Home | Community | Message Board

Out-Grow.com - Mushroom Growing Kits & Supplies
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Problems with the Standard Solar Model
    #26234977 - 10/07/19 09:31 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

1. Solar Abundance Problem

Quote:

Helioseismology has allowed us to study the structure of the Sun in unprecedented detail. One of the triumphs of the theory of stellar evolution was that helioseismic studies had shown that the structure of solar models is very similar to that of the Sun. However, this agreement has been spoiled by recent revisions of the solar heavy-element abundances. Heavy-element abundances determine the opacity of the stellar material and hence, are an important input to stellar model calculations. The models with the new, low abundances do not satisfy helioseismic constraints. We review here how heavy-element abundances affect solar models, how these models are tested with helioseismology, and the impact of the new abundances on standard solar models. We also discuss the attempts made to improve the agreement of the low-abundance models with the Sun and discuss how helioseismology is being used to determine the solar heavy-element abundances. A review of current literature shows that attempts to improve agreement between solar models with low heavy-element abundances and seismic inference have been unsuccessful so far. The low-metallicity models that have the least disagreement with seismic data require changing all input physics to stellar models beyond their acceptable rangesl. Seismic determinations of the solar heavy-element abundances yield results that are consistent with the older, higher values of the solar abundance, and hence, no major changes to the inputs to solar models are required to make higher-metallicity solar models consistent with the helioseismic data.




Quote:

Different calculations of solar opacities by various groups
(i.e., OP, OPAL, OPAS, ATOMIC, and STAR) show a
discrepancy of 5%, which is much smaller than the variations
required to bring back the agreement between helioseismology
and SSMs calibrated with the updated low-Z solar composition.
However, an element by element comparison with OP shows
large differences (»40%) nearby the CZB. On the other
hand, comparisons between atomic codes other than OP show a
good agreement (≈few%), which indicates that these atomic
codes use similar approximations for the influence of the
plasma environment on the emitting ions (such as line
broadening), which may differ than the approximations
implemented by OP. It must also be stressed that the small
discrepancy in the solar mixture opacity between different
atomic calculations is by no means a measure of the accuracy
of these calculations, since similar physical models and
approximations are used.
Opacity calculations at stellar interior conditions have never
been validated experimentally. A recent work on experimental
opacities indicates that theoretical opacity calculations, which
are the only available source of radiative opacities in solar
models, might in fact be systematically wrong.
For the first
time the opacity spectra of iron have been measured at
conditions that closely resemble those at the CZB by Bailey
et al. (2015). The measured Rosseland mean is larger by »60%
than all predicted values by available atomic calculations. No
satisfactory explanation to this discrepancy is yet known.






2. Solar Cycle not Understood

Quote:


SUNSPOTS come and go, but recently they have mostly gone. For centuries, astronomers have recorded when these dark blemishes on the solar surface emerge, only for them to fade away again after a few days, weeks or months. Thanks to their efforts, we know that sunspot numbers ebb and flow in cycles lasting about 11 years.

But for the past two years, the sunspots have mostly been missing. Their absence, the most prolonged for nearly a hundred years, has taken even seasoned sun watchers by surprise. “This is solar behaviour we haven’t seen in living memory,” says David Hathaway, a physicist at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

The sun is under scrutiny as never before thanks to an armada of space telescopes. The results they beam back are portraying our nearest star, and its influence on Earth, in a new light. Sunspots and other clues indicate that the sun’s magnetic activity is diminishing, and that the sun may even be shrinking. Together the results hint that something profound is happening inside the sun. The big question is what?

The stakes have never been higher. Groups of sunspots forewarn of gigantic solar storms that can unleash a billion times more energy than an atomic bomb. Fears that these giant solar eruptions could create havoc on Earth, and disputes over the sun’s role in climate change, are adding urgency to these studies. When NASA and the European Space Agency launched the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory almost 15 years ago, “understanding the solar cycle was not one of its scientific objectives”, says Bernhard Fleck, the mission’s project scientist. “Now it is one of the key questions.”

Sunspots are windows into the sun’s magnetic soul. They form where giant loops of magnetism, generated deep inside the sun, well up and burst through the surface, leading to a localised drop in temperature which we see as a dark patch. Any changes in sunspot numbers reflect changes inside the sun. “During this transition, the sun is giving us a real glimpse into its interior,” says Hathaway.

