Sun's Fusion mechanism is correct ??? from the ColdFusion theory(with Deep Dirac Level)

  • https://www.euro-fusion.org/fusion/fusion-on-the-sun/

    The gravity of the Sun, which is almost 28 times that of Earth, ''traps'' hydrogen from its atmosphere and this hydrogen fuels the Sun’s fusion reaction. At temperatures of 15 million degree Celcius in the Sun's core, hydrogen gas becomes plasma, the fourth state of matter. In a plasma, the negatively charged electrons in atoms are completely separated from the positively charged atomic nuclei (or ions). The Sun's gravitational force confines the positively-charged hydrogen nuclei and work with the high temperatures that cause the nuclei to move around furiously, collide at high speeds overcoming the natural electrostatic repulsion that exists between the positive charges and fuse to form the heavier helium.


    Cold Fusion does not need plasma due to the DDL so why does sun need plasma?

    The gravity is necessary but that can be smaller than they think from the ColdFusion mechanism with DDL.

    So the plasma fusion researcher must think and reconsider what they are doing without thinking DDL.

    For the nuclear physics researcher or cosmology researcher.

    could you please consider my concern.


    added on 2020/08/04

    I think DDL can have impact on cosmology so I want to reconsider the following article.

    Distant Giant Planets Form Differently Than ‘Failed Stars’

    恒星になりかけた天体と惑星の境目。褐色矮星の下限は木星質量の何倍?

    https://keckobservatory.org//brown_dwarfs/

    https://sorae.info/astronomy/20200211-jupiter.html/amp

    This is based on the current phyics, but I thought this discussion may need hydrogen DDL

    because I think DDL can allow the different type of stellar based on smaller hydrogen(DDL) due to the smaller gravity.

    I think that if the space is full of smaller hydrogen, the form of stellar can be different from our sun.

  • Cold Fusion does not need plasma


    The results from Holmlid in which the proton is cracked.. to produced kaons by laserlight of a few eV

    suggest that plasma is not needed or gravity..

    a catalyst is useful to produce dense hydrogen.. on Earth at room temperature

    Holmlid's results are a problem for the Standard model as explained here by Wyttenbach


    The physics establishment is currently fighting on many front-lines.

    According to the all mighty church of SM physics it should be impossible to produce Kaons,

    Pions from Hydrogen by just switching on the light in the lab room as it happened in Sweden.

    Of course normally a LASER is used with 532nm wave length.

    But why can an input of e.g. 1 Watt produce the same as CERN with 100MW?

    Did not the most recent experiment (super Kamikade Japan [30]) show that the proton is absolutely stable and does not decay ?


    https://www.researchgate.net/p…ics-Main-achievements.pdf

  • nkodama, although they think they have solved it with "neutrino oscillations", there is a deficit of neutrinos from the sun of like 2/3 the amount expected from hot fusion being missing. So they say "those 2/3 of neutrinos turned into the other neutrino types: see? factor of 3 error and 3 kinds of neutrinos? solved!" On its face the solar neutrino deficit is evidence that much less hot fusion is occurring in the sun than we thought - possible evidence for your theory.

  • what you say is completely counter-intuitive. There is plasma in universe where is low pressure. Are you suggesting that hydrogen atoms are also reduced to plasma in the very high pressures of the sun's core ???

    One would rather think of a shrunken atom ... ?? Moreover, you and others are obsessed about particles fashion science, which for me is very secondary.

    The conformation, that is to say the faculty that an atom has to keep its shape, its size, regardless of where it takes place in universe, remains the major subject.

    Ask yourself the right questions, is the size of atoms the same from one cluster of galaxies to another, in the past or future of universe. this remains much more important that you think about these aspects than too fashionable plasmas from school.

  • Cold Fusion does not need plasma due to the DDL so why does sun need plasma?

    The gravity is necessary but that can be smaller than they think from the ColdFusion mechanism with DDL.

