Full Version: A question to SOHO's Team
Scientists responsible of SOHO say that it orbits the Sun.
No doubt, orbiting the Sun means that SOHO sees the two faces of the Sun.
Although this rotation necessarily means that SOHO must face the far side of the sun in every revolution, there is no photo of the far side of the Sun released by SOHO as yet. Accordingly, how SOHO's scientists reconciliate between these two aspects? How do they explain this mystery?
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 09:05 PM) 
Scientists responsible of SOHO say that it orbits the Sun.
No doubt, orbiting the Sun means that SOHO sees the two faces of the Sun.
Although this rotation necessarily means that SOHO must face the far side of the sun in every revolution, there is no photo of the far side of the Sun released by SOHO as yet. Accordingly, how SOHO's scientists reconciliate between these two aspects? How do they explain this mystery?
No doubt, orbiting the Sun means that SOHO sees the two faces of the Sun.
Although this rotation necessarily means that SOHO must face the far side of the sun in every revolution, there is no photo of the far side of the Sun released by SOHO as yet. Accordingly, how SOHO's scientists reconciliate between these two aspects? How do they explain this mystery?
You seem to have clear disimformation on SOHO's orbit. I will help you.
SOHO is in orbit between the Earth and the Sun. It is about 150,703,456 kilometers (92 million miles) from the Sun and only about 1,528,483 Kilometers (1 million miles) from the Earth (three times farther than the moon). This orbit is around a mathematical point between the Earth and the Sun known as the Lagrange point or the L1 point. The L1 point is a point of equilibrium between the Earth's and Sun's gravitational field, that is to say that the pull is equal from both the Sun and the Earth. The L1 point is a point of unstable equilibrium (like a bowl round side up with a marble balanced on it). As a result, we have to compensate for perturbations due to the pull of the planets and the Earth's moon. Every few months we use a little fuel to fine tune our orbit and keep it from getting too far off track. This is known as "station keeping manoeuvres"
No spacecraft is actually orbiting at the L1 point. For SOHO there are two main reasons: the unstable orbit at the L1 point and facility of communication in a halo orbit. If SOHO was sitting directly at the L1 point, it would always be right in front of the Sun. The trouble is that the Sun is very noisy at radio wavelengths, which would make it very difficult to tune into the radio telemetry from the spacecraft. By putting it into a halo orbit, we can place it so that it's always a few degrees away from the Sun, making radio reception much easier.
Here is a diagram of SOHO's orbit, courtesy of the ESA science website.
And an animated video of the orbit:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/sohos-or...-sun/1455752233
QUOTE (Alex01 @ Apr 4 2008, 09:23 PM)
You seem to have clear disimformation on SOHO's orbit. I will help you.
SOHO is in orbit between the Earth and the Sun. It is about 150,703,456 kilometers (92 million miles) from the Sun and only about 1,528,483 Kilometers (1 million miles) from the Earth (three times farther than the moon). This orbit is around a mathematical point between the Earth and the Sun known as the Lagrange point or the L1 point. The L1 point is a point of equilibrium between the Earth's and Sun's gravitational field, that is to say that the pull is equal from both the Sun and the Earth. The L1 point is a point of unstable equilibrium (like a bowl round side up with a marble balanced on it). As a result, we have to compensate for perturbations due to the pull of the planets and the Earth's moon. Every few months we use a little fuel to fine tune our orbit and keep it from getting too far off track. This is known as "station keeping manoeuvres"
No spacecraft is actually orbiting at the L1 point. For SOHO there are two main reasons: the unstable orbit at the L1 point and facility of communication in a halo orbit. If SOHO was sitting directly at the L1 point, it would always be right in front of the Sun. The trouble is that the Sun is very noisy at radio wavelengths, which would make it very difficult to tune into the radio telemetry from the spacecraft. By putting it into a halo orbit, we can place it so that it's always a few degrees away from the Sun, making radio reception much easier.
Here is a diagram of SOHO's orbit, courtesy of the ESA science website.
And an animated video of the orbit:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/sohos-or...-sun/1455752233
SOHO is in orbit between the Earth and the Sun. It is about 150,703,456 kilometers (92 million miles) from the Sun and only about 1,528,483 Kilometers (1 million miles) from the Earth (three times farther than the moon). This orbit is around a mathematical point between the Earth and the Sun known as the Lagrange point or the L1 point. The L1 point is a point of equilibrium between the Earth's and Sun's gravitational field, that is to say that the pull is equal from both the Sun and the Earth. The L1 point is a point of unstable equilibrium (like a bowl round side up with a marble balanced on it). As a result, we have to compensate for perturbations due to the pull of the planets and the Earth's moon. Every few months we use a little fuel to fine tune our orbit and keep it from getting too far off track. This is known as "station keeping manoeuvres"
No spacecraft is actually orbiting at the L1 point. For SOHO there are two main reasons: the unstable orbit at the L1 point and facility of communication in a halo orbit. If SOHO was sitting directly at the L1 point, it would always be right in front of the Sun. The trouble is that the Sun is very noisy at radio wavelengths, which would make it very difficult to tune into the radio telemetry from the spacecraft. By putting it into a halo orbit, we can place it so that it's always a few degrees away from the Sun, making radio reception much easier.
