Condensed matter in the corona! Implications for the slow solar wind!

[@SkyScholar]

The proper citation @~3:30 for Harold Zirin's book is as follows: H. Zirin, The Solar Atmosphere, Blaisdell Publishing Co., Waltham, MA, 1966. Page numbers are correct.

[@justsayin3553]

1966 was a great year. 🤔 "singlet delta oxygen produced in gas and liquid phases by a non-thermal atmospheric plasma with relevance "

[@bumbleWeaver]

thank you doctor!

[@topcatcoast2coast579]

The more I learn about Plasma Physics, Magmatism as well as Electric Universe Theory. The more the Standard Model looks more fictitious then The Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe. Are solar physicists just out of touch Autists making up stories to suit their fancy?

[@jasonsharma5888]

why is it impossible?

[@stevecrothers6585]

@@ianw5439 : Like you, the astronomers, cosmologists and astrophysicists allow themselves phantasmagorical substances: H- ; dark matter; quark-gluon plasma; finite masses concentrated in zero volume with infinite density and infinite gravity. Yet you object to Dr. Robitaille's proton! A proton is real matter. Give the audience your answer again (surely you remember your own answer): How big must a 'gravitationally collapsing' uncontained gas become before it magically changes is heat capacity from positive to negative? (Remember that according to the astronomers stars have negative heat capacities.) "Furthermore, there is no mechanism under which LMH could form from scratch in astrophysical bodies." ian w Long before you stuck you bid in, Dr. Robitaille advanced a means for star formation by condensation reactions involving hydrogen clusters, for example, in this interview: Professor Pierre-Marie Robitaille: The Life Cycle of the Stars: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fHXRkGOerLGmga8 "Robitaille thinks gas doesn't collapse under its own gravity. Because he is stupid. We see it to occur." ian w Gases do not compress themselves by any means (own gravity included). Compression of a gas requires the action of an external agent against surfaces, as for example in a bicycle pump. The only place gases have been seen to compress themselves by their own gravity is in the irrational imagination of astronomers, cosmologists and astrophysicists. "Do you know the conditions (temp vs pressure) under which liquid metallic hydrogen can exist?Go back to high school, and check a phase diagram of H. Those conditions are KNOWN not to exist on and in the Sun." ian w Scientists with acumen that you can never hope to match don't agree with you Ian: “It is possible, however, that a layer-like lattice has a much greater heat of formation, and is obtainable under high pressure. This is suggested by the fact that in most cases of Table I of allotropic modifications, one of the lattices is layer like. … Diamond is a valence lattice, but graphite is a layer lattice . . .” Wigner E. and Huntington H.B. On the possibility of a metallic modification of hydrogen. J. Chem. Phys., 1935, v. 3, 764-70. "… we perceive that the photosphere contains solid or liquid particles hotter than carbon vapor, and consequently not carbon . … the substance in question, so far as we know it, has properties similar to those of the carbon group.” Hastings C.S. A theory of the constitution of the Sun, founded upon spectroscopic observations, original and other. Am. J. Science, 1881, v. 21, no. 121, 33-44. "In the Sun . . . the mass density and the temperature are estimated to be 156 g/cm^3 and 1.55x10^7, respectively. The mass fraction of hydrogen near the core is said to be 0.36 and thus the mass density of metallic hydrogen there is 56.2 g/cm^3." Setsuo Ichimaru and H. Kitamura, Pycnonuclear reactions in dense astrophysical and fusion plasmas, Phys. Plasmas, 1999, v.6, no.7, 2649-2671. "Where is he getting H+ from in a universe in which he has yet to form a star?" ian w You falsely assume the nonsensical big bang universe creating itself out of nothing, producing an early universe without stars. Big bang creationism is a fantastic voyage produced by Einstein's mystical General Theory of Relativity: Stephen J. Crothers: The General Theory of Relativity: Its Faulty Mathematical Foundations kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZnS2fWpmZ6-Gmrs based upon his mystical Special Theory of Relativity: Stephen J. Crothers: The Special Theory of Relativity: Circles vs Ellipses! kzbin.info/www/bejne/iXPbYpKMbdNgesk

[@j2kerrigan]

Your critics and KZbin "haters" never back up their attacks with sources or published papers as you do. I appreciate that you put all your research links and sources right up front as well as those that you are arguing against so everyone is free to study themselves. Transparency is key to educating those trapped in the "science religion" that seems to be hijacking actual scientific discussion.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@ianw5439 you don't. I've seen several dozen of your comments, and you allude non-specifically to your MD

[@robertle3038]

But they'll slump their bong-poisoned bodies in his MRI machine thinking "I love science!"

[@stevecrothers6585]

@@ianw5439 The citations you ever post you either don't read or don't understand as they are never relevant to the topic; just like your citation of a paper by Zirin relative to the microwave, which is not relevant.