    So the plasma fusion researcher must think and reconsider what they are doing without thinking DDL.

    For the nuclear physics researcher or cosmology researcher.

    could you please consider my concern.


    You are quit a bit late! ITER plasma fusion is based on the outraging lie that D+T fusion does happen in the sun ...

    In reality fusion (LENR like) does happen in the solar corona. The main path is 4p --> 4-He as we need no neutrons to produce 4-He.


    This all happened because nuclear and particle physics since 70 years is a religion (Church) based on a mind blowing almost mad theory called standard model that cannot even explain the most simple physical facts. Asking for 30 Billions based on nonsensical physics is worse behavior than the catholic church did express in the 15th century that nevertheless did give as the peters dome ... Nobody ever in future will visit the ruins of ITER except they will transform it in a large vine shop.


    The model (SO(4) physics) is there and exactly shows how fusion works.

  • >You are quit a bit late! ITER plasma fusion is based on the outraging lie that D+T fusion does happen in the sun ...

    BUT NOTE THAT THEY USE radioactive Tritium, and they want to hide the risk like nuclear power plant society by saying that tritium is common in the nature, but actually much less tritium without nuclear power plant or nuclear bomb experiment in the air.

    So I do not agree with ITER

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

    They spent a huge amount of money on the risky fusion, and I think its is a wast of money if the cold fusion become science.(For now probably we reached the common understanding on the ColdFusion can be done with DDL.

    So I strongly propose that we must reach the agreement on the cold fusion theory based on DDL.



    >The model (SO(4) physics) is there and exactly shows how fusion works.

    >In particle physics, SO(10) refers to a grand unified theory (GUT) based on the spin group Spin(10). The shortened name SO(10) is conventional[1] among physicists, and derives from the Lie group SO(10), which is a special orthogonal group that is double >covered by Spin(10).

    I would like to clarify the impact of grand unified theory on Cold Fusion.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory

    TO the researcher on the different opinion on the cold fusion theory from theory I proposed based on DDL.

    Could you clarify your theory after you understand DDL, and please have your discussion of the cold fusion theory

    Please tell us that after you understand DDL and my theory(D- confinement in metal T site to create the smaller D2 molecule(femto D2) based on DDL

    Now is the time we must forward to the common understanding of cold fusion theory based on DDL

    due to ITER project booming all-over the world.



    some other theory of Cold fusion

  • Just various points here:


    • ITER is not hiding anything about Tritium: the idea is that it could be bred from fusion neutrons, but this is complex and part of the (difficult) near wall problem. Engineering, not physics.
    • The nuclear reactions that sustain stars have been very well studied and the numbers add up without LENR. Where they don't (neutrino deficit) then this is investigated. Solar neutrino deficit is now no longer a deficit and expected because of neutrino oscillations, which are supported by evidence independent of solar nurtrinos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…utrino_problem#Resolution
    • The condition of elements inside the sun is plasma (there are maybe in some places some heavy elements not completely ionised. The core (where) fusion happens, is 15,000,000K and 150X the density of water. Both temperature and pressure help fusion, which nevertheless happens at a relatively low rate. Just there is an awfully large volume!
    • The corona can get as hot as the core in places, and can also be much cooler. generally the outer layers of the sun (which determine the spectrum of the light coming out) are much cooler as we all know from the BB spectrum observed.
  • Please tell us that after you understand DDL and my theory(D- confinement in metal T site to create the smaller D2 molecule(femto D2) based on DDL


    Sorry to inform you. Such an informal model (you call DDL) has been proposed by Takahasi since more than 20 years. He names it 3D TSC etc.. Informal model are not physics and just present an idea how things can look alike.


    Physics requires that you prove an idea by measurements. E.g. R. Mills effectively could measure the spectrum of H*-H*. So there is now definitive proof that H*-H* is a stable "chemical".


