Solar Energy
Abstract: The source of energy in the core of the Sun is neutron repulsion, the same source of energy in cores of the uranium and plutonium atoms that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August 1945, respectively. The Sun is an ordinary star that produces and discards hydrogen generated by neutron-emission followed, in succession, by neutron-decay. This conclusion is based on precise measurements of meteorites, planets, the Moon and the Sun during the space age and on precise atomic rest mass data. It assumes that free neutrons decay spontaneously into hydrogen atoms and that solar energy arises from the conversion of nuclear rest mass (m) into solar energy (E).
1. Introduction
I am grateful for the invitation to submit this review on neutron repulsion as the source of solar energy. The manuscript is based primarily on the work of two great scientists that participated on opposing sides of the Second World War and then died in 2001. The astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist, Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), led a radar development group for the British during WWII and later left unambiguous hints in his 1994 autobiography [1] of inexplicable, sudden changes in the foundations of these major fields of science in 1946. The nuclear geochemist, Paul Kazuo Kuroda aka Kazuo Kuroda (1917-2001), was more circumspect in leaving hints in the description of his life as a graduate student and then as a faculty member at the Imperial University of Tokyo, studying radium, radon and other trace elements in hot springs and later extracting uranium from Manchurian euxenite ore for Japan during WWII [2].
Kuroda became my research mentor in 1960 and assigned this research project: “The Origin of the Solar System and Its Elements.” This paper includes many of the research findings summarized in my biography, in progress [3].
After Kazuo Kuroda’s death, BBC News reported [4] his widow returned secret atomic bomb plans missing from Japan for fifty-seven years (2002 – 1945 = 57 years). 2 The BBC News Report [4] of chaos in the handling of nuclear secrets in August 1945 and the earlier warning about possible annihilation of planet Earth by uncontrollable release of nuclear energy – in the last paragraph of Aston’s 1922 Nobel Prize Lecture [5] – suggest that fear of nuclear annihilation may have influenced the decision to obscure the force of neutron repulsion in cores of heavy atoms and stars after WWII.
Hundreds of other scientists contributed to recognizance of neutron repulsion as the source of energy in cores of heavy atoms and stars and its release – suddenly in the case of atomic or stellar fission and/or more slowly in the case of nuclear reactors or stable stars. Many of these scientists were cited as references in the above papers [1-3, 5].
Special merit must go to Einstein’s finding [6,7] that mass (m) is stored energy (E), to Chadwick’s discovery of the neutron [8,9] and to F. W. Aston [5] for identifying isotopes, measuring their exact masses, and reporting a momentous promise and a dire warning to the public in the last paragraph of his 1922 Nobel lecture “. . . the human race will have at its command powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction; but the remote possibility must always be considered that the energy once liberated will be completely uncontrollable and by its intense violence detonate all neighbouring substances. In this event the whole of the hydrogen on the earth might be transformed at once and the success of the experiment published at large to the universe as a new star.”
The underlined part of Aston’s lecture may have changed the course of world history by frightening world leaders into forbidding public knowledge of neutron repulsion after the chaotic closing days of WWII, when at least one copy of plans for building atomic bombs disappeared from government control for the next fifty seven years [4].
2. Materials and Methods
The conclusions presented in this review are based on the best data available at the time the measurements were made. E.g., neutron repulsion was first recognized in 2000 in the atomic rest mass data published by the National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory [10].
Nine stages of mass-fractionation in the Sun were identified in precise isotope measurements at the Physikalisches Institut, Universität Bern [11] of solar-wind-implanted noble gases in lunar soils from the 1969 Apollo mission to the Moon. Most conclusions in this review come from Chapters 2 and 3 of my autobiography [3] and general information in chemistry and physics textbooks that was probably first published in reference books like the CRC Hand-book of Chemistry and Physics (First edition published in 1913) and the Table of Isotopes compiled at Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Paul Kazuo Kuroda supervised the author’s PhD research. John Hamilton Reynolds supervised his introduction to stable isotope mass spectrometry and space physics.
