|
|
|
Tabular Comparison of Solar Models
© Charles Chandler
This has been superceded in outline format, which better supports nested sub-topics.
- This is a comparison of solar models in how they explain various observable phenomena.
- Incontrovertible data are listed in the "Evidence" rows.
- Then the explanations of the data are presented. The models are listed in roughly the order in which they emerged.
- Registered users can add comments at the end, which the page owner can integrate into the table.
- Link to images and cite sources wherever possible.
- Distances are in Mm (i.e., thousands of kilometers). Speeds are in km/s.
- Avoid using the term "surface" as this is model-dependent; similarly, the location of the "photosphere" in contentious, and shouldn't be used to denote a location; use "limb" instead to refer to the outer edge of the Sun.
- All of this is subject to revision. This is not a once-and-for-all debate, but a search for the truth. As we learn, our opinions change, and this comparison should have the flexibility to grow with our knowledge.
| |
Sun Formation |
| Evidence |
It's there, isn't it? (The topic of star formation is more thoroughly addressed in the Stellar Models section.) |
| Standard |
Sun formed from gravitational collapse of nebular cloud into hot ball of plasma.
This requires additional force from CDM.
|
| Thornhill |
Sun formed from magnetic pinch of galactic electric current as hot ball of plasma.
Q: how does a z-pinch result in condensed matter?
|
| Mozina |
Sun formed from supernova implosion making a small neutronium core inside an iron plasma.
Q: why doesn't the neutronium decay?
|
| Callahan |
same as EU Model, but the plasma ball was mostly iron and hollow inside.
Q: what prevents the hollow core from collapsing — is the iron shell thick enough?
|
| Chandler |
Dusty plasma collapsed due to "like-likes-like" body force. On implosion, compression ionization created electrostatic layering, and the electric force keeps the matter consolidated. |
| |
Energy Source |
| Evidence |
(see the Power section) |
| Standard |
Fusion in the core by gravitational pressure, releasing heat.
Q: is the pressure sufficient for this, taking the Coulomb barrier into account?
|
| Birkeland |
Internal electromagnet, releasing heat, electrons and protons.
Q: what's the magnetomotive force?
|
| Thornhill |
Electron stream from galactic electric circuit releasing protons.
Q: would there be visible evidence of the stream, through space, and especially at the footpoint(s)?
|
| Mozina |
Neutron decay releasing heat, electrons and protons from neutronium core. |
| Callahan |
Aether from galactic center forming and releasing electrons in hollow solid iron globe. |
| Chandler |
Electrostatic potential from compressive ionization, released as arc discharges. |
| |
Power |
| Evidence |
3.80 × 1026 watts,1 in the form of 5525 K blackbody radiation, (4600 K on limb, 6400 K normal to surface), with some absorption and emission lines |
| Standard |
fusion in core generates gamma rays that propagate through radiative zone, getting redshifted by a wide variety of non-BB processes
Q: how is the model pressure in the core sufficient to overcome the Coulomb barrier in the core?
Q: convection has been found to be insufficient to carry enough heat to the surface, so how does the sparse plasma conduct the heat?
Q: what are the chances of a combination of non-BB processes producing a BB curve?
|
| Thornhill |
Electric current through Sun causes ohmic heating.
Q: current from where, and to where?
|
| Mozina |
.7 Mm deep neon layer is 4000 K hotter than underlying silicon, so most of the BB radiation comes from the neon layer
Q: what about limb darkening — could a layer only .7 Mm deep vary from 4600 K to 6400 K, with granules redistributing the heat every 20 minutes?
|
| Chandler |
atomic oscillation in supercritical fluid at a depth of 4~20 Mm, due to ohmic heating from electric current, where electrons are emitted by a negative layer at a depth of 20~125 Mm, attracted to the positive heliosphere |
| |
Neutrinos vs. Power |
| Evidence |
Electron neutrino output indicates fusion produces 1/3 of the Sun's energy. |
| Standard |
fusion is 100% of power; between the Sun & Earth, 2/3 of the electron neutrinos change into muon or tau neutrinos |
| Chandler |
2/3 of solar power comes from ohmic heating & charge recombination; 1/3 comes from nuclear fusion in the stepped leaders of arc discharges inside the Sun |
| |
Optical Depth |
| Evidence |
|
| Standard |
.3~.7 Mm
Q: isn't 6000 K hydrogen plasma transparent?
|
| Mozina |
.3~.7 Mm
Q: isn't 6000 K hydrogen plasma transparent?
|
| Chandler |
4+ Mm, with the 4600 K BB radiation coming from the top of this range, and 6400 K BB radiation coming from deeper, where greater pressure results in faster oscillations |
| |
Abundances |
| Evidence |
spectroscopy (Anders & Grevesse, 1989), inferences from helioseismology and from average density estimates |
| Standard |
thoroughly mixed, 75% hydrogen, 25% helium |
| Thornhill |
mostly heavy element core and lighter elements above the core |
| Robitaille |
hydrogen |
| Mozina |
mass separated
- photosphere: neon
- .7~4.8 Mm below: silicon
- 4.8~? Mm below: iron crust
- neutronium core
Q: doesn't differential rotation, 0~200 Mm below, indicate fluids, not solids?
|
| Callahan |
hollow solid iron with light elements atmosphere |
| Chandler |
mass separated
- convective zone: H, He
- radiative zone: Fe, Ni
- core: Pt, Os
|
| |
Density |
| Evidence |
inferences from helioseismology and from average density estimates |
| Standard |
per Dalsgaard Model Q: what about the Coulomb barrier?
