Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
There is one interesting point in all of this. 1300W/m^2 Solar insolation yields a neutrino flux of 2E10 cm^-2 sec^-1 , which is about six times more than Fred's figure, assuming that all the Solar energy output goes via the P-P reaction to He4. This raises the question: What happened to them, if Fred's figure of 3.5 Billion/cm^2 Sec^-1 is correct?
Robin, there is even more reason to doubt the "expert" mainstream opinion on this.
As you may have realized, we both have ironically expressed in the past, the view that Mills' "active corona" is so logical and consistent with observation that it may well supply most of the solar energy received on earth, as Mills claims, and that the actual rate of helium formation may fall far short of the mainstream viewpoint.
... all of which may ironically indicate that there is no "neutrino problem" at all, or even worse: that rather that the neutrino problem being too few, it may actually be too many (for the amount of helium formed). We know that Sol is "second generation" so most of the helium there could end up being primordial rather than from an ongoing process.
Given the ease with which the Farnsworth Fusor produces neutrons from Deuterium on earth, and presumably an equal number of neutrinos when the D is split, then when we transpose that situation to the solar environment, where the conditions are far more intense and gamma radiation alone would knock neuts off like mad, one might expect that deuterons would have a very short lifetime there.
Maybe they do unless they also become more stable with Mills' type shrinkage.
All of which reaffirms the "pathological" viewpoint of many vorticians, that *physics* as we *think we know it*, is in its infancy, and we have barely scratched the surface of the complexity which is out there, especially away from earth.
Jones
