Electric universe theories here.

[Michael Mozina]

Probably. But I'm hoping that my continual reminder of his continual failure at least irritates him a bit.

All you are doing is reminding me of the fact you don't actually read or respond to any of my points, starting with your stupid (and highly answered) question about "dark matter". I think everyone in astronomy can explain my position on this topic except for you.

 

[Reality Check]

All you are doing is reminding me of the fact you don't actually read or respond to any of my points, starting with your stupid (and highly answered) question about "dark matter". I think everyone in astronomy can explain my position on this topic except for you.

What question did Ziggurat ask you about dark matter?
I must have missed it.
And does everyone in astronomy know you?

 

[Michael Mozina]

What question did Ziggurat ask you about dark matter?
I must have missed it.
And does everyone in astronomy know you?

Oooops, that was you, not him. It's hard to tell you two apart at times.

 

[Reality Check]

Outstanding questions for Michael Mozina

In case your last post was about my list of questions for you here it is again in a slightly different format.
These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by spouting unsupported assertions.

1. The perpetual dark matter question:
   How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
   First asked 23rd June 2009
   So far just an unsupported assertion that astronomers have got the masses of galaxies wrong.
2. What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected?
   First asked 6th July 2009
3. A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
   What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona.
   First asked 6th July 2009
4. From tusenfem:
   Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book?
   First asked 7th July 2009
5. Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
6. Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun).
   First asked 7th July 2009
7. Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible?
   First asked 8 July 2009
   See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
8. Coronal loops are electrical discharges?
   First asked 10 July 2009
9. Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question?
   First asked 10 July 2009
10. More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth
    First asked 13 July 2009
11. Formation of the iron surface
    First asked 13 July 2009
12. How much is "mostly neon" MM?
    First asked 13 July 2009
13. Just how useless is the Iron Sun model?
    First asked 13 July 2009
14. Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina
    First asked 13 July 2009
15. Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina
    First asked 13 July 2009
    He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
16. Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested?
    First asked 14 July 2009
17. Is Saturn the Sun?
    First asked 14 July 2009
    (Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
18. Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina
    First asked 14 July 2009
    MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
19. What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model?
    First asked 17 July 2009
20. What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
    (MM states that it is not the photosphere)
    First asked 18 July 2009
21. Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles?
    First asked 18 July 2009
22. How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light?
    First asked 19 July 2009
23. Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves?
    First asked 22 July 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:

 

[Michael Mozina]

Once again, your inability to quantify anything shines through.

Once again, your failure to answer my direct question shines through too.

I can heat anything I want to arbitrarily high temperatures,

Heat it with what? You have a photosphere at 6000k. What's heating the coronal loops to well over a million degrees and sustaining that temp for hours on end?

 

[Michael Mozina]

In case your last post was about my list of questions for you here it is again in a slightly different format.
These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by spouting unsupported assertions.

1. The perpetual dark matter question:

1. 
   
   Hoy. I guess you just refuse to hear the answers eh?

 

[Reality Check]

Once again, your failure to answer my direct question shines through too.



Heat it with what? You have a photosphere at 6000k. What's heating the coronal loops to well over a million degrees and sustaining that temp for hours on end?

Actually the question should be: What is heating the corona to well over a million degrees and sustaining that temp for billions of years.
Coronal loops and flares have a short term (but dramatic) effect on the corona and solar wind.
It is however clear that there are other processes maintaining the corna and solar wind in the long term, e.g. when there are no coronal loops and flares, the corona and solar wind do not vanish.

How does the Iron Sun idea handle this?

 

[Reality Check]

Hoy. I guess you just refuse to hear the answers eh?

Hoy. If you tell me where the answers are then I will read them and update the post.

The dark matter question is not really relevant to this thread so I really should put it in another section at the bottom:
Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Micheal Mozina.

Would that be OK with you? Or do you have any evidence that astronomers cannot get the masses of galaxies correct within an order of magnitude?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Hoy. If you tell me where the answers are then I will read them and update the post.

The dark matter question is not really relevant to this thread so I really should put it in another section at the bottom:
Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Micheal Mozina.

Would that be OK with you?

Whatever floats your boat. If you going to ignore my answers and claim I never provided them, what's the point in me answering you at all?

Or do you have any evidence that astronomers cannot get the masses of galaxies correct within an order of magnitude?

What evidence do I have that they have gotten it right *EVER*?

 

[DeiRenDopa]

He created that MHD world you're using today didn't he? What makes you a greater 'expert' on MHD theory than the man that wrote the theory? Alfven was an electrical engineer by trade. He would therefore *NEVER* have claimed that magnetic lines disconnect and reconnect to other magnetic lines.

[...]

Umm ...

... let's see now ...

Newton invented the calculus (or simply 'calculus', if you prefer).

