That statement is absolutely
and completely false. Previous helioseismology studies from SOHO
have found evidence of a "stratification subsurface" where various soundwaves
are dramatically impacted by the density changes expected in a Birkeland
cathode solar model. Again, Mr. Bridgman won't debate these
issues publicly, so apparently he feels free and comfortable saying any erroneous thing that he
wants to say, while he continues to run away like a frightened child from any public debate of the
There are electric fields in the solar environment,
known since the early 1900s, many of which I have documented (see
365 Days of Astronomy: The Electric Universe)
and which Electric Universe supporters ignore, or try to mine and claim as
their own. Modern kinetic solar wind models give the Sun a net positive
charge giving a potential difference of about 1000 volts relative to the
Mr. Bridgman is not telling the whole story,
and he gives only one *opinion* of the voltages proposed by various solar
over the past 100 years.
Birkeland predicted that the sun operated at approximately 600 million volts,
whereas Alfven's model was closer to 1 billion volts. Mr.
Bridgman's voltages are off by *many* orders of magnitude. Again,
Mr. Bridgman can say anything he wants, but only as long as he avoids a public
calling solar flares 'discharges' has annoying problems with the definition of
'discharge'. In the context of human experiences with processes like arc
furnaces to lightning, a discharge corresponds to a dielectric breakdown in a
neutral gas under an applied electric field. The solar atmosphere is
completely ionized and therefore almost immediately shorts any strong electric
field. Such a 'discharge' cannot occur.
Mr. Bridgman apparently hasn't read much of
the work by James
Dungey. As far back as the term "reconnection" has been used to
describe solar flare events, those very same processes have been associated
with "electrical discharge" events! Mr. Bridgman is now taking it
upon himself to impose a breakdown of a dielectric requirement, where none is
required or discussed in solar physics! What kind of unethical
behavior is that?!?!? Apparently Mr. Bridgman
just makes up such bogus requirements on a personal whim, which explains why he is
deathly afraid of a public debate on the topic of solar physics.
Instead of debating me openly, scientifically and publicly, Mr. Bridgman will
continue to hide behind his own hater blog and he will undoubtedly continue to
mistrepresent my motives and the motives and many others on a regular basis.
With Mr. Mozina's main 'proofs' totally discredited, he will be forced to
rely even more on cobbling together bits-n-pieces from mainstream solar
theory and mangling it into some form he can try to claim is evidence for
his model. He's already started this with the revision of his site. Yet,
the more of the standard model Mr. Mozina tries to integrate into his, the
less relevant his 'model' becomes. Why?
Bridgman told another blatant lie. Mr. Bridgman refuses to even
publicly discuss the "main proofs" that I have discussed on my website since
2005, or the recent mathematical models I sent him, or the SDO Helioviewer images
that show that the loops originate and are visible under the surface of
the photosphere. What Bridgman erroneously tries to characterize as
a "main proof" was simply a minor blog entry created five years *after*
putting up my website. In five full years of material, that is
apparently the one and only error that he's managed to find, and he didn't even find
himself. He simply *stole* the idea from a member of Christianforums! It's
frankly a trivial issue in terms of it's overall impact to a Birkeland
cathode solar model. I haven't started a revision of my
website, I finished the revision two full weeks ago. I also added a bunch
more content to my blog that Mr. Bridgman cannot and will not deal with.
Meanwhile he still tries to "cobble together" a broken mainstream solar
model that failed it's key prediction on convection.
Worse yet, he refuses to even acknowledge his own errors in his own model.
If Mr. Mozina wants to be
treated like a professional, he should act like a professional. Again,
his responses suggest he is more interested in receiving attention than
Mr. Mozina evades the fact that he has treated the
scientific community poorly for many years now.
about blatant hypocrisy. Mr. Brigdman's scientific misconduct began
on February 17th, 2013 when Mr. Bridgman unethically tried to take credit
for finding an error on my website, when in fact the error was
found by a member of
ChristianForums two days earlier. Mr. Bridgman's scientific
misconduct continued for two full weeks *after* the website error in
question had already been cited and corrected. Mr. Bridgman has
continued his scientific misconduct by engaging in personal attacks and
mind reading rather
than ever even acknowledging that the error had already been corrected. Mr.
Bridgman's scientific misconduct continues to this very day as he avoids
any direct debate on the topic. Mr. Bridgman is a walking,
talking, living, breathing personal embodiment of scientific misconduct in
motion. He has absolutely no right to judge me or anyone else while
he engages in such unethical scientific misconduct.
Mr. Bridgman never mentioned
any of the
mathematical models that I sent to him or talked about on this blog and at
ChristianForums. Mr. Bridgman has never acknowledeged his *own*
errors in his own solar theories. Mr. Bridgman of all people should be the
very last person on Earth to accuse someone else of "scientific misconduct".
Mr. Bridgman didn't fix any of his solar theory errors, nor even
acknowledge their importance. Again, whatever scientific misconduct
is going on, it has nothing to do with me. Unlike Mr. Bridgman
I've already fixed my trivial error, and I'm willing to debate these ideas
openly and publicly. It's Mr. Bridgman that can only debate his
erroneous claims on a personal blog page where he controls all the content.
The Tom Bridgman Affair
Nero fiddles while Rome burns....
Rather than accept the fact that the
standard solar theory has been falsified and it needs to be replaced with a
new solar model, apparently Mr. Bridgman believes that he can simply ignore all the
problems of mainstream solar theory by starting a public flame war between us on his
Even more disconcerting and frankly rather cowardly IMO, evidently Mr. Bridgman has no
interest in a direct dialog. I have
already invited him to join
the ongoing discussion at ChristianForums where he apparently learned from
a forum member about a mistake that I made on a 2010 blog entry on my website
around February 15th of this year. After
sitting on a number of my unpublished responses on his blog for almost 5
months, Mr. Bridgman then took it upon himself to write a rather scathing public
blog entry on his website two days later on February 17th based on
what he learned from Christianforums.
Instead of accepting my invitation to join our ongoing discussion,
Mr. Bridgman steadfastly refuses to discuss the topic openly and fairly and
publicly. Even worse, he utterly refuses to address any of the problems
in mainstream theory based on the newer SDO Helioseismology data. He will not even allow for a
public response on his blog, even though
his blog includes response features. Mr.
Brigman apparently ignores the fact, that unlike the mainstream, and unlike Mr.
Bridgman, I have already publicly admitted
my *one blog* error and I have already fixed that relatively minor error as soon as it was pointed out to
me. On the other hand, Mr. Bridgman has never once addressed the *major*
convection problems in mainstream theory that were discovered by SDO.
Instead he has opted to continue his irrational, misplaced tirade in spite of my best
efforts to fix my mistake. Even after the offending entry was removed
from my blog, and even after I publicly admited to my error, Mr. Brigman's
personal attacks continue:
But the cranks not only try to push their flawed claims
into publication, but accuse others of
conspiracy/incompentence/persecution/etc. when their errors are pointed out.
Apparently Mr. Bridgman doesn't understand the difference
between a personal webpage blog entry that was already updated even before he made that
ridiculous comment, and a real "publication". Unlike all
those falisified mainstream claims about fast convection, never once did anyone try
to submit that blog entry for publication, nor did I blame anyone for my
error. Unlike Mr. Bridgman and his serious convection problems, I fixed and took care of
my minor error as soon as it was pointed out to me. Apparently Mr.
Bridgman intends to continue to blame me personally for pointing out to him
that HMI helioseismology data falsified mainstream solar theory last year, and
he intends to do absolutely nothing about it even though all those now
falsified convection claims were "rushed into publication", and even
through they have now been
shown to be false. I think Mr.
Bridgman's "crank" comments are highly ironic in the final analysis. At
least I took responsibility for my error and I immediately did something about it when it
was pointed out to me. Mr. Bridgman on the other hand has done absolutely nothing to fix
his *massively* broken solar model with all it's published claims that were
shown to be false, while he lashes out irrationally at other
solar models over one minor unpublished blog error. Wow.
Talk about hypocritical and highly ironic comments!
“[Note: With the release of the first article in this
series, I received an accusatory email from Mr. Mozina.
Apparently someone in one of the forums where he has not (yet?) been
banned has been pointing out many of the same flaws which I address in the
first post of this series (thread at ChristianForums).
Mr. Mozina seems to think this other individual is me.
Nope. In addition, Mr.
Mozina claims he is 'updating' the content on his site, so some of the links
presented in this series may break at some point in the future.
We'll see what happens.]”
What Mr. Bridgman actually got from me was an email
conversation at Christianfroums where he apparently learned about my blog
error from a member at ChristianForums on February 15th of this year, and then wrote about it on
his blog on February 17th.
Instead of joining the live conversation from which he pilfered his blog
material, and instead of giving me any credit for the fact that I did take immediate
steps to correct my error once it was brought to my attention on
Christianforums, Mr. Bridgman has decided to continue his flame war while
intentionally avoiding any actual discussion of the topic. Worse yet, he
fails to address *any* of the failures of mainstream theory.
Note that I took immediate steps to correct my error when
it was pointed out to me,
whereas six full months have gone by while Mr. Bridgman and the rest of the
mainstream have never even fully acknowledged the fact that
mainstream solar theory was falsified by HMI data in 2012.
The speed of convection is measured by SDO to be two full orders of magnitude
slower than mainstream predictions!
I already pointed out the *massive* problems this creates for standard
theory in a previous blog entry and I pointed it out to Mr. Brigman over six
Six months have gone by now, yet Mr. Bridgman has not “fixed” the
problems in standard solar theory. The
same false claims about convection still sit on WIKI, while Mr. Bridgman and the
mainstream continue to teach the same falsified solar model to gullible and
unsuspecting students to this very day knowing full well that it's errors have
never been addressed or fixed.
I have already removed the *single* offending blog entry
from the blog page so as not to confuse future readers, but I have left an
active link to the offending blog entry.
The links to the bad blog entry in question did not “break”, they were intentionally updated/removed
once I realized the mistake.
Apparently in Mr. Brigman’s mind, I’m damned if I do acknowledge and fix my error, and
I'm damned if I don’t. Meanwhile he does
absolutely nothing at all to fix any of the serious problem in mainstream theory
nore does he even acknowledge them. Since the error
that Mr. Bridgman is ranting about has been noted, and the offending blog entry has already been removed, there
is really no
point in responding to most of Mr. Brigman's nonsense, however I will respond to
The point of the first post is Mr. Mozina's claim that the solar surface in
visible light (the photosphere) is actually above the solar surface visible in
Mr. Bridgman is still making the
very same mistake that I made in my blog error in 2010!
