "education" in America. Or it could be the UK since their schools are equally pathetic.

cheers

[Jaseli]

Thanks for that...

does this bear any relevance?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ed-2009-08

[jjohnson]

Its relevance is that mainstream astronomers are continuing to try to figure out what makes the corona as hot as it is, and this is one more sophisticated-sounding guess. Magnetic fields can store a lot of energy, and it can be released suddenly, often explosively. They have an idea which they call "nano-flares" but note: they have not actually seen these nano-flares because they are too small to be resolved, which they mention quickly and go on with the article.

Scientific American publishes astronomical and cosmological articles all the time, written for them by a select group of authors as if they were facts needing only a few small details to be "proved" conclusively. Despite the magazine's beautiful illustrations and engaging style, and its good articles in other fields of science, it suffers from the blindered vision which adherents of the Electric Universe and plasma cosmology feel has severely limited progress in astronomical physics for at least the last hundred years, now. I have written repeatedly to the editor of this publication with careful commentary on published articles, along with questions on why, in their spirit of scientific enquiry, they completely ignore alternative explanations of how stars and galaxies 'work' which involve electrical interactions. They do not even bother to comment in a short e-mail, so I get their message. Our way or the highway. As for me, I no longer have any faith in SA's astronomical explanations and have let my years-long subscription lapse.

I'd recommend that you at least download the e-book, Electric Sun (it's cheap) and read through it carefully, as well as reading through the many other sources which figure prominently on this web site, most free and a few for purchase, like Thornhill and Talbott's Electric Universe and Don Scott's Electric Sky, both paperbacks. Keep an open mind, and avoid thinking "but the experts say that the sun collapsed by gravity alone from a dust cloud..." as well as other silly things, and think critically about whether or not these other viewpoints seem plausible and defensible. Since no one can actually go to a star, including our own, and do real experiments on it, this entire field is an observational science done remotely, and all the ideas of what is really going on are still just that - ideas in competition. It's not a popularity show. There is now a torrent of incredibly good data being received on Earth from our satellites and space probes looking with broadband sensors at the dynamic environment in the solar system.

Look at the NASA and ESA (European Space Agency) sites and see what they are getting - raw and processed photos, data streams on ion and electron counts, STEREO photos and videos of solar phenomena, etc etc etc. It is good data. The problem is that different camps are trying to describe this elephant from differing viewpoints. As astronomy and the physics and mathematics of physics evolve, Darwin-like the strongest and best descriptors should tend to survive - for a while. Science is a succession of better explanations. The holders of the latest theories are vested in those and do not give them up easily "because they work, sort of, lots of the time, and the math is pretty and hides the problems and mysteries from the lay person". If a better explanation comes along, that explains more of the mysteries and predicts formerly surprising and mystifying phenomena,it's human nature to man the walls and defend against these new strangers. It's kind of fun, if you think about it. For humans, too, it's a serious pursuit, since for some reason that is the way our inquisitive brains are wired up. Good luck. Stick with us. Electric universe and plasma cosmology are the next wave, the paradigm shift.

[nick c]

welcome to the forum Jaseli,

Thanks for that...

does this bear any relevance?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ed-2009-08

The photosphere (5800 K) is below the Corona (million+ K). If the Sun is heated by a nuclear furnace at the core, the Corona should not even be there. This article is just another attempt by mainstream to do an end run around the 2nd law of Thermodynamics:

Heat generally cannot flow spontaneously from a material at lower temperature to a material at higher temperature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law ... modynamics

Here is an alternate view:
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

Makes sense to me


Nick

[webolife]

I am suggesting another approach to coronal hotness, which may be amenable to either a gravitational or electric explanation. Gravitational collapse drives a dynamic reactive outburst of particles, in accordance with Newton's 3rd law. This outburst of particles "chaotically" interacts with [gravitationally] inbound particles in the "atmospheric" region of the sun. Far from being "thinnly spread gasses" [a truly moronic explanation], this region harbors actively condensing high energy stuff, yeah, plasma!, which is maintained by the intense electrical/magnetic field of Sol.
I know a lot of folks around here don't like the word "gravitation" but I recognize the gravitation/electrical connection as part of my unified field view, so it doesn't bother me at all. The strong condensation phenomena of the corona produce wide spectral light action.

[Jaseli]

Thank guys I really appreciate your help on this question.

I guess its no coincidence that nano-flares are so small they can't be resolved. It sounds like other things we have been taught, i.e. invisible matter, dark energy, phantom messenger particles... etc.

[jjohnson]

My take on the subject of gravity is not that we don't like it; it's that we don't like it used as a singular, exclusionary explanation of almost every observable (and many unobservable) phenomena in the 'verse. We would be fools to ignore any or all of the other forces, or their effects. We are simply promoting the idea that in a large part of the universe, gravity effects, while there, are swamped whenever electromagnetic forces are orders of magnitude stronger. In his work on plasma simulations, Anthony Peratt included gravitational effects by his particles-in-cells, along with their electrodynamic forces, and found that, in plasmas, it is generally reasonable to ignore gravity's effects, and it simplifies the calculations. In a plasma near a significant gravitating mass, I would hazard that in some circumstances it is not safe (i.e., accurate or realistic) to ignore combined gravity and electrodynamic effects.

