Something new on the Sun: Spacecraft observes new characteristics of solar flares

Sep 07, 2011
Instead of a conventional picture, the EUV variability Experiment (EVE) on board SDO produces graphs like this, called spectra, that show the total intensity of any given extreme ultraviolet (EUV) wavelength of light coming off of the sun. This image shows a single moment from May 5, 2010. The height of each vertical line represents how much energy is present in that particular wavelength. Spectra like this can measure energy from the sun more comprehensively than instruments that can only “see” a single wavelength. Credit: NASA/SDO/EVE

(PhysOrg.com) -- NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory, or SDO, has provided scientists new information about solar flares indicating an increase in strength and longevity that is more than previously thought.

Solar flares are intense bursts of radiation from the release of associated with . They are the solar system's largest explosive events and are seen as bright areas on the sun. Their energy can reach Earth's atmosphere and affect operations of Earth-orbiting communication and .

Using SDO's Extreme ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE) instrument, scientists have observed that radiation from continue for up to five hours beyond the main phase. The new data also show the total energy from this extended phase of the solar flare's peak sometimes has more energy than the initial event.


Video above: A compilation of solar data from various instruments on SDO recording a flare on May 5, 2010. The images on top show the initial magnetic loops of the flare, and a delayed brightening of additional magnetic loops above the originals showing the late phase flare. Along the bottom, graphs from EVE show the extreme ultraviolet light peaking both in time with the main flare and the late phase flare. Credit: NASA/SDO/Tom Woods

"Previous observations considered a few seconds or minutes to be the normal part of the flare process," said Lika Guhathakurta, lead program scientist for NASA's Living with a Star Program at the agency's Headquarters in Washington. "This new data will increase our understanding of flare physics and the consequences in near-Earth space where many scientific and commercial satellites reside."
On Nov. 3, 2010, SDO observed a solar flare. If scientists only had measured the effects of the flare as it initially happened, they would have underestimated the amount of energy shooting into Earth's atmosphere by 70 percent. SDO's new observations provide a much more accurate estimation of the total energy solar flares put into Earth's environment.

"For decades, our standard for flares has been to watch the X-rays as they happen and see when they peak," said Tom Woods, a space scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder and principal author on a paper in Wednesday's online edition of Astrophysical Journal. "But we were seeing peaks that didn't correspond to the X-rays."

During the course of a year, the team used EVE to map each wavelength of light as it strengthened, peaked, and diminished over time. EVE records data every 10 seconds and has observed many flares. Previous instruments only measured every 90 minutes or didn't look at all wavelengths simultaneously as SDO can.


Video above: On May 5, 2010, shortly after the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) began normal operation, the sun erupted with numerous coronal loops and flares. Many of these showed a previously unseen "late phase flare" appearing minutes to hours after the main flare. Credit: /SDO

To compliment the EVE graphical data, scientists used images from another SDO instrument, the Advanced Imaging Assembly (AIA). Analysis of these images showed the main flare eruption and its extended phase in the form of magnetic field lines called coronal loops that appeared far above the original eruption site. These extra loops were longer and became brighter later than the loops from the main flare and also were physically set apart from those of the main flare.

Because this previously unrealized extra source of energy from flares also is impacting Earth's atmosphere, Woods and his colleagues are studying how the late phase flares can influence space weather. Space weather caused by solar flares can affect communication and navigation systems, satellite drag and the decay of orbital debris.

SDO was launched on Feb. 11, 2010. The spacecraft is the most advanced spacecraft ever designed to study the sun and its dynamic behavior. SDO provides images 10 times clearer than high definition television and more comprehensive science data faster than any solar observing spacecraft in history.

EVE was built by the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado. AIA was built by Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory in Palo Alto, Calif.

Explore further: Sandy ridges pose a mystery for future Martian beach vacations

Related Stories

SDO celebrates one year anniversary

Feb 14, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- On February 11, 2010, at 10:23 in the morning, NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) launched into space on an Atlas rocket from Cape Canaveral. A year later, SDO has sent back millions ...

Solar Fireworks Signal New Space Weather Mystery

May 24, 2005

The most intense burst of solar radiation in five decades accompanied a large solar flare on January 20. It shook space weather theory and highlighted the need for new forecasting techniques, according to several presentations ...

