Cool, My theory explains Earth's magnetic fields, magnetotail, coronal discharge jets and transmuted elements and the accretion of matter we live in.
Can you explain all that? On Monday, January 21, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > You can see here that you can have solid plasma: > > http://www.overclockersclub.com/news/30536/ > > Giovanni > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Chem, > Maybe by use of "plasma" is not perfectly precise but for all purposes > iron at that temperature is a plasma because it is extremely ionized. Yes, > the usual idea of a plasma is that is a sort of gas but the main property > really is that electrons are stripped away from the nucleus this is the > case with the core of the earth. It is basically a plasma from this point > of view. > Giovanni > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:45 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net>wrote: > > Good discussion guys! **** > > Keeping the focus on the technical data, and so far you’ve been able to > avoid getting personal… excellent!**** > > ** ** > > Giovanni, thanks for including the web-links to references… much > appreciated.**** > > ** ** > > My only issue so far is with Giovanni’s statement:**** > > ** ** > > > The core <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core> of the Sun is > considered to extend from the center to **** > > > about 20–25% of the solar > > radius.[46]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#cite_note-Garcia2007-47> It > > has a density of up to > **** > > > 150 g/cm3[47] > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#cite_note-Basu-48>[48]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#cite_note-NASA1-49>(about > > 150 times the density of water) and a > **** > > > temperature of close to 15.7 million > > kelvin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin>(K) > [48] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#cite_note-NASA1-49>.**** > > ** ** > > There is no way we could DIRECTLY measure either the radius of the Sun’s > core or its density. The ‘accepted’ figures come from theoretical models; > and applying those models to related variable. As far as the radius is > concerned, your use of the phrasing, “… is considered to extend…” indicates > your conscious understanding that the ESTIMATES of the Sun’s core radius is > just that… and **estimate, not backed up by direct measurement**. > However, when you state, “It has a density of upto…” seems to be a bit too > ‘definite’ for my taste… **** > > ** ** > > This is a major problem I find in scientific papers. **Definitive** > wording has crept into papers where it doesn’t belong; it is not warranted > by the DIRECT experimental measurements. **** > > ** ** > > -Mark Iverson **** > > ** ** > > ** > >
