Offline Spingo

  • *
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« on: December 05, 2018, 08:49:20 AM »
To get to grips with flat earth theory, like most people, I read various sections of the wiki. The sections on the sun in particular caused me some concern in relation to the flat earth size of 32 miles in diameter. I am sure this must have been raised before.

The concern stems from how fusion is known to operate  and how this would be impossible on a star with such a tiny volume. Simple spectroscopy reveals via absobtion lines the main constituents of the sun, which are hydrogen and helium along with a cocktail of other heavier elements. The hydrogen fuel along with the resulting helium are both there but the size is a problem.

The physics of fusion are pretty well understood due to well over 30 years of experimenting with fusion power at various experimental facilities around the world as well as the developments of H bomb. All this experience in fusion points to it not being possible on such a small celestial body of only 32 in diameter. 

Given the age of the sun of over 4.5 billion years such a small sun could not have provided enough basic mass if fusion were even possible. The sums simply don’t add up. It strikes me that this 32 mile figure was arrived at before fusion power was even known about and was more a stab in the dark figure.

The small sun also size is also bad news for Mercury and Venus which would be tiny based on visual observation during transits, mere meters in diameter.

It strikes me the flat earth wiki ignores science completely in its estimation of the size of the sun, which must surely cast doubt on all its information in regards to our nearest star and it’s understanding of cosmology in general.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5472
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2018, 09:38:47 AM »
Stellar Fusion is entirely hypothetical. No one has recreated it in a lab.

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2018, 03:36:28 PM »
Actually that is not entirely true. There was a Horizon programme which featured an experiment where they had actually fused hydrogen into helium. But it was only for a tiny fraction of a second because they didn't have a large enough supply of hydrogen atoms.  Hydrogen burning (into helium) as we were discussing last night (at length) is the first stage in stellar nucleosynthesis.

I recorded the programme so I will see if I can dig it out.

Here's the link showing the experiment.   

That is not actually the one I saw. Similar but not the same one.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 03:48:12 PM by LoveScience »

Offline Spingo

  • *
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2018, 03:46:52 PM »
Stellar Fusion is entirely hypothetical. No one has recreated it in a lab.

What you say is neither accurate nor true. The whole process of the fusion of hydrogen into helium where the loss in mass  is converted into the energy we recieve is very well understood, you know the whole E=MC^2 thing.
But if we leave that to the side for one moment, what is your explanation of the sun’s energy source given it’s very small flat earth volume which discounts the fusion process? . How also do account for its incredibly long life again given it’s very small size. In flat earth terms it must be using a process as yet unknown to science.

Offline teinf

  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2018, 03:56:29 PM »
Stellar Fusion is entirely hypothetical. No one has recreated it in a lab.

And I suppose your explanation for Stars is: A very small and annoying Man in his back garden with a set of very thick lens spectacles, who probably drives a Peugeot, aiming a projector into the sky?  That’s what I heard on one of the other threads from a fellow FE Bible Basher.

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8425
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2018, 04:21:31 PM »
Stellar Fusion is entirely hypothetical. No one has recreated it in a lab.

And I suppose your explanation for Stars is: A very small and annoying Man in his back garden with a set of very thick lens spectacles, who probably drives a Peugeot, aiming a projector into the sky?  That’s what I heard on one of the other threads from a fellow FE Bible Basher.

Refrain from low-content posting in the upper fora. Given that you are on three warnings already, have a few days off to read the rules.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5472
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2018, 07:58:10 PM »
Not all types of fusion are Stellar Fusion. There are multiple types and theories. While they may have briefly created a type of fusion in a lab, I do not believe they are of the same type said to be found in the sun -- proton-proton chain reactions.

Also, some of those experiments and articles that have been posted in the past were touting to have to have recreated a star, as in "created the environment of a star", in terms of temperature and pressure, not actual fusion.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 11:07:21 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2018, 10:13:54 PM »
Tom,

I do know one or two things about stellar evolution and the cycle and chain of stellar nucleosynthesis.  All elements heavier than helium are the products of stellar nucleosythesis and every carbon atom inside you, me and every other living thing on the planet was produced inside a star that existed before the Sun.

I fully appreciate that we follow very different paths concerning our approach and acceptance of science, not only in relation to this topic but several others that have been discussed on here. Every man for themselves as the saying goes.

