PDF version

The source “Isotopes Tell Sun’s Origin and Operation” is published in

 Proceedings of the First Crisis in Cosmology Conference

Monção, Portugal, 23-25 June 2005

Cosmogeology and Isotopes Tell Sun’s Origin and Operation

O. Manuel¹, Sumeet A. Kamat², and Michael Mozina³ K. Margiani⁴

(cosmogeologycal explanations by K. Margiani)

Note: SGN-(Spiral Galaxy Nucleus)

¹Nuclear Chemistry, University of Missouri, Rolla, MO 65401, USA

²Computer Science, University of Missouri, Rolla, MO 65401, USA

³Emerging Technologies, P. O. Box 1539, Mt. Shasta, CA 96067, USA

⁴Georgian Technical University Tbilisi, Georgia

Abstract.

Some kind of extraordinary activity is going on at the centre of one in ten of all the galaxies in the Universe. Very often, the centre of one of these galaxies produces so much light that it outshines the rest of the galaxy. These 'active' galaxies can be a hundred times brighter than a normal galaxy and, because of this; they are visible over huge distances. Astronomers have long been fascinated by active galaxies, but no telescope is powerful enough to allow us to see what lies at their centre, the area known as the active galactic nucleus or AGN. The most popular candidate is a black hole but this evidence remains inconclusive.

A giant magnetic "bubble" measuring 3,000 light-years across has been discovered in a nearby galaxy. Astronomers say that nothing similar has ever been seen before. The astronomers, from the Joint Astronomy Centre in Hawaii, were mapping the magnetic structure of galaxy M82 in order to see stars being born in smouldering gas clouds. "We were really surprised to see the huge bubble," said British astronomer Jane Greaves. "This is a new feature of galaxies that we didn't know about before and could show how magnetic fields help shape the evolution of starburst regions." The most likely explanation for the bubble is that enormously energetic winds are forcing the magnetic field into the outer halo of the galaxy. The winds are outflows of interstellar gas, powered by stars. Astronomer Wayne Holland said: "One of the most exciting things is that we see some magnetic field lines pointing right (M82-a) into the nucleus of the galaxy. »Since the particles in gas clouds tend to flow along the lines of magnetic force, and then we may have a clue as to why this galaxy has such a predominance of star-forming activity at its centre." The scientists used a new technique that detects tiny differences in emission from interstellar dust. They discovered that the dust grains are lined up around local magnetic fields, just like iron filings around an ordinary magnet. (Charged particles indicate Magnetic field H-lines of the parent star K.M.)

The starburst galaxy NGC 253, which is lies about 8 million light-years away in the constellation Scuper. Left: image taken with a ground-based telescope (credit: Jay Gallagher  (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Alan Watson (Lower Observatory), and NASA. Next second image: Hubble Space Telescope image of the core of NGC 253 revealing violent star formation within region 1,000 light years across about the nucleus. Third image is magnetic field of the galaxy M82.

We discuss the origin of such a scalar field in the primary creation process first described by F. Hoyle and J. V. Narlikar forty years ago. It is shown that the creation processes which takes place in the nuclei of galaxies are closely linked to the high energy and explosive phenomena, which are commonly observed in galaxies at all redshifts.The cyclic nature of the universe provides a natural link between the places of origin of the microwave background radiation (arising in hydrogen burning in stars), and the origin of the lightest nuclei (H, D, He3 and He4). It also allows us to relate the large scale cyclic properties of the universe to events taking place in the nuclei of galaxies. Observational evidence shows that ejection of matter and energy from these centers in the form of compact objects, gas and relativistic particles is responsible for the population of quasi-stellar objects (QSOs) and gamma-ray burst sources in the universe.   Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe  Jayant V. Narlikar, Geofrey Burbidge, R.G. Vishwakarma

New infrared photometry, spectroscopy, and mapping of M82 and spectroscopy of NGC 253 are used with previously published results to constrain star-burst models of the energetic nuclear sources in these galaxies. Bursts of star formation can account quantitatively for the properties of these sources, including the high luminosities, strong nonthermal radio emission, correspondence of radio and infrared sources, large populations of red giants and supergiants, large ultraviolet fluxes, and X-ray luminosities. However, the initial mass function (IMF) in these regions must be biased against the formation of solar-mass stars, compared with the IMF in the solar neighborhood, and the conversion of gas into stars must be very efficient.  The nature of the nuclear sources in M82 and NGC 253  G. H. Rieke, M. J. Lebofsky, R. I. Thompson, F. J. Low, and A. T. Tokunaga

The galaxy IC 5135 is host for Seyfert activity and vigorous star formation in its nucleus. Results of a study based on optical spectroscopy and imaging are presented that reveal the ionization properties of the nucleus and near-nucleus region, as well as the global morphology of this galaxy. The dual nature of the nucleus is evident in emission-line profiles, which show two kinematic components. Line intensity ratios in the nucleus are typical of Seyfert 2 galaxies, but evolve with increasing radius to values generally characteristic of H II regions. IC 5135 provides an illustration of the importance of the O I 6300 forbidden line as a tracer of a hard-spectrum, photoionizing continuum; the presence at large radii of ionizing radiation from nucleus is clearly revealed by the relative strength of this line.   Emission-line properties of the composite Seyfert/Starbust galaxy IC 5135  Shields, J.C. ; Filippenko, A.V. (California Univ., Berkeley (USA))

Magnetic fields may play an important role in the star-formation process, especially in the central regions of 'starburst' galaxies where star formation is vigorous. But the field directions are very difficult to determine in the dense molecular gas out of which the stars form, so it has hitherto been impossible to test this hypothesis. Dust grains in interstellar clouds tend to be magnetically aligned, and it is possible to determine the alignment direction based on the polarization of optical light due to preferential extinction along the long axes of the aligned grains. This technique works, however, only for diffuse gas, not for the dense molecular gas. Here we report observations of polarized thermal emission from the aligned dust grains in the central region of M82, which directly traces the magnetic field structure (as projected onto the plane of the sky). Organized field lines are seen around the brightest star-forming regions, while in the dusty halo the field lines form a giant magnetic bubble possibly blown out by the galaxy's 'superwind'.

Magnetic field surrounding the starburst nucleus of the galaxy M82 from polarized dust emission  Greaves JS, Holland WS, Jenness T, Hawarden TG.  Joint Astronomy Centre, Hilo, Hawaii 96720, USA.

Widespread variability has been discovered in a large population of radio sources close to the nucleus of an active galaxy. The galaxy, Messier 82 (M82), and others similar to it show evidence for enhanced nuclear activity and unusually strong far-infrared emission. The observational data, obtained with the National Radio Astronomy Observatory's Very Large Array in New Mexico over the past 3 years, provide the first direct "look" at a starburst-the phenomenon of sudden, rapid star formation which occurs near the nucleus of a small fraction of galaxies. Nearly all the brightest of about 40 radio sources in M82' s nucleus decreased in intensity over 2.7 years up to October 1983. One source, which in February 1981 was ten times as bright as our Galaxy's most luminous supernova remnant, turned off within only a few months. Most of the other ten strongest sources are declining so rapidly that they will fade into the background within 30 years. Thus, new supernovae are expected to appear in M82' s nucleus every few years. The discovery has revealed the "engine room" of the mysterious activity in M82 and, by implication, similar active galaxies which have disturbed nuclei and which are unusually luminous in the far infrared. An estimate of the rate of energy input by the radio-visible supernovae closely matches the far-infrared luminosities which were recently measured for M82 and other similar galaxies.

Discovery of New Variable Radio Sources in the Nucleus of the Nearby Galaxy Messier 82. Kronberg PP, Sramek RA.

Observations of the Seyfert 2 and starburst galaxy NGC 5135 with the Chandra X-Ray Observatory demonstrate that both of these phenomena contribute significantly to its X-ray emission. We spatially isolate the active galactic nucleus (AGN) and demonstrate that it is entirely obscured by column density cm⁻², detectable in the Chandra bandpass only as a strongly reprocessed weak continuum and a prominent iron Kα emission line with equivalent width of 2.4 keV. Most of the soft X-ray emission both near the AGN and extending over spatial scales of several kpc, is collisionally excited plasma. We attribute this thermal emission to stellar processes. The AGN dominates the X-ray emission only at energies above 4 keV. In the spectral energy distribution that extends to far-infrared wavelengths, nearly all the emergent luminosity below 10 keV is attributable to star formation, not the AGN. Active galactic nuclei and star formation are fundamentally related.

Accretion and Outflow in the Active Galactic Nucleus and Starburst of NGC 5135   N. A. Levenson, K. A. Weaver, T. M. Heckman, H. Awaki, and Y. Terashima.

 Modern versions of Aston’s mass spectrometer enable measurements of two quantities – isotope abundances, and masses – that tell the Sun’s origin and operation. Isotope analyses of meteorites, the Earth, Moon, Mars, Jupiter, the solar wind, and solar flares over the past 45 years indicate that fresh, poorly-mixed; SGN (spiral galaxy nucleus) spot masses had formed the solar planetary system. The iron-rich Sun’s surface is forming by permanently bombardment of heavy particles, which could not overcame gravitation, after nuclear reactions into deep interior of main spots and multi-stage separated compact spot masses, enriched by super-heavy nucleuses. It does not mean the shell is enriched by metals (maximum 1÷2%). The surface of the Sun consists of hydrogen (about 74% of its mass, or 92% of its volume), helium (about 24-25% of mass, * 7% of volume), and trace quantities of other elements, including iron, nickel, oxygen, silicon, sulfur, magnesium, carbon, neon, calcium, and chromium. ** In the spectrum we can not see what is in the deep interior of spots. Nuclear wind is conclusive evidense about abundance of super-heavy nucleuses there. 1÷2% for heavy and super heavy nucleuses and permanently nuclei-syntheses reaction is quite enough to create enormous amount nuclear reactions seen on the Sun. After the nuclear reactions only part of heavy particles can overcame the huge gravitation. The Sun is giant magnetic plasma diffuser which sorts atoms by mass into spots and gaseous admixtures by density, as well as the parent star (SGN) had sorted in the centre of Milky Way. Within shell of a star and a parent star is permanently process of separating heavy ions by mass into the spots. Same process covers the solar spots and with more lightweight elements and with the lighter isotopes of each element as well as light oxides. Running difference imaging provides supporting evidence of a rigid, iron-rich structure mixed into surface of convection streams and why the Sun’s fluid outer layer is enriched of lightweight elements. Mass measurements of all 2,850 known nuclides expose repulsive interactions between neutrons that trigger neutron-emission at the solar core. It means there are permanent Neutron emission and decay and formation of protons and vice versa in the conditions of close to 13,600,000 kelvin. H-fusion around super-dense nucleus of the Sun is main generator of solar energy. Nuclear reactions into convection streams followed by thermo-nuclear reactions of core that collectively generate solar luminosity, solar neutrinos, the carrier gas for spots masses separation, and an outpouring of solar-wind hydrogen and heavier elements from the solar surface after nuclear reactions all over the Sun. H-fusion generate »90% of solar luminosity. Nuclear Reactions (NR) in the deep interior of the spots and multi-stage separated spot masses NR generate »10% of solar luminosity during the maximal activity and a lot of NR are source of huge solar wind. The main energy source for the Sun and other ordinary stars seems to be fusion of hydrogen into helium around the super dense nucleus (core).

