| Author | Message | ||
     Ivan |
Strange Anomalies in Science. This page is dedicated to the strangeness of some scientific evidence for which we may or may not know the reason. In some cases, a new science is called for, while in others is needed a better understanding of current science. If theory bumps against facts repeatedly, then reason must be called up to question theory, or reason 'fails'. An example is Seeing through Silver where light can pass through solid metal, in this case either zinc or silver. It could make for see through solid walls, or a better one-way mirror? I can imagine future spacecraft with 'see through' in their metallic walls. Maybe not too strange, but 'quantum tunneling' appears strange. http://focus.aps.org/story/v18/st4 Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Something strange is happening near the galactic black-hole. NewScientist article on Baby stars near galaxy's center: http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn9738-baby-star-found-near-galaxys-vio lent-centre.html Stars are birthing there, which is contrary to current understandings in astrophysics. How can stars form in such numbers in relative closeness to the colossal to the behemothic gravity hole there? However, if gravity is great enough in that region to fuse the heavy hydrogen, such as spat out the axis, then star formation so close to that black-hole axis makes perfect sense. But we don't know that, because for our current reason, gravity G is a universal constant. So these new million-years-old stars there are a surprise to us. Ivan | ||
| Naive |
To Ivan In general and special relativity extreme speeds and extreme gravity cause time dilation. Question #1 Is it possible that since every center of mass has an effect on every other center of mass, time dilation is caused by the change in gravity due to the movement of something away from other masses at high speeds (near or at the speed of light)? Or perhaps if gravity just is (a space medium or even space-time itself), then moving at extreme velocities (along it) might be something like approaching the instantaneous nature of gravity and thus could be responsible for the time dilation (similar to the way the collapsing of a Black Hole would seem to take forever to the observer but not to the Black hole itself. How would this relate to the time dilation caused by close proximity to extremely high gravitation? Question#2 Is a black hole / or any high gravity source spinning the space time around it at such high velocities that time dilation occurs, or simply the curving of space as general relativity says? Question#3 I guess what I want to know, is time dilation an inroad to understanding Gravity? Has anyone approached the study of gravity this way? If so I would love some links to their work and would value your insight. Question#4 If the curved space of general relativity is really gravity between bodies, at what point does the mathematics predict mass will collapse this so called fabric? Is the collapsing of fabric of space at this time equal to the moment of energy destruction/transformation into gravity? What would your Axiomatic say about these questions? I hope I asked this right. Question #5 If I was traveling in circles at light speed (like astronauts in that chamber), and someone was observing me, what would they see and what would I see (given I had control of the breaking mechanism and decided to stop after an hours time lets say)? I think special relativity says I will see them moving at normal time, but when I slow down they will suddenly be older or dead. Is this right? Thanks, Naive. | ||
| Ivan |
Time-dilation may be a function of electromagnetic information received over great distances as redshifted information, so this takes longer for us to register. By this reasoning, time-dilation is an optical illusion; or atomic-oscillation phenomenon, kind of like a slowing kitcfhen clock does not mean times is slowing. Otherwise, other than slowing or accelerating atomic clocks, which may be a function of atomic oscillations while traveling at high speeds through gravitational fields, hence 'gravitational redshift', there are no real examples of 'time dilation'. So in answer to your five questions, Naive, I am forced to consider them as answerable only within the parameters set by the mathematics of Special or General Relativity, as defined by Einstein or Lorentz, but not necessarily in terms of what actually happens in the universe. If time dilates because of redshift of light, or any electromagnetic wave (stretched signal takes longer to register here), then it may not necessarily be due to relativistic time, but rather to how this redshift 'slows' information received, though at its source the same time occurs unshifted. I think of time as a human construct, a kind of 'notch on a stick' marking change, but not necessarily what the universe defines as time. Once you establish a unit of measure of time, it is not dilatable or adjustable in any way. The reason relativistic math 'dilates' time is that it is constrained by the speed of light as a universal constant, so the math must adjust time (for the observer) in order to make sense of what is being observed at relativistic velocities. But from the 'observed' point of view, time remains the same, no matter how fast or slow traveling. The problem with Einstein's relativity is that it is constrained within the parameters of its assumptions and definitions, but all observable aspects of the theory may in fact have other causes, so the math involved in their explanations are superfluous. Relativity is an 'observational' phenomenon only, what we can observe given that we use light as our message delivery system, which is constrained by the light constant c, but if we were able to use some other method of observation that was 'instantaneous' then