There are two options for what the surface layers of the Sun could be.

For Option I, the totally crazy option, very long nuclei defined by monopole flux tubes formed from M_{89} nucleons with mass of about 512 GeV would be in question. The M_{89} nuclei could be also dark in the TGD sense and the explanation for the observations of LHC (see this and this) is in terms of a creation of M_{89} mesons for which the value h_{eff}/h=512 so that the dark M_{89} hadrons would have the same size as the ordinary hadrons. This would conform with the quantum criticality for the TGD analog of the phase transition interpreted in QCD as a formation of the quark gluon plasma.

Option I is completely crazy but it explains nicely the missing .5 percent of solar nuclear matter, the gamma ray anomalies, and the formation of planets as explosions of the surface layer. By baryon number conservation, the explosion of the surface layer would produce at most 3M_{E} of the ordinary nuclear matter. M_{89} nuclei can form atoms with the same spectrum as ordinary atoms and this would explain the strange findings of Moshina suggesting a rigid core for the Sun.

For Option II, the not so crazy option, dark variants of ordinary nuclei would populate the flux tubes. The dark M_{107} nuclei could appear in the solar corona also for the option I. For this one must give up the assumption that there is just a single layer if one wants to explain the missing nuclear matter of the Sun. The replacement M_{89} → M_{107} scales down the mass of the single layer by 2^{-18} and the increase h→ h_{eff}= 2^{10}h reduces the mass of the layer by factor 2^{-20}. One must therefore have 2^{38}∼ 10^{12}/4 dark layers with thickens of about 1/2 of the electron Compton length. The simple model for the formation of planets is lost. Both gamma ray anomalies could be understood as local phase transitions to M_{89} or M_{79} hadron physics. Also the findings of Moshina might be understood in terms of dark atoms.

In both cases, the fluxes of energy and matter arriving from the Sun would be determined at the surface layer and this certainly leads to powerful predictions, which distinguish the TGD view from the standard view. For instance, the power produced in the transformation of the layer to ordinary nuclei should be proportional to the area of the surface and if the density of the start is kept constant and the anatomy of the surface layer does not depend on the size of the star, it should behave like M^{2/3} as function of the stellar mass.

The energetics related to solar wind and radiation from the Sun would provide a killer test perhaps allowing us to choose between the two options. The ratio for the mass carried out by solar wind to the energy carried out by radiation should be consistent with the empirical findings.

The energy lost per year using solar mass as a unit is a convenient measure for the rate of the mass loss in solar wind and for the rate of the energy lost by radiation. In the standard model interpreted as thermal radiation at the surface of the Sun acting as blackbody radiation.

The experimental estimate for P(rad)/M(Sun) is P(rad)(M(Sun)) ∼ .5 10^{12}/y. The estimate for P(wind)/M(Sun) is x× 10^{-14}/y, x in the range [2,3]. The ratio R is in the range [25,16.7].

** 1. Energetics for Option II**

For Option II the energy liberated per nucleon in the evaporation of single dark layer would be essentially the ordinary binding energy per nucleon, which is few MeVs for h_{eff}/h=2^{10} suggested by the TGD based model of the "cold fusion" (see this) and in the range 10^{-3}-10^{-2}. If the liberated energy is transformed to radiation the ratio R is in the range 10^{-3}-10^{-2}. This is in conflict with the experimental findings. This leaves only the totally crazy option under consideration.

**2. Energetics for the Option I**

Solar wind could be created by the transformation of M_{89} nucleons to M_{107} nucleons. This process is new from the standard physics view.

- If the process occurs as a single step k=89→ 107, the energy of the ordinary nuclei is huge and their velocity is essentially light velocity. This cannot make sense.
In the model for Centauro and Gemini events introduce p-adic cooling as a process allowing to avoid this (see this, this and this) p-Adic prime p∼ 2

^{k}would correspond a temperature in p-adic thermodynamics which is for mass squared rather than energy and mass scale would be indeed given by m(k) which would gradually reduces in the cooling.In the p-adic cooling, the p-adic length scale of the nucleon would be increased in a stepwise manner octave by octave: L(89)→ L(91)= L(93)/2→ ....L(107). 9 steps would be involved. Mass scale would be reduced in the same way. Whether particles can appear with several p-adic mass scales has been a long standing question and it might be that solar physics demonstrates this!

The p-adic cooling would produce final state nuclei which do not move with light-velocity since the energy of about m(89)= 511m(107) would be transformed to photons and mesons of various hadronic physics along the path and eventually give rise to radiation.

- A given step would involve transformation N(k)→ N(k+2) of a nucleon given mass m to that with mass m/2 and emission of some particle say photon or meson of the physics associated with p-adic length scale L(k-2). These particles of at least part of them would heat the solar surface producing the radiation from the Sun.
The gamma rays produced at the first step of the process have so high energy that they are not expected to thermalize to thermal radiation at the surface of the Sun but leak out of the Sun. These gamma rays would belong to the anomalous gamma rays from the Sun. The absence of anomalys gamma rays in the range 30-50 GeV suggests that meson production dominates over the production of gamma rays in the transformation N(k)→ N(k+2). Therefore the spectrum of gamma rays should reflect the mass spectra for the pions of the hadron physics appearing in the casca coming as powers 2

^{107-k}m(π). - Consider the kinematics for the first step of the p-adic cooling in which one has k=89→ k+2=91. Assume that the transition is N(k)→ N(k+2)+ X. Assume for definiteness that X has so small mass that it can be regarded as massless. Energy conservation gives E(107)= m(89)-E
_{X}, E(X)∼ p(X) and mass shell condition for the k=91 nucleon gives E(X)= 3m(89)/8 from this one obtains for the velocity of the nucleon β= v/c= 3/8. - At each step the same occurs and from the formula β= β
_{1}β_{2}/β_{1}+β_{2}for the addition of velocities, one obtains that v is scaled down by a factor 1/2 at each step. 9 steps gives for the velocity of N(107) the value β(107)=3/8 × 2^{-9}= 3× 2^{-12}∼ 3/8× 10^{-3}∼ 10^{5}m/s. The velocity is non-relativistic and corresponds to a kinetic energy m_{n}β^{2}/2 ∼ .5 keV.The temperature of the solar corona is ∼ .1 keV and the heating of the solar temperature could be caused by the dissipation of the energy of nucleons. This energy is also near the energy scale of dark nucleons in the model of "cold fusion" as dark fusion.

_{0}. This would mean that the mass m(k)/2 nuclei N(k), k≥ k

_{0}, k

_{0}= 107-r

_{0}nuclei would be transformed to radiation. The mass transformed to radiation would be the m(107)× ∑

_{r=0}

^{r0-1}2

^{r}= m(107)(1+2+2

^{2}+..+2

^{r0-1}).

The ratio R= P(rad)/P(wind) of the energy lost as radiation to the mass lost as solar wind would be in a rough approximation R=1+2+2^{2}+..+2^{k0-1}. k_{0}= 101 (prime) for which one has m(101)/2=4m(107)= 4GeV gives R=30 and k_{0}= 103 with m(103)/2=2m(107)= 2 GeV gives R=22. The ratio R is in the range [25,16.7] This favors the k_{0}=103 option.

It seems that the totally crazy option might work!

See the article Some solar mysteries or the chapter with the same title.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

For the lists of articles (most of them published in journals founded by Huping Hu) and books about TGD see this.

## No comments:

Post a Comment