No. Hydrogen, helium, lithium etc are not nuclear materials. It is the intense gravity that creates a nucler reaction.
Hydrogen contains a nuclear material, Deuterium. Yes it requires high temperature and pressure to achieve fusion, but much lower than what is required for many other elements.
Wrong. If it was a million times bigger we would be engulfed by it.
For the larger comment, it depends if u are talking about radius or mass. If the sun was a million times more massive its radius would increase approximately (1,000,000)^(1/3)=100. Earth-Sun distance ~=150,000,000km, and Sun radius ~=700,000km, so 100 times the radius would make it 70,000,000km, so it would get about half-way to us. Of course this is irrelevant because we are arguing about power vs power density.
A million times smaller and you wouldn't see it but the radiation would be so concentrated by reducing size and upping power, I wouldn't be able to reply to your ridiculous assessment. Consider other effects of the sun other than heat or light or gravity as well. A million times bigger? How long would a year be?
First you say "upping the power". When did I say that? I specifically said keep the power constant, but increase its size or mass. I also specifically said ignoring gravitational effects, since we are arguing about power output not gravitational pull causing orbits and stuff. As for the heat and light, if the power output was the same, the heat and light would be the
exact same!And the sun is a conventional power source then? Designed to heat your kettle and run your fridge?
You are purposefully ignoring the difference between power and power density. I was comparing different terrestrial energy sources to show you that power density does not necessarily indicate nuclear power or the presence of nuclear fuel.
There is still no nuclear material in the sun. Nuclear reactions take place in sun due to intense gravity squashing atoms together causing a nuclear reaction. It is not the same thing. Uranium and plutonium ...
Ok so here it appears we simply differ on the definition of nuclear material. That will make the remainder of the argument useless.