[@gratefulprepsnj]

SS you must really upset the scientism theologians. Thank you for that. 🇺🇸

[@BlackMasterRoshi]

or at least that one guy who comes here to bitch but never has anything specific to bitch about aside from his usual fallacious appeals to some other alleged authority 😅

[@LightoftheMoon]

Much Love and Appreciation for SKYSCHOLAR‼️ ☀️❤️☀️❤️☀️❤️

[@robbolastname6799]

simply amazing how that planar hex structure happens at just the right point, glad there's enough water on Earth that together with and due to that structure protects life from the worst of our star. Now that's an amazing design!

[@kimberleebrackley2793]

Thank you Dr.Robitaille, l do enjoy the dialog on your site. Take care

[@fredfarquar8301]

Howdy, fellow S0! Love Dr. Robataille too!

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@DrWhom I don’t have ‘heroes’, just people I like and respect. And then, there are people like you……

[@keithnorris6348]

Thank you very much Sky Scholar I am glad to be better informed. Your work changes an ordinary day into a great day for me and I hope there will be more of these excellent videos. I know it would be better for all people if the cosmologists and solar scientists were able to grasp the message, but until then you are the clear champion of scientific reasoning.

[@alfredsutton4412]

As an old guy, now retired, with degrees in both chemistry and physics, I vote with you Sky Scholar.

[@bernthenrikwallin6609]

@@ianw5439 I suggest that you get better nutrition (I like Dr Eric Berg's short videos) and long walks in the forest. It's much more healthy than mirroring your mental problems onto Internet. Your "argument" is actually "it's crap" - That is mental illness, not another opinion.

[@jim7634]

Outstanding as always. Love the paradigm shift. I find it so refreshing.

[@MrToadio]

From Brien Foerster and UnchartedX channels there are ancient monuments that have granite surfaces that appeared to have been seared by intense heat. I had the idea that for actual solar matter to make it to earth it would have to condense out of the sun's atmosphere first..

[@michaelc424]

@@ianw5439 Ian, you can say gibberish all you wish. But there are PhDs who will tell you more than you want to hear about vitrified stone surfaces on ancient stone structures throughout our world. Robert Schoch is an expert in this area. But no doubt you are a greater expert than Schoch because your PhD, while not yet identified, is of greater significance than his is in geology. Considering your expertise, I am guessing you will call Schoch just another example of a charlatan. We bow, all of us ignorant ones, in reverence to your knowledge and expertise. Please forgive us, we know nothing of what we speak.

[@JeffErnst23]

You are over the target when you catch trolls and haters, this was an excellent clear and concise (as possible) argument. thanks

[@JeffErnst23]

Get back under your bridge you hateful troll.

[@donnamarie9593]

Fascinating! neurons firing all over the place trying to put it all together and undoing the SSM 😂

[@jasonsharma5888]

I like that so much i'll comment too.

[@Devast8r34]

Fantastic Video! Thank you Dr. Robitaille

[@ChiliBuRevolution]

thank you Professor Robitaille, Knowledge is the food of the soul. ~Plato 🙏 Sī vīs pācem, parā bellum Proverbs 27:17 states, “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another” For the strength of the pack is the wolf, and the strength of the wolf is the pack. ~Rudyard Kipling

[@reefsroost696]

🖐

[@fredfarquar8301]

👍Chili Bu!!

[@ChiliBuRevolution]

@@reefsroost696 blessings and good vibes your way eh Reef, Hope the weekend is providing smiles, laughter and great times, See you soon for the morning news. 🙏 Sī Vīs Pācem Parā Bellum

[@nobigbang825]

Love the explanation, as always thank you. BTW this ''ian w'' is a known bbt troll.

[@reefsroost696]

Is he a troll or is he just so full of knowledge that he can't see what he doesn't already know?

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@reefsroost696 Pretty much like ‘Professor Dave’.

[@fredfarquar8301]

I like your channel name!

[@DeathValleyDazed]

Dr. Robitaille makes sense to me. 🌞

[@rebeccajosteelman563]

Hi Prof. Robitaille! Thank you.

[@DonnieGoodman-ex9xk]

At 18:41 after explaining the positive net outflow between the surface and Corona. Accounting for the solar winds. There is a pause and someone can be heard saying "money "

[@justsayin3553]

That is good timing.

[@johncampbell9216]

Thank you Dr Robitaille for a well-reasoned, evidence-based analysis of the Solar Corona. Congratulations IanW for making it famous as an ill-informed, petulant little man.

[@2sipsMax]

Thx for sharing, I found it enlightening.

[@naturewildlife6665]

Someone needs to tell Professor Dave that NASA is talking about Kelvin Degrees so he can do a debunk video for them.

[@multi_misa72]

Always a pleasure doc, thank you so much.

[@alpineflauge909]

thank you

[@jlfqam]

Good Job. Now the next step is to assess the chemical structure of the crust. Coronal holes, are in fact, the nude crust of the sun. Inhomegeneities in the convection at lower solar activities create the coronal holes, which are a bare crust viewed from outside. The crust must be a solid or very viscous matter that is pierced by tunnels that let the solar matter out through. Solar granule distribution shows how tight or close are the crust pores that percolate solar matter. To support strong and lasting magnetic fields, the crust must be very viscous. It's lighter than underlaying condensed matter in order to float. A model could be slag floating over a magma pond inside a volcanic caldera. Outflowing matter as exposed to low pressure tends to expand and form jets that explain solar winds and CME. Keep, ON!!!!