Recommended for you

Winter in the southern uplands of Mars

14 hours ago

Over billions of years, the southern uplands of Mars have been pockmarked by numerous impact features, which are often so closely packed that they overlap. One such feature is Hooke crater, shown in this ...

Five facts about NASA's ISS-RapidScat

14 hours ago

NASA's ISS-RapidScat mission will observe ocean wind speed and direction over most of the globe, bringing a new eye on tropical storms, hurricanes and typhoons. Here are five fast facts about the mission.

User comments : 41

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gmurphy
5 / 5 (2) Sep 07, 2011
I'd love a live feed of all these instruments, it would make a great tablet wallpaper :)
Jeddy_Mctedder
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
this is some of the best basic empirical science going on right now.
vidyunmaya
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 07, 2011
Sub: Solar Storms-comprehension-Earth-life Support
Daily ,I search for SDO data.I wonder all the groups-SDO-Sterio-SOHO-ESA Cluster join together through Heliophysics or create- Cosmology Interlinks groups.All these specific data needs to be interlinked to Concepts-Source,Flow,Fields,Reflectors-for clear direction-See cosmology Vedas interlinks.Time is the essence to keep-up spirit of Science to nature and philosophy. Then comes advisory bulletins
Vidyardhi Nanduri
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (2) Sep 07, 2011
Two things crossed my mind:
1. Hidden within lies the answer to the next generation of fusion energy reactors.
2. That burning cauldron looks ready to blow at any moment.
Dug
2.6 / 5 (10) Sep 07, 2011
You also have to wonder if some of this extra solar heat might also have been mis-accounted for... as anthropogenic heat rather than solar.
omatumr
1.1 / 5 (16) Sep 07, 2011
Thank you, thank you, thank you for the new videos!

It is great to see first hand the violent instabilities in Earth's heat source [1].

Earth is connected gravitationally, magnetically and electrically to its heat source [2] - the core of the Sun.

Solar flares like these may play an important role in explaining changes in Earth's climate caused by the erratic transfer of heat from the energetic solar core to the Earth [3].

References:

1. "Earth's heat source - the Sun", Energy & Environment 20, 131-144 (2009)

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0704

2. "Neutron repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011)

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

3. "Super-fluidity in the solar interior: Implications for solar eruptions and climate",
Journal of Fusion Energy 21, 193-198 (2002)

http://arxiv.org/.../0501441

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo

omatumr
1 / 5 (12) Sep 07, 2011
You also have to wonder if some of this extra solar heat might also have been mis-accounted for... as anthropogenic heat rather than solar.


No, Dug, never, never, never! It was agreed at the Bilderberg [1] that Earth's heat source - the Sun - is "homogeneous, and in hydrostatic equilibrium."

If the Sun were not a constant heat source, folks might even start to doubt Al Gore's story of CO2-induced global warming!

1. The Bilderberg model, Solar Physics 3, 5-25 (1968): http://adsabs.har....3....5G
jonnyboy
1.6 / 5 (13) Sep 07, 2011
And when real science comes along it appears that all the AGW trolls go back to hiding under their bridges,
omatumr
1 / 5 (12) Sep 07, 2011
Two things crossed my mind:

1. Hidden within lies the answer to the next generation of fusion energy reactors.

2. That burning cauldron looks ready to blow at any moment.


1. Fusion may only generate ~35% of solar energy; 100% of solar neutrinos
... Neutron-decay generates ~05% of solar energy
... Neutron-emission causes ~60% of solar energy [ref #2, above]

2. Stars explode sometimes. Our Sun did so ~ 5 Gyr ago in giving birth to the solar system.
omatumr
1 / 5 (10) Sep 08, 2011
NASA's videos falsify AGW and SSM models (fables). Their roots are deep,

A. Kissinger and Chairman Mao apparently agreed in 1971 to adopt the Bilderberg model [1] of a stable Sun as the cornerstone of plans to end the threat of mutual nuclear destruction by uniting nations against a new enemy: "Global Climate Change."

B. After 1971 federal agencies hid or evaded experimental observations [2,3] that showed the Sun and Earth's climate always changed.

