[time-nuts] The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements

[Graham / KE9H]

On 8/3/2011 11:15 AM, J. Forster wrote:
> <http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html>
>
> Suppose time has variations, instead of the decay rate??
>
> :))
>
> -John
>
> ====================
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>

Suppose that light just looses energy as a function of distance,
and that the Red Shift is not due to Doppler, but just distance.
(or exposure to Sturrock's time bending neutrinos.)

Then the universe is more static in size, and it is not expanding
at an accelerating exponential rate for reasons we don't understand,
and then it did not have to start with a big bang, then we don't need
a big-bang oscillator, etc.

As with the shift from earth-centric to helio-centric thinking, the math
would sure get simpler. (Which is always a tempting indicator !)

At least this article suggests that we are not done learning, yet.

They are still looking for the coupling mechanism between the
sunspots and the temperature on Earth.  It does not appear that the
energy output of the sun in the visible and nearby bands that we
measure actually changes enough to explain the temperature
differences observed in the Maunder minimum, the earlier
heat wave, etc.  Yet, we have empirical evidence that periods
of a "Quiet Sun" does result in lower temperatures on Earth.

So, the battle of the "Quiet Sun" versus the "Greenhouse Gas"
begins.  Shame, I won't live long enough to see the definitive
conclusion.

--- Graham

==