I erroneously “assumed” as Mr. Bridgman is still assuming, that the
chromosphere was “transparent” to iron ion (EUV) wavelengths.
I therefore assumed that I could observe a relatively flat “surface”
along the limb where the iron ion light began.
A careful analysis of SDO limb images in iron ion wavelengths demonstrates
however that the chromosphere is in fact *opaque* to the iron ion light along
the limb. Along the limb light
might have to traverse more than a hundred thousand kilometers of plasma to reach SDO.
Mr. Bridgman is absolutely wrong about there being some kind of flat, thin
“solar surface visible in EUV light”.
He’s wrong for the very same
reason that I was wrong! We do not
actually observe a thin flat “surface” in the iron ion wavelengths along the limb.
We do not observe the surface of the photosphere in iron ion limb
images, and not a “surface” of EUV light either.
We actually observe a *three dimensional atmosphere* in iron ion light
because the light sources in these wavelengths are the flux ropes and the flux
ropes are three dimensional structures
in the solar atmosphere.
Along the limb in iron ion wavelengths we observe a
bright horizon above an opaque limb.
There is no flat or thin “surface” visible in iron ion EUV images since
the ropes (and light sources) are not flat.
That’s Mr. Bridgman’s *biggest* mistake, though certainly not his only mistake.
On the limb, all we observe in iron ion wavelengths is the region of
the solar atmosphere where the chromosphere transforms from transparent to
“opaque” in iron ion wavelengths due to all the dust in the lower
chromosphere. That is not an actual “EUV surface” along the limb in 171A
anymore than it is the solid surface that I thought it might be when I saw the
first light SDO image. It’s simply
an opaque area in the chromosphere that tells us *absolutely nothing* about
where the flux ropes originate or where the iron ion light from those flux
ropes actual originates in relationship to the surface of the photosphere.
It's rather ironic that Mr. Bridgman continues to blame me for an error
that I have
already admitted to making, while continuing to make that very same error
According to Schrivjer et al, 1999, the EUV loops
originate at the boundary between the sunspot umbra & penumbra, not the
In 2009, ten years more current than the Schrivjer
paper, UCAR did a supercomputer modeling study of sunspots.
I’ve pointed this out to Mr. Bridgman at ChristianForums thread that I
suggested to him, and he simply
ignored it just as he continues to ignore the failures of mainstream solar
theory. The UCAR study shows a 3D
model of the magnetic fields in and around a sunspot. It shows that the
strongest part of the magnetic field is found at the *base* of the sunspot,
far *underneath of the surface of the photosphere*, and the magnetic fields
follow the “sides” of the sunspot down into the sunspot:
In the blog entry from earlier today, I already cited all
the evidence that demonstrates that the flux ropes originate *under* the
surface of the photosphere, and they are already radiating at millions of
degrees before they ever exit that surface.
Alfven also wrote a number of papers on these topics which treat all flux
ropes as full “circuits”.
2) Plasma moving along collections of intertwined
magnetic field lines (i.e. flux ropes), have been a part of standard solar
theory for decades.
Sure, but the mainstream and Mr. Bridgman utterly ignore the current
that creates and sustains the flux rope!
I find it quite amusing that Mr. Bridgman linked to the very same NASA
animations of flux ropes that I use on my website, yet he completely ignores
the implication of that information.
If the flux ropes originate under the surface of the photosphere as
shown in the NASA animation, then
it’s entirely possible that some of the light that we observe from the flux
ropes is coming from underneath of the surface of the photosphere!
You can’t have your cake and eat it too Mr. Bridgman.
Bridgman never explained why his magic flux ropes are apparently
“invisible” and then suddenly become visible only once they reach some magic spot in
the atmosphere. Unless Bridgman
can explain why the ropes are not *always* visible even *under* the surface of
the photosphere in face on images of sunspots, he shot his own arguments in the foot using *standard theory*!
3) Mr. Mozina claims that SDO can 'image' below the
photosphere, yet provides no evidence of that.
Actually I claimed that I could see below the *surface*
of the photosphere in 171A and other iron ion wavelengths in face on images of
sunspots (not limb images).
There is no actual “photosphere” in a Birkeland solar model, just a
series of non opaque plasma double layers.
Even in standard theory it is possible to see below the surface of the
photosphere. Mr. Bridgman is dodging the
I provided him with plenty of evidence from helioviewer
images and from solar sunpot and spicule modeling studies which Mr. Brigman simply
It should be noted that the photosphere is about
500 km thick, which corresponds to a little more than one pixel at AIA and HMI
resolution. By defintion, the
photosphere, corresponds to an optical depth of 2/3 (Wikipedia) which means
only half the photons make it through the boundary without scattering. 3) Mr.
Mozina claims that SDO can 'image' below the photosphere, yet provides no
evidence of that. It should be
noted that the photosphere is about 500 km thick, which corresponds to a
little more than one pixel at AIA and HMI resolution.
By defintion, the photosphere, corresponds to an optical depth of 2/3
(Wikipedia) which means only half the photons make it through the boundary
without scattering. Optical depth
increases dramatically below that.
All of these claims about the photosphere come from a
NOW FALSIFIED solar theory by the way.
never points that fact out, but that is the case now.
His beloved mainstream solar model has been falsified by SDO. Mr.
doesn’t want to talk about that, and he blatantly refuses to address that
observation. Instead, he simply ignored that fact
and he keeps citing from his falsified “holy Wiki pages” anyway.
Mr. Bridgman is avoiding the key issue.
There is no evidence at all that light from flux ropes cannot be
observed *under* the surface of the photosphere.
We also can easily see that the photosphere in the
1700A band is still below the 171A photosphere so we are still not seeing the
coronal loops below the photosphere.
Mr. Bridgman is still making that same limb error I made and
corrected. There is no way to
discern where the 171A light *originates* along the limb in relationship to
other wavelengths. All we can
observe at the limb is the area of the atmosphere where the chromosphere turns
from transparent to opaque in iron ion wavelengths.
We cannot use limb measurements to decide where the light from the flux
ropes originate, nor where the flux ropes themselves originate.
All we can tell along the limb is *where the flux ropes become visible at limb*.
That observation tells us absolutely nothing about face on images of
the sun, and where the flux ropes
can be observed in face on images.
4) The closest thing to 'imaging'
below the photosphere is helioseismology analysis which can 'see' below the
photosphere but at very poor resolution.
It is a leading edge technique where it's
capabilities, and limitations, are still being explored.
I'll go into Mr. Mozina's delusions on that topic in the next post of
There are in fact helioseismology studies that support my
ideas including the observation of a
sitting underneath of the photosphere at a relatively shallow depth.
5) After promoting claims that involve radical
differences with the standard solar model, to rescue himself, Mr. Mozina tries
to cram some aspect of the standard model (solar coronal flux rope models)
What a bunch of horse manure!
Even in the standard model, the ropes originate *underneath* of the
surface of the photosphere. There
just so happen to be *some* areas of agreement between a Birkeland cathode
model and a standard solar model in terms of where the flux ropes originate.
Mr. Bridgman simply doesn’t like the possibility that the loops are “lit up” in
iron ion wavelengths long before they exit the photosphere.
Mr. Bridgman apparently never read my website since I've talked about flux
ropes/coronal loops since 2005.
He does this with no regard to the fact that the radical change in solar
composition he advocates (replacing a plasma that is predominantly hydrogen &
helium with much heavier elements) would largely make those components
inapplicable to his model without radical changes.
It’s not that radically different at the surface of the
photosphere. It’s still a
plasma surface with waves on it.
The model doesn’t really change all that dramatically until we reach that
“stratification subsurface” that Kosovichev discusses.
The whole field of helioseismology is based upon the sun “ringing like
a bell” in the first place. I
simply provide the ringing bell with some actual “structure”.
6) The most disturbing aspect of
Mr. Mozina's post is he has falsely attributed a claim to me which he expects
me to retract as an act of reciprocity.
Mr. Mozina seems to treat the facts of Nature
and Science as if they are something that can be negotiated or traded around
like debate points. Nature does
not plea bargain.
Um, no. That post Mr. Bridgman cites on his
website was directed at a member of ChristianForums. I expected a member of Christianforums
to retract a false claim that he made about the
origin of high temperature flux ropes and his blatant misconception about the term "opaque" as
it relates to standard theory. I simply sent Mr. Bridgman a link to the
discussion, and pointed out to him that the shoe is now on the other foot this week.
I sent Mr. Bridgman a link to that conversation
because Mr. Bridgman's argument is essentially the same argument as the one I addressed
at Christianforums. Both individuals
keep “assuming/asserting” that there is some sort of flat, thin “EUV surface”
iron ion wavelengths when it fact there is no such thing.
The light sources of iron ion images are the flux ropes which are three
dimensional structures that begin *under* the surface of the photosphere and
rise high into the corona and dive back into the photosphere. There
is no “EUV surface”.
Mr. Bridgman is essentially publicly blaming me for making the exact same
mistake that he is *still making* to this
very day. There is no “flat surface” seen in iron ion EUV images.
It’s a 3D atmosphere created by 3D flux ropes that traverse large areas
of the solar atmosphere.
If Mr. Bridgman would like to discuss these images and
these ideas, he’s welcome to join us at Christianforums and discuss them
openly and fairly, but apparently he’s not interested in an “honest”
Sunspots And Flux Ropes
Let's put all the visual and
mathematical pieces of the flux ropes together in 3D, and look at their effect
in face-on images of the photosphere and sunspots during flare events. Flux
ropes are high speed, high temperature, current carrying threads of plasma
that rise up and through the photosphere and that can be observed in virtually
every wavelength during flare events.
This Nasa animation
shows that the ropes originate under the surface of the photosphere and it
shows what happens when the currents inside these flux ropes "reconnect".
put together some Helioviewer movies from a flare event over a sunspot on
06/15/2012 to see the effect on the solar atmosphere in several wavelengths.
The first movie of the flare is shown in 1600A. It shows the net effect in
the upper photosphere and the chromosphere during the flare event in that
particular wavelength. Notice that the surface of this image contains all
sorts of brighter looking "hot spots" on the surface of this image, near and
around the various sunspots. Those hot spots are directly "caused by" the flow
of high temperature plasma and current inside the flux ropes as they rises up
and through that surface, or falls back into that surface. The bright ropes in
the flare event are pretty noticeable in this wavelength.
image is an image of the same flare event in 1700A. The flare event flux ropes
are still somewhat visible in the image, but far less visible than in 1600A.