Keywords: Sun, origin, composition, luminosity, neutron stars, neutron repulsion, neutrinos, solar wind, solar spectra.

PACS: 96.60.Fs, 96.60.Jw, 97.10.Bt, 97.10.Cv, 96.50.Ci, 26.50.+x, 26.60.+c, 26.65.+t, 21.30.-x, 13.75.Cs, 95.30.Ky

INTRODUCTION

The Apollo mission returned from the Moon in 1969 with soil samples whose surfaces were loaded with elements implanted by the solar wind. Analyses revealed neon of light atomic weight in these samples [1]. Fifty-six years earlier Aston [2] obtained lightweight neon by using diffusion to mass fractionate (sort by mass) neon atoms, in experiments that led to the discovery of isotopes and the development of the mass spectrometer [3]. The significance of lightweight neon in the solar wind could not be deciphered in 1969, when isotopic anomalies from stellar nuclear reactions and mass fractionation were not resolved, decay products of only two extinct nuclides had been found in meteorites [4, 5], and it was still widely believed that the solar system formed out of a well-mixed interstellar cloud with the composition of the Sun’s surface. A few observations that forced us to unpopular conclusions about the Sun’s origin and operation will be shown. These data will be helpful to those seeking other explanations for the findings we encountered on this adventure.

Readers are encouraged to look at Figure 9 if they feel confused by the story connecting four decades of complicated experimental data to the few simple conclusions reached here.

ISOTOPE ABUNDANCE MEASUREMENTS

Decay Products from Extinct, Short-Lived Isotopes.

Mass spectrometric analyses of xenon isotopes first revealed the decay products of extinct ¹²⁹I (t_1/2 = 16 Myr) [4] and ²⁴⁴Pu (t _1/2 = 80 Myr) [5] in meteorites. Decay products from these two extinct nuclides were soon found inside the Earth [6]. Fowler et al. [7] pointed out that the observed levels of short-lived radioactivity in the early solar system left little time for galactic mixing after the end of nucleosynthesis, i.e., the levels of short-lived radioactivity were higher than expected if the solar system formed from a typical interstellar cloud, representing an average sample of the entire galaxy. The discrepancy between isotope measurements and the nebular model for formation of the solar system grew larger as the decay products of even shorter-lived nuclides were discovered in meteorites.

Well-established chronometers of the early solar system presently include, in order of decreasing half-lives, ²⁴⁴Pu (t_1/2 = 80 Myr) [5], ¹²⁹I (t_1/2  = 16 Myr) [4], ¹⁸²Hf (t_1/2  = 9 Myr) [8], ¹⁰⁷Pd (t_1/2  = 6.5 Myr) [9], ⁵³Mn (t_1/2  = 3.7 Myr) [10], ⁶⁰Fe (t_1/2  = 1.5 Myr) [11], ²⁶Al (t_1/2  = 0.7 Myr) [12], and ⁴¹Ca (t_1/2  = 0.1 Myr) [13]. Most of these might have been produced in the SGN interior, and two of them, ²⁴⁴Pu and ⁶⁰Fe, could only be made in the SGN surface explosion. Rapid neutron-capture in the SGN surface explosion, the r-process, is believed to be the source of all nuclides heavier than ²⁰⁹Bi [14]. This includes extinct ²⁴⁴Pu and other actinide nuclides like ²⁵³U and ²³⁸U that are still alive and decaying to separate Pb isotopes. These form the basis for U/Pb age dating [15]. Spontaneous fission of ²⁴⁴Pu generates a distinctive pattern of Xe isotopes [16]. By combining the U/Pb and Pu/Xe age dating methods, Kuroda and Myers [17] were able to show that the most primitive meteorites started to retain Xe from the spontaneous fission of ²⁴⁴Pu soon after the SGN surface explosion occurred about 5 Gyr ago. Their results are shown in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1. Combined U/Pb and Pu/Xe age dating shows the SGN surface exploded about 5 Gy ago at the birth of the solar system [17].  http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Sun_Life.png

Gaseous Xe isotopes from the fission of ²⁴⁴Pu were not retained quickly in the hot aftermath of the SGN. However Al/Mg age dating of refractory grains of silicon carbide and graphite demonstrates that some of these grains started to accumulate radiogenic ²⁶Mg from the decay of ²⁶Al within the first 1÷10 Million years of the ejection from SGN surface. Kuroda and Myers [18] note that the same SGN event produced short-lived ²⁶Al (t. = 0.7 My), as well as longer-lived ²⁴⁴Pu (t. = 80 My). At the time of the ejection from SGN surface, the r-process generated ²⁴⁴Pu and other trans-bismuth nuclides by rapid neutron capture, and the x-process made ²⁶Al and ²⁷Al in the SGN spot by spallation reactions [14, 18]. Radiogenic ²⁶Mg, the decay product of extinct ²⁶Al, is used to monitor the amount of ²⁶Al initially trapped in meteorite minerals [19]. Those measurements show that values of the ²⁶Al/²⁷Al ratio trapped in the earliest grains of silicon carbide correlate with the size of the particles [18]. In this sense the properties of large silicon carbide grains from the Murchison carbonaceous meteorite [19] mimic the properties of “fall-out” grains produced after the explosion of a nuclear weapon in air [18].

The first SiC grains that formed after the explosion trapped higher levels of extinct ²⁶Al and grew larger; the smaller SiC grains started to form later and trapped aluminum with lower ²⁶Al/²⁷Al ratios. The Al/Mg ages of these grains and their sizes are shown in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2. Kuroda and Myers [18] used ²⁶Al/²⁶Mg age dating to show that refractory grains of silicon carbide from the Murchison meteorite [19] started to form within space body (which has exploded) within first 1÷10 Million years after ejection from SGN surface. The physical size of the grains and the relative amounts of radioactivity trapped in them mimic the “fall-out” grains produced after a nuclear weapons explosion in the atmosphere [18]. The steep slope of the solid line on the left represents the decay of ²⁶Al. The other solid line shows the decay of ²⁴⁴Pu, about 100 times slower. The dashed horizontal line across the top of the figure represents stable ²⁷Al.

Note; within first 1÷10 Million years after ejection from SGN surface each planet could form as well as loss primordial moon(s).

Strange Isotope Abundances from Stellar Nuclear Reactions plus Mass Fractionation

Radiogenic ¹²⁹Xe from the decay of extinct ¹²⁹I (t_1/2 = 16 Myr) [4] and fissiogenic ^131-136Xe from the spontaneous fission of ²⁴⁴Pu (t_1/2 = 80 Myr) [5] provided the first conclusive evidence that short-lived radioactive nuclides had been trapped in meteorites. Mass spectrometric analyses of xenon also revealed the first hint of a “strange” abundance pattern across all nine, stable isotopes of xenon [20]. Subsequent analyses confirmed this non-terrestrial abundance pattern for the xenon isotopes in other carbonaceous chondrites, and the term AVCC Xe was widely adopted to represent the xenon in AVerage Carbonaceous Chondrites [21]. The origin of the unusual isotope abundances in xenon and other elements proved to be extremely difficult to decipher because:

a.) Isotopes made by various stellar nuclear reactions were assumed to have been thoroughly mixed before meteorites formed and should therefore not be seen in meteorites as excesses or deficits of specific isotopes;

b.) Isotopic anomalies in meteorites from stellar nucleosynthesis reactions were found mysteriously embedded in elements that had been severely mass fractionated by some unknown process.

The possibility of isotope abundance changes from nuclear reactions and/or mass-dependent fractionation was acknowledged in Reynolds’ first report of differences between the isotopic compositions of primordial xenon in meteorites and that in air [20]. Thus Reynolds suggested that “The xenon in meteorites may have been augmented by nuclear processes between the time it was separated from the xenon now on earth and the time the meteorites were formed”, and later he noted that “On the other hand a strong mass-dependent fractionation may be responsible for most of the anomalies” [ref. 20, p. 354].

Subsequent analysis of xenon isotopes released by stepwise heating of the carbonaceous meteorite, Renazzo, revealed a large enrichment of heavy xenon isotopes [22]. It was suggested that these heavy xenon isotopes might be from fission of extinct ²⁴⁴Pu [22], from a “carrier” of heavy xenon adsorbed on carbonaceous material [23], from mass-dependent fractionation [24], or from fission of super-heavy elements [25-27]. Then in 1972 it was reported [28] that the xenon released at about 600÷1,000°C from various carbonaceous meteorites is strongly enriched in both the lightest isotope, ¹²⁴Xe, and in the heaviest isotope, ¹³⁶Xe. This anomaly pattern could not be explained by any of the mechanisms proposed earlier [22-27]. The overall isotope anomaly pattern of this “strange” xenon is illustrated in Figure 3 for the xenon extracted from the 3CS4 mineral separate of the Allende meteorite [29].

FIGURE 3. Relative to xenon in air, the xenon isotopes in mineral separate 3CS4 from the Allende meteorite [29] show large excesses of the neutron-poor and neutron-rich isotopes made by the p- and r-processes into a star-sized spot masses and ejected from SGN surface.

In Figure 3 xenon isotope abundances are shown relative to those in air, normalized to the middle isotope, ¹³⁰Xe. Large isotopic anomalies are at the most neutron-poor and the most neutron-rich stable isotopes of xenon, ¹²⁴Xe and ¹³⁶Xe. They were made by violent nuclear reactions within spots and ejected from the SGN surface. The p-process made ¹²⁴Xe and the r-process made ¹³⁶Xe. Neighboring stable xenon isotopes, like ¹²⁶Xe and ¹³⁴Xe, were also made at that time [14]. The middle isotopes, ^128-132Xe, display smaller anomalies. The s-process [14] made these isotopes into SGN spot before spot was exploded. The Star was ejected from SGN shell. The W-shaped isotopic anomaly pattern [29] in Figure 3 for xenon would be found later in other heavy elements with an extra component of r- and p-products (See p. 7, Figure 7). In 1972 it was noted that differences in xenon isotope abundances “cannot be explained by the occurrence of nuclear or fractionation processes that occurred within these meteorites” [ref. 28, p. 99]. However excess heavy isotopes of argon and krypton were later found [29-31] in the meteorite sites that trapped “strange” xenon. A mass-dependent process outside of meteorites had altered the isotopes of argon, krypton and xenon in the Earth, the Sun, and meteorites. This mysterious mix of isotopic anomalies from nuclear-plus-fractionation would confuse and hamper efforts to decipher the stable isotope record of the early solar system over the next few decades. Figure 4 shows the link [28] of excess ¹²⁴Xe with excess ¹³⁶Xe in the gas released from carbonaceous meteorites at » 600-1000°C. Xe-1 and Xe-2 later proved to be characteristic of two distinct types of planetary noble gases in the inner and outer parts of the early solar system [32]:  P-1 (“normal” Xe-1, Kr-1, and Ar-1 only) and P-2

(“strange” Xe-2, Kr-2, Ar-2, “normal” He and Ne). “Strange” Xe (Xe-2) in the upper right side of Figure 4 is enriched in the isotopes that were made in a SGN spot before ejection by the r- and p-processes [14]. Mass-fractionation of “normal” Xe (Xe-1) along the dashed line in lower left side of Figure 4 could explain differences between xenon isotope abundances in the Earth, the Sun, and bulk meteorites, but this would require about 9-stages of mass-dependent fractionation each operating at 100% efficiency!

