Cosmic Chemistry

This Text Was Completed In 1999. Since Then Convincing Experimental Evidence Has Accumulated To Verify Many Of The Author's Proposals. These May Be Seen On The Recent PBS Program NOVA Concerning The Latest Discoveries About Neutrinos (And The NOBEL Prizes Handed Out). To The Author's Knowledge, No Other Physics Writer (Besides This Author) Has Proposed That Neutrinos Were The True Building Blocks Of Matter Before 1999. Also, The Author Has Proposed That These Neutrinos Can Grow Planets From The Inside-Out. This Will Remain A Future Prediction Given Within This Text As Well As In The Planetary Expansion Text Written In 1998 Located At: http://www.johnkharms.com/planetary.htm This Text Below Will Remain Untouched As It Has Since 1999 (About Seven Years In February 2006 From This Original Writing In 1999) So That The Integrity Of This Work Will Remain Completely Intact. Thusly, The Words (Here Seen In Blue) Have Been Added In February 2006, But No Other Words Within The Text Have Been Altered Since 1999. The Author Can Offer Hard Copy Proof Of This Statement If Necessary!

Neutrino Oscillations And The Physical Chemistry Of The Cosmos

Fusion At The Cores Of Planets And The Origin Of Earth's Oceans

By: John K. Harms

Email: harmsjk3@earthlink.net

Go To HOME

Abstract:

The text proposes that neutrino oscillations inside planetary matter are responsible for the fabrication of new protons, neutrons and electrons. From this, hydrogen nuclei are likely to form at the core of dense rocky planets. Slow neutrons produced from the oscillation of neutrinos inside dense matter, may be fused into atoms near a planet's core. This will result in new elements production within a planet. Calculation of how many neutrino oscillations are required for new matter fabrication inside a planet is discussed. A plausible fusion process with growth of heavier elements is described via slow neutron amalgamation with atoms and standard beta decay processes which are commonly utilized in production of heavier elements in a laboratory context. Newly fabricated hydrogen is slowly brought to the surface, transiting crustal rocks and into the hydrosphere and atmosphere. A new proposal for the origin of Earth's oceans is discussed. Seven predictions are proposed which are a direct consequence of this physical geochemical model. This model illustrates that a Big Bang creation event is not required to account for observed Geo and Cosmo-chemical abundance i.e., the fabrication of hydrogen. See also my related planetary expansion paper under "Planetary Sciences" on the index page or by clicking here: http://www.johnkharms.com/planetary.htm . Also see "Solar System and Galaxy Evolution" at: http://www.johnkharms.com/solarsystem.htm .

Key Words: Neutrinos, Neutrino Oscillations, Chemistry, Big Bang, Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Matter Fabrication, Slow Neutrons, Fusion, Ocean Water, Metallic Hydrogen

Introduction

One of the central arguments in favor of the Big Bang theory is that it explains well the chemical abundance within the Cosmos. It describes, for example, why hydrogen and helium should vastly dominate the other elements as a percentage of visible matter and, in fact, this is precisely what is observed by astronomers. Thus, hydrogen and helium make up perhaps ninety-nine percent of the ordinary visible matter in the Universe. The elements heavier than hydrogen and helium up to iron are fused supposedly in the stars as they evolve by consuming their atomic components in fusion processes. Elements heavier than iron are catastrophically fused via supernovae explosions, the terminal phase of a stars fusion cycle. This is the orthodox convention.

For those scientists who disagree fundamentally with the Big Bang occurrence, their alternative theories have had difficulty explaining the dominance of hydrogen in the Universe. Thus a key question arises: If there was no Big Bang in the distant past, how can there be so much hydrogen as observed in the Cosmos? It is the approach of this paper that neutrino oscillations may provide such a plausible alternative mechanism whereby hydrogen can be fabricated without invoking a Big Bang-type creation event.

The other possibility is that if there was a Big Bang event, vastly less hydrogen was fabricated by it. Perhaps, neutrinos which were likely to be high energy in the early Universe, "off-loaded" their energy into the early planetary-type objects fabricating hydrogen atoms. Hence, hydrogen is created in the cores of the planets causing the evolution of such objects to larger bodies. This is an ongoing process today.