It doesn't matter to me whether you and the other members of the FE club accept what I say or not.  I get the impression that there are several other members on here who do. I am simply using the knowledge that I have gained over 35 years about astronomy to answer some of the questions posted on here as simply and as clearly as I can.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 10:16:51 PM by LoveScience »

Offline Spingo

  • *
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2018, 07:59:53 AM »
Not all types of fusion are Stellar Fusion. There are multiple types and theories. While they may have briefly created a type of fusion in a lab, I do not believe they are of the same type said to be found in the sun -- proton-proton chain reactions.

Also, some of those experiments and articles that have been posted in the past were touting to have to have recreated a star, as in "created the environment of a star", in terms of temperature and pressure, not actual fusion.

As I mentioned before Tom, what you say is just not true. You may well wish it not to be true or just not believe it, but I’m afraid it’s just not the case.

Fusion is not only possible on earth, it has been carried out many times. One of the most notable and well-documented deuterium-tritium (D/T) fusion reaction took place in the Joint European Torus (JET) reactor in the UK this year. The reaction took place, but the amount of energy needed was more than was generated by the fusion; the “gain” was about 0.7, while 1.0 means balance and more than 1 is needed for net energy output. It’s also been repeated at facilities, in the USA, China, Germany and Korea.


*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5472
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2018, 11:31:34 AM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2018, 11:41:28 AM »
To coin your own favourite phrase, whatever types of fusion reactions are going on in labs on Earth is irrelevant. The proton-proton hydrogen reaction is what is currently powering the Sun and will continue doing so for another few billion years.


So what is your point?

BTW this is a snippet from the notes that I used in connection with a solar astrophysics module that I studied as part of my BSc in Astronomy.

In 1939 Hans Bethe developed nuclear reaction theory to the point where he could explain the source of solar energy, i.e. the unexpectedly high value required for ε . He was awarded the 1967 Nobel Prize in Physics “for his contributions to the theory of nuclear reactions, especially his discoveries concerning the energy production in stars”, namely nuclear fusion. This is added to the four points listed at the beginning of this Section to form the standard model of the Sun. For more on the nuclear fusion reactions within the Sun, see Chapter 3.3 of the Encyclopaedia of the Sun.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 11:55:19 AM by LoveScience »

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #11 on: December 06, 2018, 08:39:24 PM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.
What is the reliance of that to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth?

But back earlier you claimed:
Stellar Fusion is entirely hypothetical. No one has recreated it in a lab.
So why can't I claim that UA "is entirely hypothetical? No one has recreated it in a lab".
You might object by claiming that UA too extensive to "recreate in a lab" involves the whole Flat Earth Universe but Stellar Fusion is claimed to involve dimensions far exceeding the Flat Earth Universe.

And why can't I claim that the source of the almost infinite energy UA requires "is entirely hypothetical? No one has recreated it in a lab".
You might object by claiming that it too extensive to "recreate in a lab" and I would give the same answer.

Though in the end, your answer will be that Flat Earth Theory is young and has no resources but Flat Earth Theory is not young and was the accepted by the ancient Sumerians, Babylonians and Greeks.
They had similar models that worked "fairly well" even explaining sunrises and sunsets, solar and lunar eclipses and the seasons due to what was then thought to be the tilt of the sun's orbit around the earth.
This was one of the earliest documented "cosmologies":
Quote
Cosmos, Anaximander

Anaximander of Miletus (c.610-c.545 BC), a pre-Socratic philosopher, was a contemporary of Thales and was one of the first ‘cosmologists’ (i.e. one who attempted to explain the origin and form of the Universe).
Anaximander was quite a productive philosopher as he made maps of the known world, offered explanations for the origin of the Sun, Moon and stars, and even performed simple experiments such as marking the solstices and equinoxes on sundials.

The cosmological model he proposed was a ring of fire surrounding the Earth, that was hidden from view except through vents.
The stars were the light of this fire that could be seen through the openings. This model could also explain the phases of the Moon: its phase depended on how wide or narrow the vent covering was.

Anaximander’s model of the Universe. The Sun, the Moon and each of the stars is
actually a transparent ring – or hoop – made of air. Each ring is filled with fire
which we can only see when the hole in that particular ring passes over us.


Anaximander described the Earth as rounded and circular with two plane surfaces (not necessarily a flat disk, more like a cylinder or ‘stone pillar’), which was suspended freely in space. It stays where it is because it is equidistant from everything else in the Universe. Above the Earth were (in order) the other planets, the stars, the Moon and finally the Sun. The components of the Universe were supposed to have formed as rings that were shed from a fiery sphere that once surrounded the Earth.

