Originally Posted by Peace Warrior
ETA: He posted an image of a star, and it is merely a white dot, which he perfectly illustrated the point I was making. Now, if you show me solar flares, or the stars surface with say dark spots or spinning, then you'd have a good counter point.
Hubble isn't equipped with those kinds of lens filters because that was not the mission it was designed for. In order to get the kind of images you are looking for, an observatory would have to be purpose built for just that kind of imaging (and then it would be useless for just about any other purpose). Considering that there isn't much added scientific value to imaging sun spots or solar flars on remote stars (especially at a relatively poor resolutions), nobody has yet invested the millions of dollars needed to build and launch that kind of observatory. And that is not likely to change soon as most of the relevant questions about remote stars can be answered through spectral analysis and imaging in the non-visible spectrum.
Still Wingryder's post shows that we can image stars at beyond the one pixel resolution, but not surprisingly they look a lot like the sun does if you look at it with the naked eye (please don't do this Peace Warrior) a blindingly bright ball of light.
Peace is our profession (war is just a hobby)
: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose."
: "Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."