The surface seen in 1700A also shows all the hot spots on the photosphere near
and around the sunspots. They are of course are aligned with the hot spots in
1600A because they are both caused by the same high temp plasma flux ropes.
spots we see in 1700A and 1600A are also perfectly aligned with the strong
field alignments observed in magnetogram images. The 'grey' bumpy areas in the
following movie are areas where the white part of the 1700A image combines
with the black area in the magnetogram image. It ends up looking grey in the
image. The whitest areas of the image are areas where the hot 1700A bright
areas are aligned with the white areas of the magnetogram image. The N/S
alignments of the magnetogram image are directly related to the flow of
current inside the flux ropes as they traverse the surface of the photosphere.
The magnetic fields are aligned with the hot areas of the 1700A images because
the flux ropes are the "cause' of both the hot spots on the surface of the
photosphere, and the magnetic fields on the surface of the photosphere. There
is a direct cause/effect relationship between the flux ropes and the surface
anomalies on the surface of the photosphere.
look at the last movie, let's talk about the math:
Kosovichev seems to
be in pretty general agreement with Alfven that the high speed spicules that
supposedly heat the corona start *inside* the photosphere. In fact he seems to
be in pretty much general agreement with Alfven in terms of clockwise and
counterclockwise vortexes forming in the photosphere, presumably driven by
Now let's look at some
computer modeling of sunspots:
According to the computer
models, the strongest magnetic fields exist around the outside edges of the
sunspot with the highest concentration located at the base of the sunspot. The
strong magnetic fields follow the contours of the penumbral filaments and are
strongest along the side of the 3D sunspot.
Now lets look at combined
image that puts the 1700A and an iron ion image of flux ropes together and see
what we observe:
ropes follow the contours of the penumbral filaments. They flow down and into
the surface of the photosphere, and down and into the sunspot just like the
computer models, and just as Kosovichev's modeling would suggest. The million
degree flux ropes are not heated up *above* the surface of the photosphere,
they *heat up the photosphere* as they pass through. They heat up the
chromosphere too. They are a heat source for the chromosphere and corona.
Every SDO AIA image, and the HMI magnetogram images, along with the bulk
of the mathematical modeling on sunspots *insists* that the flux ropes can be
observed flowing up through the photosphere, and down into the photosphere.
It's only a question of "how far" into the photosphere can we observe in 171A,
not *if* we can observe into the photosphere in 171A.
SDO Falsifies Standard Theory (And A Confession)
apologize that it has been quite some time between updates to this blog. It's certainly been far longer than
intended. For anyone following along, it's been a wild and woolly last
few years for solar physics research thanks to SDO.
SDO HMI helioseismology equipment dealt a serious blow to standard solar
theory in 2012. Contrary to standard solar theory, the speed
of convection is measured by SDO to occur at a much slower speed than
predicted in standard theory, in fact just 1 percent of predicted value.
These new results have staggering and far reaching implications for the
current theoretical understanding of magnetic field generation in the Sun
relies on these motions being of a certain magnitude,” explained Shravan
Hanasoge, an associate research scholar in geosciences at Princeton University
and a visiting scholar at NYU’s Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences.
“These convective motions are currently believed to prop up large-scale
circulations in the outer third of the Sun that generate magnetic fields.”
“However, our results suggest that convective motions
in the Sun are nearly 100 times smaller than these current theoretical
expectations,” continued Hanasoge, also a postdoctoral fellow at the Max Plank
Institute in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany. “If these motions are indeed that
slow in the Sun, then the most widely accepted theory concerning the
generation of solar magnetic field is broken, leaving us with no compelling
theory to explain its generation of magnetic fields and the need to overhaul
our understanding of the physics of the Sun’s interior.”
Not only does this present huge
theoretical problems for magnetic field generation theory in standard model,
it also has significant implications as it relates to the concept of mass
separation. The standard explanation the mainstream uses to explain why
heavy elements like Iron and Nickel presumably stay 'mixed together' in the
photosphere is related to the speed of convection. In the standard solar
model, convection was supposed to occur at jet speeds, thus preventing heavier
elements from "sinking" below the light elements like Hydrogen and Helium.
Instead, convection speeds are two full orders of magnitude slower than
mainstream predictions, something more like walking speed. This
observation calls into question just about every core mainstream solar physics
concept. Not only did the mainstream solar model lose it's power supply
to explain (current) "reconnection" events, the mainstream model has no
logical way to explain why Iron and Nickel would stay mixed together with
Hydrogen and Helium at the surface of the photosphere. This observation
is the ultimate "problem child" for mainstream solar theory. It will be
interesting to see what they ultimately do to "fix" their broken model, but
for the time being at least, they seem to have simply ignored that small
"problem" with their theory. :)
One of the significant new
visualization tools created by NASA and available online to study solar
satellite images can be found here at
Helioviewer.org. The beauty of this new online tool is that it
allows for various solar wavelengths and instruments to be overlayed on top of
one another in real time, giving even novice users a view of the sun that past
generations could only dream about. The downloadable version is also
well worth downloading and installing. The downloadable version provides
many of the same tools as the online version, and allows for greater
One of the important new features of
Helioviewer is the ability to overlay any number of wavelengths and
instruments together to see how they work in real time. SDO's 16
megapixel resolution, combined with fast image cadence was a giant leap
forward in technology over SOHO and Trace. SDO shows the effect the loops have
of the surface of the photosphere as they rise up and through, and flow back
into that surface. The patterns of magnetism on the surface of the photosphere
that are caused by the current in the loops, also match up perfectly with the
"bright points" seen in 1600A and 1700A, demonstrating a cause/effect link
between the flux ropes and the bright areas on that surface.
image shows the magnetic field alignments on the surface of the photosphere
using the HMI gear on SDO, overlaid with two iron ion wavelengths, 171A and
193A. What you'll observe is that the surface of the photosphere is black and
white only in the areas where the largest loops are located, and those N/S
alignments occur right along the trajectory of the loops, exactly as predicted
by a subsurface origin of the loops. The second example demonstrates that this
alignment occurs in other iron on wavelengths as predicted as well.
The third image is an SDO HMI continuum (white light) image overlaid with a
171A wavelength. You'll notice that the loops tend to flow right down along
the penumbral filaments in this image, at exactly the right angles *if* (and
only if) the loops are actually descending down into the photosphere. The
orientation of 171 loops with the penumbral filaments is certainly no
coincidence, it's directly related the orientation of the penumbral filaments.
Again, this image is completely consistent with a subsurface stratification
layer being located far underneath of the photosphere. The alignment of the
flux ropes with the penumbral filament angles would be random and meaningless
if the base of the loops were actually located a further 1200KM above the
I also need to make a public confession
related to a past blog entry dated 4.27.2010 which has since been removed, but
can still be read here if you're interested.
It seems that I was a bit "overly optimistic" about the SDO first light images
back in 2010 in a previous blog entry. I "assumed" that the SDO
first light image was properly calibrated and aligned and adjusted by
wavelength. Further study of the SDO images via Helioviewer, and a few
enlightening conversations at
Christianforums have made it clear that the first light SDO image was not
aligned properly. The first light SDO image therefore doesn't directly
falsify standard solar theory, nor does it exclusively support a Birkeland
solar model as I had originally hoped. Even more embarrasing, some
still unexplaned Helioviewer misalignments between HMI continuum images and AIA
4500A helioviewer images caused me to miss my error for some time. So as
not to confuse future readers, that particular blog entry was simply removed.
I will be posting quite a few new
Helioviewer movies of limb images of magnetic flux ropes in various
wavelengths over the next few weeks and months. These images demonstrate
rather convincingly that mass inside of flux ropes flows up and through the
surface of the photosphere during certain types of flare activity, which is
entirely consistent with a Birkeland cathode solar model. While it
would have been extermely nice if the photosphere had turned out to be as
"transparent" as I had hoped from the SDO first light image, all the
Helioviewer/SDO images are entirely consistent with a Birkeland cathode solar
model in terms of mass movements through and back into the surface of the
photosphere. While the opacity of the photosphere may preclude AIA
images alone from building a full picture of the sun's interior, the HMI gear
on SDO is already having an emormous impact on solar physics, and
helioseismology data from SDO will ultimately rewrite solar physics.
Ring Out The Old - Ring In The New!
This white light image from LMSAL's FlaresDVD video shows coronal loops traversing the surface of the photosphere and thereby falsifying LMSAL claims about the location of solar moss and the bases of coronal loops.
As we approach 2010, a number of discoveries over the past year deserve mention because they directly confirm the theories of Kristian Birkeland, Dr. Charles Bruce and Dr. Hannes Alfven as it relates to solar flare activity and their relationship to electrical discharges. A wonderful new paper
written this year by Hakan Onel and Gottfried J. Mann demonstrates via
RHESSI observations, the existence of large scale electric fields in solar flare "circuits". Another excellent paper
written by a larger team of Russian Scientists from Nobeyama Radio Observatory and the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics came out this year which
uses Trace, SOHO and RHESSI observations to demonstrate that current carrying "magnetic ropes" are directly involved in flare activity. As you may recall from revious blog entries, "magnetic ropes" are
simply current carrying filaments of plasma, large scale cousins of the current carrying filaments in an ordinary plasma ball. Both of these papers confirm the findings of an earlier paper by Marina Battaglia and Arnold Benz from 2008 that show the existence of return currents in solar flare loops. All three of these papers confirm
an even earlier paper by David
Tsiklauri that indeed electrical currents are responsible for solar flare
activity. It has indeed been a very good year for EU theory.
The white light image above demonstrates that NASA is correct about the placement of the bases of coronal loops, and it simultaneously falsifies LMSAL's claims about solar moss activities and their placement of the footprints of coronal loop activity. This movie animation from the NASA archives shows NASA's placement of the bases of the coronal loops is beneath the surface of the photosphere with the loops eventually rising up and through the photosphere to "reconnect" (electrically, not magnetically) in the solar atmosphere. NASA's position about the footprints of the loops being located under the photosphere is correct, as that white light flare image demonstrates. We can observe the effect of the loops on the photosphere as the loops light up the photosphere along the path of the coronal loops. This image is also congruent with other images further down this blog page that show the bases of the loops, and the "footprints" of the loops begin far *below* the photosphere, not 1200km above the photosphere as LMSAL has repeatedly claimed. If LMSAL was correct then the white light image would not show the photosphere being lit up like a Christmas tree along the sides of the loops.
