The Sun - Assumptions, Observations And Early Interpretations

From the many conversations I've had with people at NASA and Stanford and Lockheed Martin, and from the pictures I've downloaded at Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, I believe I can explain why a few simple misconceptions have hampered recent research into the sun's many layers.

The TRACE project began with a very important scientific mission but it also began with one very unfortunate assumption.  The Trace satellite was specifically designed to study the "transitional region" where temperatures on the sun soar from thousands of degrees Kelvin up to millions of degrees Kelvin.  Because the 171A, 195A and 284A filters are sensitive to ionized iron plasma in the millions of degree range, it was always "assumed" that this heat "transition" took place between the twenty thousand degree chromosphere and the million plus degree corona.  This initial assumption naturally led to the belief that every image returned from the iron ion spectrum on the Trace satellite were "most likely" coming from the area between the chromosphere and the corona.  This assumption was made even before the satellites were launched.  With only 2 dimensional images to work with, it's difficult to falsify or confirm this assumption.

While it may have seemed like a logical premise at the time, unfortunately that initial "assumption" was inaccurate from the start.  This animation from NASA demonstrates that the coronal loops, and the heated plasma contained within the coronal loops originates far beneath the visible photosphere, not above it.  Lockheed's preconceived assumption about location of the transitional region has led to a lot of misconceptions at NASA and Lockheed Martin that persist to this day.  Recent evidence from Lockheed Martin over the past few years would suggest that electricity plays a very key and vital role in coronal mass ejections.  This suggests that electricity rather than the corona is the likely heat source of these emissions rather than the corona as Lockheed and NASA first "assumed".  Recent heliosiesmology evidence from Stanford now confirms that a stratified layer exists at .995R UNDERNEATH of the visible photosphere, 

The various wavelengths of light that are received by the various satellite and ground based filters, reveals to us a very specific layer of the sun based on the physical composition and structures that are seen in the images from this wavelength.  From these different filters and different wavelengths of light we can determine that there are at least four distinct outer layers of the sun, each with it’s own unique set of behavioral properties, photon emission patterns, unique defining characteristics and textures.  Examples of these layers and textures can be seen in the top image on the right.  The first and second images are actually provided by Lockheed Martin and the second one is arranged as Lockheed Martin and NASA believe them to be ordered.

Three of these layers are quite well known and studied.  They have very unique and easily recognizable "surfaces" and characteristics.  For instance, the granular surface of the photosphere represented in the top two images in green, is well known and has been observed by ground based telescopes for many years.  This is the layer that emits the bulk of the visible light we see.  It emits visible light through the penumbral filaments.  We can even see the side of these filaments along the side of sunspots.  The chromosphere (blue layer) is also well known and easily recognizable by it's surface "texture".  It emits photons in the helium ion spectrum.  Since this layer is both lighter and warmer than the photosphere, it sits above the photosphere.  The thin hydrogen corona is also well documented and is shown in orange/red.

The yellow layer however is far less understood and in the second image, it has also misplaced in relationship to the other layers.  This transitional layer has only recently (in the last decade) been observed by the TRACE and SOHO satellites in the 171 and 195 and 284 angstrom frequencies that are associated with emissions from iron ions.  Only in the past month has heliosiesmology demonstrated a "transitional layer" that sits beneath the visible photosphere.   Until that time this surface electrical activity was only seen in hydrogen ion emissions.  Now however, we can also image this same electrical activity, and much of these same structures in iron ion emissions.

One of the first things we must determine is what this layer is made of, and where it sits in relationship to the other three, more easily recognizable and well understood layers of the sun.  The second photo on the right represents the “official” ordering system that NASA, Stanford and Lockheed Martin use and work with.  That ordering system is based upon the ASSUMPTION on NASA's part that the photons we see coming from the sun's arcs seen streaming from this layer MUST be “backlit” or illuminated from underneath by the sun’s photosphere or coming from the surface of the transitional layer itself.  They also base this ordering system on the assumption of Lockheed Martin that the heat associated with these emissions is coming exclusively from the heat of the corona.  That PRESUMPTION is only ONE possibility.  We must also allow for the possibility that the photons we see coming from these arcs are emitted from WITHIN the arcs themselves, and these particles are heated by the electrical activity rather than being heated exclusively in the corona.  Because  NASA has always presumed that the photons seen in these arcs must be coming up from underneath the arcs rather than from inside them, and because they never expected to find a solid surface on the sun, they have inaccurately ordered this layer of the sun that is designated in yellow.  I believe I can demonstrate that error rather convincingly.

