Two options for the New Sun in the TGD framework: which option is correct?During the last month, I have been developing a model for the Sun inspired by the article of Nassim Haramein summarizing the anomalies related to the nuclear physics of the Sun. The big idea is that the Sun is analogous to an atom or atomic nucleus in the quantization, which generalizes Nottale's view about the planetary system as an atom-like structure. In a good approximation, only the uppermost layer, valence shell, identifiable as a magnetic bubble and consisting of flux tubes would interact with the external world. In particular, the energy production of the Sun would take place in this surface layer, which means a dramatic deviation from the standard model of the Sun. There are two options for what the surface layers of the Sun could be. For Option I, the totally crazy option, very long nuclei defined by monopole flux tubes formed from M89 nucleons with mass of about 512 GeV would be in question. The M89 nuclei could be also dark in the TGD sense and the explanation for the observations of LHC (see this and this) is in terms of a creation of M89 mesons for which the value heff/h=512 so that the dark M89 hadrons would have the same size as the ordinary hadrons. This would conform with the quantum criticality for the TGD analog of the phase transition interpreted in QCD as a formation of the quark gluon plasma. Option I is completely crazy but it explains nicely the missing .5 percent of solar nuclear matter, the gamma ray anomalies, and the formation of planets as explosions of the surface layer. By baryon number conservation, the explosion of the surface layer would produce at most 3ME of the ordinary nuclear matter. M89 nuclei can form atoms with the same spectrum as ordinary atoms and this would explain the strange findings of Moshina suggesting a rigid core for the Sun. For Option II, the not so crazy option, dark variants of ordinary nuclei would populate the flux tubes. The dark M107 nuclei could appear in the solar corona also for the option I. For this one must give up the assumption that there is just a single layer if one wants to explain the missing nuclear matter of the Sun. The replacement M89 → M107 scales down the mass of the single layer by 2-18 and the increase h→ heff= 210h reduces the mass of the layer by factor 2-20. One must therefore have 238∼ 1012/4 dark layers with thickens of about 1/2 of the electron Compton length. The simple model for the formation of planets is lost. Both gamma ray anomalies could be understood as local phase transitions to M89 or M79 hadron physics. Also the findings of Moshina might be understood in terms of dark atoms. In both cases, the fluxes of energy and matter arriving from the Sun would be determined at the surface layer and this certainly leads to powerful predictions, which distinguish the TGD view from the standard view. For instance, the power produced in the transformation of the layer to ordinary nuclei should be proportional to the area of the surface and if the density of the start is kept constant and the anatomy of the surface layer does not depend on the size of the star, it should behave like M2/3 as function of the stellar mass. The energetics related to solar wind and radiation from the Sun would provide a killer test perhaps allowing us to choose between the two options. The ratio for the mass carried out by solar wind to the energy carried out by radiation should be consistent with the empirical findings. The energy lost per year using solar mass as a unit is a convenient measure for the rate of the mass loss in solar wind and for the rate of the energy lost by radiation. In the standard model interpreted as thermal radiation at the surface of the Sun acting as blackbody radiation. The experimental estimate for P(rad)/M(Sun) is P(rad)(M(Sun)) ∼ .5 1012/y. The estimate for P(wind)/M(Sun) is x× 10-14/y, x in the range [2,3]. The ratio R is in the range [25,16.7]. 1. Energetics for Option II For Option II the energy liberated per nucleon in the evaporation of single dark layer would be essentially the ordinary binding energy per nucleon, which is few MeVs for heff/h=210 suggested by the TGD based model of the "cold fusion" (see this) and in the range 10-3-10-2. If the liberated energy is transformed to radiation the ratio R is in the range 10-3-10-2. This is in conflict with the experimental findings. This leaves only the totally crazy option under consideration. 2. Energetics for the Option I Solar wind could be created by the transformation of M89 nucleons to M107 nucleons. This process is new from the standard physics view.
The ratio R= P(rad)/P(wind) of the energy lost as radiation to the mass lost as solar wind would be in a rough approximation R=1+2+22+..+2k0-1. k0= 101 (prime) for which one has m(101)/2=4m(107)= 4GeV gives R=30 and k0= 103 with m(103)/2=2m(107)= 2 GeV gives R=22. The ratio R is in the range [25,16.7] This favors the k0=103 option. It seems that the totally crazy option might work! See the chapter Some solar mysteries or the article with the same title.
|