Starship Asterisk*

Physicist and historian Spencer R. Weart in The Discovery of Global Warming (2003) wrote:
<<The study of [sun spot] cycles was generally popular through the first half of the century. Governments had collected a lot of weather data to play with and inevitably people found correlations between sun spot cycles and select weather patterns. If rainfall in England didn't fit the cycle, maybe storminess in New England would. Respected scientists and enthusiastic amateurs insisted they had found patterns reliable enough to make predictions. Sooner or later though every prediction failed. An example was a highly credible forecast of a dry spell in Africa during the sunspot minimum of the early 1930s. When the period turned out to be wet, a meteorologist later recalled "the subject of sunspots and weather relationships fell into dispute, especially among British meteorologists who witnessed the discomfiture of some of their most respected superiors." Even in the 1960s he said, "For a young [climate] researcher to entertain any statement of sun-weather relationships was to brand oneself a crank." >>

zloq wrote:
I think this is a nice looking rendering and I have seen others by him like it, but it wasn't until I read the caption that I realized something was amiss. Normally the limb is darkened, as alluded to in the caption, but the caption explains its brightening as the result of inverting and false coloring the original image.

But it doesn't "look" like an inverted image - in fact, the sunspots are still dark, while the limb is indeed brighter instead of darker. I think the effect is achieved by a nonlinear - and non-monotonic - intensity mapping, which makes the appearance very non-physical - even though it is pleasing. Dark things are dark; bright things are dark; and the mid-range is brightest. At least I think that is what's going on.

zloq wrote:I think this is a nice looking rendering and I have seen others by him like it, but it wasn't until I read the caption that I realized something was amiss. Normally the limb is darkened, as alluded to in the caption, but the caption explains its brightening as the result of inverting and false coloring the original image. But it doesn't "look" like an inverted image - in fact, the sunspots are still dark, while the limb is indeed brighter instead of darker. I think the effect is achieved by a nonlinear - and non-monotonic - intensity mapping, which makes the appearance very non-physical - even though it is pleasing. Dark things are dark; bright things are dark; and the mid-range is brightest. At least I think that is what's going on.

As for scintillation - I wouldn't describe the sun or the prominences in that image as 'scintillating.' I guess they are saying it is bright and shows dynamic stuff sticking out - but I wouldn't call it scintillation.

Charles Mercer wrote:Well let me say as a novice, I couldn't help notice what appears to be a "hole" near the left side of the sunspots. Now I'm wondering could these be evidence of impacts.??? :? Also wonder why they are all on the left.?

artk13 wrote:
Anyone else notice the two spots that resemble the mandelbrot set?

Not A Crank wrote:I find this whole discussion scintillating, and not just because it's a really cool snapshot. Similes, anyone?

neptunium wrote:

Not A Crank wrote:I find this whole discussion scintillating, and not just because it's a really cool snapshot. Similes, anyone?

That's not a simile. Similes are phrases that compare two objects using like, as, or other similar words. They are like phrases that make you simile , but are not as funny as jokes. If you are talking about smilies, though, then this example is as pointless as a mission to Mars without taking pictures or collecting samples.

Beyond wrote:

neptunium wrote:

Not A Crank wrote:I find this whole discussion scintillating, and not just because it's a really cool snapshot. Similes, anyone?

That's not a simile. Similes are phrases that compare two objects using like, as, or other similar words. They are like phrases that make you simile , but are not as funny as jokes. If you are talking about smilies, though, then this example is as pointless as a mission to Mars without taking pictures or collecting samples.

So... A scintillating similie of a smilie, would be a frown

Still Not a Crank wrote:Neptunium is absolutely right, though. I really I meant to say 'synonyms anyone?' but guests can't edit or use proper (english) language. But what's the dif? You got it anyway.

geckzilla wrote:I suppose the background was masked and excluded from the inversion technique. I wouldn't have suspected that it had been done.

DavidLeodis wrote:I appreciate that the image is an inverted H-alpha image but nevertheless, to me, "The gradual brightening towards the Sun's edges is caused by increased absorption of relatively cool solar gas and called limb darkening" sentence is still very confusing. The information brought up through the "limb darkening" link is helpful though the illustration there does shows limb darkening unlike the APOD which is brightening to the edge! :?