3. Results and Discussion
Before reviewing experimental evidence the Sun made our elements, birthed the solar system, sustained the origin and evolution of life, and generates heat, light, solar neutrinos, solar-wind hydrogen and helium as waste products of the nuclear reactions triggered by neutron repulsion in the Sun ‘s pulsar core [12], a few words on nuclear forces, nuclear structure and nuclear decay may help readers see why the ATTRACTIVE force of neutrons for protons is dominant in fusion of the light atoms, but the REPULSIVE force between neutrons causes fission and/or neutron emission from cores of heavy atoms, some planets, ordinary stars and galaxies. Three basic types of interactions between neutrons and protons [13-15] determine nuclear structure and decay modes.
In light nuclei (A < ~150 amu), the core is neutron-proton (n, p+) pairs with extra neutrons at the nuclear surface because: 1. The strongest nuclear force is the ATTRACTIVE force of neutrons for protons, and visa versa 2. The weakest nuclear force is the REPULSIVE force between neutrons 3. The intermediate nuclear force is the REPULSIVE force between protons. Powerful, short-range attractive forces are almost saturated in He-4 (-particle). Thus abundant light-weight nuclei are -particles – pairs of neutron-proton (n, p+) pairs: He-4, C-12, O-16, Ne-20, Mg-24, Si-28, S-32, Ar-36 and Ca-40. The most stable nucleus, Fe-56, is thirteen -particles surrounded by four extra neutrons The weakest and strongest nuclear forces are short-ranged; The intermediate nuclear force includes long-range Coulomb REPULSION between positive charges on protons [13-15].
This becomes competitive with ATTRACTIVE forces in neutron-proton pairs at A~150 amu (atomic mass units) and the nucleus inverts into a core of neutrons somewhat more highly energized by neutronrepulsion [14], with pairs of neutron-proton (n, p+) pairs on the nuclear surface. Alpha-emission begins in Nd-144, when the nuclear surface is 30 -particles and the core is 24 neutrons. Neutron repulsion generated ~10 MeV/neutron for lighter nuclei, but increases more rapidly with mass above A~150 amu [14]. Nuclear stability ceases when the nuclear core contains more than 44 neutrons in Pb-208. Spontaneous fission was first detected in Th-232 [16], when the surface is 45 - particles and the nuclear core is 52 neutrons.
Spontaneous fission is increasingly likely in U-238, Pu-244 etc., and becomes the dominant mode of decay in heavier nuclei like Cf-254, Fm-256 and No-258. Neutron-induced fission was discovered in U-235 and Pu-239, when the surface is 46 and 47 -particles, respectively, and the nuclear core contains 51 neutrons.
3.1 Proof of Neutron Repulsion
Figure 1 (below) shows convincing evidence of neutron repulsion [13-15] in cores of neutron-rich atoms (left), proton repulsion in cores of proton-rich atoms (right), and neutron-proton attraction in the middle. The vertical scale on this figure is the mass (energy) per nucleon, M/A = f + 1, where f is Aston’s “packing fraction.”
Figure 1a: Two forms of one fundamental particle shown by the red symbols on the left (neutrons) and right (hydrogen atoms, H-1) comprise every atom. The most stable atom, Fe-56, is also the most abundant atom in the Earth, in the Sun and in ordinary meteorites. On Earth H-1 is more stable than the neutron. At high pressure, H-1 atoms collapse into neutrons [17] and can be energized by neutron repulsion to energy levels above the top of the page [12].
3.2 Proof of Local Element Synthesis
Figure 2 (below) shows evidence the solar system’s elements were produced here and then formed solids before isotopes and elements from different regions of the supernova completely mixed. Figures 2a,b,c,d,e,f are all from papers published in 1972 [18], 1975/77/79/80 [19/20/21/22], 1993 [23], 1994 [24] and 1997 [25].
Figure 2a: “Normal” xenon, Xe-1, is dominant in the iron-rich, inner region of the solar system but mass fractionated (dashed line) in the Sun. “Strange” xenon, Xe-2, dominates the outer region of the solar system [26]. Xe-1 is dominant in the Earth (AIR), the Sun (SOLAR), and in ordinary meteorites. At about 1000o C [18], carbon-rich inclusions of average carbonaceous chondrites (AVCC) selectively released Xe-2 that is enriched in 124Xe from the p-process and in 136Xe from the r-process of nucleosynthesis [27].
