The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way. Ionization in the corona would be maximized either by a minimum pressure
or a maximum temperature. Saha's equation relied on a low-temperature
estimate from the ionization, giving the corona low pressure. However,
the ions Iron 14 and Iron 13 are of equal abundance, there so from the
Elwert ionization theory, this provides a temperature of one million
degrees such that the pressure must be at least tens of thousands times
more than Earth's atmosphere.

Harold Zirin p. 72
Robitaille: "The Saha Equation & the Pressure above the Photosphere!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt_wnyewBm0&list=PLdnBDlkvz2vMjeEke6PLIQWNT1eZf7O62&index=4

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Therefore, it is dense enough to account for the 1.75" deflection of
starlight during eclipses.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"“As Harold Zirin writes in his monograph on the Sun:[80] “On the other hand, we observe that the abundance of the two ions in the corona is
nearly equal. […] So, the Saha equation is off by a factor of 100
trillion times.”” [Unzicker, Alexander. The Liquid Sun: A Coming
Revolution in Astrophysics (p. 121). Kindle Edition.]

“something every practitioner in a lab would call a vacuum.[31] An
illusory equation Such a low density is already suspicious, but one
should keep in mind that Saha also assumed a local thermal equilibrium.
It is disconcerting that his equation, however reasonable from a
theoretical point of view, has never been put to the test in a
laboratory. Its validity remains entirely conjectural. On top of this,
the Saha equation makes grossly wrong predictions regarding the
abundance of ions in the solar atmosphere. As the distinguished
astrophysicist Harold Zirin points out: [32] “Although errors of such magnitude appear ridiculous, their existence was discovered only in the
last 30 years; and the Saha equation is so convenient to use that one
may still find it occasionally applied in the current astrophysical
literature to problems in the solar” [Unzicker, Alexander. The Liquid
Sun: A Coming Revolution in Astrophysics (pp. 45-46). Kindle Edition.]

“atmosphere, where it gives errors of factors of millions.” Zirin is
quite harsh in his general assessment: [33] “For some years after the discovery of the quantum theory and the Saha ionization theory,
astrophysicists were ignorant enough of the problems of nonequilibrium thermodynamics to use these formulas blindly to calculate and explain everything.””

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-12-10 21:52:58 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way.

It is not meaningful to say that Sun's corona is more or less dense
that Earths atmosphere. Both have more dense and less dense parts,
depending mainly on the altitude.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 10:01:06 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-12-10 21:52:58 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way.

It is not meaningful to say that Sun's corona is more or less dense
that Earths atmosphere. Both have more dense and less dense parts,
depending mainly on the altitude.

It is the relativists who insist it is meaningful when asserting that
the Corona is 1/10,000th of the pressure of Earth's atmosphere so that
the bending of light near the Sun could not be refraction. It is clear
from the above case that the whole corona has vastly more pressure than
the Earth's atmosphere which refracts sunlight.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Den 10.12.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way. Ionization in the corona would be maximized either by a minimum pressure
or a maximum temperature. Saha's equation relied on a low-temperature estimate from the ionization, giving the corona low pressure. However,
the ions Iron 14 and Iron 13 are of equal abundance, there so from the
Elwert ionization theory, this provides a temperature of one million
degrees such that the pressure must be at least tens of thousands times
more than Earth's atmosphere.

Harold Zirin p. 72
Robitaille: "The Saha Equation & the Pressure above the Photosphere!" https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=vt_wnyewBm0&list=PLdnBDlkvz2vMjeEke6PLIQWNT1eZf7O62&index=4

The pressure in the solar photosphere is only approximately
1% of the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground,
yet it is radiating black body radiation at 5778 K.

If the pressure in the corona were tens of times more
than the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground, then
the corona would also radiate black body radiation. At temperature
1 million K, the radiated energy would be 0.9e9 (0.9 billion) times
what it is.

Don't you understand how ridiculous this is?

The radiation from the corona is a discrete spectrum consisting
of emission lines, and nothing like a black body spectrum.
That's why we know that the pressure must be _much_ less
than in the photosphere.

That's why we can see the photosphere through the corona.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 21:37:51 +0000, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

Den 10.12.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way.
Ionization in the corona would be maximized either by a minimum pressure
or a maximum temperature. Saha's equation relied on a low-temperature
estimate from the ionization, giving the corona low pressure. However,
the ions Iron 14 and Iron 13 are of equal abundance, there so from the
Elwert ionization theory, this provides a temperature of one million
degrees such that the pressure must be at least tens of thousands times
more than Earth's atmosphere.