We all use calculus today*.

For those of us who remember our (undergrad) university course(s) on the subject, all of us are greater experts on the subject than the man who wrote 'the theory' (a more rigorous, consistent approach to limits, to take just one example).

Of course the very considerable advances in understanding of the relevant parts of math since Newton's time in no way diminish his genius or his spectacular achievements.

Lather, wash, rinse, repeat, substituting any one of several hundred great scientists ...

You seem to have a rather bleak, sterile view of the nature of science MM.

* well, MM excepted of course

 

[Reality Check]

Whatever floats your boat. If you going to ignore my answers and claim I never provided them, what's the point in me answering you at all?

All you have to do is give the links to the posts where you answered the questions. That will not take long.
If you cannot then I have to conclude that you never answered them.
I cannot remember you ever answering them. Perhaps a clue to where you answering them?

How about the answer to just 1 question. Since you have already answered this it will be extremely easy for you to give the link:
How much is "mostly neon" MM?
First asked 13 July 2009

Or you can just reply to this post: The percentage of neon in the photosphere is XX%.

What evidence do I have that they have gotten it right *EVER*?

You are claiming that they got it wrong. It is up to you to provide the evidence that they have did get the masses of the visible matter in galaxies wrong.

 

[Michael Mozina]

All you have to do is give the links to the posts where you answered the questions. That will not take long.

Here you go on the DM question.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4913045&postcount=2432

Either scratch it off your list or respond in the appropriate thread, but quit claiming I never explained what was wrong with your DM theories. If and when you're "happy" with my explanation on that topic, we'll move on to something else, but until then I"m wasting my breath because you don't read or respond to my points.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Umm ...

... let's see now ...

Yes, by all means, let's watch DRD avoid the images yet again...

Newton invented the calculus (or simply 'calculus', if you prefer).

That might be fine if you could explain how magnetic reconnection is a unique energy release mechanism and Alfven was wrong to call it pseudoscience. Can you? Yes or no?

 

[Reality Check]

Here you go on the DM question.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4913045&postcount=2432

Either scratch it off your list or respond in the appropriate thread, but quit claiming I never explained what was wrong with your DM theories. If and when you're "happy" with my explanation on that topic, we'll move on to something else, but until then I"m wasting my breath because you don't read or respond to my points.

Read the post. I never claim that you never answered. I state that all that you have answered is that astronomers have got the mass of galaxies wrong (I really should have visible mass there).

The post you link to is about a possible way of actually detecting DM. I tis not about the existing evidence as in the question.

Thus I will not scratch it off the list. BUt I will move it to a new section.

 

[Michael Mozina]

No, it isn't, but the fact you are willing to make the claim only emphasizes the obvious point that you reject the validity of science in general, and physics in particular. No surprises here.

I simply reject the notion that you can point at things in the sky without ever demonstrating anything in a controlled test. Got one?

Oh, by the way, have you got a "controlled laboratory experiment" that shows the sun has a "crust"? Didn't think so.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. Birkeland already demonstrated his model works in a lab.

Yes, but I don't know what I am supposed to be looking for. The master menu shows "X Flares Part 1", "X Flares Part 2", "Filament Flares" and "Flare Evolution" Lots os stuff. So which menu am I supposed to look in to see the magic? Each of the menu entries is arranged by date, so I need to know the menu and the date.

You're supposed to be looking a flares in white light and noticing that:

A) the bases of the loops light up the photosphere as they come through the photosphere and the loop comes up *THROUGH* the photosphere.
B) the mass ejections from a flare blow material up and through the photosphere during the flare process.

Neither of these things would be true if the bases of the loops originate above the photosphere and "magnetic reconnection" causes flares to occur *above* the photosphere.

I guess I'll hunt copy and paste the specific images for you all after work today since none of you seem to be able to find them even with the DVD timelines specified for you and everything.

 

[Reality Check]

Outstanding questions for Michael Mozina

These are some of the questions that MM has been asked and seems incapable of answering other than by spouting unsupported assertions.

