Jump to content
IGNORED

The SUN (lets take a look see)


Enoch2021

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

 

It doesn't remove anything actually....he has a quite the "Eye Opening" rebuttal.

 

 

I am sure it is.  In the end you have two (or more) competing theories and one must choose which they feel is the best supported. 

 

And I provided reasons and asked you questions concerning .......Types/Sources and How did they conclude Source, that I felt was legitimate and extremely relevant.

 

The link I gave has references at the bottom of the page which answer some of your questions. I am not equipped to answer them as that is not my area of expertise so I must rely on others that I have come to trust.   I am sure most of your questions have probably been answered on the reason.org site, more than once

 

 

I've checked a couple of them and they did not.  I haven't got to all of them just yet.....I'm getting post slammed today LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

 

 

====================================================================

 

I hope this comes out right, but there is nothing being crumbled, not even close.  but nothing you have posted has not even done much denting let alone crumbling.

 

You must not have been keeping track.  You can Poo Poo it....just "Whistling Past The Graveyard" IMHO.

 

But this subject speaks to an overall Problem....it's only a tiny piece of the "Gravity"/"Big Bang" fiasco.

 

 

It seems that these discussion would flow better without such hyperbole, which just puts people on the defensive.

 

I add some "Flavor" to the posts....I do have a personality.  Try concentrating on the subjects and Specifically Refuting the evidences presented will help you focus more on that.

 

Also, these are not personally directed comments.....do you take "Secular" science personally?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Seeker
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,033
  • Content Per Day:  0.28
  • Reputation:   67
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

 

 

It doesn't remove anything actually....he has a quite the "Eye Opening" rebuttal.

 

 

I am sure it is.  In the end you have two (or more) competing theories and one must choose which they feel is the best supported. 

 

And I provided reasons and asked you questions concerning .......Types/Sources and How did they conclude Source, that I felt was legitimate and extremely relevant.

 

The link I gave has references at the bottom of the page which answer some of your questions. I am not equipped to answer them as that is not my area of expertise so I must rely on others that I have come to trust.   I am sure most of your questions have probably been answered on the reason.org site, more than once

 

 

I've checked a couple of them and they did not.  I haven't got to all of them just yet.....I'm getting post slammed today LOL

 

 

Dr Ross has a number of very good books out, I suggest you check one or two out.  Any ideas and theories can be so much better defended and explained in a book as opposed to a website or a forum such as this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Seeker
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,033
  • Content Per Day:  0.28
  • Reputation:   67
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

The Chromosphere..seems there are some theories out there...

 

Scientists at Northumbria University have begun to unlock the mystery of why the outer edge of the Sun is much hotter than its surface for the first time.

 
   

A team led by Northumbria's Dr Richard Morton, and including researchers from the University of Sheffield and Queen's University Belfast, has used cutting-edge solar-imaging technology to observe the Sun's chromosphere -- a region of the Sun's atmosphere sandwiched between its surface (photosphere) and outer layer (corona) -- to an unprecedented level of detail.

For years astronomers have looked for the elusive mechanism that causes some stars to have a corona that is almost 200 times hotter than their photosphere, despite being further away from the heat source at the star's core. It is believed that the cause of the increased temperature is due to magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) waves that distribute the energy generated below the star's surface to the outer layers of the Sun's atmosphere

Now, for the first time, the team has examined the MHD waves using a UK-designed dedicated solar-imaging telescope known as Rapid Oscillations in the Solar Atmosphere, or ROSA, to observe the chromosphere with a high degree of clarity. The powerful tool enabled some of the highest resolution images of the chromosphere to be obtained, allowing the scientists to study the speed and power of the waves and then estimate the amount of energy that they transport.

Their calculations confirm that the MHD waves could be responsible for transporting energy from below the solar surface, out through the chromosphere, into the corona and leading to heating of the outer layers in excess of a million degrees.

Dr Morton said: "The Sun is our closest star and provides a unique opportunity to study the properties of stars in detail. Stars generate heat through thermonuclear reactions in their core and the temperature decreases towards the star's surface. However, a significant number of stars have higher temperatures at the outer edges of their atmospheres than they do on their surface.

"Our observations have permitted us to estimate the amount of energy transported by the magnetic waves, and these estimates reveal that the waves' energy meets the energy requirement for the unexplained temperature increase in the corona."


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130204094608.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

I read the article you linked to.  Basically the gist is "convective velocities are 20–100 times weaker than current theoretical estimates".  What's your point?  What's the point of this thread?  Are you saying that since science is attempting to update and improve its theories that the devil made them put out false information originally?  Are you just attempting to impugn the scientific process in general?