To start with, it is important to understand that these light we see comes from atoms of iron, or more specifically ions of iron plasma.    The 171 and 195 and 284 angstrom filters are specifically designed to "see" photons emitted by a very specific types of ionized atoms, namely energetic forms of iron ferrite, specifically Fe IX, X, XII and XV.  These same filters are also sensitive to Calcium ions in the 4 million degree range as well as Fe XX emissions in the 10-20 million degree range as well.  This wide range of temperature sensitivity precludes the dark areas of these images from being "hotter" than the lit areas.  The SERTS space program has also documented the entire range of ferrite ion emissions, not to mention ions from calcium magnesium, chromium, manganese, aluminum, silicon, neon, and helium from these arcs.  In addition, the University of Maryland has documented temperature extremes of over 1000 Million (1 Billion US) degrees.

Ferrite is a magnetic form of iron and as we all know, iron is a MUCH heavier material than the hydrogen, helium, neon, silicon and calcium layers of photosphere and chromosphere and corona.  If atoms of iron are being ripped from the surface in solar moss activity and ionized in the electrical arc, then gravity alone would suggest such a heavy iron layer would simply SINK to the bottom, not float ABOVE lighter plasma layers.  This seems like the most damaging piece of evidence against the "official" ordering system.  The fact we see coronal rain in these images also suggests that the iron plasma falls back to the surface once the arc ceases.

It's also rather difficult to imagine how visible light travels from the photosphere could somehow manage to travel THROUGH a structured layer of  calcium ferrite material (think refrigerator magnet) to somehow reach us here on earth.  It's also hard to fathom what keeps the iron layer cool enough to form a structured surface between the chromosphere and corona with structure that persists over days, and rotates uniformly to boot.

Lockheed Martin suggests that the heat from the corona is responsible for the iron ion emissions based on the fact that temperatures of over a million degrees are required in order for us to be to able to see these kinds of iron ion emissions.  If however we look at the relative distribution of heat up close, we can see that the heat which releases these photons comes not from around the iron loops but from within them.  This implies that electrical activity within the arc itself is responsible for the heat and the iron ion emissions.  The electrical arcs produce the heat that releases these photons, not the corona, otherwise the area around the arcs would be hotter than the arcs themselves.  If we look at the next  image that compares the 171 angstrom view of the surface with the heat distribution patterns related to this activity, it's clear that the surface of this iron layer is much cooler than the iron within the arc itself.  The areas of greatest electrical activity correspond to the areas with the greatest amount of heat present.  This is exactly the opposite of what we would expect to see if the corona was the heat source for these emissions.  In such a scenario, we would expect to see the area around the arcs and around this layer to be HOTTER than the arcs themselves and much hotter than the iron layer.  That is not what we see.  The surface is dark.  A quick reality check here also reveals that if the dark surface was truly a million degrees, black body mathematics suggest that a black body the size of the sun heated to a  million degrees would constantly emit 3.45 X 10^35 watts or joules per second.   Now let us compare this number to Wikipedia’s OOM calculation of the solar output: 3.827 × 10^26 joules per second.  That is about nine orders of magnitude too high!    If however we plug in the actual temperature of the photosphere into those dark areas (5800K) for purposes of our black body energy calculation, we come up with the "correct" order of magnitude number for solar output.  The dark regions of the original 171A image therefore cannot be hotter than the brightest areas in the image or we would all be fried to a crisp!

Instead of a seeing a relatively hot background against a cooler arc and cooler surface, we find a heated arc within a cooler environment and find a surface that is relatively cool.  This is exactly the opposite condition of what Lockheed Martin's layering system would predict and exactly backwards of Lockheed Martin's own explanation of this image.  If the blue surface was hotter than the arc, then the blue areas would be lit up in bright white in the left hand image.  Instead the red and green areas correspond to the brightest shades and therefore indicate the areas of greatest temperature.  Evidently Lockheed Martin does not fully appreciate the physics and implications of black body radiation.  The brightest areas of any black body represent the hottest temperatures.  The fact the surface is dark in both Trace and Yohkoh satellites means the surface is cool.  In fact we already know that the surface of the photosphere is only 6000K, much too cold to emit iron ion photons in this wavelength.  Only the iron in the arc itself is heated to millions of degrees.

The work of Nicklas Eckland promises to answer the question of this layer's surface composition. The presence of calcium in the chromosphere suggests that the surface ferrite is likely to be a type of calcium ferrite with whatever other impurities (magnesium, chromium, manganese, aluminum) might be useful in keeping the structure stable in these temperature ranges.

The photosphere certainly acts as a heat sink, drawing heat away from the bottom and bringing it to the surface. That part is already known and documented. The only thing that remains to be answered is how "cool" is the bottom of the photosphere and how high is the melting point of these types of calcium ferrites considering the gravity and magnetic field conditions on the surface of the sun.

Nicklas Eckland's work suggests that it might be possible to explain a consistent and organized calcium ferrite surface that sustains itself as a solid structure in an environment where temperatures soar to upwards of two to three thousand degrees.  These are conditions which might exist at the BOTTOM of the photosphere.  However, it is nearly impossible to explain how such a solid ferrite surface could exist in an environment that is upwards of twenty thousand degrees as the "official" ordering system would require!

