Is the TGD based model of the Sun consistent with the standard model?

The key question is whether the proposed model is consistent with the standard model of the Sun. Can the predicted nuclear abundances be consistent with the abundances predicted by the standard model? Is there a counterpart for the notion of stellar generations with a new generation formed from the remnants of supernova explosions. I have also proposed that dark fusion as the TGD counterpart of “cold fusion” could replace ordinary hot fusion even in the case of the Sun. How does the model based on M₈₉→ M₁₀₇ transition relate to this model and can the two views be consistent?

Mini Big Bangs (see this and this) would cause the formation of planets as a surface layer of a star explodes (see this). Also supernovas would be explosions of this kind. Micro Big Bangs at the surface of the Sun could cause solar wind and coronal mass ejections (see this).

In the case of solar wind and related phenomena magnetic fields are involved and must be an essential aspect of the phenomena. The mechanism for the acceleration of trace amounts of heavy ions and atomic nuclei of elements such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, neon, magnesium, silicon, sulfur, and iron encountered also in solar plasma is believed to involve magnetic fields but the mechanism is not understood.

The key ideas are as follows.

1. The mini and micro Big Bangs could be seen as the TGD counterpart for the cosmic expansion replacing it with a sequence of rapid bursts.
2. A phase transition changing the effective Planck constant and relevant p-adic length scale could take place. This phase transition would liberate large cyclotron energy making it possible to overcome the gravitational force.
3. The notion of magnetic bubble (see this and this) identified as a layer formed by a network of monopole flux tubes and forming the basic structural element of the magnetic body together with radial U-shaped gravitational monopole flux tubes could be crucial. For instance, this leads to a model for the solar wind based on the reconnection of flux tubes of a surface layer of the Sun formed by magnetic monopole flux tubes.
4. A natural guess is that nuclear fusion is involved in the case of the Sun. I have considered several options for what the fusion-like process could be in the TGD Universe. The standard option is ordinary nuclear fusion in the core but is plagued by several conflicts with empirical facts.
   1. The first TGD inspired proposal is based on “cold fusion” (see this and this) identified as dark fusion giving rise to dark proton sequences with dark Compton length of order electron Compton length. The dark nucleon sequences would spontaneously decay to ordinary nuclei. This could ignite ordinary fusion but one can also consider the option that ordinary fusion is not needed at all.
      1. The elegance of the “no hot fusion” option inspires the question whether dark fusion at a surface layer of the Sun could produce the radiation energy of the Sun and the solar wind. The energy scale for the gamma rays from the transition of the dark nuclei is about 10 keV and considerably lower than the MeV scale for the ordinary nuclei.
      2. This option should be consistent with the ordinary model of nuclear fusion. The first objection is that this seems to realize the stellar evolution so that it occurs at the level of a single star. This view conforms with the fact that nuclei up to nuclear masses of Fe are present in the solar wind. It has been also found that the distribution of stars in various stages of evolution does not seem to depend on the cosmic time.
      3. Can this view be consistent with the assumption that the evolution of stars is by supernova explosions providing material for the subsequent generation of stars? Zero energy ontology allows us to consider the possibility that the supernova explosions are quantum tunnelling events involving two “big” state function reductions (BSFRs) changing the arrow of time. This view might allow us to understand why the fraction of the heavier nuclei in the surface layer increases in the supernova explosions.
   2. I have considered a rather radical, one might call it totally crazy, proposal (see this) that the Sun contains a surface layer in which the monopole flux tubes carry nuclei of M₈₉ hadrons physics with mass scale which is 512 times higher than for the ordinary hadron physics.
      1. The transformation of M₈₉ nuclei to ordinary nucleons in p-adic cooling would be responsible for the solar wind and also for the energy production of the Sun. The interior of the Sun could be totally different from what has been believed. This layer would be gravitationally dark and have thickness of order of gravitational Compton length of the Sun which is R_E/2.
      2. This model should reproduce the predictions of the standard model of solar energy production assuming nuclear fusion in the solar core. Suppose that the dark fusion at the surface layer produces the same distribution of nuclei as the ordinary fusion. Suppose that the end product of M₈₉→ M₁₀₇ transition consists of dark nuclei of M₁₀₇ hadron physics, which spontaneously transform to the ordinary nuclei. If the composition of the solar wind codes for the outcome of the ordinary fusion, the model could be consistent with the standard model.
      3. Ordinary nuclear reactions (, which could take place as dark fusion by tunnelling by two BSFRs) are possible between the ordinary nuclei produced in the phase transition and affect the distribution of the nuclei. There are some indications that the “cold fusion” produces the same distribution of nuclei and these indications have been used as a justification for the claims about fraud.

   The magnetic fields should play an important role so that an estimate for the cyclotron energy in the case of a solar magnetic field is in order.

   1. For the Earth the cyclotron frequency of proton in the endogenous magnetic field, with a nominal value B_end = .2 Gauss assigned with the monopole flux tubes, is 300 Hz, and the corresponding energy is E_c= ℏ_gr,EeB/m_p= 4.6 eV. This energy is higher than the gravitational binding energy of protons of about 1 eV at the surface of Earth (note however that the gravitational binding energy increases below the surface like 1/r). This could make it possible for transition ℏ_gr,E→ ℏ or a transition 1/β₀=n→ n-1 to provide the energy needed for the explosion throwing a surface layer of the Earth giving rise to Moon.

