Spectacular 12 Month Composite Image of Our Sun over the Last Year ! Notice Anything Odd?

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


v.nice picture

devils advocate time.....

is it possible that our imaging equipment has improved over the past 5 years ?

Primarily... how can you claim that this is not 'Normal' behavior for our sun? you are basing your assumptions on 5 years worth of data? Our sun is 4.6 billion years old and you are ascribing behavioral patterns within a 5 year cycle of data?..



Playing devils advocate with this one is more simple than that...

If the OP is going to show us a composite image of 12 months worth of sun images in the OP, then he should show us a 12-month-composite image of the sun from 5 years ago to compare (which he did not).

Plus, there's the whole 11-year solar cycle thing, as other have mentioned, which would mean that the Sun's activity will almost ALWAYS look different when viewed in 5-year intervals, just because 5 (or 6) years is the middle of those 11-year cycles.

edit on 4/29/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


v.nice picture

devils advocate time.....

is it possible that our imaging equipment has improved over the past 5 years ?

Primarily... how can you claim that this is not 'Normal' behavior for our sun? you are basing your assumptions on 5 years worth of data? Our sun is 4.6 billion years old and you are ascribing behavioral patterns within a 5 year cycle of data?..



Playing devils advocate with this one is more simple than that...

If the OP is going to show us a composite image of 12 months worth of sun images in the OP, then he should show us a 12-month-composite image of the sun from 5 years ago to compare (which he did not).

Plus, there's the whole 11-year solar cycle thing, as other have mentioned, which would mean that the Sun's activity will almost ALWAYS look different when viewed in 5-year intervals, just because 5 (or 6) years is the middle of those 11-year cycles.

edit on 4/29/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


you are 100% correct of course (yes i did read the replies)

i quote myself




Primarily... how can you claim that this is not 'Normal' behavior for our sun? you are basing your assumptions on 5 years worth of data? Our sun is 4.6 billion years old and you are ascribing behavioral patterns within a 5 year cycle of data?


This is the point i was trying to make as i don't have faith in the 11 year cycles either, as the sun is 4.6billion years old for us to ascribe patterns that we would consider 'normal' over 5 years , 10 years 100 years or 1000 years is just pure madness imho



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


I had to go searching over at SOHO.

This was our sun in May 1996.



Here is the 12 month composite again.




posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


what is your point?

One is a single picture, the other is a lot of pictures stacked on top of one another.

The other was taken during solar minimum, the more recent pictures at solar maximum.

Again, other than just showing the difference in activity (which is normal) what is your point?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel
 


Pure madness??? No.


The technology exists to alter our sun.

BTW, have you noticed the large coronal holes recently?

According to Space Weather.com it takes about 3 days for the coronal hole solar wind

to hit the Earth. I guess this picture could be another good Wallpaper image.

April 21, 2013 Our Sun

Right Click & Save.


edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)
edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Agreed I am not sure of the point the OP is making or just trying to confuse people to think that is what our sun looks like on a regular basis cause I watch the SDO often and rest assured there are not that many active regions at one time. The may 16th photo shows what a normal day on the disc looks like and has for many days past this year due to a dud of a solar maximum so far, a dud enough to have some calling for a second Maunder minimum.

So yeah a little confused bye what the OP is trying to convey??? And if it was misdirection of sort to try and use the two views for contrast of something you can not compare.

SaneThinking



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SaneThinking
 


Look on the bright side. Now you have some great eye candy for your Wallpaper files.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 





The technology exists to alter our sun.


Ahh i get it now , your thread seems to imply that the sun is dramatically changing its activities beyond the ../cough norm,


You are saying that it has altered because we are engaged in engineering the sun to save/help alter our planet/solar system

You are saying we have progressed covertly to a type II civilization? without going through the process of being a type I Civ first? able to extract energy from an entire planet?

links ? any threads i could read that back up this claim?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


What did you think was odd? And yes our sun did not look like this 5 years ago and actually has never looked like this all at once since it is a composite image of course. That and it is entering the peak of it's solar cycle.


I had to go searching over at SOHO.

This was our sun back in May 1996.



OK HANG ON! You took one image back in 1996 to compare to this one? The first image you posted is a COMPOSITE of A FULL YEAR! From April 2012 until April 2013

www.space.com...

