Solar Flares

[Mike C]

Cause of Solar Flares

 

The current prevailing theory for these eruptions is that they are caused by magnetic fields interacting(?) This is difficult to comprehend since there is no explanation of why these fields even exist on the Sun.

 

These magnetic fields are the remains of the impacting bodies on the Sun like comets and other objects where they form strong residual positive ions and electrons after the explosions that cause these separated particle ions.

 

The Solar Maximum Mission (SMM) satellite was launched in 1980 and remained in orbit for nine years observing the Suns activities. It recorded 10 comets that approached the Sun and did not see their exit from behind the occulting disc of the satellite.

So during the last 2 years of observation, the Sun was at its maximum peak of the solar cycle that recurs every eleven years. These eruptions were in the hundreds range during these last 2 years when the comets disappeared and by far, outnumbered the amount noted in the 1st seven years. This correlation indicates that these comets are the cause of these solar activities and eruptions.

Each comet can cause several eruptions because they are loose parts of the main body as was seen by the comet that landed on Jupiter a number of years ago that was fragmented into several parts.

 

There was a positive link to a gigantic solar eruption that caused the stripping off of all the electrons off two elements that were iron and sulfur. Another flare revealed the presence of oxygen. Only the inner two electrons were intact in surviving these explosions.

These observations were done by the x-ray satellite Solar Max. It was equipped with seven telescopes that could observe from gamma rays to radio waves.

Since oxygen was one of the elements involved in an eruption, it is obvious that a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen at that high temperature would cause an explosion.

This also explains where all the water comes from in the solar system. Most everyone should know that water is a byproduct of oxygen/hydrogen explosions.

 

The presence of sulfur can indicate that these comets originated from a comet belt between the asteroid belt and Jupiter’s orbit. The large presence of sulfur on the moon ‘Io’ that is the closest to Jupiter of the 4 visible satellites, could be the source of the presence of sulfur in the Suns activity.

 

The sources for this article are the S & T magazines dated June, 1989, p. 590-591 and the S & T magazine dated December, 1989, p. 600-601.

 

There is more evidence on thes website below:

 

JUNE 2, 1998: Projectiles Hit Sun

 

NS

[InfiniteNow]

The current prevailing theory for these eruptions is that they are caused by magnetic fields interacting(?) This is difficult to comprehend since there is no explanation of why these fields even exist on the Sun.

 

Sorry mate. I appreciate that you're exploring new ideas, but this opening salvo really misses the mark. Like most other magnetic fields, on our sun they are created by the flow of electrically charged ions and electrons. I would suggest that since there are so many, this partly explains why we see such huge effects like flare and prominance. More at the link below:

 

NASA/Marshall Solar Physics

[InfiniteNow]

Here's another clip from that site, but a different page. Check it out! :)

 

 

NASA/Marshall Solar Physics - Flares

[solar flares] occur near sunspots, usually along the dividing line (neutral line) between areas of oppositely directed magnetic fields.

 

 

It's not like impacts to the sun created some ever lasting magnetic field. The movements, the churning and flow that is constant in the sun due to the nuclear and thermodynamic processes cause particles to flow, like dirt in spa with the jets turned on. The movement of the charged particles, per electromagnetic dynamics, cause the magnetic field generation. These fields then interact in a complex manner and create much of the beauty which is our sun.

[InfiniteNow]

Now, can you talk more about the oxygen and hydrogen forming water on the sun?

[Pluto]

What drives the magnetic field?

 

The core would have to be driving the main magnetic field. This would explain the main explosions that are in line with the poles.

 

The solar enevelope secondary magnetic fields.

 

The outer layers third magnetic fields.

[InfiniteNow]

What drives the magnetic field?

 

The core would have to be driving the main magnetic field. This would explain the main explosions that are in line with the poles.

 

The solar enevelope secondary magnetic fields.

 

The outer layers third magnetic fields.

 

The field is driven by the motions of charged ions and particles. Are you suggesting that ONLY the core has charged particles?

[Mike C]

Sorry mate. I appreciate that you're exploring new ideas, but this opening salvo really misses the mark. Like most other magnetic fields, on our sun they are created by the flow of electrically charged ions and electrons. I would suggest that since there are so many, this partly explains why we see such huge effects like flare and prominance. More at the link below:

 

NASA/Marshall Solar Physics

 

You can believe what you want to but I cite 4 sources of science for my explanation

 

1st - The impacting bodies contain oxides that are separated at those high temperatures to release the 'oxygen'. Result? BANG!

 

2nd - The residual remains of these explosions observed by SMM that had all but the inner two electrons separated to create the strong magnetic fields.

 

3rd - At solar mininmum. do you see anything that is dynamic? It is a dull star then.