1. What is the amount of 171A light emitted by the photosphere and can it be detected?
   First asked 6th July 2009
2. A post that seemed to retract his "mountain ranges" on the TRACE 171A RD animation evoked this question:
   What discharge rates and processes come from your hypothetical thermodynamically impossible solid iron surface to show up as records of change in the RD animation in the corona.
   First asked 6th July 2009
3. From tusenfem:
   Where is the the solar wind and the appropriate math in Birkelands book?
   First asked 7th July 2009
4. Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified fission as the "original current source" and in the same post
5. Please cite where in his book Birkeland identified a discharge process between the Sun's surface and the heliosphere (about 10 billion kilometers from the Sun).
   First asked 7th July 2009
6. Is your solid iron surface thermodynamically possible?
   First asked 8 July 2009
   See this post for a fuller explanation of the thermodynamic problems with MM's solid iron surface.
7. Coronal loops are electrical discharges?
   First asked 10 July 2009
8. Can Micheal Mozina answer a simple RD animation question?
   First asked 10 July 2009
9. More questions for Michael Mozina about the photosphere optical depth
   First asked 13 July 2009
10. Formation of the iron surface
    First asked 13 July 2009
11. How much is "mostly neon" MM?
    First asked 13 July 2009
12. Just how useless is the Iron Sun model?
    First asked 13 July 2009
13. Coronal loop heating question for Michael Mozina
    First asked 13 July 2009
14. Coronal loop stability question for Michael Mozina
    First asked 13 July 2009
    He does link to his copy of Alfvén and Carlqvist's 1966 paper (Currents in the Solar Atmosphere and A theory of Solar Flares). This does not model what we now know a real solar flare acts like.
15. Has the hollow Iron Sun been tested?
    First asked 14 July 2009
16. Is Saturn the Sun?
    First asked 14 July 2009
    (Birkelands Fig 247a is an analogy for Saturn's rings but MM compares it to to the Sun).
17. Question about "streams of electrons" for Micheal Mozina
    First asked 14 July 2009
    MM has one reply in which is mistakenly thinks that this question is about coronal loops.
18. What is the temperature above the iron crust in the Iron Sun model?
    First asked 17 July 2009
19. What part of the Sun emits a nearly black body spectrum with an effective temperature of 5777 K?
    (MM states that it is not the photosphere)
    First asked 18 July 2009
20. Is the iron surface is kept cooler than the photosphere by heated particles?
    First asked 18 July 2009
21. How does the "mostly neon" surface emit white light?
    First asked 19 July 2009
22. Same event in different passbands = surface of the Sun moves?
    First asked 22 July 2009

Actual Answers From Michael Mozina:



Unsupported Assertions as Answers from Michal Mozina:

1. How are these items of evidence for dark matter incorrect?
   First asked 23rd June 2009
   So far just an unsupported assertion that astronomers have got the visible masses of galaxies wrong (and another reply with his usual "if we cannot detect it on Earth then it does not exist" non-science)

 

[Michael Mozina]

Read the post. I never claim that you never answered. I state that all that you have answered is that astronomers have got the mass of galaxies wrong (I really should have visible mass there).

I didn't say it should have visible mass there, I said you can't guestimate the mass of a galaxy properly or you won't need "dark" stuff to fill the gaps. I also said SUSY theories that *assign* properties to non existent particles is a bunch of horse pucky.

The post you link to is about a possible way of actually detecting DM. I tis not about the existing evidence as in the question.

It's a wonderful example of no less than 7 different assumptions that are being made about an exotic "dark matter" particle that doesn't even exist and has never been shown to have any of the properties that are being assumed about it. That's my whole complaint in a nutshell.

Thus I will not scratch it off the list. BUt I will move it to a new section.

I suppose we could call that "progress" of sorts.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. Birkeland already demonstrated his model works in a lab.

And Birkeland's solid shell was surrounded by an optically opaque layer at 6000 K? No, I believe it was not.

I'm still waiting for you to quantify any of your ideas, Michael.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

[...]

Newton invented the calculus (or simply 'calculus', if you prefer).

That might be fine if you could explain how magnetic reconnection is a unique energy release mechanism and Alfven was wrong to call it pseudoscience. Can you? Yes or no?

Why should I re-invent the wheel?

The general topic of magnetic reconnection has been covered quite extensively here in the JREF Forum, and those who hold to what they think Alfvén's view on it is have given a, shall we say, underwhelming defence (and no, I'm too lazy to do your work for you ... you go find, and read, the threads).

The specific magnetic reconnection topic that got us here has been well addressed by tusenfem (and in the papers he cites).

Did you read that material MM? Can you say, sincerely, that you could at least follow it, if not actually understand it?

With your indulgence, I shall refrain from posting a more detailed answer to your question, pending:

a) the publication, on your website, of the math (numbers, whatever) that you have promised,

b) a satisfactory answer to Ziggurat's questions concerning quantification of your ideas, and

c) an answer to my, now very old, question concerning the stiffness of the solid surface of the Sun, per your claims (if you no longer remember the question, please say so ... I'll be more than happy to provide a link, and repeat the question).

 

[Michael Mozina]

And Birkeland's solid shell was surrounded by an optically opaque layer at 6000 K? No, I believe it was not.

No, nor is the sun surrounded by such an optically opaque layer. His model *WAS* however surrounded by atmospheric plasma and the loops originated at the surface and came up through that layer, just like it works on our own sun.