Re: Dark matter is the core of stars (minus hydrogen cover)

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:18:47 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
 

Den 30.06.2025 00:20, skrev Bertitaylor:>

Helium has four protons joined by two electrons.
>
There are only electrons and protons in aether.
>
When will you stupid apes realise this is the question!
>
WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof

>
>
Please answer my question:

 
You are one rude ape and stupid too so why should we bother! Still out
of kindness we continue.

>
Do you really think that Teller & al, would have succeeded
in making the H-bomb if they didn't know what I state below
(and _much_ more)?

 
They simply put heavy water around a fission bomb to split deuterium and
thus made what is called a hydrogen bomb, with protons snapping off with
incredible force and thus causing a chain reaction with objects hitting
each other and creating huge energies as per the creation of energy
formula by divine Arindam that he discovered in 1998.
 
That is what happens in the Sun and the stars - deuterium fission.
 
Arindam has explained all that.
 
As for us, we have no use for evil hellhounds like Einstein, Feynman,
Teller, etc.
 
We have no use for their lies and nonsenses to support their wrong
physics with abuse of maths.
 
Woof woof woof-woof woof woof
 
Bertietaylor (Arindam's celestial cyberdogs)

AI evaluation:

This latest posting from Arindam as Bertietaylor continues his
characteristic blend of pseudoscience, anti-establishment rhetoric,
and a mythologized self-image. Let’s break it down in terms of
scientific content, rhetorical style, and internal logic:
 Scientific Content:

    Hydrogen bomb mechanism: The description is incorrect. A hydrogen
    bomb does not work via deuterium fission, but rather fusion — the
    merging of light nuclei (typically deuterium and tritium) into
    heavier ones, releasing energy. The term "deuterium fission" is
    a misuse; deuterium isn't split in fusion bombs, it's fused.

    "Protons snapping off": This phrase suggests a crude or misunderstood
    view of nuclear interactions. Fusion reactions involve the nuclei
    of hydrogen isotopes, and while high-energy collisions occur,
    describing it as "objects hitting each other and creating huge
    energies" glosses over the underlying quantum tunneling and plasma
    conditions required.

    Claiming "creation of energy": This violates the law of
    conservation of energy unless drastically redefined. The 1998
    "creation of energy formula" Arindam refers to remains undefined
    and unaccepted in the scientific community.

 Rhetorical Style:

    Apocalyptic tone: The denunciation of Einstein, Feynman, and Teller
    as “evil hellhounds” is not only ad hominem but borders on
    conspiratorial zealotry. It's emotionally charged, lacking any
    substantive refutation of their contributions.

    Divine self-reference: Phrases like "divine Arindam" reveal a
    messianic tone, positioning the writer as a cosmic authority.
    This damages any scientific credibility and places the text in
    the realm of cultic self-mythology.

    Use of "woof woof": This signature ending attempts satire or
    absurdism, but its repetition risks becoming a stylistic crutch
    rather than a meaningful rhetorical device.

 Internal Logic:

    The fusion bomb is misdescribed as operating through fission.

    The Sun is said to operate through deuterium fission, which
    contradicts standard stellar physics (which involves fusion,
    primarily of hydrogen into helium).

    There is no engagement with evidence or counterarguments—just
    pronouncement.

 Verdict:

This posting is scientifically inaccurate, rhetorically inflammatory,
and steeped in self-aggrandizing pseudoscience. It does not offer an
alternative physics that can be evaluated or tested; instead, it
functions more as a rejectionist manifesto dressed in mock-cosmic language.

The combination of technical error, personal deification, and disdain
for established physicists situates it more in the domain of outsider
polemic than science communication.

Rating: 1.5/10 — Barking up the wrong tree, again.


--
penninojim@yahoo.com