The correlation between the solar maximum period and the amount of comets disappearing is plain enough as to the cause of all that activity.

 

4th - Visual proof of comets disappearing into the Sun. Those photos show, plainly enough, what happens a short time later (1-2 days). It took that time because the occulting disc is three times (estimate) the diameter of the Sun.

 

NS

[jackson33]

The magnetic field on the Sun, is said to change directions every 11 years, almost exactly and its also said that Solar Flare activity is at its highest with this change.

 

However, the surface of the sun where flare activity is present is much cooler than the normal surface area. This could be a result outside or impacting materials from space. Remembering the Sun makes up 99.80% of all the solar system mass, things other than Planets a very small fraction, with the estimated millions of objects still in solar orbit and the amounts of these

other items that do hit our tiny planets mass, the idea should be considered.

[InfiniteNow]

Okay NS. Let's make sure we're on the same page then. I did not intend to imply in my post that the sun does not get impacted by comets and other space objects, nor that these impacts wouldn't influence the local magnetic field. Did you read otherwise?

 

Next, I read your post to mean that magnetic fields came only from impacts. Was it your intent to imply this?

[HomoSapiens]

I wondering what happens to the our life when theres a solar flare effecting us?

 

I just curious thats all.

[Turtle]

The magnetic field on the Sun, is said to change directions every 11 years, almost exactly and its also said that Solar Flare activity is at its highest with this change.

 

 

actually the solar polarity changes periodically and outside the 11 year cycle. See if this helps. >> The Interplanetary Magnetic Field

 

 

:doh: :hihi:

[Mike C]

Okay NS. Let's make sure we're on the same page then. I did not intend to imply in my post that the sun does not get impacted by comets and other space objects, nor that these impacts wouldn't influence the local magnetic field. Did you read otherwise?

 

Next, I read your post to mean that magnetic fields came only from impacts. Was it your intent to imply this?

 

Yes. These magnetic fields are the result of all the ionic nuclei that had all their electrons stripped away, but two, that are interacting with the free electrons that form the sunspots. The fact that they are 'matter' content is why they obscure some light to appear cooler.

Magnetic fields would not obscure the light. Only matter content can do that.

 

As far as the 11 year cycle effecting the polarity of the Suns field is concerned, that is questionable.

If during minimum period, when no spots are present, I cannot see how the Sun would have a magnetic field, since the Sun is considered to be a plasma gas that would not have an overall magnetic field since it would be electrically neutral like the hydrogen atom is.

However, on the other hand, if the central region of the Sun is slightly positive in polarity while the outer surface is slightly negative, its rotation could generate a magnetic rotational field but its rotation is in one direction only, so I cannot see any switching of the magnetic polarity as is being taught.

So, IMHO, I cannot give this reversal of polarity much credibility.

[DougF]

I thought you might like this link.

New theory straightens out sun's curved magnetic fields | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

A long-accepted model of the sun's magnetic fields holds that the fields radiate outwards from the sun into space in great curving arcs in the sun's equatorial regions and growing ever more radial at higher solar latitudes. That model has been proven only partly right by direct measurements of magnetic fields by the Ulysses solar orbiter and other spacecraft.

 

Data from Ulysses and other observations have yielded an interesting phenomenon. While the sun's magnetic fields are usually curved' date=' as expected, sometimes they're not, actually changing from long arcs to straight radial lines once or twice a month, on average, and at intervals lasting two or three days. One possible explanation for this puzzle was presented by Los Alamos National Laboratory researcher Jack Gosling to the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union meeting in Washington, D.C., today.

 

About five years ago Ulysses data confirmed the existence of straight radially-oriented fields and their association with Coronal Mass Ejections about 50 percent of the time. "These observations depart dramatically from the standard model," said Gosling, of Los Alamos' Non-Proliferation and International Security Division. "The fields are nearly radial, or straight, for extended periods of time, almost always when the speed of solar wind plasma observed in space is in decline, and about half the time this occurs during a CME. There still is no definitive explanation for why this is happening."[/Quote']

 

And this one.

Giant loops in the solar atmosphere may trigger Sun's magnetic poles reversals, new study reveals | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

By Mark Shwartz

New findings by Stanford astronomers may help solve one of the most baffling questions in solar science: What causes the Sun's magnetic poles to flip-flop every 11 years?

 

Understanding the forces that drive this 11-year cycle could help researchers predict violent solar flares and eruptions that periodically interfere with communications on Earth' date=' said Elena E. Benevolenskaya, a physical science research associate at Stanford's W.W. Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory (HEPL).

 

"One of the main problems for astronomers in the last century has been finding a mechanism strong enough to cause polar reversals," she noted.[/Quote']

 

This link is a little of subject but thought you might find of interest.