Moreover, the fusion of slow neutrons which then beta decay to fabricate higher elements may take place at or near the core of a planet. Thus, the fusion of hydrogen is taking place within planets as well as stars. The common beta-decay process, provides a standard mechanism which enables nuclide to nucleus fusion at low energies and provides a fabrication pathway to heavier elements over time. Another consideration is that hydrogen is joining-up with other elements to form simple molecules such as ordinary water and hydrated minerals in the liquid outer core. This offers a different explanation of the origin of the oceans on Earth.

The Hydrogen Cycle

Although the Sun is presently emitting a huge amount of energy in the form of neutrinos, at the Sun's core new hydrogen nuclei i.e., protons, are continuously being refabricated. This is because the neutrinos present throughout space-time oscillate inside all massive normal matter. Moreover, it is very likely to be true that the interactions with the denser matter near the Sun's core may increase the rate of neutrino oscillations. Thus, all stars are both emitters of neutrinos via hydrogen fusion and absorbers of neutrino energy, given up via oscillation interactions in the Sun.

This outlook carried further suggests that there is a hydrogen cycle, which involves both a destruction and refabrication of hydrogen nuclei. Such a hydrogen cycle might operate in this fashion: It is known from experiments that neutrino's "oscillate" (give up energy to matter) and it is proposed by this text that this excess energy shedding can fabricate new hydrogen nuclei inside dense matter concentrations. Hydrogen atoms (one proton + one electron) then fuse to create helium inside all stars which releases even more neutrinos into space. More neutrinos in space-time leads to more available hydrogen within the cores of stars for fusioning processes, which in-turn produces more neutrinos. Thus, hydrogen atoms are transformed by fusion, but new hydrogen nuclei are constantly refabricated by one of the byproducts of fusion itself--the neutrino.

The neutrinos therefore are agents for mass/energy transmission throughout the cosmos. The energy of the stars, thus, has as its final destination massive planets, bodies dense enough to cause reaction by oscillation. In the early Universe in the Big Bang scenario, neutrinos may be of a high energy causing a relatively rapid transmission of mass/energy.

Cosmic Chemistry Begins With Hydrogen

The chemistry of our Cosmos begins with the creation of simple hydrogen atoms. Therefore, there must be a process by which the vast quantity of hydrogen in the Universe is produced. Since it is proposed by this text that hydrogen is being regenerated inside the cores of the stars, it is, therefore, very likely that stars live longer then present nucleosynthesis theory predicts. Hence, this model predicts that a main-sequence star such as our Sun burns hydrogen perhaps forty to fifty percent longer than is presently implied in stellar fusion evolutionary modeling.

Present stellar evolution theories estimate the amount of hydrogen in the Sun's interior and atmosphere and the present rate of the fusion of hydrogen into helium atoms. From these estimates a forecast is made as to when all the hydrogen will run out and the star begins to fuse heavier elements and daughter products. These events signal various other characteristics and processes i.e., the fusion of lithium and/or a red giant stage or a gravitational collapse to an eventual black hole or a neutron star etc.. Since this model predicts the active fabrication of new hydrogen at the Sun's core from neutrino oscillations, the calculation of the time-frames for hydrogen depletion given by present stellar evolution models cannot be close to the proposed reality.

Accordingly, large rocky planet's will eventually become gaseous stars (and small rocky planets will grow to become large rocky planets). This is due primarily to the production of protons, neutrons and electrons (the building blocks of all ordinary matter) from continuous neutrino oscillations inside high mass clusters. Thus, a planet such as Jupiter will eventually become a star when it becomes massive enough from the active fabrication of new matter to begin overt fusioning which is detectable from net radiation emission from the planet, the result of gravitational compression due to an increase in mass. This mass increase by all planets, the result of the absorption of neutrino oscillation energy, is a consequence (and a prediction) of this neutrino oscillation model.

Moreover, the massive Jovian planets contain hydrogen and helium in their atmospheres, whereas planets with less gravity do not. The escape velocity of these light elements exceeds the gravity of a small planet. The gaseous nature of the Jovian planets is due to the active production of hydrogen within. Due to the less dense nature of the generated hydrogen, it can travel up and away from the core region to the surface of the planet and into the atmosphere.

