Clearance Items

Don't worry. I'm not going to be here by this evening. All my content will be deleted.

Quote from Wyttenbach

What you are learning in a graduate school is enough to make an earning. But it is peanuts value for understanding modern physics that evolved during the last 30 years and is complementary to the classic standard model.

Physics textbook knowledge that fusion stops at 56-Fe is outraging nonsense as almost all elements in the periodic table can be exothermically produced by just adding H/D. This is exactly what happens above the surface of the sun - in the corona.

I'm only interested in the Safire experiments. Glow discharge has always been a reliable path for LENR and transmutations.

If you want to discuss about a philosophy then we are the wrong place.

Display More

So, you haven't got any science to back up your unscientific claims? There's a surprise. It might be nonsense to you, but I suggest that is due to you not understanding the relevant science.

Quote from Alan Smith

If there is no fusion in the corona, why is it so hot?

Is that a serious question? I told you - if there were fusion anywhere above the surface of the Sun, it would produce a signature in gamma rays. They ain't there. Thankfully.

Quote from LeBob

Firstly the fusion that powers the Sun generates heat that warms the stellar atmosphere, but that's not enough. Cue the observations and theories of Randall Mills in relation to hydrogen and cosmic phenomina and Jacques Dufours in relation to transmutations involving hydrogen and low energies.

More than the details, it's the general approach and vibe that works with what we've seen in creation. I'm saying it's likely energetic new chemistry.

ProcJCF20paper_Takahashidraft.pdf

Display More

Mills! Lol.

Quote from RobertBryant

“It’s amazing that we were so spectacularly wrong about something we should understand really well: the sun,” said Brian Fields, a particle astrophysicist at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

There are further problems with nucleosynthesis...not just Titanium in our sun

which are worrying

and the subject of hypotheses in astrophysics.

eg the lithium problem..

Big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) theory, together with the precise WMAP cosmic baryon density, makes tight predictions for the abundances of the lightest elements. Deuterium and 4He measurements agree well with expectations, but 7Li observations lie below the BBN+WMAP prediction by a factor of three to four. This 4–5-σ mismatch constitutes the so-called cosmic lithium problem; disparate solutions are possible. First, astrophysical systematics in the observations could exist but are increasingly constrained. Second, nuclear physics experiments provide a wealth of well-measured cross-section data, but 7Be destruction could be enhanced by unknown or poorly measured resonances. Third, physics beyond the Standard Model could alter the 7Li abundance, although deuterium and 4He must remain unperturbed. In this review, we discuss such scenarios, highlighting decaying supersymmetric particles and time-varying fundamental constants. Present and planned experiments could reveal which (if any) of these proposed solutions is correct.

Could Ian enlighten us on the solution to the BB lithium problem

Perhaps it is beyond the Standard Model..?

Display More

I'm sorry? What relevance has any of that to the impossibility of electric woo powering the Sun? Or the impossibility of fusion of titanium in the Sun. What was Fields talking about? Where is the link to the paper? Where is the link to the paper suggesting such heavy elements can be synthesised in the Sun? It doesn't exist because it is pure crackpottery.

Quote from Alan Smith

HOW STARS ARE FORMED

This is a brief excerpt from The SAFIRE Project presentation at the November 2019 GlobalBEM Conference in the Netherlands. Dr. Michael Clarage presents a simple overview of two possible models for the formation of stars.

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Display More

Clarage is another electric universe nutter, perhaps you can link to Clarage's papers on the subject. In which he does not appear.

Quote from RobertBryant

12.00 noon Sydney

On nucleosynthesis..

Once upon a time ...In a galaxy far way

"

Astronuclear Physics: a Tale of the Atomic Nuclei in the Skies
M. Arnould and S. Goriely...2020

Ian , you might want to read around the 105 or more instances of the word "uncertaint" in this recent review

of stellar nucleosynthesis among the Pantheon of astrophysicists...

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.11228.pdf

Display More

None of which would be idiotic enough to suggest the fusion of titanium in the Sun, nor that it is electrically powered. Perhaps you can link to papers the specifically suggest such things. I'm thinking that they don't exist.

Quote from RobertBryant

Contrary to this assertion

There are gamma rays in the sun,.. they are there...during the daytime,,

but maybe not during the nightime? maybe not before 2008.. perhaps this is a new phenomenon... solar climate change?

"

The Sun is a bright source of multi-GeV gamma-rays, with emission observed both from its halo —

due to cosmic-rays electrons interacting with solar photons — and its disk —

Although the halo emission [9] agrees with theory [10–12], the disk emission does not, and hence is our focus.
Until recently, the most extensive analysis of solar disk-ray emission was based on Fermi-LAT data from 2008–2014..

First, the flux is bright, e.g., at 10 GeV, it exceeds the flux expected from Earth-directed cosmic rays interacting
with the solar limb by a factor of >50 [

Second, it continues to 100 GeV, requiring proton energies ∼1000 GeV.

Third, the 1–10 GeV flux is anti-correlated with solar activity, and is
∼2.5× larger at solar minimum than maximum.

The only theoretical model of disk emission is the 1991 paper of Seckel,Stanev, and Gaisser (SSG) [16],

which proposes that magnetic flux tubes can reverse incoming protons deep within the solar atmosphere,

where they have an appreciable probability of
producing outgoing γ-rays.

Even though this enhances the gamma ray flux, the SSG prediction

still falls a factor ∼6 below the data at 10 GeV, and does not explain the time variation

Evidence for a New Component of High-Energy Solar Gamma-Ray Production

March 2018.. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.05436.pdf

Display More

Yes, a tiny amount from cosmic rays. And occasionally in the very biggest flares. There is no gamma showing fusion in the chromosphere, as suggested by the SAFIRE clowns. To account for the observed neutrino production, you need precisely the amount of fusion required to power the Sun. We know what that is, and that amount of gamma would fry the planet. Fact. And the neutrino energy spectrum tells us what is being fused. And the vast majority of it comes from the first step in the p-p chain. As predicted. None of it comes from the ridiculous suggestion of titanium nucleosynthesis!

Quote from LeBob

Glad you are interested in this field in some way! Why are you here? To sow seeds of doubt or are you genuinly interested in the scientific possibilities outside of what is already "completely understood"?

Nobody scientifically literate takes Mills' rubbish seriously. He is running a bath