C. This video recording of the belated release of isotope data from Galileo probe's 1995 entry into Jupiter is one example [4].

1. The Bilderberg model of the photosphere and low chromosphere, Solar Physics (1968) vol 3, 5-25 http://adsabs.har...oPh.3.5G

2. Neutron repulsion, The APEIRON Journal, in press
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

3. Origin and evolution of life . . , J Mod Physics 2, 587-594 http://dl.dropbox...5079.pdf

4. http://www.youtub...IFmZpFco
omatumr
1 / 5 (11) Sep 08, 2011
Wow! Look at all the emission lines coming from heavy elements (Fe, Mg, etc) in the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) spectrum of light coming off the Sun!

Wow! That removes the cornerstone of Chairman Mao, Henry Kissinger, Al Gore, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard's story:

www.physorg.com/n...ate.html

The Bilderberg group is powerful, but

Observations confirm old scriptures:

"Truth is victorious; Never untruth."
omatumr
1 / 5 (9) Sep 08, 2011
Thanks for the EUV spectrum of light emitted at a single moment on 5 May 2010!

Can you also show us how the ratio of emission lines from light and heavy elements, e.g., He/Fe, changes during a flare?

Thanks!

Oliver

SteveL
5 / 5 (7) Sep 08, 2011
Hm... All of the world leaders with incredibly disparate agendas, religions and philosphies, then and since, agreed to have a "kum ba ya" moment with the understanding that they would be purposely and permanently misleading the world and make up global warming as a unitizing world concern? I suppose we should be happy that they finally agreed on something. That is interesting since in reality we mere humans have trouble agreeing with our families, the people we work with and our neighbors next door.
omatumr
1 / 5 (10) Sep 08, 2011
Correct link:

1. The Bilderberg model, Solar Physics (1968) vol 3, 5-25

http://adsabs.har....3....5G
barakn
3.7 / 5 (9) Sep 08, 2011
Wow! Look at all the emission lines coming from heavy elements (Fe, Mg, etc) in the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) spectrum of light coming off the Sun!

Wow! That removes the cornerstone of Chairman Mao, Henry Kissinger, Al Gore, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard's story: -omatumr

You obviously need a refresher course. The ionization energy of a hydrogen atom is -13.6 eV. This means that the smallest wavelength at which hydrogen will produce light at discrete (quantized) peaks is 91.2 nm, well outside the range of wavelengths in the graph. The graph therefore says very little about the relative concentrations of the elements, and certainly doesn't support your iron sun proposal. If it does illustrate anything, it's that the magnitude of the ionization energy of highly-ionized high-Z atoms is much higher than that of the hydrogen atom.
brant
1.9 / 5 (9) Sep 08, 2011
Well... This along with the new cloud paper definitely puts AGW to bed...
omatumr
1 / 5 (10) Sep 08, 2011
Who need a refresher course?


Solar flare videos and emission lines reveal more innards:

www.physorg.com/n...m67.html

May confirm or deny:

a.) Evidence of an iron-rich solar interior [1-5]
b.) The AGW model of Earth's global climate, and
b.) The Bilderberg model of the Sun's constant heat [6].

With kind regards,
Oliver

References:

1. "Solar abundances", Meteoritics 18 (1983) 20
www.omatumr.com/a...nces.pdf

2. "Isotopic ratios in Jupiter", Meteoritics 33-A97 (1998) 5011
www.lpi.usra.edu/...5011.pdf

3. "Trans-iron elements in solar energetic particles", APJ 540 (2000) L111
http://epact2.gsf...0HiZ.pdf

4. "Neutron cross-sections and solar abundances", JRNC (2005) 159
www.springerlink....q712t75/

5. "Neutron repulsion", in press (2011)
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

6. "Bilderberg Sun", Solar Physics 3 (1968) 5
http://adsabs.har.....3....5
barakn
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 08, 2011
I suppose responding with a half-dozen non-related links is the closest you're ever going to get to admitting that the graph of emission spectra from 6-37 nm doesn't say anything about elemental abundances versus hydrogen. I therefore thank you for admitting you were wrong.
AngryMoose
not rated yet Sep 09, 2011
I'd love a live feed of all these instruments, it would make a great tablet wallpaper :)

Put me down for this as well!
omatumr
1 / 5 (10) Sep 09, 2011
I suppose responding with a half-dozen non-related links is the closest you're ever going to get to admitting that the graph of emission spectra from 6-37 nm doesn't say anything about elemental abundances versus hydrogen.


