All ideas are worth the thought, MM. But I rely of a multiple of factors
when deriving my understandings of the inner sun. There is some evidence,
however derived, that the central sun is of a solid nature. Solid like our
sun of the exterior. Seismographic readings indicate a central core, even
though these readings are generally misinterpreted by the seismologists.
Still, it is there, and it shows up as having some sort of solid mass.
Cater's theories are fascinating, and they give great insight into the
possibilities of understanding the mysteries of the earth's cosmogony, but
let's not abandon all other facts and knowledge to promote one appoach or one
piece of the puzzle, regardless of how large that piece might be.
But what you're saying is that the inner sun in more like a moon that isn't
the source but only a reflector of the light source? Interesting. But . . .
all things considered . . .Hmmmm . . . thanks for the thought, interesting
idea.
Norlan
All ideas are worth the thought, MM. But I rely of a multiple of factors
when deriving my understandings of the inner sun. There is some evidence,
however derived, that the central sun is of a solid nature. Solid like
our
sun of the exterior. Seismographic readings indicate a central core, even
though these readings are generally misinterpreted by the seismologists.
Still, it is there, and it shows up as having some sort of solid mass.
Cater's theories are fascinating, and they give great insight into the
possibilities of understanding the mysteries of the earth's cosmogony, but
let's not abandon all other facts and knowledge to promote one appoach or
one
piece of the puzzle, regardless of how large that piece might be
Norlan,
Cater's central sun would consist of an electrostatic charge, which should
extend around it. Could such seismographic readings be due to this
phenomenon. The problem is always in interpretation.
Dean