This seems to be the general case in plasmas, which state allegedly encompasses the vast majority of matter. If I may paraphrase Don Scott, the electrons in the copper wire in your house do not notice if the wire is going downhill or uphill; gravity has negligible effect on what they are doing. There are many places where gravity is very important, and largely may control events, but that does not mean other forces stop existing. There are places where gravity forces and E/M forces are comparable and orchestrate the dance rather equally. Mathis is doing a very interesting job in unifying gravity and the charge field, which is precisely the sort of thinking we need to be seriously considering.

[MGmirkin]

Hi I wonder if anyone can help with a question.

I recently asked a physics teacher to explain why the sun has a Corona and their answer was to say that it is due to thinly spread gasses distributing light?

Does this actually make sense?

Cheers

Well, what was the original question and what question was actually answered?

AKA, was the question phrased such that one might assume you were asking how we can SEE the corona, or was the question phrased in such a way as to ask why the corona exists at all (that is to say, why the upper atmosphere is considerably hotter than the lower atmosphere in a ball of "gas" [plasma] supposedly undergoing energetic nuclear fusion in its core)...

Was he simply answering one way we can SEE the corona (AKA by the tenuous gases diffusing or bending [refracting] starlight, etc.)? Or was he literally saying that the corona is generated by light (photons) doing something to the gases there (like a laser heating up materials into a cloud of gas or a plasma)?

Just wondering...

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin

[Jaseli]

Hi Michael

This was actually a question my son originally asked his physics teacher and I further questioned at a school parent evening because it didn't seem to make any sense to me, needless to say my questioning went down like a lead baloon with the teacher.

The original question to the teacher was "what causes the suns corona" to which the reply was "thin gasses are responsible for spreading light and that's why the corona glows" or words to that effect. It's been a while now and we can't remember the exact details. My son is 14 so it was a pretty basic question.

Sorry for the delay in responding

[mharratsc]

Jaseli,

You're in the unfortunate situation that I'm in as well. I have kids that must learn the garbage that the Church of Gravity teach... or fail. :\ My irritation knows no bounds, knowing that I am asking my children to learn things that I _do_NOT_believe in... but for their own sakes, ask them I must.

However, my solution was to tell my kids that astronomy is like art- not everyone interprets what they see the same way as the next person does. When I put it that way, my 17-year-old artist came to grips with the situation quickly, and understood that there were two opinions, and that only one of them could get her a good grade.

I simply made sure that she understood that I didn't agree with them, and gave her the (very logical) reasons why!


Mike H.

[jjohnson]

Hi, Jaseli,

Mike's method to get his kids to understand that there are differing opinions on things is a very good teaching tool - it likely will always be the case, particularly surrounding difficult questions that appear simple on the surface, and behind which there may be a large body of "conventional wisdom" steering the answers.

If you'd like to acquire some highly understandable, richly illustrated e-books which you simply download into your computer as a PDF file, they are available from Mikimar Publishing, website [url]http:\\www.mikimar.biz[/url]
currently priced around $12, plus or minus, depending on the e-book desired. A collection of the 3 Electric Universe titles goes for $39, for example. I got the Electric Sun about a year ago and enjoy it immensely. The photography and illustrations are beautiful and clear, and the text can be understood by someone your son's age with ease. In my judgment, if we can truly understand the physics of our own nearest star, we will have a much firmer foundation to extend our knowledge to the operation of stars in general. We need to keep our kids' minds open to new ideas, to help learn to think critically and carefully for themselves, and keep the sense of discovery and enthusiasm alive. That's hard to find in much of today's establishment education system, unfortunately.

JIm

[webolife]

I, on the other hand, am in the interesting position as a public school science teacher, of presenting standard theory in as clear a way as possible so as to expose its failures to explain the actual evidence or answer the fundamental questions... then open the floor for questions and suggestions, and open doors of reference for students wishing to explore alternative ideas. All you need to do is show a high def picture of the sun's corona showing the magnetic flux from poles to equator, and ask how the nuclear powerplant model explains it.

[mharratsc]

A public school teacher! Why then- I salute you, Web!

In my opinion, public school teachers are one of the great 'unsung heroes' of... well the U.S.A., at least, if not the whole world! By contrast to other disciplines, public school teachers never seem to receive the level of compensation that they would in other commercial fields... yet you have the all-important job of shaping the future of our country, if not our species!

As to your teaching method- how I wish every teacher could take such an empirical, truly scientific approach to teaching as you do. If there were more teachers out there with a similar attitude such as yours- we'd have a lot less of the problems the Sciences are currently experiencing (i.e.- blinded by dogma) as a direct result.

Kudos to you, Web!


Mike H.

[Jaseli]

Thanks Web that is a very useful piece of information, I will search for that High-def picture