[@szymonbaranowski8184]

​@@ianw5439 argument without arguments

[@triedproven9908]

You've actually got the surface activity right. It's the internal model everyone is clueless about.

[@danielarcher369]

not everyone, stars and planets are the same objects just at different ages. Since planets have iron/nickel cores, this is what is happening inside the sun, a core is formed, the sun further cools and shrinks becoming a brown dwarf then gas giant etc.. This is Stellar Metamorphosis.

[@nonlinearplasma]

The Sun has a quadrupole which is a specific geometry of motion. It's not as hard to figure out as most think. They just haven't looked at the problem from the correct perspective. For example superconductivity and the magic angle of 1.1°

[@gsdalpha1358]

Thank you, Dr. R!

[@summerbrooks9922]

Thank you very much for your sublime put down as to the Standard solar model. You remain a constant beam of light in this dark midevil

[@jasonsharma5888]

@@ianw5439 @7:35

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@ianw5439 Then provide your over whelming evidence. Just one piece. You have none.

[@theroguetomato5362]

Love your videos. I share them often.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@ianw5439 Yes, he specifically hates you.

[@Startraxxion]

The sun's escape velocity exceeds 600km per second!

[@emariaenterprises]

Thank you. I shared with Family too.

[@leggomuhgreggo]

This video? It's like the first time you chief that good loud - you don't even know how giggly you are, because it's not unfamiliar enough yet to all-the-way process it. But you still know enough to say it's outstanding and dank🔥

[@critical-thought]

Thank you for a clear explanation.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439Boooooorrrrrrrriiiiiing.

[@lmwlmw4468]

Great video.

[@johnos4892]

Seems so well thought out and logical. It is hard to believe astronomers are so reluctant to go with a theory that makes sense.

[@normanschmidt8389]

Thank you. The information presented here far outweighs that which we have been told. It's a shame that folks like you and Ben Davidson have to pitch like carnival barkers to get official notice. I salute your perseverance.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439LOFL! Boooooooooorrrrrriiiiiiiing.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

NOTE CHEMICAL ELEMENT #120 (8S2) BELOW: PERIODIC TABLE OF THE ELEMENTS: (copy and paste from my files): Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements: I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2). Chemical Element #119 (8s1): #119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell. Chemical Element #120 (8s2): #120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars. When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way. In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically). If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better. (Except of course for those who might be in the way of a periodic nova or supernova. They might have a no good, very bad, horrible day.)

[@AAAanomalies]

Thank you! Very interesting but it also gave rise to a question. I think the sun is sun is powered by a cosmic birkeland current. At the center of a bc we find iron and at the center of the sun might be a plasmoid, maybe the whole sun is a plasmoid (thats why it's so bright). Anyway, referring to the SAFIRE project, there we can clearly see double layers. My question is: If gas needs a real surface for being pressurized, does a double layer count as a "real" surface? I think it has to because it is real thing. Maybe I lean waaay too far out of the window LOL! But since the question arised, I thought I ask. I want to learn! Greetings!

[@keithnorris6348]

I have formed the impression that the condenced hydrogen core has the ` sheath ` surface of metalic Hydrogen [ type 1 and 2 ]. The cosmic Birkeland current lacks any core [ substantive ] it is real but ` pressure ` would / could vary a great deal over it`s length due to variable factors along it`s length. If I am wrong I expect I will get ` pulled up ` about it.

[@AAAanomalies]

@Keith Norris According to a graph from Donald Scott, at the center of a bc, we find fe, si, and magnesium. Yes, a bc doesn't have a core, but like stars are formed like pearls on a string, the material seems to accumulate in certain regions, such as galaxies and stars. So I think of a "spherical part" of bc, bennett, or z-pinch. It is a focus point, a place where matter condences and forms a cosmological body. Since they are all more or less spherical in shape, I tend to call them plasmoids. The equatorial planes are the magnetic properties of birkeland currents. They are perpendicular in nature. The current fluctuates, not only at the scale of galaxies, the sun but also on earth, see jetstreams, aurorae, etc. Yeah, I thought twice about writing a comment, LOL! But who else to ask? Let's see if we get "roasted," but as long as we keep respect towards each other, it can't be that bad...

[@AAAanomalies]

@@ianw5439 No, Plasma physics is not my strong point. I am just some random dude talking occasionally to chickens...