Here is a diagram of SOHO's orbit, courtesy of the ESA science website.
And an animated video of the orbit:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/sohos-or...-sun/1455752233
Dear Alex01,
The very useful knowledge you brought here does not give any explanation for the puzzzle my question is about. All the time SOHO photographs the same side. Hence, the question is this: why is SOHO always unable to photograph the far side of the Sun if it really rotates around the SUN and comes facing this side? Doesn't the rotation of SOHO around the SUN mean that it faces the far side also?
The sun it self rotates.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 08:31 PM)
The very useful knowledge you brought here does not give any explanation for the puzzzle my question is about.
Yes it does, you just can't see it because you lack the understanding of what a Lagrange point is and how SOHO is in a halo orbits around the L1 point. Did you watch the video that Alex posted a link to? It very effectively shows SOHO's orbits.
QUOTE
All the time SOHO photographs the same side. Hence, the question is this: why is SOHO always unable to photograph the far side of the Sun if it really rotates around the SUN and comes facing this side?
How would you recognize the "far side" of the Sun? The Sun is essentially an immense ball of fire. It would look essentially exactly the same not matter what "side" you were looking at. Are you trying to suggest the one side of the Sun is different from another?
QUOTE
Doesn't the rotation of SOHO around the SUN mean that it faces the far side also?
Again, how would you know the difference between the "far side" and the "near side"? As Roger has pointed out, the Sun itself rotates around its axis in a manner somewhat similar to that of the Earth's rotation around its own axis. The Sun's rotational period is is defined and explained below:
From Wikipedia - Solar Rotation
QUOTE
Solar rotation varies because the sun is composed of a gaseous plasma, and therefore lacks a fixed rotation rate. The rate of rotation is fastest at the equator (latitude φ=0 deg), and decreases as latitude increases. The rotation rate is demonstrated by the equation:
where ω is the angular velocity in degrees per day, φ is the latitude and A and B are constants.
A= 14.18 deg/day (+/- 0.35)
B= -2.00 deg/day (+/- 0.48)
Sidereal rotation
At the equator the solar rotation period is 25.38 days. This is called the sidereal rotation period, and should not be confused with the synodic rotation period of 27.2753 days, which is the time for a fixed feature on the sun to rotate to the same apparent position as viewed from Earth. The synodic period is longer because the sun must rotate for a sidereal period plus an extra amount due to the orbital motion of the earth around the sun. When the sun is viewed from the "north" (above the Earth's northern pole) solar rotation is counterclockwise. Sunspots viewed from Earth (its Northern hemisphere) appear to move from left to right across the face of the sun.
Using sunspots to measure rotation
The rotation constants have been measured by measuring the motion of various features ("tracers") on the solar surface. The first and most widely used tracer are sunspots. Though sunspots had been observed since ancient times, it was only when the telescope came into use that they were observed to turn with the Sun, and thus the period of the solar rotation could be defined. The English scholar Thomas Harriot was probably the first to observe sunspots telescopically as evidenced by a drawing in his notebook dated December 8, 1610, and the first published observations (June 1611) entitled “De Maculis in Sole Observatis, et Apparente earum cum Sole Conversione Narratio” ("Narration on Spots Observed on the Sun and their Apparent Rotation with the Sun") were by Johannes Fabricius who had been systematically observing the spots for a few months and had noted also their movement across the solar disc. This can be considered the first observational evidence of the solar rotation. Christopher Scheiner (“Rosa Ursine sive solis”, book 4, part 2, 1630) was the first to measure the equatorial rotation rate of the Sun and noticed that the rotation at higher latitudes is slower, so he can be considered the discoverer of solar differential rotation.
Each measurement gives a slightly different answer, yielding the above standard deviations (shown as +/-). St. John (1918) was perhaps the first to summarise the published solar rotation rates, and concluded that the differences in series measured in different years can hardly be attributed to personal observation or to local disturbances on the Sun, and are probably due to time variations in the rate of rotation, and Hubrecht (1915) was the first one to find that the two solar hemispheres rotate differently.
where ω is the angular velocity in degrees per day, φ is the latitude and A and B are constants.
A= 14.18 deg/day (+/- 0.35)
B= -2.00 deg/day (+/- 0.48)
Sidereal rotation
At the equator the solar rotation period is 25.38 days. This is called the sidereal rotation period, and should not be confused with the synodic rotation period of 27.2753 days, which is the time for a fixed feature on the sun to rotate to the same apparent position as viewed from Earth. The synodic period is longer because the sun must rotate for a sidereal period plus an extra amount due to the orbital motion of the earth around the sun. When the sun is viewed from the "north" (above the Earth's northern pole) solar rotation is counterclockwise. Sunspots viewed from Earth (its Northern hemisphere) appear to move from left to right across the face of the sun.
