Nature of the Universe: Astrophysical Paradigm Shifts

631

AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal–Vol.8,No.1PublicationDate:January25,2021DOI:10.14738/assrj.81.9704.Herndon, J. M. (2021). Nature of the Universe: Astrophysical Paradigm Shifts. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8 (1) 631-645.

NatureoftheUniverse:AstrophysicalParadigmShifts

J.MarvinHerndon,Ph.D.TransdyneCorporationSanDiego,California,USA

ABSTRACT

Overmy lifetime I havewitnessed the decline of scientific capabilityandintegrityinthephysicalsciences.Whenanewideaarises,itshouldbediscussedanddebated.Attemptsshouldbemadetorefutethenewidea;otherwise,itshouldbecitedinsubsequentliterature.Thatistheway scienceprogresses,notbyattempting to suppressanew ideaorfailingthat,toignoreit.Butalltoooften,ininstancesofdiscoveriesorinsights thatmight causemajorparadigmshifts, suppressionornon-recognition is what happens. Here, I describe, from a first-personperspective, several paradigm shifts in astrophysics that have beensystematically ignored, including the thermonuclear ignition of stars,thenatureofdarkmatter,whyvastnumbersofgalaxieshavejustafewprominentpatternsofluminousstars,theoriginofchemicalelements,andanewspeculationaboutthenatureoftheUniverse.Keywords: Stellar ignition; Dark matter, Element synthesis; Cosmology;Darkgalaxy;Spiralgalaxy;Hubble;Universe.

INTRODUCTION

Throughouthumanhistory,scientificknowledgesometimeshasbeenasourceofenlightenmentandothertimes,anexcuseforpersecution.Scienceisallabouttruth,truthsecurelyanchoredtothe propertiesofmatter and radiation. The science of ourworld today, however, has departedfromstandardsof truthandobjectivity,andhasall toooftenbecomeanarena fordeceitbythescience controllers. Yet truth is a fundamentally important human determinant, inextricablyconnectedtothefreedomweseekanddeemprecious.Theimportanceofthesunforhumanexistencewasrecognizedlongagoinancientcultures,andfiguredprominentlyintheirreligionsandcosmologies[1-3].Yetcriticalknowledgeofourstar,thesun,andtheimplicationsderivedtherefrom,althoughpublishedinthescientificliterature[4-6],hasneitherbeensharednordisclosedbytoday’s“scientists”.ButIshareknowledgepertainingtothe ignition of the sun which is crucial for progress along the path to better understand ourUniverse.

THESTARLIGHTPROBLEM

Atthebeginningofthe20thcentury,understandingthenatureoftheenergysourcethatpowersthesunandotherstarswasoneofthemostimportantunsolvedproblemsinthephysicalsciences.Initially, it was thought that during formation, when dust and gas coalesce and collapse bygravitationalattraction,greatamountsofheatwouldbeproduced.Butcalculationsshowedthat

632

Vol.8,Issue1,January-2021AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal(ASSRJ)theenergyreleasewouldbeinsufficienttopowerthesunforaslongaslifehasexistedonEarth.FollowingthediscoveryofradioactivitybyBecquerelin1896[7],numerousexperimentsbegantorevealthenatureofradioactivity,theatomicnucleus,andnuclearreactions[8].In1934,Oliphant,Harteck, andRutherford [9]discovered thermonuclear fusion reactions, anexampleofwhich isillustratedinFigure1.

Figure1.Schematicrepresentationofathermonuclearfusionreaction.Thenucleioflightelements,