relativity would be meaningless. So what happens at black-holes? If light cannot escape there, then we simply cannot know. But we can observe the polar jets at black holes and know they are spitting out proto-hydrogen at near light velocity, so this is observable. We also know quasar redshift more than they're supposed to, but this may be due to the very great gravity present there, like in neutron stars, so this is really 'gravitationally redshifted' light coming at us. This leaves the question: What is gravity? Einstein's General Relativity only gives it a mathematical description of curved space-time, but no cause and effect reason. So for now, we are ignorant of what gravity is really all about. But time is whatever measure you want to make it, but no fair to start changing the rules set once measuring motion, or the whole exercise is meaningless. Still, Relativity has built up quite a following, though it is more math-faith based than real. Once we understand what is gravity, Relativity as we know it will disappear, except as a fun exercise in math. The reality is that what is being observed at relativistic velocities cannot be imposed on the observed phenomenon; the two are unrelated, which nixes a lot of SR/GR right in the bud. So, though Relativity is full of sex appeal, and immensely popular, I think it is an example of failed reason, in my humble opinion. Ivan | ||
| Naive |
Ivan, Thanks for keeping me up at night. I just discovered your Axiomatic Equation a few days ago and now I'm going back to read all of your posts (I'm fascinated) . . . while reading, several things occured to me: 1. Your description of energy and gravity reminds me of the behavior of gas. For example . . . what if the star does not just have a dampening effect on gravity, but might actually work to excite it similar to a gas. Thus making the effect of gravity less in local regions, and greater further away from the star. 2. On ecclipses: Since you said small (albiet infinitesimal) changes in gravity could be measured during ecclipses, perhaps experiments would better be conducted on the moon when the earth comes between it and the sun. At least you wouldn't have to wait for all the deep space information, and it would be less expensive if you were trying to convince someone to fund it. Space reminds me of genesis and human nature. 1. God creates light from darkness (blackhole - Hawking radiation). 2. Lucifer (meaning light bringer) is the prince of darkness. 3. In betwen them is the "matter" - humanity 4. We try to be positive, often act negative 5. When we get sucked into our most negative and destructive hour (blackhole), 6. We find positive redemption (axis emissions) as we come through it. Such inverses are the stuff of poetry: We never understood the gravity of the situation Until we moved away from the light. More difficult was travel through our dark destination Pioneers showed Ivan was right. Fools will say "no", and defend with big bangs Ideas of a constant force But they are generally, and relatively wrong Gravity is variable of course! Naive | ||
| Ivan |
Thank you Naive, for the encouragement. I think the idea you have about behavior of gas in radiant energy rich environment, that it expands, is something I also had thought about on and off: why is this so? What drives the molecules into a frenzy of activity, pushing away from each other into a larger volume, though it remains the same mass? It's almost as if energy gets pumped into those atoms so they are more active, less bound to one another, so in a gas they separate, become less dense. The analogy fits to what happens to gravity in a hot radiant solar region, that it is less 'dense', and that in the cold of deep space, it becomes more 'dense', which is what the Axiomatic Equation says, in essence. So in yours: "Thanks for keeping me up at night. I just discovered your Axiomatic Equation a few days ago and now I'm going back to read all of your posts (I'm fascinated) . . ." I feel I can relate to that, having spent many nights tossing around an idea, and wondering why am I even thinking of this, when I should be asleep? In fact, the whole conundrum started with some of us on this forum, years ago, asking whether it may be possible to find a kind of philosophical "theory of all things", where 'all things' included not only physical and material energy, but also psychic and spiritual energy. This was quite a question, a kind of ultimate philosophical quest, to understand how the universe works. One thing led to another, and I found myself contemplating 'energy' as being the universal, with matter only one manifestation of this universal energy, except for gravity to binds all things. This then led to trying to match energy with energy, which is how the Axiomatic Equation started to take shape, and atomic matter became the key to solving this riddle. You can find a trail of how these ideas progressed, with links to specific notes on this, on this page: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/6/23.html?1148054570 - and scroll down to May 7, 2006: 'BREAD CRUMBS' TRAIL. You'll see how this idea progressed from some simple questions to the hypothesis that perhaps gravity is not what we thought it was. The Axiomatic Equation essentially takes a Quantum equation, as formulated by Planck and de Broglie, and matches it against the famous Einstein equation, which already had been theorized by JJ Thomson (and an Italian, De Pretto published it two years prior) earlier, which we all know as E=mc^2 (note in the Wiki reference, the equation is not exactly right, as Max Planck noticed). However, while the left side of the equation showed mass in kilograms, the right side mass was also in kilograms, but something was missing; I subtracted a very tiny gravity (proton-to-proton) component from that side, and suddenly