[@JoeDeglman]

Referring to the data from the SAFIRE Project, All indications there are that the 'new elements' are from fission of the titanium probe used to monitor the experiment. Like the Lockheed-Martin hydrogen reactor, there is no indication of helium being a major output of the experiment, and the only fusion present seems to be limited to isotopes of the trace elements present in the experiment. Presumably due to electric current used in the experiment. Fusion in the Sun does not happen at the core, but more likely happens in the solar atmosphere, just like the chemical reactions that Sky Scholar points out. However, the Sun's major energy output is as a pure Poynting flux directly out of the photosphere. It is the Poynting flux out of the photosphere that ionizes and propels the charged particles out of the chromosphere by first ionization potential. Fusion seems to happen along electric current flows in the atmosphere as a side-effect of the Poynting flux out of the photosphere. Unlike the Don Scott model, charged particles are propelled out by First Ionization Potential (not by mass) and the slow wind speed maxes out at 20-30 solar radii, and the solar wind steadies out at just over 400 km/sec at all of the outer planets. The solar wind does not accelerate all the way to the heliopause as Don claims. The solar wind is a nuclear or magnetic force out of the photosphere, not an anode-cathode effect as Don claims. Clearly the sun gets an input plasma from the galactic spirals but probably this energy vibrates the photosphere to cause fission (resonant breakdown) of the condensed hydrogen back into a pure Poynting flux. In retrospect, the Poynting flux out of the galactic core forms neutrons in the relativistic jets which accumulate into quasar pairs at the magnetic poles. So, the main energy output of the Sun seems to be from fission of the hydrogen proton. In fact, the annihilation of protons, and fission, are the only verified manner in which we can get e=mc^2 energy. Fusion doesn't provide e=mc^2 energy, but only on par with plasma recombination, or matter/ "antimatter" recombination.

[@AAAanomalies]

@ian w So what powers them? Or what keeps the gas ionized? If not electricity. Where you have an electrical current, you have a magnetic field and vice versa...

[@markisganitis3496]

Interesting video and well explained. If coronal mass ejections were indeed millions of degrees kelvin, wouldn't their impact on Earth have a much greater effect on global temperature? Would this not cause a noticeable spike in global temperature?

[@Dan-gs3kg]

Never thought of that, quite insightful.

[@nonlinearplasma]

Temperature is a human construct that measures the kinetic energy of the atoms in a collective medium. It does not work well when applied to highly energetic plasma mediums from the water based low energetic medium it is based on. Take the Earth's outer magnetosphere which is claimed to have a temperature of 1200°k. It is measuring kinetic energy of the plasma and the scale is simply useless.

[@ronusa1976]

Many peer review paper indicate this. Its called Solar forcing. I would provide the links but KZbin will have is censored by deleting my post.

[@bernthenrikwallin6609]

You can actually touch things that are thousands of K without burning yourself if they are fluffy enough and you touch them for a short time (running on burning embers). In the same way, if there would be a solar flair of millions of degrees for a short time, it could not affect the Earth's temperature. So the arguments against these high temps have to be found in the spectrum as explained in the video.

[@johnlord8337]

The tension in the stellar engine layers is not an external pressure outward to inward (as in compression). The layers contain the force carrier currents (multiple Birkelund currents) which are electro-gravitic in nature, and thus there is compaction inward toward the outward areas being pulled in.

[@theroguetomato5362]

Love your videos! Could you please cover redshift, and what it's really about? I seem to recall you mentioned that the interpretation of redshift is incorrect, but I can't find that video or any further details. Thanks!

[@bernthenrikwallin6609]

This is my idea: When light passes thought the invisible Birkeland currents that connect the stars and galaxies, the light gets sucked out of some of it's energy. I have no data to back this up, but if you as Birkeland himself create that current in a lab, I'm sure it will change the light passing through it.

[@theroguetomato5362]

@@bernthenrikwallin6609 I read something similar to that. I'd love to hear the Sky Scholar explanation. I doubt if it has anything to do with the expansion of the universe from a big bang.

[@master_rajeev]

I think that the sun is a ball of liquid helium. And due to very high temperature, some of the helium has evaporated and some has disintegrated into hydrogen. Thus, the liquid helium is surrounded by the atmosphere of hydrogen and helium in gaseous form with the major portion of the atmosphere being hydrogen. And since we are dealing with a liquid sun, and not a solid sun, therefore the lattice structure is immaterial, there is no lattice structure, actually, in a liquid.

[@barrywilliams991]

I am not a physicist, mathematician nor a chemist. I can understand the logic of Dr Robitaille's explanation. I wonder why those more erudite than me don't see it?

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@DrWhom And you are a scientist? Clearly, you are not or are a poor one. You have lost, Gerardo.

[@Inisfad]

At 17:30. Would this then support the theory of the sun effecting a micronova??

[@gameelders3611]

1:00 Presactly.

[@deepblack67]

Can you predict what we should see in the way of Nova activity? Seems that Astronomers are being surprised by what they are seeing.

[@chrisbanbury]

Why do we hear so little about the Parker Solar Probe?

[@AllenBethea]

Videos of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot show the spot is anchored/ tethered moving very little longitudinally or by latitude. If it is tethered, to what?

[@demonmonsterdave]

The most likely is a prominence in the more dense layers below.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@demonmonsterdave or a mountain tall enough to bridge a slow coronal discharge between the surface and the cloud layer.