deuteriumandtritium,“fuse”toproducehelium,aneutron,andagreatamountofenergy.Thermonuclear fusionreactionsarecalledthermonuclearbecausetemperaturesontheorderof1,000,000°Carerequiredforthenucleitoachievetheveryhighvelocitiesneededtoovercometheelectric charge repulsionandget closeenough for thenuclei to react.When the fusionreactiontakesplace,agreatquantityofenergyisreleased.Thermonuclearfusionreactionsseemedtobetheunknownsourceofenergythatpowersthesunand other stars, which contain copious amounts of hydrogen and helium. The scientificdevelopment of solar thermonuclear reactions was undertaken by nuclear physicists such asEdward Teller [10] and Hans Bethe [11], whose names would later be associated with thedevelopmentofnuclearweapons.By1938,theoreticalinvestigationsonthethermonuclearreactionsthoughttopowerthesunandotherstarshadsufficientlyprogressedthat thereseemedtobenolongeranyquestionas to thesun’senergysource.Butasoftenhappensinscience,“thedevilisinthedetails.”In1938,therewasnoenergysourceknownthatcouldproducethemilliondegreetemperaturesnecessarytoignitethermonuclear fusion reactions. So, it was just assumed that such temperatures would beproducedduringformationwhendustandgascoalesceandcollapsebygravitationalattraction.

Herndon, J. M. (2021). Nature of the Universe: Astrophysical Paradigm Shifts. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8 (1) 631-645.

633URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.81.9704.

Scientiststendtobeforward-looking,andrarelylookquestioninglyatcircumstancesinthepastthat set them on their present path. That was certainly the case for igniting thermonuclearreactions in starsbygravitational collapse. In1965,Hayashi andNakano [12] firstshowed thatgravitational collapse of dust and gas during formation would not yield the requisite milliondegreetemperaturesforignitingthermonuclearfusionreactions.Thereasonisobvious.Heatingaformingstarbythegravitationalcollapseofdustandgasisoffsetbyheatradiatedfromitssurface,which is a function of the fourth power of temperature. In otherwords, TxTxTxT represents ahuge loss factorwhen T=1,000,000°C. But instead of asking “what iswrongwith this picture”,astrophysicists just made ad hoc assumptions, such as a shock-wave induced flare up, or theytweakedmodel-parametersinattemptstoattaintherequisitetemperatures[13,14].The sun is like a hydrogen bomb held together by gravity (Figure 2). Both are powered bythermonuclearfusionreactions,andbothrequiretemperaturesontheorderofamilliondegreesCelciusforignition.

Figure2.Thesun(left)islikeanon-goinghydrogenbomb(right)heldtogetherbygravity.

Both Teller and Bethe made crucial contributions to hydrogen bomb technology. But anothercriticaldiscoverywasmadebetweenthetimeoftheirworkonthermonuclearreactionsinthesunand on hydrogen bombs. That discovery, made in December 1938 and published in DieNaturwissenschaften in January 1939,was nuclear fission, the splitting of the uranium nucleus[15].Asexperimentalinvestigationsearlyinthecenturyrevealed,nuclearreactionscanbeartificiallyinduced by bombarding a target nucleus with neutrons. This may cause the target nucleus tobecomeanentirelydifferentelement,changingitselementnumber(protonnumber)bynomorethantwo.In1938,however,HahnandStrassmann[15]bombardeduraniumwithneutrons,andchemically detected barium, an element about half the proton number of uranium. Hahn andStrassmannhadsplittheuraniumnucleusintotwoparts.Splitting the uranium nucleus releases an enormous amount of energy and liberates neutrons.Thesenewlyreleasedneutronscouldsplitotheruraniumnuclei,whichcouldsplitothers,andsoforth in a chain reaction that is the basis for the atomic (fission) bomb [16, 17] and nuclearreactors[18](Figure3).

634

Vol.8,Issue1,January-2021AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal(ASSRJ)

Figure3.Schematicrepresentationoftheuraniumnuclearfissionchainreaction.

Nuclear fission, discovered as war clouds were gathering over Europe in December 1938,immediatelybecameofparamount interest asapotentialnewweaponofwar.Thatpotentialitybecamearealitywiththedetonationofatomic(fission)bombsoverHiroshimaandNagasaki in1945[17].Justsevenyearslater,theUnitedStatesdetonatedthefirstthermonuclearfusionbomb,alsocalledhydrogenbomb,onEniwetokAtollinthePacificOcean[19].Thathydrogenbombandallsubsequenthydrogenbombshaveutilizedanuclearfissionchainreactiondevicetoignitetheirthermonuclearfusionreactions.