As if on cue today, as I began rounding up the links for this blog entry, the sun decided to put on quite a show for the STEREO-Ahead satellite by belting out a CME in a nearly horizontal direction that essentially defies gas model theory. While most CME's have a directional component, they usually point away from the surface. In this particular instance however, the "blow out" of much of the material from the flare/CME is ejected in a nearly horizontal direction and it generates an atmospheric disturbance accross surface, but only in a *SINGLE* direction! While this type of lateral energy discharge is consistent with a Mt. Saint Helen's type of lateral volcanic blowout, it really doesn't fit very well into contemporary gas model theory. If as gas model theory insists that this flare activity is mainly an atmospheric event taking place inside a very light plasma atmosphere, how come there is such a strong horizontal component to the discharge, and only in *one* direction? The lack of an "equal and opposite reaction" in the shock wave distribution pattern isn't particularly congruent with conttemporary gas model theory, but it is highly consistent with volcanic activity where the blowout of material can be highly directional, and the shock wave can be shielded in some directions by solid matter.
Merry Christmas to Plasma Cosmology Theory 2007!
The few weeks building up to Christmas 2007 have been pretty
remarkable in terms of the presents that were given to Plasma cosmology theory
from NASA and other institutions recently. To understand the significance
of this recent announcement from Themis team, we need to begin with an explanation/definition of a "magnetic
rope" from Hannes Alfven, the father of MHD theory, from his book Cosmic
"However, in cosmic plasmas the
perhaps most important constriction mechanism is the electromagnetic attraction
between parallel currents . A manifestation of this mechanism is the pinch
effect, which was studied by
Bennett long ago (1934), and has received much
attention in connection with thermonuclear research . As we shall see, phenomena
of this general type also exist on a cosmic scale, and lead to a bunching of
currents and magnetic fields to filaments or `magnetic ropes' . This
bunching is usually accompanied by an accumulation of matter, and it may explain
the observational fact that cosmic matter exhibits an abundance of filamentary
structures (II .4 .1) . This same mechanism may also evacuate the regions near
the rope and produce regions of exceptionally low densities."
A Bennett pinch is a distinctly electrically oriented
phenomenon, and it requires the flow of current through the rope to generate and create the
constriction effect in the rope. This brings us to NASA's announcement this week
from the Themis program. It seems that they observed
in-situ. the presence of
large scale current flows between the Sun and the Earth.
"NASA's Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions
during Substorms (THEMIS) mission observed the dynamics of a rapidly developing
substorm, confirmed the existence of giant magnetic ropes and witnessed small
explosions in the outskirts of Earth's magnetic field. The findings will be
presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San
Francisco in December."...
"Angelopoulos was quite impressed with the substorm's power
and he estimated the total energy of the two-hour event at five hundred thousand
billion Joules. That's equivalent to the energy of one magnitude 5.5 earthquake
. Where does all that energy come from? THEMIS may have found the answer.
"The satellites have found evidence of magnetic ropes
connecting Earth's upper atmosphere directly to the sun," said David Sibeck,
project scientist for the mission at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center,
Greenbelt, Md. "We believe that solar wind particles flow in along these ropes,
providing energy for geomagnetic storms and auroras."
So now we have direct in-situ evidence that current carrying
threads of plasma carry huge amount of current between the Sun and the Earth.
From an plasma cosmology/EU theory perspective, that is certainly welcome news.
Merry Christmas to EU theory from NASA via the Themis Program.
Now of course there is evidence
that this pinching process that creates "tornado-like" filaments in plasma is
involved in the
"The surprise turned out to be a shock-wave created by a jet
of material flowing through a vast cloud of interstellar gas and dust. The jet
slammed into neighboring dust clouds at more than 100 miles per second, heating
the dust and causing it to glow."
That really isn't surprising if we note that this is also the
telltale sign of a Bennett pinch, or a "magnetic rope" caused by the flow of
current through plasma. We can watch similar filaments form inside an
ordinary plasma ball.
Now this information comes on the heels of another very
important finding released last month that was related to
electrical atmosphere of Venus. It turns out that Wal Thornhill
was proven right about the dynamic electrical nature of the atmosphere of Venus and
the skeptics of Electric Universe theory have been shown to be wrong (yet
This lengthy (but worth it) Qucktime movie shows the solar wind's effect on
Venus. This movie is absolutely spectacular. Thanks ESA for making this a very happy holiday for those of us in
the EU/Plasma Cosmology movement. :)
*MAJOR* Hinode Breakthrough: Evidence That Cathode Rays Power
Here are two images of cathode ray activity,
one black and white image from the lab of Kristian Birkeland from 1908, and a
second image just release by the Hinode spacecraft mission team. Just as
in Birkeland's model, we observe cathode ray activity from our own sun.
This confirms the predictive usefulness of Birkeland's solar model, and it
demonstrates the electrical nature of our universe.
The Hinode satellite program just announced a
one that is going to have very profound implications for solar theory, and electric
universe theory. Evidently the Hinode instrument has been observing
cathode ray activity in the northern polar regions of the sun since at least
January of 2007. The cathode rays
they have observed are directionally vectored, they spew x-rays from the plasma
and they seem to strike the surface from several predefined
directions (more than 7 in the video with 7 highlighted "events"). This observations of rays of energy,
and high speed plasma jets in the
solar atmosphere is a huge step forward in our understanding of solar activity.
It explains the huge outburst of energy we observe at intermittent intervals.
As cathode rays strike the lower solar atmosphere they trigger a massive
electrical discharge process in the atmosphere and they accelerate the solar
wind particles that are predominantly composed of protons and positively charged
helium ions. Not only does the
discover of cathode rays in the solar atmosphere support Birkeland's solar
theories, it shows the predictive usefulness of this theories and how they can
be used to predict solar behaviors. Birkeland was a man ahead of his time.
He was already simulating solar activity in his lab over 100 years ago!
Carbon Stars And The Mass Separation Of Elements
It seems that a brand new type of star has been discovered,
and it directly supports our mass separated solar model. It would seem
that the atmospheres of stars are not limited to hydrogen and helium, but rather
some stars can develop a *carbon*
atmosphere. Now of course that discovery of a carbon solar
atmosphere isn't much of a surprise when you assume that all stars have a mass
separated set of layers in their atmosphere as our model presumes, but that is
quite a revelation for standard solar theory. The quote for the article on
how to explain this phenomenon was also quite interesting:
000 K), why don’t we see
carbon/oxygen-rich white dwarfs at intermediate temperature? We believe that
the simplest way to explain this is that a star like H1504+65, however it was
formed, most probably still contains a tiny amount of helium which will
eventually diffuse upward to form a thin layer (
is enough to form a full atmosphere!)
above the C-enriched and O-depleted mantle.
If they are descendants of a star
like H1504+65 (
In other words, they are suggesting that the easiest and
simplest way to explain this solar behavior is to assume that the elements will
tend to mass separate in the solar atmosphere. :)
The Gaping Hole In The Big Bang Theory.
Every so often,
some new information comes along to demonstrate our basic ignorance of the
universe around us. The
hole that was recently discovered in the universe is one such example.
"Not only has no one ever found a void this big, but
we never even expected to find one this size," said researcher Lawrence Rudnick
of the University of Minnesota.
"What we've found is not normal, based on either
observational studies or on computer simulations of the large-scale evolution of
the universe," said Liliya R. Williams, also of the
University of Minnesota.
Of course we must recognize that the
hole they found is in fact "perfectly normal" for our universe, it simply defies
our computer modeling entirely. While EU theory predicts a threaded and
non uniform universe, Big Bang theory has consistently predicted a smooth,
nearly homogenous universe that is practically devoid of these sorts of "gaping
holes" in the universe. In fact, a nearly homogenous universe is one of
the "key predictions" of inflation theory that the mainstream has touted as an
important example of importance and usefulness of Big Bang theory. It now
turns out that this "key prediction" of Big Bang theory is critically flawed.
The real life observations of our "perfectly normal" universe refutes the
homogenous predictions of the inflation period of Big Bang theory. As
usual, the mainstream will not embrace this new information as a key failure of
Big Bang theory and therefore abandon that particular theory. Instead they
will do what they always do. They will quickly revise their Gumby-Lambda
thingamabob Big Bang theories to "postdict" a new "key prediction" of a
non-homogenous background and then they will claim that their new "prediction"
is a key validation of "new and improved" Big Bang theory. The consistent
and numerous failures of the key predictions of Big Bang theory cannot ever be
used to refute or falsify the Big Bang theory. That is because Big Bang
theory has become a type of quasi-religious dogma within the mainstream
astronomy community. Any observation that refutes the dogma must be
incorporated into the new and improved Big Bang dogma. Despite the fact
that Big Bang theory relies upon no less than three different metaphysical
entities, and it has never produced an accurate "prediction" in it's history,
the dogma of Big Bang theory lives on in some revised form. Of course the
primary reason that the theory cannot ever be falsified is the fact it is based
on three different metaphysical forces of nature. If they can't explain
the hole in the universe with inflation, then they can always chalk it up to one
of the "dark" forces of nature that their Gumby-Lambda models rely upon.
Lambda theory has become the ultimate Gumby theory. It can be bent and
twisted like a pretzel simply by tweaking one of it's metaphysical variables.
Since these metaphysical variables cannot ever be falsified here on earth, there
is no limit to the number of different outputs that can be "predicted" with the
Gumby-Lambda thingamabob theory! If one prediction is falsified, they can
just tweak a metaphysical variable and make a new prediction that posticts the
observation in question! What a racket! It's certainly no mystery
why an ever growing list of
scientists have called on astronomers to fund other types of competing
theories. Plasma physics and EU theory do not require any type of "gap
fillers" to bridge the gap between theory and observation.
FYI, over the summer, I've been posting
my theories on the
forum. The Thunderbolts forum is devoted to the study of the science
of plasma physics, and to exploring all non-metaphysical theories about the
universe around us, without the bias of all the quasi-religious dogma that is
currently being peddled by the mainstream institutions. I'm finding the
Thunderbolts forum to be a friendly place for real physical "science" (as
opposed to metaphysical pseudo-science) to be explored in an open, honest and
non threatening manner. What a breath of fresh air that has been.
started this thread that is specifically devoted to iron sun theories.
There are several other current threads that are related to this topic that I am
also actively involved in, including the thread entitled "In
EU, why does the sun have a black body spectrum?" and "The
New Images From Hinode reveal solar atmospheric plasma
behaviors that are 'impossible' to explain according to standard theory.
