Part B: The insanity of a neutron star at center of the Sun.
Nothing but the usual replies with insults, irrelevancy, and most importantly no science or real world evidence addressing is issues from Michael so onto the next part of the idiocy of no stated power source in Michael's solar "model".
Part C: Using the fantasies of two ignorant Thunderbolts authors about the power source of the Sun.
These fantasies are in books that we have to pay for or hidden in blogs or videos. But there is a EU guide book written in 2012 available as e-book that was used as the basis of
Testing the Electric Universe by the astrophysicist Brian Koberlein:
Reference:
A Beginner’s View of Our Electric Universe by Tom Findlay (
PDF)
This 2012 guide book was endorsed by EU experts (Wallace Thornhill and Dr Donald E Scot) and thus should contain correct information. The problem is that this book explicitly states that stars are not fusion powered at all! Page 79:
We will be returning to the idea of nuclear fusion-powered stars later to delve into why this, in fact, is not the way the Sun works and to take a close look at how all stars actually do work, electrically of course.
There is no statement of an electrically powered star generating fusion anywhere in the book. The basic fact of a flux of solar neutrinos corresponding to fusion and matching the Sun's energy output is not mentioned. These obvious errors were not noticed by Thornhill or Scott.
Thornhill's "power source" in
2001, which seems to be his last coherent explanation (rumors of something in a video?):
"he electric Sun model expects far more complex heavy element synthesis to take place in the natural particle accelerators in the photospheric lightning discharges. In that case the various neutrino “flavours” are all generated on the Sun and do not need to “oscillate” on their way to the Earth to make up an imagined deficit.
...
To sum up, the electrical model of the Sun requires that neutrinos of all “flavours” are produced by heavy element nucleosynthesis in the photosphere of the Sun.
An ignorant fantasy of heavy element synthesis in lightning discharges.
A lie of fusion creating neutrinos of all flavors when the dominating
p-p and CNO reactions in stars only create electron neutrinos.
The ignorant delusion of having fusion in the photosphere is the killer blow.
Fusion produces more gamma rays than neutrinos. We do not detect these gamma rays from solar fusion placing any source so far beneath the photosphere that the gamma rays are absorbed and turned into the thermal spectrum we detect. If he had ever read an astronomy textbook or could apply Newton's law of gravitation and the gas laws to stars then he would know the physical impossibility of a stable star heated at its photosphere. A star needs temperature and pressure increasing with depth to be stable. Heating from the photosphere produces a uniform temperature and the star collapses. Specifically an electric Sun has to be a white dwarf
!
Scott's "power source" according to Michael comenting on Brian Koberlein's blog is on page 106 of his book and is
Scott: The neutrino flux from the sun seems to vary inversely with sunspot number. This is not unexpected in the ES hypothesis because the source of those neutrinos is the z-ping-produced fusion occurring in the double layer (DL) – and sunspots are the locations where there is no DL in which this process can occur.
Michael...He names the emission method (z-pinch processes in plasma), the location of the neutrino emissions (photosphere/chromosphere) and he predicts variation in neutrino emissions due to current flow changes...
Scott at least knows that neutrinos are produced by fusion! There is a fantasy that z-pinches are produced n the turbulent conditions in the solar photosphere. We can create fusion in the
controlled conditions of terrestrial z-pinch experiments. There is no evidence of any z-pinches on or in the Sun.
The proposed fusion is probably physically impossible in the photosphere since the
proton–proton chain reaction requires sustained temperatures and pressures
This first step is extremely slow because the
positron emission of the diproton to deuterium is extremely rare (the vast majority of the time, the diproton decays back into two hydrogen-1 unbound protons through
proton emission). This is because the emission of the positron is brought about by the
weak nuclear force, which is immensely weaker than the
strong nuclear force and the
electromagnetic force.
The half-life of a proton in the core of the Sun before it is involved in a successful proton–proton fusion is estimated to be about one billion years, even at the extreme pressures and temperatures found there.
Also read the blog
Just-So Story by Brian Koberlein where he mentions that the neutrinos from the
proton–proton chain reaction have been detected.
Neutrinos from the primary proton–proton fusion process in the Sun by the Borexino Collaboration,
Nature volume 512, pages 383–386 (28 August 2014)
Thornhill and Scott just have bad fairy stories. Competent people would have learned about stars and fusion. Competent people would have done more than fantasize. Competent people would have done their own calculations to see if heir theory matched the real world or at least consulted astronomers and nuclear physicists.
Thornhill and Scott could partially fix their fantasies by placing the fusion so far below the phosphate that the gamma rays are absorbed and turned into the thermal spectrum we detect. But stars still collapse! Worse - there have been no sources stating that is what they have done.