PLANETARYNUCLEARFISSIONREACTORSEnricoFermiformulatednuclearreactortheory[20]andin1942constructedthefirstman-madenuclear fission reactor at the University of Chicago. Producing a nuclear fission chain reactionfromnaturallyoccurringuraniumrequiredacleverreactordesignbecausereadilyfissionableU-235presentlycomprisesonly0.7%ofuranium.In1956,PaulKazuoKurodaappliedFermi’snuclearreactortheoryanddemonstratedthatnuclearfissionchainreactionscouldhaveoccurred inseamsofuraniumoretwobillionyearsagowhentherelativeproportionofU-235wasgreater[21,22].Kurodalater toldmethat the ideawassounpopularthattheonlywayhemanagedtogetitpublishedwasbecauseatthetimetheJournalofChemical Physics would publish short paperswithout review. Even in 1956 peer-reviewswerebeingusedasameanstosuppresspublicationofscientificadvances!In 1972, French scientists discovered, in a uraniummine at Oklo in the Republic of Gabon inWestern Africa [23, 24], the intact remains of a natural nuclear reactor that had operated aspredictedbyKuroda[21,22](Figure4).



Figure4.SeamofuraniumoreinanOklonaturalnuclearreactorzone.PhotocourtesyofFrancoise

Gauthier-Lafaye.As astronomers first discovered in the late 1960s, three of the giant gaseous planets, Jupiter,Saturn,andNeptuneradiateintospaceapproximatelytwicetheenergytheyreceivefromthesunanddisplayprominentturbulence[25,26](Figure5).TheexplanationprofferedbyNASA-fundedscientistswasthattheenergyisgravitational[27].ItdidnotmakesensetomethatJupitershouldstillbecollapsingafter4.5billionyears.Reflectingontheproblem,IrealizedthatJupiterhasallthe ingredients for a planetocentric nuclear fission reactor. I applied Fermi’s nuclear reactortheory to demonstrate the feasibility that the internal energy production and atmosphericturbulenceinthegiantplanetsisproducedbyplanetocentricnuclearfissionreactors.MyscientificpaperonthesubjectwaspublishedbyNaturwissenschaftenin1992[28].

636


Figure5.TurbulenceintheatmospheresofJupiter,Saturn,andNeptune,butnotconspicuousinthe

atmosphereofUranus,picturedinthelowerleft.Initially,Ithoughtthathydrogenwouldbenecessarytoslowneutronsforthenuclearfissionchainreaction(Figure3),butquicklyrealizedthathydrogenwasnotatallnecessary.Thatopenedthepossibilityofcentralnuclearfissionreactorsinsideotherplanetsandlargemoons,suchasIo,thatcouldpowerandproducetheirmagneticfields[4,28-36].Tomyknowledge,overaperiodof39years,NASA-fundedscientistshavenevercitedmyworkonnuclearfissionreactorsinsideplanetsandlargemoons,despiteitsbeingpublishedinsomeoftheworld’sforemostscientificjournals[4,28-37].

THERMONUCLEARIGNITIONOFTHESUNANDOTHERSTARSShortly after publishing my demonstration of the feasibility of nuclear fission reactors for thegiantplanets [28], I started thinkingabout Jupiterbeing similar to,butmuch too small tohavebecomeastar.Astar is likeahydrogenbombheldtogetherbygravity,andallhydrogenbombsare ignited by their own small atomic (nuclear fission) devices. Is it possible that thethermonuclearreactionsinstarsareignitedbynuclearfissionchainreactions?Coulditbethattheastrophysics communitymissed that?Thatseemedunlikely, especiallyasbothTellerandBethehaddonepioneeringworkonthermonuclearreactionsthatpowerthesun,andbothhadworkedon the development of hydrogen bombs. In fact, Edward Teller is known as the father of thehydrogenbomb.



