Journey to the Center of The Yellowstone Caldera

HectorDecimal said:
One thing to remember is that the sun's core rotates about 5 times faster than the surface. That middle layer has most of the astrophysicists speculating a bit, but it is known to dilate and release a massive ball of plasma from the core.
Click to expand...

That's the part I was wanting to see some evidence on.

Keep in mind also that what I'm suggesting in all this is a slight deviation form what is mainstream not a quantum leap to lightyears away. There is really little to say about the sun's connection to earthquakes and weather that can't be found through a search, short of teaching a course in high school level science here.
Click to expand...

No, a CME that is plasma from the core is a huge divergence from the mainstream. I mean it takes a photon >10,000 years to get from the core to the surface of the sun, and you are saying that is were a CME comes from?

For what it's worth. The sun is basically quiet right now. If you check that link, you'll get to see what I am calling "normal" activity. No flares larger than 1.5% of the star's diameter. Bigger flares than those, I'm finding fall into the predictions.
Click to expand...

Actually the sun has been quite for the past decade but we are now in an active cycle and there have been several very nice flares. There was some nice activity around March 4th. We have to see a Kp of about 5 or greater for me to get see the aurora from my part of the country.
 
HectorDecimal said:
geysers at yellowstone in 2003

So much for that "quiet" decade. 2002 and 2003 both had very significant solar storms and Voila! mid-2003 the park starts acting up.
Click to expand...

Way to pick to random events draw a conclusion.:rolleyes:

But we are suppose (I thought) to be looking at one item and that is your conjecture that CMEs or balls of plasma come from the core of the sun.
 
origin said:
I thought we were concentrating on CMEs originating in the core. Any evidence of that. I meant the last 10 years have been quite which is due to the 11 year solar cycle.
Click to expand...

sun's core

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/explore/sun101.html

http://www.grandunification.com/hypertext/SunspotsSolarBallLightning.html

http://www.grandunification.com/hypertext/ExplodingSunspot.html#Video of Expoding Sunspot

The examples are tough to find, but they are out there. The best reference I've seen was the SOHO program on the NASA Channel back in 2005. I've tried ever since to find that with no luck.

I hope you aren't of the mind that after a ball of plasma, if it really is a "ball," bubbles out of the core after a million years, it takes another 50 million years for the next one to bubble up. It's an ongoing process.

The NASAChannel program of 2005 was beautiful because it also showed that the work I submitted to NASA in 1999 was correct, in that the so-called tachocline is merely an integral part of the cryo-layer that I pointed out in the cutaway from SOHO's 2007 proposal for new funding. What Trippy said was wrong. That was described in the document as a thermograph, even though it is obviously combined with a NASA artist's work to make the cutaway.
 
HectorDecimal said:
sun's core

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/explore/sun101.html

http://www.grandunification.com/hypertext/SunspotsSolarBallLightning.html

http://www.grandunification.com/hypertext/ExplodingSunspot.html#Video of Expoding Sunspot
Click to expand...

None of these support your idea that CMEs come from the core of the sun. The first site is just a generic low level discussion of the sun. The second 2 sites are from the mind of a lunatic. (that is a bit harsh really, it is just a pseudo science site)

The examples are tough to find, but they are out there. The best reference I've seen was the SOHO program on the NASA Channel back in 2005. I've tried ever since to find that with no luck.
Click to expand...

Well that makes it tough to support then.

I hope you aren't of the mind that after a ball of plasma, if it really is a "ball," bubbles out of the core after a million years, it takes another 50 million years for the next one to bubble up. It's an ongoing process.
Click to expand...

No, actually I am one of those guys that thinks that when the magnetic loops that connect sunspots collapse that the a large mass of plasma that is in the upper most layes of the sun is expelled into space.

The NASAChannel program of 2005 was beautiful because it also showed that the work I submitted to NASA in 1999 was correct, in that the so-called tachocline is merely an integral part of the cryo-layer that I pointed out in the cutaway from SOHO's 2007 proposal for new funding. What Trippy said was wrong. That was described in the document as a thermograph, even though it is obviously combined with a NASA artist's work to make the cutaway.
Click to expand...

Really. I am a bit skeptical, I tend to think that NASA may not interpret the situation the same as you do.

Since we have not been able to get any evidence that a CME is ejected from the core should we move to another topic or do you want to continue to look for support for this first idea of yours?
 
I did not say a CME is ejected from the core. I said essentially the process begins there and all the links provide enough corroborration that plasma and magnetism begins there. As for the off-stream, remember you wanted to see "balls of plasma."

Much of what I'm saying is based not only on corroborrable material, but quantum sense. Are you trying to tell me there is no magnetic field in a star's core?

Are you skeptical of the documents at NASA and other sources about 2002 and 2003 having intense solar storms and that mid-2003 the park was heating up and produced new steam vents?
 
HectorDecimal said:
I did not say a CME is ejected from the core.
Click to expand...

The direct quote is:

the core has recently spat out a major plasma burst

So I incorrectly, I guess, thought you meant that the core spat out a major plasma burst. Hopefully you can see my confusion.

I said essentially the process begins there and all the links provide enough corroborration that plasma and magnetism begins there. As for the off-stream, remember you wanted to see "balls of plasma."
Click to expand...

I would find it much more likely that the magnetic fields assocaited with solar flares would be found in the upper layers in the convective region of the sun. There is no evidence whatsoever that plasma from the core makes it to the surface as a solar flare.

Much of what I'm saying is based not only on corroborrable material, but quantum sense. Are you trying to tell me there is no magnetic field in a star's core?
Click to expand...

