4 ms·

You can see the emission spectra near the "surface",you cannot see what's inside. Still, plenty of lead heavy stars have been detected. >exactly who are they t

You can see the emission spectra near the "surface",you cannot see what's inside. Still, plenty of lead heavy stars have been detected. >exactly who are they trying to keep these details a secret from? Pretty much everyone. There are not that many countries with thermonuclear weapons (Pyongyang doesn't have one) and you don't want e.g. ISIS make a clandestine 10Mt bomb.

jjk166 5y ago
Convection currents mix the star's material together over long time scales. And neutrinos allow us to peer directly into the core in real time. The most lead rich stars ever detected are less than 0.000000000000005% lead by mass. Stars are formed from stellar nebulae which are the remnants of supernovae that create heavy elements - except for the very first stars in the universe all of them contain heavy elements. As a star ages and its temperature changes, it can bleed off some material, which will preferentially remove lighter elements (because it takes less energy for them to escape), leaving behind an increased concentration of the heavy elements. Anyone who conducted even rudimentary nuclear experiments would be able to identify if the most basic tenets of quantum mechanics were a lie. Maintaining the ruse would require pretty much all the physicists in the world to be in on it. And if all the physicists are in on it, who exactly that is not in on it would be building these thermonuclear weapons? No, the basic physics of thermonuclear weapons are well known, but the engineering is incredibly difficult and resource intensive. You get a nickel-63 if a nickel-62 captures a neutron. You can't get a positron/neutrino pair directly, you get a w+ boson which will decay into a positron/neutrino pair, but that w+ boson, like the z0 boson in the other case, is prohibitively heavy so this reaction doesn't take place. If you want, you can think of the 62Ni(p,2n)61Cu as a Nickel-62 fusing with a hydrogen to produce an excited state of Copper-63 which then immediately decays by double neutron emission to Copper-61, but the fact is the end product being Copper-61 is observed reality, and any model that doesn't predict its production is at best an elegant fiction.
- Gauge_Irrahphe 5y ago
  >You can't get a positron/neutrino pair directly, you get a w+ boson which will decay into a positron/neutrino pair, but that w+ boson, like the z0 boson in the other case, is prohibitively heavy so this reaction doesn't take place. Good. So you agree that p+p fusion into deuterium cannot occur? >Maintaining the ruse would require pretty much all the physicists in the world to be in on it. Any time anyone figures out they get shut down as described in the article. >the basic physics of thermonuclear weapons are well known, but the engineering is incredibly difficult and resource intensive. They figured making false principles well known would make keeping the real mechanism secret easier.

jjk166 5y ago

Convection currents mix the star's material together over long time scales. And neutrinos allow us to peer directly into the core in real time. The most lead rich stars ever detected are less than 0.000000000000005% lead by mass. Stars are formed from stellar nebulae which are the remnants of supernovae that create heavy elements - except for the very first stars in the universe all of them contain heavy elements. As a star ages and its temperature changes, it can bleed off some material, which will preferentially remove lighter elements (because it takes less energy for them to escape), leaving behind an increased concentration of the heavy elements. Anyone who conducted even rudimentary nuclear experiments would be able to identify if the most basic tenets of quantum mechanics were a lie. Maintaining the ruse would require pretty much all the physicists in the world to be in on it. And if all the physicists are in on it, who exactly that is not in on it would be building these thermonuclear weapons? No, the basic physics of thermonuclear weapons are well known, but the engineering is incredibly difficult and resource intensive. You get a nickel-63 if a nickel-62 captures a neutron. You can't get a positron/neutrino pair directly, you get a w+ boson which will decay into a positron/neutrino pair, but that w+ boson, like the z0 boson in the other case, is prohibitively heavy so this reaction doesn't take place. If you want, you can think of the 62Ni(p,2n)61Cu as a Nickel-62 fusing with a hydrogen to produce an excited state of Copper-63 which then immediately decays by double neutron emission to Copper-61, but the fact is the end product being Copper-61 is observed reality, and any model that doesn't predict its production is at best an elegant fiction.

Gauge_Irrahphe 5y ago
>You can't get a positron/neutrino pair directly, you get a w+ boson which will decay into a positron/neutrino pair, but that w+ boson, like the z0 boson in the other case, is prohibitively heavy so this reaction doesn't take place. Good. So you agree that p+p fusion into deuterium cannot occur? >Maintaining the ruse would require pretty much all the physicists in the world to be in on it. Any time anyone figures out they get shut down as described in the article. >the basic physics of thermonuclear weapons are well known, but the engineering is incredibly difficult and resource intensive. They figured making false principles well known would make keeping the real mechanism secret easier.