Thanks, Barakn, but nobody mentioned hydrogen.

Can you also show us how the ratio of emission lines from light and heavy elements, e.g., He/Fe, changes during a flare?


He is the chemical symbol for Helium, element #2
Fe is the chemical symbol for Iron, element #26

Nobody asked about H, the chemical symbol for Hydrogen, element #1.

barakn
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 10, 2011
So now you're going to pretend you haven't spent the last several decades trying to foist a theory that the sun is not a giant ball of hydrogen but is instead a neutron star surrounded by a shell of metals like Fe? I bet you got pretty excited when you saw that graph and mistakenly thought it proved the sun's composition was dominated by iron.
omatumr
1 / 5 (9) Sep 10, 2011
Did you overlook the large number of emission peaks from iron?
Ethelred
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 11, 2011
Did you overlook the He line and narrow range of wavelengths?

The HeII line has full order of magnitude more energy than anything else even in that narrow band.

Ethelred
gimpypoet
1.5 / 5 (8) Sep 11, 2011
if the sun is a ball of gas where fusion takes place, and we onearth have to build facilities and complexes just to experiment with fusion because of the forces involved (an explosive force),why doesn't it blow to pieces.two nuclei smash into each other releasing energy (an explosion) that is held together by the pressure of the vacuum of space, the force of gravity, and the magnetic fields and should go to pieces but doesn't. at least not in our lifetimes. Now all this is trying to say is spin also contributes. earth also has a nuclear explosion at it's center, has slowed considerably since it formed and science say's it is not expanding? (this site couple of weeks ago had an article that says no expansion) the big bang was an explosion and is still expanding? DM/DE must be found and used cause all the ingredients mentioned about sun/earth plus more are in the universe. when will it stop. put more energy in and none comes out. very strange this earth/sun complex is.
gimpypoet
1.5 / 5 (8) Sep 11, 2011
I don't beleive in global warming, just that almost every thing has a cycle to it. this warming going on now is part of a longer cycle than we can measure due to subduction resurfacing the planet. all this is theory, so is relativity. every time some one posits a theory, he is a tard or troll. make better use of your time and prove/disprove any theory presented here, bet ya can't. the light and the radiation given off by the sun, coronal mass ejections do lend credence to an exploding, fusion powered sun. these are all particles and have been seen hitting our planet. the composition of the sun matches what we fuse in our reactors for fusion on earth and lots of power and radiation (new lining a iter) which we must protect ourselves from and sunburns prove it. heat comes from the explosion of fusion in/on the sun. proved and done.
omatumr
1 / 5 (7) Sep 11, 2011
Misinformation on energy that powers the Sun, Earth's climate, and sustains our lives [1-3] is a grave danger to National Security.

NAS was "established by an Act of Congress . . . on March 3, 1863 . . . calls upon the NAS to "investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art" whenever called upon to do so by any department of the government" [1].

Please join me in asking Congress to request a FULL and CANDID evaluation from NAS of conflicting information in [1-3], BEFORE approving more funds for government research.

1. UN's IPCC reports (1990-2007)
www.nasonline.org...ain_page

2. Super-fluidity in the solar interior: Implications for solar eruptions and climate", JFE 21, 193-198 (2002) http://arxiv.org/.../0501441

3. "Neutron repulsion", in press
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

Sincerely,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://myprofile....anuelo09
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
(an explosion) that is held together by the pressure of the vacuum of space
No. And you are possibly the first person in the history of the entire universe to ever make that statement.

the force of gravity,
YES. That is the answer. The fusion takes place in the core of the Sun which is close to a million miles across and ALL that mass is involved in the containment of the fusion.

and the magnetic fields
No. Though I suppose this time that is a unique mistake.

fields and should go to pieces but doesn't.
It shouldn't so it doesn't. That is a LOT of gravity holding a LOT of mass over the core where that fusion takes place.

