The Standard Solar Model versus Experimental Observations

Mathematics – Logic

Scientific paper

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

Scientific paper

The standard solar model (ssm) assumes the that Sun formed as a homogeneous body, its interior consists mostly of hydrogen, and its radiant energy comes from H-fusion in its core. Two sets of measurements indicate the ssm is wrong: 1. Analyses of material in the planetary system show that - (a) Fe, O, Ni, Si, Mg, S and Ca have high nuclear stability and comprise 98+% of ordinary meteorites that formed at the birth of the solar system; (b) the cores of inner planets formed in a central region consisting mostly of heavy elements like Fe, Ni and S; (c) the outer planets formed mostly from elements like H, He and C; and (d) isotopic heterogeneities accompanied these chemical gradients in debris of the supernova that exploded here 5 billion years ago to produce the solar system (See Origin of the Elements at http://www.umr.edu/õm/). 2. Analyses of material coming from the Sun show that - (a) there are not enough neutrinos for H-fusion to be its main source of energy; (b) light-weight isotopes (mass =L) of He, Ne, Ar, Kr and Xe in the solar wind are enriched relative to heavy isotopes (mass = H) by a factor, f, where log f = 4.56 log [H/L] -- - Eq. (1); (c) solar flares by-pass 3.4 of these 9-stages of diffusion and deplete the light-weight isotopes of He, Ne, Mg and Ar by a factor, f*, where log f* = -1.7 log [H/L] --- Eq. (2); (d) proton-capture on N-14 increased N-15 in the solar wind over geologic time; and (e) solar flares dredge up nitrogen with less N-15 from this H-fusion reaction. Each observation above is unexplained by ssm. After correcting photospheric abundances for diffusion [Observation 2(b)], the most abundant elements in the bulk sun are Fe, Ni, O, Si, S, Mg and Ca, the same elements that comprise ordinary meteorites [Observation 1(a)]. The probability that Eq. (1) would randomly select these elements from the photosphere, i.e., the likelihood for a meaningless agreement between observations 2(b) and 1(a), is < 2.0E(-33). Thus, ssm does not describe the Sun. Other stars are too distant for measurements to determine their origin/evolution. Kluwer Academic/Plenum will publish observations summarized here in Proceedings of the 1999 ACS Symposium on the Origin of Elements in the Solar System, organized by Glenn T. Seaborg and Oliver K. Manuel. Supported by the Foundation for Chemical Research, Inc.

No associations

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for scientists and scientific papers. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

The Standard Solar Model versus Experimental Observations does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with The Standard Solar Model versus Experimental Observations, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and The Standard Solar Model versus Experimental Observations will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1724583

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.