Supposedly, the sun did this somersault over a 7 hour period. I think the satellite did a flip.

I can't think of any physics that would support such a transition over such a short period. The momentums involved are just too outrageous. Someone explain it to me, please.

http://www.space.com/33462-sun-somersault-photos-nasa-sdo.html

 

If you notice, the sun "returns" back to its original position with no changes wrt surface features.

 

Sorry, I just noticed this sentence buried in the text:

SDO did a full somersault on July 6 over the course of about 7 hours...

Just sensationalism. My bad.

 

Well, joey, if you had read the article, the spacecraft that took the photos has to flip every so often to recalibrate its sensors. It was filming while it did the flip, so NASA decided to publish the nonscence.

184 miles SE of Tampa, Florida... That puts you in my area.

 

Well, joey, if you had read the article, the spacecraft that took the photos has to flip every so often to recalibrate its sensors. It was filming while it did the flip, so NASA decided to publish the nonscence.

I normally only have time to quickly scan news in the morning. I got caught up in the (sensational) headline. Like I said, my bad.

Edit: Initially, I thought the article was going to be about the magnetic field switching polarity, which does happen every so often. So, my mindset was that I was reading actual "news". This wasn't it.

 

Just remember that NASA is no longer interested in space exploration, since their primary mission is now muslim outreach.

 

Sorry, I just noticed this sentence buried in the text:

Just sensationalism. My bad.

Yea, that having to read whole sentences and even paragraphs to find out what the topic is really about a real pain huh?

 

Hi,

Another example of what i have seen over the past few years or more now. Bad journalism.
They are regularly constructing made up headings in order to get a reader to click on a link, period. They sometimes get paid for you just clicking on a link, and that is what started this i think.

For example, if you type, "Observing the Sun for seven hours", it doesnt sound as interesting, but if you type, "Sun flips over for the first time in history!!!", then you get people to click on your link and you might make money because of that. Of course the second line above is not true, but they can make up for that by later explaining that it's not really the Sun that flipped over it just appeared that way at first.

This kind of journalism isnt new at all. I dont know if anyone remembers but not that long ago there was a show on that talked about an extinct shark that was huge in prehistoric times. They title was something like, "Extinct Shark Comes Back To Life", or some dumb misleading title like that. So people tuned in thinking that the shark was somehow discovered to be actually living somewhere in the oceans of the world, when really it was a made up title made up to somewhat match the main content of the show which was computer generated graphics that 'resurrected' the shark. It becomes obvious only after watching the show for some 30 minutes that there is no such shark, it's just a made up computer graphics simulation. The really sad part was the title was due mostly to the scientists involved, not the press. They called it by a misleading title and misled the public into watching a 'regular' computer generated graphics show that showed various things about how the shark USED TO live when it did actually live on the earth.

That might be an example of the evolving pseudo science where you can lie about what you are doing just to get people to pay attention to your work. That's just bad science.

This kind of thing makes us start to question everything reported by scientists these days. The end result can be nothing short of forcing the general public to loose faith in science, which in turn reduces financing to various projects that purportedly are good for humanity.

 

Hi,

Another example of what i have seen over the past few years or more now. Bad journalism.
They are regularly constructing made up headings in order to get a reader to click on a link, period. They sometimes get paid for you just clicking on a link, and that is what started this i think.

For example, if you type, "Observing the Sun for seven hours", it doesnt sound as interesting, but if you type, "Sun flips over for the first time in history!!!", then you get people to click on your link and you might make money because of that. Of course the second line above is not true, but they can make up for that by later explaining that it's not really the Sun that flipped over it just appeared that way at first.

This kind of journalism isnt new at all. I dont know if anyone remembers but not that long ago there was a show on that talked about an extinct shark that was huge in prehistoric times. They title was something like, "Extinct Shark Comes Back To Life", or some dumb misleading title like that. So people tuned in thinking that the shark was somehow discovered to be actually living somewhere in the oceans of the world, when really it was a made up title made up to somewhat match the main content of the show which was computer generated graphics that 'resurrected' the shark. It becomes obvious only after watching the show for some 30 minutes that there is no such shark, it's just a made up computer graphics simulation. The really sad part was the title was due mostly to the scientists involved, not the press. They called it by a misleading title and misled the public into watching a 'regular' computer generated graphics show that showed various things about how the shark USED TO live when it did actually live on the earth.

That might be an example of the evolving pseudo science where you can lie about what you are doing just to get people to pay attention to your work. That's just bad science.

This kind of thing makes us start to question everything reported by scientists these days. The end result can be nothing short of forcing the general public to loose faith in science, which in turn reduces financing to various projects that purportedly are good for humanity.

You might be taking yourself and your drivel way too seriously.

 

Sorry, I just noticed this sentence buried in the text:



Just sensationalism. My bad.

Now I'm disappointed! it would have been exciting to know reality had BUGS!

 

Sorry, I just noticed this sentence buried in the text:



Just sensationalism. My bad.

Ain't you bit too old to believe in witches and magic?

 

You might be taking yourself and your drivel way too seriously.

Hi,

You mean like you just did with your drivel ?

Is it fair to call what anyone else but you say drivel?
Are you the overseer of all drivel ?

 

...question everything reported by scientists....

I have been doing exactly that for 60 years.

 

"184 miles SE of Tampa, Florida... That puts you in my area."

From what I here, lake O, isn't smelling too good right now.

 

You know joey, I suspected the earth had flipped over a while back, but didn't want to raise alarm.

I think the whole solar system flipped, and the satellite caught it.

You can hide anything from the public when you change the reference.

DO DO do do DO DO do do.

 

From what I here, lake O, isn't smelling too good right now.

That's just propaganda. It's what we locals say when tourist season hits high-gear.

 

I live in Fl at different times, but never near resort areas. We loved the summers, cause all the snowbirds would leave, and you could actually get around and enjoy the state.

 

Now I'm disappointed! it would have been exciting to know reality had BUGS!

Well then -- perhaps the (very near) coincidence of the Sun/Moon radius ratio vs the Sun/Moon (Earth) distance ratio (to wit: ≈ 400 in each case [hence said bodies' ~equal angular diameter of ≈ 0.5° as viewed from Earth]) supports your (tacit) assertion that 'reality' is but a construct? -- I expect the qualifier 'near' is a spoiler --- Still, one needs only view a total eclipse to intuitively grasp just how near near is in this case!

Best regards
HP

 

We loved the summers, cause all the snowbirds would leave, and you could actually get around and enjoy the state.

So... Fla suffers junco 'plagues'?! We (i.e. MN, WI, 'Crown Land' ONT) have certain wetland areas annually overrun by migrating waterfowl, but... --- That said, I recognize the fact that avian 'mobbing' behavior is a very real phenomenon across most species - still, a mob of such small birds must be as a 'lake fly' infestation on steroids!

Best regards
HP

 

@BR-549
Here's a little ditty to bolster your morale next time the hordes descend

Best regards
HP