The Standard Solar Theorist's Slogan: "Anything But
A Hinode Ca-H image of coronal loops traversing the solar
the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, new images
from the Hinode satellite program are already revealing solar atmospheric plasma
behaviors that are "impossible"
to explain using the current solar model. Evidently the mainstream
community is still having a hard time accepting the role of electrical currents
in solar activity. They are also having a very difficult time accepting
the fact that Hannes Alfv'en actually did know what he was talking about when he
described the electromagnetic interactions that take place in *light* (non
dense) plasmas. Hannes Alfv'en was the Nobel Prize winning author of
magneto hydrodynamic theory. He explained in his book "Cosmic
"Again, it should be mentioned that there is no possibility of accounting for
the energy of the particles as a result of 'magnetic merging' or of 'magnetic
field-line reconnection', or any other mechanism which implies changing magnetic
fields in the region of acceleration. In the region of the double layer, the
magnetic field during the explosive transient phase is almost constant and
cannot supply the required energy (of course, the secondary effects of the
explosion also cause changes in the magnetic field)."
Handing Hannes Alfv'en the Nobel Prize
for MDH theory didn't stop the mainstream community from ignoring his work.
According to Alfv'en, the energy release of these atmospheric solar events comes
from the flow of electrical current, not from "magnetic
reconnection" as LMSAL and NASA have been trying to suggest.
Standard theorists try to claim that magnetic fields drive these high energy
solar events, but according to the author of the principles of MHD theory, that
is simply impossible. If you read the article,
Leon Golub from Cambridge explains one of these presumably
Another surprise sighting is that of giant magnetic field loops crashing down
onto the Sun's surface as if they were collapsing from exhaustion, a finding
that Golub describes as "impossible". Previously, scientists thought they should
emerge from the Sun and continue blowing out into space.
Golub may believe that
this sort of plasma behavior is "impossible" to explain, but Hannes Alfv'en
explained this behavior 25 years ago. The atmosphere of the sun is electrically
active and it interacts with the electromagnetic fields of space.
Currents ebb and flow, particularly in the corona. As soon as the electric
currents that are flowing through a coronal loops stop flowing, say for instance
the electric current seeks a shorter path of lesser resistance through the
plasma, the suspended loop will deteriorate rapidly, and it will come crashing
back to the surface. As long as we accept Alfven's view that the coronal
loops are electrically active and electrically driven, it's not such a mystery.
The same electrical current that is running through these massive loops, and
heating them to millions of degrees, can instantly terminate. In
that scenario. these kinds of "crashing loop" observations become quite easy to
explain using the principles of plasma cosmology theory and MHD theory.
It seems that even though the the astrophysical community presented Hannes
Alfven with the Nobel Prize in the early 1970's for inventing MHD theory, they
only heard and understood part of his plasma physics theories. They
immediately turned right around after giving him the Nobel Prize for MHD theory,
and they completely ignored the other half of Alfven's statements related to MHD
theory related to *light* plasma. The mainstream community only "latched
on" to the very early part of Alfven's work that was related to the flow of
magnetic fields in very *dense* plasma. They quite literally ignored all
the rest of Alfv'en's life's work on light plasma. Now that problem has
come back to haunt the mainstream community in the Hinode images in a big way.
As Alfven explained
from his work in plasma physics, certain types of plasma behaviors simply cannot
be be properly modeled or properly understood without considering the electrical
flow patterns that are traveling through the plasma. Alfv'en warned the
mainstream community during his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize about
trying to mathematically oversimplify every plasma behavior, and trying to model
every plasma transaction as a purely "magnetic" event. Some plasma events,
like atmospheric discharges, are in fact electrically driven events, and in such
scenarios, the electrical current in the plasma must also be considered.
While lightening strikes on earth generate magnetic fields as a result of the
current flowing through the plasma of the bolt, the electrical discharge is not
"caused" by changes to the magnetic fields. The discharges in atmosphere
are due to charge differences in the atmosphere, and charge equalization laws,
not by magnetic fields. In other words, the magnetic fields are the
effect of the electrical discharge event, they are not the cause of the
discharge event. In this case, as Alfven warned, the mainstream community
has the cart before the horse. They find these observations to be
"impossible", because they are not magnetic events, they are electrical events.
Clearly the observations are not impossible, it is the standard theory of
magnetic reconnection that is "impossible". Alfven already explained that
to them more than 2 decades ago. They just refused to listen. Maybe
they listen to Alfv'en again now that their current theories have failed to
explain the solar atmospheric activity.
X-ray Images From
I think the motto of
the mainstream solar community must be "Anything but electricity" since they
seem to be looking for any possible way to avoid accepting the obvious solution
to the coronal heating problem, and the high temperature coronal loops. As
electrical solar theory suggests the sun's corona is heated by the electrical
current running through it. These current flows create electrical
discharge events in the suns atmosphere, just like they do here on earth. In
fact the RHESSI satellite program has already provided
evidence of electrical discharges in the solar atmosphere. When RHESSI
was pointed at the earth, they made a rather surprising discovery. They observed
gamma ray discharges coming from the earth atmosphere. Such gamma ray
bursts are related to electrical discharges that occur regularly in the earth
atmosphere. Not surprisingly the RHESSI satellite also observes gamma ray
bursts in the solar atmosphere as well. These gamma ray bursts are also
related to electrical discharges, this time to electrical discharges in the
solar atmosphere. Such
gamma ray bursts
occur in and around the footprints of the coronal loops, or the areas of
electrical energy concentration. This is tangible evidence
that electrical discharges play a significant role in atmospheric activity, just
as Alfven suggested over 25 years ago. The image below is
another image from the Hinode satellite using the G-Band filter using the Solar
Optical Telescope (SOT) instrument. The .2 arcsecond resolution of
these SOT images is very impressive.
G-Band SOT image of the photosphere by Hinode
The European Space Agency has provided more movies and images
from Hinode that can be found
anyone interested in a very good video introduction to plasma cosmology theory,
and Electric Universe theory, I highly recommend
Thunderbolt Of The God's Video. that is now viewable on Google. I also
highly recommend the Book "The
Electric Sky" by Donald E. Scott. If you're looking for a more in
depth (mathematical) presentation of Alfv'en's material and plasma cosmology
theory, I highly suggest the book "Cosmic
Plasma" by Hannes Alfv'en.
The First STEREO Running Difference Images
As the STEREO images are beginning to
come online, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the improvement in
resolution that is provided by the next generation of satellite technologies is
going to revolutionize solar astronomy. It is clear from the very first
images from each satellite program that the
and STEREO satellite systems will
forever change solar astronomy as we understand it. With four times the
resolution of the SOHO images, the new full surface solar images from STEREO are
already revealing far greater detail in the sun's surface activity than were
ever before possible using previous satellite technology. The four running
difference images above were all created by images that were taken on December
27th, 2006 using the 171A filters on the STEREO-A and STEREO-B satellites.
The top two images were created by STEREO-A and STEREO-B images respectively by
subtracting two images that were taken on 02:01 and 02:31. The two bottom
images represent the sun's surface features 21 hours later using images from
23:01 and 23:31. The level of detail that is revealed in these high
resolution STEREO running difference images is remarkable, and the surface
features that are seen in the top two images are clearly visible 21 hours later.
The active features on the surface have rotated uniformly during that timeline.
You may click on each of the JPG images above to get a full resolution Running
Difference GIF file of the same image. Just as in the SOHO RD
images, there are very distinct, long duration surface features that can be
observed in the RD images which rotate uniformly from pole to equator and do not
exhibit differential rotation patterns like the plasma in the solar atmosphere.
The multi-hour longevity of these surface structures are quite unlike the
structures in the photosphere that are created and destroyed in approximately 8
minute intervals. These persistent structures seen in running difference
EUVI images last for hours and days, and rotate uniformly across the surface.
Mass Separation Of Plasma Discovered In Cassiopeia A's
"Onion Skin" Atmosphere
This artist's concept illustrates an onion skin of mass separated plasmas
encircled Cassiopeia A.
I definitely want to start this month's
blog entry by congratulating the members of the
Hinode (formerly Solar-B) and
STEREO teams. Both of these new
and highly important solar satellite systems were launched successfully over the
past month and a half.
Hinode (aka Solar-B) and STEREO are
Hinode includes a number of unique
abilities and an assortment of new instruments to help us to add to, and improve
our understanding of solar activity. Hinode should finally be able to shed
some light on the amount of electrical current that flows inside of the coronal
loops. The discovery of very powerful electrical currents flowing inside
of the coronal loops should be quite a revelation to astronomers who tend to
downplay the importance of electricity and the role of electricity in solar
activity. The astronomy industry in general tends to myopically focus only
on the sun's magnetic fields. The powerful magnetic fields that form at
the solar surface however are actually caused by powerful electrical discharges
that occur in the solar atmosphere. Hinode (Solar-B) should help verify
the importance of the role of electricity as it relates to coronal mass
ejections, coronal loops and solar activity in general.
As I've discussed in previous blog
entries, STEREO should finally take a lot of the guess work out of solar image
analysis and allow us to tell where solar moss activity occurs in relationship
to the chromosphere and photosphere. STEREO will also allow us to
map the trajectory of CMEs with far greater precision. By comparing the
the location of solar moss activity seen in the Secchi 171A 3D images with the
location of the chromosphere seen in Secchi's 304A images, we should finally be
able to determine the location of solar moss activity in relationship to the
surface of the chromosphere. By triangulation methods, we should also be
able to determine the X,Y,Z components of coronal loops in relationship to the
core of the sun. Both of these things will allow us to finally place the
"transition region" in mathematically precise ways, without requiring any sort
of human interpretation. That is a giant step forward in solar image
Several times a year some new and
important information comes out that calls contemporary gas model solar theory
into question, and lends strong credence and powerful support to a Birkeland
solar model. These past few months were no exception, but the information
that was published earlier this month was simply "over the top" in terms of
scope and importance. Scientists have been carefully studying the remnants
of Cassiopeia A and have gained remarkable insight as to the construction of
that star before it exploded. It seems that the plasma ejected from
Cassiopeia A, shows that this star was composed of
concentric "layers" of mass separated plasmas, with the lighter layers on
top, and heavier layers underneath. The verbiage and the onion skin
analogy that was used in the article was particularly ironic from my
perspective, particularly since the onion skin analogy was the very same analogy
that Dr. Manuel used to describe the solar atmosphere when we first began
discussing his work in nuclear chemistry. According to nuclear chemical
analysis, the sun's plasma are arrange by weight, and form in layers, much like
an "onion skin" around the solar core. I had also reached the very same
conclusion about mass separated plasmas based on what I had seen in the
satellite images. The solar model I originally proposed is in the
image right below this entry. As you can see from the model below,
Dr. Manuel and I (and Hilton Ratcliffe) have suggested that the solar atmosphere
is mass separated by weight based on two different kinds of analysis. The
onion skin that formed around Cassiopeia is not unique. That is what all stars
do. They form "layers" of plasma around them that are mass separated by
atomic weight. This is perfectly congruent with experiments here on
earth. Plasmas tend to mass separate right down to the individual
isotope in the presence of strong magnetic and gravitational fields, both of
which exist in great abundant at the solar surface. It should not be
surprising that *all* solar bodies cause mass separation of plasmas. That
is the nature of stars. They contain a huge gravity well, and powerful
magnetic fields. These forces, along with a steady flow of hydrogen from
the surface, separate the plasma in the solar atmosphere, with the hydrogen and
helium layers forming the outside layers of all stars.
