Satellites have now captured two separate hypervelocity impacts into the sun. The sun's immense gravitational pull accelerates incoming comet nuclei to extraordinary speeds, and the faster that object is moving at the moment of impact, the more kinetic energy gets released. That's basic physics. But here's where it gets... interesting: if the sun is in a quasi-stable state, could there be internal mechanisms that amplify the effects of such an impact? It's not a far-fetched question. We're dealing with plasma dynamics, magnetic field interactions, and energy transfers we're only beginning to understand. The implications for solar behavior and Earth's climate could be significant.show more

Here is a good example of what Randall is discussing

On sungrazers, “falling into the Sun,” and whether an impact can wake the star Randall Carlson has been circling something real: solar observatories have now recorded sungrazing comet nuclei arriving at the Sun at hypervelocity, and in at least two widely circulated sequences the plunge is followed almost immediately by a large coronal mass ejection. He treats that as a possible coupling between outer-solar-system mass flux and solar weather, with knock-on effects for Earth. The question is worth taking seriously. The wording around gravity is where it gets sloppy, and sloppy wording hides the part that is actually geometric. People say the Sun’s gravity “speeds the comet up” or that the nucleus “falls” into the star. Both phrases point at a true energy budget and a false picture of the last minutes. From the Oort cloud or the inner Kuiper region, a nearly parabolic inbound object already carries almost zero specific orbital energy. Conservation of energy then does the rest. At distance r its speed is set by v \approx \sqrt{\frac{2GM_\odot}{r}} Near the photosphere that is about 618\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}. That is not a last-second kick. It is the same potential well the object has been sliding down the entire way in. Kinetic energy at impact is just the gravitational potential that has been converted since “infinity.” Faster at impact means more energy released because the object reached a smaller r, not because the Sun suddenly grabbed harder. What does change in the last stretch is the shape of the path. Specific angular momentum decides whether the object is a grazer or an impactor. Perihelion for a near-parabola is set by that angular momentum. If perihelion sits outside the photosphere, the nucleus threads the corona and may or may not survive. If perihelion sits inside the Sun, there is no perihelion — the trajectory intersects the star. From a few AU out those two families look almost the same: a long, shallow inbound curve. Closer in, the flight-path angle steepens. The velocity vector swings toward the radial direction. On a coronagraph the track stops looking like an orbit and starts looking like a spear. That is the language problem. “Falling” is what a radial plunge looks like. “Losing the sideways speed” is what the direction of travel does. The tangential component itself is not cancelled; angular momentum conservation actually raises v_\perp as r drops. For a true impactor you never reach the point where the radial speed goes to zero, so the remaining path is dominated by the sunward heading. Geometry, not a new force. That geometric filter is the interesting part. Most Kreutz fragments we see in SOHO and STEREO are small. They ablate in the corona. A nucleus large enough, on a steep enough entry, can reach the chromosphere, pancake under ram pressure, and dump its kinetic energy in a thin layer near the photosphere. Papers from Ibadov and from Brown, Carlson & Toner put that dump in the same energy neighborhood as magnetic flares for big enough masses. Small sungrazers do not have that budget. That is why the default solar-physics reading of the famous “comet then CME” movies is coincidence: CMEs are common, sungrazers are common, and several of the best-looking pairs happened on opposite limbs of the Sun. So the honest position is: the videos are not proof. They are a prompt. Here is a suggestion that fits the geometry Carlson already uses everywhere else. Treat the Sun as a quasi-stable magnetic system, not a passive target. The corona is a web of stressed flux ropes sitting near instability thresholds. Ordinary CMEs are not “caused by mass hitting the Sun.” They are caused by reconnection after a structure crosses a stability line. A hypervelocity plasma injection is a localized, impulsive load: mass, momentum, and a high-β blob driven into a specific set of field lines. Most of the time that load is a spark in an empty room. Occasionally the inbound track, the entry angle, and a metastable filament occupy the same volume. Then the small impulse is amplified by energy the Sun already stored. That is not magic. It is the same logic as a snowpack that is quiet until one skier hits the right slope. If that is right, you should not expect every sungrazer to launch a CME. You should expect a geometric coincidence: impact azimuth and field-line connectivity lining up with a region that was already close to eruption. The test is straightforward and visual, which is why it might actually get done. Take the events with good multi-spacecraft stereo (SOHO + STEREO, later Parker and Solar Orbiter). Reconstruct the true 3-D inbound path, not the coronagraph projection. Overlay that path on AIA/EIT loops and on the magnetogram of the suspected CME source. Ask two questions: 1. Is the source region magnetically connected to the impact corridor more often than chance, or is it often the far limb? 2. Does a steep entry (small impact parameter, more radial terminal heading) correlate with a photospheric or chromospheric response — a sunquake, a compact EUV brightening, a high-metallicity plume — even when no CME follows? If the answers are “far limb, no extra signature,” Carlson’s two examples stay as striking coincidences and the climate implication shrinks. If the answers start clustering on connected, stressed field, then outer-solar-system mass flux is not just a debris problem for Earth. It is a possible trigger term in solar variability, and the Oort/Kuiper supply rate matters for more than impact winters. The gravity story does not need mysticism. The well sets the speed. Angular momentum sets whether you miss or hit. The last few solar radii turn a long ellipse into a near-radial line. Whether that line can ring the star depends on whether it strikes a structure that was already waiting to go. That is a geometric question. Someone who already thinks in Roche limits, nested orbits, and hierarchical breakup is exactly the person who should plot those tracks. Utmost respect,use or discard.

Is the footage posted somewhere?

Not shown: any evidence of these impacts and their velocity.

We believe this?

I don't believe the Sun has 'immense' gravitational pull. Fundamental math tells us if it did Mercury would have been sucked into the sun by now. .. It has to be something else that pulls those 'SELECTIVE' objects inward.

The double slit experiment is solved and answers all these questions.

Sun stomped out a couple of giant cockroaches.Thank you,Sun.

I think the key point is we are just beginning to understand. We don’t know what we don’t know.

what a fkn ridicilous horse shit utter wanna be smart wanna be evolved humanoid horse shit

Thank you sir for all the work you do and knowledge you share with us.

Seen these?