Dark matter is the core of stars (minus hydrogen cover).
On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 13:23:35 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 26.06.2025 09:15, skrev bertitaylor:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:30:27 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 18:54:15 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Can you please explain Arindam's theory?
Where does the radiated energy come from?
Deuterium fission.
Deuterium is stable, does not undergo radioactive decay, and thus
cannot
undergo fission, crackpot.
Fool, we are not talking about deuterium on Earth, decaying naturally.
Things are different in the Sun's atmosphere. Lots of heat, radiation,
charged particles, very dense there.
And no deuterium is decaying, but a lot of deuterium nuclei are fused
to Helium.
It is deuterium fission which provides the energy for the hydrogen bombs >>> on Earth.
Good grief, what a gigantic blunder!
Yes it was the most gigantic blunder to think that fusion at all
happens.
It obviously is _fusion_ of H and T in a hydrogen bomb.
Very not obviously. The fission of the deuterium nucleus (two protons
held by one electron) creates extraordinary force creating great
energies as produced by the stars.
Details in Arindam's links.
Well, yes the elements weren't created in a Big Bang obviously.
Do you
know it is believed that our galaxy has only spun around 60 times? Big Bangers have a very young and naive universe! The elements continue to
form in the stars contrary to the Big Bang baloney.
A neutron is the tightest bond between a proton and an electron.
Dark matter is the core of stars (minus hydrogen cover).
Den 01.07.2025 01:52, skrev Bertitaylor:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:18:47 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Elements with 1 proton in the nucleus are Hydrogen
There are two stable isotopes:
¹H (Protium) 1 proton 0 neutrons
²H (D Deuterium) 1 proton 1 neutron
³H (T Tritium) 1 proton 2 neutrons
Tritium is unstable with half-life 12.33 years.
The decay mode is β−, which means that a neutron splits
into a proton and an electron. The electron is ejected as β-rays.
So we get a nucleus with 2 protons and and 1 neutron, which is
³He, the most abundant stable Helium isotope.
The short half-life should indicate that T should not
exist naturally, but it is created by interaction between
cosmic rays and air. The natural abundance is however very low.
But T can be artificially created in an atomic reactor.
T has several applications, among them are H-bombs.
D and T combine very easily in fusion to ⁴He, a stable Helium isotope. >>> That's why the Hydrogen in a H-bomb is enriched with both D and T.
(Some, or all of the T can be created in the bombs itself from lithium.) >>>
An atomic bomb exploded on Earth can't create the temperature and
pressure to make H explode in a chain reaction. The enrichment
of D and T are necessary to make the bomb explode.
Please answer my question:
Do you really think that Teller & al, would have succeeded
in making the H-bomb if they didn't know what I stated above
(and _much_ more)?
So the answer is "yes",
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:18:47 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Elements with 1 proton in the nucleus are Hydrogen
There are two stable isotopes:
¹H (Protium) 1 proton 0 neutrons
²H (D Deuterium) 1 proton 1 neutron
³H (T Tritium) 1 proton 2 neutrons
Tritium is unstable with half-life 12.33 years.
The decay mode is β−, which means that a neutron splits
into a proton and an electron. The electron is ejected as β-rays.
So we get a nucleus with 2 protons and and 1 neutron, which is
³He, the most abundant stable Helium isotope.
The short half-life should indicate that T should not
exist naturally, but it is created by interaction between
cosmic rays and air. The natural abundance is however very low.
But T can be artificially created in an atomic reactor.
T has several applications, among them are H-bombs.
D and T combine very easily in fusion to ⁴He, a stable Helium isotope.
That's why the Hydrogen in a H-bomb is enriched with both D and T.
(Some, or all of the T can be created in the bombs itself from lithium.)
An atomic bomb exploded on Earth can't create the temperature and
pressure to make H explode in a chain reaction. The enrichment
of D and T are necessary to make the bomb explode.
Please answer my question:
Do you really think that Teller & al, would have succeeded
in making the H-bomb if they didn't know what I stated above
(and _much_ more)?
They simply put heavy water around a fission bomb to split deuterium and
thus made what is called a hydrogen bomb, with protons snapping off with incredible force and thus causing a chain reaction with objects hitting
each other and creating huge energies as per the creation of energy
formula by divine Arindam that he discovered in 1998.
As natural radioactivity is caused when electrons
escape the nucleus the nucleus has to have electrons in it.
Why cannot apes grasp this simple matter?
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 17:20:24 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 01.07.2025 01:52, skrev Bertitaylor:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:18:47 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Elements with 1 proton in the nucleus are Hydrogen
There are two stable isotopes:
¹H (Protium) 1 proton 0 neutrons
²H (D Deuterium) 1 proton 1 neutron
³H (T Tritium) 1 proton 2 neutrons
Tritium is unstable with half-life 12.33 years.
The decay mode is β−, which means that a neutron splits
into a proton and an electron. The electron is ejected as β-rays.
So we get a nucleus with 2 protons and and 1 neutron, which is
³He, the most abundant stable Helium isotope.
The short half-life should indicate that T should not
exist naturally, but it is created by interaction between
cosmic rays and air. The natural abundance is however very low.
But T can be artificially created in an atomic reactor.
