Terry
If Hy- are spewing forth as you conject, that means He is not
being
formed and there is mass balance problem in solar theory.
It's not an "either/or" situation. Certainly fusion accounts for
about half the solar energy, as the neutrino flux indicates. There
is still plenty of helium ash in the sun.
The solar neutrino problem is/was a major discrepancy between
measurements of neutrinos on Earth - in contrast to known results
from from fission reactors - but mostly from the theoretical
models of the solar fusion mechanism. The "problem" was considered
by the mainstream to have been "solved" in about 2002 by "new
understanding" of neutrino physics (total BS ! in parts at least)
requiring a modification of the Standard Model - specifically,
**neutrino oscillation.**
Here is the way the argument goes: "neutrinos have mass (in some
meansurements), and if neutrinos have mass, then they can change
from the massless type which had been expected to be produced in
the sun's interior, into other types that would not be caught by
the detectors in use at the time".
Even if your agree with the idea of "oscillation" of neutrinos,
and that they have apparent mass in certain measurements (I do
believe that, if it matters) --- can you spot the logical fallacy
of the so-called "solution" to the problem: (there are several)?
The whole solution is presently little more than an impossible
kludge that few want to talk about -- possibly because the same
problem is elegantly and accurately solved by a least one version
of the hydrino concept. The whole scene now is indicative of just
how easily the "mainstream" can be, and is, fooled by a near
consensus of self-appointed experts.... somewhat reminiscent of
the "pathological science" which Vo's know and love ...
Jones
