Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Micheal's solar model
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Michael" data-source="post: 70510328" data-attributes="member: 627"><p>For the record, I have no idea who wrote that "hit piece" on Juergen's solar model, but their criticisms are almost entirely invalid. Jeurgen's solar model is indeed more "flexible" with respect to total neutrino output, but simply by "tweaking" the external/internal fusion numbers, his model can accommodate almost any neutrino output, including the observed numbers. The primary difference between any EU/PC solar model and the mainstream model is that EU/PC models allow for/predict fusion to occur inside coronal loop activity near the surface, and throughout the sun, meaning the *location* of neutrinos would be different in various EU/PC models compared to the standard solar model. The total number doesn't have to vary in the least however.</p><p></p><p>Whatever the writer's concern about Juergen's solar model with respect to convection at the surface of the photosphere, it *pales* in comparison the *two order of magnitude* problem in the mainstream model.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/09/weak-solar-convection-approximately-100-times-slower-than-scientists-had-previously-projected/" target="_blank">Weak solar convection – approximately 100 times slower than scientists had previously projected</a></p><p></p><p>If you're going to whine about Jeurgen's predictions with respect to convection, you should also be whining about the mainstream model after SDO revelations about convection. You folks missed the speed of convection by *two whole orders of magnitude*. That also creates all sorts of problems with respect to your modeling of the solar atmosphere. Your magnetic power source is two orders of magnitude *less than* you originally estimated it to be. You're just going to ignore that problem in the mainstream model, aren't you?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Michael, post: 70510328, member: 627"] For the record, I have no idea who wrote that "hit piece" on Juergen's solar model, but their criticisms are almost entirely invalid. Jeurgen's solar model is indeed more "flexible" with respect to total neutrino output, but simply by "tweaking" the external/internal fusion numbers, his model can accommodate almost any neutrino output, including the observed numbers. The primary difference between any EU/PC solar model and the mainstream model is that EU/PC models allow for/predict fusion to occur inside coronal loop activity near the surface, and throughout the sun, meaning the *location* of neutrinos would be different in various EU/PC models compared to the standard solar model. The total number doesn't have to vary in the least however. Whatever the writer's concern about Juergen's solar model with respect to convection at the surface of the photosphere, it *pales* in comparison the *two order of magnitude* problem in the mainstream model. [URL='https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/09/weak-solar-convection-approximately-100-times-slower-than-scientists-had-previously-projected/']Weak solar convection – approximately 100 times slower than scientists had previously projected[/URL] If you're going to whine about Jeurgen's predictions with respect to convection, you should also be whining about the mainstream model after SDO revelations about convection. You folks missed the speed of convection by *two whole orders of magnitude*. That also creates all sorts of problems with respect to your modeling of the solar atmosphere. Your magnetic power source is two orders of magnitude *less than* you originally estimated it to be. You're just going to ignore that problem in the mainstream model, aren't you? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Micheal's solar model
Top
Bottom