Deep-Gas, Deep Hot Biosphere Theory

Its a good idea to dump the models all together and start from basic facts-don't you think? Why adopt the fusion model for how stars are powered?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by nemesis</i>
[Gregg, what you describe here would only take place in a very massive star which has exhausted all the hydrogen in its core. According to the standard theory, only hydrogen fusion takes place in the Sun.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I don't know if you are disputing the standard theory or the boiling chaos observation. If our Sun is only converting hydrogen to deuterium, then that would be only one layer of an onion. It seems to be very disturbed about one elemental reaction. Many elements are observed in the Sun.

Actually, I agree with that first fusion reaction.

Gregg Wilson

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Its a good idea to dump the models all together and start from basic facts-don't you think? Why adopt the fusion model for how stars are powered?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I at least think that the fundamental premises of the model should be examined. Many of them are unstated and therefore only semi-conscious:

1) It is <b>assumed</b> that a fusion reaction releases energy. I have not seen any hard evidence for that claim.

2) We have the equation E = mc2. Therefore, since the larger, product nucleus has slightly less mass than the reactant nuclei, there must have been an energy release and we know how much!!!!!

baloney. Here, once again, a human formed equation is supposedly <b>metaphysically determining</b> Reality

As has been stated by Dr. Van Flandern, "energy", when viewed closely enough, is mass in motion. If we cannot see the particles, we call it pure energy.

So, has a nuclear fusion reaction released particles with velocity? From where? How were they originally hiding in a hydrogen nucleus?

This problem is very similar to the problem with Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation. If we accept the equation at face value, then the entire Universe is unstable. It must either collapse to nothing or explode to ....nothing. "Been there, done that"?

A truly open debate on a subject cannot be held if there are implicit restrictions which bound the subject. So here goes...

In contrast to conventional physics, we are aware of a gravitational flux and a light carrying medium. The gravitons have an inherent high velocity and they push elysons around. As long as no proton matter is present, the pushing of elysons is entirely random and nothing develops, not even a light wave.

Let's throw some protons in. They don't have to do anything except <b>be in the way.</b> The elysons now get pushed up against the protons. Here I break all the rules. The Elysium is compressible and the portion of it piled up against the protons becomes a liquid, essentially incompressible. If the liquid elysons cannot avoid being hit by gravitons, they will vaporize. Out go electromagnetic waves.

I suggest that when we look at the Sun, we are looking at liquid Elysium which is boiling. The energy comes entirely from the gravitational flux. (Dr. Van Flandern has already stated that particular interpretation as the energy source for a star.) Nuclear fusion as an energy source is not needed nor is it warranted. Where's the hard evidence?

I will propose, in detail later on, that nuclear fusion encapsulates energy and nuclear fission releases it. Keep your eye on sun spots....

Gregg Wilson

Where's the hard evidence? How about the H-bomb?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by nemesis</i>
<br />Where's the hard evidence? How about the H-bomb?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I am in my 36th year as a process design and startup engineer. I have learned - the hard way - that Reality will prevail regardless of human theories. Many of my presumptions, theories and designs have gone down flames. Sadder but wiser. I hold all human hypothesises, theorems, laws, etc, as conditional and pay very close heed to what actually happens.

The application of standard nuclear fusion theory to designing and operating fusion reactors has been a complete failure. They admit to not getting any net energy out, and cannot make any hard claim to a fusion product. The perfect example is the fusion reactor at the University of Wisconsin. They decided, according to standard theory, that the ultimate, perfect fuel was helium-3. They ran the system with helium-3 at the required temperature, with magnetic confinement - long enough to get a result: 140 million protons per second as an outward flux and no energy gain. Notice that the results of nuclear collisions were single protons. They dismissed the results and stuck with theory. According to standard theory, helium-3 consists of one neutron and two protons. But they got no neutrons. Are we to believe that there was a vast conspiracy by all the helium-3 nuclei to hide their neutrons? The actual result indicates that helium-3 is made of three protons. In fact, if that is so, then all of the "bizarre" behavior of helium-3 is accounted for. And the helium-3 does not have to "do anything". It can be totally passive and exhibit the "bizarre" behavior.

I side with the results and to hell with the human theory.

All the steps in a "hydrogen" bomb are adequately and explicitly explained by nuclear fission. A coventional explosive collapses the plutonium shell into a fissionable mass. The plutonium detonation provides the high temperature that drives the tritium to very high velocity. The target is the mass of deuterium. Once a small amount of tritium has initialized an outward flux of neutrons from deuterium - which is fissioned - the chain reaction continues until the deuterium is exhausted. The tritium, by the way decays to helium-3.

There is no positive value to a "hydrogen" bomb. We have done our worst with the phenomenon; why not try to do our best with it? Several research teams have had some minor success in splitting deuterium without resorting to using neutrons (or tritium). But they continue to think, talk and write in terms of nuclear fusion! Whoever solves the problem of splitting deuterium by chemical means (doubtful) or electrical means (much more promising) will have achieved the greatest advance in release of useful energy.

Once this is achieved, natural gas will still be useful as a small scale energy source; petroleum can be used to make useful products; and coal will be reduced to being a technical curiosity.

And I will be out of a job.


Gregg Wilson

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> Whoever solves the problem of splitting deuterium by chemical means (doubtful) or electrical means (much more promising) will have achieved the greatest advance in release of useful energy. [Gregg] <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The big problem with fission reactors has been radioactive waste with a long half-life, and how to dispose of it safely. Would that problem be solved here?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> Once this is achieved, natural gas will still be useful as a small scale energy source; petroleum can be used to make useful products; and coal will be reduced to being a technical curiosity. [Gregg]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I assume you mean plastics, etc., from petroleum by-products, and natural gas for cooking stoves and camping and such? But rest assured, it will be a long time before enough power generating plants are built using your new method of deuterium fission, or even plutonium fission, to heat American homes.

Your job is probably safe for many years.

Neil