    But LENR is a way more complex than just having an idea that a state like H*-H* or D*-D* does in fact exist. Key is to show how you remove the 23..25 MeV of energy. So any theory of LENR must contain a physical model (not just an idea) describing how the energy of fusion is removed.

    ITER is not hiding anything about Tritium: the idea is that it could be bred from fusion neutrons, but this is complex and part of the (difficult) near wall problem. Engineering, not physics.


    The nuclear reactions that sustain stars have been very well studied and the numbers add up without LENR. Where they don't (neutrino deficit) then this is investigated. Solar neutrino deficit is now no longer a deficit and expected because of neutrino oscillations, which are supported by evidence independent of solar nurtrinos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…utrino_problem#Resolution


    The problem is that breeding tritium is just an idea (from experiments) with no real physics behind kit.


    Numbers that add up are just a nice thing but have nothing to do with physics. Physics is about measurement of the process and this has not been done. The silly idea of the classic sun model is that the main reaction is H+H --> 2H what of course is absolute nonsense as we do not see an increase of 2H and even more bad: Which process does produce the neutrons ???


    The dominant reaction is 4p --> 4He that can run without neutrons. (Something that the nonsensical standard model completely fails to predict!)

  • The silly idea of the classic sun model is that the main reaction is H+H --> 2H what of course is absolute nonsense as we do not see an increase of 2H and even more bad: Which process does produce the neutrons ???


    The dominant reaction is 4p --> 4He that can run without neutrons. (Something that the nonsensical standard model completely fails to predict!)


    I'll call out these Wyttenfacts.


    Nice description of proton-proton reaction in the sun in three images:


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/s…rogen-into-helium-mostly/




    The overall reaction is indeed 4p -> 4He.


    However this is done in multiple steps: and the final part from 3He to 4He has two different paths, both of which exist.


    p+p -> fusion and then decay into a deuteron, neutrino, and positron does generate D, but is rate limiting. The next step: p + d -> 3He is much more energetically favourable and also much faster, so we do not see a build-up of D.


    None of these steps need free neutrons, nor do they generate free neutrons. And the standard model predicts every one of these steps.


    THH

  • Sun's Fusion mechanism is correct ???

    Actually ITERspeak says that Bethe theorised (identified) that it was correct in 1939...

    https://www.iter.org/mag/3/29


    the most obvious thing to say is that Nature invented fusion like the Big Bang..

    "Of the many ways to answer this question the simplest and

    most obvious would be to say that Nature herself invented fusion.

    One hundred million years after the Big Bang,

    the first fusion reaction was produced in the ultra-dense and ultra-hot core

    of one of the gigantic gaseous spheres

    that had formed from primeval hydrogen clouds.

    Thus the first star was born, followed by billions of others in

    a process that continues to this day.


    the bambinos in Borexino also appear to do ITERspeak

    "We know that the Sun is fueled by nuclear reactions fusing protons (hydrogen) into helium.....

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.12967.pdf


    The cross section for the assumed Bethe diproton pp--> 2H + e+ ν reaction

    is not measurable

    but calculatable based on assumptions


    "This cross section is far too small (~10-47 cm2 at 1 MeV)

    to measure in the laboratory, but it does have a nearly constant, calculable S-factor.
    The theory is straightforward, but complex because it includes a strong interaction and weak interaction happening in rapid succession.


  • Hoaxlyfacts: A di-proton will decay to a deuterium !!!! May be good opens his deep electron bag and wiggles one around a proton that from scariness just thinks that it is now a neutron...


    People that talk of 2He instead of H*-H* are victims of a mental illness.


    @THH: If you do believe in such weird fantasies (Its not a model or a theory!) then I understand that you are a friend of conspiracy sites!

    The dominant reaction is 4p --> 4He that can run without neutrons. (Something that the nonsensical standard model completely fails to predict!)


    I'll call out these Wyttenfacts.


    Sorry these are Holmlid facts!!