Nevertheless,Iheadedforthesciencelibraryandmeticulouslyresearchedtheliterature.Ifoundnomentionofstellarthermonuclearignitionbynuclearfissioninthescientificjournals.Andtobesure, I even hired a research librarian to search all available online data bases. That computersearch still revealed no mention of stellar thermonuclear ignition by nuclear fission. Amazing!TellerandBethehadneglectedtolookovertheirshoulders,neglectedtoreconsidertheirpreviousworkinlightofthelessonslearnedfromtheirlaterwork.Ipromptlywroteashortscientificarticleaboutthermonuclearignitionofstarsbynuclearfissionchainreactions,whichwasrejectedbyseveral journalsbeforebeingaccepted forpublication inthe Proceedings of the Royal Society of London [4]. One of the rejections was based upon ananonymous reviewer’s remark that “Herndon is throwing away forty years of astrophysics.” So,what is wrongwith that? Science progresses by findingwhat iswrongwith current ideas andcorrectingthem.Scientistswouldhavewelcomedmyparadigmshiftasitaffordsnewinsightsandopensnewpossibilitiesforscientificdiscoveries[38].

NEWINSIGHTONTHENATUREOFDARKMATTERIthasalwaysbeenmyexperiencethatnewinsightsanddiscoveriesinevitablyleadtofurthernewinsights and to further newdiscoveries. In the old, flawedparadigm, stars (except tiny browndwarfs) are always thought to ignite by gravitational collapse during formation. In my newparadigm,however,stellarignitionrequiresthepresenceofveryheavyelements,suchasuraniumor plutonium, to undergo nuclear fission chain reactions. Without fissionable heavy elements,after cooling from contraction, the stars would be dark stars. Without heat generated bythermonuclear reactions to expand their gas, a dark star the mass of the sun would have adiametersimilar to thatofEarth.Oneof theconsequencesofmynewinsightonstar ignition isthatitshedslightonthenatureofdarkmatter[4].Aspiralgalaxy,suchasshowninFigure6,representsadynamicallyunstableassemblageofstarsthatwouldhypotheticallywraparounditscenterofrotation,unlessitissurroundedbyamassivehaloofunseen(dark)matter10-100timesasmassiveastheluminousstars[39].InFigure6,thisyet unobserved halo of dark matter is illustrated in green. I suggested that the dark mattersurroundingluminousgalaxiesiscomposedofdarkstars,theconsequenceofstellarnon-ignitionthatresultsfromtheabsenceoffissionableelements.Ievenpointedoutcorroboratingevidence,namely,theassociationoflow-metalstarsintheregionsbelievedpopulatedbydarkmatter[4].

638


Figure6.Typicalspiralgalaxy.Thehypotheticalgreenhaloshowstheregionwheredarkmatteris

thoughttoreside,impartingdynamicstabilitytotheluminousconfigurationofstars[39].The question ofwhat constitutes dark matter is a subject of active debate in the astrophysicscommunitywith awide range of exotic possibilities discussed, such as hypothetical axionsandputative primordial black holes [40]. To the best ofmy knowledge, in the intervening 27 yearssincepublicationofmyconceptofdarkmatterconsistingofdarkstars[4],noastrophysicisthascitedmysuggestionthatzero-metallicitydarkstarsmayaccountforatleastasignificantportionofthedarkmatterintheUniverse.

THERMONUCLEARIGNITIONOFDARKGALAXIESFigure7isaHubbleSpaceTelescopedeep-fieldviewshowingapproximately15,000galaxies.Twofeatures standoutandbeg forexplanation.First, among thisvastnumberof galaxies, thereareonlyafewprominentmorphologies,suggestingacommonalityofformativeconditions.Second,avastproportionoftheobservableluminousgalaxiesareflat,notspherical.



Figure7.HubbleSpaceTelescopedeepfieldphotographshowingapproximately15,000galaxies.