Our next piece of evidence relates the longevity of this particular layer in comparison the other layers of the sun.  The photosphere and chromosphere are VERY active layers, composed primarily by hydrogen and helium plasma.  These layers change very dramatically over the span of a few minutes.  Ferrite materials on the other hand tend to be far more "stable", more rigid, more resistant to heat, and less apt to change rapidly from one moment to the next.   This layer is very active however as the solar moss videos demonstrates.  Even still, this layer can be VERY stable, over a very long period in solar terms.  The third and forth yellow photos on the right were taken with the 171 angstrom filter.  This layer is represented in the top image as the yellow layer.   Here is a video of this layer, and the activity found on this layer using the 171 angstrom filter, that is processed through the running difference imaging technique.

On the right, near the bottom of the page, we see two individual snapshots using the 171A filter that were taken two minutes and thirty seconds apart.  In the center of each photo we can see the clear outlines of a crater shaped structure that has changed very little during that two and half minutes.  In fact very little about the underlying structures on this surface has changed much during this two and half minutes.  In solar terms, two and a half minutes is virtually an eternity.  The suns upper layers are VERY dynamic.  The crusty upper layers of the light chromosphere, and granular surface of the photosphere change RAPIDLY and dynamically and do not resemble these solid looking surfaces.  Whatever surfaces these structures represent,  they are not related to the chromosphere or the photosphere, and NASA already knows this since it designates this layer individually.  This type of continuity of structure over a two and a half minute timeline is simply not found in the light-liquid-like upper layers of the photosphere and chromosphere.  These layers are gas plasma layers that are constantly in flux and change rapidly over time.  Only the surface layer itself has that kind of stability, and even for the surface itself two minutes and thirty seconds can be a very long time indeed!

Another clue that there is a serious problem with the official ordering system comes from the Yohkoh satellite. The “solar moss” image on the home page of this website was created by overlaying the 171 angstrom images from the TRACE satellite with YOHKOH’s x-ray view of this same event.  There are three distinct “layers” shown in this photo. There is the bottom layer that shows the solar moss and is the "surface" (represented in yellow in the upper image) that emits the arcs, and sits at the base of the arcs.  There is then a “cooler”  blue region that the arcs traverse where the arcs do not emit x-rays, followed by a  higher energy state layer where the arcs emit x-rays and become visible to Yohkoh and appear in yellow.

This image demonstrates that the ordering system that NASA uses is simply wrong.  We can see in this image that the solar moss is the BOTTOM surface layer from which the arcs originate.  The arcs travel through the cooler, thicker blue layer of the photosphere during which time they are not visible by Yohkoh.  As these arcs pass from the thicker layer of the photosphere into the thinner, hotter chromosphere, they pick up heat and begin to emit soft x-rays that YOHKOH can see.  If the solar moss layer sat above the photosphere as NASA believes, we would not have two more distinct layers of the sun for these arcs to pass through.  If however the solar moss surface is actually the bottom surface of the sun, then these photos make complete sense.  The arcs pass through the cool, thick medium of the photosphere, and then “heat up”  rather dramatically as they pass into the hotter chromosphere.  That photo clearly demonstrates the error in NASA's ordering system.

The second major misconception involves Doppler imaging and the concept of moving mass and how moving mass reflects off solid surfaces in Doppler images.  The Doppler imaging systems that NASA is using are fully capable of showing us not just two dimensions as is presumed in a gas model but can in fact show all three dimensions from a solid surface. Because NASA ASSUMES that the sun has no solid surface to reflect back Doppler images, it simply isn’t looking for such patterns in these images.  The tsunami video is produced by the Doppler imaging systems onboard SOHO.  It clearly reveals a SOLID, irregular shaped surface structure below the liquid-plasma layer of the photosphere.  We can and do see a flat ridge with jagged sides that is consistent from frame to frame in these Doppler images.  This structure blocks the moving mass used in Doppler images around the outlined areas.   That is only possible if there is something SOLID to block moving mass at that point.  Many surface images are taken using Doppler imaging, and the sun's hard surfaces are in fact visible in the tsunami video based on Doppler images.  This video also demonstrates that NASA ordered these layers incorrectly because something hard can be seen BELOW the photosphere that the wave is propagating through.  The photosphere simply CANNOT be the bottom layer and this video offers us direct proof of that.

The last misconception involves the scientific tradition.  The gas model concept came about based on Galileo's very limited visual OBSERVATIONS, OBSERVATIONS that were done four centuries ago using a very rudimentary telescope.  Since that time the scientific community has tried and failed to explain the sun's activities using the gas model given to us by Galileo.  In all that time however, it has never fully explained the arcs from the sun, the cause of solar flares, the cause of the changing sunspots, solar moss, the suns 11 year sunspot cycle, etc.