Figure 2d: In 1978 Srinivasan and Anders [28] found a “complementary” component to “strange” xenon, enriched in middle isotopes by the s-process of nucleosynthesis [27], in the Murchison meteorites. By 1993, “strange” and “complementary” isotopic anomalies had been found in the isotopes of xenon (element #54) [18, 28], tellurium (element #52) [21], barium (element #56), neodymium (element #60) and samarium (element #62) [23]. These two anomaly patterns are usually observed in refractory grains of diamond (C) and silicon carbide (SiC) that condensed early in the heterogeneous solar nebula [12, 20, 21].
3.3 Proof of Solar Mass Fractionation and the Iron-Rich Sun
Figure 3 (below) shows the results of a few of the thousands of measurements that revealed unequivocal evidence of mass-dependent fractionation in the Sun and its iron-rich interior. Ubiquitous evidence is even in publications of leading astronomers and astrophysicists. E.g., pages 153-154 of Sir Fred Hoyle autobiography [1] tell of abrupt, inexplicable changes in consensus opinions on composition and source of energy in the stars in 1946; Nobel Laureate William Fowler admitted in 1998 [29] that “we certainly do not understand the nuclear astrophysics which produced the oxygen and carbon in our bodies.” Data from a well-known paper co-authored by these scientists, B2FH [27], are shown on the right in Figure 3a:
A common mass-fractionation of xenon and neon isotopes was identified earlier in the Sun and meteorites in 1970 [35]. The dashed line in Figure 2a shows massfractionated xenon isotopes first observed in primitive meteorites in 1972 [18]. It was not possible to recognize a common mass fractionation across all five noble gases in the Sun (See the graph of the left side of Figure 3a) before the discovery [19] in 1975 of “strange” isotope abundances in all three heavy noble gases; argon, krypton and xenon and the 1976 [36] discovery that noble gases in the Sun are a mixture of “strange” ones, from the outer region of solar system, with “normal” ones from the inner regions of the solar system [37].
Over my entire research career, from the first meteorite I analyzed in 1964 [40] – a meteorite that fell near the University of Arkansas in 1934 [41] – until the present, precise measurements have revealed severe mass fractionation in the Sun. I.e., the Sun’s internal composition is not represented by high abundances of light-weight elements (H and He) at the top of its atmosphere any more than Earth’s internal composition is represented by the ocean waters and air that cover its surface.
My 1964 finding [40] was repeatedly confirmed by analyses of meteorites and the solar wind [42] but obscured by claims data points on the dashed fractionation line (below) are mixes of arbitrary types of primordial neon: Ne-A, -B, -C, Ne-etc [43].
4. Conclusions
The inescapable conclusion of all the experimental results shown in the preceding section, and independent studies of the Sun [44, 45] and interactions of atoms with the Sun [46-48], is that solar energy comes from the pulsar remnant of the supernova that made our elements, birthed the solar system 5 Ga ago, and sustained the origin and evolution of life on Earth after ~3.5 Ga ago [49].
This conclusion confirms the validity of a.) Kuroda’s insight standing in the ruins of Hiroshima in August 1945: “I became overwhelmed by the power of nuclear energy. The sight before my eyes was just like the end of the world, but I also felt that the beginning of the world may have been just like this” [reference 51, page 2], b.) Aston’s earlier promise on 12 December 1922 that nuclear energy offers the human race “powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction” [ref. 5, page 20], and c.) Max Planck’s views on the essence of matter in 1944: “There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together … We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.” [52].
Solar energy is generated by a series of nuclear reactions [12] triggered by neutron repulsion in the Sun’s pulsar core [44, 45]. This same energy source triggered the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki from cores uranium and plutonium atoms sixty-nine years ago and the production of chemical elements in stars and in selfsustaining nuclear chain reactors that spontaneously burned on the surface of the Earth about two billion years ago [51], as Kuroda first explained in 1956 [53].