Astronomers have produced a wealth of observations about the matter in the Universe.Astrophysicistsattempttoexplaintheseobservations,buttheyarecrippledbyscientificfailings,for example, by making models based upon assumptions instead of making discoveries, byignoringcontradictoryconcepts,andbyacceptingwithoutquestionobtuseideas.IincludeamongthoseobtuseideastheconceptthattheUniversesprangintoexistencefromapointofnothingnesssome13.8billionyearsago,andthatatthecenterofgalaxiesmatterdisappearsforeverintoblackholes.FromlongexperienceIhavelearnedthatnaturecanusuallybeunderstoodasoperatinginlogical,causallyrelatedwaysthatdonotrequireunscientificsuppositions.Galaxiesaremassiveassemblagesofmatter,somecontainingasmanyasabillionluminousstars.Asmatter at the galactic center becomes extremelymassive, it does notdisappear forever intoblack-holenothingness,butinsteadmatterisjettedfromthegalacticcenterintospaceasmono-polarorbi-polargalacticjets(Figure8).

640


Figure8.HubbleSpaceTelescopeimagesofgalacticjetswiththeirlengthsindicatedinlightyears.As I have published [4-6, 33, 41], the morphological features and galactic luminous stardistributionscanbeunderstoodinlogical,causallyrelatedways.Consider a dark galaxy consisting solely of zero-metallicity dark stars, stars consisting only ofhydrogenandhelium.Asthedarkmattercoalescesandbecomesextremelydenseatthegalacticcenter,atsomepointthegalacticcentershootsoutitsfirstgalacticjet.Thegalacticjet,Icontend,seeds any of the dark stars it contactswith fissionable elements, capable of producing nuclearfissionchainreactions, thusprovidingthemillion-degreetemperaturesnecessaryto ignite theirstellarthermonuclearfusionreactions[5,6].What would a spherical dark galaxy look like after its first galactic jet? Figure 9a,b show twoexamples.Figure9a,NGC4676,referredtoastheMiceGalaxies,aretwospiralgalaxies.Notethe“tail”ofthegalaxyontheright.Thisisalineofluminousstarsthatwereignitedwhenthatgalaxysentfromitscenter its firstgalactic jet,whichseededthedarkstars itencounteredwith fissionableelementsthat produced nuclear fission chain reactions that provided themillion degree temperatures toignitetheirthermonuclearfissionreactions,thusturningthedarkstarsintoluminousstars.Figure9b,UGC10214,referredtoastheTadpoleGalaxy,isabarredspiralgalaxyintheearlystageof luminosity when galactic jets sent from its center first begin to seed its dark stars withfissionableelementswhich,bynuclear fissionchainreactions, ignite thedarkstarsencounteredbythegalacticjets.Figures9c,dshowmoreevolvedgalacticluminousstardistributionsthatneverthelessdisplaythepath of former galactic jets that provided the heavy-element component permitting stellarthermonuclear ignition. And what of the dark matter necessary for dynamical stability of theluminousstructures?Itisthereintheun-ignitedportionofthesphericaldarkgalaxies.



Figure9.HubbleSpaceTelescopeimageof(a)NGC4676,MiceGalaxies,(b)UGC10214,Tadpole

Galaxy,(c)spiralgalaxy,M101,and(d)barredspiralgalaxy,NGC1300.

ORIGINOFTHEELEMENTSIn a 1957 scientific article, entitled “Synthesis of the Elements in Stars,” Burbidge, Burbidge,Fowler,andHoyle[42]proposedthatchemicalelementsaresynthesizedinstarsbyanumberofprocesses. Heavy elements, however, were assumed to be solely produced by “rapid neutroncapture” during supernova explosions. These ideas are still widely believed [43]. Subsequentobservations [4], I posit, lead to a fundamentally different understanding of the origin of theelements[41],whichIdescribebrieflyhere.Astrophysicistsgroupstarsintotwocategoriesbasedupontheirmetalcontent.Theassociationoflow-metalstarsintheregionbelievedpopulatedbyzero-metalstars,i.e.,darkstars[4],suggeststomethatthereexisttwoprimarysourcesofchemicalelements.Oneofthetwoprimarysourcesconsistssolelyofamixtureofhydrogenandhelium(thestuffofzero-metallicitystars).Theotherprimary source consistsof thenuclearmatter jettedout from thegalactic center thatyieldsnotonlythefissionableelementsthatignitethermonuclearfusionreactions,butvirtuallyallelementsheavier than hydrogen and helium. Secondarily, over their lifetimes starsmay synthesize someelementsinternallyaswellaspossiblyaccumulatingdebrisfrompreviousastrophysicaltrauma-events.