Using sunspots to measure rotation
The rotation constants have been measured by measuring the motion of various features ("tracers") on the solar surface. The first and most widely used tracer are sunspots. Though sunspots had been observed since ancient times, it was only when the telescope came into use that they were observed to turn with the Sun, and thus the period of the solar rotation could be defined. The English scholar Thomas Harriot was probably the first to observe sunspots telescopically as evidenced by a drawing in his notebook dated December 8, 1610, and the first published observations (June 1611) entitled “De Maculis in Sole Observatis, et Apparente earum cum Sole Conversione Narratio” ("Narration on Spots Observed on the Sun and their Apparent Rotation with the Sun") were by Johannes Fabricius who had been systematically observing the spots for a few months and had noted also their movement across the solar disc. This can be considered the first observational evidence of the solar rotation. Christopher Scheiner (“Rosa Ursine sive solis”, book 4, part 2, 1630) was the first to measure the equatorial rotation rate of the Sun and noticed that the rotation at higher latitudes is slower, so he can be considered the discoverer of solar differential rotation.
Each measurement gives a slightly different answer, yielding the above standard deviations (shown as +/-). St. John (1918) was perhaps the first to summarise the published solar rotation rates, and concluded that the differences in series measured in different years can hardly be attributed to personal observation or to local disturbances on the Sun, and are probably due to time variations in the rate of rotation, and Hubrecht (1915) was the first one to find that the two solar hemispheres rotate differently.
Cz
QUOTE (ROGER @ Apr 5 2008, 03:50 AM)
The sun it self rotates.
Thanks.
Really, the Sun rotates. But scientists must prove two things:
1--That the Sun revolves around the Earth.
2-That the Sun revolves around the Earth such that the time of this revolution is the same it needs to complete one rotation on its axis.
Sigh... I sense another nonsense thread... In the event that this is not such a one:
No planet is tidally locked to the sun and the sun is not tidally locked to any planet. The planets orbit around the sun (or rather around the common center of mass of the solar system which is pretty much within the sun) and the sun turns about once a month (varies with solar latitude).
SOHO does orbit the sun, but it's orbit is weird. It stays near the Lagrange point between the earth and the sun, such that it circles the sun in a year just like the Earth and sees the same side of the sun that we are seeing at any given time. However, there is no permanent "far side of the sun" because the sun rotates on its axis.
No planet is tidally locked to the sun and the sun is not tidally locked to any planet. The planets orbit around the sun (or rather around the common center of mass of the solar system which is pretty much within the sun) and the sun turns about once a month (varies with solar latitude).
SOHO does orbit the sun, but it's orbit is weird. It stays near the Lagrange point between the earth and the sun, such that it circles the sun in a year just like the Earth and sees the same side of the sun that we are seeing at any given time. However, there is no permanent "far side of the sun" because the sun rotates on its axis.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 10:00 PM)
Really, the Sun rotates.
Yes... it rotates. read the Wikipedia article I quoted in my previous post.
QUOTE
But scientists must prove two things:
1--That the Sun revolves around the Earth.
2-That the Sun revolves around the Earth such that the time of this revolution is the same it needs to complete one rotation on its axis.
1--That the Sun revolves around the Earth.
2-That the Sun revolves around the Earth such that the time of this revolution is the same it needs to complete one rotation on its axis.
1. Scientists have proven that the Earth revolves around the Sun. End of story.
2. Again.... read the Wikipedia quote in my above post. The Sun takes approximately 25 days to rotate on its axis, but because of the motion of the Earth AROUND THE SUN, it appears to take about 27 days for the Sun to rotate around its axis.
YOU HAVE TO PROVE that the so called "far side" of the Sun would be distinguishable in any way from any other side of the Sun.
So PROVE it, if you can...
Cz
Attiyah, since this thread covers what we discussed via e-mail i'll continue my response here.
There is no side of the Sun that is permanantly facing away from the Earth. When I stated this you told me that the reverse was true and to simply go and look it up on Google, with the obvious problem there being that it is up to you to provide an argument in support of what you are saying, not for us to do that for you.
What evidence do you have to support the notion that there is a permanantly fixed, unobservable 'far side' of the sun ?
There is no side of the Sun that is permanantly facing away from the Earth. When I stated this you told me that the reverse was true and to simply go and look it up on Google, with the obvious problem there being that it is up to you to provide an argument in support of what you are saying, not for us to do that for you.
What evidence do you have to support the notion that there is a permanantly fixed, unobservable 'far side' of the sun ?
QUOTE (SaRuMaN @ Apr 5 2008, 09:13 AM)
Attiyah, since this thread covers what we discussed via e-mail i'll continue my response here.
There is no side of the Sun that is permanantly facing away from the Earth. When I stated this you told me that the reverse was true and to simply go and look it up on Google, with the obvious problem there being that it is up to you to provide an argument in support of what you are saying, not for us to do that for you.
What evidence do you have to support the notion that there is a permanantly fixed, unobservable 'far side' of the sun ?
There is no side of the Sun that is permanantly facing away from the Earth. When I stated this you told me that the reverse was true and to simply go and look it up on Google, with the obvious problem there being that it is up to you to provide an argument in support of what you are saying, not for us to do that for you.
What evidence do you have to support the notion that there is a permanantly fixed, unobservable 'far side' of the sun ?
Dear Administrator,
I thank you very much.
