Key Findings
What the paper establishes
01
The BBN prediction is wrong by 3.5×
Standard Big Bang Nucleosynthesis predicts a lithium-7 abundance of 5.6 × 10⁻¹⁰. The observed Spite plateau is 1.6 × 10⁻¹⁰. This discrepancy has persisted for more than three decades with no resolution.
5.6 × 10⁻¹⁰ predicted · 1.6 × 10⁻¹⁰ observed
02
Two measured inputs. One division. No free parameters.
ISM lithium abundance [Li/H] = 2 × 10⁻⁹ (Knauth et al. 2003, direct UV spectroscopy) divided by convective depletion factor 12× (Pinsonneault et al. 1999; Charbonnel & Talon 2005) gives 1.67 × 10⁻¹⁰. Match to observed: within 5%.
2 × 10⁻⁹ ÷ 12 = 1.67 × 10⁻¹⁰ ✓
03
Photospheric destruction is physically impossible
The Gamow tunnelling factor at photospheric temperature T = 6000 K gives a reaction rate suppressed by 10⁻¹⁵⁹⁵ relative to the destruction threshold. This is not approximately zero. It is physically zero to any meaningful precision.
Gamow factor at 6000 K: 10⁻¹⁶⁷⁷
04
The Spite plateau's flatness is explained
The plateau is flat because the ISM lithium reservoir and the convective depletion factor are both metallicity-independent in the relevant stellar population. No fine-tuned depletion mechanism required. No BBN rescue required.
Equilibrium, not a primordial relic
The Decisive Calculation
Two measured inputs - no free parameters
| Input / Quantity | Value | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| ISM lithium abundance [Li-7/H] | 2 × 10⁻⁹ | Knauth et al. (2003) Direct UV absorption spectroscopy |
✓ Measured |
| Convective depletion factor (old metal-poor dwarfs) |
12× (0.8–1.1 dex) | Pinsonneault et al. (1999) Charbonnel & Talon (2005) |
✓ Established |
| Predicted photospheric [Li-7/H] = ISM ÷ depletion |
2×10⁻⁹ ÷ 12 = 1.67 × 10⁻¹⁰ |
Derived from rows 1 and 2 No free parameters · No fitting |
✓ Derived |
| Observed Spite plateau | 1.6 × 10⁻¹⁰ | Spite & Spite (1982) Match to predicted: within 5% |
✓ Matches |
| BBN prediction | 5.6 × 10⁻¹⁰ | Planck 2018 + standard BBN Discrepancy: factor 3.5× |
✗ Wrong by 3.5× |
Row 3 is pure arithmetic - division of row 1 by row 2. The 5% agreement between rows 3 and 4 is not a fit. It is a prediction confirmed by observation.
The Gamow Calculation
Why photospheric Li-7 destruction is physically impossible
Sommerfeld parameter η for Li-7 + p (Z₁=3, Z₂=1, μ = 0.875 mᵤ)
At destruction threshold T = 2.5 × 10⁶ K:
E = kT = 215 eV · η = 30.1 · Gamow factor = exp(−189) ≈ 10⁻⁸²
At photospheric temperature T = 6,000 K:
E = kT = 0.517 eV · η = 615 · Gamow factor = exp(−3863) ≈ 10⁻¹⁶⁷⁷
Reaction rate at 6000 K suppressed by: 10⁻¹⁵⁹⁵ relative to threshold
E = kT = 215 eV · η = 30.1 · Gamow factor = exp(−189) ≈ 10⁻⁸²
At photospheric temperature T = 6,000 K:
E = kT = 0.517 eV · η = 615 · Gamow factor = exp(−3863) ≈ 10⁻¹⁶⁷⁷
Reaction rate at 6000 K suppressed by: 10⁻¹⁵⁹⁵ relative to threshold
The Li-7 + p reaction rate at photospheric temperature is not approximately zero. It is physically zero to any meaningful precision. No photospheric lithium destruction occurs. This follows from fundamental constants and confirmed nuclear physics alone.
The three-environment model. ISM: production. Stellar core: instantaneous destruction. Photosphere: regulated equilibrium.
Four Falsifiable Predictions
What the steady-state framework predicts
Prediction 1
Spite Plateau Stability Test
Environments of genuinely zero prior stellar processing should show Li-7 values at or below the current plateau - not approaching the BBN prediction of 5.6 × 10⁻¹⁰. If the plateau were a frozen primordial relic, unprocessed environments would show higher values.
Prediction 2
Deuterium Gradient Correlation
Deuterium abundance will show quantitative correlation with local cosmic ray flux and stellar density - not just stellar processing history. CMB-S4 and JWST provide the resolution to test this.
Prediction 3
No Ad Hoc Universal Depletion Rescue
No uniformly acting depletion mechanism will be found that simultaneously explains the flatness of the Spite plateau and the full 3.5× discrepancy while preserving the primordial interpretation. Three decades of searching confirm this.
Prediction 4
Lithium-6/Lithium-7 Ratio
The Li-7/Li-6 ratio in pristine environments will vary systematically with cosmic ray flux - a direct prediction distinguishing steady-state kinetics from a frozen primordial ratio.
Interactive Simulation
BBN vs BFUT Steady-State - see the difference
Left panel: BBN prediction frozen at 5.6 × 10⁻¹⁰, unable to reach the observed target. Right panel: BFUT steady-state converging from the ISM reservoir to 1.67 × 10⁻¹⁰ - exactly the observed Spite plateau.