Supernovas

SUPERNOVA PHENOMENOLOGY:

 

 

We do know for a fact however, that stars over a certain density run the real risk of creating such an anomalous positive feedback at some time or another, and that some of them subsequently do undergo graviton induced thermal amplification. So by another possible mechanics to that which will be described shortly; 'boom we have a supernova'!

The affects of powerful magnetic fields and the far field affects of massive bodies on gravitons and photons will have to go unaddressed for now because it requires intensive research which is beyond the scope of my capabilities. I suspect that other than affects which are already logged, there is a strong likelihood of other phenomena being elicited when sufficiently powerful force fields are at work.

I must argue the point with the current theory of supernova mechanics. The traditional idea that a white dwarf running out of fuel has sufficient gravity to suck up fuel from a neighboring star is based on the specious pull theory of gravity. In any case why doesn't it just suck up enough matter to simply become itself again and the neighbor would then become the white dwarf. This to and fro mechanics should end up with them both being white dwarfs. It appears unlikely that any individual body would be able to gain such a massive amount of 'energy' as that exhibited by a supernova being derived from a cannibalistic 'energy' losing mechanics. Where's the empirical science in that? Where's the physics behind a vague gravitational phenomenon which allows part of a body to fall into another body in an orbital system? There is none!

I'm really being a bit facetious but in actual fact the graphical representation which is often shown to represent a white dwarf acting like some sort of space 'vacuum cleaner' sucking in the matter from its neighbor, doesn't fit at all with any known mechanics of gravity that I have seen!

At first I thought that was just a bit of sensationalism for public consumption but I find to my horror that many scientist actually *support the phenomenology! This even applies to the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates who won the 2011 prize for proving that the universe is expanding. In light of this, I suspect that they were unjustly rewarded (for not having empirical proof) because supernova physics of binary pulsars with a white dwarf is not well understood enough for iron clad conclusions to be reached: especially when other scientists have concluded the opposite contracting universe scenario!

*This is not decrying the result.

 

The only mechanics that can cause some of its stellar dust to arrive at the white dwarf a little before the mother object does, is only enabled because the dust particles are running into severe retardation of their orbital velocity by a possible stellar wind imbalance because of a greater size proportionality to PIR than to AIR whereby the converse may also be true. Dust and gas is being affected no more by space drag of any description than the mother star. We should declare this to be an unknown. Perhaps we could tentatively assume that the white dwarf isn't emitting stellar wind?! I personally couldn't go that far.

However I think it more likely, and for the following reasons that dust and gas will arrive before the mother star, but not in the vast quantities proposed because no more matter than that which is emitted by the stellar wind can be forced to be sucked from the ordinary star. However the collapsing of the white dwarf would probably cause a coronal matter ejection event in the ordinary star (which may or may not enter the gravitational capture zone of the white dwarf) but it would cause a far greater and denser stellar wind by gravitational and magnetic distortions as the ordinary star began to experience a massive stellar wind friction caused devolving orbit and a similarly massively altered GTDg.

Such an increased stellar wind would be proportionately captured by the increased gravity of the white dwarf. The white dwarf would consequently see an even greater temperature increase because of the increased graviton 'energy' and the pressure inside would grow which would in turn cause fusion to occur to higher generational levels of matter such as from carbon fused into oxygen!

Another approach to understanding how this phenomenon might cause a thermal imbalance which results in a type 1a supernova might be as follows:

Consider first the likelihood that a white dwarf has used up its supply of hydrogen and even helium has mostly been fused to carbon and carbon is being or has been fused into oxygen and it is likely that the fusion can go no further because the star is too small to gain the extra 'energy' it needs from graviton transitional 'energy' transfer.

So the white dwarf is now a star that's no longer undergoing fusion and it collapses under its own pressure because of a lack of dynamic volatility and even the electron orbitals become crushed or stripped. In this condition it is likely to remain stable for a very long time.

 Let's take a step back a minute and analyze the currently recognized progressive steps in stellar fusion. I.e. H→ He→ C→ O--- If we study this for more than a few moments it becomes patently obvious that at some critical point during the process of fusion to oxygen sixteen that an oxidizing reaction between the oxygen and carbon is likely to occur. At the extreme pressures expected this will be stable but should the pressure at any point within that potentially fatal mix within the star fall to a sufficient level, such an unfortunate happenstance would result in the formation of an expansion of super hot CO2 gas at first, which would have historically remained stable as a liquid or even a solid at the super high temperature and pressure.

This particular fluid however is a serious threat to the continued existence of the star, should any phenomenon cause a sufficient imbalance of pressure and/or temperature. We could consider such a star to be a containment vessel for the CO2 and should any of it expand by turning into a gas, then that bubble would result at the very least a massive matter ejection event and in the worst case of severe 'flatulence', in a runaway explosion which would, in parlance 'Blow the sucker to smithereens'. This would in turn become an even more massive event, once the inner oxygen layer met the outer hydrogen layer which it just gained from its neighbor. …Anyone for a drink of water?