Please review the coming articles.
Sun's Far Side Visible Now
By Sara Goudarzi
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 20 March 2006
7:00 am ET
There's no place for the Sun to hide its face anymore.
The rotating star's far side, out of view to astronomers, has now been fully seen for the first time using data from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO).
A new technique allows scientists to detect potentially damaging solar storms that may be brewing on the far side of the Sun and, weeks later, will be rotated into view and aimed our way.
"Sunspots, solar flares and other active regions on the surface of the Sun emit radiation that can interfere with orbiting satellites, telecommunications and power transmission," said Philip Scherrer, a research professor at Stanford University Department of Physics. "This new method allows more reliable warning of magnetic storms brewing on the far side that could rotate with the Sun and threaten the Earth."
VIDEO: Sunspots in the fall of 2003 kicked up massive flares. This newly provided view shows the spots on the far side, too. Credit NASA, Tom Bridgeman
DVD: Danger! Solar Storm
A Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI) aboard SOHO creates the images of the Sun's interior by measuring the speed of sound waves formed by blistering gases that well up to the surface.
"This technique works on the same principle as a medical ultrasound, which can create an image of a fetus inside a pregnant woman," Scherrer explained. "In this case, we're looking through a star with sound waves."
Although two similar techniques have been around for a few years now, their limitations did not allow the entire hidden side of the Sun to be observable. The images from one offered a view of the center of the Sun's far side, while the other showed the edges.
A new computer algorithm finally allows the entire back face to be viewed.
"This new method is a vast improvement," Scherrer said. "It should be especially important during the next solar maximum, which should begin in 2011, when solar activity will be at its peak."
During the last solar max, the peak of sun's activity in a roughly 11-year cycle, solar storms caused power outages in parts of Sweden and Canada and destroyed a satellite used to verify a number of credit card payments in the United States.
Air transportation can also be affected because solar storms interfere with the Global Positioning System satellites, Scherrer explained. "Our goal is to give pilots and air traffic controllers a day or two notice of a possible solar event."
SOHO Image Gallery
Natural Space Mirrors Reflect Sun's Hidden Outbursts
New Model Predicts More Intense Solar Storms Ahead
What is a Solar Maximum and What Happens?
Sun Cam: Live Views
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0603...un_farside.html
=============================
These images display the seismic signature of magnetic activity on the far side of the Sun that we cannot directly see from Earth.
The images show sound wave travel time variations, with locations of shorter travel times appearing darker. These darker regions indicate locations where there is an accumulation of magnetic field on the far surface. Both a Line of Sight projection (left) and a Longitude ― Sine of Latitude projection (right) of the farside images are shown. The Line of Sight projection is from the perspective of an observer looking at the Sun from the other side. As the Sun rotates with a period of appproximately 27 days, the farside of the Sun moves across the longitude ― sine of latitude projection of the entire Sun - 360 of longitude and 180 of latitude - which uses what is known as the Carrington coordinate system. The areas of concentrated magnetic field tend to remain in the same position on the Sun.
Each image is made from 24 hours of GONG surface velocity data, and a new image is computed every 12 hours. We also superimpose the magnetic field that is directly observed on the frontside of the Sun. As it takes a while to get all of the data from the six sites around the world and to merge them together, if significant additional data for an image arrives within 48 hours, the farside map for the 24 hour period is regenerated.
Additionally, each farside map is marked with a Quality value, a number from 0 to 1 which represents the fraction of the 1440 minutes used by each map for which we have good data. Using this value as our guide, we toss out farside maps that do not meet our self-imposed goal of at least 65% network duty cycle.
The method for estimating far-side magnetic activity was developed by Charles Lindsey and Doug Braun of Colorado Research Associates, a division of Northwest Research Associates, Boulder, Colorado.
http://gong.nso.edu/data/farside/
=====================
N.B.
Please noitce that the intended images in the above referred-to articles are taken by special techniques:
"A Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI) aboard SOHO creates the images of the Sun's interior by measuring the speed of sound waves formed by blistering gases that well up to the surface.
"This technique works on the same principle as a medical ultrasound, which can create an image of a fetus inside a pregnant woman," Scherrer explained. "In this case, we're looking through a star with sound waves."
Ok, you've answered your own question, at least partially. Details of the side of the Sun not facing the Earth during the Sun's rotational period can be obtained through this method, however, that does not contradict the fact that SOHO is in orbit around the sun and is always facing the Sun from the same perspective that Earth faces the Sun.
Did you notice where the the first article said "the rotating star"...? So for you to say that all of SOHO's pictures show the "same side" is incorrect. All of SOHO's pictures show the Sun from the same perspective, but the since the Sun is itself rotating, there is not one side of the Sun that permanently fixed facing away from the Earth.
Now, the questions to you are:
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
Cz
Did you notice where the the first article said "the rotating star"...? So for you to say that all of SOHO's pictures show the "same side" is incorrect. All of SOHO's pictures show the Sun from the same perspective, but the since the Sun is itself rotating, there is not one side of the Sun that permanently fixed facing away from the Earth.