Everything I have presented on this website is based entirely on OBSERVATION from six different multi-million dollar satellite systems as well as from ground based observations and spectral analysis from the SERTS program.  With a solid surface model I can and have explained a LOT of what goes on in the sun, far better than I could ever explain the sun's behaviors while I clung to scientific tradition and the gas model theory of the sun.

Once I let OBSERVATION be my one and only guide, and I trusted in the technology of these satellites, everything changed.  I found by observation, a model that can and does explain the behaviors of the sun quite well.  I therefore believe that a solid surface model is a FAR SUPERIOR model than the current gas model, a model that is 400 years old and has managed to explain virtually nothing about the inner workings of the sun.

Please consider the following:  I have spent a great deal of time and effort to explain a whole range of phenomenon related to the sun's activities on this website.  I did this to demonstrate that a solid surface model is a GOOD model, and a WORKING model that offers us real explanations for what we observe.  This is a sound scientific model that is based entirely and completely on OBSERVATION, the same kind of observations that Galileo made.  The difference between our different sets of observations is 400 years of technological progress, and millions of dollars in high tech satellite imaging systems.

The gas model of the sun, though a wonderful theory has yet to be verified or validated by direct observation of real world satellite imagery of the sun.  The gas model has yet to offer any predictive capabilities of the sun, even after 400 years of efforts by untold numbers of very educated, dedicated and intelligent scientists.  What should that tell us about the gas model and it's usefulness as an explanatory device?  If a solid surface model can be supported by observation, and can explain the phenomenon that we see with great accuracy, why should scientists cling to a failed model, only because it's considered  "acceptable"  to the scientific community?  The gas model is to day, simply a theory.  Whether or not this theory actually applies to "reality" and to a real sun depends on it's ability to explain the images you see before you.  These are observations in the truest scientific sense. 




The four agreed upon layers of the sun

NASA's "official" ordering system that defies the laws of physics.  Since when did iron float on helium?

The heat we see in these arcs is caused by the electrical activity within the arc itself, not heat from the corona. 

Principles of black body radiation suggest that the temperature at the surface is much lower than within the arc.  The background surface is dark indicating cooler temperatures, while some areas emit many photons indicating the concentration of heat flows with the arcs and follows the electrical activity.  The red areas are not, and cannot be the coolest areas of this layer as Lockheed Martin suggests.  Evidently Lockheed Martin does not seem to understand the concept of black body radiation.  We can see in the image on the left that the brightest and hottest elements in the image relate to red areas in the image on the right.  This bright glow on the left makes the red areas the hottest areas not the coolest areas as Lockheed claims.

The hottest regions, and the most photon emission takes place in areas nearest the electrical activity within the arc itself rather than around the surface of the sun or outside of the arcs.  The heat is therefore due to electrical activity within the arc, not heat from the corona.  These filters are sensitive to temperatures up to 20 million degrees. The dark areas of the surface are certainly not the highest temperature areas since the photosphere is known to be about 6000 degrees Kelvin.  The arcs are the where the photons and heat are concentrated, not the dark regions in these images.

Yohkoh's x-ray vision combined with the TRACE photo of the same solar moss region show that the ferrite layer is BELOW the photosphere and chromosphere, not above these layers as Lockheed Martin suggests.

Here is a composite image from Lockheed Martin that visually confirms that the base of the arcs originate below the photosphere and chromosphere from the transitional region that is located underneath the photosphere.  Notice that the very tops of the arcs seen in 171A are "poking through" the surface of the photosphere and chromosphere plasmas.  We can also see a lot of green electrical activity happening below the surface of the plasma layers.  This image confirms the previous composite image.  Both images demonstrate that the transitional layer that Trace and Soho image, where the arcs originate is located underneath the surface of the photosphere.

There is an obvious structure to the left of the center of a wave that is passing through the photosphere.  This image correlates well with heliosceismology revelations of a change of density at 4800km from the surface of the photosphere.   Structures can even be seen in this layer at a relatively shallow depth below the surface.  This image was created by Dr. Alexander Kosovichev with the Doppler imaging system on board the SOHO spacecraft. 

A hole has formed in the neon layer of the penumbral filaments revealing the silicon layer and the iron surface below.  There is a large crack in the calcium ferrite layer that is causing the silicon layer to push through the neon.  Once things cool off, the silicon will stop rising and the neon layer will close in these areas.

TRACE captures shots of this ferrite surface at 171 angstroms two and a half minutes apart.  There is very little that has changed during that entire two and a half minutes

TRACE captures the same basic surface features two minutes and a half minutes after the first photo.  Not much has changed.  If such a solid ferrite surface existed between the photosphere and earth, we would never see the light of the sun!  The visible light would be blocked by the ferrite.



The Surface Of The Sun