The Melting Point Of Iron And More Interesting Tidbits Of
I wanted to begin this month's blog entry
with an answer to a common email question I receive. I also wanted to
address some common misconceptions about the Birkeland solar model, and add some
new satellite data from other satellite programs to the growing body of evidence
that continues to provide support for a Birkeland solar model.
I am often asked how a the mostly iron
surface can remain solid at roughly 5700 degrees Kelvin. The simple answer
is that the solid surface of the sun isn't anywhere near 5700 degrees Kelvin,
but rather it is somewhere between 1500 and 2000 degrees Kelvin. The
surface is covered by a progression of mass separated plasma layers that are
thickest and coolest near the surface, and become progressively hotter as
they become thinner in the upper atmosphere.
The melting point of iron is actually
variable depending on the specific conditions. According to Livermore
scientists, iron is capable of remaining solid here on (in) earth to
temperatures up to
degrees Kelvin. The surface of the sun however is nowhere near
that temperature. The surface of the sun is covered by a variety of mass
separated plasma layers that are cooler and more dense near the surface, and
become progressively hotter as they become less dense in the upper atmosphere.
The 5700 degree neon photosphere is relatively thick, dense material and
therefore it is relatively cool compared to the sun's lighter helium
chromosphere, where temperatures can range up to 20,000 degrees Kelvin.
Likewise the helium chromosphere is considerably more dense and cooler than the
sun's light, whispy hydrogen corona. That same arrangement of cooler, more
dense plasmas, covered by thinner, hotter plasmas is repeated below the
photosphere as well. According to heliosiesmology estimates there is
a 4800 kilometer distance between the top of the photosphere and the actual
surface of the sun. The neon photosphere is only about 400 to 500
kilometers in depth. The silicon plasma layer is located under the
photosphere. It is by far the thickest of the sun's plasma layers and is
approximately 3000 KM in depth. It ranges in temperature from about 2500
degrees at the bottom to about 4500 degrees Kelvin where it meets up with the
photosphere. These dramatically lower plasma temperatures have been
evidenced in upwelling plasma in the umbra region of a sunspot during sunspot
activity. Underneath the thick silicon layer, sits a very dense
plasma layer of calcium. The calcium plasma layer is cooler and
significantly more dense than the silicon plasma layer. The actual
surface of the sun is covered by a calcium plasma layer that is approximately
1500 to 2500 degrees Kelvin from bottom to top, meaning the surface is roughly
1500 degrees Kelvin, not 5700 degrees Kelvin.
I also found a couple more satellite
programs that offer us some tantalizing observations to support a Birkeland
solar model, including a satellite created by students at Colorado University.
Data from the Student Nitric Oxide Explorer (SNOE) satellite have verified
that our Sun emits far more x-ray energy than once thought.
In addition, SNOE has demonstrated that this x-ray activity increases by a
factor of 5 during the sun's active phases and decreases again during it's quiet
phases. This drastic change in x-ray output during the solar cycle is
highly consistent with the premise that the coronal loops emit much of the
x-rays released from the sun. This correlation between coronal loop
activity and x-ray emissions has been graphically demonstrated in
based on data from the
SORCE and SOHO programs. This graph of the sun's x-ray output
from the SORCE program combined with the visual SOHO EIT image of the sun,
demonstrate that when surface activity peaks in 171A as seen by SOHO, so too the
sun's x-ray emissions spike significantly. This behavior of x-ray output
being directly related to coronal loop activity is completely consistent with
the prediction of a Birkeland solar model. It was a phenomenon that
Birkeland even produced in his lab. Any significant change of coronal loop
activity directly relates to a change in x-ray output. As the sun enters
it's active phase and the sun becomes more electrically active, and the x-ray
output of the sun increases up to five fold. As the sun enters it's quiet
phase again, the coronal loop activity drops and the the x-ray output decreases
significantly. This same effect can actually be demonstrated with a
standard plasma ball here on earth. With sufficient voltage, even a simple
plasma ball can create filaments that emit x-rays.
interesting link I found describes the temperatures that were created in
z-pinch forces in in the
at Sandia National Laboratories. It seems
that when you combine metals, electricity and plasma, it's possible to create
temperatures in plasma that reach nearly 2 billion (US) degrees Kelvin while
emitting x-rays galore. This is more than enough energy to release free
neutrons and initiate hydrogen fusion and
fusion reactions in the solar atmosphere. These are the kinds of
experiments that demonstrate quite conclusively that current flow plays a very
large role in coronal loop activity and x-ray output from the sun.
Blackbody Concepts, Sunspot Activity And Sea Surface
According to standard solar theory,
blackbody principles apply to sunspot activity. When explaining
sunspots, gas model solar theory suggests that the reason that the umbra
of a sunspot is darker than the photosphere is because this region is roughly
2000 degrees "cooler" than the surrounding photosphere. If that was the
case, and this whole region were cooler than the surrounding photosphere, we
would expect to see an increase in sunspot activity would result in a noticeable
decrease of ocean temperatures. This however is the exact opposite of what
we actually observe here on earth. While it may be true that *some*
areas of a sunspot are actually cooler than the photosphere, in a Birkeland
solar model the umbra represents an area of upwelling silicon plasma that is
being heated and pushed upward by the increased electrical activity at the
surface. In a Birkeland model we would expect to see an "average"
temperature in a sunspot that is in fact *higher* than the surrounding areas of
the photosphere. This increase in temperature during sunspot activity
would tend to correlate to an increase in ocean temperatures here on earth,
while a decrease in sunspot activity would result in a cooler ocean
temperatures. Indeed, when we look at the graph above, we see that
an increase in sunspot activity is directly associated with an increase in sea
temperatures. Likewise, when sunspot activity is low, the ocean
temperatures tend to drop. While this confirms the predictions of a
Birkeland solar model quite convincingly, this temperature trend directly
refutes the standard explanation for the cause of sunspot activity.
If these sunspots were actually cooler on average than the surrounding material,
then we would expect to see a *decrease* in sea temperatures with an increase in
sunspot activity, and an increase in ocean temperature during quiet phases of
the solar cycle. This is just the opposite of what we actually
observe. This is just another perfect example of the ever increasing
amount of data that directly falsifies current solar theory, while
simultaneously confirming the Birkeland solar model.
Where's the Moss?
If you're old enough to remember the
Wendy's commercial, "Where's the Beef?", and you are results oriented, you will
probably appreciate this next "prediction" related to the
STEREO satellite program. One
of the most significant differences between a Birkeland solar model
interpretation of these satellite images and current gas model interpretation,
relates to the placement of the solar moss events in relationship to the surface
of the photosphere. The 'Trace' spacecraft is an abbreviation for "Transition
Region And Coronal Explorer". Even before the TRACE spacecraft was
launched, there was an "assumption" made inside of Lockheed Martin about where
we should expect to find these million degree plasmas. Specifically the
expectation was that we should expect to see such activity begin somewhere above
the photosphere. Since that time, LMSAL has consistently "interpreted"
this solar moss activity as
approximately 1000-1500 kilometers above the surface of the photosphere.
The problem with satellite image interpretation is that all TRACE, Yohkoh and
SOHO images are only two dimensional images. The depth aspect has thus far
required human "interpretation", but all of that is about to change in a radical
way thanks to the hard work and efforts by the folks involved in the STEREO
STEREO will finally allow us to study the
solar atmosphere in all three dimensions for the very first time. Three
dimensional solar moss images will give us an extremely reliable way to
determine if Lockheed's placement was a valid "assessment" on their part, or if
their original assumptions and expectations regarding the location of the
transition region have done more harm than good as it relates to satellite image
interpretation. According to a Birkeland solar model, these emissions
should begin at the solar surface.
Based on data from the field of
heliosiesmology the surface of the sun is located at about 4800km below
the white light surface of the photosphere. Lockheed Martin however
contends that these solar moss events occur far above the photosphere,
and they label this region the "transition region". Determining the
precise location of this solar moss activity in three dimensions then becomes a
very useful way to determine the validity of LMSAL's early assumptions and
expectations about the location of this region in relationship to the
photosphere. It will also allow us to test their (and my) skills at
satellite image "interpretation". Determining the precise location of
these solar moss events in relationship to the surface of the photosphere will
allow us to test the accuracy of both "interpretations". If Lockheed
Martin's interpretation is correct, then this solar moss activity should take
place between 1000 and 1500 kilometers above the visible photosphere.
If a Birkeland interpretation of the satellite images is correct, then STEREO
should "discover" that these solar moss events are in fact originating
underneath of the surface of the photosphere, not above it. Only one
of these two "interpretations" can be accurate and there is a 6000km difference
in distance, and a 4000+ degree difference in temperature between these two
"interpretations". The real question then to determining which
interpretation is accurate is: "Where's the Moss"? STEREO should be able
to answer that question for us, once and for all. Hopefully we should see
some results from STEREO in a few months. Stay tuned!
Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
I thought I'd use this year's summer
solstice to stick my neck out a bit and make a couple of important predictions
about the upcoming STEREO program, and the data it is likely to return.
Since STEREO will be able to observe the sun's atmosphere in three dimensions
for the first time in human history, STEREO will afford us the opportunity to
verify or falsify some important predictions of both a Birkeland solar model and
current gas model theories. There are two important differences
between current gas model theory and a Birkeland solar model that STEREO should
be able to resolve once and for all.
The first key prediction of a Birkeland
solar model is the position of the base of the coronal loops in relationship to
the surface of the photosphere. In a Birkeland solar model, the base of
the coronal loops begin at the solar surface. According to the
heliosiesmology data from Stanford, the solar surface is located roughly 4800KM
*below* the surface of the photosphere. On the other hand, according to
Lockheed Martin and current gas model theory, the base of the coronal loops
originate in the lower corona or the "transitional region", far *above* the
surface of the photosphere. This is a key difference between the two
solar models and only one of these "interpretations" can be accurate.
