Sun's Hot Surface: Influence of Jupiter on our Sun~~~

In article .com,
says...
i am saying the planets and orbits are not kinetic energy. the orbit
of the moon around
earth gives us huge tital forces everyday, two high and two low tides.
that is not kinetic energy.

i am going to be famous.


Yup, a nutter.
--
Craig Oldfield

granite stone wrote:
I have re-written the article. Hope you understand it.

Sun's Hot Surface: Influence of Jupiter on our Sun

By: Jon Riley B.A., Toronto, Canada,

all pictures at;

www.kfcircuits.com/Sun.pdf

Hello: I have not studied your texts in depth. However, let me point
out there appeared some articles in the 60's or 70's (if I recall
rightly) in peer-reviewed journals about the topic.

Where did you got your idea? It would be a good idea if you will cite
your references.

Schneewittchen

David Knisely wrote:

As for the rest of your posting, there is so much wrong with it that I
can only say you need to take some basic science courses and come back
when you understand what their teachers have told you (and stay off of
sci.astro.amateur, as this is rather off-topic for that newsgroup).
Clear skies to you.

As I wrote elsewhere I believe he pinched the idea from some other
sources. However, there were indeed some papers in peer-reviewed
journals who tried to make some correlations between solar sunspots,
solar surface and the gravity exposed by planets.

I have never red any of this papers. It would have been interesting
where he got his sources. It would have been also interesting whether
he red some of the original "ideas"-papers since they were written by
professional astronomers.

Schneewittchen

Good morning......Wow. Someone instead of telling me I am a troll is
asking where I copied this from. Still an insult but I have moved out
of the gutter to the sidewalk.

You will not believe this but I thought of the idea that magma and the
hot surface of the sun are from the same force, elongation. (see my
article for elongation) And too, from high planet rotation. Last
summer on my sailboat I started to write this article. I first thought
of it when I was asked "where does magma comes from" on a term paper at
Lakehead University. I was studying Geography and had a course
Astronomy under my belt. During my research, just done at google, I
looked at the planets and moons that had high rotation and compared
this to planets and moons that had a magma surface. During my google
search I saw that the sun rotated at 25 days and it too, might be from
the same forces, elongation and high rotation. Earth and Io rotate at
higher speeds, 1 day, but the sun, since it is so big, might have a hot
surface from the result of high rotation speed and elongation (bulge).

In the fall, when I just had 2 pages written, I went to NASA websites
and read articles about Mars and any new articles on magma. I tried
emailing authors about my new idea but just got a few emails back that
"magma remains a mystery". And that I was wrong. I had a feeling that
my article was not read. But, I did get one email from a scientist at
NASA which has motivated me being here. THis is the place to be for
new ideas but the ridiculing is so much!

Jon Riley

Good morning......Wow. Someone instead of telling me I am a troll is
asking where I copied this from. Still an insult but I have moved out
of the gutter to the sidewalk.

You will not believe this but I thought of the idea that magma and the
hot surface of the sun are from the same force, elongation. (see my
article for elongation) And too, from high planet rotation. Last
summer on my sailboat I started to write this article. I first thought
of it when I was asked "where does magma comes from" on a term paper at
Lakehead University. I was studying Geography and had a course
Astronomy under my belt. During my research, just done at google, I
looked at the planets and moons that had high rotation and compared
this to planets and moons that had a magma surface. During my google
search I saw that the sun rotated at 25 days and it too, might be from
the same forces, elongation and high rotation. Earth and Io rotate at
higher speeds, 1 day, but the sun, since it is so big, might have a hot
surface from the result of high rotation speed and elongation (bulge).

In the fall, when I just had 2 pages written, I went to NASA websites
and read articles about Mars and any new articles on magma. I tried
emailing authors about my new idea but just got a few emails back that
"magma remains a mystery". And that I was wrong. I had a feeling that
my article was not read. But, I did get one email from a scientist at
NASA which has motivated me being here. THis is the place to be for
new ideas but the ridiculing is so much!

Jon Riley

granite stone" wrote in message
oups.com... Good morning......Wow. Someone
instead of telling me I am a troll is
You will not believe this but I thought of the idea that magma and the
hot surface of the sun are from the same force, elongation. (see my
article for elongation)

You should publish Jon, if this is as hot as you hope the journals will be fighting for it.

--
John Carruthers
http://mysite.freeserve.com/jc_atm/

"granite stone" wrote in message
ups.com...
with reference to earth, the moon does not rotate. if the same side
earth always faced the sun, earth would not be known to rotate.

"Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a
different result"
- Albert EInstein

George

".. If you could work out a test,
I am not sure I could make a test to prove my theory. The only test I
can think of, is to compare the energy of the Jupiter obit to the
energy of the sun. But, I would not know where to start on this one.

How do you define 'magma' ? molten silicates or
any eruptive fluid ? (I'm thinking of cryovulcanism here)
I define magma as a fluid from the core of the planet that reaches the
surface. This would include cryovulcanism.

At which point of a planet's (or planetesimal's) geologic history does this idea refer ?
Some planets and moons have old volcanic craters and it does not
include these planets or moons. I am referring to planets and moons of
today and what is going on today.

Larger/denser bodies retain their primordial accretional heat better and so longer. Radiogenic
heating plays a very large part. Tidal heating also, but more if there's a greater disparity in the
bodies' masses. Atmospheres and distance from their star as well as the star's energy output all
contribute..."
This is the theory I found for magma but I disagree with it.

Some food for thought;
How old would you estimate the sun and planets to be ?
I know Hubble is finding galaxies that are 13 billion light years away
so I don't believe in the big bang 4 billion years ago. I think our
galaxy is trillions of years old and so is our sun.

I take it you do not agree with the accretional model of solar system formation ? (Google for "Jeans
mass")
I did a google search and found this interesting but disagree. You
have recommended taking a course but I think reading good
books/internet sites is the same thing. I have learned so much writing
here.

How much of the phenomena that we see on the sun's surface do you attribute to magnetic forces ?
If this is referring to the Sun being like a nuclear reaction, I
disagree.

I say this and ask where does the energy of the Moon and the tides come
from? No one has answered this. It would not be kinetic energy.

On 25 Feb 2006 06:14:46 -0800, "granite stone"
wrote:

I say this and ask where does the energy of the Moon and the tides come
from? No one has answered this. It would not be kinetic energy.

And why not? All the planets and their satellites have kinetic energy,
both from their orbital motion and their rotational motion. The energy
that originally set these bodies in motion was from the gravitational
collapse of the nebula that produced the Solar System.

All of the bodies in the Solar System affect each other gravitationally,
transferring energy between themselves. In some cases this is
measurable. The Moon and Earth produce tidal forces on one another, and
this has resulted in a tidally locked Moon, which has a rotation period
and revolution period that are the same (on average). These tides are
transferring energy from the Earth to the Moon- we see this as a slowing
down of the Earth's rotation, and an increase in the size of the Moon's
orbit. Both effects are confirmed by actual measurement.

Something similar is going on between the Sun and Jupiter. I seem to
recall that a tiny tidal bulge may have been measured on the Sun,
although I don't recall the reference. In any case, the tidal forces
between the Sun and Jupiter are extremely small because of their large
separation. Any energy transfer between the two is extremely tiny
compared with the energy output of the Sun.

By my calculation, Jupiter's total KE is equal to the total energy
output of the Sun for 13 years. Not very impressive in the grand scheme
of a solar system that is nearly 5 billion years old.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com