642

Vol.8,Issue1,January-2021AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal(ASSRJ)SPECULATIONSABOUTTHENATUREOFTHEUNIVERSE

All attempts at this point in time to understand the nature of theUniverse should properly bedescribedasspeculation,notscience.But“admirablespeculation,” touseGalileo’swords[44], isneverthelessan importantpartof science, as it representsanattempt tobegin tounderstandascientificunknown.In 1929, Hubble [45] noticed that themore distant a galaxy, themore its spectrum of light isshifted toward thered.Hubbleadopted the interpretationof Slipher [46] forgalactic-spectrum-shiftsasbeingDopplershiftsinfrequencycausedbyradialvelocity.ToHubbleandtothosewhofollowed,essentiallyallofthegalaxiesaremovingawayfromus,andthefurthertheyarefromus,thefasterthattheyaremovingaway.So,howcanthatbe?IftheinterpretationofDopplershiftiscorrect, which I seriously doubt, then it must mean that the Universe is expanding. ThatinterpretationistheunderlyingbasisforthebigbangtheorythattheUniverseisexpandingfromapointofnothingness.Nonsense!The implicit assumption underlying Hubble-expansion is that if therewere no expansion, lightwouldtravelforeverwithoutchangingfrequencyandwavelength.Manyastronomers,goingbackto Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), have noted, in their own ways, that if the Universe is notexpanding and ismore-or-less homogeneous and is essentially infinite in size and has been inexistence essentially forever, then the night sky should be filledwith background light. But thenightskyappearsdark,simplylightedbypointsoflightfromstarsanddistantgalaxies.Butbehold!Theskyisindeedfilledwithbackgroundlight,butlightnotvisibletothehumaneye.That light has lengthened in wavelength and is in fact the cosmic microwave backgroundelectromagneticradiationdiscoveredbyPenziasandWilson[47](notarelicof thebigbang,assomebelieve).Light,Iposit,lengthensinwavelengthonitslongtransitthroughinterstellarspaceas it losesenergy/mass through interactionwith the infinitesimalmatteralong its sojourn, thusredistributing its energy/mass throughout a portion of the Universe, approaching cosmicequilibriumbetweenitselectromagneticradiationandtheinfinitesimalmatter.Presumably, withmuch latitude for speculation, that infinitesimal matter becomes, through yetunknownreactions,hydrogenandhelium,theprimordialelementsthatinturnbecomethestuffofdarkstars,whichthengravitationallyattractandformdarkgalaxies.Asthegalacticdarkmattercoalescesandbecomesextremelydenseatitscenter,atsomepointitbeginstoshootoutgalacticjets.These jets,consistingof theparentnuclearmatter forelementsheavier thanhydrogenandhelium,seeddarkstarstheycontactwithfissionableelementsandproducenuclearfissionchainreactions, thus providing the million-degree temperatures necessary to ignite thermonuclearfusion reactions that light the formallydark stars. The now luminous stars radiate their visiblelightoutintotheUniverse,beginninganewtheredistributionofenergy/matterintheUniverse.ThustheUniversehasnoobviousbeginning,andnoforeseeableend.Presumably,theUniverseisfinite,yetunbounded.



