Solar Mountains & Solar Flares & Shockwaves
Just to set the context ...
http://spaceweather.com/images2011/24sep11/x2.mov
That last x-class flare was pretty interesting for a couple of reasons. Not only does it clearly show the electrical discharge event, the shock wave that ensues follows a path that makes prefect sense in a Birkeland solar model, but looks to defy the laws of physics in the standard model.
That was really cool!
What is it that shows the shock wave defies the laws of physics in the standard model?
In the standard model, the path of the shock wave should have traveled roughly outward in a relatively linear fashion as we might see the bow shock of a CME in LASCO C-2 and C-3 images. The path of the bow shock should pretty much be dictated by physics. The path of the bow shock should be at least "roughly" outward and not particularly "angular' in it's movement.
That's not what happens. The bulk of the bow shock is deflected over 70 degrees once it hits the ridge, and part of it splits from the rest.
Assuming you mean the same flare, what deflection are you talking about? I see no deflection.
Hmm. It probably would be better to wait until I have some time to mark up a few specific frames so you clearly understand the terms that I'm using and the locations of specific locations in the image that I want point out, but I'll try to just do it verbally for you at the moment.
Let me have you stop that video at the 09:40:19.840 frame and take a close look at it. Use the over saturated green lines to orient yourself as the 9:00 and 3:00 position on a clock from the point of the flare. The bulk of the mass flow from the remaining part of the flare looks a bit like a wispy hour hand that points at approximately the 10:00 position from the point of the flare. Pay attention to what happens to that mass flow in the following sequences. It doesn't travel in a straight line, nor did the preceding shock wave. In fact if you look closely at that very same image, the primary part of the bow shock is just down and the the left of the tip of the over saturated green line in the image. If you look closely you'll also notice it's not oriented as though it followed a straight path from the point of the flare, in fact it's already deflected off "the ridge".
Let's see if I can explain how to find "the ridge". What I'm calling "the ridge" in that same image is the area about twice the distance as the hour hand is long in that image. It's an areas that is very dark (nearly black) then turns into blue color, and then becomes green near the top where the coronal loops are clearly visible.
If you play the image through again, watch what happens as the shock wave moves through the atmosphere. It blows around the coronal loops light they are wispy little blades of grass. Something however not only splits the bow shock in two, it defects it downward at the location of the ridge.
I can see from just trying to describe locations I need to mark up some specific frames to clearly explain what I mean. I'll try to do that as I get time this week, but it won't likely be today. Be patient. I'll use some specific images from the movie to identify the ridge and the mass flow movements I'm trying to describe.
Just out of morbid curiosity, I don't suppose any of you would like to take a shot at explaining what deflected that shockwave in today's flare? A solid surface feature would certainly have that that effect, but I'll be darned how anyone might explain that deflection of the shock wave with nothing but a bunch of wispy light plasma.
http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/sdo/shockwave.jpg
I quickly pulled a frame out of the image and marked the specific items I'm talking about.
0-is the mass flow movement that can be seen in that image
1-is the leading angular edge of the ridge that splits the shockwave in two
2-is valley that the top part of the shockwave goes through
3-is the main part of the ridge
4-is the southern shockwave front that is shooting down the valley
5-is an example of wispy coronal loops being blown around in by the shockwave
I have looked at the
X2 flare movie and the
labeled single frame. I don't have any software that will allow me to separate and identify individual frames from the movie. I use quicktime on my MAC (Powerbook G4) to move through the video and identify what I am seeing by time stamp on the video, which should be good enough.
Let me start by addressing Mozina's claim above, regarding how the visible shock wave should behave, given a standard solar model ...
In the standard model, the path of the shock wave should have traveled roughly outward in a relatively linear fashion ...
This is not at all correct, by virtue of being considerably over simplistic. The environment in the chromosphere & transition region, above the photosphere, is topologically complicated. There is no simplistic general rule for how the shock wave should propagate. Rather, the details of the environments, as well as the detailed physics going on at the source of the flair, will dictate how the shock wave behaves.
Now, let me consider what I see as the primary claims from Mozina above: (1) The shock wave splits in two, and (2) the shock wave is split by a solid ridge, labeled "3" in the
still image. The event interpreted by Mozina as a split in the shock wave occurs between time stamps 09:36:43.840 and 09:37:31.840 at the angle of the "ridge", between points 1 & 2 in the labeled frame. It is an obvious interpretation, but it also brings out the true weakness of trying to to make definitive arguments just by looking at pictures, or watching movies. In this case, there are multiple subjective interpretations available, and the end result is that the viewer will see exactly what they want to see, what they expect to see. For instance, if you go on a couple of frames, in particular to time tag 09:38:43.840 you can now see a bright jet emanating towards the 10 o'clock position from the primary flare. Follow that jet in the few succeeding frames, rocking the movie back & forth so you can see what's happening and at least one other interpretation becomes evident, and it is as "obvious" to me as the first: The event interpreted by Mozina as a splitting shock wave is not that at all, but rather a fore shock leading the bright jet, which arcs over and above the darker "surface" regions below, thus insinuating itself between the motionless background and the observer as a translucent/transparent cloud. That the shock wave does not split is most apparent at time tag 09:37:31.840, where the translucent cloud can be readily seen projected between the "ridge" and the observer, especially near labeled point "1" in the still frame. So rather than a "split", we are seeing a "fan", spread out over the "ridge" as a single entity, which can in fact bee seen all across the ridge with careful attention.
Of course, it is not possible with a simple movie like this to tell where the translucent cloud is located; it could be right on top of the "ridge" or it could be thousands of miles above it along the line of sight (remember, the sun is 860,000 miles across and we are seeing a substantial portion of the sun's disk here, so in the absence of a scale, "hundreds" or "thousands" of miles is perfectly reasonable). The absence of a "split" removes the motivation for postulating any kind of solid object, and renders the interpretation merely a subjective exercise in bias confirmation; my interpretation is no more certain or objective than is Mozina's, and that is precisely the whole point. Mozina stretches the available evidence beyond the breaking point and substitutes his own subjective bias, disguised as an objective interpretation of the movie, only serving to confirm his unreasonable bias that there must be mountains where mountains are physically impossible.
But let us carry the exercise a bit farther and consider this: Suppose we accept Mozina's explanation, and hold that the shock wave is indeed split by an intervening object. Is there an alternative to "solid" ("firm"? "rigid"?) mountains? The answer is yes. What we see in the image, labeled "ridge" by Mozina, certainly look like magnetic field structures, and any kind of magnetic field would certainly do a fine job of splitting or blocking a shock wave. No need for mountains. So we see bias extended so far that all of the laws of physics are to be summarily ignored, and subjective interpretations of a movie are to be forcibly re-interpreted as objective analysis, anything to save the holy grail of real mountains on the sun.
This is, in a word,
pseudoscience, that which copies the form but not the substance of science. Subjective interpretation made to appear as an objective analysis is exactly that copying of form without substance and cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.
!
!