A planet must have a mechanism for getting rid of or storing the excess hydrogen fabrication. In the case of massive planets, they simply store it in their atmospheres i.e., the Jovian planets. In the case of our planet, the hydrogen is stored mostly in the oceans as water and in abundant OH mineralogies throughout the planet. In other smaller bodies such as the Moon or Mercury for example, the excess hydrogen is simply vented into space, or has not yet accumulated sufficiently to be overtly detectable in high abundance.

When fusion begins inside a gaseous giant planet, perhaps by slow neutrons, helium can become synthesized. Second or third generation gaseous planets usually have helium already present in their atmospheres (even before thermonuclear ignition), as these type planets are formed from the gathering of the remnants of a previous supernovae. Hence, in a first generation star, there would be no helium before fusion begins. After the fusion of helium, fusion continues to lithium and on up to the heavier elements until iron is eventually fused. The elements heavier than iron are generated in the higher pressures produced by a supernovae.

How Many Neutrino Oscillations Does It Take To Create New Matter Particles?

The example of particle accelerators demonstrate that it is common for nature to generate new much heavier particles from excess available energy. Thus, excess energy can be transformed into new matter particles, which is everyday proven in particle accelerators around the world. It has been demonstrated that neutrino oscillations generate such excess energy inside matter in the quantity of about one electron Volt (eV) per neutrino oscillation. This translates to a mass equivalent of about 10^-33 grams per oscillation. Los Alamos Laboratory (New Mexico, USA) physicists used an accelerator to fire neutrinos into a tank of mineral oil and they found that muon neutrinos changed into electron neutrinos en route. The difference in mass/energy was estimated to be about one eV given up to the mineral oil (Weiss, 1999).

When one electron Volt (about 10^-33 grams) is compared to the mass/energy of a proton, neutron or electron, this quantity (one eV) appears minute indeed. For example, the energy of one proton is about 938.272 x 10^6 eV, thus, it requires the energy equivalent of about 938,272,000 localized neutrino oscillations to generate one new proton. By similar mathematical reasoning, the production of one electron requires about 510,990 neutrino oscillations. Neutrons need slightly more energy than a proton. About 939,570,000 nearby oscillations are needed to generate one new neutron. Quarks are not discussed here because their energies are only rough estimates of binding energy. Hence, fairly accurate estimates of quark production at a planet's core based upon the energies i.e., number of neutrino oscillations required, cannot be as accurately calculated [Jeff W. Robertson, personal communication (February 24 and April 22, 1999)].

While the fabrication of new matter by this process appears unlikely at first glance due to the vastly higher energies of the matter particles in question, the model can be reconciled when one considers the shear numbers and high density of neutrinos in the Cosmos. For example, it is estimated that there are 1000 million neutrinos and anti-neutrinos for every one ordinary nuclear particle in the Universe. This leads to a huge flux of neutrinos passing through the Earth or the human body at any given moment. It has been estimated from the Super Kamiokande neutrino experimental data and publications that approximately fifty four million electron neutrinos, from all origins, pass through the human body each second [David Ford, personal communication (April 7, 1999)]. It should be noted that this is only an approximate figure and the true figure is likely to be even higher than this working estimate.

The liquid outer core must contain a mystery element. It is found that the density is not quite great enough to be only nickel-iron, thus, an unknown element must be mixed in with these two metals. At the approximately 3.5 million atmospheres near the core, perhaps there are blobs of metallic hydrogen (or other elements) in combination with nickel-iron (Hazen #2, 1999). Perhaps there is only metallic hydrogen at the core. This idea is explored subsequently.

The Creation Of The Elements And Neutron Fusion Near The Core

As described above, this model also allows for the production of neutrons from neutrino oscillations. Indeed, there should be as many neutrons generated by neutrino oscillations as protons.

Since it is probably unlikely that ordinary "chain reaction" fusion (as in thermonuclear bombs or at the core of the Sun) is taking place at the cores of planets, a different fusion scenario is proposed. The high pressures required for ordinary fusion are not present at the cores of most planets, thus, this new proposal must take place at relatively lower energies.