[@johnlord8337]

The corona is the matter-holding region sitting alongside the photosphere and chromosphere inside the superconductor graviton core's solar Meissner force field. Matter (H => He - Fe) fused in the photosphere is uploaded into the chromosphere via the tenson bosino force carriers and photino bosino force carriers. Matter (Co-Element 118) is fused in this region, and eventually passed into the corona holding area. All elements can be fused and produced - depending on the solar mass and energy of the stellar engine, giving less or more of the fused elements per its ability. So the corona does hold condensed matter ... eventually swept away via the solar wind into the deep space of the cosmos.

[@fredfarquar8301]

Would there be any measurable effects from the transition energy of the body-centered cubic structure in the core to the hexagonal planar structure further away from the core? If there are, would this be evidence of the LMH structure? (I was a chemist, and it seems ALL transitions require either energy input or energy release, unless the two states are virtually equivalent, which would set up an oscillation between the two forms at some distance from the center, and might cause it’s own measurable effects)

[@ResortDog]

Vibration runs thru everything

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@ResortDog Indeed. Hence my question if there is any measurable evidence that could provide further information on the question of the nature of the sun.

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@ianw5439 No reason to.

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@ianw5439 You really are a ‘contrare’. As W.C. Fields might say: “Go away, BOY, ya bother me! Go play in traffic!”

[@Goalsplus]

​@Fred Farquar yes, Ian w is just here to take out his anger.

[@ResortDog]

I trust the kids in school are looking down the same corridors that you are without blinders on.

[@demonmonsterdave]

They're too busy learning to choose their own genders and getting ready to be mutilated.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@DrWhom It is impossible to choose one's own gender. Trying to do the impossible at the behest of perceived authority is pretty far from harmless.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@DrWhom You can cut off your leg and pretend to be a pirate if you want, but you still won't really be a pirate. Everything else you say is nonsense, and you're just repeating it because you prefer to remain in the collective even when it goes against all sense and logic. Gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder, not a lifestyle choice.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@DrWhom You can't argue for nonsense. I can't agree with you until you re-engage with reality. There are lots of fictional things that will go over my head, but clear and obvious facts not so much.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@DrWhom That's the kind of response I expected.

[@RoosKohn]

So the lattice makes fusion possible?

[@Dan-gs3kg]

Lattice enable nuclear fusion has been demonstrated and published by NASA, but it'd be premature to say it is the only method. But at the very least, the molecular forces of a tight lattice would be a lot more convenient to dipping into nuclear manipulation.

[@davidmcguinness9187]

Thanks

[@Sueezedtight]

Logic and reason. The basis for scientific exploration and explanation. Eventually, this will become mainstream. Congrats.

[@Sueezedtight]

@@ianw5439 Any line of reasoning such as condensed matter leads to "x" and this is seen to produce "y" etc. where "x" and "y" follow logically and can be observed to do so. Science is all about hypothesis testing and 99% of all previous knowledge has been up-ended over the centuries thanks to this approach, as we refine our understanding of the natural universe. Dr. Robitaille is to be commended for his alacrity and persistence despite statements like yours bearing nothing but opinion.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439Boooooooooorrrrrriiiiiiiing.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439Boooooooorrrriiiiiiing.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439Callin the kettle black again. Booooooooorrrriiiiiing.

[@KaliFissure]

If the sun were gaseous rather than fluidic why aren't there banding or tropics?

[@KaliFissure]

Clearly molten liquid metallic plasma. 1.5 times as dense as water. Clearly conditions difficult to create at any scale here. The affect of an intense gravity as container of sorts can't be overlooked.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@KaliFissure it could be electrical

[@KaliFissure]

@Dan is definitely electrical. Liquid metal plasma. Highly charged with all kids of fiends flows creating the spectacular texture of eruptions and reconnections

[@m.c.4674]

The gas is the surface that holds the rest of the gas up . Yes the gas is not dense , and a gas particles can travel a mile before it hits something , therefore the surface is a mile thick . The chance that a particle penetrating this is very unlikely , as the long it travels the more chances it has to collide .

[@MyMy-tv7fd]

rather hard going but I think I got most of it

[@kevinburke8608]

I don't know nearly enough but was curious about the Parker Solar Probe. Wouldnt there be an instrument to directly measure the temperature or is that not possible?

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@ianw5439 That's like infinite heat. There's clearly not enough energy input for that. Numerous times by numerous methods you say, but there's only one actual method.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@ianw5439 It's not about me. Answer the question or admit you cannot.

[@demonmonsterdave]

@@ianw5439 Measured against what? If it's measured against absolute zero my point is solid. You use the word "proposed" then say you know. Proposed means we don't know. It's not about me, but I don't understand anything because your reasoning makes no sense. Answer the question before worrying about me.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@demonmonsterdave PMR made the example of silver clusters in argon at 3K producing spectra in the thousands of Kelvin. You have to ask if spectra are a robust proxy for physical temperatures. Especially in situations of chemical reactions which can produce spectra of forbidden transitions, produce really weird spectra at weird "temperatures". Going by dimensional analysis, the only reasonable method is with a physical surface, and a physical pressure applied to that surface.