T has several applications, among them are H-bombs.
D and T combine very easily in fusion to ⁴He, a stable Helium isotope. >>>> That's why the Hydrogen in a H-bomb is enriched with both D and T.
(Some, or all of the T can be created in the bombs itself from
lithium.)
An atomic bomb exploded on Earth can't create the temperature and
pressure to make H explode in a chain reaction. The enrichment
of D and T are necessary to make the bomb explode.
Please answer my question:
Do you really think that Teller & al, would have succeeded
in making the H-bomb if they didn't know what I stated above
(and _much_ more)?
So the answer is "yes", Bertitaylor does indeed believe that
Teller & al would have succeeded in making the H-bomb even if
they had known nothing about Hydrogen, Deuterium and Tritium.
They had to know that deuterium existed and tritium is irrelevant save
for confusion.
However, since they _did_ know what I have stated above, and much more,
about Hydrogen, Deuterium and Tritium they used a fission bomb around
a capsule with Deuterium and Tritium, and when the fission bomb went
off the pressure and temperature became so high that Deuterium and
Tritium was fused together in the fusion process:
²H+³H → ⁴He + n
Rubbish. The fission bomb caused the two protons in the deuterium
nucleus to split with the breaking of the electron bond holding them together.
Just consider two huge metal balls being held together by a string.
Electric charge is put on both so both balls must move apart. The string stops them. Now the protons are like the two balls and the string is the electron. Quite stable till the string is cut. Then the two balls go off
in different directions.
The fission bomb creates the forces required to bust the electron bond.
Pretty simple, what.
D with 1 proton, 1 neutron + T with 1 proton, 2 proton 2 neutrons →
He with 2 protons, 2 neutrons + neutron + 17.6 MeV.
Most of the energy is kinetic energy of the ejected neutron.
D = 2.01410200 u
T = 3.01604928 u
------------------
5.03015128 u
He = 4.002603254 U
n = 1.008664916 U
------------------
5.011268170
mass loss m = 0.01888310 u, E = mc² = 17.589507 MeV
Bullshit stuff made up to confuse people and boost the e=mcc nonsenses.
They simply put heavy water around a fission bomb to split deuterium and >>> thus made what is called a hydrogen bomb, with protons snapping off with >>> incredible force and thus causing a chain reaction with objects hitting
each other and creating huge energies as per the creation of energy
formula by divine Arindam that he discovered in 1998.
Yes, yes.
Bertitaylor, I will not ask you if you really believe that Teller & al
could simply have put heavy water around a fission bomb to make a
H-bomb. Of course you don't. And you know they didn't.
Why do you pretend to believe what you know never happened?
Exposing liars and lies leads to a safer and better world, so our
altruistic efforts. You are the victim of lies.
Are you trolling?
No, following Jesus Christ for we did live in a Christian country. Now talking pure Christianity does sound like trolling in this selfish world
of lies, run by greedy liars.
Am Donnerstag000003, 03.07.2025 um 01:57 schrieb Bertitaylor:
On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:41:33 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
Den 29.06.2025 06:18, skrev Bertitaylor:
Am Samstag000028, 28.06.2025 um 14:47 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
Den 28.06.2025 01:49, skrev Bertitaylor:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 19:57:30 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
One question:
What created the elements you and I and everything around us
consist of?
The Devine Arindam?
Heard of eternity? It all was always there, is, and will be.
I am asking YOU, Bertitaylor:
How do YOU think U-238 and other heavy elements were created?
Supernovas where lots of electrons or protons fly and create heavy
nuclei.
Right.
So you have realised that you were wrong when you claimed that
all elements "was always there, is, and will be."
Yes. All matter changes as per chemical and nuclear reactions from
aetheric vibrations and electric forces.
So you have finally admitted to being wrong.
No. Matter change has nothing to do with big bangs and black holes and
e=mcc stuff.
Actually it has...
I have invented this concept, which I called 'structured spacetime':
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
I wanted to put GR and QM into a single framework and thought, that
matter should be 'relative'.
My idea is actually quite simple, but based upon unusual assumptions.
I use spacetime of GR as kind of 'background' and call 'timelike stable patterns' 'matter'.
Iow: matter for one observer is not matter for another observer.
This would de-materialize the concept of particles and assumes, that particles are actually certain 'structures'.
Now we could alter the axis of time (in theory) and could create by this method all sorts of cosmological phenomena like black-holes or
big-bangs.
Astonishingly the heavier elements are found near the surface of planet Earth.
Creation of iron and heavier elements by fusion doesn't release
energy, it uses energy, so these elements can only be created
in cataclysmic events where energy is abundant.
Most iron was always there. Sometimes it may get upgraded to other
elements, then radioactive decay brings that down.
This would require, that matter could age and build heavier elements
from lighter ones over time.
The reason:
according to the current paradigm ('accretion hypothesis') the Earth was formed by a gravitational collapse of large amounts of dust.
The result was entirely molten in the early stage.
But that would have allowed the heavier elements to sink into the lower levels of the Earth.
But we actually find Lead, Gold and Uranium quite high in the crust
(like in mountains).
So, these metals could not have been there when Earth was molten, hence
must have aged sind the creation of their plate.
...
TH
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 168:49:34 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,551 |