This experimentally demonstrated common nucleosynthesis mechanism utilizes the proposed neutrons fabricated from internal neutrino oscillations discussed here. Neutrons fuse to other nuclei and this process has well established via observational confirmation. In the late 1940's, the elements more massive than plutonium (element # 94) were created i.e., americium, curium, berkelium, californium etc., by bombarding plutonium with "slow neutrons". The neutrons would then fuse with the plutonium nucleus and via beta-decay the neutron decays to become a proton and an electron. The addition of this extra proton raises element # 94 to element # 95 etc..

By continuing with this process, this is how these higher elements were produced in the Berkeley, California laboratory. Therefore, new created neutrons stick to the nuclei of other elements and are transformed into a higher element through beta decay (Hazen #1, 1999). Hence, the fusion of new elements at the core could be achieved in this indirect fashion by slow (not particularly energetic) neutrons.

The neutrons might fabricated originally as slow neutrons or be slowed by the small amounts of deuterium, perhaps, available in the water (heavy water) or other elements (perhaps graphite) of the Earth's interior (Burke, 1999).

When nuclei become eventually more massive through this beta decay process, perhaps, some limited fission might begin, also via slow neutrons. In essence, many of these heavier atoms are split-up forming lighter nuclei and releasing energy as heat (Wheeler, 1998).

It has been discovered that an electron neutrino can also cause beta decay to occur. When an electron neutrino hits a neutron, the neutron may change into a proton and the nucleus then emits an electron. So, neutrinos may help this beta decay process along adding mass and energy to a planet (Klein, 2001).

As nuclei become heavier and suitable fissionable nuclei are fabricated, each nucleus may fission from its interaction with slow neutrons, splitting itself into several lighter elements. These new elements in-turn may continue to evolve through the beta decay processes, each new element itself the foundation of new atomic scale growth. Hence, the transformation of the elements at the core, evolving via both beta decay and fission processes, are actually a branching-out (and an expansion) of matter on the atomic scale--evolution of a planet from the bottom-up. Again, neutrinos may aid in this process.

The compressional forces at the cores of planets assist in the fusion process (as described above). This leads to the expansion of a planet from below its surface, and the slow accumulation of new more massive elements which are the basis of rock forming minerals.

Hence, hydrogen fuses to helium which does not require the very high pressures within the stars, but the moderately high pressures at (for example) the core of the Earth. At the Earth's core, the pressure is about 3.5 million atmospheres (Hazen #2, 1999). This fusion would release energy when a proton fuses to a neutron. A proton--proton reaction requires very high energy to overcome the large barrier of electric charge of two positive protons. However, a proton and a neutron have an attraction because of the energy of the combination, a deuteron, is less than the sum of the ingredients separately. The attraction is only when the proton and neutron are close [Milo Wolff, personal communication (August 30, 1999)]. Due to the release of energy during fusion, perhaps the cores of planets are vastly hotter than we now believe!

Indeed, there does not seem to be any barrier to slow neutron fusion fabricating elements above that of iron. It has always been assumed that ordinary fusion cannot fuse elements higher than iron. However, with the slow neutron process via beta decay, entirely new elements above plutonium (element # 94) can be produced in the laboratory and at low energies. Thus, one does not really need a supernovae nearby to fabricate these heavy elements. Have astrophysicists considered this mechanism?

Indeed, a different mechanism for the production of neutrons at the core of the planets could be suggested. It is that wormholes exist at the core of a massive body and they are passing and depositing slow neutrons through five dimensional hyperspace. The slow neutrons are then attaching themselves to the nuclei that exist at the core of a massive body, changing the atomic number of the element as described above. In this way, the planet becomes more massive. This idea is explored in more detail in the "inflation" text, at the address below.

Metallic Hydrogen Core?

A different scenario is indeed possible, and has been suggested by the engineer Neil B. Christianson, that the Earth's core is largely metallic (not liquid) hydrogen. Experiments performed in Russia in 1973 have claimed that hydrogen becomes metallic at a pressure of 2.8 megabars-- a pressure that exists at the core of the Earth. Other scientific groups have matched the Russian claim (Christianson, 1999).