A supernova would be the result and it is suggested by this writer that such large matter ejection events (which have been observed) as well as supernovas are set off by something similar to a massive 'soda pop' explosion. Nucleosynthesis is likely to occur during a supernova event for reasons that are well understood.

The very act of limited matter absorption into a white dwarf star from its binary pulsar partner would cause the risk of such an occurrence to increase by many orders of magnitude upon reaching the required 1.4 solar mass. Apart from the gaining of hydrogen (another oxidative fuel) it would at some stage become imbalanced by matter density divergence. Note: Such matter absorption would take some time because it would have to 'spiral' in, and at first it would be fairly even and only fill the outer hydrogen layer of the white dwarf until chunks of calcium and carbon began to strike. Such an off centered strike would make the resulting explosion (of either kind) slightly imbalanced. I.e. this means not perfectly symmetrical or even. This would be the case if the explosion generated from the core of a star with even shells as per current understanding.

In all likelihood its partner star would be following the spiraling matter stream, not too far behind. It would only be being delayed by the combined mutual affect of force frame dragging.

At some point quantities of oxygen would be gathered into the white dwarf which would have already internally fused carbon to oxygen as well, and this would now be ready to add fuel to the supernova.

The problem with the traditionally accepted suggestion that all supernovas of that type achieve the same 'brightness' is dependant on the assumption that when they reach the critical Chandrasekhar mass of 1.4 Ms they auto self destruct. I have shown good reasons why this is not necessarily the case. So the new practice of drawing distance data from type 1a supernova brightness is problematical, as is interpretation of the abruptly delineated red shift observed at the outer universe: TBE.

It can be assumed (or not) that larger stars forming more massive supernovae were manufactured from stuff that already contained heavier elements and further supernova nucleosynthesis would only account for more elements up to 60Fe. All of this is impossible to prove because spectral markers for various elements that exist deep inside stars are difficult to define and in the case of supernovas, the even greater difficulties are well known.

A possible phenomenological mechanism for the type 1A supernovae could be as follows: At sufficiently high temperatures, the stellar hydrogen ions (which have been the identifying markers for these types of stars) become too cold to fuse any more and in a sudden and very short time period, they find themselves being forced together to form an extremely fast decaying 'neutronium' and/or 'positronium' (actually any old 'ionium') whereby the star becomes almost perfectly inelastic because of this kind of bonding which, at every instantaneous 'time slice' consists of an even but morphing bonding arrangement which is non electronic and extremely compressed to almost non zero separation. However we are able to consider that the star is not quite large enough to become a neutron star.

In such a case the individual nucleons can no longer move, they just changes state at hyper high frequencies by intra nucleon 'energy' (particle) motion which may cause the emission of x-rays*. This is fuelled by the residual heat emanating from inside the star; in which case the smallest external force would cause almost instantaneous nucleon decrepitation in all directions. This would occur at almost the speed of light until the resulting quark gluon plasma began to recombine to form visible clouds of space 'dust' whereupon the process would lose 'energy' and slow down as a result**. In such large supernovae, a vast quantity of higher levels of elemental matter might also be turned into Q-G plasma. In other words you could expect matter transformation to occur but only as matter degeneration.

*According to G-theory electrons are not necessary for the emission of light. The idea of core explosions postulated by others is a very problematical and implausible phenomenology.

**Here we have 'energy' being consumed as binding and bonding 'energy' as well as being used in slowing motion by force but not being converted to 'mass' per se; which we have already discounted as an impossibility.

 

Much of the decrepitated matter including recombined hydrogen and helium would therefore be lost to space to form a nebula in that state and the remaining nucleonic mass might be unable to ever become anything other than a small neutron star. This would require a massive amount of 'energy' and matter particles which would cause Beta positive decay on a grand scale indeed! This could only be caused by the extreme centrally compressive effects of such a behemoth event causing sufficient internally directed explosive force. Think about it. On the outside everything not tied down is being turned into Q-G plasma while on the inside protons and electrons are being recombined en masse and forced into the center as 'neutronium'.

Photons etc, gravitons and neutrinos etc would be manufactured and emitted at their own particular speeds as well. This brings me to the point where I must admit that (if as is currently recognized), neutrinos are capable of being eventually captured by matter, and because of the laws that govern all of physics, they also must have some affect on gravity because of their possession of a small degree of mass (to what may turn out to be a limited and perhaps even insignificant degree). However this is a deviation from the standard model.

*The expansion speeds of the heavier ejectile matter would be less and variable. Such an explosion would be uneven and this indeed is what is observed.