The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass to energy.

Hello,

The main argument to oppose this theory is to claim that the magnetic
fields in the galaxy are too week to provide the sun with sufficient
enrgy. To reply to this argument I did some calculations which are
found in the pdf file below in the section:
The sun small resistivity enables it to absorb large amount of energy
from weak magnetic fields.

Visit the site that present this theory at
http://www.magneticgalaxy.com

The Big Bang theory, dark matter and dark energy could be replaced
with a simple theory based on magnetic fields in the galaxy. The
article below contradicts the usual explanation for the sun energy
source as a fusion reactor and suggests that the sun is heated by
magnetic fields from the Galactic center.

The main points of this theory are as follows:

1. The sun energy source is from magnetic fields from the
galactic center.
2. The heat from the magnetic fields leads to high energy
collision between particle in the sun core that creates new particle
and increase the sun mass.
3. All the stars in the galaxy create new mass so the total mass
and the size of the galaxy is increasing.
4. The stars in the galaxy eject dust that freefall to the
galactic center super massive black hole. Thorough the dynamo effect
the potential energy of the dust is converted to magnetic fields.
5. As the galaxy mass and size increase, distance arm of the
galaxy is detached form the main galaxy to create a new galaxy.
6. Galaxies spawn new galaxies and the total number of galaxies
in the universe increase.
7. The universe expands and accelerates from the increase in the
number of the galaxies.
8. The Big Bang cosmological model is replaced by a new
cosmological model that resembles the steady state theory.



The solar cycle is a striking evidence for this theory. Every 11 years
the sun is changing the direction of its dipole magnetic field. The
current solar model assume incorrectly that the change of the magnetic
fields is coming from inside the sun, but it is not, it is coming from
the galactic center and it supply energy that heat the sun. The
magnetic fields from the galactic center reach the sun not directly
but through magnetic eddies in the galactic disk.



The article could be downloaded at:
http://www.pixelphase.com/sun/sun.pdf
http://www.tikunim.co.il/sun/sun.pdf
http://www.philica.com/display_artic...?article_id=65

The article is also in the following newsgroups:
Alt.binaries.astronomy
Alt.binaries.pictures.astronomy

Its title is:
The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from
the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass
to energy.

Abstract:
The sun energy source thought to be a nuclear fusion reactor inside
the sun core. The sun is not heated by fusion reaction but by magnetic
fields coming from the galactic center. The nuclear fusion is a by
product of the magnetic fields heating. The changing magnetic fields
from the galactic center induce electric currents inside the sun that
heat the sun. The heat and the high kinetic energy of particles in the
sun core, trigger high energy collisions that create the main
constituents of matter, electron, proton and neutron. The collisions
also fuse or nucleosynthesis heavier elements like deuterium, tritium,
helium and lithium. This leads to the fact that the stars and galaxies
constantly produce mass and energy. The article will explain the
clockworks behinds the galaxies energy production. The galaxy energy
and mass production cancel out the Big Bang theory and leads to a
steady state cosmological model with large amount of new mass created
that expand and accelerate the universe.




Regards,
Dan Bar-Zohar

Sorry for the triple post; had trouble with my newsreader.

wrote in message ...
Sorry for the triple post; had trouble with my newsreader.


You have trouble with your physics, too.

I dont think I have problem with my physics. Do you find any contradiction
to a physical law?

wrote in message ...
I dont think I have problem with my physics. Do you find any contradiction
to a physical law?

You have a problem with your stupidity. You don't even know the difference
between "week" and "weak" or how to spell "don't", who the **** are you
to ask about physical laws?
Do you have a problem with nuclear weapons and power stations?
****in' galactic magnets! **** off, moron.
*plonk*