The Empty Sun. The Hollow Sun. The Electric Sun.

[I_Like_Science]

First off, hello all, new to the forum!

Now, the original article for the weak convective motion is here.
'MRI' of the Sun's interior motions challenges existing explanations for sunspots
And while it agrees that current models need to be updated, the models they are referring to are how the sun generates it magnetic field, NOT its energy source.

And...

If a stars energy source is not from fusion, what gives us the particles heavier than helium?

And what energy source is large enough to make the larger stars explode at the end of their lives?

And if the energy source is electromagnetism from the center of the galaxy (LOLOLOL!!!), then how is there any iron on earth (assuming it was able to be created in the first place) as the field is OBVIOUSLY strong enough to attract iron at this distance.

If the sun is hollow, what forces keep it from collapsing?

And instead of saying that seeing dark spots is 'seeing inside', could it just be possible that that is a colder part of the sun? (they are indeed cooler than the surround outer layer)

I'm not saying there is no reason to question current models of science, but they usually follow the idea of Occam's razor, and the ideas I'm seeing here simply do not.

[Berg]

The Sun According To Eric Dollard

If the sun is hollow, what forces keep it from collapsing?

Good Question. What do you think the answer is?

There is no inside structure. There's only a surface. There's nothing inside. Not burning anything. There's no fusion in the Sun. That's well understood.

Source: Eric Dollard: The Sun is Not What we We Have Been Told.... Eric Dollard reveals 3 secrets about the Sun - YouTube

Just let me say that Eric Dollard is highly respected by many prominent people in the "field" and here at this forum.

You can also check out: Can Gravity be Induced?

Cheers

[I_Like_Science]

Good Question. What do you think the answer is?

Simply fusion.

What do you believe to be the answer to the other questions?

EDIT: So I watched that video. Wow.

Soooooo.....if the visible light spectrum isn't, well, visible in space, what does nasa keep taking pictures of out there?

[Farmhand]

There could be simple explanations for the black spots on the Sun even if it is
a point discharge or whatever (electrical in nature).

Phantom imaging in MRI scan due to metal implants is a problem that causes
black area's on the image's. I see no reason why magnetic anomalies on the
Suns surface might not be a cause of "black spots" on optical and radio scope
images.

http://www.clinical-mri.com/pdf/IR/IR_mar12.pdf

Metal artifacts in MRI come from metal-induced inhomogeneity of the
local magnetic field. These inhomogeneities in the
region of metal implants cause areas of signal void, geometric
distortions, image contrast changes and signal pile-ups.

If it was a hole and we could see inside then why can't we see the "inside" of
the other side ?

To me sunspots look like artifacts caused by magnetic anomalies on the
surface of the sun. Probably due to persistent currents or some such thing.

But who knows.

Cheers

P.S. When we look at pictures of the Sun we should take into account what
the nature of the equipment is that we use to view it with. Are we seeing
what the sun actually looks like or some "radio type data" converted to optical
images ? With contrast and colors ect. manipulated and so forth ?

I think it might be relevant. Dunno.

..

[Farmhand]

Soooooo.....if the visible light spectrum isn't, well, visible in space, what does nasa keep taking pictures of out there?

From what I can gather and if I understand correctly, I think the idea is that
visible light is produced when non visible radiation from the stars encounters
matter. It does kinda make sense but is difficult to explain well.

Not saying I agree, it's not for me to say one way or the other. It doesn't
matter much what I think. What matters is, if what most people think is
true/real or not. Who can provide 100% proof one way or the other ?

Cheers

[I_Like_Science]

From what I can gather and if I understand correctly, I think the idea is that
visible light is produced when non visible radiation from the stars encounters
matter. It does kinda make sense but is difficult to explain well.

Not saying I agree, it's not for me to say one way or the other. It doesn't
matter much what I think. What matters is, if what most people think is
true/real or not. Who can provide 100% proof one way or the other ?

Cheers

Lol, yarp, I do get the basic idea. Like all the best crazy ideas, this one has kernel of truth taken too far. You really can't 'see' anything that either hasn't produced light, or hasn't had light reflected off of it. But light does have a very measurable speed, red-shift, and even mass (solar wind anybody?).

There ARE lots of things we don't understand about the universe, just look at this awesome list. But we can take a pretty good guess as to, at LEAST the basics, of what's inside the sun, the finer points of magnetic field generation being well up in the air though.

Seriously, this guy makes the case that everybody just wants to see 'destruction' as what the universe is about, and the irony of it is that without fusion working inside of stars, the type of matter that makes up the earth and almost everything on it wouldn't exist. If long term heat-death is the price paid for life to exist, I'd say it's worth it.

