Sun more of a puzzle than we (so far) thought.

The more meaty version.

I think the guy works for the dod so much of the hypothesis seems to be missing "things" but I found the video interesting to study.

from 2012

note-

This may be nothing more then high quality gsi and posted by those allowed to use. It can all be fake for all I know.

Several months ago, our friend ALHFORS drew our attention to the company KEPLER AEROSPACE

Not exactly "Cold Fusion", but it does a very interesting work:

The 'missing' gamma rays from the Sun's spectrum could be evidence that low energy nuclear reactions are occurring there in tandem with conventional fusion reactions. Are they in the same range as X-rays observed in our ECALOX X-ray spectra? This could have arisen by conventional physicist's adherence to E=mc squared rather than the true equation E = mc to the power n where n can range from - infinity to +infinity, mathematically speaking! - infinity is probabilistically impossible like negative time, only the present and future can be considered, but we have infinite energy release in the Sun and our typical Hydrogen Bomb. Proof of the pudding will be coming soon once we test out my new prototype, Alan.

There's also the possibility that Dr. Pierre Marie Robitaille is right, and the sun is not gaseous but condensed matter (as opposed to a giant structureless sphere of ionized hydrogen nucleus gas that can never condense to a non-gaseous structural phase with a real surface because such heresy would break the foundations of astrophysics). Gravitational collapse of a gas in an infinite vacuum still hasn't solved the "Jeans swindle" that allows astronomy to forget entirely about molecular kinetic theory (though recently dark energy has been invoked as a potential 'solution', ignoring the fact that the necessity of dark energy is a direct result of redshift being assumed to correspond exactly with recessional velocity alone, which is an estimation that itself relies on the gaseous plasma sun model... ugh.)

Quote from Alan Smith

“It’s amazing that we were so spectacularly wrong about something we should understand really well: the sun,”

What I personally find amazing is that Robitaille has been saying this literally for decades and every new contradiction the standard solar model encounters somehow changes nothing about the vehement rebuke his criticisms received from the now self-described "spectacularly wrong" mainstream solar physics community. Basically all of modern cosmology is built on the standard solar model - including LambdaCDM - and so is most research in "hot" fusion because stars are assumed to be masses of ionized materials surrounding and obscuring a "hot fusion reactor" buried in their (still somehow gaseous plasma) cores.

I worry that popsci presenting theory as established fact - and the current establishment as somehow beyond the human trappings that have kept science stagnant on occasion throughout history (cough phlogiston cough) - has turned the standard model of cosmology into the holy scriptures of modern atheism, and any questioning of the foundations upon which LambdaCDM, hallowed be its assumptions, is built is therefore a direct attack on the "antireligious" religious doctrine of atheism that holds itself to be the church of the institutions of science.

I used to be an atheist. I consider myself agnostic now. Many gods, one god, or zero - it's not the gods or the number that make them dangerous; it's the certainty, and the dogma that certainty will eventually create. There's more than just money on the line for protecting a model of creation that many in science have made a part of their identity, whether they realize they have inadvertently embraced a religion of sorts or not.

But we can take some comfort in the fact that the standard models seem to be coming apart at the seams, and the truth is always out there whether the funds exist to find it today or not - and JWST may just open its $10 billion eye - which will still function regardless of theorists, because it's a $10 billion engineering project rather than a $10 billion grant for more papers to feed into the research publication profiteering machine - to a universe that LambdaCDM can't explain. I'm very excited for the next decade in astronomical science. I hope Robitaille lives to see his work vindicated or at least not completely ignored and attacked with arguments from authority made by the "spectacularly wrong" establishment - Halton Arp wasn't so lucky, and he still hasn't been disproved (he thought redshift might not be exclusively caused by recessional velocity, and therefore that quasars were not nearly as far away - or as unfathomably large and energetic to explain their brightness at that distance - as is currently believed).

Been looking at Jupiter with all the reactors all over it wounding if its just a unborn star waiting to reach .....

Quote from Seatrout

Been looking at Jupiter with all the reactors all over it wounding if its just a unborn star waiting to reach .....

I would be willing to bet that most of the doubt around the theory of metallic hydrogen in the gas giants (which I remember and I'm only 24) came from a fear that such a confirmation would vindicate Robitaille's criticisms of the gaseous sun model, as well as his literal advocacy of a liquid metallic hydrogen model of the sun since before gas giant metallic hydrogen became basically undeniable even by the mainstream astrophysics community. There is something of a tension in astronomy between planetary and stellar modelers; the standard stellar evolution model rather pointedly ignores the initial accumulation of gas and dust into a planetary sized object that even the Jeans swindle requires, preferring instead to treat the initiation of the hot core fusion their model requires to avoid the gravitational collapse becoming a singularity as literally the beginning of time, and ignoring all possible things that came before unless there's a spectral anomaly in the isotopes they see, which they then blame on "tainted/heterogeneous pre-stellar dust" basically.

There are a lot of anomalous spectra (for example, the sun has about one 140th of the Lithium it should according to LambdaCDM; there's also the star that has elements in its spectra we've literally never seen or produced, namely Flerovium 298 or the star that's only 200 light years from us for which they still don't have a consistent modification to their models to make it not look very much like it is ...older than the universe).

They have also never seen a Population III star, ever. They are also resolutely confident that Population III stars existed. The further back they look in our light bubble, the shorter the timespan that LambdaCDM has to get the Population III stars to form, fuse Big Bang nucleosynthesis hydrogen/helium, and then go supernova to make all the things that we see in the Population II stars so that enough supernovae have happened by the time Population I stars like the sun form that we can have planets with a nonzero percentage of elements heavier than iron (yes the population designation increases in the reverse order they formed, because scientists are weird). JWST is perfect for looking for Population III stars, which is one of the things I am most excited about it - I don't think they'll find any, and LambdaCDM kind of needs them to. I'm fully prepared to eat my words, but only if there is no ambiguity in the detection (i.e. the star has only hydrogen/helium spectral lines).

Tinkering with simple models show possibility but its just tinkering.

interesting to think about over the years.

I'm still not convinced of the Big Bang yet. or a lot of the observations are accurate or the ms but time will tell.