CONCLUSIONSThat theUniversehasnoobviousbeginning,andno foreseeableendhasbothphilosophicalandtheological implications. In the cosmology described here, the beginning, end, and age of theUniverse are no longer ascertainable by scientific methodologies. In this instance, science nolongertrumpstheology.Criticalknowledgeaboutthethermonuclearignitionofstars,andimplicationsderivedtherefrom,although published in the scientific literature, have been un-cited and ignored by the scientificcommunity.Thisisindicativeofabiggerandfarmoredevastatingproblem.Blatantdeceptionandfailure to tell the truth pervades officialdomworldwide and should not be tolerated, as thesepracticesposeveryrealthreatstocivilization,andtoindividualfreedom.Recallthesewords:Andyeshallknowthetruth,andthetruthshallmakeyoufree(John8:32).References1. VonHagen,V.W.,TheancientsunkingdomsoftheAmericas.Vol.1.2017:PicklePartnersPublishing.

2. Benson,E.P.andA.G.Cook,RitualsacrificeinancientPeru.2001:UniversityofTexasPress.

3. Breasted,J.H.,DevelopmentofreligionandthoughtinancientEgypt.Vol.45.1972:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.

4. Herndon,J.M.,Planetaryandprotostellarnuclearfission:Implicationsforplanetarychange,stellarignitionanddarkmatter.Proc.R.Soc.Lond,1994.A455:p.453-461.

5. Herndon,J.M.,NewconceptforinternalheatproductioninhotJupiterexo-planets,thermonuclearignitionofdarkgalaxies,andthebasisforgalacticluminousstardistributions.Curr.Sci.,2009.96:p.1453-1456.

6. Herndon,J.M.,Inseparabilityofsciencehistoryanddiscovery.Hist.GeoSpaceSci.,2010.1:p.25-41.

7. Bacquerel,H.,Surlesradiationsemisesparphosphorescence.ComptesRendus,1896.122:p.501-503.

8. Malley,M.C.,Radioactivity:ahistoryofamysteriousscience.2011:OxfordUniversityPress.

9. Oliphant,M.L.,P.Harteck,andE.Rutherford,Transmutationeffectsobservedwithheavyhydrogen.Nature,1934.133:p.413.

10. Gamow,G.andE.Teller,Therateofselectivethermonuclearreactions.Phys.Rev.,1938.53:p.608-609.

11. Bethe,H.A.,Energyproductioninstars.Phys.Rev.,1939.55(5):p.434-456.

12. Hayashi,C.andT.Nakano,Thermalanddynamicpropertiesofaprotostaranditscontractiontothestageofquasi-staticequilibrium.Prog.theor.Physics,1965.35:p.754-775.

13. Larson,R.B.,Gravitationaltorquesandstarformation.Mon.Not.R.astr.Soc.,1984.206:p.197-207.

14. Stahler,S.W.,etal.,Theearlyevolutionofprotostellardisks.Astrophys.J.,1994.431:p.341-358.

15. Hahn,O.andF.Strassmann,UberdenNachweisunddasVerhaltenderbeiderBestrahlungdesUransmittelsNeutronenentstehendenErdalkalimetalle.DieNaturwissenschaften,1939.27:p.11-15.

16. Serber,R.,TheLosAlamosprimer:Thefirstlecturesonhowtobuildanatomicbomb.1992:UnivofCaliforniaPress.

17. Rhodes,R.,TheMakingoftheAtomicBomb.1986,NewYork:Simon&Schuster.

18. Sekimoto,H.,Nuclearreactortheory.2008:COE-INES,TokyoInstituteofTechnology.

19. Rhodes,R.,DarkSun:TheMakingoftheHydrogenBomb.Vol.2.1996:SimonandSchuster.

20. Fermi,E.,Elementarytheoryofthechain-reactingpile.Science,Wash.,1947.105:p.27-32.

644

Vol.8,Issue1,January-2021AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal(ASSRJ)21. Kuroda,P.K.,Onthenuclearphysicalstabilityoftheuraniumminerals.J.Chem.Phys.,1956.25(4):p.781-

782.