When sunspot numbers drop at the end of each 11-year cycle, solar storms die down and all becomes much calmer. This “solar minimum” doesn’t last long. Within a year, the spots and storms begin to build towards a new crescendo, the next solar maximum.

What’s special about this latest dip is that the sun is having trouble starting the next solar cycle. The sun began to calm down in late 2007, so no one expected many sunspots in 2008. But computer models predicted that when the spots did return, they would do so in force. Hathaway was reported as thinking the next solar cycle would be a “doozy”: more sunspots, more solar storms and more energy blasted into space. Others predicted that it would be the most active solar cycle on record. The trouble was, no one told the sun.

“The latest solar cycle was supposed to be the most active on record. The trouble was, no one told the sun”

The first sign that the prediction was wrong came when 2008 turned out to be even calmer than expected. That year, the sun was spot-free 73 per cent of the time, an extreme dip even for a solar minimum. Only the minimum of 1913 was more pronounced, with 85 per cent of that year clear.

As 2009 arrived, solar physicists looked for some action. They didn’t get it. The sun continued to languish until mid-December, when the largest group of sunspots to emerge for several years appeared. Finally, a return to normal? Not really.

Even with the solar cycle finally under way again, the number of sunspots has so far been well below expectations. Something appears to have changed inside the sun, something the models did not predict. But what?

The flood of observations from space and ground-based telescopes suggests that the answer lies in the behaviour of two vast conveyor belts of gas that endlessly cycle material and magnetism through the sun’s interior and out across the surface. On average it takes 40 years for the conveyor belts to complete a circuit.

When Hathaway’s team looked over the observations to find out where their models had gone wrong, they noticed that the conveyor-belt flows of gas across the sun’s surface have been speeding up since 2004.

The circulation deep within the sun tells a different story. Rachel Howe and Frank Hill of the National Solar Observatory in Tucson, Arizona, have used observations of surface disturbances, caused by the solar equivalent of seismic waves, to infer what conditions are like within the sun. Analysing data from 2009, they found that while the surface flows had sped up, the internal ones had slowed to a crawl.

These findings have thrown our best computer models of the sun into disarray. “It is certainly challenging our theories,” says Hathaway, “but that’s kinda nice.”

It is not just our understanding of the sun that stands to benefit from this work. The extent to which changes in the sun’s activity can affect our climate is of paramount concern. It is also highly controversial. There are those who seek to prove that the solar variability is the major cause of climate change, an idea that would let humans and their greenhouse gases off the hook. Others are equally evangelical in their assertions that the sun plays only a minuscule role in climate change.





3. Missing Neutrinos/Neutrino Flux

Quote:

According to the so-called standard solar model, nuclear fusion reactions at the sun's center pump out vast quantities of energy. About 2 percent of that energy should appear in the form of neutrinos - fundamental particles that interact only weakly with matter.
But that's not what researchers see. Data collected by an Earth-based detector over a period of 20 years suggest that the neutrino flow from the sun varies from time to time rather than remaining constant. Moreover, the flux seems to follow a pattern that runs counter to the rise and fall in the number of sunspots visible on the sun's surface.
"This time variation of the neutrino flux coincides with the well-known 11-year cycle of solar activity", says physicist Kenneth Lande of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. The neutrino flux is high when solar activity is low and declines to near-zero values as the number of sunspots rises to a peak.
Lande reported the latest measurements from a neutrino detector deep in the Homestake gold mine near Lead. S.D., at this week's American Physical Society meeting in Washington, D.C. The measurements clearly show a sharp drop in neutrino flux starting last year - just as the present solar cycle approached its maximum.
Such a rise and fall in neutrino flow, detected now for the second time in two decades, hints that the effect is real. Lande says. The chance of such a pattern happening randomly is less than 1 percent according to computer simulations. At its peak, the neutrino flux is reasonably close to the value theorists predict the flux from the sun should have. "You can think of the peak level as being the real neutrino flux and the reduced level as being the attenuated or modulated level," Lande says. "Something does something to the neutrinos."
No one yet has a clear picture of what exotic mechanism may be responsible for altering the fundamental nature of neutrinos coming from the sun's center or for the apparent link between solar activity and neutrino physics. Preliminary results expected later this year from two new neutrino detectors should help clarity the matter.



the problem was "solved" by inventing distinct 'flavours' of neutrino that somehow change from one state to another making them hard to detect. another scapegoat is atmospheric absorption predicated on cosmic ray influence, but no measurements have been taken in space to quantify the effect.