Now all this is trying to say is spin also contributes.
No. Only you said that. And it is again wrong.

earth also has a nuclear explosion at it's center,
No. Where did you get that idea?>>
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
has slowed considerably since it formed
No. It has slowed but only from a twenty hour day down to the present 24 hour day. The missing angular momentum was transferred to the Moon which now has a much higher orbit.

and science say's it is not expanding?
I lost track. Just what do you think is expanding. By context you may mean the Earth. Why do you think it is expanding? Have you ever taken a science class?

the big bang was an explosion and is still expanding?
No and yes. It was not an explosion in any normal sense. The Universe itself expanded. That is matter did not explode out into an existing space instead Space expanded taking the matter with it.

all this is theory, so is relativity. every time some one posits a theory, he is a tard or troll.
I think that counts as Deep Irony.

coronal mass ejections do lend credence to an exploding, fusion powered sun.
CME only show that there are some serious magnetic forces going on.>>
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
sun matches what we fuse in our reactors for fusion on earth
No. We only have EXPERIMENTAL fusion on Earth and even when the experiment produces actual fusion it is NOT straight hydrogen with no neutrons as the Sun burns. The fusion experiments use Deuterium and Tritium which is hydrogen one neutron and with two neutrons.

sunburns prove it
No. Sunburns are due to ultraviolet which has nothing to do the KIND of heat source only with the actual temperature.

proved and done.
No.

Talk about getting the right answer for the wrong you reason you have ALL the wrong bases covered.

Please go learn something. Anything. You can start here:

http://en.wikiped...lar_core

http://en.wikiped...wiki/Sun

http://physics.info/fusion/

Ethelred
SteveL
not rated yet Sep 12, 2011
@Gympypoet, you may want to consider this: "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." - William Kingdon Clifford
omatumr
1 / 5 (6) Sep 13, 2011
if the sun is a ball of gas where fusion takes place


Government scientists would not have ignored decades of experimental observations:

www.omatumr.com/D...ata1.htm

www.omatumr.com/D...Data.htm

And published reports of severe mass fractionation:

"Mass fractionation and isotope anomalies in neon and xenon," Nature 227, 1113 (1970)
www.nature.com/na...3a0.html

"Isotopic ratios in Jupiter confirm intra-solar diffusion", Meteoritics 33, 5011 (1998)
www.lpi.usra.edu/...5011.pdf

"Composition of the solar interior: Information from isotope ratios", ESA SP-517, 345 (2003)
www.omatumr.com/a...2002.pdf

"Solar abundance of elements from neutron-capture cross sections", 36th LPSC, 1033 (2005)
www.lpi.usra.edu/...1033.pdf

"The Sun is a plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass", Physics of Atomic Nuclei 69, 1847 (2006)
http://arxiv.org/...609509v3

omatumr
1 / 5 (6) Sep 13, 2011
if the sun is a ball of gas where fusion takes place,


Government scientists would have successfully developed such H-fusion reactors here on Earth, instead of repeated promises that H-fusion reactors will be operational "soon."

The Sun is powered by a central pulsar that emits neutrons. These neutrons subsequently decay to a waste product, hydrogen, that accumulated as a glowing cloud of waste surrounding the pulsar.

"Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011)

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
Ethelred
3 / 5 (6) Sep 13, 2011
Did you overlook the He line and narrow range of wavelengths?

The HeII line has full order of magnitude more energy than anything else even in that narrow band.

Ethelred
Gosh what a surprise that Oliver ignored the question and instead reposted the same old nonsense that he has no support for.

Just Oliver can ignore even more relevant questions.

Where is the evidence that neutrons repel each other in a way that is different from the Pauli Exclusion Principle?

Where is that evidence for Iron in the those solar flares? Sure isn't in this article.

Where is someone, someone remotely competent as opposed to the South African geologist, that supports your idea that the Sun is a pulsar? And how can a pulsar form IF there is such a thing as neutron repulsion? How could degenerate matter form with that going on keeping in mind your contradictory claim that neutron repulsion makes Black Holes impossible despite the math not working for you at all?