Now, the questions to you are:
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
Cz
An article about a technique used to observe whichever side of the Sun is facing away from us at any given time makes no implication that the side in question does so on a permanant basis.
I echo what Czero has said and would also be interested in hearing a direct response to the three questions he has posed, the articles you have posted do not address these points.
I echo what Czero has said and would also be interested in hearing a direct response to the three questions he has posed, the articles you have posted do not address these points.
QUOTE (SaRuMaN @ Apr 5 2008, 09:38 PM)
An article about a technique used to observe whichever side of the Sun is facing away from us at any given time makes no implication that the side in question does so on a permanant basis.
I echo what Czero has said and would also be interested in hearing a direct response to the three questions he has posed, the articles you have posted do not address these points.
I echo what Czero has said and would also be interested in hearing a direct response to the three questions he has posed, the articles you have posted do not address these points.
Please bear me to write the coming iterating explanation to show that the far side implies its meaning on a permanent basis.
The far side of the Sun is so called or described because it is always the far side, because it does not at all become the near side i.e. it never faces the Earth. It does not happen that it becomes facing the Earth-stationed observers. It never becomes the Earthward solar hemisphere. Please remember what does the far side of the Moon mean and how astronomers interpret it.The other side that is the far side is always hidden. The far side of the Sun is the "back" of the Sun. We do not see the back of the Sun at all. The back of the Sun is perpetually prevented from rising on the Earth. We are permanently deprived of seeing this far side. Nor now neither then can we see the far side. Always only the same face of the Sun rises on the Earth. This is the near side. It is not at all the "far" side. The other far side does not rise on the Earth at all. All the time the far side does not face the Sun. It looks like as if the Sun is only a semisphere and that always we see only this very semisphere. In the perspective of the Earth, the far side, the anti-Earth side, is all the time the same side, and of course, the near side that is the Earth-facing solar hemisphere remains always the same side.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 5 2008, 02:31 PM)
Please bear me to write the coming iterating explanation to show that the far side implies its meaning on a permanent basis.
The far side of the Sun is so called or described because it is always the far side, because it does not at all become the near side i.e. it never faces the Earth. It does not happen that it becomes facing the Earth-stationed observers. It never becomes the Earthward solar hemisphere. Please remember what does the far side of the Moon mean and how astronomers interpret it.The other side that is the far side is always hidden. The far side of the Sun is the "back" of the Sun. We do not see the back of the Sun at all. The back of the Sun is perpetually prevented from rising on the Earth. We are permanently deprived of seeing this far side. Nor now neither then can we see the far side. Always only the same face of the Sun rises on the Earth. This is the near side. It is not at all the "far" side. The other far side does not rise on the Earth at all. All the time the far side does not face the Sun. It looks like as if the Sun is only a semisphere and that always we see only this very semisphere. In the perspective of the Earth, the far side, the anti-Earth side, is all the time the same side, and of course, the near side that is the Earth-facing solar hemisphere remains always the same side.
The far side of the Sun is so called or described because it is always the far side, because it does not at all become the near side i.e. it never faces the Earth. It does not happen that it becomes facing the Earth-stationed observers. It never becomes the Earthward solar hemisphere. Please remember what does the far side of the Moon mean and how astronomers interpret it.The other side that is the far side is always hidden. The far side of the Sun is the "back" of the Sun. We do not see the back of the Sun at all. The back of the Sun is perpetually prevented from rising on the Earth. We are permanently deprived of seeing this far side. Nor now neither then can we see the far side. Always only the same face of the Sun rises on the Earth. This is the near side. It is not at all the "far" side. The other far side does not rise on the Earth at all. All the time the far side does not face the Sun. It looks like as if the Sun is only a semisphere and that always we see only this very semisphere. In the perspective of the Earth, the far side, the anti-Earth side, is all the time the same side, and of course, the near side that is the Earth-facing solar hemisphere remains always the same side.
Your interpretation of the nature of the rotational aspects of the Sun, the Earth's orbit around the Sun, and even your interpretation of how one views a sphere that itself is rotating is wrong.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun the continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 01:21 PM)
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
Cz
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 09:51 PM)
Your interpretation of the nature of the rotational aspects of the Sun, the Earth's orbit around the Sun, and even your interpretation of how one views a sphere that itself is rotating is wrong.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun the continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
Cz
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun the continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
Cz
Before answering your questions I want you to specify your understanding of the meaning of " the far side of the Sun". Do you agree that the far side of the Sun never faces the Earth?
QUOTE
Before answering your questions I want you to specify your understanding of the meaning of " the far side of the Sun". Do you agree that the far side of the Sun never faces the Earth?
Why is it necessary for us to agree to a false assumption before you will respond to the points raised ?
Nobody is going to agree with this statement as it is fundamentally incorrect, a very concise explanation of why this is the case was provided to you but you seem to have completely disregarded it without comment or rebutal.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 5 2008, 03:07 PM)
Before answering your questions I want you to specify your understanding of the meaning of " the far side of the Sun". Do you agree that the far side of the Sun never faces the Earth?