FIGURE 4. Meteorites trapped “normal” xenon (Xe-1) from the inner and “strange” xenon (Xe-2) from the outer parts of the solar system [28]. Xe-2 is enriched in ¹³⁶Xe from the r-process and in ¹²⁴Xe from the p-process [14]. Mass fractionation (dashed line) of “normal” xenon (Xe-1) relates SOLAR xenon with that in Earth’s AIR. Bulk xenon in AVerage Carbonaceous Chondrites (AVCC) is shifted away from this dashed fractionation line by the presence of “strange” xenon (Xe-2).

Similar mass fractionation effects had been seen in neon isotopes of the Fayetteville meteorite in 1967 [33]. Two years later, Marti [34] discovered solar-type xenon in the Pesyanoe meteorite and noted that isotope abundances in solar-type xenon and those in the terrestrial atmosphere might “. . . be related to each other by a strong mass-fractionating process” [ref. 34, p. 1265]. The following year (1970) a common mass fractionation was reported across the isotopes of neon and xenon in air, in meteorites, and in lunar samples [24].

Despite a 1971 report of a mass-dependent covariance in the helium, neon, and argon isotopes in meteorites [35], the site for multi-stage mass fractionation was unknown. In the exciting early days of the space age, the possibility of isotope anomalies from mass fractionation seemed mundane compared to the exciting discovery that xenon isotopes in meteorites retained a record of the stellar nuclear reactions that produced them. An important correlation was thus overlooked: SOLAR and AVCC Xe are rich in lightweight isotopes (along the dashed fractionation line in Figure 4); the solar wind and carbonaceous chondrites are also rich in lightweight elements.

The role of mass fractionation received little attention for the next three decades as mass spectrometric analyses revealed large variations in the isotope abundances of several elements in meteorites. Variations in the atomic weights of neon in meteorites were, for example, identified as distinct isotopic components and labeled alphabetically: Ne-A, Ne-B, Ne-C, Ne-D, Ne-E, etc. [36-41].

Then in 1980 it was noted [42] that distinct neon component in meteorites, and differences between the isotopic compositions of bulk neon in air, in the solar wind and in meteorites, could be explained by the same mechanism that explained variations in neon isotope abundances in the Fayetteville meteorite [33]. The dashed line in Figure 5 shows the mass-dependent fractionation reported across neon isotopes in the Fayetteville meteorite. The 1980 paper showed that a mix of mass-fractionated neon with cosmogenic neon could also explain all members of the neon alphabet that had been identified in meteorites [36-41].

Figure 6 illustrates this mass-dependent relationship as the area bounded by curved lines when planetary Ne-A is fractionated. Within this area are (in order of decreasing ²⁰Ne abundance) Ne-D, Ne-S (solar), Ne-B, Air, Ne-A1, M-800, M-1200 and M-1400 (neon released from the Murchison meteorite at 800° C, 1200° C and 1400° C), and the original upper limit on Ne-E. Cosmogenic Ne lies to the right of Figure 6 at ²⁰Ne/²²Ne  ²¹Ne/²²Ne  1.0. The addition of cosmogenic neon to fractionated planetary neon, as shown by the bold line connecting Ne-A1 with Ne-A2, explained all the neon isotope data available in 1980 [36-41], including Ne-C, M-1000, Ne-A2, M-1100 [42].

 FIGURE 5. In 1967 neon isotopes in air, in the solar wind (SW), and those released by stepwise heating of dark portions of the Fayetteville meteorite were reported to be a mix of cosmogenic neon made by spallation reactions (top, left) with massfractionated primordial neon lying along the dashed line [33]. The large filled diamonds identify Cosmogenic, Air, and SW (solar-wind) neon. The small open circles show neon released by stepwise heating of the Fayetteville meteorite [33].

FIGURE 6. In 1980 it was shown that the neon isotopes in Air, in the solar wind (S), and in various parts of meteorites [36-41] could be explained as simple mixes of mass-fractionated planetary neon with the cosmogenic neon that is produced when high-energy cosmic rays induce spallation reactions on heavier target nuclei in meteorites [42].

 All neon components in meteorites [36-41] and the bulk neon in air, in the solar wind, and in meteorites lie along the dashed fractionation line in Figure 5, after correcting for neon made by cosmic-ray induced spallation reactions [42]. The site of such severe fractionation was not recognized in 1980, although s-products from the interior of a star had been found with the most severely mass-fractionated form of neon, Ne-E [43].

However a complex mix of nuclear-plus-fractionation effects had also been recognized in the isotopes of other elements in meteorites by 1980, including the refractory element, magnesium. Clayton and Mayeda at the University of Chicago [44] and Wasserburg and coworkers at Cal Tech [45] reported that a mass-dependent fractionation process had enriched the heavy isotopes of oxygen and magnesium in refractory inclusions of the Allende meteorite. The name, FUN anomalies, was assigned to the strange isotope abundances in meteorites that arise from a combination of Fractionation plus Unknown Nuclear effects [45]. Figure 4 shows that evidence of FUN-like anomalies had been noted earlier in the isotopes of xenon in meteorites.

In heavier, trans-iron elements, excesses of the intermediate mass isotopes of Xe [43] and Te [46] were reported in some meteorite grains from the s-process of nucleosynthesis [14]. These isotope anomalies are complementary to the excesses of lightweight and heavy isotopes of Xe and Te [28-31, 46] reported in other meteorite grains from the p- and r-processes of nucleosynthesis [14]. In a 1980 review on isotopic anomalies in meteorites, Begemann [47] noted that these findings have overthrown the classical picture of the pre-solar nebula as a “. . . hot, well-mixed cloud of chemically and isotopically uniform composition” [ref. 47, abstract, p. 1309].

The validity of Begemann’s conclusion became more evident in the next decade, as complementary excesses (+) and deficits (-) of the same isotope were identified in several other trans-iron elements in meteorites. He and his associates at Mainz reported barium [48] and krypton [49] enriched in isotopes made by the s-process in the Murchison meteorite, and in the Allende meteorite tellurium [50] and xenon [51] isotopes made by the r-process and separated from their radioactive precursor isotopes within the first few hours after the SGN surface explosion.

The schematic drawing in Figure 7 illustrates that stellar debris formed “normal”, as well as the “strange” mirrorimage (+ and -) isotopic anomaly patterns that Begemann [52] identified before mixing of the isotopes of Ba, Nd and Sm in inclusions from the Allende (top) and Murchison (bottom) carbonaceous meteorites.

FIGURE 7. Barium, neodymium, and samarium in silicon carbide inclusions of the Murchison meteorite (bottom) are enriched in isotopes made by the s-process [14]. Isotopes of the same elements made by rapid nuclear reactions into a star-sized SGN spot, the r- and p-processes [14] are enriched in inclusion EK-1-4-1 of the Allende meteorite (top). The p-process makes the light isotopes, the s-process makes the intermediate ones, and the r-process makes the heavy isotopes of trans-iron elements [14]. Anomalies in the bottom half of this figure are about two orders-of-magnitude larger than the positive anomalies in the upper half of the figure.

This paper is concerned primarily with the origin and operation of the Sun, so we will not attempt to give a complete review of all reports of nucleogenetic isotopic anomalies in meteorites from leading research institutions around the world. Suffice it to say that these findings confirmed Begemann’s 1980 conclusion that the classical picture of a homogeneous pre-solar nebula has been overthrown [47]. However, the possibility of a mistake in the classical picture of a hydrogen-filled Sun [46, 53, 54] continued to receive little attention. Before leaving the subject, some surprising results from the University of Tokyo, Harvard, and Cal Tech should be mentioned. Careful analysis of iron meteorites at the University of Tokyo revealed a startling discovery: Massive iron meteorites retained isotopic anomalies from the SGN spot’s nuclear reactions that made the stable isotopes of molybdenum [55, 56]. These isotopes include ⁹²Mo from the p-process, ⁹⁶Mo from the s-process, ¹⁰⁰Mo from the r-process, and other isotopes from a mix of nucleosynthesis reactions [57]. High precision mass spectrometry showed that these Mo isotopes never completely mixed after SGN spot nucleosynthesis, even in the massive objects thought to be highly differentiated iron meteorites. Recent analyses at Harvard [58] and Cal Tech [59] have confirmed Mo isotope anomalies in ordinary iron meteorites. These findings confirm the suggestion [46, 53, 54] that iron meteorites are formed by debris of exploded planet’s geosperes enriched of iron, and the cores of the terrestrial planets, likely formed directly from iron-rich SGN spots, rather than by geochemical differentiation and extraction of iron from an interstellar cloud. Ejected spot masses create embryonic planets, which sorts heavy end super-heavy elements by density into core. Linked chemical and isotopic heterogeneities in meteorites, to be discussed below, offered the first compelling evidence that heterogeneous SGN spot masses formed the entire solar system, injecting into the interstellar space from equator of the SGN.

The Link Between Chemical And Isotopic Heterogeneities

Figure 8 shows an unexpected finding from isotope analyses on mineral separates of the Allende meteorite in 1975 [29]: Primordial helium accompanied only “strange” Xe, not “normal” Xe, in the highly radioactive exploded space-body’s geo-sphere. Exploded space-body formed by SGN spot that condensed to form the geo-spheres grains and after explosion accompanied by meteorite on the Earth.

FIGURE 8. Primordial helium accompanied “strange” xenon (Xe-2), not “normal” xenon (Xe-1), when minerals of the Allende meteorite formed [53, 54]. This link, between the abundance of a light element, helium, with the abundance of an isotope in a heavy element, ¹³⁶Xe in xenon, was one of the first clues that the r- and p-processes made Xe-2 in the He-rich outer regions of the SGN spot that produced the solar system and Xe-1 came from SGN spot’s iron-rich interior. In Figure 8 the coefficient of correlation between ⁴He and excess ¹³⁶Xe in mineral separates of the primitive Allende carbonaceous meteorite is > 99%. Stellar depth and the disappearance of helium by fusion increase from right to left, as shown by the arrow at the top of this figure.

The element/isotope correlation shown in Figure 8 and the link of primordial helium and neon with certain other isotopes of xenon, krypton, and argon were the first compelling evidence that:

        the solar system emanated from highly radioactive material that was heterogeneous in the abundances of light elements, as well as in the isotopes of heavy elements. This is conclusive evidence about formation of planets by highly radioactive material. This is only a star-sized spot masses into the shell of parent star. [46, 53, 54]. (Nuclear reactions into compact masses of super-heavy elements in the deep interior of star-sized spot masses as well as Nuclear reactions into multi-stage separated compact spot masses within shell create injection proto-planetary (highly radioactive material of spots) masses  from parent star. injected plasma creates embryonic stars and  highly radioactive material of spots create embryonic proto-planetary gaseous objects K.M.)