22. Kuroda,P.K.,Ontheinfinitemultiplicationconstantandtheageofuraniumminerals.J.Chem.Phys.,1956.25(6):p.1295-1296.

23. Frejacques,C.,etal.,inTheOkloPhenomenon.1975,I.A.E.A.:Vienna.p.509.

24. Hagemann,R.,etal.,inTheOkloPhenomenon.1975,I.A.E.A.:Vienna.p.415.

25. Conrath,B.J.,etal.,inUranus,J.T.Bergstralh,E.D.Miner,andM.S.Mathews,Editors.1991,UniversityofArizonaPress:Tucson.

26. Hubbard,W.B.,Interiorsofthegiantplanets,inTheNewSolarSystem,J.K.B.a.A.Chaikin,Editor.1990,SkyPublishingCorp.:Cambridge,MA.p.134-135.

27. Stevenson,J.D.,Theouterplanetsandtheirsatellites,inTheOriginoftheSolarSystem,S.F.Dermott,Editor.1978,Wiley:NewYork.p.395-431.

28. Herndon,J.M.,Nuclearfissionreactorsasenergysourcesforthegiantouterplanets.Naturwissenschaften,1992.79:p.7-14.

29. Herndon,J.M.,FeasibilityofanuclearfissionreactoratthecenteroftheEarthastheenergysourceforthegeomagneticfield.J.Geomag.Geoelectr.,1993.45:p.423-437.

30. Herndon,J.M.,Sub-structureoftheinnercoreoftheearth.Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.USA,1996.93:p.646-648.

31. Herndon,J.M.,Examiningtheoverlookedimplicationsofnaturalnuclearreactors.Eos,Trans.Am.Geophys.U.,1998.79(38):p.451,456.

32. Herndon,J.M.,Nucleargeoreactororiginofoceanicbasalt3He/4He,evidence,andimplications.Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.USA,2003.100(6):p.3047-3050.

33. Herndon,J.M.,Nucleargeoreactorgenerationoftheearth'sgeomagneticfield.Curr.Sci.,2007.93(11):p.1485-1487.

34. Herndon,J.M.,Natureofplanetarymatterandmagneticfieldgenerationinthesolarsystem.Curr.Sci.,2009.96(8):p.1033-1039.

35. Herndon,J.M.,Terracentricnuclearfissiongeoreactor:background,basis,feasibility,structure,evidenceandgeophysicalimplications.Curr.Sci.,2014.106(4):p.528-541.

36. Hollenbach,D.F.andJ.M.Herndon,Deep-earthreactor:nuclearfission,helium,andthegeomagneticfield.Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.USA,2001.98(20):p.11085-11090.

37. Herndon,J.M.,NASA:PoliticsaboveScience.2018:amazon.com.

38. Kuhn,T.S.,TheStructureofScientificRevolutions.1962,Chicago,IL,USA:UniversityofChicagoPress.

39. Rubin,V.C.,Therotationofspiralgalaxies.Science,1983.220:p.1339-1344.

40. Arun,K.,S.Gudennavar,andC.Sivaram,Darkmatter,darkenergy,andalternatemodels:Areview.AdvancesinSpaceResearch,2017.60(1):p.166-186.

41. Herndon,J.M.,Herndon'sEarthandtheDarkSideofScience.2014:PrintedbyCreareSpace;AvailableatAmazon.comandthroughotherbooksellers.

42. Burbidge,E.M.,etal.,Synthesisoftheelementsinstars.Rev.Mod.Phys.,1957.29(4):p.547-650.

43. Anders,E.andN.Grevesse,Abundancesoftheelements:Meteoriticandsolar.GeochimicaetCosmochimicaacta,1989.53(1):p.197-214.

44. Drake,S.,ed.DiscoveriesandOpinionsofGalileo.1956,Doubleday:NewYork.301.

45. Hubble,E.,Arelationbetweendistanceandradialvelocityamongextra-galacticnebulae.Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.USA,1929.15:p.168-173.



46. Slipher,V.M.,TheradialvelocityoftheAndromedaNebula.LowellObservatoryBulletin,1913.2:p.56-57.

47. Penzias,A.A.andR.W.Wilson,Ameasurementofexcessantennatemperatureat4080Mc/s.Astrophys.J.,1965.142:p.419-421.

Nature of the Universe: Astrophysical Paradigm Shifts

Documents

Transcript of Nature of the Universe: Astrophysical Paradigm Shifts