I have answered your question. In fact, I answered it before you even asked it. Maybe if I use a large font like you seem to enjoy doing, you'll actually READ my response, see that the answer to the question you asked is ALREADY THERE and then after that, perhaps you'll answer the questions posed to you.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 01:21 PM)
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
Can we now get some actual answers from you, please?
Cz
EDITED for typos...
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 11:43 PM)
Hello Czero 101,
You say: "I have answered your question. In fact, I answered it before you even asked it. Maybe if I use a large font like you seem to enjoy doing, you'll actually READ my response, see that the answer to the question you asked is ALREADY THERE and then after that, perhaps you'll answer the questions posed to you.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact".
Every one who is aware of that there is a hidden side of the Sun on a permanent basis can immediately judge that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates". This is a description of the case. It is not an iterpretation. Why does this happen? How do you account for it? Why does the same thing also happen in the case of SOHO?
Any way, in the case you can account for this and prove your interpretation, automatically, there will be no need to see my answers to your questions.
Where do you find that I don't consider that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates"?
Cz
EDITED for typos...
You say: "I have answered your question. In fact, I answered it before you even asked it. Maybe if I use a large font like you seem to enjoy doing, you'll actually READ my response, see that the answer to the question you asked is ALREADY THERE and then after that, perhaps you'll answer the questions posed to you.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact".
Every one who is aware of that there is a hidden side of the Sun on a permanent basis can immediately judge that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates". This is a description of the case. It is not an iterpretation. Why does this happen? How do you account for it? Why does the same thing also happen in the case of SOHO?
Any way, in the case you can account for this and prove your interpretation, automatically, there will be no need to see my answers to your questions.
Where do you find that I don't consider that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates"?
Cz
EDITED for typos...
QUOTE
Every one who is aware of that there is a hidden side of the Sun on a permanent basis can immediately judge that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates". This is a description of the case. It is not an iterpretation. Why does this happen? How do you account for it? Why does the same thing also happen in the case of SOHO?
Any way, in the case you can account for this and prove your interpretation, automatically, there will be no need to see my answers to your questions.
Where do you find that I don't consider that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates"?
Any way, in the case you can account for this and prove your interpretation, automatically, there will be no need to see my answers to your questions.
Where do you find that I don't consider that "the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates"?
So in essence, you are saying that you are right, the rest of the scientific world is wrong and therefore you don't need to answer my - or anyone else's - questions...?
You have NO CONCEPT of BURDEN OF PROOF.
YOU are disputing accepted scientific fact, therefore YOU NEED TO PROVIDE PROOF TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.
End of story.
I am done trying to be reasonable with you.
I am done trying to explain ANYTHING to you since it seems you are patently unable to understand even the most basic of scientific facts, preferring rather to dream up your elaborate and ridiculous "Attiya Theories" that make no sense to anyone who has any knowledge of the things you are trying to explain to yourself with these theories. Maybe you can come up with a theory to explain why you chose not to do any real studying and learn why things work the way they do, rather then inventing your ludicrous theories.
Enjoy living in your ignorance...
Cz
Ten days in May, 2002. UV 1950 Ang. I mean, the Sun takes just a month to rotate. If this isn't plain, then I'll post some of longer time period.
This is UV 3040 Ang. The utility is that it shows sunspot groups 10987, 10988 and 10989 as the sun revolves. The link may eventually update the GIF, but I hope not.
I think this is the same 70 days, but in UV 1710 Ang. The loops are nice visuals.
The attached image is, I think, ionized Ca. It shows the recent sunspot arrangement.
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 10:43 PM)
I have answered your question. In fact, I answered it before you even asked it. Maybe if I use a large font like you seem to enjoy doing, you'll actually READ my response, see that the answer to the question you asked is ALREADY THERE and then after that, perhaps you'll answer the questions posed to you.
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
Can we now get some actual answers from you, please?
Cz
EDITED for typos...
Yes, the Sun has a "near" side and a "far" side. But what you are failing to understand is that, since the Sun itself rotates around its axis while the Earth orbits the Sun, the surface of the Sun that continually faces the Earth continually changes as the Sun rotates.
This has been proven to be a scientific fact. If you intend to dispute it, you need to have factual and verifiable evidence to the contrary. Do you have such evidence that is not a link to a picture, not a link to another article, not another grandiose and thoroughly incorrect "Attiya Theory"...?
If you stick a imaginary flagpole on the spot of the Sun's surface at its equator that is nearest the Earth right now, in about 12.5 to 13.5 days that flagpole will be on the other side of the surface of the Sun, facing completely away from the Earth, essentially that part of the surface of the Sun has become the "far side" and the part the was the "far side" when we planted the flagpole has now become the "near side". In another 12.5 to 13.5 days, that flagpole would once again be directly facing the Earth, once again, it would be on the "near side".
Regarding your assertions about the Moon, it has no bearing whatsoever on the Sun's rotational period or the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Moon is tidally locked in orbit with the Earth. The Moon's rotational period almost exactly matches its orbital period around the Earth. That is why we always see the same side of the Moon facing us. This is not the case with the Sun. The Sun's rotational period is approximately 25 to 27 days. That means that every 24 hours, the Sun's surface has rotated approximately 13.333 to 14.4 degrees away from where it was 24 hours previously.
