Plasma Cosmology, Nucleosynthesis

[Dancing David]

Hello,

I have asked this question before and not got an answer:

One of the indirect supports of the BBE theory is that the proportions of H, He and Li support that which might be accounted for in nucleosynthesis following the BBE. Now certainly I find it reasonable to think that there could be a blend of standard cosmology and plasma cosmology. When effects of plasma are demonstrated to do what is suggested.


The question I have is this, so far PC has been presented as contradicting the BBE consmology, which may not need be the case.

But if it does, how does PC explain the rough proportion of H, He and Li in the universe?

 

[Zeuzzz]

Lerner has addressed this, and i think Arp has aswell.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel1/27/928/00024633.pdf

Galactic model of element formation

Lerner, E.J.
Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on
Volume 17, Issue 2, Apr 1989 Page(s):259 - 263
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/27.24633


Summary:

A cosmological model is presented that produces He, C, O, D, Li, Be, and B in their observed abundances without a Big Bang. The elements are produced during the 1.5-Gy formation period of a galaxy, with C, O, and other heavy elements produced by stars of M>12 M3 , He by stars of 6 Ms<M<12 Ms, and D, Li, Be, and B by cosmic-ray reactions in a nearly pure H plasma halo. Thus, the model shows that the major elements used in astrophysical studies can be produced during galactic formation by exactly the same processes known to function today at much lower rates

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4316620&isnumber=4316609

Magnetic Vortex Filaments, Universal Scale Invariants, and the Fundamental Constants

Lerner, Eric J.

This paper appears in: Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on
Publication Date: Dec. 1986
Volume: 14, Issue: 6
On page(s): 690-702
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands,
ISSN: 0093-3813
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/TPS.1986.4316620
Posted online: 2007-11-12 16:30:32.0

Abstract:

An explanation for the observed scale invariants in the universe is presented. Force-free magnetic vortex filaments are proposed to play a crucial role in the formation of superclusters, clusters, galaxies, and stars by initiating gravitational compression. The critical velocities involved in vortex formation are shown to explain the observed constant orbital velocities of clusters, galaxies, and stars. A second scale invariant nr = C where n is particle density and r is average distance between objects, is also noted here and explained by our model. The model predicts a maximum size for magnetic vortices, which is comparable to the dimensions of the observable universe and a density for such vortices which is close to that actually observed, eliminating any theoretical need for missing mass. On this basis, we present an alternative cosmology to that of the "Big Bang," one which provides a much better fit to recent observations of large-scale structure and motion. The model suggests scale invariants between microscopic and cosmological scales, leading to the derivation of a simple analytical expression for the fundamental constants G, mp/me, and e2/hc. We conclude that these expressions indicate the existence of vortex phenomena on the particle level.

 

[Zeuzzz]

http://www.helium.com/tm/157299/reality-theory-almost-universally

The agreement of the observed abundances of light elements in the universe with those predicted by various Big Bang cosmologists is frequently cited as one of the primary proofs of their theory, but this proof also faces some difficulties. The study of historical data shows that over the years predictions of the ratio of helium to hydrogen in a Big Bang universe have been repeatedly adjusted to agree with the latest available estimates of that ratio as observed in the real universe. The estimated ratio is dependent on a ratio of baryons to photons (the baryon number) that has also been arbitrarily adjusted to agree with the current established helium to hydrogen ratio. These appear to have not been predictions, but merely adjustments of theory ("retrodictions") to accommodate the current data. Big Bang cosmologists tell us that observed ratio of helium to hydrogen in the universe could only have been the result of BB thermonucleosynthesis. However, that presumes, not only a precise knowledge of the processes of a BB, but a precise knowledge of the processes of other possible cosmologies. If, for example, another cosmology should suggest that helium has accumulated as result of other processes (such as stellar thermonucleosynthesis over tens of billions of years), having given other cosmological little or no consideration, on what basis might a BB theorist deny that?

The BBT theory predicts the cosmic abundance of some light elements like helium-4, deuterium and lithium-7. The abundance of these elements is said to confirm the prediction. It is not necessary, however, to invoke a Big Bang in order explain the observed abundance of light elements. A plasma model of galaxy formation accomplishes the task very well (Rees 1978, Lerner 1989). The plasma model shows that the elements are produced during galaxy formation in their observed abundance by early massive and intermediate stars. The nuclear reactions and cosmic rays generated in and by the stars lead to the production of these elements. The current plasma model accounts quite accurately for the observed abundance of light elements. [....]

 

[Zeuzzz]

And heres Martin Ree's original paper on a possible alternate origin for the microwave background and elements, published in Nature; Origin of pregalactic microwave background, the first real publication to offer an alternative explanation.