Anaximander's model of the flat earth, as with most others of his day, did quite reasonably sunrises and sunsets etc, yet it was discarded - I wonder why.

Offline Spingo

  • *
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2018, 11:33:32 PM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.

All I can say John is why don’t you turn your skeptical eye on your book ‘The Kings Dethroned’ with the same degree?
I agree with you that being skeptical is good, but it strikes me you go about it in rather a cherry picking sort a way, where you will quite readily accept a non-scientific critique, like your book, then take research projects, that in all honesty are way beyond you in their scope, and then offer a critique as to their authenticity based on no more than your uninformed opinion! I say uninformed because most of us will share that label with you. Let’s not kid ourselves you along with everyone on this forum are in no position to comment on the authenticity of current fusion research unless you or anyone else have recently completed a Phd on the subject, such is its complexity.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5472
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2018, 11:36:15 PM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.
What is the reliance of that to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth?

I will suggest you re-read the thread. It was claimed that we know how the sun works and can recreate its processes in the lab.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2018, 02:59:15 AM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.
What is the reliance of that to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth?

I will suggest you re-read the thread. It was claimed that we know how the sun works and can recreate its processes in the lab.
I did not claim that we can or cannot "recreate its processes in the lab". All I claim is that recreating the processes in the lab is quite irrelevant "to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth".

So my question stands.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5472
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #15 on: December 07, 2018, 03:40:29 AM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.
What is the reliance of that to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth?

I will suggest you re-read the thread. It was claimed that we know how the sun works and can recreate its processes in the lab.
I did not claim that we can or cannot "recreate its processes in the lab". All I claim is that recreating the processes in the lab is quite irrelevant "to the question of flat earth vs. Globe earth".

So my question stands.

Where did I assert that you did claim it? The OP claimed it, to justify the RET Sun. Review the thread.

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2018, 07:53:38 AM »
Just going back to a point made earlier, Tom why do you state that stellar fusion, which is now well established as the power source for not just the Sun but all other stars as well, is hypothetical just because to quote you again 'no one has ever recreated it in a lab'? 

Are you saying then that stellar fusion is not the power source in stars?  If so then what is your take on it. Please enlighten us.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 07:56:14 AM by LoveScience »

Offline Spingo

  • *
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #17 on: December 07, 2018, 10:10:53 PM »
Was that a proton-proton chain reaction? As I am aware, the "brief fusion" processes that have been claimed were quite different.

Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.

Hey Tom...you’re going to give me a complex! You keep avoiding answering my questions! I thought this was just a friendly debate, chewing the fat and that?
The trouble is there are more than just a few fusion reactors that have been built and are being built. You price tag however is way out....millions!......more like billions.  Why? Because it’s the energy holly grail , it’s E=MC^2 in action. That little bit of lost mass going from hydrogen to helium is what it’s all about. It’s a big price tag but it may we’ll be worth it.
Which the haunting spectre of global warming it’s more important than ever, plus it would sure ‘fuck’ the Saudi Arabia which may not be a bad thing.

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2018, 05:21:26 PM »
Quote
Fusion power research should be looked at skeptically, as a general rule, because it's a bunch of people asking for millions of dollars to build a machine that can generate more energy than is put into it.

Seems to me Tom that you regard anything that has happened or been achieved in science or technology in the last couple of centuries with a degree of skepticism. While I think of it you still haven't answered my question about whether you are disputing that stellar fusion ( I call it nucleosynthesis) is the power source of the Sun and all stars.

Re: Flat Earth Wiki and the Sun.
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2018, 04:42:59 AM »
Nuclear fusion weapons rely upon nuclear fusion to actually work. The national ignition facility is capable of achieving nuclear fusion, although it requires more energy than it outputs due to the small scale of the thing. But yes; nuclear fusion has been conclusively demonstrated to exist beyond any scientific reasonable doubt. It powers thermonuclear bombs, and dozens of experimental facilities worldwide have achieved nuclear fusion in a controlled setting. The problem is not achieving nuclear fusion; the problem is sustaining nuclear fusion in a manner which produces more energy than it requires to sustain. That is a serious engineering problem, and one that many individuals are working hard to overcome. We're getting close but there's still a long way to go.