Q: in a smooth gradient, what produces the helioseismic shadows at .27 and .7 SR?
|
| Robitaille |
1408 kg/m3 throughout
Q: what produces the helioseismic shadows at .27 and .7 SR?
|
| Chandler |
3-tier, producing helioseismic shadows at .27 and .7 SR (see Abundances) |
| |
Granules |
| Evidence |
width: 1 Mm
duration: 20 minutes
dynamics: Bénard cells (updraft in center, downdraft around outside
speed up: 2 km/s (supersonic)
speed down: 7 km/s (hypersonic) |
| Standard |
convection due to +/- buoyancy (hot plasma rises, releases heat, cools, and falls)
Q: how does buoyancy create supersonic updrafts, and hypersonic downdrafts?
|
| Birkeland |
cathode tufting |
| Thornhill |
anode tufting
Q: what produces the distinct limb?
|
| Scott |
anode tufting, with power regulated by PNP transistor
Q: how is a transistor instantiated in the excellent conductivity of 6000 K plasma?
|
| Mozina |
cathode tufting |
| Callahan |
cathode tufting |
| Chandler |
cathode tufting
depth: 4~5 Mm, as determined by the normal dynamics of Bénard cells, by helioseismic evidence of different flows below 5 Mm, and possibly by SDO "first light" images
updraft: + thermal buoyancy plus electron drag
downdraft: electric force pulls ions back down |
| |
Faculae |
| Evidence |
bright streaks down the sides of granules, easiest seen on the limb, associated with magnetic fields in the intergranular lanes |
| Standard |
strong magnetic fields reduce gas density, making it nearly transparent, exposing deeper layers that are hotter2 Q: how do magnetic fields reduce the density of hydrogen plasma?
Q: would thinner plasma still be negatively buoyant?
|
| Chandler |
ohmic heating in downdrafts creates more heat, as the electron speed + the downdraft speed results in higher energy collisions; magnetic fields are effects, not causes |
| |
Spicules |
| Evidence |
"torches" found in the valleys between granules that last 15 minutes, coinciding with enhanced magnetic fields, and with particle speeds of 20 km/s (hypersonic), typically forming an Eiffel Tower shape3
|
| Standard |
p-waves accelerate plasma upward at .5 km/s, and magnetic flux tubes focus it into jets
Q: how do p-waves create hypersonic jets?
Q: how does the magnetic force operate on hydrogen plasma, which has a weak magnetic dipole?
|
| Thornhill |
solar~galactic current (inflowing electrons)
Q: if the spicules are the footpoints of the external power source, why don't they produce more total photons than the granules, like the footpoints in a plasma lamp?
|
| Chandler |
electric current through faculae graduates to arc discharge; magnetic fields are generated by the electric current, and magnetic pinch effect helps consolidate the charge streams |
| |
Sunspots |
| Evidence |
solenoidal magnetic fields; cooler umbra; see Sunspots
|
| Standard |
|
| Mozina |
|
| Chandler |
increased solar~heliospheric current, in the presence of the Sun's overall magnetic field, produces solenoid |
| |
Coronal Loops |
| Evidence |
most visible in Fe IX/X/XV emissions; oriented along magnetic field lines; current density: 1~3 A/m2
|
| Standard |
energy from magnetic reconnection
Q: why do the most powerful loops form after reconnection events that should have released all of the energy, such as flares?
|
| Mozina |
arc discharges from oppositely charged regions, based on Birkeland's terrella experiments
Q: what is the insulator that keeps the charges separate until the discharge?
Q: why do the most powerful loops form after flares that should have discharged all of the potential?
|
| Chandler |
magnetic field lines connecting active regions of opposite polarity, and supporting B-field-aligned electric currents if there are charge disparities |
| |
Solar Moss |
| Evidence |
uneven distribution of iron plasma near active regions |
| Standard |
above limb; associated with hot magnetic plasma loops arching above active regions
Q: was the elevation determined by photogrammetry, or by assumptions about heat stratification above the photosphere, based on assumptions concerning the measurement of temperature by degree of ionization?
|
| Mozina |
below limb; evidence of solid surface at a depth of 4800+ km |
| Chandler |
below limb; evidence of varying electric fields that selectively attract iron, which is capable of a higher degree of ionization than lighter elements |
| |
Streamers |
| Evidence |
emerging from broad areas, particles accelerate away from the Sun |
| Standard |
solar wind |
| Chandler |
flow of free electrons, from solar cathode to heliospheric anode, through stationary positive ions, with some "electron drag" accelerating the positive ions in the same direction |
| |
Solar Wind |
| Evidence |
slow wind: 400 m/s, equatorial during quiet periods, all over during active periods;
fast wind: 800 m/s, polar during quiet periods |
| Standard |
thermal expansion? |
| Chandler |
electron drag accelerates atomic nuclei, which eventually get neutralized, thereafter unaffected by E-field |
| |
title |
| Evidence |
|
| Standard |
|
| Mozina |
|
| Chandler |
|
|