And Arp has proposed a matter creation method in galaxies, i cant seem to find it at the moment, but its related to his work on quasars being ejected from galaxies, and other things.

I could tell you more if i had access to much of the copyrighted publications

This is as close as i've got to seeing some of the matter creation proposals; http://www.springerlink.com/content/t1051925605842n8/

Creation of Matter and Anomalous Redshifts

Fundamental Theories of Physics
Volume 126

Jayant V. Narlikar6
(6) Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Post Bag 4, Ganeshkhind, Pune, 411007
Abstract:

This presentation discusses the role of creation of matter in cosmology. While the phenomenon is considered a singular event in the big bang model, a more physical description is given in the quasi-steady state cosmology. Some highlights of this model are presented. Finally, the observations of anomalous redshifts are briefly described and viewed as a consequence of newly created matter ejected from older matter.

 

[Dancing David]

Thanks Zeuzz, I will look at them and see what they say.

 

[Dancing David]

Zuezz, the first article is loccked to me and all there is is the abstract. It doesn't really say how you get a 25% He ratio, it just asserts that it can be done through the formation of large stars in the early universe. That is possible but leaves one lacking and wanting more. I would assume there are reasons to think it comes from the BBE but thanks for the answer! Certainly the BBE could allow for the exact same process in the early universe.

I am not sure how the second source addresses the question.

 

[Klimax]

Unfortunately the first article is part of only handfull IEEE journals,which is not subscribed by University library(MFF UK-czech one!)

If the paper or similar work was published elsewhere tell me and I can try to get access.(I am student...)

Of course only particular excerpt with relevant info would be provided by me,so no law would be theoreticaly broken. :-|

 

[Reality Check]

"Galactic model of element formation", Apr 1989 by Lerner, E.J.

1 citation in 19 years​

"Magnetic Vortex Filaments, Universal Scale Invariants, and the Fundamental Constants", Dec. 1986 by Lerner, Eric J.

2 citations in 22 years​

"Creation of Matter and Anomalous Redshifts" by Jayant V. Narlikar

I cannot find this as a published paper but the author has 3 other papers published. Two are on cosmology, published in 1999 with a total of 10 citations.​

Try to guess how important these papers are. They are so obviously wrong that scientists have not even bothered to refute them.

 

[Dancing David]

Cue the music, creeping corporate conspracy, as played by the Hitchcock orchestra.

(Not you Zuezz, another poster , who insists that there is this huge BBe conspiracy to spend money. Never mind where Lerner and Perrat got some of their funding.)

 

[Yllanes]

"Creation of Matter and Anomalous Redshifts" by Jayant V. Narlikar

I cannot find this as a published paper but the author has 3 other papers published. Two are on cosmology, published in 1999 with a total of 10 citations.​

Try to guess how important these papers are. They are so obviously wrong that scientists have not even bothered to refute them.

I don't know where you searched that, but ISI's Web of Science has 204 publications for JV Narlikar, with an h-index of 24 and 2097 total citations.

 

[Reality Check]

I don't know where you searched that, but ISI's Web of Science has 204 publications for JV Narlikar, with an h-index of 24 and 2097 total citations.

I used Scopus and must have done something wrong. Searching again for "(AUTHOR-NAME(narlikar j.v.) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(cosmology))" gives 45 results with a good half of them cited multiple times.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

And heres Martin Ree's original paper on a possible alternate origin for the microwave background and elements, published in Nature; Origin of pregalactic microwave background, the first real publication to offer an alternative explanation.

And Arp has proposed a matter creation method in galaxies, i cant seem to find it at the moment, but its related to his work on quasars being ejected from galaxies, and other things.

I could tell you more if i had access to much of the copyrighted publications

This is as close as i've got to seeing some of the matter creation proposals; http://www.springerlink.com/content/t1051925605842n8/

.
Trouble is, the Arp et al. model of quasars etc is inconsistent with astronomical observations, especially those of the last decade or so.

Perhaps the two most compelling are:

* the 2006 L-C&G paper BeAChooser cited in another thread knocks just about all previous Arp et al. papers of six ... and L-C&G have tried hard, for some time, to find observational support of Arp et al.!

* (strongly) lensed quasars: these are at the cosmological distances implied by their redshifts (to within the, admitedly wide, uncertainties); this is fatal to Arp et al. because they treat quasars as a homogeneous class of objects.

There are, of course, hundreds of other papers presenting detailed observational results that no Arpian has yet attempted to address (as far as I know). In many ways this is not surprising; the best efforts of Arp et al. fall far short of presenting detailed, quantitative models that can actually be tested.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

And heres Martin Ree's original paper on a possible alternate origin for the microwave background and elements, published in Nature; Origin of pregalactic microwave background, the first real publication to offer an alternative explanation.

