Astronomers Again Baffled by Solar Observations
SteakNShake writes "Once again professional astronomers are struggling to understand observations of the sun. ScienceDaily reports that a team from Saint Andrew's University announced that the sun's magnetic fields dominate the behavior of the corona via a mechanism dubbed the 'solar skeleton.' Computer models continue to be built to mimic the observed behavior of the sun in terms of magnetic fields but apparently the ball is still being dropped; no mention in the announcement is made of the electric fields that must be the cause of the observed magnetic fields. Also conspicuously absent from the press releases is the conclusion that the sun's corona is so-dominated by electric and magnetic fields because it is a plasma. In light of past and present research revealing the electrical nature of the universe, this kind of crippling ignorance among professional astrophysicists is astonishing."
Isn't it rather an indication that they're doing their job? Data which challenge our current models are the most valuable things scientists can collect, because they give researchers chance to refine their theories.
The thing is, the theory the submitter alludes to isn't the "current model", it's extreme fringe theory (I'm tempted to call it crackpot theory but will leave that to an actual physicist), and the submitter managed to get his troll on Slashdot.
I mean, he's calling the fact that scientists don't agree to a theory on thunderbolts.info as "crippling ignorance".
I mean, Nature, thunderbolts.info, they're about the same in status, don't you agree?
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
DISCLAIMER: I am an astronomy grad student.
I have repeatedly gotten emails from a similar group of nutjobs linking to a 40 page paper which "proves" the universe is not powered by fusion but by magnetic fields or some such. Their paper contained I think three equations and a whole lot of hooey.
The story on the front page of slashdot is complete and utter BUNK (yes, I know not THAT big of a surprise). Editors should remove immediately.
I'm not exactly the most savvy Slashdot reader around, and even I know this "electric universe" theory is about as credible as the time cube.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
Over ninety-nine percent of the visible universe is matter in a plasma state. Only utter ignorance of plasma could lead one to the conclusion that the universe is anything but electrically-driven. Plasmas are affected about forty orders of magnitude more strongly by electromagnetic fields than by the weak, virtual force of "gravity". Gravity is an anachronistic model and stellar fusion is a myth that's been falsified by observations. The sun is not a "nuclear furnace". The sun is solid.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
...a solid body: http://thesurfaceofthesun.com/ ...the focus of an electric discharge, which powers it: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm ...to be respected. The sun doesn't dodge bullets. Bullets dodge the sun. http://passthebrass.com/2005/12/chuck-norris-owns- you/
Off-topic, but the first is a myth. Noone with any education believed the Earth was flat after oh, about 100 AD - the Greek experiments that showed it otherwise were well-known. The reason why it's commonly believed that middle-age man believed the Earth to be flat can be blamed on Washington Irving, who needed a nice symbol of the barbarism of Europe as compared with the enlightened new world, and came up with this idea.
The second was actually for good reasons, since the early Copernican models provided no better accuracy than the the Ptolemaic system - Copernicus simply preferred it for aesthetic reasons. It wasn't until Brahe provided the measurements, and Kepler the mathematical model that there was a good reason to switch to the new way of looking at things.
Paranoia is simply reality on a finer scale.