Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jim Pennino Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics Subject: Re: Dark matter is the core of stars (minus hydrogen cover) Followup-To: sci.physics Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:31:30 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 134 Message-ID: References: <7a01799ad1646344d5af2e6e295a1f8f@www.novabbs.com> <103jhki$3fqet$1@dont-email.me> <103mt33$bcvg$1@dont-email.me> <4db6908bd23e49b82ae1085188e74c00@www.novabbs.org> <103oo36$rv5q$1@dont-email.me> <7d02633425b6fd819bddfd54a2120e07@www.novabbs.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2025 03:46:06 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="35dd1dd99b4e77dbd7c8d7ebee9e94ed"; logging-data="2739825"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ZWdmcxq5wLo4E6f54UvdG" User-Agent: tin/2.6.2-20220130 ("Convalmore") (Linux/5.15.0-142-lowlatency (x86_64)) Cancel-Lock: sha1:tFs0CzkXdmqpqfTGr5CH00PA9h4= In sci.physics Bertitaylor wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 3:58:26 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: > >> Am Samstag000028, 28.06.2025 um 14:44 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: >>>> >>>>> Den 27.06.2025 05:47, skrev Bertitaylor: >> >>>>>>>> It is deuterium fission which provides the energy for the hydrogen >>>>>>>> bombs on Earth. >>> >>> Any particular reason why you don't even try to defend your >>> claim that it is deuterium fission which provides the energy for >>> the hydrogen bombs on Earth? >>> >>> Let's look at where the energy in a fission comes from. >>> >>> When a radioactive element such as Uranium decays, the nucleus >>> splits in two. Each of the new nuclei will contain protons, >>> and there will be a very strong electrostatic repulsion between >>> the nuclei. That means that the nuclei will get tremendous >>> kinetic energy. As the nuclei collide, this energy will be >>> transformed to heat. >> >> Certainly the nuclei will not collide, because nuclei are extremely >> small and also have a charge, which will prevent collision with other >> nuclei of the same charge. > > The electrostatic repulsion causes great opposing forces within the > nucleus causing it to split into two high velocity atoms. The high > velocity atoms impart energy to surrounding atoms and when thus slowed > get accelerated by more high velocity atoms coming from the source. Like > in any explision, following Arindam's formula for energy creation from > kinetics. > > Then gamma rays as well of very high frequencies related to intra > nuclear distances. These high high frequency rays at very short > distances cause very powerful aetheric disturbances that break up other > loose nuclei causing the well known chain reaction. > > When surrounded by deuterium there is huge amplification of fission > energy. > > Woof woof > > Bertietaylor AI evaluation: This latest exposition by Arindam (writing as Bertietaylor) attempts to offer a mechanistic explanation of nuclear fission and its amplification, but it is riddled with conceptual misunderstandings, pseudo-physics, and vague references to personal theories. Here's a breakdown and critique of the main elements: Evaluation of Claims: 1. "The electrostatic repulsion causes great opposing forces within the nucleus..." Kernel of truth: Electrostatic repulsion (Coulomb force) between protons does create internal pressure. ❌ Oversimplification: A stable nucleus is held together by the strong nuclear force, which overcomes electrostatic repulsion at short ranges. Spontaneous fission or induced fission depends on quantum tunneling, neutron absorption, and nuclear binding energy—not simply "great opposing forces." 2. "Causing it to split into two high velocity atoms..." ❌ Misleading phrasing: Fission yields fragments (not fully intact atoms), which are typically ionized, highly energetic nuclei—not neutral atoms. The use of "atoms" glosses over key nuclear dynamics. 3. "Like in any explision [sic], following Arindam's formula for energy creation from kinetics." ❌ Invalid framework: This refers back to Arindam's previously discussed nonstandard and unsupported "energy creation" formula. Mainstream physics follows energy conservation laws. Nuclear fission releases binding energy—it does not "create" energy from kinetic motion per se. 4. "Gamma rays... cause very powerful aetheric disturbances that break up other loose nuclei..." ❌ Outdated concept: The reference to "aetheric disturbances" is a throwback to pre-relativistic physics and has no place in modern nuclear theory. ❌ Incorrect mechanism: Gamma rays emitted in fission do not typically trigger fission in other nuclei. The chain reaction is maintained by neutrons, not electromagnetic radiation. 5. "When surrounded by deuterium there is huge amplification of fission energy." ❌ Confusion of mechanisms: Deuterium is used in fusion reactions and as a moderator in some reactors (e.g., heavy water reactors). It doesn’t "amplify" fission in the way described here. A hydrogen bomb uses a fission primary to trigger fusion in deuterium/tritium—different physics. Conceptual Issues: Vague terminology: Phrases like "high high frequency rays" and "loose nuclei" are imprecise and scientifically meaningless. Fabricated mechanisms: Invented or speculative ideas (e.g., "aetheric disturbances" causing fission) are presented as fact. Lack of causality: The actual fission chain reaction is driven by neutrons, not gamma radiation or kinetic collisions. Scientific Status: Not aligned with accepted physics. Invented terminology and personal theories. Mimics language of science but fails at core principles. Final Verdict: Once again, Bertietaylor's writing is a stew of real physics terms, misapplied concepts, and invented mechanisms wrapped in dogmatic self-reference. It's pseudoscientific, though delivered with typical rhetorical bravado. “Woof woof,” indeed—but not the sound of a well-trained theory. -- penninojim@yahoo.com