Are we at risk?
In the Standard Model, our Sun is the heaviest object in our solar system, held together by its own gravity. Plus, solar gravity holds everything from the biggest planets in the solar system to the smallest bits of matter in orbit around our star.
Contrast this with the Standard+ Model in which something extra is going on, subtracting importance away from gravity:
- The solar system has a circular motion and this motion helped collect light-weighted materials in the center.
- Planets formed where additional but smaller circular motions collected matter in place.
How is this all different from the Standard Model?
Envision an eddy in a river. Its slow-moving character may capture a leaf and have that leaf stay in place for a real long time while the middle section of the river rushes by in the near distance. If the eddy is large, this area can actually capture a lot of leaves.
Same setup for the Sun, sitting in the center of the solar system’s circular motion, itself not moving all that much while the planets rush along on their large circular paths around the center.
The Sun is the perfect spot for collecting light-weighted material.
- The Sun’s mass is about 70% Hydrogen
(Element #1 on the periodic table) - About 28% Helium (Element #2)
- About 1% Oxygen (Element #8)
- Carbon .4% (#6), Iron .14% (#26), Nitrogen .1% (#7), Silicon .1% (#14),
- Magnesium (#12), Neon (#10), Sulfur (#16), combined 0.15%
The lower the element number, the lighter the material.
Our Sun is the collection point of a lot of leaves in the water. Nearly all of it is light-weighted material.
Most stars in the universe are very similar in that hydrogen and helium are the main ingredients of what makes a star a star.
The largest circular motions in the universe that can capture light-weighted materials develop into stars.
[Black Holes are actually Black Eyes.]
Eddies collect leaves and keep them there.
—
The Lithium problem
Element #3, Lithium, is hardly present in our Sun. As shown in the graph, lithium is (together with Beryllium #4 and Boron #5) actually lacking quite a bit in its expected abundance all across the universe.
Physicists discovered that stars with planets lack lithium, while stars (binary stars) that do not have planets do have more lithium.
- When the circular motion of a proto-star system is such that planets can form in their own but smaller circular motions, then the planets collect that lithium and the star receives very little.
- In a binary star system, that lithium is collected by one or both stars.
This collection feature points out how hydrogen is truly the main ingredient of stars, with helium the result of hydrogen fusion.
Leaves end up collecting in eddies, while the rocks do not collect themselves here. Once there are enough leaves though, then additional heavier parts can get carried by the leaves, but only to a point. Anything too heavy, and it will sink to the bottom of the river.
—
When gravity is not the only component of star formation, then this sheds a new light on what our Sun is: a sleeping giant of light-weighted material.
Due to the lack of motion in the center of the circular motion of our solar system, all this light-weighted material is collected because there is no motion to stir it up.
- This can get recreated in simple experiments. The center of slow moving whirlpools can collect material in these centers. If the whirlpool goes a bit fast, no light-weighted material will collect there.
—
The main thrust of this article is that physicists hold on to a gravitational model that is too simplistic.
The scientific model does not contain the net-zero location for motion in settings with a modest circular motion, capable of collecting light-weighted materials.
All is explained by physicists through gravity. They are not looking at the mechanical setting, not considering its importance, explaining the effects of motion as all belonging to gravity.
That begs the question if physicists have a good idea what the Sun is. They believe it is held together by its own gravity. They give gravity sole importance and point to the Sun as the item holding the solar-system planets in place.
- But what if we are all just going in the same direction?
Some 13.8 billion years ago, the materialization process catapulted all this energy outwardly away from that original Area X, and that outbound motion never stopped. It’s actually the fastest motion we ourselves are involved in.
When two celestial bodies are moving in the same direction, then they will be dancing around one another due to gravity. Yet gravity may only be part of the story. The other part of the story is that initial motion, the fastest for matter, of 13.8 billion years ago. Physicists seem to overlook the importance of the initial push in the Standard Model.
Light-weighted material of stars was collected in that net-zero center of circular motion. Stars are sleeping giants that ended up producing life-giving light.
A Nova may be nothing else but the disturbance of that eddy.
—
Old Faithful in Yellowstone National Park does not blow because its entire chamber reached the boiling point of water.
It is just the top layer of the intrinsic chamber, right underneath the surface, that needs to reach that boiling point. Everything else in the chamber was at that boiling point already, waiting for that tiny layer of water to start boiling, too.
Then, all blows.
It was the lower temperature of that tiny top layer of water that kept all that hot ready-to-boil water in the chambers.
- A sleeping giant should not be woken up.
Particularly when physicists say something that does not contain all information, then we have reason to worry.
Exploring our star has started in all earnest and, knowing physicists, they will not know where to stop. Perhaps not the Parker probe currently investigating the Sun, but subsequent missions may end up waking our sleeping giant.
As long as we do not have the evidence that intelligent life around a star can end up blowing up their own star, for instance, for research, we should think twice about waking up our sleeping giant.