[@danielarcher369]

@@demonmonsterdave the million degree temps are electron temperatures, that is not the same as real heat. Actual heat is photon density.

[@2HighNoon]

Electromagnetic anomaly in the Sun creating a bubble that matter is condensing on. Giving the appearance of a surface to an otherwise hollow bubble. 🤷‍♂️ that’s how my mind envisions it. Like a black hole, something in the middle is creating a sphere of influence. In the case of black holes, light can’t escape the bubble so it looks empty. Stars are a scaled down version of that anomaly.

[@Hei1Bao4]

Wouldn't that be considered ablation then, not sublimation, if it still maintains it's lattice within the corona?

[@jnhrtmn]

They are measuring surface wave speeds that are very fast. Do those observed wave speeds support condensed matter as a surface wave medium?

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@@ianw5439Wrong! You can't seem to escape your Kirchhoff's black box. Such a trivial mind.

[@jspies123]

Can your work address as to why the sun is a perfect sphere. Shouldn't an object that large, spinning that fast be oblate to some extent?

[@Kenzofeis]

What would be the effect of strong electric fields, currents and EM fields, transients, even, on this lattice? Would there not be very strong and ever changing stresses?

[@michaeldeanleonardo4621]

So the solar wind is like the force off a pot of boiling water.

[@triedproven9908]

That's what he said in example form.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

That's what the standard model says it is. This doesn't explain how the solar wind gets faster the further from the Sun it gets.

[@michaeldeanleonardo4621]

@@Dan-gs3kg Distance from source of magnetic attraction and gravity source decrease their affect allowing for increased gaining of momentum.

[@yougeo]

Is P.-M. Robitaille doing ok? He has not hosted for a while.

[@justinfalzon6854]

amazing

[@bramblemat]

sounds like a description of gravity.

[@AboveMediocrity2010]

How do you solve a problem like Maria? How do you catch a cloud and pin it down?

[@estebanwedontneednostinkin9969]

The sun is changing dramatically.

[@priyanthahettige7694]

Thanks Doc. Good stuff... not widely read.. pity.

[@florianopohlmann9516]

Dear Prof Robitaille, How can I get in touch with you? The only email I’ve found, linked to an University, is not working. Thank you. Kind Regards, Floriano

[@whaleoilbeefhooked3892]

....and we have no idea how physically far away the sun is measured from our earth.

[@whaleoilbeefhooked3892]

@@ianw5439 Okay. In fairness of your disrespectful comment, I've not found any credible scientific documentation to physically prove scientific verification of the moon's distance from the surface of the earth. The moon's distance must first be physically known ahead of employing any other mathematical applications, for any and all subsequent cosmic observations that are of greater distance than the moon. My comment stands as stated.

[@daleeagar4014]

Wow, this is very good... I have been working on a theory about a form of cold fusion that would shoehorn right into this improved model of Corona. physics. It would explain some of the properties of the Corona that lead the researchers to surmise such very high temperatures. These would comprise both Neucleogenisis and some of the very high-energy stuff that is normally attributed to temperatures in the tens of millions of degrees... As to the Neucleogenisis part, there is a very strange abundance of Al26 in the Tektites of the moon, that suggests some very aggressive moments of the Solar Neucleogenisis in the past million years. But be aware that my theory includes a player not normally thought about when thinking of the sun.

[@RT-hl4uk]

Something I don’t get. If we observe our star from further away, the spectrum shifts to the red. Not because of you moving away, but just by examining it from further away. Does that fact go against the idea of the Hubble redshift? More distance than motion. Did I hear that right?

[@vortextube]

You just made all that up.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

Are you mental?

[@DadBadGaming]

Micro Nova

[@fredfarquar8301]

@@ianw5439 You really don’t keep up on latest findings in astronomy, do you? On repeating novae, red dwarves having nova-like events, novae of all kinds of levels of energy release, most in non-binary systems? (Sorry, I had to try once again to open your eyes…)

[@joycemaurer3588]

@@ianw5439 ok you've lost everyone now.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

@@ianw5439 so you've not read the lastest in nova science which has found that many of these recurrent novae don't have a binary? Odd

[@chrisstevens2]

It would probably be a good idea to stop referring to a "standard model" but instead call it something like "the gaseous star theory".

[@Goalsplus]

I was going to say, it should be "the old model." But yours is probably better.

[@adampetrowsky1771]

👍

[@trollmcclure1884]

a temperature around 5800K leads me to question the claim that the closest stars if pea sized would be some 200 km away and visible. I dont believe you'd see a pea-sized welding arc at that distance.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

Oh yeah, the inverse square law is a thing. The thing you need to account for is that the light we see might not be pure black body radiation.

[@ebb2421]

Alrighty then, the 12yo ID is still looking for a causeual mechanism of an SO micronova event...thank you doctor R.

