The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis

[Reality Check]

Displaying 21st Century delsuions with a PDF on a web site

It is well known to industry that refractory (heat blocking) material is needed so that iron and nickel...

Snipped iron and nickel and asteroid delusions from jeffreyw ! This includes the stupidity that scientists are ignorant about science!

Asteroids were heated by processes including radioactivity and impacts thus forming iron/nickel alloys.

30 March 2016 jeffreyw: A delusion that iron/nickel alloys in asteroids cannot form!

 

[Reality Check]

jeffreyw: The ignorance of citing the invalid quasars theory of Halton Arp

Here is a new graphics video. It is dedicated to Halton Arp and Victor Ambartsumian who originally hypothesized that galaxies beget galaxies and provided the initial observation of the process of forming the material needed to make stars. This understanding is very rare to find so I thought I'd share it here.

We understand that you are trying very hard to besmirch the reputations of scientists by associating them with your delusions, jeffreyw.
Halton Arp's invalid idea that quasars were ejected from galaxies is nothing to do with your delusion that planets are stars.

Lying about observation of "process of forming the material needed to make stars". That was during the Big Bang and no one has observed this process. We have observed its effects, e.g. the cosmic microwave background radiation.

Insulting our understanding when we know vastly more than you, e.g. the mass of the Earth is not the mass of a star!

30 March 2016 jeffreyw: The ignorance of citing the invalid theory of Halton Arp of quasars being ejected from galaxies.

30 March 2016 jeffreyw: Probable lie about Victor Ambartsumian.
What we have is rumors from Arp about a presentation at the Solvay conference about 1957 and a talk given in 1961 where Ambartsumian speculates about a dwarf galaxy being separated from a host galaxy !

 

[Reality Check]

Some science for jeffreyw to ignore or deny:
ALMA's Stunning Image Of A Protoplanetary Disk Sheds Light On Planet Formation

What we found was a spectacular confirmation of our best theories: protoplanetary disks are real, they’re found around the youngest, infant stars in nebulae, they evaporate over time, and they show up with a variety of parameters and orientations. But in order to identify the specific planet-forming phenomena that occur within these disks, it would require a different type of imaging from the conventional optical-to-infrared pictures that Hubble takes in space. Instead, we’ve developed the ability to do radio imaging by building arrays of large (6-7 meter) radio telescopes, separated by anywhere from hundreds of meters to tens of kilometers. The most powerful array of these is the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) in Chile, atop a 5,000-meter elevation plateau. By using astronomical interferometry and pointing at young, infant stars known to have protoplanetary disks, we’ve been able to image the structures of them to unprecedented resolution.

 

[abaddon]

Heating caused by radioactivity and collisions alone is implausible.

Because?

So billions of radioactive pre-formed rocks all slammed together into a giant ball called Earth?
Highly unlikely.

Nope. That is your strawman.

Rocks moving at even slow velocities of around 10 feet per second would bounce off each other like billiard balls.

LOLWUT?

Two chunks of highly enriched plutonium would also bounce off each other, there goes the radioactive heating part. There is nothing to melt them down!

Who needs plutonium?

Again, to melt down rocks/metal you need refractory material, a fuel source and an atmosphere to provide huge pressures.

Which even proto-stars have in abundance.

Outer space is absent refractory material (its vacuum the heat immediately dissipates as radiation the objects would never get hot enough), there is no fuel as in coke in blast furnaces, there is no pressure (again outer space is vacuum).

Wrong.

So how exactly do you form meteorites with? Magic? Again, it is clear, the location for forming huge iron/nickel cored objects is inside of stars themselves.

Leftovers. Did you think they just popped into existence?

The thick atmosphere is refractory material to block heat loss, the fuel is gravitational collapse and the heat from exothermic chemical synthesis reactions forming a plethora of chemicals (which are stable in late stage stars, they are called rocks/minerals), there is a whole hell of a lot of pressure...

Thermodynamics fail.

The star forms the planet, as planets are byproducts of stellar evolution. A planet is an evolving/dying star. They were never mutually exclusive.

Evidence?

This is very easy to understand.

Or very easy to make up out of whole cloth.

 

[Lennart Hyland]

Establishment astrophysics is fundamentally misguided.

