Solar wind and absurdities of modern science

Sun and solar phenomena are extensively studied, but as is presented in the link, there is a lack of a common sense explanation for these phenomenons.
Related to the solar wind, actual science is not able to explain the generation of radial electric fields able to accelerate the particles of solar wind outwards. Even such electric fields are somehow generated, there should be a specific pattern of solar wind composition at the level of Earth orbit, depending on the orientation of these fields.
In some cases, the solar wind should be formed only from electrons, because positive charges are eliminated from solar wind by accelerated electric field. In other cases, the solar wind should be formed by protons and alfa particles because electrons are eliminated by accelerated electric field. In the latest case, as far the alfa particles present a smaller ratio charge/mass, there should be two pulses of particles at the level of earth orbit at different time intervals.
But nature is not taking into consideration the absurdities of actual physicists and all components of a solar eruption (electrons, protons, alfa particles), independent on charge or mass, arrive at the same time at the Earth orbit level. It is like a wave front of a liquid is moving as a whole, and there is no individual movement and individual acceleration of every particle of fluid.
In the new theory, as far the sun is boiling liquid, the explanation of solar wind is based on fluid mechanics and the paradox of time flight is eliminated.
Of course, in the new theory of magneticity (in working), a macroscopic magnetic field can exist in absence of a macroscopic electric field. As consequence, there is no accelerating electric field for the particles which form the solar wind.
More about subject (how is possible to have huge eruptions of X ray or radio waves at level of solar spots, even the Sun as a whole is a faint emitter of X Ray or radio wave) in the book.
Of course, no new experiments are necessary for a rational mind in order to conclude that actual science is a monument of absurdity … But who cares!?
Mainstream science is not preoccupied with truth in science. More important is to gain as much money for small ideas and after hat is very important to write science fiction reports….
The link:
http://www.elkadot.com/ro/astronomie/Vintul_solar.htm

Best regards,
Sorin Cosofret

There is a grammatical error in the third paragraph ...
Instead of:
because positive charges are eliminated from solar wind by accelerated electric field.

it has to be :
because positive charges are eliminated from solar wind by accelerating electric field.

WOW correcting a gramatical error ... try correcting some of the science instead ... you can obviously read.

I have read more science books in my holidays then you in your ,,official and payd activity".

Again as any reader can see another unsubstantiated claim with absolutely no proof.

That first sentence shows the entire document isn't worth reading. It's not important if there's a common sense explanation or not. Common sense is just a fault in the human brain.

Yes, ,,common sense" is a fault in a degenerated society... which is our case today.

I agree, but it's not limited to today, refusal to let go of common sense has been inhibiting people throughout history. So it's perfectly fine not to have a common sense explanation for a natural phenomenon.

Perhaps there is confusion here between a common sense explanation and an explanation that non-specialist people can understand. The first may be no more than a widely accepted "mumpsimus",the second is important to real understanding.

Perhaps. But there's no guarantee that the 2nd can always be possible - at least without converting the non-specialists into specialists in the process. Some concepts just require several layers of understanding that can't be picked up straight away from one paragraph.

I accept that as the reason why I struggle with so many concepts. I don't necessarily subscribe to the view that because an one expert can't enlighten me, and another can, the second necessarily has a better understanding of the concept. The second may be a better teacher, or just happen on an explanation I can get my head round. However, I still think the distinction between common sense and non-specialist understanding is an important one.