Thank you for overviewing it. A few lessons I've learned over this time is to always keep an open mind towards new approaches to explaining nature. I could easily just ridicule and say nasty things like establishment overeducated people do, but since we are under the gun to provide actual leadership I won't do that. Leading by example is hard.Electro wrote:Well, I just read the whole thing, and although the author does refer to stellar metamorphosis, he does not mention anywhere that a star is a dissipative system, and very little about phase transition (other than plasma recombination). At the end of his article, he refers to a link where he submits his own version of the fusion reaction system. He says fusion is responsible for forming the core. He does offer an interesting theory about sunspots, flares and CME's from rotating plasma fields generated by Z-pinch mechanism.
I don't know, but nature has a tendency to do it as simple as possible. Fusion, in my opinion, is not something that can easily happen naturally... Look how hard it is to achieve in a highly controlled environment...
http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0472
In this case, I do find it disappointing how stars are not mentioned as dissipative systems, regardless if all thermodynamic events are dissipative. I'm guessing the idea of stars being "powered" has a firm grip on the minds of people. The idea that the initial conditions for a young astron (star) are provided by galaxy birth seems to be out of the norm. People have a difficult time realizing that there are events so incredibly powerful that they defy all human imagination (yet we see them, as if seeing meant comprehension, yet right!!)

Astrons both young and old are big to us, but on mother nature's scale, they are nothing of significance. The object pictured above is Hercules A, a birthing galaxy many thousands of light years in diameter. Hundreds of millions of stars are being formed in those two lobes. If you were to zoom in you would see them, like a microscope to skin cells.