[@spiritsplice]

@@ianw5439 Weird how we see them all over the place, they are talked about in our histories, we see them in the geology of the earth and moon.

[@ebb2421]

@@ianw5439 Glib comments are meaningless. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qmbYlaBphMeYsK8 find the evidence/mechanism to prove or disprove. Nova level isotopes are found locally, why? Glass and iron sphereals are found in the geology at known cataclysmic dates. The moon has the best undisturbed evidence. A little difficult to mount a detailed core sample expedition but the glass beads are there. Discoveries are made where the mainstream isn't looking.

[@briankerr4512]

I say the extent of the solar atmosphere is the heliopause ...

[@hoon_sol]

I don't see why streamers or anchoring of the corona would require condensed matter in the corona itself, though. If the magnetic field is generated from well below the corona, the plasma would still be anchored to those lines there even if gaseous.

[@michaelc424]

Ian, there is literally not a single person who is listening to you on this channel's comments. They find you insulting. Gee, I wonder why. Most commentators who do respond to you each seem to come to a similar conclusion. They quickly realize that you are probably suffering from OCD. And once this is realized, they cease engaging with you. But you, on the other hand, never stop responding; it is for you a mission on having the last word, like your life depended on it. You must be a very lonely person. I will pray for you. I sincerely hope life takes for you a turn for the better.

[@michaelc424]

@@ianw5439 last word? Go ahead, I know you cannot resist.

[@Jueyes-vg2gb]

They dont care because of the implications, and not in physics, think about what it means to say the stars did not form from gravitational collapse, how profound that is.

[@KennethKustren-lr6tg]

Let's all guess what happens in a few billion, or some hundreds of, ...to a Star that starves itself .... Pay It Forward. ... TAG ... UR IT .

[@richardtofield5210]

how does lightning work on the sun?could that appear as a steady glow?....physicists might have to get their theory straight about how lightning works on the Earth before answering that

[@summerbrooks9922]

No they don't. Because they say that lightning comes from the sun! Ha! They got you!

[@danielarcher369]

LOL, ian w got roasted.

[@danielarcher369]

@@ianw5439 in the video above you numbnut

[@danielarcher369]

@@ianw5439 so weak

[@phyarth8082]

7:58 Earth atmosphere is not anchored to the surface, I just asking for flat earther friend :) That believes that Earth is stationary. In stationary Earth if it is Hollow, Convex or flat, atmosphere is not anchored to the ground based on rules of fluid dynamics, where moving solid objects high density object drags low density fluid.

[@iooi1181]

spinning a ball in water it lifts on the field generated between the ball and the water. if the earth didn't spin it would be more like our moon.

[@phyarth8082]

@@iooi1181 Moon is locked to one face and Dark Side of the Moon is only described by songs lol. If Earth spins with frequency f=24 hours=24*60*60=86400 seconds, and atmosphere is not locked (anchored) thus linear velocity in equator where earth radius is maximum R=6370 km is v=2*pi*R*f=2*3.14*6370000/(24*60*60)=463 m/s Air Speed velocity is 340 m/s. Thus two possible options Earth is stationary or atmosphere in spinning Earth must be anchored to ground (how nobody can explain), it just must be.

[@iooi1181]

@@phyarth8082 the moon not spinning is the point of it not having much of an atmosphere and in fact is part of the earths atmosphere. right now the earth has 4 poles, true north and south on that it spins and magnetic north and south on that energy is transferred... so as the sun steps down will the earths (and other planets in our solar system) magnetic field break into more poles? will the axis just tilt like uranus or will it rip the crust open exposing an ocean to the core?.... boom, vast amounts of elements shoot towards space, what goes up must come down?

[@spacecase0]

All this sure shows us why sun diving comments make such large solar disruptions

[@craigfisher3976]

If condensed metallic H and He for the most part the magnetosphere caused by rotation (spin) being slowed by reduction of pressure to surface creating toroidal magnetic field with giant flux lines (shooting out energetic particles) from fusion like enormous CERN's? Looks like a duck.

[@DegreesOfThree]

That must be quite a thermometer that can survive 10 billion Kelvin. 😂 Almost as impressive as the scale that can measure the weight of a neutron star. 🤦

[@summerbrooks9922]

One Hell of a thermometer, LOL!

[@demonmonsterdave]

People get angry and abusive before we even begin to question their beliefs. They can't even do proper insults, and comparing to children is asinine in that it just copies the 12-year-old meme, as if 12-year-olds are automatically all stupid enough to accept without investigation like the delusional potential patient who posted the comment. Sorry for the negativity.

[@ronusa1976]

It's called theory induced blindness.

[@captainsensible298]

K - Coronal spectrum scattered light ? that's a pretty desperate guess, like purposely ignoring that which you choose to ignore, ideology not science.