The existence of this kind a layer and reduction of ℏ_gr, say a transition 1/β₀= 2→ 1 could make energetically possible also the expansion of the radius of the Earth by a factor 2.

What does one obtain in the case of Mars? Could the gravitational binding energy be compensated by the liberation of dark cyclotron energy as the value ℏ_gr=GMm_p/β₀ for Mars is reduced to a smaller value. The ratio of the mass of Mars to that of Earth is M_Mars/M_E∼ .1. If the monopole flux tubes carry a magnetic field of strength B_end,E=.2 Gauss the cyclotron energy of the proton is scaled down to .46 eV. The gravitational binding energy for protons at the surface of the Earth is about 1 eV and at the surface of Mars about .1 eV. Also now the liberation of the dark cyclotron energy for protons in a phase transition increasing the value of β₀ could make the explosion of the surface layer possible.

What about the Sun? Somewhat surprisingly, the magnetic field at the surface of the Sun is the same order of magnitude as the magnetic field of Earth. One can estimate the value of solar gravitational Planck constant ℏ_gr= GM_Sm_p/β₀ in the case of protons with mass m=m_p and corresponding dark cyclotron energy. The Nottale’s model for the planetary orbits as Bohr orbits implies β₀∼ 2^-11 for the Sun and suggests β₀∼ 1 for the Earth. The ratio of the solar mass to the mass of the Earth is M_S/M_E∼ 3× 10⁵.

For the Sun with β₀= 2^-11, E_c is scaled up by the factor (M_S/M_E/β₀ to E_c=2.76 GeV, almost 3 proton masses, which looks nonsensical! In the radical model for solar energy production involving M₈₉ hadrons this scale would be natural. A possible interpretation is as nuclear binding energy for M₈₉ nuclei: one has 512× 5 MeV= 2.56 GeV.

For 1/β₀=1, the solar cyclotron energy would be E_c= 1.38 MeV, which corresponds to the energy scale of weak nuclear interactions. They would make possible weak transitions transforming neutrons to protons and vice versa even if the final state would consist of dark nucleon sequence. The nuclear binding energy per nucleon for light nuclei is around 7 MeV and looks somewhat too large: note however that 1/β₀=n>1 is possible for the horizontal monopole flux tubes and is consistent with quantum criticality. What could these results mean? Solar wind contains nuclei up to Fe, the heaviest nucleus produced in ordinary fusion and there is also a mysterious finding that the solar surface contains solid iron. One can consider several options.

1. Quantum criticality suggests several values for ℏ_gr corresponding to different values of β₀. Suppose that horizontal flux tubes at the solar surface have β₀∼ 1 whereas the gravitational U-shaped flux tubes with β₀∼ 2^-11 are radial.

For β₀≥ 1 horizontal flux tubes with cyclotron energy about 1.38 MeV, ordinary nuclear reactions and even fusion might take place near the surface of the Sun. Could dark cyclotron photons from monopole flux tubes with 1≤ 1/β₀ ≤ 7 transforming to ordinary gamma radiation ignite the ordinary nuclear fusion in the surface layer and in this way explain why the standard model works so well?

The second, more radical option is that the dark nuclei as products of dark fusion and having a binding energy scale of 10 keV, possibly produced as the outcome of the M₈₉→ M₁₀₇ transition, produce the ordinary nuclei. Also the ordinary nuclear fusion could be reduced to dark fusion involving tunnelling by two BSFRs. If so, the attempts to realize nuclear fusion in nuclear reactors would be based on wrong assumptions about the underlying physics.

The density of the Sun at the photosphere is ∼ 10^-4 kg/m³ whereas the average density of the Sun is 1.41× 10³ kg/m³ (the average density of Earth is 5.51× 10³ kg/m³). The density is extremely low so that surface fusion at photosphere cannot explain the energy production of the Sun. The surface fusion layer should exist at some depth where the density is not far from the average density of the Sun. One candidate is a layer above the surface of the solar core. As found its thickness should be of the order of Earth radius.

The solar core, usually believed to be the seat of hot fusion, has radius about .2× R_S and its mass is roughly .8 percent of the mass of the Sun. This brings in mind the strange finding that .5 percent of the mass needed to explain the fusion energy power produced in the solar core seems to be missing. Could this missing mass be associated with a layer near the surface layer of the Sun and could it be responsible for the solar wind?

The radius of Earth is 1/109 times the radius of the Sun and the gravitational Compton length L_gr,S of the Sun equals to L_gr,S=R_E/2 and is therefore .5 percent of R_S! What could these coincidences mean? If the Sun has a layer of thickness Δ R with the average density of the Sun, one has Δ M/M = 3 (ρ_S/ρ_E)Δ R/R ∼ .75 Δ R/R. For Δ R=R_E one obtains Δ M/M ∼ .75 per cent, not far from .5 per cent. Could the Sun have a gravitationally dark layer of thickness about R_E with density .75 ρ_S. This is indeed assume in the proposed model (see this). See the article Some Solar Mysteries or the chapter with the same title.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

For the lists of articles (most of them published in journals founded by Huping Hu) and books about TGD see this.

Source: https://matpitka.blogspot.com/2025/01/is-tgd-based-model-of-sun-consistent.html