Now please, answer these specific questions:
Can we now get some actual answers from you, please?
Cz
EDITED for typos...
QUOTE (Czero 101 @ Apr 5 2008, 01:21 PM)
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
==========================
Your questions and my answers:
1. Do you have any factual proof that contradicts the established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun?
Where do you find in this thread itself that I contradict what you describe as an "established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun"?
My thread's title is "A Question to SOHO's Team".
However, you can ask SOHO's team the same question independently. In case you get an answer, please post it here.
2. Do you have any factual proof that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth?
You yourself say that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth. You yourself say that this is a scientific fact. Why do you yourself say that it is a scientific fact and at the same time are asking me to prove it?
3. Do you accept the established fact that the Sun itself rotates about its axis? If not, do you have any factual proof that contradicts this fact?
Where do you find that I deny the rotation of the Sun on its axis?
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 6 2008, 01:14 AM)
Where do you find in this thread itself that I contradict what you describe as an "established fact that the Earth orbits the Sun"?
Right here.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 10:00 PM)
Really, the Sun rotates. But scientists must prove two things:
1--That the Sun revolves around the Earth.
2-That the Sun revolves around the Earth such that the time of this revolution is the same it needs to complete one rotation on its axis.
1--That the Sun revolves around the Earth.
2-That the Sun revolves around the Earth such that the time of this revolution is the same it needs to complete one rotation on its axis.
Is this not a claim by you that the Sun orbits the Earth and that you are saying that scientists should prove that for you?
QUOTE
My thread's title is "A Question to SOHO's Team".
However, you can ask SOHO's team the same question independently. In case you get an answer, please post it here.
However, you can ask SOHO's team the same question independently. In case you get an answer, please post it here.
So you addressed your question to the scientists working on SOHO, posted it HERE and actually expected a SOHO team member to A: know about this place and B: actually answer you...?
QUOTE
You yourself say that one side of the Sun permanently faces away from the Earth. You yourself say that this is a scientific fact. Why do you yourself say that it is a scientific fact and at the same time are asking me to prove it?
Yes, one side of the Sun faces away from the Earth, but the SURFACE of the Sun is in motion as the Sun rotates about its axis. What you seem to be suggesting is that the surface of the Sun is permanently fixed in that position i.e. that it does not rotate about its axis, or that its rotational period matches that of Earth orbital period around the Sun.
QUOTE
Where do you find that I deny the rotation of the Sun on its axis?
Here:
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 01:05 PM)
No doubt, orbiting the Sun means that SOHO sees the two faces of the Sun.
Although this rotation necessarily means that SOHO must face the far side of the sun in every revolution, there is no photo of the far side of the Sun released by SOHO as yet.
Although this rotation necessarily means that SOHO must face the far side of the sun in every revolution, there is no photo of the far side of the Sun released by SOHO as yet.
and here:
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 4 2008, 08:31 PM)
All the time SOHO photographs the same side. Hence, the question is this: why is SOHO always unable to photograph the far side of the Sun if it really rotates around the SUN and comes facing this side? Doesn't the rotation of SOHO around the SUN mean that it faces the far side also?
While you have not explicitly said that the Sun does not rotate, you seem fixed on the idea that it rotates in a manner similar to that of the Moon's rotation - that the Sun rotates about its axis with the same period as the Earth's orbit around the Sun and that there is one side permanently facing away from the Earth. By suggesting these ideas, you are challenging the mountains of globally accepted data and observations that prove you wrong. Therefore, the burden of proof lies with you to prove your "theory" to be correct.
So show us your proof or retract your claims.
Cz
This is the issue:
Why do the Earth-stationed observers see only the same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
As well as, why does SOHO see only this same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
http://physics.mercer.edu/petepag/scp.gif
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMF78XLDMD_index_0.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0603...un_farside.html
Select Tags... SaveCancel
[Edit Tags]
No, the issue here is why you seem to be deliberately ignoring anything anyone else says, repeating the same incorrect statements over and over, posting the same irrelevant articles over and over and being intentionally awkward and unco-operative.
Unless you're going to debate the topic in a logical manner then there's little point keeping this thread open.
Unless you're going to debate the topic in a logical manner then there's little point keeping this thread open.
I think we should all calm down... I think what he's ACTUALLY asking is why we haven't seen any reonstructed images of the side currently facing away from us from the solar seismic data.
QUOTE (attiyah zahdeh @ Apr 6 2008, 10:18 AM)
[size=3]This is the issue:
Why do the Earth-stationed observers see only the same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
Why do the Earth-stationed observers see only the same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
This has been entertaining.
And it all comes down to this? This is the issue?
Earth stationed observers see a rotating ball of gas. Thus they see all of it, and always have, at one time or another.
QUOTE
As well as, why does SOHO see only this same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
It doesn't. It too sees the rotating Sun.
These facts have long been established, and of course shown to be the case in this thread.
I wonder if you are just here to see your words on the screen...?
QUOTE
Why do the Earth-stationed observers see only the same side of the Sun on a permanent basis?
Dear attiyah, what in the world are you talking about?