Ethelred
jsdarkdestruction
3 / 5 (6) Sep 14, 2011
well oliver, you going to man up or run with your tail between your legs b/c you know you cant win again?
Ethelred
3 / 5 (6) Sep 14, 2011
Very good answer Oliver. You gave me a one for asking questions you can't handle. So all those posts on this thread that I didn't give ones now have ones.

And you still have run away the questions again.

If you can't answer them you have no theory. You are just cranking.

Ethelred
SteveL
5 / 5 (2) Sep 14, 2011
Hm... A "central pulsar". I wonder at what speed is it rotating? I also wonder why we're not repeatedly irradiated. I understand that being in the path of a pulsar's beam at such a short distance can give us quite a tan!
omatumr
1 / 5 (5) Sep 14, 2011
Hm... A "central pulsar". I wonder at what speed is it rotating? I also wonder why we're not repeatedly irradiated. I understand that being in the path of a pulsar's beam at such a short distance can give us quite a tan!


Fortunately between you and the pulsar today are:

a.) A mantle made mostly of Fe, O, Ni, Si, S, Mg and Ca

b.) A photosphere of gaseous waste products (H and He)

Initially there was less protection and d- and l-amino acids were separated by circular polarized light from the pulsar.

The wavelength of light likely increased (become less energetic) as shielding separated Earth from the pulsar.

Life may have evolved as the Sun evolved:
http://dl.dropbox...5079.pdf

With kind regards,
Oliver

omatumr
1 / 5 (5) Sep 14, 2011
These figures convey experimental observations on the Sun:

1. Solar surface:

www.omatumr.com/P...face.htm

2. Surface composition:

www.omatumr.com/i...Fig1.htm

3. Mass fractionation (MF) observed at surface:

www.omatumr.com/i...Fig2.htm

4. Mantle composition - Inferred from MF isotopes:

www.omatumr.com/i...Fig3.htm

5. Mantle composition - Inferred from MF s-products:

www.omatumr.com/i...Fig4.htm

6. Core - Inferred from measurements on solar luminosity, solar neutrinos, and solar wind emissions:

www.omatumr.com/P...core.htm

For more information, see "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011);

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 15, 2011
Fortunately between you and the pulsar today are:

a.) A mantle made mostly of Fe, O, Ni, Si, S, Mg and Ca
Unsupported by any actual evidence. Just your circular reasoning.

b.) A photosphere of gaseous waste products (H and He)
Purest bullshit based on your circular reasoning that can be seen in the post Oliver followed that with. There was no evidence that supported your conclusion. All the conclusions were predicated on the hypothesis that you were supposed to be supporting.

Gross circular reasoning. As usual.

Ethelred
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 15, 2011
I read those before. They didn't change reality the first time either.

1. Solar surface:

2. Surface composition:
Which agrees with reality. The only part of your post that does.

3. Mass fractionation (MF) observed at surface:
Bullshit. Its ABOVE the surface. And the conclusions were based circular reasoning.

No one but you agrees with your claim of mass separation. Nothing in that diagram supports the your claim about iron.

4. Mantle composition - Inferred from MF isotopes:
Is based on the assumption that mass fractionation is occurring AND that there is iron in the mantle. Again circular reasoning was involved.

5 is that same exact process of circular reasoning based on a VERY faulty concept of how the inner solar system has little hydrogen or helium. Which is based on YOUR theory that the Sun has a neutron star in it. Circular reasoning again.>>
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 15, 2011
6. Core - Inferred from measurements on solar luminosity, solar neutrinos, and solar wind emissions:
Bullshit. Its inferred from your theory as the conclusion has nothing to do with actual evidence you used. Yet more circular reasoning.

And none of that answered my questions. So here they are again.

Where is the evidence that neutrons repel each other in a way that is different from the Pauli Exclusion Principle?

Where is that evidence for Iron in the those solar flares? Sure isn't in this article.

Where is someone, someone remotely competent as opposed to the South African geologist, that supports your idea that the Sun is a pulsar? And how can a pulsar form IF there is such a thing as neutron repulsion? How could degenerate matter form with that going on keeping in mind your contradictory claim that neutron repulsion makes Black Holes impossible despite the math not working for you at all?


Ethelred