Well then please show me the corroborrating evidence, that is what I ahave been asking for. The relatively small magnetic loops do not appear to be related to any activity from the core of the sun.

Are you skeptical of the documents at NASA and other sources about 2002 and 2003 having intense solar storms and that mid-2003 the park was heating up and produced new steam vents?
Click to expand...

If you are implying that these 2 phenomena are related then I would not characterize my position so much as skeptical, it is more like I think the idea is bat-shit crazy. I cannot fathom any mechanism that could possible relate these 2 phenomena.
 
This is the take I'm getting here. You just graduated high school in say 2009? That would explain how so much information most of us had way back then would be buried so deep and you never reviewed it. The fact that you are having this much difficulty putting together not 2 but several events and label these events "phenomena" makes me doubt you have followed very much about solar and earth events in the last 12 years. Maybe in another 5 or 10 years you'll be qualified enough to assess scientific work as others carry it out.
You're a mod here. Perhaps you'd do well as a politician or business owner. I'd recommend against working as a scientific reviewer. You are much too quick to label others' work as pseudo- (fill in the blank.)
When you search so hard to find the bad, you miss a lot of good ;)
 
HectorDecimal said:
This is the take I'm getting here. You just graduated high school in say 2009? That would explain how so much information most of us had way back then would be buried so deep and you never reviewed it. The fact that you are having this much difficulty putting together not 2 but several events and label these events "phenomena" makes me doubt you have followed very much about solar and earth events in the last 12 years. Maybe in another 5 or 10 years you'll be qualified enough to assess scientific work as others carry it out.
You're a mod here. Perhaps you'd do well as a politician or business owner. I'd recommend against working as a scientific reviewer. You are much too quick to label others' work as pseudo- (fill in the blank.)
When you search so hard to find the bad, you miss a lot of good ;)
Click to expand...

I wish, I am a 57 year old engineer. I do enjoy astronomy, I have even ground my own telescope mirror. I have taken too much science and run to many experiments in my life to take someones suppositions as fact. I am sure that a relationship between solar activity and geysers make sense to you, but you need more than 'looks like' to convince me.

You have nothing but 2 completely seperate things that you have paired together in your mind. If it is more than that then present some compelling data.
 
HectorDecimal said:
As for Trippy's comment. I'll just say "Wrong" on the first...
Click to expand...

mdi010_prev.jpg

Concentric layers in a cutaway image show oddities in the speed of sound in the deep interior of the Sun, as gauged by two instruments on the SOHO spacecraft...

...In red coloured layers, sound travels faster than predicted by the theories, implying that the temperature is higher then expected...

...In blue coloured layers the sound speed is lower than expected, and temperatures are lower too...
Click to expand...
Source
It uses sound wave velocity as a proxy for temperature, but it is not by any reasonable interprtation of the word, a Thermograph.

I said it was based on gas velocity, it's based on soundwave velocity in the gas :shrug:

It's still not a thermograph of the sun.
 
Thank you for clearing that up. It's been several years since I've looked at the actual SOHO document. The effects are the same. It is showing us the temperatures of the various zones with red being the coldest.
 
HectorDecimal said:
Thank you for clearing that up. It's been several years since I've looked at the actual SOHO document. The effects are the same. It is showing us the temperatures of the various zones with red being the coldest.
Click to expand...

That is not what it is saying. The captions says that blue is colder than expected it says nothing about the absolute temperature.
 
The core has a temperature of ~16,000,000 degrees Kelvin, the blue indicates temps slightly lower than that expected number, not coldest temperatures. The core is about 25% of the diameter of the sun, but contains almost 90% of the mass. The next layer, the Radiative zone, is 70% the diameter of the sun, contains most of the rest of the mass, rotates with the core. It is not turbulent but is a dynamic balance between atomic nuclei and photons generated by Gamma rays from the core. There is a shear zone between it and the Convective zone, the outer 30% at ~5700K(with extreme temperature in the corona gasses). Only the outer third of the sun participates in violent eruptions and convection, violence in the core is a terminal sign. The very worst coronal mass ejection would only be a firecracker compared to something violent occurring in the core.

Grumpy:cool:
 
HectorDecimal said:
Thank you for clearing that up. It's been several years since I've looked at the actual SOHO document. The effects are the same. It is showing us the temperatures of the various zones with red being the coldest.
Click to expand...

NO.

1. It says nothing about the absolute temperature, it uses sound wave velocities to infer temperature deviations.
2. Red is a positive temperature anomaly, blue is a negative temperature anomaly - IE the Tachocline appears to be hotter than we expected, but the core appears to be cooler.
3. The deviations are small - in the case of the core, it's 0.15%.
 
Origin,

I did a search for the SOHO 1997 proposal. Nowhere to be found now. Sometime when I have a few extra moments I'll look in my stacks of citations and find it, scan some of it, etc. I'm right. You aren't.

Grumpy,

All that you have said is correct, however "violence" is relative. Are you going to try to tell me there is no magnetic connection in the sun's core?
 
I would love to reply in here, but my reply would sound like Star Trek. I'll just give you a taster...

When a sun collapses it becomes a Black Hole.. what if it was just an out hole that lost energy to become an in hole?
 
Pincho Paxton said:
I would love to reply in here, but my reply would sound like Star Trek. I'll just give you a taster...

When a sun collapses it becomes a Black Hole.. what if it was just an out hole that lost energy to become an in hole?
Click to expand...

Thats great, thanks. Please do not add anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top