Solar Spectrum

On Wednesday, April 5, 2006 2:38:02 AM UTC-7, Gautham Ram wrote:
We know that the sun emits a line absorption spectrum(certain
wavelengths of light are absorbed by the sun's atmosphere and so are
not emitted by the sun) Well that's fine but the elements in the Sun's
atmosphere(hydrogen and helium atoms) absorb the wavelength and hence
the energy contained with the particular wavelength... So they must be
heated to incandescence and thus emit light corresponding to their own
wavelength(which is the same as the one that they absorbed).. Following
this line of reasoning, we come to the conclusion that there must not
be any absorption lines in the spectrum of the sun which is not
true.. So can anybody explain this to me?

Obviously this Usenet/newsgroup is nearly dead, with few of any astrophysic
s expertise and never any K-12s that could probably research on behalf of a
nswering our questions. You might care to try alt.astronomy, sci.astro or
sci.physics because, those are active unmoderated newsgroups.

I certainly can't explain it, but it'll be interesting to see what the next
close encounter probe can help deduce as to what makes the atmosphere of t
hat sun so much hotter than its highly problematic photosphere surface.

"The coolest layer of the Sun is a temperature minimum region about 500 km
above the photosphere, with a temperature of about 4,100 K.[63] This part o
f the Sun is cool enough to allow simple molecules such as carbon monoxide
and water, which can be detected by their absorption spectra.[69]"

Large dark spots and especially those vast gaping dark areas of relative th
ermal darkness can fall below 3300 K (even dropping to 3000 K).

For example; the enormous red giant atmosphere of Betelgeuse is reported as
running at roughly four times hotter than is the photosphere, which is eit
her extremely odd or else its fusion process is into burning helium and abo
ut to become a neutron star that could deliver a great deal of gamma our wa
y.

Here's another greenhouse analogy page that's way better than most:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/1...el-greenhouse/

There's actually a lot of basic science about Earth and our moon, and espe
cially of whatever the Earth-moon L1 has to offer, that's either extremely
hard to fine or having been nondisclosure rated by those in charge of mains
tream media damage control. Our sun really isn't very well understood, bec
ause even mainstream science and physics can't seem to boil it down without
someone or another group chiming in with yet another interpretation.

Essentially we need more objective science without the usual strings of alw
ays being afraid of upsetting previous generations that had us thinking in
other ways.