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

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)