| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
 |
|
My current position:
Sunspots are the result of impacts from billions of asteroids in close orbit around the Sun, circling it in the orbital plane. Those objects have either been there for countless eons or are the result of some recent (in cosmological terms) catastrophic event (I lean toward the latter explanation as it is consistent with other research of mine and seems the best way of explaining how we could yet be witness to a process that must inevitably come to an end, when the supply of asteroids runs out).
A measure of these objects are destabilized on a periodic basis and begin to fall into the Sun as their orbit decays. Those that fall most rapidly, strike the Sun's equatorial zone. Those that remain in orbit longest while declining toward the Sun's surface are slowly pulled by magnetic forces toward the Sun's polar regions.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Chad
In: Ramsbottom
|
|
|
|
This is from the British Astronomical Society website:
| High-resolution simulations are used to map out the detailed structure of two long-lived stable belts of asteroid orbits in the inner Solar system. The Vulcanoid belt extends from 0.09 to 0.20 au, though with a gaps at 0.15 and 0.18 au corresponding to de-stabilizing mean motion resonances with Mercury and Venus. As collisional evolution proceeds slower at larger heliocentric distances, km-sized or larger Vulcanoids are most likely to be found in the region between 0.16 and 0.18 au. The optimum location to search is at geocentric ecliptic longitudes 9°≤∣ℓg∣≤10° and latitudes ∣βg∣<1°. Dynamically speaking, the Earth–Mars belt between 1.08 and 1.28 au is a stable repository for asteroids on nearly circular orbits. It is interrupted at 1.21 au owing to the 3:4 commensurability with the Earth, while secular resonances with Saturn are troublesome beyond 1.17 au. These detailed maps of the fine structure of the belts can be used to plan search methodologies. Strategies for detecting members of the belts are discussed, including the use of infrared wide-field imaging with VISTA, and forthcoming European Space Agency satellite missions such as GAIA and BepiColombo. |
The Vulcanoid belt looks very interesting... being intra-Mercurial.
(Vulcan was the name given to the hypothesised intra-Mercurial planet.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Ok Chad. That's all we needed.
We are ready to publish.
Thesis:
Sunspots are caused by the impact of asteroids with the Sun, periodically destabilized from the Vulcanoid belt by the motions of Mercury and Venus.
Course it would be best if we could show how the subspot cycle is timed with the periodic alignment of Mercury and Venus so... who's game to go have a look?
Yes my friends. You are in the presence of greatness.
But of course it was easy to figure out. I just used the Applied Epistemological principles that I have put together over the past few years working with Mick and other members of this group. Nice to see them working though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mallas
|
|
|
|
I just did some research on those ultraviolet pictures of the sun that have been linked:
I found out that "the bright areas on the sun's surface are faculae, which are hot areas often associated with nearby sunspots".
I am not one that likes to link to wiki, but I was referred to this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sun_at_304_Angstroms.jpg
Maybe the objects hitting the sun are causing the faculae and not Sun spots?
I have tried to find temperature data on the SOHO website:
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/
I am still searching for data at this time.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Mallas wrote: | | Maybe the objects hitting the sun are causing the faculae and not Sun spots? |
"Faculae" and sunpots are psrt of a single phenomenon caused by the impact of objects from space.
The same hot spots appear on Jupiter in association with the Shoemaker-Levy impact zones.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
I have deleted Komorikid's post for violation of the rules.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Komorikid
In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
|
|
Ish wrote:
| I have deleted Komorikid's post for violation of the rules. |
Violation of what rules?
So anything that doesn't conform to your narrow view is rejected.
Your journey to the Dark Side (standard orthodox practice) is complete.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DPCrisp
In: Bedfordshire
|
|
|
|
| I have deleted Komorikid's post for violation of the rules. |
You could have left it to undermine itself, since Komori said sunspots are 'cool' and the Birkeland paper said his dots were 'hot'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chad
In: Ramsbottom
|
|
|
|
| Komorikid wrote: | | Violation of what rules? |
Presumably the same rule that Mick invoked (on your behalf) when he wrote:
| Chad, as far as I know the species-get-old-and-die thesis is new and original to Komoro. That being the case House Rules say we must be supportive | |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Komorikid wrote: | | So anything that doesn't conform to your narrow view is rejected. |
For the time being.
I am just not prepared to get side-tracked defending a thesis that has yet to be fully thought through. I've seen these discussions so many times and they make me sick. Nothing ever gets done. It's just one big argument. Happens on every single discussion board. Someone makes a suggestion and then it's an ass-hole feeding frenzy as all the self-appointed arbiters of truth brain storm reasons why the idea can't be right.
And so the idea is discarded.
That will not happen here!
Moreover, I have no patience for people who think they are made to look smart by rapidly dismissing new and interesting ideas. It doesn't make you look smart at all. It demonstrates an unwillingness to even to consider what does not appear to fit your preconceptions.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Mallas wrote: | | I am not one that likes to link to wiki... |
It's all we ever do around here!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mallas
|
|
|
|
I am still trying to get my head around something.
An object impacts the sun, causes a spike in temperature (faculae) and then begins to cool (Sun spot). But why would it cool to a lower temperature than the surrounding area?
We know Sun spots are cooler, from UV images and temp calculations from satellites. Faculae are hotter shown on IR pictures and also temp calculations taken.
I just don't get what causes the temperature to drop off so substantially after the impact.
I am still trying to find a UV/IR image of the Sun taken at the same time so we can overlay the images and check the position of Sunspots to Faculae. Would be interesting to see.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Mallas wrote: | | But why would it cool to a lower temperature than the surrounding area? |
I think you've got it backwards.
The information I have is that sunspots are hotter than the surrounding area. The same goes for the impact zones on Jupiter.
Now if someone has a fact to contradict this, that is perfectly welcome. So long as we are trying to nail down the facts and see if any one of the falsifies the thesis.
| We know Sun spots are cooler, from UV images and temp calculations from satellites. Faculae are hotter shown on IR pictures and also temp calculations taken. |
Ok. This is definitely contrary to what I have seen on Carl Sagan's COSMOS.
| I am still trying to find a UV/IR image of the Sun taken at the same time so we can overlay the images and check the position of Sunspots to Faculae. Would be interesting to see. |
Sounds exciting! Post as soon as you've got something.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Komorikid
In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
|
|
Dan wrote:
| You could have left it to undermine itself, since Komori said sunspots are 'cool' and the Birkeland paper said his dots were 'hot'. |
Birkeland's spots were hot because he was experimenting with a cold steel sphere. His intent was to replicate the as many features of the Sun, Earth and Planets in terms of his theory that they were electrically driven.
The fact that the umbra of sunspots is cooler than the surface in not in dispute by orthodox astronomy. It has been verified by several NASA probes and the Chandra X-Ray telescope. What they haven't been able to explain using the standard solar model is why they are cooler. Nor can they explain why the Sun's corona is several million degrees while the surface is only 6500 degrees. In fact they can't actually explain why the Sun has a corona.
Science has come a long way since COSMOS and none of you will gain any understanding of how the Sun or any other body in the Solar System in particular and the Universe in general works if you continue to get your information from Wankapedia.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DPCrisp
In: Bedfordshire
|
|
|
|
| I just don't get what causes the temperature to drop off so substantially after the impact. |
Well, if the surface of a pond can rebound so strongly that it shoots water droplets back up in the direction of the pebble you dropped... who knows what's gonna happen?
Ripples and sunspots go away eventually.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
