Vast Cracks in the Surface of the Sun?

I've been toying around with JHelioViewer from the ESA. It's kind of like Google Earth using the Solar Dynamics Obeservatory imagery. Here's a clip of SDO (AIA 171) footage spanning the past few days:

The SDO, Stereo and SOHO spacecraft are redefining what we know about our nearest star. I'd venture that the SDO may prove to be as significant a contribution to Solar astronomy as were Galileo's first telescope, and his subsequent theories about the gaseous composition of the Sun - theories which are now 400 years old, and remain nothing more than theories based upon remote observations which were effectvely limited to staring into the Sun. With the SDO instruments we can peer much deeper into the surface structure of the Sun - we can observe energetic relationships as never before. An alternative idea which recently caught my attention was the Iron Sun theory, which is quite extensively explored on this website.

Now my question to my fellow ATS'ers is this : Doesn't that look like a crack in the surface of the Sun, right below the arcs? I don't see any fluid movements around that feature which would indicate is to be gaseous or liquid. I t looks like a solid feature to me. Any other ideas?

(I'll post a higher quality vid soon)

As promised, here's a more detailed view of the same feature :

I agree it does look like a crack - need some experts on this one. Thanks for the thumbs up!

Don't worry about it it's completely normal.

It's what happens when a magnetic field causes mayhem. The sun isn't solid so cracks are no biggie.

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


I didn't mention being worried at all. Did you bother to read any material from the website linked to above before pronouncing such a well reasoned and supported premise? Based upon what evidence do we know that the surface of the Sun is not solid? Galileo's 400 year old theory was based upon his observations made through a primitive telescope. Please take cognisance of the fact that the gaseous sun model is a THEORY, not a proven fact. It is a theory which has been supported by modern scientific dogma, which is in itself based upon more visual observations which are PRIMITIVE compared to what the SDO provides. Perhaps we could use a piece of contemporary rhetoric such as "The Science is Settled", or perhaps we should talk about the "Scientific Consensus"? Where have we heard those terms bandied about a lot in recent years?

Science is DEAD the moment that there is consensus, or the moment that contradictory, questioning views or ideas are rejected outright as being heretic. It is only in the past couple of decades that we have been able to peer into the chromosphere because of instruments like the SDO, and much of what we are observing with these new instruments does not agree with the gaseous solar hypothesis. They are yielding amazing new observations which challenge the prevailing hypothesis.

reply to post by treesdancing


I'm more of a electric sun theory follower but that doesn't really matter cause the behavior we witnessed of the sun makes it not solid.

You know like the sun's plasma that seems to fall in dark spots/ The outbursts of material from the sun when a magnetic field bursts. Not really signs the earth also shows.

If it helps just trying to make sure you'd know the world isn't gonna end. But I guess you already new

I agree that there isn't a consensus but Iron ? Iron would make our sun have a lot more gravity would it not since its mass is a hell of alot bigger the hydrogen or heluim.