Now if you made a composite of 1996 I am betting you would see a similar pattern...



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 


Do you notice anything odd about the before and after images?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
LOL at people not understanding the image in the OP is a composite generated over a years time (even after it was pointed out by multiple users).


Do they not teach reading comprehension in school anymore?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
If this thread was simply the OP posting a neat looking picture and sharing it, that would be one thing.

However, the OP uses the thread title and says that there is something odd.

Then turns around and REFUSES to say what is odd at all.

Are you or are you not going to get around to what the entire point of your thread is?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 





The technology exists to alter our sun.


Ahh i get it now , your thread seems to imply that the sun is dramatically changing its activities beyond the ../cough norm,


You are saying that it has altered because we are engaged in engineering the sun to save/help alter our planet/solar system

You are saying we have progressed covertly to a type II civilization? without going through the process of being a type I Civ first? able to extract energy from an entire planet?

links ? any threads i could read that back up this claim?


This appears to be a possible explanation.



BTW, it's not the USA doing the Type II Civilization thingy.


Our sun is being transformed into a blue white star.

Go outside and take a look. She is burning hot today.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
If this thread was simply the OP posting a neat looking picture and sharing it, that would be one thing.

However, the OP uses the thread title and says that there is something odd.

Then turns around and REFUSES to say what is odd at all.

Are you or are you not going to get around to what the entire point of your thread is?


There is a very good reason why we have had many, many, many.....peaceful Coronal Loops

on our sun over the last 12 months.


edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


Gorgeous!


Here are some images of the sun from 5 years ago. I don't know if the magnification is the same, so I don't know if there's any difference or not.

2008 Sun


Nice pics jiggerj! Thanks for posting the article!



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Originally posted by eriktheawful
If this thread was simply the OP posting a neat looking picture and sharing it, that would be one thing.

However, the OP uses the thread title and says that there is something odd.

Then turns around and REFUSES to say what is odd at all.

Are you or are you not going to get around to what the entire point of your thread is?


There is a very good reason why we have had many, many, many.....peaceful Coronal Loops

on our sun over the last 12 months.


edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)


Might I suggest that before you start another thread here on ATS about anything, that you give THIS a good read first:

Starting A New Thread?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by abeverage
 


Do you notice anything odd about the before and after images?



Ok this is silly...the 1996 image is not a before of the original image! That is impossible because that image is made up of 365 images stacked on top...
This is ONE YEAR OF IMAGES or 365 images stacked together


Here is the sun ONE IMAGE in 1996 as you posted...



Here is SUN TODAY! One image not 365...and yes it is very active compared to the 1996 image!


If you continue to insist that is a strange image and not understand what a composite image is so be it. But all you are doing is spreading mus-information!



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 


I guess we can agree to disagree. I see a clear difference.

On the plus side, i have given you 2 great Wallpaper pictures for your computer.


Maybe everything is completely normal with our sun.

BTW, did you hear over the weekend that scientists have discovered that the center

of the Earth is heating up?

I wonder why? Maybe it has something to do with our sun?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Originally posted by eriktheawful
If this thread was simply the OP posting a neat looking picture and sharing it, that would be one thing.

However, the OP uses the thread title and says that there is something odd.

Then turns around and REFUSES to say what is odd at all.

Are you or are you not going to get around to what the entire point of your thread is?


There is a very good reason why we have had many, many, many.....peaceful Coronal Loops

on our sun over the last 12 months.


edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)


Might I suggest that before you start another thread here on ATS about anything, that you give THIS a good read first:

Starting A New Thread?


It's never a good idea to shoot the messenger.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
...This is the point i was trying to make as i don't have faith in the 11 year cycles either, as the sun is 4.6billion years old for us to ascribe patterns that we would consider 'normal' over 5 years , 10 years 100 years or 1000 years is just pure madness imho


True, we only have an infinitesimally small sample of data relative to the entire history of the Sun, but we do have sunspot observational data dating back 400 years.

Taking into account the 400 years of data, it seems that the Sun actually does have these 11-year cycles -- at least we know it has acted this way for 400 years.

Before that? who knows? The next 400 years? Who knows?
But it seems unlikely that the cycles started just at the exact same time we had the ability to track sunspots.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join