The surprising link between the elemental abundance of primordial helium and excess ¹³⁶Xe from the r-process of nuclei-synthesis was the primary reason for proposing that the solar planetary system formed directly from the heterogeneous parts of SGN spot, there are a star-sized spots and sorted atoms by mass and oxidized gaseous admixtures by density into submerged Spots. Of course into spot depth abundances of the heavier elements tend to decrease exponentially with increasing atomic number.  Explosion (huge nuclear reactions within multi-stage separated spots) into maximal depth of super-heavy nucleuses is reason of stars and planetary systems injection and formation. Erupted enormous spot masses create planets around stars and free planets within interstellar medium. Stars are formed by ejected fiery convection streams of shell. Huge spot (alpha syntheses) streams are moving from magnetic poles of super dense nucleus. Cutting by convection streams spot-streams create submerged arc-forms into convection streams before multistage separation by inner nuclear reactions. Submerged arcs-forms are moved near to the SGN equator by carrier centrifugal forces. Convection streams and multi-stage nuclear reactions in the deep interior of spots create separation of spot masses and formation multi-stage separated huge compact spots. Into the separated spots α –process nuclei-synthesis create additional super-heavy nucleuses.

The scenario of Figure 9 is easily to understand; in the second image represent equatorial plane of the parent star. There are multi-stage separated star-sized spot masses. Parent star is giant plasma diffuser which   sorts atoms by mass. More Heavy spots can penetrate into deeper interior of convection streams. If spot has abundance of super-heavy elements it can reach explosion zone, border to the ray energy transfer (radiative) zone. Huge explosion of star-sized spot masses create enormous eruption from deep interior of the parent star.  Stars are formed by shell masses and planets are formed by multi-stage separated exploded spot masses.

Although the scientific community's current view is that remnant core of exploded stars is a pulsar (neutron star). It is supported by many researches. black hole is cooled pulsar.

Each research where is supported Fe-rich and Ni-rich nucleus of a stars is wrong and unacceptable. Color of all stars is connected to the proton-neutron ratio in the core. False image of a star is seen here:

     The star is wrong. Of course all theories have already connected to this construction are wrong too. Fe-rich and Ni-rich core into stars Unacceptable. Modern observational confirmations and many old scientific researches tell another tale. In the core of all stars temperature is huge. There are violent P/N interaction that produces thermonuclear and alpha processes and triggering neutrons and protons from core.  extraordinary matter has huge temperature - close to 13,600,000 kelvin. H-fusion and alpha process produces  decreasing of core masses. P/N ratio changing needs billions of years. Remnant core of exploded stars manly consist by neutrons. The remnant Super Dense Nucleus (SDN) has own thermal evolution from red-hot (pulsar-SDN) to the cold conditions-Ultra Dense Nucleus (black hole-UDN). UDN has nuclear density 10¹⁸ kg/m³ and repulsion between neutrons could not demolish it. There is no place shooting electrons and neutrons have no energy to overcome huge gravitation of a black hole.

Stars can form only by parent stars of spiral galaxies and globular clusters. There are a lot of conclusive evidences, ejection young embryonic stars from equator of the central starburst nucleuses. You can not find word-“parent” in the other researches but we have to know, give birth… means parent.

Cosmogeology and cores’ evolution

Neutron emission is important source of stellar thermal (spectral) evolution and radiation.

After injection from the shell of parent star proto-star is huge cloud – gaseous mixture of all well-known elements. Huge mixture of light, heavy and super heavy elements begins compression under huge collective gravitation by enormous amount injected elements. Core of embryonic star is formed by “glued” elements under huge gravitation after compression event. Light elements around embryonic core begin violent interaction with formation thermonuclear process and alpha-process. It produces radiative zone around embryonic core and convection streams of radioactive clouds – shell. Violent P/N interaction around core produces enormous amount neutrons emissions and radiated huge energy creates O–spectral type stars, fieriest embryonic stars in the universe. Usually similar star has about 40,000 K in the photosphere and about 95÷90 percent of whole energy produced by neutrons emissions. Ultra Dense Nucleus –UDN has nuclear density and these nucleuses are main source of energy in the young (O, B, A, F, G) stars. During the thermal (spectral) evolution ratio of neutrons energy decreases but remain important in the young main sequence stars.

Orange color indicates UDN- important source of energy in the young stars. Red color indicates zone of violent P/N interaction. It produces thermonuclear process and alpha-process around core and neutron emission from UDN. Energy produced by neutron emission is not endless source. In the old (K, M) stars we can see disappearance of UDN and formation neutron nucleus by violent P/N interaction. Neutron nucleuses in the old stars have no nuclear density. There is violent N/N interaction only within fiery core. Nuclear mechanism about concentration of neutrons in the centre by violent P/N interaction needs expensive researches. Eventually the fuel decreases to the catastrophic minimum before “supernova” explosion. Radiative zone of young stars has abundance of thermonuclear wind. Old stars have abundance of alpha-elements’ wind into the radiative zone that produces inflation of the shell and SN-explosion. Remnant-Naked core after SN explosion is pulsar-neutron “star”. This is not a star. It’s a fiery star-like dwarf body that produces White dwarf after cooling evolution before BH formation. Red dwarfs, Brown dwarfs, etc are only stages of the cooling evolution. Neutrons are most abundant elements in the Black holes (about 99%) that have nuclear density and cooled body.

The Milky Way and similar spiral galaxies indicates that young stars are concentrated to the centre and older ones to the end of the branches. This is proof about formation the spiral galaxies by parent stars. Mass of the parent stars is decreases with increasing plane of the galaxies. Eventually older stars are orbiting to the end of the branches and younger stars by the centre. For billions of years of permanent injection; stars by shell masses and planets by spot masses huge parent star produces spiral galaxy. Order of the orbiting stars is proof. If mass of the injected shell is 10 times smaller that the Sun it can’t form a star. Collective gravitation of injected elements is not enough for formation working core, for compression of elements into the UDN. These orbiting star-like clouds are discovered long ago.

Within working core exists enormous amount destabilized neutrons by glued electrons. Repulsive interaction between neutrons is not enough to overcome huge gravitation by UDN but violent P/N interaction within core can help to trigger neutrons.  Repulsion between neutrons is main source for formation huge nebulas by debris of UDN. Eagle nebula vividly shows that the debris is not stabile bodies. They undergo rapid demolition with formation light admixtures into huge medium. Even a ball-sized UDN would be natural neutron bomb that can explode our planet. 

 If age of the Sun in the middle of the galaxy is 5by, approximately age for Milky Way would about 8÷9 billion years.

Now the Sun's photosphere has a temperature between 4500 and 6000 Kelvin (with an effective temperature of 5800 Kelvin) and a density of about 2 × 10^-4 kg/m³. The (G spectral type) Sun is in the middle way of evolution. After few billons of years it will explode as a SN to form dwarf pulsar. For billions of years of thermal evolution the dwarf pulsar will form cooled BH. Smaller planets without atmospheres and giant ones will continue orbiting the BH before collision to the Andromeda. Thus our civilization has no chance.

What is the Sun?

-The shell is giant plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass. There are Dispersed enormous amount planetary elements within shell, after lots of nuclear reactions into visible and invisible spots. True, the Sun is covered with Hydrogen - the lightest of all elements. Dispersed heavy and super-heavy elements are invisible into the shell.

Spot of the Sun is giant gaseous diffuser that sorts atoms by mass and their oxidized admixtures by density. Thus spot spectrum indicates abundance of light elements and their oxides. More heavy elements and their oxides are covered within interior. Violent nuclear synthesis reactions into visible and invisible spots produce enormous amount super-heavy elements and their explosion form:

1. Nuclear wind of heavy elements and captured light and super-heavy elements (planetary elements).

2. Dispersion of the planetary elements within shell.

3. Bombardment of the Sun by planetary elements that could not overcame huge gravitation of the Sun after nuclear explosions into visible and invisible spots. 

  magnetic confinement fusion  is very interesting! Violent proton neutron interaction around the super dense core and strong magnetic field from the magnetic poles of the core prevent thermonuclear reactions and produce alpha process from the poles. It produces two huge alpha process-streams through radiative (thermonuclear wind) zone. Both streams moving through radiative zone under huge bombardment of protons, neutrons and alpha particles become heavy and heavy. Entering into convection streams both are splitting periodically. Bombardment by thermonuclear wind and by other convection-particles is continuing. Within these split streams of planetary elements are installed strong magnetic field by the core. Eventually two poles of submerged arcs are visible as the spots. I've written above about the spots.

Thus thermonuclear reactions under influence of strong magnetic field produce alpha process only. Alpha process has own energy as well. The Sun indicates that thermonuclear processes as well as alpha-processes need huge temperature 14,500,000K and enormous (almost nuclear) density . If someone will decide to produce that in the bottle is unbelievable illusion and fiction and connected to rise lots of money only!

At first we have to know exactly that how the Sun is working. Vibration of the shell closely connected  to the oscillation of nuclear energy balance between inner thermonuclear wind from core and outer nuclear wind produced by lots of nuclear reactions into visible and invisible spots.

The Sun is tiny model of parent star and repeats all nuclear processes in miniature.

What about parent star of our galaxy? It has died as well as parent stars of surrounded old galaxies. After eruption almost all stars it could die as a star. Of course remnant of super-massive parent star is super-massive black hole.

 We can not see invisible UDN cold and black remnant of the parent star but there is conclusive evidence, nearest orbiting star.  The black hole in the centre of Milky Way is as big as 3,000,000 mass that of the Sun and has aproximately density ρ≈10¹⁸ kg/m³. It has nuclear density and is dormant quasar. During future merging to the Andromeda it will awoke, starts eating planets and stars of andromeda, partially recycling between two galaxies and hit to the Andromeda’s central embryonic quasar will create big bang. Mainly each big bang in the universe is hit between two quasars.

Stars are formed by injected shell masses of the parent star. The shell is enriched by light planetary elements tha are glued into working core.   Parent star gives maximal working resource all embryonic stars. . It means maximal proton-neutron ratio for embryonic stars. Before star explosion approximately proton-neutron ratio in the core is 1/99 (p/n≈1/99 ) and ρ≈150,000 kg/m³. 

The link of primordial helium with “Strange” xenon, and its absence from the noble gas component with “normal” xenon, we can interpret as evidence that the solar system formed directly from by heterogeneous SGN spot masses.  “Strange” Xe (Xe-2) came from the He-mixed outer part of the SGN spot or α–particles were captured into the shell by ejected spot). “Normal” xenon (Xe–1) came from the fiery Fe-rich interior of parent star’s spot, which was depleted of He and other lightweight elements [14]. Dr. Kiril Panov has correctly noted that a more radical evolutionary scheme may be required if our conclusions for the Sun are true for other stars in this galaxy and others.

Primordial helium with excess ¹³⁶Xe was established in the captured mass of He-rich SGN shell, but it does not means formation planets by very low density gasses from rapidly extending shell or multi stage separated shell too.  There is almost impossible r-process made ¹³⁶Xe [53, 54]. The scenario offers a viable explanation for the high levels of decay products from extinct ¹²⁹I and ²⁴⁵Pu that had been discovered in meteorites and in the Earth [4–7]. The scenario can also account for other nucleogenetic isotopic anomalies [43-52, 55-59] that would be found later in meteorites and the decay products of other extinct isotopes [8-13], including the presence of live ⁶⁰Fe from the SGN spot interior and that is the cradle of the solar system.

