Thursday, September 24, 2020
Wednesday, September 23, 2020
Stellar nucleosynthesis is pseudoscience.
It has been an enormous blunder and continues to this day. Stars are not fusion reactors.
Past scientists and mathematicians never really knew how, where or why elements were formed.
Heavy elements are formed in the cores of active galaxies, or AGN's, which back in the 1950's were not thought to be doing anything particularly special.
Stars are not energetic enough to sustain fusion reactions.
Not a single observation of the interiors of stars was made.
Not a single observation of detailed surface phenomenon was made of the Sun.
Not a single observation was made of any interior of any "star" as defined by the mathematicians.
There were never any discoveries made of the processes of how fusion supposedly occurs. Not a single date of observation is written down, not a single process seen in any laboratory which would confirm the various "fusion" processes.
They just assumed they knew the elemental abundances of the galaxy, and then tried to make stars the source of these elements. Not only that, they then assumed that the processes that stars apparently formed elements as the reason they evolve... They didn't even know what highly evolved stars looked like, even though they are standing on one!
They just made it all up, and people started citing it as if it was true. Like, a new religion.
Sunday, September 20, 2020
Saturday, September 19, 2020
Friday, September 18, 2020
"A fundamental principle in this idea is that planets and other smaller bodies are much older than stars."
Negative. A fundamental principle in this idea is that planets are the old, evolving and dead stars.
Right from the beginning the paper misrepresents and deceives. I can expect more hit pieces to misrepresent and try to deceive the readers.
Here is a graph that shows why. Planets are the evolving/dead stars. There was never any fundamental difference.