4. The Mystery of Coronal Heating

Quote:


Imagine standing around a roaring campfire, roasting s’mores. You feel the warmth of the flames as the marshmallows crackle. Now back away. You get cooler, right?

That's not how it works on the sun. The visible surface of the sun has a temperature of 10,000° F.  Backing away from the inferno should cool things down, but it doesn’t.  Instead, the sun's upper atmosphere, or corona, sizzles at millions of degrees - a temperature 200 to 500 times higher than that of the roaring furnace below.

For more than a half-century, astronomers have tried to figure out what causes the corona to be so hot.  It is one of the most vexing problems in astrophysics.

Solar physicist Bart De Pontieu of the Lockheed Martin Solar & Astrophysics Laboratory says, “The problem of coronal heating was first discovered in the 1940s. The problem involves a variety of complex physical processes that are difficult to directly measure or capture in theoretical models.





--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26234999 - 10/07/19 09:42 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

I’m not sure the point of all this, but if you dismiss a solution to one of these problems by using the word “Somehow” then I’m going to say you need to learn more about that solution.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235003 - 10/07/19 09:48 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

lol, no it is the imperative of the ones making the assertion to adequetly explain their hypothesis, the word 'somehow' is thus used as a slight and reflects on their inability to convey a complete explanation of the process


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235011 - 10/07/19 09:55 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

They have.

Neutrino Oscillation wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation
“First predicted by Bruno Pontecorvo in 1957 neutrino oscillation has since been observed by a multituve of experiments in several different contexts.”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235045 - 10/07/19 10:10 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

While the standard model predicts that neutrinos
should not have mass, experiments such as SNO’s mea-
suring of solar neutrinos have shown neutrinos actually
behave as if they have mass eigenstates between which
they can oscillate. This discovery lead to the whole the-
ory of neutrino oscillations, as both their mass and weak
eigenstates oscillate alongside each other. Since we know
that neutrinos must be massive in order for their mass
eigenstates to oscillate, we also know that our standard
model view of neutrinos is incorrect. This discrepancy
signifies a need for beyond the standard model physics in
order to fully understand neutrinos. Many theories arise,
explaining how neutrinos may get their mass. These
lead into several complex and beautiful theories, many
of which—such as the Higgs mechanism—run deep into
heart of modern particle physics.




oscillating neutrino masses defy the known laws of physics


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235103 - 10/07/19 10:31 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Well no, they don’t match the basic Standard Model which we are certain isn’t the whole story.  Hence why no one calls it the standard law.
Have you read the maths in these theories?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235141 - 10/07/19 10:50 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

lossless mass fluctuation breaks the law of conservation


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235161 - 10/07/19 10:59 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

What’s lossless mass fluctuation, what’s the law of conservation and why do you think it breaks it?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235214 - 10/07/19 11:22 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

kinda off topic, maybe you should start a thread asking for help understanding the nuances of neutrino science


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235228 - 10/07/19 11:28 AM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Oh no you misunderstand, I’m asking specifically you so that I’m sure we are talking about the same things as well as wanting some elaboration beyond a rather vague comment of conservation violation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235547 - 10/07/19 01:40 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

oh no you misunderstand, i am not interested in entertaining off topic troll posts from someone who uses wiki for a science resource


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235590 - 10/07/19 01:56 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

How about this,
“Lossless mass fluctuation” seems to suggest you think something can’t gain or loose mass without losing energy. Is that true?

“Law of conservation” isn’t a real thing.  I assume you mean a conservation law, like say how momentum is conserved.  You need to specify what conservation you think its violating and how.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235613 - 10/07/19 02:04 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

StygianKnight said:
What’s lossless mass fluctuation, what’s the law of conservation and why do you think it breaks it?



