Misconceptions About The Origin Of Sunspots

[Masterov]

Misconceptions about the origin of sunspots

 

It is generally believed that sunspots are the result of internal processes in Sun.

 

If this were so, the spots on the sun should be bright, but the sun spots have a dark color.

 

CONCLUSION: Sunspots are result from comets fall on the sun.

 

If you insist on the fact that sunspots are the result of internal processes, then you have to admit that in Sun there are processes with the absorption of huge amounts of energy in the local area.

[CraigD]

It is generally believed that sunspots are the result of internal processes in Sun.

 

If this were so, the spots on the sun should be bright, but the sun spots have a dark color.

Sunspots are not dark in the way that a cool object is, just darker than normal for the Sun’s photosphere. If you isolate a sunspot from the surrounding photosphere, such as with a telescope, it looks very bright – brighter than sun-illuminated surface of the Moon.

 

If you insist on the fact that sunspots are the result of internal processes, then you have to admit that in Sun there are processes with the absorption of huge amounts of energy in the local area.

Sunspots don’t absorb energy from an underlying photosphere, they are portions of the photosphere cooler (3000 to 4500 K) than usual (5780 K), and thus emitting less light than usual.

 

Like the rest of the photosphere, the spectrum of sunspots depends on their temperature, following nearly perfectly that of a black body. Using Hyperphysic’s handy Planck’s law calculator, you can see the power per unit area of the sunspotted or un-sunspotted photosphere, total or in the visible spectrum:

Temp  Total power   Power 400 to 700 nm (visible light)

(K)   (10^6 W/m^2) (10^6 W/m^2)

3000   4.59294      0.368488

4500  23.25177      6.20658

5780  63.2874      23.22232

 

CONCLUSION: Sunspots are result from comets fall on the sun.

There are a few problems with you hypothesis, Masterov

• Size. Large sunspots have diameters of nearly 200,000,000 m. Large comets have diameters of on the order of 10,000 m, much too small to cause a dim spot on the sun as large as a sunspot. Large comets have volumes up to about 10¹⁵ m³, so even if it were spread to create a sunspot, it would be only 0.001 m thick, too thin to block light.
• Rarity. Comets collisions with the Sun are rare. Because large, bright tails occur when even small comet are near the sun, they’re very visible (for example, see this 2011 video), but we never see them cause sunspots.
• Duration. Sunspots appear and disappear gradually, commonly lasting more than 14 days. 2014’s Sunspot region 2192 is an example.
• Pairs. Sunspots usually appear in pair. This makes sense if, as best-accepted theory explains, they are due to magnetic fields protruding through the photosphere, but not if they are cause by impacts of comets.

The best-accepted models of the sun, which explain sunspots as being caused by the Suns magnetic flux tubes, which are normally below the photosphere, protruding through it, are a pretty compelling, explaining may solar phenomena.

[Masterov]

It is generally believed that sunspots are the result of internal processes in Sun.

If this were so, the spots on the sun should be bright, but the sun spots have a dark color.

Sunspots are not dark in the way that a cool object is, just darker than normal for the Sun’s photosphere. If you isolate a sunspot from the surrounding photosphere, such as with a telescope, it looks very bright – brighter than sun-illuminated surface of the Moon.

Dark and light, light and heavy, the top and bottom ... all these are relative terms. They all depend on what with that compared.

 

Sunspots are dark because the gas temperature of inside the spots is below the temperature on the Sun's surface.

 

If sunspots arose as a result of internal processes of the sun, the temperature inside the spots must be higher than the surface temperature of the sun. Then the spots should be light against the light on the solar surface.

 

Comparison of the temperature inside a sunspot with temperatures on the lunar surface is incorrect.

[Masterov]

Sunspots don’t absorb energy from an underlying photosphere, they are portions of the photosphere cooler (3000 to 4500 K) than usual (5780 K), and thus emitting less light than usual.

You propose assumptions that have a weak argument.

 

Sunspots occur locally and on a homogeneous background. There are no external signs in neighboring areas, which could warn us that: in the environment is in an unstable state.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Masterov

[Masterov]

 

There are a few problems with you hypothesis, Masterov

• Size. Large sunspots have diameters of nearly 200,000,000 m. Large comets have diameters of on the order of 10,000 m, much too small to cause a dim spot on the sun as large as a sunspot. Large comets have volumes up to about 10¹⁵ m³, so even if it were spread to create a sunspot, it would be only 0.001 m thick, too thin to block light.

You mentioned the size of the solid comet nucleus. But we should speak about the size of the whole of the comet, not excluding the comet cloud of gas, dust and small fragments of a comet.

 

Look at this:

comet size commensurate with the size of Sun.

[Masterov]

 

• Rarity. Comets collisions with the Sun are rare. Because large, bright tails occur when even small comet are near the sun, they’re very visible (for example, see this 2011 video), but we never see them cause sunspots.
  

Collisions of comets with Sun are happen, and traces of these collisions on the surface of the Sun is not.

 

How is this possible?

 

Look at this picture:

 

This drop a comet on Jupiter.

 

Something like this should look like a comet falling sun.

 

For example like this:

 

 

Edited April 29, 2016 by Masterov

[Masterov]

• Duration. Sunspots appear and disappear gradually, commonly lasting more than 14 days. 2014’s Sunspot region 2192 is an example.

