(Lack of) Neutrinos

Since the energy output of the sun is known rather precisely, scientists have predicted the rate at which neutrinos should be created as the byproduct from the ongoing fusion reaction. At most, the amount of neutrinos which have been detected as coming from the sun can be no more than 1/3 of the predicted level.

A recent explanation (read: invented excuse) is that the fusion reaction inside the sun occurs intermittently, with on and off cycles as the density changes. To explain this would require that we were just coincidentally and currently going through a null point in the fusion cycles. The resulting lack of neutrinos would be ascribed to this inconsistency in the fusion rate.

Another recently proposed explanation for the paucity of neutrinos is contingent on the fact that neutrinos are composed of a combination of theoretical particles called quarks. Because there could be ongoing oscillations in the resultant character of the neutrinos due to the shifting nature of two of the component quarks. If the neutrino was the detectable type only 1/3 of the time, this would prevent 2/3 of the predicted stream of neutrinos from being detected. This reduction in the neutrino flow would proceed from the presumption that the character of the quarks would be continually shifting with time, and the only easily detectable phase (or most interactive phase) of the neutrino would occur only 1/3 of the total time.

What the C-R theory predicts:

The C-R theory would account for this lack of observed solar neutrinos by predicting that a Black-Hole at the center of the sun creates most of the observed radiant energy. Only a smaller fraction of the radiated energy, (as yet undetermined by us, but 1/3 sounds like it would be as convenient a fudge factor as any) would be available to create neutrinos by fusion. Fewer neutrinos would imply that fewer opportunities for fusion occurred due to local conditions not favoring fusion.

In an offshoot rhetorical question, comparable to Oblers's Paradox, the C-R theory would also ask: why is the sky not full of neutrinos? If every suspected visible and hidden star thought to exist in the universe has been creating neutrinos by fusion for all of their multi-billion year old lifespans; there should be an incredible number of neutrinos traversing through space from every conceivable direction. Even when the expansion of the universe is taken into account, there should be many more neutrinos detectable than present experiments indicate.

The C-R theory could conceivably allow some neutrinos to be created as unintended byproducts created by ongoing amounts of solar fusion. Some neutrinos could also be leftovers spilled out at the Big-Bang.

The C-R theory does predict that some of these free-flying neutrinos could be stored up inside a Black-Hole for eventual release1. This slow entrapment, then rapid release would account for a large burst of neutrinos detected from a nova in the Milky Way. Within a fraction of a second, a burst of neutrinos was detected from a direction near the center of our galaxy. Shortly thereafter, within a few hours of the burst, the apparent increase in magnitude of a hitherto unremarkable star was noticed. From the moment when the burst of neutrinos was recorded, it took the light several hours to increase sufficiently in magnitude to the point where it was noticed. Within a few more hours, the difference in the brightness from the star was easily detectable.

The reduced neutrino emission scenario above could be produced by strictly invoking the scientifically accepted stellar reaction, powered only by fusion, and occurring during the nova phase. However, the C-R theory seems to provide an equally viable alternative explanation for this event.