Probably a half assed attempt to complain about lepton flavor.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235616 - 10/07/19 02:06 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

killingravensun said:
oh no you misunderstand, i am not interested in entertaining off topic troll posts from someone who uses wiki for a science resource



Dude, you are the troll in this scenario...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235620 - 10/07/19 02:09 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

this is my last response to you unless you can state clearly what your problem is

Quote:

Definition of lossless
: done or being without loss (as of power or data)



with regards to flavour oscillation

Quote:

Law of Conservation of Matter – Conservation of Mass
The law of conservation of matter or principle of matter conservation states that the mass of an object or collection of objects never changes over time, no matter how the constituent parts rearrange themselves.




--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekillingravensun
destroying angel

Registered: 04/03/19
Posts: 738
Loc: cult of the sun machine
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: chibiabos]
    #26235626 - 10/07/19 02:10 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

chibiabos said:
Quote:

killingravensun said:
oh no you misunderstand, i am not interested in entertaining off topic troll posts from someone who uses wiki for a science resource



Dude, you are the troll in this scenario...



way to be dismissive, you guys arent too familiar with science or the scientific method, you seem to have everything all figured out when nobody else does


--------------------
evil always wins, good can only do good, evil will lie and cheat until it fools good into doing evil

freedom is the ability to take wrong action, right actions are constrained by nature

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: killingravensun]
    #26235647 - 10/07/19 02:21 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

I see.

The “law of conservation of mass” is not a real scientific law, it’s a “law” similar to how
Moores Law is a law. It is being used here as short hand for an approximation that can be used in certain fields.  For example, chemistry can presume that measured masses are equal because chemistry rarely uses scales that can measure the loss of mass to heat, but it’s there.

Since matter and energy are equivalent and interchangeable, the true law of conservation of mass is the conservation of energy, which states that the energy is conserved certain reference frames of closed systems.

Mass energy equivalence is the basis in which particle accelerators probe particle physics.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235680 - 10/07/19 02:35 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

StygianKnight said:
I see.

The “law of conservation of mass” is not a real scientific law, it’s a “law” similar to how
Moores Law is a law.



Conservation of mass is definitely a law of nature.  Moore's law is a neat idea that was invented for an entirely different purpose that doesn't even come close to meeting the same epistemological criteria.  The fact that you get different results when you use a different system of axioms where the concept of mass is sort of meaningless doesn't somehow make it not a "real" law.  That's (almost literally) like saying that Euclidean geometry is a fake geometry because you get different results when you decide to assign a non-Euclidean geometry to the same space.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleStygianKnight
A Mushroom

Registered: 03/12/12
Posts: 2,717
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: chibiabos]
    #26235704 - 10/07/19 02:43 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

The conservation of mass as stated above is incorrect. The mass of an object does indeed change over time.  Gaining or losing energy changes the mass of an object.

Although yes you’re right, I should have said something more like newtonian mechanics which is ‘correct’ in so much as in everyday usage we rarely need the accuracy difference between newtonian and relativity, but between the two relativity is the more accurate representation and when dealing with tiny details it’s required as newtonian mechanics isn’t the whole picture.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Problems with the Standard Solar Model [Re: StygianKnight]
    #26235732 - 10/07/19 02:49 PM (4 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

StygianKnight said:
The conservation of mass as stated above is incorrect. The mass of an object does indeed change over time.



Totally irrelevant.  Paring off a chunk of apple and blasting it into a black hole wouldn't somehow remove it from existence.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Solar System May Be Unique After All, Astronomers Say
( 1 2 all )
ivi 4,502 21 08/23/04 07:53 PM
by Asante
* Canadian Researcher Invents New Solar Cell SeussA 1,033 5 01/13/05 01:05 PM
by Ythan
* Solar Power Anonymous 1,066 7 05/17/03 10:19 AM
by matts
* Problems with my asus P4B533mb and P4 2.42 proccessor.. FlusH 918 5 01/10/04 02:33 AM
by FlusH
* Huston, we have a problem. AnnoA 1,252 11 04/20/03 11:20 AM
by Seuss
* dvd region problem on pc butterflydawn 1,057 11 12/25/04 04:36 PM
by Mushie_Man
* build your own powered model aircraft trypyamine 924 4 04/27/03 12:59 AM
by blaze2
* *DELETED* Hefex78 1,166 6 09/24/03 03:11 PM
by longshot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
1,508 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 13 queries.