If the core is a solid hydrogen crystal, the liquid outer core might be liquid hydrogen. Cosmologists theorize that hydrogen becomes a hot-liquid-atomic metal at between 1.5 and 3 megabars, roughly the pressure that exists in the outer core (Christianson, 1999). It can be speculated that the gaseous form of hydrogen is produced when liquid hydrogen boils in the lower mantle. When gaseous hydrogen combines with oxygen (ratio 2: 1) perhaps in the lower mantle, ordinary water can be produced. The water might then join the Earth's hydrological cycle.

The other possibility is that the outer core is actually nickel-iron as is presently claimed by geologists, perhaps the mystery element water is also present there. This would extend the hydrological cycle to the deep Earth with the formation of liquid water in the outer core.

The Origin Of Earth's Oceans

It has been proposed by geologists that the sea water contained in Earth's oceans cycle into the mantle and back in a few hundred million years or so. This takes place largely at subduction zones where cold wet lithospheric material is forced down into the mantle carrying sea water with it. Moreover, the mantle may have vast amounts of water contained in mineral OH groups, perhaps many times the amount of water at the Earth's surface (Hazen # 3, 1999). Hence, if the mantle contains a substantial amount of water, is it possible that the liquid outer core does also? Ordinary water, along with nickel-iron, might be the less-dense mystery substance in the outer core mentioned above.

Naturally occurring fission can split more massive nuclei yielding neutrons. These excess neutrons can decay into protons and electrons (hydrogen atoms). This, along with the atoms generated by neutrino oscillations, can produce great quantities of hydrogen within the Earth (Elton, 1966).

Perhaps water originates in the 2270 km liquid outer core of the Earth as hydrogen atoms (created by neutrino oscillations and/or fission) bond with oxygen atoms (Hazen #2, 1999). This bonding might be aided by rock-eating microbes which can oxidize hydrogen yielding water. Such microbes can thrive in the most extreme conditions on Earth and obtain their nutrients from the rocks themselves, thus, there may no shortage of such microbes in the outer core (Hazen # 4,1999).

The mystery is how gaseous oxygen is present in the outer core. This might be explained by the fusion reactions via slow neutrons and the beta decay processes described above. Therefore, some gaseous oxygen (element: atomic # 8) is eventually produced by the fusion of lighter elements through the beta decay of neutrons near the core or lower mantle. Such neutrons are generated, in the same way as protons, by the energy of neutrino oscillations. Moreover, oxygen might be already present from initial planetary condensation, from an oxygen rich interstellar gaseous collapse precursor composition [David Ford, personal communication (September 16, 1999)].

Thus, oxygen atoms join-up with hydrogen atoms yielding water in the outer core of the Earth. Water is non-compressible, therefore, it is not a solid (like ice) at the high pressures deep inside the Earth. Moreover, water is an excellent solvent and blends well with the other nickel-iron components of the outer core. The newly created water gradually percolates upward as it is less dense. It then joins the water cycle of the mantle and could be expelled by volcanoes. Thus, the created water eventually ends-up in the oceans and joins the hydrological cycle at the Earth's surface. When envisioned from a wider perspective, one sees that almost every place on Earth (even the deep interior) is involved in the water cycle. Therefore, the outer core is the source of the Earth's ocean water. It is the mechanism that drives the hydrological cycle.

The Earth mostly stores its produced hydrogen atoms as water or in OH minerals. Excess water above a certain level can be purged from the atmosphere into space. It is widely known that water molecules can do this, but not known exactly why or how much. There must be a physical limit to the quantity of water that the Earth's hydrological cycle system can hold. However, if the Earth is expanding over time, its water budget is likely also increasing.

One might consider this model as an alternative explanation of the oceans, if one is not convinced that the liquid matter on the Earth is only the accumulation of melted comets that have impacted the Earth over time. Indeed, comets may contribute some water, but it appears doubtful that the comet model of Earthly water accumulates enough water to fill the vast oceans. Thus, the comet model is a little difficult to take seriously.

Conclusion

Carl Sagan has said that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". While the fabrication of hydrogen nuclei within stars is probably not an extraordinary claim, the continuous expansion of large planets to become future stars is. Such a claim would require a preponderance of evidence in its favor and indeed an entire theoretical framework whereby such an expansion becomes plausible.