I do agree that no-one can provide 100% proof of, well, just about anything if you want to get super philosophical about it. With that said, there are other, far more elegant and believable ideas out there than believing the sun is friggin hollow.

[Berg]

Not In Free Space

I don't know that that is a real image of the Sun, Earth or the Glory Mission.

The curvature of the Earth in that image is concave.

You might be able to find an explanation for the Earth being concave in that image.

Try looking at Optical phenomenon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nice try, but even if that image were real, it would just be an image that was taken in low Earth orbit, probably in the lower thermosphere, with just enough atmosphere acting as a diffraction grating, so it doesn't count.

That image is just an artist's impression.

The Glory Mission was lost after launch. It never made it into space.

Source:

1. Image source: http://www.earthzine.org/wp-content/...rise-nasa2.jpg

2. Web site associated with the image: NASA’s Glory will be in improving climate models | Earthzine

3. General Information about the Glory Mission: Glory (satellite) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. News Story: NASA's $400 Million Glory Satellite Lost in Pacific Ocean | Fox News

5. NASA on the Glory Mission: Glory

6. Video of briefing from NASA: Glory Mission failure 04 March 2011 - YouTube

FREE SPACE

You can't see the Sun in free space. NOT IN FREE SPACE.

Source: Eric Dollard: The Sun is not a Nuclear furnace raging at millions of degrees. It is Electric and Cold! - YouTube

Real image of the Earth:



This is a normal image of the Earth. The curvature is not concave, rather convex.

Cheers

[Berg]

No Fusion In The Sun

Simply fusion.

That's great that you think that.

But can you prove there is fusion happening in the Sun?

There's not that way to prove there is any.

Source: Eric Dollard at 3m8s: The Sun is not a Nuclear furnace raging at millions of degrees. It is Electric and Cold! - YouTube

There is no fusion in the Sun. They don't know how the Sun works.

Source: Eric Dollard at 3m8s: The Sun is not a Nuclear furnace raging at millions of degrees. It is Electric and Cold! - YouTube

Cheers

[I_Like_Science]

I don't know that that is a real image of the Sun, Earth or the Glory Mission.

Oh fer gawds sake. There are a lot of other pictures out there, sorry I didn't background check the first one that came up on google image search. I know you're just going to claim any other picture from leo is fake, so how about I riddle you with this...

What are the STEREO satellites looking at? And they are nowhere near LEO, rather what anyone would call free space.

But can you prove there is fusion happening in the Sun?

Can you prove that it isn't? C'mon man, seriously, the idea that fusion is what powers the sun explains more than it leaves questions for. The theory helps to explain novae, supernovae, heavier than helium atoms, nebulae, white dwarves, black holes, and lots of other fun phenomena we actually see in space. Yes it's just a theory, but it's one that makes sense!!!

In contrast, the idea that stars are electromagnetic explains exactly nothing of the rest of the phenomena we see. (and are made of!)

You haven't answered any of my questions, or even attempted to. I'm starting to guess you're just trolling.

And you know what, because I already found these and they are pretty, I'll end with this.

[bhaas]

Where did they store that land rover they were driving around in on the moon?
The rover they drove looks bigger than the lander.

Where's the motor??? If those tires had air in them wouldn't they explode
due to no atmospheric pressure???

Kinda makes you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......................

[I_Like_Science]

^^LOL!!

I smell a troll.

[bhaas]

^^LOL!!

I smell a troll.

Bite me.

Still doesn't look like it would fit anywhere in or on that lander.

That pic isn't real is it? That's an awfully short horizon.
Unless of course the moon is only a few hundred feet in diameter. Just looks bigger in the sky. Right???

[I_Like_Science]

That's an awfully short horizon.
Unless of course the moon is only a few hundred feet in diameter. Just looks bigger in the sky. Right???

HOLY LOL!

That sir, is the best use of science I have ever heard of! Bravo!

[Berg]

^^LOL!!

I smell a troll.

Heah, newbie. I'm quoting Peter Lindemann and Eric Dollard. Who have you been quoting. Nobody. You don't even check out your material. Your first image posted was a fake. I started this thread, so with only six posts to your name, the troll you're smelling is yourself.

[Franco malgarini]

E 'desirable that humankind try to understand the secrets of the Sun with a mission at its center by means of a probe consisting of a nuclear fusion reactor "upside down", that is, that instead of confining the plasma within it, it deflects towards the outside so as to penetrate nell'infuocato world of the sun