Harold Zirin p. 72
Robitaille: "The Saha Equation & the Pressure above the Photosphere!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=vt_wnyewBm0&list=PLdnBDlkvz2vMjeEke6PLIQWNT1eZf7O62&index=4

The pressure in the solar photosphere is only approximately
1% of the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground,
yet it is radiating black body radiation at 5778 K.

If the pressure in the corona were tens of times more
than the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground, then
the corona would also radiate black body radiation. At temperature
1 million K, the radiated energy would be 0.9e9 (0.9 billion) times
what it is.

Don't you understand how ridiculous this is?

The radiation from the corona is a discrete spectrum consisting
of emission lines, and nothing like a black body spectrum.
That's why we know that the pressure must be _much_ less
than in the photosphere.

That's why we can see the photosphere through the corona.

The corona emits no blackbody radiation, and a denser corona would not
emit blackbody radiation either. It would block more of the blackbody
radiation from the photosphere concealing the higher temperature there
than the 5778K believed in.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 21:37:51 +0000, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

Den 10.12.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way.
Ionization in the corona would be maximized either by a minimum pressure >> or a maximum temperature. Saha's equation relied on a low-temperature
estimate from the ionization, giving the corona low pressure. However,
the ions Iron 14 and Iron 13 are of equal abundance, there so from the
Elwert ionization theory, this provides a temperature of one million
degrees such that the pressure must be at least tens of thousands times
more than Earth's atmosphere.

Harold Zirin p. 72
Robitaille: "The Saha Equation & the Pressure above the Photosphere!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=vt_wnyewBm0&list=PLdnBDlkvz2vMjeEke6PLIQWNT1eZf7O62&index=4

The pressure in the solar photosphere is only approximately
1% of the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground,
yet it is radiating black body radiation at 5778 K.

If the pressure in the corona were tens of times more
than the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground, then
the corona would also radiate black body radiation. At temperature
1 million K, the radiated energy would be 0.9e9 (0.9 billion) times
what it is.

Don't you understand how ridiculous this is?

The radiation from the corona is a discrete spectrum consisting
of emission lines, and nothing like a black body spectrum.
That's why we know that the pressure must be _much_ less
than in the photosphere.

That's why we can see the photosphere through the corona.

Right.

The corona emits no blackbody radiation, and a denser corona would not
emit blackbody radiation either. It would block more of the blackbody radiation from the photosphere concealing the higher temperature there
than the 5778K believed in.

You are already wrong by definition.
The edge of the photosphere is precisely at the level
where the Sun stops being optically dense, hence a black body.
The corona absorbing the black body radiation from below
is a contradiction in terms.
If it did it wouldn't be the corona,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Den 13.12.2024 00:03, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 21:37:51 +0000, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

Den 10.12.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

The accepted solar physics is that the density of the Sun's corona is
only 1/10,000ths of Earth's atmosphere. Robitaille disproves this by
relying on Zirin's refutation of Saha's equation in the following way.
Ionization in the corona would be maximized either by a minimum pressure >>> or a maximum temperature. Saha's equation relied on a low-temperature
estimate from the ionization, giving the corona low pressure. However,
the ions Iron 14 and Iron 13 are of equal abundance, there so from the
Elwert ionization theory, this provides a temperature of one million
degrees such that the pressure must be at least tens of thousands times
more than Earth's atmosphere.

Harold Zirin p. 72
Robitaille: "The Saha Equation & the Pressure above the Photosphere!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=vt_wnyewBm0&list=PLdnBDlkvz2vMjeEke6PLIQWNT1eZf7O62&index=4

The pressure in the solar photosphere is only approximately
1% of the  pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground,
yet it is radiating black body radiation at 5778 K.

If the pressure in the corona were tens of times more
than the pressure in Earth's atmosphere near the ground, then
the corona would also radiate black body radiation. At temperature
1 million K, the radiated energy would be 0.9e9 (0.9 billion) times
what it is.

Don't you understand how ridiculous this is?

The radiation from the corona is a discrete spectrum consisting
of emission lines, and nothing like a black body spectrum.
That's why we know that the pressure must be _much_ less
than in the photosphere.

That's why we can see the photosphere through the corona.