The next important prediction of a
Birkeland solar model which STEREO should be able to confirm or falsify is the
location of the calcium plasma emissions in relationship to the chromosphere.
According to contemporary gas model theory, the calcium emissions we see coming
from the sun, originate in the sun's chromosphere. In a Birkeland solar
model however, all the plasmas in the solar atmosphere are arranged by atomic
weight. This would suggest that the calcium plasma is much heavier than
helium rich chromosphere. Therefore the calcium ion emissions should
originate from underneath of the neon photosphere, and from underneath of the
helium chromosphere, not from the chromosphere as current gas model theory
predicts. STEREO should be able to confirm or falsify this positioning,
and again, only one of these predictions can be accurate. STEREO
should be able to demonstrate that the solar plasmas are arranged by atomic
weight. Since these theories are mutually exclusive, the location of the
calcium ion emissions in relationship to the chromosphere is another very
significant and testable difference between the Birkeland solar model, and
contemporary gas model theory.
In an effort to begin to understand the
movement and the flow patterns of the sun's coronal loops, I have been spending
most of my free time studying the work of
was the creator of the field of science
of plasma flow now called
and was awarded the
prize for his work in 1970. Throughout his published career,
wrote many papers commenting on the
practical use of MHD theory in astronomy, as well as it's inappropriate misuse
by many in the astronomical community during his tenure and even to this day.
demonstrated that when the
density of plasma is decreased, the importance of electrical current flow, the
kinetic energy, and the resistance of the plasma is often more relevant and
meaningful than the orientation of the magnetic fields. That is never more true
than inside coronal loops where the flow of electricity and the kinetic energy
within the moving plasma filament is far more relevant than the magnetic fields.
The current flow and kinetic energy of the coronal loop sustains the loop.
These loops are not “frozen” magnetic fields in solid plasma, rather these loops
are moving columns of flowing plasma that are driven by DC currents that are
running through the coronal loop filaments. The coronal loops
discharge current from a negatively charged area of the surface discharge toward
a positively charged surface area. The coronal loops are simply large scale
plasma filaments driven by electrical currents, much like we find in a common
plasma ball. The plasmas in the filaments are moving and flowing through
the solar plasma atmosphere in tight filamentary structures in much the same way
as we see filaments forming in any electrified plasma environment.
In today's news, the Spitzer telescope
program provided additional information about solar system formation processes
and additional confirmation of
Dr. Manuel's neutron core theories.
Spitzer has now confirmed that when a sun goes supernova and "blows up", it
tends to blow its iron content and heavy elements into a disk that eventually
forms into a new solar system. The heavy elements ejected into the disk
provide the materials that eventually coalesce into planets. Spitzer
has now demonstrated that this proto-solar condition, complete with heavy
planetary materials in the disk, and a neutron core in the center holding it
together, is exactly
as Dr. Oliver Manuel predicted it would look prior to solar system
reconstruction. A naked neutron core will tend to attract an iron or
metallic sphere around itself due to its exceptionally strong magnetic field.
Once that outer shell reforms, a solar atmosphere can reform around the iron
shell and a new, albeit somewhat smaller star begins to form from what was once
considered a "dead" star. If there is enough neon in the remaining
material, the star will form a neon photosphere and produce photons in the
visual spectrum. This new information from Spitzer suggests that
solar system formation is likely to be highly cyclical in nature. A
large star forms and eventually explodes leaving a neutron core in the center
while it spreads its heavy metals into a solar disk. The remaining neutron
core eventually reforms a new iron shell and plasma atmosphere, while the
materials in the disk form into new planets, and the cycle begins anew.
Eventually the new star goes supernova again, and process repeats itself until
the neutron core eventually
becomes too small to form a stable shell and eventually explodes. This
minimum stable configuration "M(min)" has been calculated to occur at around
.189M (solar masses) including the shell.
A couple of articles caught my attention this week. One
article was entitled: "Why
Is The Suns Corona Hotter Than The Sun Itself." This question
is actually pretty easy to explain with a Birkeland solar
model. The coronal loops are composed of
rising columns of
superheated metallic plasma as shown in this NASA animation. These electrified columns of
metallic plasma are made
of surface materials that have been ionized in the arc as it rises from the
surface. Because these arcs
are electrically energized, they operate at a much higher temperature than
the plasma in the solar atmosphere. As these columns of rising superheated
material pass through the atmosphere, they pass their heat into the surrounding
solar atmosphere. Each outer plasma layer of the sun gets progressively lighter
The neon photosphere is relatively dense and relatively cool compared to the
lighter helium chromosphere above it. In turn the chromosphere is more
dense and considerably cooler than the hydrogen corona. The corona being
the least dense, is also the highest temperature plasma. That is due to
the fact that there are fewer and atoms for the heat to disperse through as the
loop travels through the various layers.
As the coronal loops pass through lighter and lighter plasma layers, from the
photosphere, to the chromosphere to the corona, each layer is heated by the
loops. As the loops reach into the corona, they glow in the soft x-ray
spectrum. As the loops reach the corona, the corona is simply too light
and is too sparsely populated to to re-absorb these soft x-ray emissions. The
following image and
animation of the same event by NASA gives us a Trace/Yohkoh overlay view of
solar moss activity. It also shows a set of coronal loops rising through
the solar atmosphere.
The blue regions are the view from the Trace satellite system
using it's 171A filter. The yellow areas represent Yohkoh's view in the
soft x-ray spectrum using it's SXT filter. As the coronal loops reach the
corona, the glow from the soft x-ray spectrum comes into Yohkoh's view as shown
in yellow. While the arcs emit x-rays all along the coronal loop,
these emissions are mostly reabsorbed by the photosphere and chromosphere.
It is only as the arcs/loops reach the corona that Yohkoh can begin to clearly
observe the emissions from the coronal loops.
The other article that caught my attention was
this article about changes in the earth's magnetotail on August 5th, 2004.
I went back to the SOHO running difference images for that day to get some idea
of what was going on at the solar surface on that day.
Throughout that day there were two very electrically active
areas on both sides of the equator facing directly toward the earth. These
regions were interacting with one another
all day. It is probable that the flow of current between these two surface
points and the electrical activity occurring in these areas had a lot to do with
the event the satellites witnessed in the magnetotail. Electromagnetic currents
flow between the sun and the earth and the current flow patterns on the solar
surface can directly affect the earth and the earths electromagnetic field.
The fact that witness and experience powerful
magnetic reconnection events has been verified by the
ESA Cluster spacecraft and the NASA Wind and ACE satellites.
Esa's cluster mission has also revealed a
three dimensional model of the magnetic turbulence in the magnetosheath
during these electromagnetic exchanges between the sun and the earth.
More fun with solar flares. I've run across some rather
interesting flares and related solar phenomenon on Lockheed's website that I wanted to keep handy during debates.
I'll mention some of them here and remind myself of the location of each of the links.
All the images come from
this page and
are provided by Lockheed Martin. In
this event (movie 59) we see
a "tadpole" event
where material from above the event is being "sucked in" by the magnetic fields of the
electrical discharges. In this video (61) we see a
fractured piece of the
surface rise up into the atmosphere where it is promptly obliterated by the
electrical blowout that ensues. This movie (67) shows a current loop being
and replaced by a shorter, more direct, more energetic current flow much closer
to the surface. Here (47) we see a material being ejected as in
a jet rising up
from the surface in a straight line and then the same material is sucked back
down again to the surface. In this movie (48) we find
"hot spots" all interacting with one another. Here (29) we find what
Lockheed describes as a filament draining into the umbra as
material spirals around and into a point. Here we see more
like structures forming in the solar atmosphere. Here (96) is another
I thought I'd share a few of my current cyberspace "hangouts",
where I actually debate these ideas so others can join in the debate and comment in
real time if they are so inclined. I'm currently participating in two
active forums, the
forum on Uplink on the Space.com forums, and also at "Skeptic
Friends Network". You are welcome to join one of these two
active conversations if you are so inclined. I have participated on
the Skeptic Friends Network for several months now and I have come to like Dave
and Dr. Mabuse a great deal, even if we remain far from agreement at the moment.
:) They both however are very good "skeptics", even if Dave is sometimes a
bit gruff at times.
Saiph at the Uplink forums
looks to be an excellent and educated astronomer as well, and I actually prefer
his "debate style". I'm just getting started at Uplink on
Space.com, but the conversations there are very interesting, and the forum seem
to be well moderated. In fact my hat is off to the moderators at both sites.
The debates have been lively, fair and very interesting.
I've learned a great deal over the past month. One of
the primary issues that keeps cropping up in these conversations, and a very
that must be addressed is the
heat source of coronal loops. These
sometimes massive loops are heated by the electrical current that is running
through them like we see during this
flare. In fact, we can see that these electrical arcs are the
focus of the energy emissions from
iron ion filters on the Trace spacecraft. "Electricity" is the great "mystery"
that seems to elude gas model theorists as it comes to explaining the heat source of the
coronal loops. The temperature does not drop off with height because the
loop is constantly being heated by the electrical current that is running
through the arc. That constant flow of electricity is what sustains these
coronal loops over one spot for a period of hours and even days. In some
cases we can actually see
far out in the corona that are caused by the electromagnetic disturbance of
the flare near the surface. Here we can see
that are directed by the electromagnetic fields in the corona and we see
similar sorts of
inbound jets in this image. These loops do not only "not sag", they
actually grow in size and continue to flow even over the span of many hours such
as this six hour
time sequence of loop evolution and coronal rain activity.
The other issue that is key to this debate is the notion of
mass separation. Dr. Oliver Manuel (my good friend) has spent three
decades documenting that the
solar atmosphere is mass separated via careful isotope analysis of lunar
soil samples and comets. Satellite imagery has recently confirmed that the
solar atmosphere is mass separated in several ways, most visually in the form of
a rigid surface,
and many images of "coronal
rain". We also see evidence of mass separation in the presence of at
least three agreed upon plasma layers of the sun, the photosphere, the
chromosphere and the corona. Each of these regions is associated with it's
own temperature and density range. The photosphere is more densely packed
and is cooler than the lighter layers above. The chromosphere is
considerably lighter and hotter than the photosphere and the corona is lighter
and hotter still. These three distinct plasma layers, with three
unique densities and temperature ranges have already been documented and agreed
upon. The images of coronal rain falling through the corona
demonstrates that these regions are composed of materials with radically
different densities. There is also additional evidence of mass
sunspot activity where we see a very clear visual delineation at the base of
the penumbral filaments which all end at a very specific depth. This clear
visual delineation between light and dark areas at the end of the filaments is
where the neon filaments meet up with and end at the silicon layer below.