Researchers Identify Driver for Near-Earth Space Weather | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

Researchers Identify Driver for Near-Earth Space Weather

New findings indicate that the aurora and other near-Earth space weather are driven by the rate at which the Earth's and Sun's magnetic fields connect' date=' or merge, and not by the solar wind's electric field as was previously assumed. The merging occurs at a spot between the Earth and Sun, roughly 40,000 miles above the planet's surface, and appears fundamental to the circulation of particles and magnetic fields throughout near-Earth space.

 

Researchers at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in Laurel, Md., and the Air Force Research Laboratory at Hanscom Air Force Base (Massachusetts) will announce the results of their study at the Fall American Geophysical Union Meeting in San Francisco on Dec. 11. The researchers, led by Patrick Newell of APL, have developed a formula that describes the merging rate of the magnetic field lines and predicts 10 different types of near-Earth space weather activity, such as the aurora and magnetic disturbances[/Quote']

 

I hope this helps in this discussion.

[InfiniteNow]

Well No Science, it appears that facts won't help update your thinking. Enjoy your thought surfing on what makes the sun tick.

 

 

Dynamo theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dynamo theory of astrophysical bodies uses magnetohydrodynamic equations to investigate how the flow of the conducting materials in the interior of an object can continuously regenerate the magnetic fields of planetary and stellar bodies.

<...>

When conducting fluid flows across an existing magnetic field, electric currents are induced, which in turn creates another magnetic field. When this magnetic field reinforces the original magnetic field, a dynamo is created which sustains itself. Similar magnetic fields are present in many celestial bodies including most stars such as the Sun (which contains conducting plasma) and active galactic nuclei.

 

 

For the interested reader, the following is also useful:

Hydromagnetic Dynamo Theory - Scholarpedia

[CraigD]

The current prevailing theory for these eruptions is that they are caused by magnetic fields interacting(?) This is difficult to comprehend since there is no explanation of why these fields even exist on the Sun.

1st - The impacting bodies contain oxides that are separated at those high temperatures to release the 'oxygen'. Result? BANG!...

Ignoring for the moment that there is overwhelming evidence from direct measurement by spacecraft that the sun has a strong magnetic field, I would find the alternative solar flare explanation NS offers more convincing (and better researched) if he would provide a calculation estimating the number of comets necessary for the radiant power measured for a solar flair to be accounted for by a chemical explosion of the material in these comets.

 

Often, this sort of “order of magnitude” estimating calculation is all that is necessary to reject a hypothesis, or indicate that it’s worth further consideration. It’s a mark of scientific courtesy for the one offering the hypothesis (NS) to do the labor of calculations this, before even offering the hypothesis.

[Mike C]

Ignoring for the moment that there is overwhelming evidence from direct measurement by spacecraft that the sun has a strong magnetic field, I would find the alternative solar flare explanation NS offers more convincing (and better researched) if he would provide a calculation estimating the number of comets necessary for the radiant power measured for a solar flair to be accounted for by a chemical explosion of the material in these comets.

 

Often, this sort of “order of magnitude” estimating calculation is all that is necessary to reject a hypothesis, or indicate that it’s worth further consideration. It’s a mark of scientific courtesy for the one offering the hypothesis (NS) to do the labor of calculations this, before even offering the hypothesis.

 

Craig, your reliance on mathematics is not the final word in science. Math is basically used for predicting (prophet) than explaning phenomenon.

 

Math that I consider to be false and misleading is Einsteins mass/energy formula, his curvature of space formula, (he needed a crutch to support his static universe), the inflationary formulas and the current string theories.

 

The only math I support is Keplers formulas and subsequent laws , Newtons math and other research and Plancks math that transformed light from a continuous wave to a 'pulse'.

 

I said that 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. Math is nothing but a language and languages contain errors.

A banana can be explained by a variety of words but a picture explaines it the best, the way that everyone can understand.

 

That is why I rely on 'visualization', rather than math. SMM was an example of 'technical' visualization as was that website I posted.

 

It is the sunspots that are the source of the Suns magnetic fields that resulted from the separated positive nuclei and the freed electrons.

Regarding the energy levels of these flares, they represent only a small portion of the energy because most of the energy is left in the Sun that forms the sunspots.

 

NS

[Zythryn]

Math that I consider to be false and misleading is Einsteins mass/energy formula, his curvature of space formula, (he needed a crutch to support his static universe), the inflationary formulas and the current string theories.

 

NS

 

I've seen some really 'out there' posts and positions in the past. But dismissing math you don't like really does, in my opinion, take the cake;)

 

Let's focus on one thing for a moment, e=mc^2. You claim it doesn't work, right?

Can you explain how a nuclear fission explosion works? Where does the energy come from if it is not from conversion of matter into energy?