Subsequent measurements confirmed that “strange” xenon (Xe-2) was linked with the lightweight as well as heavy and super- heavy elements that formed planets [61, 62] and diamond and graphite inclusions of meteorites [30÷32]. “Normal” xenon (Xe-1) was linked with the iron, nickel and sulfur that formed troilite inclusions in meteorites [63],  into main nucleuses of planets [64] and primordial moons ejected from planets during gaseous/liquid boundary within first 1÷10 Million years.

Later meteorite analyses revealed nucleogenetic isotopic anomalies in other elements linked with the chemical composition of the carrier phase. Although the connection was not as clear-cut as the either/or association of primordial helium and neon with “strange” xenon, krypton and argon [32], these associations also extended across planetary distances to the sites where different classes of planets formed. The meteorites are small debris of exploded planet or moons.

In 1973 it was reported that carbonaceous meteorites trapped a primitive nuclear component of “almost pure ¹⁶O” [ref. 66, p. 485] when they formed. In 1976 it was found that the excess ¹⁶O is characteristic of six distinct classes of meteorites and planets, “none of which can be derived from another by fractionation processes alone” [ref. 67, p. 17]. Figure 10 shows the levels of excess ¹⁶O in different types of meteorites [67].

FIGURE 10. Different classes of meteorites and planets can be grouped into at least six different categories based on the levels of ¹⁶O in their oxygen [67]. The sixth and most ¹⁶O-rich category is the anhydrous phase of carbonaceous chondrites. This association and the presence of excess ¹⁶O in the Sun itself [68] are explained by nuclear-syntheses into spots.

Levels of mono-isotopic ¹⁶O, like those of “strange” xenon, varied across planetary distances, and are closely linked with modern planet’s geo-spheres chemical heterogeneities and exploded planets or its natural moons which formed the different types of meteorites (small debris of exploded space-bodies). Fowler [69], Cameron [70], and Wasserburg [71] correctly noted that many isotopic anomalies from the decay of extinct isotopes or nuclei-synthesis involve only a tiny fraction (.10-5 to 10-4) of the material in the solar system. The data in Figures 8 and 10 show that some of these isotopic anomalies were closely associated with elements and that may comprise a larger fraction of the total mass of the solar system. (This is the clue for together ejection from the SGN our Sun and its primordial planets).

It would be surprising if the Sun accreted none of the material with anomalous isotope abundances. Earlier this year scientists at Osaka University and the CNRS Research Facility reported that at least 2.0% (±0.4%) of the oxygen in the Sun is mono-isotopic ¹⁶O [68]. Thus oxygen in the Sun would plot in the upper right side of Figure 10, with even more ¹⁶O than the Earth, the Moon, ordinary meteorites, or the hydrous matrix of carbonaceous chondrites. The amount of excess ¹⁶O reported in the Sun (>2%) is bracketed by the amounts of excess ¹⁶O (<4%) observed in the anhydrous phase of carbonaceous chondrites [66, 67].

 Xenon in the solar wind is mostly a mass-fractionated form of “normal” xenon (Xe-1), like that on Earth (See Figure 4). However it was noted in 1976 [65] that “strange” xenon (Xe-2) might account for about 7% of the ¹³⁶Xe in the Sun. Researchers at the University of Minnesota [72] recently estimated that “strange” xenon (Xe-2) accounts for about 8% of the ¹³⁶Xe in the Sun.

Lee et al. [73] noted other links between isotopic anomalies and the chemical composition of the carrier phase in meteorites. In addition to the “normal” isotope abundances seen in heavy elements here on Earth and in iron sulfide inclusions of meteorite from a mix of stellar nuclear reactions [14], specific nucleosynthesis reactions generated excess r- and p-isotopes in the heavy elements that became trapped in diamond inclusions of meteorites, and excess s-isotopes in the heavy elements that became trapped in the silicon carbide inclusions. Silicon carbide also trapped mass-fractionated neon isotopes [42] (See Ne-E in Figure 6), confirming the FUN link [44, 45].

Refractory diamond and silicon carbide grains maintained the record of linked chemical and isotopic variations in different classes of meteorites, e.g., “in unmetamorphosed members of all seven chondrite classes” [ref. 74, p. 115]. The linkage of r- and p-products with diamonds, and the linkage of s-products with silicon carbide, is so strong that Huss and Lewis [74] were able to estimate the amounts of each type of inclusion by measuring noble gas isotopes in acid residues of meteorites.

Thus the scenario shown in Figure for the origin of the solar system explains the decay products of short-lived isotopes, nucleogenetic isotopic anomalies, and the links preserved between elemental and isotopic heterogeneities in meteorites and planets. Four enigmas, unexplained by Figure, will be addressed in the next sections:

a.) Why is the chemical composition of the Sun’s surface [75], as shown below in Figure 11, so unlike that expected in the chemical composition left from the SUPERNOVA explosion? This is not enigma now… Secret is decoded… Stars aren’t formed after supernova explosion!!!

 b.) Why are fractionation-plus-nuclear effects linked for the isotope anomalies in meteorites [28, 44, 45]?

c.) Why is the composition of carbonaceous chondrites like that of the solar photosphere [75]?

d.) What is the current source of luminosity in the Sun? 

 FIGURE 11. Lightweight elements are dominant in the Sun’s photosphere [75]. Abundances of the heavier elements tend to decrease exponentially with increasing atomic number, Z.

The Site Of Multi-Stage Mass-Dependent Fractionation

Other nucleogenetic isotope anomalies and the decay products of other extinct nuclides were found after the scenario in Figure 9 was proposed for the origin of the solar system [53, 54, 76]. It was suggested that these findings might be explained instead by the addition of a small fraction (»10^-5 to 10^-4) of “alien” nucleogenetic material [69-71] to the early solar system. Clayton [77] even suggested that the link of primordial helium with “strange” xenon (Figure 8) might indicate that both are alien nucleogenetic products, trapped in circum-stellar carbon dust grains that migrated into the early solar system.

Manuel and Hwaung [78] took a different approach. They assumed that the Sun spot is a mix of the components seen in meteorites. They used isotope abundances in the solar wind to estimate the fraction of each primitive component in the Sun. Since primordial helium and neon are only found with “strange” Xe-2, Kr-2, and Ar2 in meteorites [32], they assumed that helium and neon in the Sun came from this source (parent source is only SGN! K.M.). This assumption is consistent with the massdependent relationship seen [35] across the isotopes of helium and neon (See also Figures 5 and 6).

Manuel and Hwaung [78] found a » 9-stage mass fractionation process! About nine theoretical stages of massdependent fractionation have each enriched the abundance of the lighter mass (L) neon isotope relative to that of the heavier mass (H) one in the solar wind by the square root of (H/L). Although less well defined, the isotopes of solar-wind helium seem to have been sorted by the same mass-dependent process [78]. The 9-stage fractionation process extends across the isotopes of the heaviest noble gas, but solar-wind xenon is mostly a mass-fractionated form of “normal” xenon like that in air (Xe-1 in Figures 4 and 8). Assuming that the same process sorts the intermediate noble gas isotopes, they showed [78] that solar krypton is a mix of the “normal” (Kr-1) and “strange” (Kr-2) seen in meteorites [32], while solar argon is the “strange” Ar-2 [32] that accompanies primordial helium and neon in meteorites. Their results are shown in Figure 12.

FIGURE 12. A common, 9-stage mass fractionation process selectively enriches light isotopes of He, Ne, Ar, Kr and Xe in the solar wind relative to those in planetary material [78]. Solar noble gases (in bold) are a mix of the two planetary components [32]:

{He, Ne, Ar-2, Kr-2, and Xe-2}_P-2 + {Ar-1, Kr-1 and Xe-1}_P-1 = {He, Ne, Ar-2, (Kr-2 + Kr-1) and Xe-1}_SUN. [78].

If H and L are the masses of the heavier and lighter isotopes, respectively, then the empirical mass-dependent fractionation power law that Manuel and Hwaung [78] found to be common across the stable isotopes of the five noble gases in the solar wind, from A = 3 to 136 mass units, is

log(Mass Fractionation) = 4.56log(H /L)    (1)

When element abundances in the photosphere were corrected for this fractionation, the most abundant elements in the interior of the Sun (mainly into spots) were found to be Fe, Ni, O, Si, S, Mg and Ca [78]. These same elements comprise 99% of ordinary meteorites [79]. (This is conclusive evidence that spot masses are source of planetary masses) The probability, P, is essentially zero (P < 2 x 10^-33 [80]) that this agreement between the composition of the star and that of ordinary meteorites is not fortuitous. (Shells and Spots of Sun and Parent star have almost same consistence).

     Any remaining doubts about planetary systems forming directly from SGN were further reduced by Wolszczan’s 1994 report [81] of rocky, Earth-like planets orbiting pulsar PSR 1257+12. (Pulsar is super-dense nucleus and naked core of exploded star. According by many evidence it mainly consist of neutrons and has thermal evolution. Debris of the nucleus (core) is not stabile and rapid demolishing creates enormous nuclear black clouds “Unwrapping Pillars” within galaxy.    Conclusive evidence in the link:

http://sscws1.ipac.caltech.edu/Imagegallery/image.php?image_name=ssc2007-01d

 Core (ultra dense nucleus) has about 90÷99% of whole planetary system mass. PSR 1257+12 is reason of very interesting conclusions.

1.   Star was exploded but planets were survived.

2.   Shell of core has insignificant mass of whole stellar system, because planets are orbiting pulsar still.

3.   Rapidly extending shell of low-dense gasses does not create planets; they have already existed by explosion time.

4.   SUPERNOVA’S CORE IS NOT Fe-RICH REMNANT, IT MAINLY CONSIST OF NEUTRONS ONLY.

5.   BLACK HOLE IS COOLED PULSAR

Wolszczan’s observations [81] and isotope measurements [78] on the solar wind thus explain the first enigma: Stars aren’t formed after supernova explosion!!! The solar planetary system is formed by SGN spot but The Sun, its lightweight isotopes and elements are formed by SGN shell. The Sun spot is mixing sorts and moves lightweight elements and the lighter isotopes of each element to the spots’ surface and heavy and super-heavy elements and their isotopes in the interior of spots.

Isotope measurements also explain why heavy elements are more abundant in solar flares (explosion multi-stage separated spot masses) than in the solar wind (all ejected particles could not overcome the gravitation): Flares are energetic events (formed by explosion mini-spot masses.)  That by-pass about 3.4 of the 9-stages of mass fractionation [80]. The Wind Spacecraft also observed that heavy elements were systematically enriched, (The wind is formed by nuclear reactions into main spots and multi-stage separated spot masses into convection streams) by several orders of magnitude, in material ejected from the interior of the Sun [82].

Abundances of s-process nuclides in the photosphere confirm mass fractionation in the Sun [83]. For nuclides made by slow-neutron capture (into spot masses) [14], the steady-flow abundance, N, of nuclides of successive mass numbers, A-1, A, A+1, is expected to be inversely proportional to their neutron-capture cross sections, s :

N(A -1) * s (A -1) = N(A)* s (A) = N(A + 1) * s (A + 1) (2)

This prediction [14] has been confirmed across the isotopes of samarium that were made by the s-process, ¹⁴⁸Sm and ¹⁵⁰Sm, and across those of tellurium, ¹²²Te, ¹²³Te and ¹²⁴Te [83]. Over the total mass range of s-products in the photosphere is however, values of the N*s product decline by »5, orders of magnitude as the mass number, A, increases from 25 to 207 mass units. This is shown below in Figure 13.

