Like most people, I was taught that the sun is huge ball of gas (plasma), mostly hydrogen. This description of the sun dates back almost 400 years to Galileo Galilei.
However, there are dissenting voices. At least two of which claim that a significant percentage of the sun is composed of iron. The first is Michael Mozina and the second is Dr. Oliver K. Manuel of the University of Missouri at Rolla. Both of their work incorporates the newest data from solar space probes launched over the last ten years.
Mozina claims that the sun has a seismically unstable solid iron surface. He uses this hypothetical surface to explain the full range of solar phenomena. Dr. Manuel claims the sun is primarily iron with a supernova core at its center. Here's a SpaceDaily.com article which cleanly discusses Dr. Manuel's theory.
I'm too much of an amateur to decide if these gentlemen are correct, but their ideas are quite intriguing. Consider this quote from wikipedia: One of the first people in the Western world to offer a scientific explanation for the sun was the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras, who reasoned that it was a giant flaming ball of rock or metal, and not the chariot of Apollo.
How ironic would it be if this ancient philosopher was (in a simplistic way) correct?
"What is the Sun made of?"
1 Comment -
it's a fascinating theory. thanks for sharing.
3:30 PM