everything began to make sense. When I worked out a hypothetical energy component for all the planets, and using the Axiomatic Eq. figured out the gravity component, what fell into place (much to my surprise) was that Newton's G was not a universal constant, but had a linear progression of about 1G per 1AU (astronomical unit =distance of Earth to Sun), which again was a great surprise. So you can see how this stuff really can work on your brain at night, when you really want to sleep. When I learned the Pioneer Anomaly approximated this same rate for G as the equation showed, then I thought there was a chance it just maybe might perhaps be right, at least hypothetically. That's where it stands now, only as a hypothesis for what happens to mass and gravity at some distance from the radiant stars, where G is very low, and in deep intergalactic space, where G is very high. Of course, until we test for G outside of Earth's orbital region, we really don't know, so it can only be a hypothesis for now, though some things seem to fit, like flat rotation curves of galaxies, or why the gas planets sport such large atmospheres, especially evident on Titan, the Saturn moon smaller than Earth but having an atmosphere (rich in nitrogen like Earth's) that is ten times thicker and taller than Earth's. So a lot of unanswered questions, and perhaps testing for G on the moon during a total Terran eclipse might give us a clue, as you suggested, even if the difference is still very small. Well, that's about all there is for now, so the search continues, and clues keep coming in, that Newton's G is not a universal constant. But I, like De Pretto, am a dilettante, not a scientist. So, in time, we'll know. Thanks, Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
GRAVITATIONAL 'POTENTIAL' VS. GRAVITATIONAL INVERSE SQUARE LAW. Note how 'potential' (1/r) violates the 'conservation law' while the inverse square law, such as experienced by light traveling through a vacuum (1/r^2) does not, which may appear unreasonable. Here is a page that discusses this in mathematical terms: http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath527/kmath527.htm I suspect that gravity is something different, in how it is 'felt' throughout space, than the way light travels, at v=c. Gravity, or other electromagnetic 'potentials' may in fact be instantaneous, though this is not accepted theory at present. | ||
| Anonymous |
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/news/2003-04-15/poincare/ Poincaré Conjecture Proved--This Time for Real Alhazen's problem Don solves the last puzzle left by ancient Greeks http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1997/04/01/ngre01.htm l Until the Oxford Don proved it they said it could not be done. Hippias was a contemporary of Socrates whose only contribution to mathematics seems to be the quadratrix - a curve he may have used for squaring the circle and trisecting angles. Some times great work must be rediscovered in order to fully understand it. That the circle can be squared and the angle trisected has long been known. What it truly means is different. Ed explored the quadratrix as a child and but for brain damage might have been one of the greatest mathmeticians the world has ever known. I have copy of his diagrams and hope one day to meet him. Life is not fair often and I hope that he will find fulfillment in his life. That he saw something in geometry beyound what we can see I have no doubt. Any mind that can reconstruct and re-discover the quadratrix as a child using a child's compass and ruler is indeed special. | ||
| Ivan |
THERE IS 'DARK' MATTER, here's the proof. When I see a sentence like: " The Bullet Cluster is not the only direct evidence for dark matter. In fact, last year folks claimed to have found a "ghost galaxy" made mainly of dark matter and cold hydrogen, with very few stars" -Per This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 238), by John Baez; then I have hope that we may yet be on the path to discovery. The operative word is "cold" which is what modifies atomic matter to leave it "dark". Per the Axiomatic Eq. (may need Netscape Navigator to read Greek symbols), where there is an absence of light electromagnetic energy, higher wavelength radiant energy, then the atomic gravitational mass is greater than what we know here on Earth, in close proximity to a hot radiant star. Out in deep space where this light is very low, the gravitational G for any atomic matter out there is very high, some five orders of magnitudes higher than Newton's 'universal constant' G here. So all hydrogen and other molecular gas in that space acts as if it were higher gravity 'dark matter', with such greater G. Once you read the above article by Baez (we had corresponded long ago about this, BTW, but it went nowhere), then the articles below start to make more sense. The evidence is slowly trickling in. New Scientist: Cosmic smash-up provides proof of dark matter 21 Aug. 2006 BBC Science news: Team finds 'proof' of dark matter 21 Aug. 2006 Let's see where this goes, but the glimmers or 'reason' are getting out of the cold dark, maybe.  Ivan Ps: I agree Anon, that Ed could have been one of those for that math prize, maybe still can happen someday. But prizes are worth more to those who give them than those who receive, in my opinion, so no loss. I'm sure Ed understands. He's the one who knows what he knows. | ||
| Anonymous |
