In tips, Scarlet Pumpernickel pointed to an article about the sun and it having a ‘calcium ferrite’ shell / layer to it. It’s the first time I’ve seen that combo, so it caught my eye. Perhaps it has always been part of the Iron Sun thesis and I just didn’t notice. Or perhaps it is a new refinement.
At any rate, the article was rather interesting:
and looks to be the top level intro to a lot of stuff at their site. I can’t really do a decent abstract of it in the time I have right now (and not sure I could do it justice in any amount of time), so I’m going to just put a pointer to it and a couple of ‘teaser’ quotes.
This visible neon plasma layer that we call the photosphere, and a thicker, more dense atmospheric layer composed of silicon plasma, entirely covers the actual rocky, calcium ferrite surface layer of the sun. The visible photosphere covers the actual surface of the sun, much as the earth’s oceans cover most of the surface of the earth. In this case the sun’s photosphere is very bright and we cannot see the darker, more rigid surface features below the photosphere without the aid of satellite technology.
This leaves me with several ponderings. Neon layer? Silicon plasma layer? Calcium ferrite surface layer? Do we have evidence for that much stratification? Talk of a solid surface, but at the temperatures involved, is anything a solid? Or is the gravity sufficient to make it act as a solid? Interesting thoughts about an electrically driven neon sun…
It turns out however, that modern satellite images now lend very strong observational support to the electrical model of the sun originally described by Dr. Kristian Birkeland in the early 1900′s and later verified by Dr. Charles Bruce and Dr. Oliver Manuel. Dr. Charles Bruce and a number of other scientists have already demonstrated the electrical nature of the sun’s activities and have put forth solid surface theories of the sun based on predictions that are supported by direct observation. These models simply never gained momentum and ultimately fell out of “style” in the field of astronomy in mid to late part of the 20th century in favor of a gas model theory of the sun. Fortunately science still enjoys a small minority of dedicated scientists and maverick thinkers that have long promoted a very different, very iron rich model of the sun based on many decades of sound sweat equity, solid scientific research, and careful observation. In recent months, many of Dr. Manuel’s conclusions about our sun being composed of material from a supernova remnant have been confirmed by direct evidence. It turns out that these visual observations of an iron rich surface were predicted via the field of nuclear chemistry more than three decades earlier, while the experiments to support these ideas and many mathematical predictions had been verified over 50 years ago and were originally predicted by Birkeland almost 100 years ago! Studies of quasars in the early universe demonstrate the presence of large quantities of iron, casting serious doubt on the gas model in recent years.
I don’t know who made the site (not dug into it enough to find out, though the contact page lists a “Michael Mozina” in Mt. Shasta California – but it looks like rather a lot of quality work for just one person, though possible) but on the off chance that Dr. Oliver Manuel does not know, he has some supporters out there.
At any rate, many of the statements in those quotes are ‘links’ in the original article, so lead to other sites, supportive evidence, or elaborations on that site. You can spend hours checking the reference chain in depth if you like. In many cases, particular observations of NASA or particular satellites are referenced.
In general, it looks like an interesting way to start getting acquainted with the Iron Sun and the Electric Universe ideas; and from a source I’d not seen before.
There are lots of pictures and ‘eye candy’ on the site. (The ‘production values’ are rather good). All in all, a decent place to spend some time. Especially on this page:
where Hubble images abound amid discussions of how large amounts of iron are found in the very early universe (and what that implies for us, now, and for the hydrogen model).
I wish that right now I had the time to ‘work through the site’ and figure out if all of it was as well supported as it looks. Perhaps someone here can take on that bit and report back on it…
At any rate, I’m still pondering to what extent a 2 minute ‘solid surface’ image is really a solid, and to what extent it could be one of those magnetic stabilized fluids as are used in some shock absorbers these days… (They have two images a couple of minutes offset in time and assert this is evidence of a solid surface; and I’m just thinking of other ways a ‘liquid’ might not move much in 2 minutes… perhaps just due to the large distances involved…). So while not committed to the evidence so far, it does cause some interesting wonderings…