In fact, it is the upwelling of a rising column of heated silicon plasma that
creates the holes in the neon photosphere, and exposes the sides of the neon
penumbral filaments during sunspot activity. We can actually see,
cool dense material being hurled into space in the electrical eruptions from the
surface. In this movie we can see a
dense and dark
"cloud" in the lower right corner is being hurled into the coronal loops at
the top of the image, causing the coronal loops to sway in the breeze.
Here we can see a
top down view
of a similar surface flare episode. This time. the dark and dense
cloud of heavier materials is flowing in an arched path with the center loop
just before the flare. When the flare occurs, that dense cooler cloud of
material is hurled from the center arc, upward and towards the top of the image.
In this movie, we can see
ejected changing course in the constantly changing magnetic fields and is
pulled right back down toward the surface.
Rocks! As of today, the website traffic from New Zealand has made up
about 8% of the total website traffic for this month. For such a modest
sized country, that is simply unbelievable. That is greater than the
combined monthly traffic of the next three largest countries of the UK, Canada
and Australia combined. That is really awesome. The website
also reached a numerical milestone this month. This website has now been
visited by over a quarter of a million individuals from more than one hundred
and forty countries since May of 2005. You gotta love the power of Google.
Since I get a lot of emails and questions about my opinions regarding the topic
of plasma cosmology, I thought I'd give this topic a bit of column space this
week. It is my opinion that a gravity oriented, big bang, gas model
approach to astronomy will eventually give way to an Electric Universe, plasma
cosmology oriented approach that includes and acknowledges the very
large scale Birkeland currents that flow through our universe.
Once this enlightenment process begins to pick up steam, current gravity
oriented gas model ideas will seem about as credible as believing the earth is
flat or that the earth is the center of the universe, or that gravity alone is
the driving force of solar system formation. In fact we already have
substantial evidence to suggest that
gravity is *not* the only force that drives solar system formation.
Most likely Birkeland currents are involved in this process and in every process
within our very electric universe. There are quite a few really excellent
websites devoted to the topic of plasma cosmology, including
electric universe model is certainly going to replace the current
gravity-centric notions of astronomy in the next few decades.
Several articles have come out recently that further demonstrate the presence
and the effects of Birkeland currents both inside and outside of our solar
system. It seems there is now evidence to suggest that
Mars also experiences
The ionosphere of
Mars is also affected by x-ray flares from the sun, much as the earth is
affected by these same events. These two phenomenon demonstrate that
Birkeland currents play a major role in daily solar system activity. This
is because the sun and the
earth as well as other planets are predominantly made of iron.
Preliminary data from the Stardust satellite confirm yet again that
comes from meteorites, which are themselves iron rich because they are
ultimately composed of supernova remnants. There has also been recent
massive sized Birkeland currents in space. It seems that
Birkeland was more than 100 years ahead of his time, but many of his electrical
current theories have been verified time and time again, not to mention
satellite confirmation of his solar model. :)
The Spitzer Telescope is starting to reveal more clues about
solar formation processes. These events reveal the presence of a
significant amount of crystal silicates. This "discovery" helps us
to confirm that other suns also have a silicon plasma layer that covers their
surface, just as our own sun has a silicon plasma layer that covers it's
surface. Another interesting "discovery" this week involves Saturn.
Saturn is currently experiencing a very large electrical storm event in it's
atmosphere. It seems that
bolts on Saturn are up to 1000 times more powerful than lightning that we
experience here on earth. This information suggests that the largest
bodies in our solar system (including the sun) are considerably more
electrically active than smaller bodies. I also ran across a
very interesting new paper from
Alexander Kosovichev that demonstrates the presence of waves in the
photosphere on dates and times that are directly associated with surface
fractures that can be seen in 195A SOHO images. His new work includes the
2005 event that is listed on the sunquake page of this website.
On all three dates listed, there are noticeable surface fractures that can be
seen in the raw SOHO images. These surface fractures are what
create the tsunami like waves in the photosphere.
Over the last couple of weeks I've been studying the heliosiesmology work of Dr.
Alexander Kosovichev from Stanford University in greater depth. While his
most recent paper confirms the
presence of stratification layer at .995, extending to about .985R, some of
Kosovichev's earlier work demonstrates that this stratification layer
can and does block the flow of plasma. In figure 2A, we see the
mass flow patterns in the plasma above the stratification layer. The
movement of mass in the area above the stratification layer is generally
oriented downward, as plasma moves toward the downward spiraling column of
plasma. This is very consistent with the tornado like features we often
see in the solar atmosphere. Figure 2B represents the material flow
in the area beneath the stratification layer. In this region however the
material flows generally upward and away from the rising column of material.
flow behavior is consistent with a rising heated column reaching the underside
of a dense crust and spreading itself out along the underside of the crust.
Figure 3 represents the flow patterns seen over a very great depth.
We see that the downward oriented plasma
flows ends, and flattens out at the same place the stratification layer begins.
Figures 2(a) and 2(b) - Click on the images for a larger view
I also came across some interesting information from the
Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy. This website talks
of sector boundaries at aphelion. It visually animates the flow patterns
of Birkeland currents through the iron sun at the sun rotates slowly over time.
This movie demonstrates the spiral pattern that is created in the current
flow around the sun as the predominantly iron sun slowly rotates on its spin
find sunspot activity to be quite fascinating. The
structures that emerge in the solar atmosphere carry the heat from the arcs down
below up into the upper atmosphere into massive hurricane sized events.
These events disperse vast amounts of mass and heat and energy that extend
far out into the solar system. Some of that material is drawn back by
gravity and falls again as coronal rain.
After receiving over 4000 hits from a single blog in the month of January, I am
now sold on the power of the blog. I also seem to be learning something interesting
and new (to me at least) about the sun every week, sometimes every day, so I thought I'd start a web log to make notes about the data I collect as
I discover new facts about the sun. I eventually intend to turn this page into a real blog that will
allow others to comment. For the time being however, I'll use this page to
make current notes that strike me as interesting and I will update this page
regularly, treating it as more or less a "current news" page.
Goodness Sake, Fix Your Website!
The first subject I would like to tackle on the blog relates back to an online
conversation I was having before being rudely burned at the virtual stake for my
Since I didn't quite get a sense of completion on that topic, I'll lay out the
materials that I have been collecting to support my analysis of these images,
including some new materials that I never had the opportunity to post. This information relates to
a conversation I was engaged in concerning the topic of black body radiation and
how that relates to a series of images that Lockheed
Martin misidentified on their website.
The images above are the images in question. The blue/green images are
processed images that attempt to show heat signatures within the solar
atmosphere, whereas the orange image
is a raw (but colorized) image from the Trace spacecraft taken at 171A. According to
Lockheed's website, the base of
the coronal loops shown in red are cooler than the surrounding materials.
This is false
and misleading according to NASA. According to NASA, the bulk of the
heating takes place at the base of the coronal loops:
"The TRACE observations show that instead, most of the heating
must occur at the bases of the coronal loops, near where they emerge from
and return to the solar surface."
If the heating occurs at the base of the loop, then the heat itself and the heat
mechanism is also concentrated at that point. The heating and cooling at the base of the arc is directly related to the flow
of current at that moment in time. The source of energy to heat the base of
is electricity, specifically
flowing from the surface features and ionizing surface solids into plasma into
the coronal loops. NASA's assessment of heating at the base of the arc
confirmed by Rhessi/Trace images which show that the base of the coronal
loops/arcs is the point of positron/electron annihilation. The neutron
capture wavelengths are circled in red, while the positron/electron annihilation
areas are circled in the blue regions at the base of the electrical arcs.
The blue, high energy emissions are located along the surface at the base of the
arc. This recent
from Lockheed Martin also explains the wide range of high temperature sensitivity of the
171A and 195A filters onboard the Trace spacecraft.
While the 171A images are typically considered to be sensitive to only to
FE IX/X ion
photons in the 1 million degree range, this same filter is also quite
capable of seeing calcium emissions in the 4 million Kelvin range and even FE XX
ion photons in the
10-20 million Kelvin range. In addition,
University of Maryland has also demonstrated that the coronal loops generate
emissions that are consistent with plasma temperatures of over 1000 million (1
US Billion) degrees Kelvin.
The soft x-ray Yohkoh image on the left was taken at the dawn of new Millennium
as the sun reached the peak of it's active solar cycle. Yohkoh allowed us for the
first time to observe the highest energy emissions from the sun. Yohkoh
showed us that the highest energy photons, and the areas of greatest
heat concentration are located in and around the coronal loops, just as Dr.
Kristian Birkeland's model predicts. The
dark areas of the solar surface represent the chromosphere and photosphere that
are measured in the thousands of degrees Kelvin, whereas the loops/arcs coming from
the surface carry heated plasma that is in excess of 1 million degrees Kelvin.
Yohkoh have both demonstrated that the highest energy emissions come from
the arcs and from the base of the arcs where the arcs touch the solar surface. The arcs will
up through the plasma of the photosphere and chromosphere and into the
corona where they can be seen emitting in the x-ray spectrum against a dark
Yohkoh, Geos and Rhessi have all demonstrated this phenomenon. All three
satellites consistently show that the highest energy photons and the hottest
areas of the sun are directly related to the
flow within the arc. Just as
Lockheed Martin's Analysis of the Bastille Day flare demonstrates, 171A
images are fully capable of picking up not only the Fe IX/X photons, but also
Calcium photons in the 4 Million degree range and Fe XX ion photons in the 10-20
million degree range as well. Any interpretation of photon emissions from
the surface must take this very large, very wide heat range of the 171A and 195A
filters into account. Because of this high temperature sensitivity,
it is physically impossible for the dark regions of the surface which emit no
light in the original two images to be "hotter" or more energetic than the
brightest areas of the original images. These same filters are ultimately
sensitive to a range of temperatures that far exceeds anything remotely related
to the surface of the photosphere and chromosphere. Lockheed
Martin's analysis of the 171A and 195A images is flawed. The base of the
coronal loops is brighter and hotter than anything else on the surface in both
images. Black body concepts certainly DO apply here in a very standard
way. The 171A an 195A emissions are concentrated in and around the arc,
because electricity is flowing through that arc and heating the iron plasma to
million plus degree temperatures against a backdrop of thousand degree plasma