The corona emits no blackbody radiation, and a denser corona would not
emit blackbody radiation either.

A gas/plasma absorbs the same frequencies as it emits.
The corona emits no blackbody radiation, it emits a discrete
set of frequencies (emission lines), mostly in the X-ray range.

That means that the corona can't absorb blackbody radiation.
That's why we can see the photosphere through the corona.

It would block more of the blackbody
radiation from the photosphere concealing the higher temperature there
than the 5778K believed in.

Have you ever looked at the Sun? (Use dark glasses)
What you see is the photosphere, you don't see the corona at all.

It is idiotic to claim that the invisible (to the eye)
corona can block the very bright (to the eye) photosphere.

If you partly "blocks" the blackbody radiation from the photosphere
with dark glasses, the temperature of the blackbody radiation will
not change at all.

At 5778K the spectrum will peak at the wavelength 0.5 μm which
is in the green part of the spectrum, about in the middle of
the visible part of the spectrum. That means that the light will
consist of all colours in the rainbow, and will appear white
(when observed outside of Earth's atmosphere).

See the yellow spectrum: https://www.sun.org/uploads/images/mainimage_BlackbodySpectrum_2.png

Observed from the Earth, much of the blue light will be scattered all
over the sky (that's why the sky is blue), and since this blue light
comes from the sun, the solar disk will appear yellow rather than white.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Anyone wishing to learn about the discovery of liquid metallic hydrogen
and the fact the Sun is made of it from free pdf's:

Nellis, WJ: Wigner and Huntington, The long quest for metallic hydrogen,
High Pressure Research 2013, 33(2), 369-376.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie and Berliner, Lawrence (2006) Ultra High Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Springer.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2009) Kirchhoff’s law of thermal emission: 150 years, Progress in Physics 4, 3-13;  http://www.ptep-online.com/2009/PP-19-01.PDF .

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2011) Special Issue: "The Sun — Gaseous or
Liquid? A Thermodynamic Analysis", Progress in Physics 7(3); http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2011-03.pdf

Robitaille Pierre-Marie (2013) The liquid metallic hydrogen model of the
Sun and the solar atmosphere (7 articles), Progress in Physics; http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2013-03.pdf

Unzicker, Alexander. The Liquid Sun: A Coming Revolution in Astrophysics
(p. 151). Kindle Edition.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

Anyone wishing to learn about the discovery of liquid metallic hydrogen
and the fact the Sun is made of it from free pdf's:

Nellis, WJ: Wigner and Huntington, The long quest for metallic hydrogen,
High Pressure Research 2013, 33(2), 369-376.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie and Berliner, Lawrence (2006) Ultra High Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Springer.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2009) Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission: 150 years, Progress in Physics 4, 3-13;
http://www.ptep-online.com/2009/PP-19-01.PDF .

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2011) Special Issue: "The Sun — Gaseous or Liquid? A Thermodynamic Analysis", Progress in Physics 7(3); http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2011-03.pdf

Robitaille Pierre-Marie (2013) The liquid metallic hydrogen model of the
Sun and the solar atmosphere (7 articles), Progress in Physics; http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2013-03.pdf

Unzicker, Alexander. The Liquid Sun: A Coming Revolution in Astrophysics
(p. 151). Kindle Edition.

Thanks for this update to my crackpot list,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 17:29:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

Anyone wishing to learn about the discovery of liquid metallic hydrogen
and the fact the Sun is made of it from free pdf's:

Nellis, WJ: Wigner and Huntington, The long quest for metallic hydrogen,
High Pressure Research 2013, 33(2), 369-376.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie and Berliner, Lawrence (2006) Ultra High Field
Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Springer.

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2009) Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission: 150
years, Progress in Physics 4, 3-13;
http://www.ptep-online.com/2009/PP-19-01.PDF .

Robitaille, Pierre-Marie (2011) Special Issue: "The Sun — Gaseous or
Liquid? A Thermodynamic Analysis", Progress in Physics 7(3);
http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2011-03.pdf

Robitaille Pierre-Marie (2013) The liquid metallic hydrogen model of the
Sun and the solar atmosphere (7 articles), Progress in Physics;
http://www.ptep-online.com/complete/PiP-2013-03.pdf

Unzicker, Alexander. The Liquid Sun: A Coming Revolution in Astrophysics
(p. 151). Kindle Edition.

Thanks for this update to my crackpot list,

Jan

Ad hominem is a failure to reason.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)