I was always comfortable with the liquid sun hypothesis. And then I went to this website and it threw a huge wrench into my spokes. What the author says about high voltage arcs is correct. I myself have seen filaments inside of ordinary light bulbs emit bizzare plasmic clouds that slowly circle around the bulb, long after the high voltage impulse is removed. The question I always asked myself was, what are these clouds made of? They didn't glow with the same color as the gas in the bulb. Eventually I reached the conclusion that these clouds were made of vaporized metals from the filament. This phenomena would occur at a mere 10 Kv at like 20 micro amps. And it would only occur if the power was impulsed. This all sounded exactly like this theory on solar flares! ... A burst of high voltage arc superheats the metals on the sun's suface, and sends a burst of metallic plasma streaming into space. The fact that it's iron plasma would add monads of ease to describing why the flares are so bent by the sun's EM field. Magnets attract iron. And arcs jump between two places.. so do solar flares. Science already knows that much of the sun's cosmic radiation that reaches earth is in the form of iron plasma. It all makes too much sense to be wrong. When I look at these pictures, I see a conductive suface where high charge points result in arcing through the gas plasma of the photosphere, which causes the discharge surface to melt under the extreme heat near the arc. It is basic high voltage stuff.
Why would you want to have the surface of the sun to be iron? Not so long ago, people believed that it was made of coal. It made some sort of sense in a religiously buttressed world view. The world was only five thousand years old and the coal of the sun would burn out shortly, and the last trump would sound on new years eve 2001. industrialists could sleep in their beds, without worrying about the plight of the poor.
Has this guy's web site not got itself all confused and caffufled over the difference between an ion and iron?
Just out of idle curiosity I worked out how thick a solid surface to the sun would be. Given that there's 80 iron atoms to 10 million hydrogen atoms, I get the surface at about 13 metres.
Wrong again That radius is if the iron as at the centre, drag it out to the surface and it's about 1.8kms. Though it might be best to pretend I never said any of this
Iron is on the surface of the sun-I hope that is an established fact we can all agree on. It seems to me iron might be the cause of most of the explosive activity observed on the sun. All of the pictures of the gas planets and the sun indicate they are not gas but either liquid or solid. It seems to me anyone looking at any of the modern photos would conclude the sun is not gas anyway. Its good to see new down the Earth stuff on this site rather than worn theories.
Evidence that the sun has a solid surface
Posted - 16 Sep 2005 : 03:51:24
I was way off there, make that 13 thousand kms, Well, an easy mistake to make, it's about one fiftieth of the radius.