Here is another paper which I explain that the elemental abundances of the star changes as it evolves. The young stars have the most helium/hydrogen, but as they evolve they lose the light elements, unless they can combine with others forming molecules, such as water and methane.

http://vixra.org/pdf/1603.0422v1.pdf

The disk paradigm no longer works. It is a false paradigm misleading scientists. We need to get rid of it immediately. Looking at a shrapnel field and saying this is where planets are formed is false, protoplanetary disks are grave yards, evidence for huge collision events, not nurseries. The star is the planet nursery.

Can you actully explain what you mean with the term paper?

 

[JeanTate]

Establishment astrophysics is fundamentally misguided.

Here is another paper which I explain that the elemental abundances of the star changes as it evolves. The young stars have the most helium/hydrogen, but as they evolve they lose the light elements, unless they can combine with others forming molecules, such as water and methane.

http://vixra.org/pdf/1603.0422v1.pdf

The disk paradigm no longer works. It is a false paradigm misleading scientists. We need to get rid of it immediately. Looking at a shrapnel field and saying this is where planets are formed is false, protoplanetary disks are grave yards, evidence for huge collision events, not nurseries. The star is the planet nursery.

May I ask, do you have any peers, jeffreyw?

Ones who have, in your opinion, sufficient understanding of the relevant (astro)physics and your, um, ideas, to be able to review your publications?

If so, have you submitted any of those to any of those people, for critical review? If not, why not?

Have any of your papers been accepted for publication in any of the standard astrophysics journals, ApJ, say? Have you submitted any of your papers to any of them? If not, why not?

 

[turingtest]

Can you actully explain what you mean with the term paper?

I'd like him to explain what he means by "explain"- apparently, in JeffreyScience (as in DanielScience), it means something like "proclaim."

But he won't; his body of work here shows that he has no interest in answering questions, the proclamations are the thing.

 

[Dancing David]

Two chunks of highly enriched plutonium would also bounce off each other, there goes the radioactive heating part. There is nothing to melt them down!

So now plutonium is a naturally occurring substance in interstellar space? How big a piece is that?

How interesting, please tell me more.

 

[jeffreyw]

What a dead star looks like

I don't remember posting this video. Anyways it explains that Mercury is a dead star. Its like, right there. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAkMGC-SZYA

No surrealistic big bang required. lol

 

[ben m]

Rocks moving at even slow velocities of around 10 feet per second would bounce off each other like billiard balls.

It's not surprising that Jeffrey has never interacted with a physics experiment, a plasma, or a heat source, but now we learn that he has never interacted with a rock.

Jeffrey, drop a billiard ball onto a very hard surface (a concrete floor, for example) from a height of 1.5 feet. That is a 10 ft/s collision. How high does it bounce? If it bounced exactly back to its starting height we would call this an "elastic collision"

Repeat the experiment with a rock. Does it bounce as high as the billiard ball did? Half as high? Hardly at all? You tell me, Mr. Scientist.

Again, to melt down rocks/metal you need refractory material, a fuel source and an atmosphere to provide huge pressures.

You've never checked, have you? Radioactivity (from the *known* radioactive content of this sort of source material) is a perfectly adequate heat source---look it up, there are numbers, you're not supposed to just guess. A thick layer of rock, rubble, or even magma is a perfectly adequate thermal insulator---again, look it up, there are numbers, there's no reason to be satisfied with vague guesswork and mental pictures. "Refractory material" is a specific requirement for building crucibles and furnaces on Earth. Like, you'd use a refractory crucible to prevent your batch of molten iron from spilling on your factory floor.

You are making up the need for an atmosphere from some mistaken premise I can't even diagnose.

 

[Reality Check]

Anyways it explains that Mercury is a dead star.

Repeating a delusion that planets are stars again and again via insanely ignorant YouTube videos just emphasizes how delusional the idea is , jeffreyw.
Mercury has a mass of 0.055 Earths - about millionth that of the Sun which happens to be a star! Mercury is made of rock, not hydrogen.

 

[Reality Check]

Heating caused by radioactivity and collisions alone is implausible.

Heating caused by radioactivity and collisions is basic high school level science, jeffreyw !