FIGURE 13. Values of log (N* s ) for the nuclides in the photosphere that B2FH [14] identified as s-products decline exponentially with increasing mass number, A. The 72 data points shown here [14] cover a mass range of 25-207 mass units.

The mass-fractionation relationship defined by the abundances of s-products in the photosphere (Figure 13) indicates that the lightweight ones have been enriched by »10-stages of mass-dependent fractionation. Despite the scatter of data points, correction of the solar abundance data of Anders and Grevesse [75] for this fractionation relationship also yields Fe, Ni, O, Si and S as the most abundant elements on the surface of the Sun spot.

This reinforces the validity of the answer given earlier for the first enigma: Solar planets are formed by SGN spot. Sun is formed by lightweight nucleuses of SGN shell and it suggests a related answer for the second enigma and the third enigma:

a.) The chemical composition of the Sun’s surface [75] (Figure 11) same SGN’s surface (Figure 9) because the Sun is mixing and moves lightweight elements and the lighter isotopes of each element to the solar surface. Sun into the spots creates nuclear syntheses and ejection (mass-fractionation) spot masses.

b.) Fractionation-plus-nuclear effects are linked in meteorites [28, 44, 45] because mass-fractionation is a common occurrence in stars, including the parent star of the solar system (Figure 9). Thus stellar nuclear reactions into spots generated new isotopes in material that was already mass fractionated.

c.) The composition of carbonaceous chondrites is like the photosphere [75] because lightweight elements are now sorted into the photosphere, as they had earlier been sorted into that part of the parent star (SGN) that would later form carbonaceous chondrites into planets geo-spheres formed by SGN spots.

Thus solar mass fractionation explains: i) Excess lightweight isotopes in the solar wind (Figure 12), ii) Elevated abundances of heavy elements and heavy isotopes in solar flares [80, 82], iii) Mass fractionated s-products in the photosphere (Figure 13), and it also explains the second of the two serious difficulties that Nobel Laureate William

A. Fowler [84] identified in the most basic concepts of nuclear physics:

a.) “On square one the solar neutrino problem is still with us (…), indicating that we do not understand how our own star really works.”(It’s already decoded in the cosmogeological theory)

b.) “On square two we still cannot show in the laboratory and in theoretical calculations why the ratio of oxygen to carbon in the Sun and similar stars is close to two to one (…)” [ref. 84, p. xi] (Because of  formation by one parent star only.)

It was recently shown [83] that mass fractionation changes the oxygen to carbon ratio from O/C»10 in the Sun and similar stars to the surface value of O/C»2. The solar neutrino problem [84] will be addressed in the section on solar luminosity, after a brief look at visual images of the iron-rich structure below the Sun’s fluid outer layers.

Visual Images of a Rigid Iron-Rich Solar Surface

 Mozina [86] reported a surprising discovery in the spring of this year, “While viewing images from SOHO’s EIT program, I finally stumbled across the raw (unprocessed EIT images) marked “DIT” images that are stored in SOHO’s daily archives. After downloading a number of these larger “DIT” (grey) files, including several "running difference" images, it became quite apparent that many of the finer details revealed in the raw EIT images are simply lost during the computer enhancement process that is used to create the more familiar EIT colorized images that are displayed on SOHO’s website. That evening in April of 2005, all my beliefs about the sun changed.” Here are images, over a 60-hour (2.5-day) period on 27-29 May 2005, of the rigid structure below the fluid photosphere.

 FIGURE 14. Running difference images from SOHO using a 195 A filter to enhance light Fe (IX) and Fe (X) emissions. Surface features in the iron-rich surface below the Sun’s fluid, hydrogen-rich photosphere are visible for days or weeks. From videos of these images, Mozina shows that this surface rotates uniformly, from pole to equator, every 27.3 days [86]. (Mozina discovered one of the multi-stage separated spots. (I think it is remnant “island” of oxidized mixture elements: Al₂O₃, SiO₂, Fe₂O₃, etc (Slag-roof of convection streams)... Almost solid mixture has very low density and large plane, shows renewing tendency, and did not destroy and submerge into convection streams for days.  K.M.)

 Mozina also noticed that images from the TRACE satellite revealed a solar flare and the release of volatiles from a small section of the sun's surface on 28 Aug. 2000. Figure 15 shows this region, using the 171A filter that is specifically sensitive to the iron ion (Fe IX/X) emissions.

The first serious difficulty Fowler identified in nuclear astrophysics — “the solar neutrino problem” [Ref. 84, p. xi], and the fourth enigma — “the current source of luminosity in the Sun”, will be addressed in the next section.

     FIGURE 15. This is a "running difference" image of one small part of the sun's surface revealed by the TRACE satellite using a 171 A filter. This filter is specifically sensitive to iron ion (Fe IX/X) emissions. The TRACE satellite recorded an eruption and mass ejection from this region of AR 9143 on 28 August 2000. A video of the flare event on 28 August 2000 is available in the link:

http://vestige.lmsal.com/TRACE/Public/Gallery/Images/movies/T171_000828.avi – (explosion one of the multi-stage separated compact-spots into convection streams. Usually strongest similar explosions create temporary giant fractures through the shell. K.M.) 

ATOMIC MASS MEASUREMENTS

The Source Of Luminosity In An Iron-Rich Sun

Figure 9 is a summary of the events revealed by findings that the Sun and its planets formed out of fresh SGN masses and inherited chemical and isotope heterogeneities from the parent star:

a.) Short-lived radioactive isotopes in the material that formed the planetary system (See Figures 1 and 2).

b.) Isotope anomalies in meteorites, planets, and Sun from stellar nuclear reactions (See Figures 3, 4 and 7).

c.) Element and isotope variations linked together in embryonic proto-planetary material (See Figure 8 and 10).

Evidence of mass-dependent fractionation, in the Sun and in the parent star that produced the solar system, was recorded by these separations of lightweight elements and isotopes from heavier ones within shell and spots:

a.) Variations in the non-cosmogenic neon isotope abundances shown in Figures 5 and 6.

b.) Linked fractionation-plus-nuclear effects in FUN inclusions of meteorites [44, 45] (See also Figure 4).

c.) High abundances of lightweight isotopes in the solar wind (See Figure 12).

d.) High abundances of lightweight elements in the photosphere (See Figures 11 and 13).

e.) Images of a rigid, iron-rich structure into multi-stag separated compact spot masses below the Sun’s fluid outer layers (See Figures 14 and 15).

The scenario in Figure 9 offers a viable solution for these observations, but that solution raises another puzzle: How can the Sun shine? The answer to this question, identified above as the fourth enigma, will also explain Fowler’s “solar neutrino problem” [ref. 84, p. xi].

All iron isotopes have high nuclear stability [86]. Less abundant elements cannot explain solar luminosity. After correcting for fractionation, solar abundances of the elements correlate with nuclear stability – from the loosely bound nucleons of Li, Be and B to the tightly bound nucleons of Fe [87], as first suggested by Harkins [79]. In the search for an overlooked source of nuclear energy, students in an advanced nuclear chemistry course were assigned the task of re-examining the systematic properties of all 2,850 known nuclides (assemblages of neutrons, protons and electrons) [86]. Students were encouraged to abandon the conventional approach and to use reduced nuclear variables, like the reduced physical variables used in developing the corresponding states of gases [88].

When the nuclear charge, Z, and the mass number, A, are combined into one reduced variable, Z/A, the charge per nucleon, then all known nuclides lie in the range of 0 > Z/A < 1. Likewise, the atomic mass and the mass number can be combined into the reduced variable used by Aston [3], M/A. Values of M/A, potential energy per nucleon, lie close to the value of 1.00 mass units per nucleon for all nuclides. Aston [3] subtracted 1.00 from the value of each to obtain a quantity called the “packing fraction” or “nuclear packing fraction.” The left side of Figure 16 shows the “Cradle of the Nuclides” [89] that is revealed when all 2,850 nuclides [86] are plotted in terms of these two reduced variables, Z/A and M/A, and then sorted by mass number, A.

FIGURE 16. The “Cradle of the Nuclides” on the left [89] shows the potential energy per nucleon for all known nuclides, stable and radioactive nuclides [86]. The more stable nuclides have lower values of M/A and occupy lower positions in the cradle. Those that are radioactive or readily consumed by fusion or fission occupy higher positions. On the right, mass parabolas defined by the data points [86] intersect the front plane, at {Z/A = 0, M/A = (M/A) _neutron + ~10 MeV}, for each value of A>1 [89-92].

The left side of Figure 16 shows all the atomic mass data [86]; the right side shows the mass parabolas defined by these data [86] at each value of A [86]. Intersections of mass parabolas with the front plane at Z/A = 0 and with the back plane at Z/A = 1.0, are shown on the right. The intercepts at Z/A = 0 and Z/A = 1.0 display peaks and valleys at the same mass numbers because of tight and loose nucleon packing, respectively. Additional repulsive interactions between positive charges cause the peaks to be more pronounced at Z/A = 1 than at Z/A =0 [90]. For purposes of explaining solar luminosity the most important revelation in Figure 16 is repulsive interactions between like nucleons (n-n or p-p) and attractive interactions between unlike nucleons (n-p) [93]. This suggests that neutrons are in an excited state in neutron stars, with about 10-22 MeV more energy than a free neutron [89-91]. On the other hand, the accepted view is that neutron stars are “dead” nuclear matter, (Super-dense nucleus, remnant core, of exploded star. K.M.) with the neutron at about 93 MeV less energy than a free neutron [94].

In view of the above evidence for an iron-rich multi-stage separated Sun-spots that formed like parent star-spot and recent SNO data for solar neutrinos [95], we conclude that enormous amount of excited neutrons and protons after ejection from SGN shell surface create core and shell and continue to generate solar luminosity, solar neutrinos, and an outflow of 3 x 10⁴³ H⁺ per year in the solar wind [89-93, 96] by the thermonuclear reactions around core and additional nuclear reactions within shell.

The final section is a table summarizing our conclusions from puzzling isotope data and other unexpected observations since B2FH [14] explained the synthesis of elements in stars in their landmark 1957 paper:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Research by O. Manuel1, Sumeet A. Kamat2, and Michael Mozina3

“Isotopes Tell Sun’s Origin and Operation”

CONCLUSIONS

 The most obvious, common sense conclusions with cosmogeological explanations to a seemingly complex set of observations made after B2FH [14] published their classical paper on element synthesis in stars [14].

OBSERVATIONS AND COMCLUSIONS – with cosmogeological explanations.

Observation/Question/Enigmas Conclusion (SN = Supernova)

(SGN = Spiral Galaxy Nucleus) Observation/Explanations.

1. Decay Products of Short–lived isotopes.

Fresh debris from a SN explosion 5 Gy ago formed the entire solar system

Fresh gaseous huge streams, ejected from a SGN shell 5 Gy ago formed the entire solar system

2. Isotope Anomalies in Stone Meteorites

The axial SN explosion left isotopes, elements unmixed in accretion disk

Axial injection from SGN shell’s giant interior was formed by huge nuclear reactions into a star-sized spot. Different part of the spot has abundance of different isotopes. Planets are formed by different parts of injected and multi–stage separated spots. Stony meteorites (debris) are formed after hit between solar primordial space–bodies and captured interstellar planetary mass objects. Both tips of space–bodies can explain isotope anomalies in stone meteorites.