Like all planets in our solar system, the Earth is in an elliptical orbit around our Sun. In Earth's case, its orbit is nearly circular, so that the difference between Earth's farthest point from the Sun and its closest point is very small. Earth's orbit defines a two-dimensional plane which we call the ecliptic.
We are NOT always facing the same side of the sun because we are in an orbit around it, plus the sun itself rotates on it's own axis:
And to end this, pictures of the far side of the sun HAVE BEEN TAKEN, so I please ask to to INFORM YOURSELF on this subject before making theories which make no sense whatsoever and totally IGNORE the laws of physics. Images of the far and near side of the sun have been taken by the same SOHO spacecraft we are talking about here.
QUOTE
June 23, 1999: Scientists have found that they can peek around the Sun and predict whether solar storms on its far side will shortly appear on the side facing the Earth. This surprising discovery by SOHO's SWAN instrument could help to predict the solar storms that sometimes threaten the Earth.
SWAN, short for Solar Wind Anisotropies, is a telescope on board SOHO that can map the whole sky in ultraviolet light. This kind of observation is impossible from Earth because the atmosphere completely filters short-wavelength UV rays. A European team of scientists headed by Jean Loup Bertaux, of the CNRS Service d'Aronomie in France, have discovered an ingenious way to use SWAN's UV mapping capabilities to infer what's on the far side of the Sun.
SWAN, short for Solar Wind Anisotropies, is a telescope on board SOHO that can map the whole sky in ultraviolet light. This kind of observation is impossible from Earth because the atmosphere completely filters short-wavelength UV rays. A European team of scientists headed by Jean Loup Bertaux, of the CNRS Service d'Aronomie in France, have discovered an ingenious way to use SWAN's UV mapping capabilities to infer what's on the far side of the Sun.
Source article, more info, nasa.gov
QUOTE (Alex01 @ Apr 6 2008, 05:00 PM)
Dear attiyah, what in the world are you talking about?
Like all planets in our solar system, the Earth is in an elliptical orbit around our Sun. In Earth's case, its orbit is nearly circular, so that the difference between Earth's farthest point from the Sun and its closest point is very small. Earth's orbit defines a two-dimensional plane which we call the ecliptic.
We are NOT always facing the same side of the sun because we are in an orbit around it, plus the sun itself rotates on it's own axis:
And to end this, pictures of the far side of the sun HAVE BEEN TAKEN, so I please ask to to INFORM YOURSELF on this subject before making theories which make no sense whatsoever and totally IGNORE the laws of physics. Images of the far and near side of the sun have been taken by the same SOHO spacecraft we are talking about here.
Source article, more info, nasa.gov
Like all planets in our solar system, the Earth is in an elliptical orbit around our Sun. In Earth's case, its orbit is nearly circular, so that the difference between Earth's farthest point from the Sun and its closest point is very small. Earth's orbit defines a two-dimensional plane which we call the ecliptic.
We are NOT always facing the same side of the sun because we are in an orbit around it, plus the sun itself rotates on it's own axis:
And to end this, pictures of the far side of the sun HAVE BEEN TAKEN, so I please ask to to INFORM YOURSELF on this subject before making theories which make no sense whatsoever and totally IGNORE the laws of physics. Images of the far and near side of the sun have been taken by the same SOHO spacecraft we are talking about here.
Source article, more info, nasa.gov
Please see the red colored words.
What do such words imply?
All imply that SOHO does not face the far side at all.
"June 23, 1999: Scientists have found that they can peek around the Sun and predict whether solar storms on its far side will shortly appear on the side facing the Earth. This surprising discovery by SOHO's SWAN instrument could help to predict the solar storms that sometimes threaten the Earth.
SWAN, short for Solar Wind Anisotropies, is a telescope on board SOHO that can map the whole sky in ultraviolet light. This kind of observation is impossible from Earth because the atmosphere completely filters short-wavelength UV rays. A European team of scientists headed by Jean Loup Bertaux, of the CNRS Service d'Aronomie in France, have discovered an ingenious way to use SWAN's UV mapping capabilities to infer what's on the far side of the Sun".
Please read this in order to be sure that SOHO does not face the other side at all.
"A Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI) aboard SOHO creates the images of the Sun's interior by measuring the speed of sound waves formed by blistering gases that well up to the surface.
"This technique works on the same principle as a medical ultrasound, which can create an image of a fetus inside a pregnant woman," Scherrer explained. "In this case, we're looking through a star with sound waves."
Although two similar techniques have been around for a few years now, their limitations did not allow the entire hidden side of the Sun to be observable. The images from one offered a view of the center of the Sun's far side, while the other showed the edges".
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0603...un_farside.html
Scientists use such techniques as a trick to compensate for the inability of SOHO to photograph the far side because it does not face it at all.
That's the third time you've posted that same article in this thread as your response and once again you have completely ignored everything that the other posters have taken the time to contribute.
I'm not going to let anyone else waste their time trying to respond to you, my thanks and apologies to those members who have been participating in this discussion.
Thread closed.
I'm not going to let anyone else waste their time trying to respond to you, my thanks and apologies to those members who have been participating in this discussion.
Thread closed.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.