STELLAR
ENERGY GENERATION
The theory of stellar energy generation in the Reciprocal System is stated
qualitatively in various works by Mr. Larson, such as
To sum up, when the destructive thermat limit is reached, the following word equation holds true:
Let
E
Each of the terms in the equation will now be discussed. Equivalent energy of one unit of magnetic time displacement Before we can find the energy equivalent of one unit of magnetic time displacement, we must find the mass equivalent. According to deductions previously made from the postulates of the Reciprocal System the electric equivalent of a magnetic displacement n is 2n²; this does not refer to the total from zero to n—it is the equivalent of the nth term alone. Each electrical unit is equal to two atomic mass units, and each atomic mass unit is equivalent to 931.48 MeV. For n equal to 3 and 4, the following table results:
Thus, the third magnetic time displacement is equivatent to 33533.28 MeV, and the fourth unit to 59614.72 MeV. Ionization energy At the present stage of development of the Reciprocal System we do not have a theoretical equation giving the energy needed to completely ionize at atom—but then neither does quantum mechanics. An empirical equation will have to do for now. Reference three has the most comprehensive table of ionization values available, giving the complete ionization energy for the first twenty elements. From the values, I have derived the following empirical equation:
where
Z is the atomic number. Of course, other equations are possible.
Thermal energy Let k be Boltzmann’s constant in MeV/°K and T be the temperature of an atom in °K Then the standard equation for the thermal energy (based on the ideal gas taw) is
Calculation of critical temperature and velocity From eq. lb,
Then,
For
thorium, E
This is fantastically high from our view as spectators on the earth, but in terms of natural units, the temperature is “only” 127.44. With k in J/°K, equation 3 can be solved for the velocity at the critical temperature.
For thorium, this amounts to
This is 84% of the speed of light:
and the critical velocity is
This is 91% of the speed of light! No wonder atoms are accelerated to velocities above the speed of light during a supernova explosion: Most likely the motion of the atoms in the core of a star is circular. The greater the temperature, the higher the velocity—thus as theoretically expected O and B type stars have much greater rotational velocities than G and K type stars. Rate of energy generation Since both the unit of magnetic time displacement and the opposing space displacement revert to linear motion, the total energy radiated per critical atom is
for n = 4. The
rate of energy generation depends on the number of atoms at the critical
temperature, N
Let
P
For the sun,
Taking thorium as representative of the critical elements,
Assuming
various values of F
According to the Reciprocal System, net accretion does occur over the
life of a star, but there may be periods where there is a net loss. Since
such a period may last as long as a billion years, I believe we are on
good ground assuming that F Rate of accretion
The sun appears to be one-third along its way on the Herzsprung-Russell
diagram. Since the sun has been estimated to be in existence for about
5 billion years, we can roughly assume that the average lifetime of a
star is 15 billion years. According to the theory, a star slowly increases
in temperature until the critical temperature of the iron group of elements
is reached, at which point the life of the star is terminated in a supernova
(Even
if L were only 7.5x10 Thus stars are for most of their lives very stable energy generators. From this we can conclude that the rate of accretion is just slightly greater than the rate of mass lost through burning. For calculating the rate of accretion we can assume that for the short term they are identical.
Let R
Using
previous values of P
This amounts to .000000096% of the mass of the star per year. It would take over 3108 years for the accretion to amount to the mass of the earth: Clearly we cannot observe this small rate of accretion. Observation cannot tell us whether the mass of the sun is remaining constant or slowly increasing, as we believe, or whether the mass of the sun is slowly decreasing, as present theory suggests. Conclusion The current theory of stellar energy generation has been criticized elsewhere, and a summary of that criticism is presented in reference five. The basic differences between the new theory and the current one are as follows: - In the new theory, energy is generated by disintegration of heavy elements; in the current theory, energy is generated by fusion of light etements.
- In the new theory the temperature
of the stellar core is of the order of 4.6 x 10
^{14}°K in current theory, it is 3x10^{7 }°K for the first phase, and 10^{9}for later phases. - In the new theory, ordinary stellar energy generating processes do not give rise to neutrino emission, but in current theory they do. So far, no neutrinos have been found to emanate from the sun.
- In the new theory, one
method for energy generation serves all types of stars; current theory
proposes that various stars have different energy schemes: proton-proton
reaction: the CNO bi-cycle; helium burning; (y, a)
reaction of C
^{12}, O^{16}, Ne^{20 }nuclei; e-process; r-process.
Thus, though observation (other than neutrino counts) cannot at present decide in favor of one theory over the other, Occam’s Razer can: the new theory wins hands down. References - Dewey B. Larson,
*Quasars and Pulsars*(Portland, Oregon: North Pacific Publishers, 1971), p. 60. - Dewey B. Larson,
*New Light on Space and Time*(Portland, Oregon: North Pacific Publishers 1965) p. 234 - Von W. Finkelnburg and
W. Humbach, “Ionisierungsenergien von Atomen and Atomionen,”
*Die Naturwissenschaften*, Heft 2, Jg. 42, 1955, pp. 35-37. - For instance a Polynomial
equation in Z has been worked out by computer by Frank V. Meyer: E
_{I}= 78.6411 - 72.8213 x Z + 33.675 x Z² + .801221 x Z³ . - Ronald W. Satz,
*The Unmysterious Universe*(Troy, NY: Troy Printers, 1971), p. 11. - R. Davis, Jr., D. S. Harmer, K. C. Hoffman, “Search for Neutrinos from the Sun,” Phys. Rev. Let., 20, 1205 (1968).
Author’s Note: This paper is not meant to be the last word on subject of stellar energy. Rather it is meant only to be the second word. Constructive criticism would be welcome. |