Hi,

Those extinct short lived isotopes were produced by the sun 4.6
billion years ago. At that time the sun was a red giant and had strong
solar wind. The solar wind condensed and formed meteorites and comets.
Those days the short lived isotopes are not found, but their decay
products are found in meteorites. It is hard to explain the presence
of those short lived isotopes 4.6 billion years ago without a red
giant sun because they decay very fast. If the source was external
from a supernova the short lived isotopes should decay before they
were incorporated in the meteorites.

Regards,
Dan Bar-Zohar




On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 21:59:36 -0000, "Mike Dworetsky"
wrote:

wrote:
Hi,

There are many short lived isotopes that are found in the solar
system. There is much research going on in this field to understand
the early history of the solar system according the the solar nebula
hypothesis.


in google books - Encyclopedia of the solar system.

http://books.google.com/books?id=G7U...system&f=false


Regard,
Dan

I don't think you can read. The table on that page says these are *Extinct
radionuclides* that were present very early when the solar nebula formed,
4.6 BY ago, which have since decayed to stable daughter isotopes. They are
absolutely not present today, which is what you have claimed. If you don't
think you claimed this, do read what you wrote below.


On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 16:35:09 -0000, "Mike Dworetsky"
wrote:

wrote:
Hi,

The sun converts energy to mass. The energy comes from the magnetic
fields of the solar cycle. The neutrino emissions from the sun are
the result of the mass production. The muon neutrinos from the sun
are not the result of neutrino oscillation. They are produced by
reactions involved with the mass production and the second family
of the standard particle model.

http://www.philica.com/display_artic...article_id=126

If stars produce their mass by conversion of energy to mass than the
young stars are red dwarfs and old stars are blue giant. This leads
to the fact that stars are growing from planets.
Red giants are created by long Maunder minimum that cools the star.
The sun was a red giant 4.6 billion years ago and its solar wind
created the object of the Kuiper belt. This is evident from the
short live isotopes found in meteorites and can explain the
formation of chondrules.

Regards,
Dan Bar-Zohar

Violates *all* known physics and astronomy. Also, short lived
isotopes are specifically not found in meteorites (other than those
which are decay products of long-life isotopes that are found). If
you have evidence to the contrary you should present it (references,
etc).

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:39:22 -0000, "Mike Dworetsky"
wrote:

wrote:
Hi,

The sun energy source is not fusion. The sun and other stars are
heated by magnetic fields from the supermassive black hole at the
center of the Milky Way galaxy.
With this idea it is possible to trace the formation of the solar
system. The sun and stars formed separately. First the sun formed
and then after some time the planets formed. Red giants are not
dieing stars. Stars fluctuate all the time from being a red giant
to being a regular star. The sun was a red giant 4.6 billion years
ago as evident from meteorite age. The solar planets formed from
the strong solar wind of the red giant sun.

Aside from the fact that your "theory" contradicts all known
physics (a minor trifle, I'm sure you will say), from theory of
gases to nuclear physics to electromagnetism, to name a few, how
does your "theory" account for the detection of solar neutrinos?


For more details read the article:

http://www.philica.com/display_artic...article_id=210

http://www.pixelphase.com/sun/solarsystem.pdf


Abstract

How the solar system formed, is a puzzle that challenged
scientists for many centuries. The current accepted theory is the
Solar Nebula Hypothesis originated by Kant and Laplace in the
18th century. In reference 1 it was suggested that the sun energy
source is not fusion but magnetic fields from the center of the
galaxy. The Solar nebula Hypothesis cannot coexist with a sun
powered by magnetic fields. As shown on reference 4, those
magnetic fields create mass that slowly increase the mass of the
sun. The sun is growing not from dust from the interstellar space
but from synthesis of new particles in the sun interior. The sun
and the planets formed separately, the sun came first and then
the planets follow.
In the standard solar model stars are turned into red giants when
the hydrogen in their core is depleted and the energy production
stop. Stars do not work on fusion, but on magnetic fields, so they
turn into a red giant when their energy supply from the magnetic
field is stopped. Stars that have a very long Maunder minimum, for
tens of million of years, in which their stellar cycle is weak,
will turn into a red giant.
The exoplanet search programs found that stars with planets have
higher metallicity compared to stars without planets. The
metallicity of a star depends on its mass. Massive stars have
higher pressure and temperature in their core that increase the
fusion rate of heavy elements. Stars with planet, that show higher
metallicity, had higher mass in the past that created the high
metallicity. They went through a significant mass loss that
decreased their mass but did not change the high metallicity.
Those stars significant mass loss occur when they turned into red
giants. Red giants have strong stellar wind that disperses the
star outer layers into interstellar space. This stellar wind
creates comets that form planets around the star. The high
metallicity of the sun indicates that it was a red giant. The
solar planets where born from the solar wind of the red giant
sun. The solar system shows many evidences in support of an
ancient red giant sun. The energy calculation in reference 4
suggests that stars are slowly growing by converting the energy
from the magnetic fields to mass. The gradual mass increase
indicates that more massive stars are also older, so according to
the standard solar model there is a mix up between older and
younger stars. Older stars are not the smaller stars like red
dwarfs but the heavier stars like blue giants. The idea that
stars are slowly growing from small sizes, and the fact that the
latest exoplanet search programs found large number of
exoplanets, leads to the conclusion that stars originate from
planets. The development steps leading to the creation of stars
from planets include: growth of the planet by cold accretion of
comets and asteroids; separation of the planet from the star;
magnetic ignition of the planet when it reaches the size of a
brown dwarf; and growth of the star by conversion of the energy
from the magnetic fields to mass.

Regards,
Dan Bar-Zohar