Heh. That’s rich, considering that you don’t even seem to be able to substantiate your basic concepts.
What makes the sun burn? Does fusion occur or not? If it doesn’t, where are all those solar neutrinos coming from? If its photosphere is comprised mainly of neon, why does it only have trace amounts of neon in its emission spectrum? How can calcium ferrite be solid at the temperatures on the sun’s surface? If the sun is made of iron, how come its density is far lower than that of iron? Is it just a hollow shell? If so, how’s that supposed to have formed?
I mean, I just feel like you should be able to answer at least a couple of those questions if your understanding of ‘quantum nature’ is that much more advanced to mine; otherwise, how am I supposed to tell whether or not you’re not just regurgitating Star Trek technobabble? Because, from my position of ignorance, the two seem nigh indistinguishable.
If you want to win some acceptance for your theories, you’ll have to do some substantiation – you can’t just say ‘gravity is caused by tiny invisible dwarves pushing down on you; proof of this is left to the reader’ and expect people to take you seriously. At least throw some quotes from your favourite website around! I’ve got other things to do (academic upgrading, you know), I can’t really wade through all that glurge that – again, to me in my position of ignorance – does seem an awful lot like someone seeing things in sunspots and then going a bit funny in the head.
By the way, much of his arguments, as far as I was able to follow, of course, seem to be derived from sunspot observations, and he in fact talks about seeing ‘the dark surface of the sun’ through a sunspot on the ‘sunquakes’ page – however, sunspots are anything but dark, and in fact have a greater apparent magnitude than the full moon, plus a temperature of some 4500K. Care to explain that little discrepancy?
There were probably too many words for your limited attention span. I read everything but needed a good two hours to do that. Too much technical detail tends to derail some, but not me. I understood it.
It’s much simpler, and easier on the feeble mind, to be the skeptic and simply nay-say things and ask cynical questions that can very easily be answered much better to your satisfaction just by doing the research. There has been so much progress in our study of the sun over the last ten years that it supersedes all the knowledge that went before it, rendering it obsolete.
It’s not our job to do the research. It’s your job to go find it and bring it to us. If it takes 2 hours to read, then you need to trim it down and present it here. You need to specifically point to the parts that you find compelling and state what this has to do with the Mayan calendar. It’s not our job to infer your proof.
For those of us with less attention for bizzare, the photosphere and helioseismology.
Funny. baud’s website attempts to argue that the surface of the sun (underneath its liquid neon photosphere) is solid iron and cites a Dr Manuel for support - but following that link Dr Manuel claims that the core is iron, not the surface (“an iron-rich interior”). And of course that is in itself disproven by, what? Oh yes helioseismology!
If your understanding of solar physics is so great, then it should be easy for you to dumb it down for us educated-stupid simpletons. The theory of stellar fusion is pretty complicated, but it goes something like this: immense pressure at the center of the sun makes hydrogen atoms attach to each other, forming helium. This configuration is a lower energy state than two separate hydrogen atoms, so the leftover energy is released as a photon. Do this trillions and trillions of times, and you have a star.
According to you, this is all actually wrong. I read through the website but all he did was repeat how correct his theory was and then link to tangentially related papers as if that explained why. If you know it so well, then you should be able to explain it in a short paragraph just like I did.
There’s a famous anecdote where Richard Feynman was asked to explain the principles of quantum field theory at the level of a kindergartner. He was confident that he could do it, but after some thought, he realized that he couldn’t. He thus concluded that we don’t understand quantum mechanics as well as we’d like to believe.
Well, there’s not much possibility for debate if all you’re gonna do is just to tell me to read the link, is there?
Anyway, searching the site for ‘neutrinos’ revealed exactly three hits, all in at best weakly related papers that espouse theories completely different from that of the website’s creator, so in the face of the failure of that approach, and with your apparent inability to answer even the most obvious and basic questions, I guess I’ll just go ahead and feel justified in sticking to my feeble-minded scepticism.
While it seems to be par for the course that someone with a new, brilliant theory that trumps all that has come before it will arrive on the SDMB wearing their hubris on their shirtsleeve and trying to be condescending to hoi polloi who have failed to notice the brilliance of their prose, we still ask that everyone maintain a degree of civility. If you cannot post without insulting everyone else in the thread, then you need to reserve your posts for The BBQ Pit and not clutter Great Debates with your acrimony.
[ /Moderating ]
It’s THE hoi-polloi, dammit! That is Standard American-English Usage and, as far as I can tell since I don’t speak Ancient Greek, it’s correct.
Anyway, if you don’t want to be condescending to the hoi-polloi, you gotta include the “the” so we understand you. baudrunner, I would like to welcome you to the SDMB. However, this is the sort of discussion you open yourself up to if you limit your participation to your speciality–we will not only take you on toe-to-toe but will find the time to argue linguistics at the same time. Broaden your horizons and you will be happier. I mean, there are still people here who insist the LOTR is GOOD LITERATURE, fercryinoutloud. WORLDS of opportunity!
baudrunner, here you can see why you needn’t recreate the laws of physics to find a good, solid, satisfying fight here. Just stroll around, mouth off now and then, and the fights will come to you.
I am astonished at your ability to discern what educational systems posters here learned under. Either you are brilliant, or you are making assumptions that may or may not be founded.
*When I think of the future, well, you really have to laugh;
An asteroid is coming with an antimatter half.
It’s ridden by some angels who will wave as they pass by
And if we don’t destroy it then we’re surely going to fry!
Oh, superluminosity annihilation closes!
As set out in Mayan wisdom passed on by osmosis!
Doom is coming - it’s as plain as all your faces’ noses!
Superluminosity annihilation closes!