The mass of the comet nucleus is measured in tens of billions of tons.

 

It would be strange if sunspots there were fewer time for exist.

[Masterov]

• Pairs. Sunspots usually appear in pair. This makes sense if, as best-accepted theory explains, they are due to magnetic fields protruding through the photosphere, but not if they are cause by impacts of comets.

A pair of spots of Comets fall may indicate that the comet passed through the photosphere of the Sun and its nucleus rebound bounced off the Sun. (Comets are scratched the surface of the Sun.)

[Masterov]

The best-accepted models of the sun, which explain sunspots as being caused by the Suns magnetic flux tubes, which are normally below the photosphere, protruding through it, are a pretty compelling, explaining may solar phenomena.

Flat Earth had many convincing arguments, too.

[Masterov]

I had the pleasure to oppose you.

 

I propose to continue the discussion on this topic.

 

In advance thank.

[CraigD]

Sunspots occur locally and on a homogeneous background. There are no external signs in neighboring areas, which could warn us that: in the environment is in an unstable state.

I don’t think this is an accurate description, because at high magnification, the photosphere outside of sunspots doesn’t have a homogenous temperature or brightness, and because sunspots have

two distinct parts, the central, umbra, there the photosphere has a temperature as low as 4500 K, and the outer penumbra, where the temperature is about 5500 K, only a little cooler than the photosphere’s usual 4780 K. These NASA images

 

 

 

shows this clearly, and also shows the penumbra’s inclined convection cells, one of the reasons nearly all astrophysicists accept the conventional explanation for the formation of sunspots.

 

(sources: Hyperphysics page Sunspots and Solar Storms; Wikipedia article Granule (solar physics))

 

Collisions of comets with Sun are happen, and traces of these collisions on the surface of the Sun is not.

 

How is this possible?

Because comets don’t reach the surface (photosphere) of the Sun, but evaporate in its corona.

 

In addition to the problems I listed in my previous post, the hypothesis that sunspots are caused by comet impacts suffers from being strongly contradicted by direct observation. The STEREO solar observatory spacecraft, assisted by the Mauna Loa Solar Observatory, recently imaged a comet nearly impacting the Sun’s photosphere. As one would expect for a body as small as a comet, the comet was completely vaporized and blown away from the Sun by its solar wind a few thousand km before reaching the photosphere, and didn’t cause any sunspots.

 

(Source: Space.com article Comet's Collision with the Sun Captured in 3-D)

 

Look at this picture:

This drop a comet on Jupiter.

 

Something like this should look like a comet falling sun.

 

For example like this:

I can see why these images look similar to you, Masterov, and lead you to conclude that sunspots are like the dark spots in Jupiter’s atmosphere caused by the impact of fragments of Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9. However, the two images are very different.

 

The Sun’s corona and photosphere are very hot – 1000000 and 4870 K respectively – while Jupiter has no hot corona, and the surface of its atmosphere is very cold – about 40 K. Although the Shoemaker-Levey comet fragments burned up in Jupiter’s atmosphere, it was not due to Jupiter’s temperature, but atmospheric friction. The Sun’s corona is much less dense than Jupiter’s atmosphere. The comet imaged by STEREO and MLSO didn’t burn up due to friction with the corona, but because of its high temperature.

 

The diameter of the largest of the Shoemaker-Levey “Jupiter spots” was much smaller – about 6000 km – than a large Sunspot – about 160000 km.

 

(sources: NASA webpage “what is Jupiter?”; Wikipedia article Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9)

[Masterov]

Because comets don’t reach the surface (photosphere) of the Sun, but evaporate in its corona.

It is assumption.

 

Mass of the nucleus of some comets reach tens of billions of tons.

It is a huge mass. She did not just evaporate.

 

Around the comet formed a gas cloud which shields the core of a comet by solar radiation, which slows down the evaporation of the comet's nucleus.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Masterov

[exchemist]

 

It is assumption.

 

Mass of the nucleus of some comets reach tens of billions of tons.

It is a huge mass. She did not just evaporate.

 

Around the comet formed a gas cloud which shields the core of a comet by solar radiation, which slows down the evaporation of the comet's nucleus.

 

No it's not an assumption, it's observation. Craig gave you a reference to this actually being observed - as expected. 

[Masterov]

The diameter of the largest of the Shoemaker-Levey “Jupiter spots” was much smaller – about 6000 km – than a large Sunspot – about 160000 km.

Spot size on Sun is huge, and is determined by a size of a gas cloud that formed around a comet when the comet approaches Sun.

 

The comet that fell on Jupiter, had not this cloud.

[Masterov]

It is assumption.

 

Mass of the nucleus of some comets reach tens of billions of tons.

It is a huge mass. She did not just evaporate.

 

Around the comet formed a gas cloud which shields the core of a comet by solar radiation, which slows down the evaporation of the comet's nucleus.

No it's not an assumption, it's observation. Craig gave you a reference to this actually being observed - as expected. 

I'm not saying that none of the comets evaporated before reaching the surface of Sun.

 

But and you can not argue that all comets evaporate without reaching Sun.

[Masterov]

Fall of the comet to Sun is accompanied by a flash.

[exchemist]

Fall of the comet to Sun is accompanied by a flash.

YouTube videos are not a reliable source of information about science.