[@michaelc424]

Ian, help me here. Robitaille,'s argument has to be dealt with by you. His argument is based upon basic science principles. Robitaille is saying in clear terms that the cosmologists of today are wrong in basing their conclusions utilizing the 'law of thermal emissions' that is central to all of their claims. He is saying that Kirchhoff's law of thermal emissions is in error as currently applied. Other than saying you are the smartest dude around, can you demonstrate that Kirchhoff's law of thermal emissions is proven to be correct by scientifically established experimentation. Can you present that to us? Have you personally, in your scientific career, done the work to prove this law. Is there something other than consensus to support acceptance of this law. Is Kirchhoff's law of thermal emissions proven? Not generally accepted, but proven. Or maybe you think Kirchhoff's law of thermal emissions is not relevant. Like no one is using that law to support their conclusions. That would surely be relevant as well. Just asking.

[@stevecrothers6585]

@@ianw5439 : As usual you have not presented a single scientific argument. Since you are so fond of peer-reviewed papers provide papers (you have studied and understand) proving experimental or theoretical proof of Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission. That is a tall order because there are none. But try anyway.

[@stevecrothers6585]

@@ianw5439 The reason why you cannot provide citations of any peer-reviewed papers proving that Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission has been proven experimentally or theoretically is because, as I said above, no such papers exist. Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission is false. His law has never been proven experimentally or theoretically for that very reason. The very existence of resonant cavities proves that his law is false. If is was true, resonant cavities would not exist. But they do exist. You have demonstrated over and over that you are a very hateful fellow. But the only person your all consuming hate will harm is you. And you labour under the misconception that your irrelevant hate speech matters to Dr. Robitaille or to me or to anybody else. You lost the argument at your very first post on Dr. Robitaille's channel.

[@michaelc424]

@@DrWhom Since Ian will not answer my question, maybe you will. Is there any scientific experimentation published establishing that Kirchhoff's law of thermal emissions is legitimate, especially as applied to gases?

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@ianw5439 Word salad. Not a single cogent argument. Usual nonsense from Ian.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

​@DrWhom Another confession that you have no argument and are a maroon. Clearly you are not up to the task.

[@bulkbogan4320]

P.-M. Robitaille will take your wife too!

[@imnewtothistuff]

Sorry Doc, but you are incorrect. The sun is not a ball of metallic hydrogen at its core. There is no fusion happening at the core. That happens at the surface. The sun is more simply a solid rocky body under great electrical stress caused by the Berkland currents that are impinging on its surface. The thermal model for the sun is bogus, every observation can be explained by the electrical model. That's why the Corona is millions of degrees Kelvin. There are only 2 things in the universe that can produce a continuous spectrum white light... tungsten and an electric arc. Thanks for taking the time to read.

[@runs_through_the_forest]

Kristian Birkeland, proposed specific currents for the way the aurora's are observed, and he was right as shown by direct measurements and observations by satellite.. thanks to Hannes Alfvén these specific currents are called birkeland currents, and we could say other stellar or even galactic currents are birkeland currents, but we don't, and we can say for sure Kristian didn't propose the sun to be a "solid rocky body under great electrical stress", neither did Alfvén btw..

[@runs_through_the_forest]

@@ianw5439 similar, could be called by a long stretch of the imagination, but i did say we don't.. i'm not here to claim i know better, i don't, but i did spend lot's of time reading the basics in astrophysics etc, after getting euhm tempted by the nice stories the electric folks tell us, it's rather compelling to people who haven't spend years studying astronomy etc.. given you are very vocal about this stuff, what's your opinion on Peratt's hypothesis linking high-current z-pinch aurora's with petroglyphs all around the world? (not the hi-jacked EU saturn stuff btw) i mean the papers build a strong hypothesis, right? yet not much attention is given by the academic crowd (for sure not in the archaeological and anthropological, maybe some in geophysics?) or am i wrong? cheers

[@imnewtothistuff]

@@runs_through_the_forest I never said 'those' gentlemen proposed a solid rocky body, but the now consensus, 80+yrs later is yes, there is. Just as today's electricity travels on the outside of a conductor and not through it, so do Berkelund currents travel around the surface of the sun and not through it, that's why the visible sun (observed sun) is round. Also, his "Terella" (spelling?) experiment was a sphere.

[@runs_through_the_forest]

@@imnewtothistuff "Also, his "Terella" (spelling?) experiment was a sphere" please what do you mean by that? terra, teralla, as in the earth, that was the earth in his lab setting.. i might be misunderstanding you here.. :p

[@runs_through_the_forest]

@@ianw5439 well in his defence, there are signatures at about the end of the younger dryas events, which could indicate these much more extreme solar cycles/storms.. and never before seen aurora's, well, since when, 150-300 years of more recent scientific observations? that's very short in terms of glaciation interglacial period time frames, if the sun has a major part to play in these cycles your rebuttal is a bit weak in my opinion.. the carrington event is still nothing to strong when knowing what's possible from observations of other stars, it's in my opinion a bit premature for our contemporary civilization to conclude our star is by definition mostly calm, over longer time scales.. anyhow nice chat and have a good one oh yeah, you have any proof that said Peratt, et al studies where funded by Wall and thunderbolts or is that based on that one video where they (wall thornhill and that other dude) are in the audience of his lecture?