3. Isotope Anomalies in Iron Meteorites.

Iron–rich SN debris directly formed iron meteorites and planetary cores

Iron–rich SGN spots gaseous huge streams directly formed space–bodies and Iron–rich geo–spheres and Iron–rich planetary cores. Iron meteorites are formed later by debris of exploded iron–rich planetary geo–spheres. Reason of isotope anomalies in iron meteorites is same as well as stony meteorites.

4. Elements/Isotopes Were Linked Xe–1 in FeS, Xe–2 in Carbon Grains

Xe–1 was made in iron–rich SN interior, Xe–2 made near carbon–rich SN surface

Xe–1 was made in ejected iron–rich SGN spot’s interior, Xe–2 made and ejected near carbon–rich SGN spot’s surface.

5. Isotope Anomalies in Planets: Xe–1 in Sun, Mars; Xe–2 in Jupiter

Xe–1 was made in iron-rich SN interior, Xe–2 made near carbon–rich SN surface

Xe–1 was made in iron-rich SGN spot’s interior, Xe–2 made near carbon-rich SGN spot’s surface.

6. Severely Mass-Fractionated Isotopes in Meteorites and Planets

Multi–stage mass separation in the Sun and in the parent star of the SN

Multi–stage mass separation in the Sun’s spots and in the parent star’s spots (SGN)

7. FUN (Fractionation + Nuclear) Effects Linked in Meteorites 

The supernova made new isotopes in material that was mass fractionated 

The violent process of nuclear-synthesis into SGN–spots made new isotopes for embryonic planets that were mass fractionated. 

8. Mirror–Image Isotope Anomalies

Unmixed products of the various nuclear reactions that collectively made “normal” isotope abundances

Well-unmixed products of the various nuclear reactions within spot of parent star, which collectively made “normal” isotope abundances in meteorites, into debris of geo-spheres later.

9. P–1 Planetary Gas Component Had Only “Normal” Xe–1, Kr–1 and Ar–1 

This came from SN’s iron–rich interior that was depleted of light elements

This came from SGN-spot’s iron–rich interior that was depleted of light elements

10. P–2 Planetary Gas Component Had “Strange” Xe–2, Kr–2, Ar–2, Ne, He.

This came from the outer SN layers where light elements remained.

This came from the outer SGN spots layers where light elements remained.

11. The Solar Surface Is Made Mostly of Light Elements.

Elements undergo multi–stage mass separation in the Sun.

The solar surface is made mostly of light elements but inside is abundance of light planetary elements Elements. Sun-spots undergo multi–stage mass separation into convection streams and planetary elements are sorted by mass there.

12. Carbonaceous Meteorites Are Also Rich in Light Elements.

These came mostly from the surface of the mass–fractionated parent star.

These came mostly from the surface of the mass-fractionated SGN spots mixed into other ejected spot–masses.

13. Why Does O/C ≈ 2 at the Surface of the Sun and Similar Stars?

Multi-stage mass separation decreases O/C ≈ 10 to O/C ≈ 2 at solar surface.

Multi-stage mass separation, oxidization of elements and nuclear syntheses reactions into spot decreases O/C ≈ 10 to O/C ≈ 2 at solar surface.

14. What Are the Most Abundant Elements in the Solar System?

Iron, oxygen, nickel, silicon, sulfur, magnesium and calcium

Iron, oxygen, nickel, silicon, sulfur, magnesium calcium and lead–(into the metallic nucleus of planets) are the most abundant elements.

15. What Causes the Solar Neutrino Deficit? 

The number of neutrinos produced is the number detected. There is no deficit m

16. What Is The Source of Solar Luminosity?

Neutron emission and decay generate >62%; H-fusion generates <38%

 H – Fusion, neutron emission and alpha process generate ≈ 90%;  SNR _max ≈  10% (at the spots’ maximal activity stage)

SNR – Nuclear reactions in the deep interior of main spots and multi-stage separated compact spots masses within the convection streams.

17. What Is the Source of Hydrogen in the Solar and Stellar Winds?

Neutron–decay and upward acceleration of H+ ions by solar magnetic field

Hydrogen, abundant element of the shell is captured by ejected masses after nuclear reactions in the deep interior of main spots and multi–stage separated spot masses within shell.

P.S. Our SGN–(Super Massive BH) is surrounded by younger stars than expected.  The younger stars  orbiting remnant super massive BH of the super massive parent star. There is no suspect; super massive black hole is discovered now  

Scientific Video clip. Black hole in the centre of Milky Way: http://www.astro.virginia.edu/class/whittle/astr553/Topic14/M1_MW_nuc.mpg

 Source of strange isotope abundances in the Solar wind are periodic nuclear reactions within a lot of separated compact spots and huge nuclear reactions into the deep interior of main spots too. The solar surface is made mostly of light elements that is sorted by mass into spots and dispersed on the surface by nuclear reactions. This is conclusive evidence about abundance super–heavy nucleuses into spots and violent nuclear syntheses reactions into main spots and multi–stage separated spots masses within shell. It means periodic violent nuclear reactions into the compact spots within convection streams. Super heavy nucleuses are exploded and Light Elements are dispersed all over the shell or ejected in the wind.  He nucleus is main builder of the nuclear syntheses reactions. He nucleuses are main product of radioactive demolition too. The double destructive and creative feature of He nucleuses must be easily understandable (α–process). Fe nucleuses are important in the magnetic field of convection streams.

   Space and time exist forever

*The big bang is not the beginning of time; rather, it is a bridge to a pre–existing contracting era

*The Universe matter undergoes an endless sequence of cycles in which it contracts in a big merge and re-emerges in an expanding big bang, within trillion years of evolution in between

*The temperature and density of the universe do not become infinite at any point in the cycle; indeed, they never exceed a finite bound (about a trillion degrees)

*Inflation of nuclear and molecular masses (matter) have taken place since the big bang; the current homogeneity and flatness were created by next events that occurred by huge gravitation of extended matter. Next stage of a big bang (big inflation of matter) is big compression and formation of a parent star. Parent star creates plane of a spiral galaxy again.

     The seed for our galaxy formation was created by instabilities arising as the merger galaxies matter was collapsing towards a big merge, prior to our big bang.

We discuss the origin of such a scalar field in the primary creation process first described by F. Hoyle and J. V. Narlikar forty years ago. It is shown that the creation processes which takes place in the nuclei of galaxies are closely linked to the high energy and explosive phenomena, which are commonly observed in galaxies at all redshifts. The cyclic nature of the universe provides a natural link between the places of origin of the microwave background radiation (arising in hydrogen burning in stars), and the origin of the lightest nuclei (H, D, He3 and He4). It also allows us to relate the large scale cyclic properties of the universe to events taking place in the nuclei of galaxies. Observational evidence shows that ejection of matter and energy from these centers in the form of compact objects, gas and relativistic particles is responsible for the population of quasi-stellar objects (QSOs) and gamma-ray burst sources in the universe: Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe  Jayant V. Narlikar, Geofrey Burbidge, R.G. Vishwakarma

Ejected SGN’s shell masses create stars and gaseous (spot) masses and oxidized admixtures – planets in the tails of stars. Ejected embryonic proto–planetary masses start orbiting embryonic stars. It is possible that one isotope of a definite chemical element is fundamental into one planet and into another planet another isotope.  The active parts of starburst galactic nucleus shell like active parts of the Sun – (spots). There is possible mainly one chemical reaction. It’s the reaction of oxidation. There is discovered H₂O in the Sun’s spots spectrum, nothing strange because after violent nuclear synthesis reaction in the spots, huge number oxygen nucleuses are formed. It’s clue of different chemical oxides formation. Embryonic gaseous planet has captured and mixed enormous amount light nucleuses from shell. Nuclear synthesis reactions create new super–heavy nucleuses within gaseous nucleus of an embryonic planet.  There is violent process of chemical admixtures formation. Oxygen is main chemical elements in the admixtures. An embryonic planet is giant gaseous diffuser which sorts chemical elements and admixtures by mass and density. Of course super–heavy nucleuses are gathered into physical centre. Dangerous concentrations of super heavy elements in the central dense velocity create periodic nuclear reactions at the Gaseous/Liquid boundary. This is clue of primordial moons formation by ejected upper layers of embryonic planets. Moons densities are closely connected to the percentages of heavy end super–heavy metals in the physical centre as well as average density of moons. Both are closely connected to the one another. As a result, planets and their satellites formed from those spot masses are mainly made up of oxides.  We must remember the active role of helium in heavy nuclear–synthesis reactions and we have to come closely analyze why almost 50% of heavy nuclear–synthesis reactions are finished on the oxygen (Side effect of triple α–process). Why great numbers of chemical reactions into spots are ceased by the silicone dioxide and no other elements? Radioactive elements afterwards, in the depth of planets G nucleuses decompose to the level of lead and xenon.

      Only axial hit and cyclonic merging between galaxies are main source of a recycling renewing and cosmogeological evolution  in the Universe, a cosmology in which the Universe matter undergoes a periodic sequence of expansion and contraction. Each cycle begins with a “big bang” and ends in a “big merging,” only to emerge in a new big bang once again. The expansion phase of each cycle includes a period of radiation–, matter–, and quintessence–domination, the last phase of which corresponds to the current epoch created by parent star after nuclear and molecular (matter) compression. The accelerated expansion phase dilutes by an exponential factor the entropy and by huge gravitation of extending matter formed by big bang. The acceleration ultimately ends, and it is followed by a period of decelerating expansion and then contraction. After the transition big expansion and big contraction, fiery matter and its huge gravitation creates parent star of a proto–galaxies, and high density of the core required for formation working core–SDN, fiery shell of light elements and then eruption new stars. Historically, cyclic models have been considered attractive because they avoid the issue of initial conditions (important problem of the BB theory for decades. Examples can be found in mythologies and philosophies dating back to the beginning of recorded history. Since the introduction of general relativity, though, various problems with the cyclic concept have emerged. In the 1930’s, Richard Tolman discussed cyclic models consisting of a closed Universe with zero cosmological constant. He pointed out that entropy generated in one cycle would add to the entropy created in the next. Consequently, the maximal size of the Universe, and the duration of a cycle, increases from bounce to bounce. Extrapolating backwards, the duration of the bounce converges to zero in a finite time. Detail explanations of many topics are in the cosmogeological theory 

Truth easy to explain… 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Source has support from the University of Missouri–Rolla and the Foundation for Chemical Research, Inc. (FCR) and permission to reproduce figures from reports to FCR are gratefully acknowledged. NASA and ESA, specifically the SOHO and TRACE programs, made possible the solar images shown in Figures 14 and 15. Students enrolled in Advanced Nuclear Chemistry (Chem. 471) in the spring semester of 2000 – Cynthia Bolon, Shelonda Finch, Daniel Ragland, Matthew Seelke and Bing Zhang – contributed to the development of the “Cradle of the Nuclides” (Figure 16) that exposed repulsive interactions between neutrons [89–92]. This manuscript benefited from comments by UMR Chancellor Gary Thomas, Eugene Savov (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences), Kiril Panov (Director, Institute of Astronomy, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences), Michael Ibison

(Institute for Advanced Studies, Austin), José B. de Almeida (University of Minho), R. Greg Downing (NIST), Ramachandran Ganapathy (Baker Chemical Co.), Hilton Ratcliffe (South Africa Astronomical Society), and Bing Zhang (GE Global Research, Shanghai). This paper is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Dwarka Das Sabu who participated in many of the findings [28, 32, 42, 53, 54, 65] that laid the basis for the conclusions reached here.