.
After the angular power spectrum was detected (by COBE) and details observed (by numerous, independent researchers), interest in this kind of alternative explanation of the CMB quickly died, not least because it offered no explanation of that angular power spectrum.

I haven't read the Lerner papers yet (and didn't even know they existed until today), but the mechanism he seems to have proposed - per the abstracts - should leave clearly detectable signals in one or other cosmic background; it could be that the CMB angular power spectrum is also a fatal blow to Lerner's ideas ...

 

[Wangler]

One of the indirect supports of the BBE theory is that the proportions of H, He and Li support that which might be accounted for in nucleosynthesis following the BBE.

Too bad BBN has an issue with Li abundances as checked against WMAP data.

I wonder how this diffence will require changes to the current cosmology?

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Too bad BBN has an issue with Li abundances as checked against WMAP data.

I wonder how this diffence will require changes to the current cosmology?

.
Could you say a bit more about this please?

For example, Spergel at al. (2007) find that the Three Year WMAP data are consistent with a LCDM model for a considerable number of parameters, including D, ³He, and ⁴He primordial abundances. The ⁷Li is inconsistent, they report ... however there appear to be a number of mechanisms and systematics in the observations that need to be addressed.

 

[Dancing David]

Isn't that great!

They are doing what they oughta. And maybe someday, they will find something that makes them chuch the whole thing and start over, it looks unlikely right now.

 

[Wangler]

.
Could you say a bit more about this please?

For example, Spergel at al. (2007) find that the Three Year WMAP data are consistent with a LCDM model for a considerable number of parameters, including D, ³He, and ⁴He primordial abundances. The ⁷Li is inconsistent, they report ... however there appear to be a number of mechanisms and systematics in the observations that need to be addressed.

That Spergel paper is interesting, but they don't mention too much about the abundances, as it is a general overview of the fit of the WMAP data to the standard lambdy-CDM cosmology. The WMAP data has really nailed down the cosmology in large part; what a fascinating and fulfilling time we live in, if you are a cosmologist!

For further reading about the Li problem, please see:

Steigman: http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.1100

Coc, et. al.: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0309480

Molaro: http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.3922

among others.

It seems as if the lithium problem has been around for some time, but there are some possible sources of error in the estimations that might reconcile the difference between theory and observation.

The Helium abundance was a problem once upon a time, but refinements to the models have been made, helping to reconcile the theory to real life.

I actually came across this stuff while looking for plasma cosmology's estimates for the primordial element abundances.

The oft-discussed (by BB theorists) relative abundances of He, Li, and deuterium as expressed as predictions or observational points are easy to find, but it is a disappointing search trying to find these same predictions from the PC camp.

 

[Wangler]

Isn't that great!

They are doing what they oughta.

Are you referring to their use of Bayesian statistics?

From Spergel, et. al.:

We use Bayesian statistical techniques to explore the shape
of the likelihood function,........

Or are you referring to the fact that cosmologists are working to incorporate observational evidence into refinements of their theories?

 

[Dancing David]

Neither, I am sulking in my safe space!

(Enjoying the sun and waves and laughing at myself with great joy). At least we are going to havre a high in the 60s and no snow.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

That Spergel paper is interesting, but they don't mention too much about the abundances, as it is a general overview of the fit of the WMAP data to the standard lambdy-CDM cosmology. The WMAP data has really nailed down the cosmology in large part; what a fascinating and fulfilling time we live in, if you are a cosmologist!

For further reading about the Li problem, please see:

Steigman: http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.1100

Coc, et. al.: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0309480

Molaro: http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.3922

among others.

It seems as if the lithium problem has been around for some time, but there are some possible sources of error in the estimations that might reconcile the difference between theory and observation.

The Helium abundance was a problem once upon a time, but refinements to the models have been made, helping to reconcile the theory to real life.

I actually came across this stuff while looking for plasma cosmology's estimates for the primordial element abundances.

The oft-discussed (by BB theorists) relative abundances of He, Li, and deuterium as expressed as predictions or observational points are easy to find, but it is a disappointing search trying to find these same predictions from the PC camp.

.
Dunkley et al. present an update on Spergel at al. ("Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Likelihoods and Parameters from the WMAP data", note that it's apparently still only a pre-print); section 4.2.9 ("Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis") addresses the observed/estimated Lithium-7 (primordial) abundance, and cites two of the papers you did (they do not cite Molaro), and several more besides.

Of course it's a WIP, but here's one sentence:

A possible solution has recently been proposed using new observations of stars in the globular cluster NGC 6397 (Korn et al. 2006). They find evidence that as the stars age and cool, the proportion of lithium in their atmospheres drops, indicating that transport processes within the star lead to the destruction of lithium.