Having established that publicly-financed consensus science misrepresented solar energy after the Second World War [Chapter 2 of my auto-biography, reference 3, and reference 54], e.g.-
1. The internal composition of the Sun was changed from mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946 [1];
2. Aston’s rigorously valid nuclear packing fraction, clearly showing evidence of neutron repulsion, was removed from text-books and replaced with von Weizsacker’s nuclear binding equation that obscures neutron repulsion; and
3. Honesty, humility and open-minded willingness to learn from measurements and observations – marks of genius in scientists like Einstein, Aston, Planck and Kuroda – were replaced with the arrogance and closed-mindedness of post-1945 Standard Models of stars and nuclear energy –
What should society do now? Forgive those who deceived us for the past sixtynine years for being human and move as quickly as possible to restore integrity to government science and constitutional limits on governments.
As noted in the conclusions on page 11 of a message to the US Congressional Space Science & Technology Committee on 17 July 2013 [50], the human race has been deprived of Aston’s 1922 promise – “powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction” [ref. 5, page 20] – for ninety-two years.
Like the still-evolving 2009 Climategate scandal [55], a 1998 CSPAN news video [56] revealed efforts to obscure supporting evidence in 1995 data from a probe of Jupiter, confirming yet earlier evidence from the 1969 Apollo Lunar Mission [31].
5. Acknowledgements
Kuroda never hinted what I would find when he made my research assignment in 1960, but the knowledge he had displayed in 1956 of the infinite multiple constant in natural, self-sustaining nuclear fission reactors on Earth [53] convinces me that Kuroda already knew in 1960 I would eventually discover neutron-repulsion in the Sun’s pulsar core, if I remained faithful to basic principles of science.
This paper is dedicated to my research mentor, the late Professor Paul Kazuo Kuroda, and to all those who love eternal truths more than the temporary fame or fortune bestowed by mankind.
6. References:
1. Fred Hoyle, Home Is Where The Wind Blows: Chapters from a Cosmologist’s Life (University Science Books; First edition, 1994) 443 pp. See especially pages 153-154: www.amazon.com
2. Paul Kazuo Kuroda, My Early Days at the Imperial University of Tokyo (autobiography, 1992) 69 pages: www.omatumr.com
3. Oliver K. Manuel, A Journey to the Core of the Sun –
Chapter 1: Coincidence (2013) 14 pages: dl.dropboxusercontent.com
Chapter 2: Acceptance of Reality (2014) 21 pages: dl.dropboxusercontent.com
Chapter 3: Nuclear Forces, Physical Size and Structure (2014) in progress
4. BBC News, “Atomic plans returned to Japan,” News Front Page, World Edition (3 Aug 2002) news.bbc.co.uk
5. Francis William Aston, “Mass spectra and isotopes,” Nobel Prize Lecture (12 December 1922): veksler.jinr.ru or www.nobelprize.org
6. A. Einstein, “Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper” [“On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”] Annalen der Physik 17 (1905) 891.
7. A. Einstein, “Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energie-gehalt abhängig?” [“Is the Inertia of a Body dependent on its Energy-Content?”] Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639.
8. James Chadwick, “Possible existence of the neutron,” Nature 129 (3252), 312 (27 February 1932): doi:10.1038/129312a0
9. J. Chadwick, “The existence of the neutron,” Proceedings Royal Society London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 136 (830): 692-708 (1 June 1932): rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org
10.J. K. TULI, Nuclear Wallet Cards, Sixth Edition, National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY (2000) 74 pp.
11.P. Eberhardt, J. Geiss, H. Graf, N. Grögler, M. D. Mendia, M. Mörgeli, H. Schwaller, A. Stettler, U. Krähenbühl, and H. R. von Gunten, “Trapped solar wind noble gases in Apollo 12 lunar fines 12001 and Apollo 11 breccia 10046,” Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference 2, pages1821-1856 (March 1972): tinyurl.com – books.google.com
12.Oliver K. Manuel, “Neutron Repulsion,” The APEIRON Journal 19, 123- 150 (2012): redshift.vif.com
13.O. Manuel, C. Bolon, A. Katragada, and M. Insall, “Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy” Journal of Fusion Energy 19 93-98 (2001): www.omatumr.com
14.O. Manuel, C. Bolon, M. Zhong, “Nuclear systematics: III. The source of solar luminosity,” Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 252, 3- 7 (2002): www.springerlink.com
15.O. Manuel, E. Miller, A. Katragada, “Neutron repulsion confirmed as an energy source,” J. Fusion Energy 20, 197-201 (2002): www.springerlink.com
16.Norman E. Holdren and Darlene C. Hoffman, “Spontaneous fission half-lives for ground state nuclides,” Pure and Applied Chemistry 72, 1525-1562 (2000): www.researchgate.net
17.W. Baade and F. Zwicky, “Cosmic rays from super-novae,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 20, 259-263 (1934).