REFERENCES

1. Lunar Sample Preliminary Examination Team, Science 165, 1211-1227 (1969).

2. F. W. Aston, British Assoc. Adv. Sci. Reports 82, 403 (1913).

3. F. W. Aston, Proc. Roy. Soc. 115A, 487-514 (1927).

4. J. H. Reynolds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 8-10 (1960).

5. M. W. Rowe and P. K. Kuroda, J. Geophys. Res. 70, 709-714 (1965).

6. M. S. Boulos and O. K. Manuel, Science 174, 1334-1336 (1971).

7. W. A. Fowler, J. L. Greenstein and F. Hoyle, Am. J. Phys. 29, 393-403 (1961).

8. D.-C. Lee and A. N. Halliday, Nature 378, 771-774 (1995).

9. W. R. Kelly and G. J. Wasserburg, Geophys. Res. Lett. 5, 1079-1082 (1978).

10. J. L. Birck and C. J. Allègre, Geophys. Res. Lett. 12, 745-748 (1985).

11. A. Shukolyukov and G. W. Lugmair, Science 259, 1138- (1993).

12. C. M. Gray and W. Compston, Nature 251, 495-497 (1974).

13. G. Srinivasan, A. A. Ulyanov, and J. N. Goswami, Ap. J. Lett. 431, L67-L70 (1994).

14. E. M. Burbuidge, G. R. Burbidge, W. A. Fowler and F. Hoyle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 547-650 (1957).

15. C. Patterson, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 10, 230-237 (1956).

16. E. C. Alexander, Jr., R. S. Lewis, J. H. Reynolds and M. C Michel, Science 172, 837-840 (1971).

17. P. K. Kuroda and W. A. Myers, Radiochimica Acta 77, 15-20 (1997).

18. P. K. Kuroda and W. A. Myers, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 211, 539-555 (1996).

19. S. Amari, P. Hoppe, E. Zinner and R. Lewis, Ap. J. 394, L43-L46 (1992).

20. J. H. Reynolds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 351-354 (1960).

21. O. Eugster, P. Eberhardt and J. Geiss, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 3, 249-257 (1967).

22. J. H. Reynolds and G. Turner, J. Geophyhs. Res. 69, 3263- 3281 (1964).

23. M. W. Rowe, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 32, 1317-1326 (1969).

24. P. K. Kuroda and O. K. Manuel, Nature 227, 1113-1116 (1970).

25. B. Srinivasan,E. C.Alexander, Jr.O.K. Manuel and D.Troutner,Phys.Rev.179,1166-1169. 1969  

26. M. Dakowski, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 6, 152-154 (1969).

27. E. Anders and D. Heymann, 164, 821-823 (1969).

28. O. K. Manuel, E. W. Hennecke, and D. D. Sabu, Nature 240, 99-101 (1972).

29. R. S. Lewis, B. Srinivasan and E. Anders, Science 190, 1251-1262 (1975).

30. U. Frick and R. K. Moniot, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 8^{th, 229-261 (1977).}

31. U. Frick, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 8th, 273-292 (1977).

32. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, Meteoritics 15, 117-138 (1980).

33. O. K. Manuel, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 31, 2413-2431 (1967).

34. K. Marti, Science 166, 1263-1265 (1969).

35. B. Srinivasan and O. K. Manuel, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 12, 282-286 (1971).

36. R. O. Pepin, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2, 13-18 (1967).

37. D. C. Black and R. O. Pepin, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 6, 395-405 (1969).

38. D. C. Black, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 36, 377-394 (1972).

39. P. Eberhardt, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 9th, 1027-1054 (1978).

40. R. S. Lewis, L. Alaerts, J.-I. Matsuda and E. Anders, Ap. J. 234, L165-L168 (1979).

41. L. Alaerts,R. S. Lewis,J.-I. Matsuda and E.Anders, Geochim.Cosmochim.Acta 44, 189-209 (1980).

42. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 11th, 879-899 (1980).

43. B. Srinivasan and E. Anders, Science 201, 51-56 (1978)  

44. R. N. Clayton and T. K. Mayeda, Geophys. Res. Lett. 4, 295-298 (1977).

45. G. J. Wasserburg, T. Lee and D. A. Papanastassiou, ibid., 299-302 (1977).

46. R. V. Ballad, L. L. Oliver, R. G. Downing and O. K. Manuel, Nature 277, 615-620 (1979).

47. F. Begemann, Rep. Prog. Phys. 43, 1309-1356 (1980).

48. U. Ott and F. Begemann, Ap. J. 353, L57-L60 (1990).

49. U. Ott, F. Begemann, J. Yang and S. Epstein, Nature 332, 700-702 (1988).

50. S. Richter, U. Ott and F. Begemann, Nature 391, 261-263 (1998).

51. U. Ott, Ap. J. 463, 344-348 (1996).

52. F. Begemann, “Isotopic abundance anomalies and the early solar system” in Origin and Evolution of the Elements, edited by N. Prantos, E. Vangioni-Flam, and M. Cassé, M., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 518-527.

53. O. K. Manuel and D. D. Sabu, Trans. Missouri Acad. Sci. 9 104-122 (1975).

54. O. K. Manuel and D. D. Sabu, Science 195 208-209 (1977).

55. Qi-Lu, "High Accuracy Measurement of Isotopic Abundance Ratios of Molybdenum in Iron Meteorites and Molybdenites and the Fundamental Studies for Chemical Separation and Mass Spectrometry”, Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Tokyo, 1991.

56. A. Masuda and Qi-Lu, Meteoritics Planet. Sci. 33, A99 (1998).

57. Qi-Lu and A. Masuda, “Variation of molybdenum isotopic composition in iron meteorites” in Origin of Elements in the Solar System: Implications of Post-1957 Observations, edited by O. Manuel, New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000, pp. 385-400.

58. Q. Yin, S. B. Jacobsen and K. Yamashita, Nature 415, 881-883 (2002).

59. J. H. Chen, D. A. Papanastassiou, G. J. Wasserburg, and H. H. Ngo, Lunar Planet. Sci. XXXV, abstract 1431 (2004).

60. J. J. Hester, S. J. Desch, K. R. Healy and L. A. Leshin, Science 304, 1116-1117 (2004).

61. O. K. Manuel, K. Windler, A. Nolte, L. Johannes and D. Ragland, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 238, 119-121 (1998).

62. K. Windler, “Strange Xenon Isotope Ratios in Jupiter” in Origin of Elements in the Solar System: Implications of Post-1957 Observations, edited by O. Manuel, New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000, pp. 519-527.

63. G. Hwaung and O. K. Manuel, Nature 299, 807-810 (1982).

64. J. T. Lee, B. Li, and O. K. Manuel, Geochem. J. 30, 17-30 (1996).

65. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, Nature 262, 28-32 (1976).

66. R. N. Clayton, L. Grossman and T. K. Mayeda, Science 182, 485-487 (1973).

67. R. N. Clayton, N. Onuma and T. K. Mayeda, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 30, 10-18 (1976).

68. K. Hashizume and M. Chaussidon, Nature 434, 619-622 (2005).

69. W. A. Fowler, Rev. Mod. Phys. 56, 149-179 (1984).

70. A. G. W. Cameron, Icarus 60, 416-427 (1984).

71. G. J. Wasserburg, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 86, 129-173 (1987).

72. R. O. Pepin, R. H. Becker, and P. E. Rider, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 59, 4997-5022 (1995).

73. J. T. Lee, B. Li and O. K. Manuel, Comments Astrophys. 18, 335-345 (1997).

74. G. R. Huss and R. S. Lewis, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 59, 115-160 (1995)

75. E. Anders and N. Grevesse, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 53, 197-214 (1989).

76. O. Manuel, “Comment on Isotope Cosmochemistry: The Rare Gas Story and Related Matters” in Proceedings of the 1977 Robert A. Welch Foundation Conference on Chemical Research, XXI Cosmochemistry, edited by W. O. Milligan, Houston, Texas, The Robert A. Welch Foundation, 1978, pp. 263-272.

77. D. D. Clayton, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 12^th, 1781-1801 (1981).

78. O. K. Manuel and G. Hwaung, Meteoritics 18, 209-222 (1983).

79. W. D. Harkins, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 39, 856-879 (1917).

80. O. Manuel and S. Friberg, “Composition of the solar interior: Information from isotope ratios” in Proc. of SOHO 12/ GONG+2002 ‘Local and Global Helioseismology: The Present and the Future’, edited by H. Lacoste, Noordwijk, ESA SP-517, 2003, pp. 345-348.

81. A. Wolszczan, Science 264, 538-542 (1994).

82. D. V. Reames, Ap. J. 540, L111-L114 (2000).

83. O. Manuel, W. A. Myers, Y. Singh and M. Pleess, J. Fusion Energy 23 55-62 (2005).

84. W. A. Fowler, “Forward” in Cauldrons in the Cosmos: Nuclear Astrophysics by C. E. Rolf and W. S. Rodney, edited by D. N. Schramm, Chicago, Illinois, The University of Chicago Press, 1998, p. xi.

85. M. Mozina, “The Surface of the Sun”, http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html

86. J. K. Tuli, Nuclear Wallet Cards, 6^th ed., Upton, NY, Brookhaven National Laboratory, National Nuclear Data Center, 2000, 74 pp. 87. O. Manuel and C. Bolon, J. Radioanal. Nuclear Chem. 251, 381-385 (2002). 88. E. A. Guggenheim, J. Chem. Phys. 13, 253-256 (1945).

89.O.Manuel, C.Bolon, M.Zhong amd P.Jangam, 32^nd Lunar & Planet.Sci. Conf.,abstract #1041 (2001).

90. O. Manuel, E. Miller and A. Katragada, J. Fusion Energy 20, 197-201 (2001).

91. O. Manuel, C. Bolon and M. Zhong, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 252, 3-7 (2002).

92. O. Manuel, “Is There A Deficit Of Solar Neutrinos?” in Proceedings of the Second NO-VE International Workshop on Neutrino Oscillations in Venice, edited by M. B. Ceolin, Venice, Italy, Instituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, (2003), pp. 548-549.

93. O. Manuel, C. Bolon, A. Katragada and M. Insall, J. Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2000).

94. H. Heiselberg, “Neutron Star Masses, Radii and Equation of State”, in Proceedings of the Conference on Compact Stars in the QCD Phase Diagram, eConf C010815, edited by R. Ouyed and F. Sannion, Copenhagen, Denmark, Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics (2002) pp. 3-16, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/?0201465

95. Q. R. Ahmad et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 011301-1 to 011301-6 (2002).

    96. O. K. Manuel, B. W. Ninham and S. E. Friberg, J. Fusion Energy 21, 192-199 (2002).

Copyright © 2005  tbiliselebi.ge  web studio  axaliimige@yahoo.com . All rights reserved.