Starship Asterisk*

Fibrils Flower on the Sun

Explanation: When does the Sun look like a flower? In a specific color of red light emitted by hydrogen, as featured here, some regions of the solar chromosphere may resemble a rose. The color-inverted image was taken in 2014 October and shows active solar region 2177. The petals dominating the frame are actually magnetically confined tubes of hot plasma called fibrils, some of which extend longer the diameter of the Earth. In the central region many of these fibrils are seen end-on, while the surrounding regions are typically populated with curved fibrils. When seen over the Sun's edge, these huge plasma tubes are called spicules, and when they occur in passive regions they are termed mottles. Sunspot region 2177 survived for several more days before the complex and tumultuous magnetic field poking through the Sun's surface evolved yet again.

<< Previous APOD

This Day in APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

Oddly enough, these solar fibrils remind me of the little structures amid iron filings on a piece of paper when
held over a magnet. Are solar fibrils essentially like magnetized iron filings writ massively large and energized?

Well the color and density of blooms pretty well matches my Lucille Ball, petals though make this flower an aster.

Are there any signs of internal electric currents, similar to Telluric currents, that have been seen on the sun. Any chance that these fibrils are self contained 'metallic hydrogen' rope-like structures that constrain themselves as a result of their own localized magnetic fields that occur along their length as a result of internal 'electric flow, all directed and aligned by some underlying (and more powerful) magnetic sub-surface anomaly?

Amazing....

:---[===] *

Guest wrote:Oddly enough, these solar fibrils remind me of the little structures amid iron filings on a piece of paper when
held over a magnet. Are solar fibrils essentially like magnetized iron filings writ massively large and energized?

Similar in many respects. Both consist of physical material tracing out magnetic field lines. In the case of iron, we have a ferromagnetic material. What's going on in the fibrils is less well understood, but is related to the movement of charged particles in a magnetic field (and not a ferromagnetic effect).

Indeed, a rose is not a rose just because the APOD calls it one.

But the resemblance is there, especially of flowers whose heads are a mass of individual florets.
Those have been studied by mathematicians who have found the maths that govern their arrangement.
From dandelions (https://deepfriar.wordpress.com/2011/05 ... -on-weeds/) to Sunflowers (http://www.popmath.org.uk/rpamaths/rpam ... lower.html), Fibonacci rules.
Fibonacci, and also phi, the Golden Ratio.

I don't see that much regularity in that splendid prominence - has anyone looked them in the same way?

JOhn

JohnD wrote:I don't see that much regularity in that splendid prominence - has anyone looked them in the same way?

Flowers show a pattern of mathematical progression because of the way they grow. There is no analog to biological growth with these magnetic regions, so no reason to expect that kind of structure.

For no particular reason, I was expecting to see M63, the Sunflower Galaxy based on yesterday's clue.

Chris Peterson wrote:

JohnD wrote:I don't see that much regularity in that splendid prominence - has anyone looked them in the same way?

Flowers show a pattern of mathematical progression because of the way they grow. There is no analog to biological growth with these magnetic regions, so no reason to expect that kind of structure.

Well, it was APOD that entitled the pic "Fibrils Flower on the Sun".
J

Todays image illustrates the importance of being able to see subtitle contrast. Most observations of this region would reveal nothing but monotonous oversaturation; hiding the true complexity of what we see. Such observations may lead one to believe there is nothing worth studying here. However, the right equipment in the hands of an experienced observer reveals a more interesting truth.

The description is inaccurate and wrong. There are no spicules in this image, only something that resembles the behaviour of dynamic fibrils.[youtube]

Suspect the commentator on this picture is a better astronomer than gardener. Great picture though.

FloridaMike wrote:Todays image illustrates the importance of being able to see subtitle contrast. Most observations of this region would reveal nothing but monotonous oversaturation; hiding the true complexity of what we see. Such observations may lead one to believe there is nothing worth studying here. However, the right equipment in the hands of an experienced observer reveals a more interesting truth.

An example of poor subtitle contrast?

Imaging the Sun
Our Star Illustrated

Chris Peterson wrote:

FloridaMike wrote:Todays image illustrates the importance of being able to see subtitle contrast. Most observations of this region would reveal nothing but monotonous oversaturation; hiding the true complexity of what we see. Such observations may lead one to believe there is nothing worth studying here. However, the right equipment in the hands of an experienced observer reveals a more interesting truth.

An example of poor subtitle contrast?

Imaging the Sun
Our Star Illustrated

Too subtle?

Nitpicker wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote: An example of poor subtitle contrast?

Imaging the Sun
Our Star Illustrated

Too subtle?

Suitable subtlety.