18.O. K. Manuel, E. W. Hennecke and D. D. Sabu, “Xenon in carbonaceous chondrites,” Nature 240, 99-101 (1972): www.omatumr.com
19.R. S. Lewis, B. Srinivasan and E. Anders, “Host phase of a strange xenon component in Allende,” Science 190, 1251-1262 (1975): www.sciencemag.org
20.O. K. Manuel and D. D. Sabu, “Strange xenon, extinct super-heavy elements and the solar neutrino puzzle,” Science 195, 208-209 (1977).
21.R. V. Ballad, L. L. Oliver, R. G. Downing and O. K. Manuel, “Isotopes of tellurium, xenon and krypton in the Allende meteorite retain record of nucleosynthesis,” Nature 277, 615-620 (1979): www.nature.com
22.O. K. Manuel, “The enigma of helium and anomalous xenon,” Icarus 41, 312-315 (1980): www.sciencedirect.com
23.F. Begemann, “Isotopic abundance anomalies and the early solar system” in Origin and Evolution of the Elements, edited by N. Prantos, E. VangioniFlam and M. Cassé, M. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1993) pp. 518-527.
24.P. K. Kuroda and W. A. Myers, “Plutonium-244 fission xenon in the most primitive meteorites,” Radiochimica Acta 64 167-174 (1994): adsabs.harvard.edu
25.P. K. Kuroda and W. A. Myers, “Aluminum-26 in the early solar system”, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 211, 539-555 (1997).
26.O. Manuel, K. Windler, A. Nolte, L. Johannes, J. Zirbel and D. Ragland, “Strange xenon in Jupiter,” Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 238, 119-121 (1998): See 2001 analysis of xenon isotope data from Jupiter: www.omatumr.com
27.E. M. Burbidge, G. R. Burbidge, W. A. Fowler, and F. Hoyle, “Synthesis of the elements in stars,” Reviews of Modern Physics 29, 547-650 (1957): Free abstract and pdf file at: rmp.aps.org and rmp.aps.org and www.nature.com
28.B. Srinivasan and E. Anders, “Noble gases in the Murchison meteorite: Possible relics of s-process nucleosynthesis,” Science 201, 51-56 (1978): www.sciencemag.org
29.W. A. Fowler, “Forward” in Cauldrons in the Cosmos: Nuclear Astrophysics by Claus E. Rolf and William S. Rodney, edited by David N. Schramm (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA, 1988) pp. xi-xii: www.omatumr.com
30.O. Manuel, W. A. Myers, Y. Singh and M. Pleess, “Solar abundance of elements from neutron-capture cross sections,” Thirty-Sixth Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, paper number 1033 (March 2005): www.lpi.usra.edu
31.O. K. Manuel and Golden Hwaung, “Solar abundances of the elements,” Meteoritics 18, 209-222 (1983): tinyurl.com
32.A. O. Nier, “A re-determination of the relative abundances of the isotopes of neon, krypton, rubidium, xenon and mercury,” Physical Review 79, 450-454 (1950): prola.aps.org
33.U. Frick, “Anomalous krypton in the Allende meteorite,” Proceedings of the Eighth (8th) Lunar Science Conference, pages 273-292 (1977): adsabs.harvard.edu
34.J. H. Reynolds, U. Frick, J. M. Neil and D. L. Phinney, “Rare-gas-rich separates from carbonaceous chondrites,” Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 42, 1775-1797 (1978): www.sciencedirect.com
35.P. K. Kuroda and O. K. Manuel, “Mass fractionation and isotope anomalies in neon and xenon,” Nature 227, 1113-1116 (1970): www.nature.com
36.D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “Xenon record of the early solar system,” Nature 262, 28-32 (1976): www.nature.com
37.D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “Noble gas anomalies and synthesis of the chemical elements,” Meteoritics 15, 117-138 (1980): tinyurl.com
38.E. Anders and N. Grevesse, “Abundances of the elements: Meteoritic and solar,” Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 53, 197-214 (1989): www.academia.edu
39.W. D. Harkins, “The evolution of the elements and the stability of complex atoms,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 39, 856-879 (1917).