A delusion that rocks in space "bounce off each other like billiard balls" at low velocities is bad. For a start there is a thing called gravity ! At very low velocities they stick together. At medium velocities they "bounce " and heat up from the collision. At higher velocities they shatter and heat up.

 

[Reality Check]

For the new readers

The main problem with establishment astrophysics is with their false philosophy:
....

The main problem with jeffreyw is that he has the delusion that planets are stars and so making up fantasies about the real world.
jeffreyw wants planets to be stars and so makes up fairy stories about magic that turns stellar masses of H, He, etc. plasma into planetary masses (hundreds of thousands of Earth masses magically vanish!) made of rock.

 

[Reality Check]

Establishment astrophysics is fundamentally misguided.

jeffreyw repeats his delusion about establishment astrophysics that he is fundamentally ignorant about !
jeffreyw has deluded PODFs on a PDF upload site.
We have images of planets clearing their obits in new stellar systems. ALMA's Stunning Image Of A Protoplanetary Disk Sheds Light On Planet Formation

A list of 21 ignorant and deluded items from jeffreyw starts with: 15th January 2015 jeffreyw: That is a video containing an ignorant fantasy about how planets were formed. The Sun is 333,000 Earth masses!
and continues:

1. 22 March 2016 jeffreyw: The delusion that stars have cooler "interior regions" (stellar fusion means hotter cores).
2. 30 March 2016 jeffreyw: A delusion that iron/nickel alloys in asteroids cannot form!
3. 30 March 2016 jeffreyw: The ignorance of citing the invalid theory of Halton Arp of quasars being ejected from galaxies.
4. 30 March 2016 jeffreyw: Probable lie about Victor Ambartsumian maybe based on stories from Arp.

 

[Reality Check]

jeffreyw: It is a delusion that "all the objects in our solar system are not related

I forgot to post this! Ooops!

5 April 2016 jeffreyw: It is a delusion that "all the objects in our solar system are not related".
All of the objects in our solar system are related in that they formed together.
The Moon has a similar composition to Earth's mantle (thus the giant impact hypothesis for its origin).
The measured age of the Earth matches the estimated age for the Sun - they formed together.
The measured age of meteorites matches the measured age of the Earth - they formed together.

 

[Kid Eager]

I forgot to post this! Ooops!

Since all the objects in our solar system are not related, they must have formed from somewhere else in the galaxy and were all adopted by the Sun to take up their current configuration.

Here is the paper:

http://vixra.org/abs/1603.0202

The NICE model doesn't fix the issue, they just repeat the same dogma. I address them in this paper:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO3X5wt7UcM

The difference between a bad science paper and bad YouTube science is that you can wipe your backside with a bad science paper.

 

[Reality Check]

jeffreyw: A lie about the Nice model - it matches the Solar System

The NICE model doesn't fix the issue, they just repeat the same dogma.

5 April 2016 jeffreyw: A lie about the Nice model - it produces most of the features of the Solar System. The astronomers do not know about this "solar system collected from random parts" delusion so there is no issue to fix.

P.S. it is Nice after Nice, France, not NICE.

 

[Reality Check]

jeffreyw: A lie about a Principle of Stellar Adoption paper

IHere is the paper:

5 April 2016 jeffreyw: A lie about a Principle of Stellar Adoption paper.
This is a PDF on a PDF upload site containing one incoherent fact-less paragraph with a fantasy of "chaotic stars wandering the galaxy" !
That would be marked as F for a high school science paper.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

So now plutonium is a naturally occurring substance in interstellar space? How big a piece is that?

How interesting, please tell me more.

That's not remarkable. Plutonium is formed in supernova. Primordial plutonium can also be found on Earth.

 

[Reality Check]

jeffreyw: One crank cites another crank (J. Marvin Herndon)

....

5 April 2016 jeffreyw: Cites another crank (J. Marvin Herndon) that jeffreyw thinks has unsound ideas !
J. Marvin Herndon has a crank web site starting with "From Earth’s early formation as a Jupiter-like gas giant..." and going onto cartoon fantasies about the formation and geology of the Earth.
ETA: When an American geochemist stops publishing in geology related journals and publishes exclusively in a low impact Indian general science journal (Current Science) then he has fallen so off the deep end that his peers know it!