For a theory about the expansion of planets, see my other text containing more information about a model of planetary expansion based upon neutrino oscillations. It is entitled "Planetary Sciences--A Planetary Expansion Model" in the index and is a complete expansion system. It contains the observational evidence for expansion. It can be accessed directly at: http://www.johnkharms.com/planetary.htm . For a somewhat wider view of the beginning of the Universe, see the "Inflation" text at: http://www.johnkharms.com/inflation.htm . The quantum gravity mechanism for expansion can be seen at: http://www.johnkharms.com/gravity-growth.htm . Solar system and the Universe's evolution is located at: http://www.johnkharms.com/solarsystem.htm . For a change of pace related to astronomy, see black holes: http://www.johnkharms.com/blackholes.htm .

Six central predictions arise from this neutrino oscillation model:

1) The Sun's hydrogen will last an estimated forty to fifty percent longer than predicted by present solar models. This is due to the active production of hydrogen within or near the Sun's core.

2) Very large planets will eventually expand to become stars. On large planets, hydrogen fabrication will fill the atmosphere of such planets leading eventually to fusion and the fabrication of the heavier elements.

3) The fabrication of hydrogen in the Cosmos is an ongoing process inside large planets and stars and need not be only leftover remnants from a Big Bang. Thus, the percentage of hydrogen is relatively constant (or increasing) over time i.e., the hydrogen cycle. This view does not require a Big Bang scenario for the creation of hydrogen atoms. However, if the Big Bang is accepted as true, perhaps, vastly less hydrogen was fabricated by it. Perhaps, the hot fires of the Big Bang fabricated largely high energy neutrinos driving the production of hydrogen at the cores of the planets. This leads to the expansion and evolution of the planets, which grow into the stars. Neutrinos do still exist in vast quantities, only presently they are at lower energies.

4) The cores of planets are likely to be hotter than we presently believe, because there is active fusion taking place.

5) There may be a continuous purge of water from the atmosphere into space that cannot be explained, except by postulating the production of new water deep within the Earth. The Earth's water budget may not be a constant if the Earth is slowly expanding. The budget may gradually increase in step with the size of the Earth. Indeed, there is a purge of the Earth's atmosphere into space, the effect of the solar wind. This is consistent with this model (Reference at: http://wwwssl.msfc.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast08dec98_1.htm ).

6) Hydrogen is escaping into space from planets such as the Moon or Mercury. Hydrogen is being produced at the cores of all planets, but planets that have little capacity to store hydrogen atoms (and weak gravity) vent this hydrogen into space. If this hydrogen is not fused via slow neutrons or combine with other atoms as molecules, it may escape the atmosphere. Hence, there should be a substantial amount of free hydrogen floating around between the planetary bodies in our solar system.

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank both Jeff W. Robertson, David Ford and Milo Wolff for their contributions to this text.

Go To HOME

References

Burke, J., 1999, Connections # 3, Video: Vol. 9; Hit The Water, Ambrose Video Publishing Inc. New York

Christianson, 1999, Website: http://www.ftlmagazine.com/features/cookbook.html : Cookbook Cosmology: An Engineering Approach To Planetary Body Formation

Elton, S., 1966, A New Model Of The Solar System, Philosophical Library, New York, P. 76

Hazen, R. #1, 1999, Video: The Great Principles Of Science, Part III, Lecture 27: Isotopes And Radioactivity, The Teaching Co., Springfield, VA.

Hazen, R. #2, 1999, Video: The Great Principles Of Science, Part III, Lecture 36: The Earth As A Planet, The Teaching Co., Springfield, VA.

Hazen, R. #3, 1999, Video: The Great Principles Of Science, Part IV, Lecture 40: Earth Cycles: Water, The Teaching Co., Springfield, VA.

Hazen, R. #4, 1999, Video: The Great Principles Of Science, Part IV, Lecture 44: Strategies Of Life, The Teaching Co., Springfield, VA

Klein, J., June 19, 2001, The San Francisco Chronicle, Newspaper Article, San Francisco, CA, P. A1- A10

Weiss, P., January 30, 1999, Science News, A Little Mass Goes A Long Way, Vol. 155, P. 76-78

Wheeler, J. A., 1998, Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam, W. W. Norton & Co., New York, P. 39-46

Reader's Note: Proper References And/Or Acknowledgments To This Text Are Appreciated.