40.O. K. Manuel, “Noble gases in the Fayetteville meteorite,” Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 31, 2413-2431 (1967): www.sciencedirect.com or adsabs.harvard.edu
41.D. P. Richardson, “The Fayetteville, Arkansas meteorite,” Popular Astronomy 43, 384 (1935): tinyurl.com or adsabs.harvard.edu
42.O. Manuel and Stig Friberg, “Composition of the solar interior: Information from isotope ratios,” Proceedings SOHO 12/GONG Conference on Local and Global Helioseismology: The Present and the Future, 27 Oct – 1 Nov 2002, Big Bear Lake, CA, U.S.A. (ESA SP-517, editor: Huguette Lacoste) pp. 345-348 (2003): www.omatumr.com
43.D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “The neon alphabet game,” Proceedings of the Eleventh Lunar & Planetary Science Conference 15, 879-899 (1980): tinyurl.com and tinyurl.com
44.Peter Toth, “Is the Sun a pulsar?” Nature 270, 159-160 (1977): www.nature.com
45.V. A. Kotov, “A pulsar inside the Sun?” Radiophysics and Quantum Electronics 39, 811-814 (1996): link.springer.com
46.Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen, “Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage—a missing link in solar-climate relationships, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 59, 1225–1232 (July 1997): www.sciencedirect.com
47.J.H. Jenkins and E. Fischbach, “Perturbation of nuclear decay rates during the solar flare of 2006 December 13,” Astroparticle Physics 31, 407-411 (2009): Preprint: arxiv.org and www.sciencedirect.com
48.I. G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, F. Ludlow, J. Beer, M. Friedrich, G. A. Kovaltsov, S. K. Solanki and L. Wacker, “The AD775 cosmic event revisited: The Sun is to blame,” Astronomy & Astrophysics Letters 552, L3 (2013): dx.doi.org
49.Karo Michaelian and Oliver K. Manuel, “Origin and evolution of life constraints on the solar model,” J. Modern Physics 2, 587-594 (2011): dl.dropbox.com
50.Oliver K. Manuel, The Creator, Destroyer & Sustainer of Life, messages sent to the US Congressional Space Science & Technology Committee on 17, 18 July 2013 and 8 August 2013 (20 pages): dl.dropboxusercontent.com
51.P. K. Kuroda, The Origin of the Chemical Elements and the Oklo Phenomenon (Springer Publishing, December 1982), 165 pages: www.amazon.com
52.Max Planck, “The Essence of Matter,” from a speech Dr. Planck presented in Florence, Italy in 1944, entitled “Das Wesen der Materie” (The Essence/Nature/Character of Matter) Quelle: Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797: www.greggbraden.com
53.P. K. Kuroda, “On the nuclear physical stability of the uranium minerals,” J. Chem. Physics 25, 781 (1956); “On the infinite multiplication constant and the age of the uranium minerals,” J. Chem. Physics 25, 1256 (1956).
54.Oliver Manuel, “Why did our government deceive us?” one-page message to US Congressional Space Science & Technology Committee on 20 Dec 2013: dl.dropboxusercontent.com
55.Oliver K. Manuel, Climategate Sequel (4 Mar 2015) and Sequel II (15 Mar 2015) dl.dropboxusercontent.com and dl.dropboxusercontent.com
56.NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin, releases isotope data from the 1995 Galileo Probe of Jupiter (video and 1998 C-SPAN tape 98-01-07-22-1) www.youtube.com
Read more at dl.dropboxusercontent.com
Trackback from your site.