 

 

==============================================================================

 

You just read the Abstract and picked out (In Green), and then you asked what's my point??  :huh:   If you kept reading, you would have got the point.   I'll make it a little bigger for you.....

 

"Within the wavenumber band ℓ < 60, convective velocities are 20–100 times weaker than current theoretical estimates. This constraint suggests the prevalence of a different paradigm of turbulence from that predicted by existing models, prompting the question: what mechanism transports the heat flux of a solar luminosity outwards?"

 

The POINT:  The Convection Thingy, Remember?  Kinda Important.....and, The Same thing I've been posting to you the past three posts and one of the EVIDENCES of This SUN Fiasco highlighted in the OP

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  223
  • Content Per Day:  0.06
  • Reputation:   27
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/07/2014
  • Status:  Offline

Tired of dividing already divided quotes, so I'm posting my reply in blue.

 

Um...anything. Provide any real actual proof (not mere evidence or conspiracy theory or speculation) that I am wrong and I will change my view.

 

What Like Dandelions?  We've talked about "Specifics" before if I recall, No? 

 

Bring Specifics Sheniy.

*************

I am referring to my original post, which you seemed to have issue with (but now you don't?).

What do dandelions have to do with anything?

******************

 

 

I just don't think it goes against the bible to see that creative force as mega-explosive.

 

I do.  Because it's not there

 

****************

I have shown where it is possible. If you don't wish to see it, that's fine.   I'm not going to twist your arm.

I agree there is some speculation, but there's nothing wrong with that.

****************

 

I don't know. You brought it up as contradictory. Shouldn't you provide the specifics? lol

 

OF WHAT??   Were getting into "ridiculous" Sheniy

****************

I agree.

After my original post you mentioned something about quasi-nebula something, but you didn't explain how it contradicted. I was just trying to understand why you even brought it up.

****************

 

You already stated my post was in line with the word (see above). If it isn't in line with the Word,

 

  If I see any, you'll most likely hear from me  :)

 

***********************

I did hear from you. You pointed out several contradictions which either I explained (and you have since agreed with...I think?), or I ignored because they were completely irrelevant to my original post.

***********************

and as long as it doesn't change any already established vital christian doctrines, which it doesn't...where's the issue?

 

I've pointed out the discrepancies with the Big Bang Official Theory and The WORD of GOD quite specifically.  The balls in your court whether to accept or reject.  I'm not gonna twist your arm.

*facepalm*

I don't even know why I bother. You don't seem to even listen.

I should have posted in a different thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  18
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  588
  • Content Per Day:  0.16
  • Reputation:   82
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  11/22/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/12/1969

 

I read the article you linked to.  Basically the gist is "convective velocities are 20–100 times weaker than current theoretical estimates".  What's your point?  What's the point of this thread?  Are you saying that since science is attempting to update and improve its theories that the devil made them put out false information originally?  Are you just attempting to impugn the scientific process in general?

 

 

==============================================================================

 

You just read the Abstract and picked out (In Green), and then you asked what's my point??  :huh:   If you kept reading, you would have got the point.   I'll make it a little bigger for you.....

 

"Within the wavenumber band ℓ < 60, convective velocities are 20–100 times weaker than current theoretical estimates. This constraint suggests the prevalence of a different paradigm of turbulence from that predicted by existing models, prompting the question: what mechanism transports the heat flux of a solar luminosity outwards?"

 

The POINT:  The Convection Thingy, Remember?  Kinda Important.....and, The Same thing I've been posting to you the past three posts and one of the EVIDENCES of This SUN Fiasco highlighted in the OP

 

No, I read the whole thing - I guess I could have copied and pasted the whole thing...  You still have not given a reasonable answer as to why the corona being hotter than the photosphere violates the second law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

 

No, I read the whole thing - I guess I could have copied and pasted the whole thing...  You still have not given a reasonable answer as to why the corona being hotter than the photosphere violates the second law.

 

 

 

========================================================================

 

 

 

You still have not given a reasonable answer as to why the corona being hotter than the photosphere violates the second law.

 

It's actually shocking that I would even have to....but did numerous times anyway.

 

 

No, I read the whole thing - I guess I could have copied and pasted the whole thing...

 

Did you come by this.....

 

"which leads us to conclude that large-scale convective flows are weak in magnitude."

 

You have a Thermo-Nuclear Fusion Bomb about the size of 1010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000------>  Nagasaki's and you have "Weak" Convection Flows......about 1% of expected.  Can you say "Dagger".

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

 

 

=============================================================================================

 

I should have posted in a different thread.

 

Try the Generalization Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

 

 

Thanks.  Have you been following the thread?

 

This same Article was posted by Jerry earlier, Here: 

 

See discussion after

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...