Thanks for the kind words Ivan, I still remember as a child drawing the lines that trisected the angle. My teacher at the time told me that it had to apply to all angles so I played with it and made it work. Decades latter I discovered that I had just repeated what Hippias did thousands of years ago. In my solution to the Billiard Problem I used the quadratrix to solve it like the trisection of the angle. Once learned it become a skill and explains why Pi is integral to my solutions to the trisection of the angle. The quadatrix is a powerful tool and all I did was demonstrate its application to solving the Billiard Problem as well as trisecting the angle and squaring the circle; using the same tools I used as a child. One of the reasons I shun publicity, public awards and public recognition and what drives me to remain out of the public spotlight is that thru most of my childhood I was constantly called stupid for not being as well socialized as other kids due to coming from a poor background; not being as strong or fast as the other kids due to lack of a balanced diet as kid; and then having a teacher call me stupid in front of an entire class because I could not spell well. Then when I worked my way to the top of my profession and had the rug jerked out from under me by co-workers that were fighting to retain their positions on government contracts that were being terminated for lack of performance. I could not take it any more and walked away. Years of breaking codes, and spy networks using the gifts I had. I could always see the patterns in the data sets that troubled me. The Conrad Spy ring was one: the Spy ring in our Embassy in New Delhi another: the theft of my laptop with the data on it that I could myself have used to reconstruct the operating environment used by the Department of State on its computer networks, now confirmed by massive pentrations of the databases steming from Asia. The breaking of the code talk used by Al Qaeda, like the old Navajo Code talkers we used in WWII. I still recall the time in Saudi Arabia and my identification of the Al Qeada network and why I left. I read all about them and then I read all of the releases by Al Qaeda. After that I turned my gifts to Abu Graib Prison in Iraq and the abuses of prisoners. From conversations with the analysts putting the information into the computer systems we gleaned from the interrogations; to conversations I overheard, and reports I read, I was able to rebuild the interrogation techniques being used that violated the Geneva Conventions. When exposed as I feared those tactics leap like fire around the Middle East. This ability earned me the hatred of many in the Government and many of the NEOCON's. it is something I live with and will live with until the day I die. That is why I walked away and shun publicity and did everything to keep those of the media at bay. All of that and the thousands I helped kill over the course of my career. I balance that with the millions I help save. In all I count myself fortunate. Am I angry, at this point I am too busy and tired to be angry most of the time. Will I again enter government service. Perhaps. Until then I wish you my best. Ed Chesky | ||
| Anonymous |
THE QUADRATRIX Trisecting an angle - Squaring the circle http://cage.rug.ac.be/~hs/quadratrix/quadratrix.html When you deconstruct and reconstruct Ed's final solution to the Billiard Problem you find it involves an application of the Quadratrix of Hippias that is similar to that used in Squaring the Circle. All in all it is a nice piece of work and could have in other circumstances have been used to justify the award of a PHD in Math/Geometry with proper documentation. Its clearly a masterful approach to solving the problem. Pity that he was not a citizen of the UK. We know how to reward men and women like him when it comes to this type of thing. A honorary degree and position at university would have been appropriate. Cheers | ||
| Anonymous |
http://descartes.cnice.mecd.es/ingles/maths_workshop/A_history_of_Mathematics/Gr ecia%20heroica2.htm Thanks Anon, The above link illustrates the application of the Quadratrix of Hippias in trisecting an angle. To perform the feats of geometry I did with regards to trisecting any angle, squaring the circle and solving the Billiard Problem I had to generate the curve first discovered by Hippias then go from there. In doing so I was able to prove that the Quadratrix of Hippias has other applications. Could I document this work to qualify for a PHD. Probably but it would take a lot of time given the damage I have sustained to my brain. I am starting to see the relationships now that I can compare them to the diagrams of the Quadratrix. I note I did this work while recoving from neurtoxin exposure and did the best I could in explaining it until the teams of doctors I was being treated by was able to find the right chemical combination to counter the effects of the neurotoxin I was given. I also note that my ideas and work was attacked by at least one poster during that period on this website. A hate filled man I suspect was using the name Marcus on another site. I ignored him for the most part and knew that my work with the Quadratrix was correct. I also note that when I was predicting earthquakes I used feeds from NASA, USGS, historical databases on earthquakes, gravitational readings from gravity meters, tidal data and a number of other factors and indicators to assess stress on fault lines. To do this I logged onto multiple computers and brought up simultaneous feeds on them and then performed an assessment of all the information I was getting in. Was it worth it. I think so. In doing so I was exploring the effects of gravity and trying to visualize it. It about drove me crazy. I have given up that and have settled down. I am going on vacation, working on my house and will be going wild boar hunting soon. I leave the rest up to the scientific community and the federal government that made me a case study following the Persian Gulf War. To them I say there is an indelible record on the WWW of my predictions and geometry. A copy of my briefing on the risks of further earthquakes follwing the great Sumatra Quake and the likely location of these quakes is circulating among many hands. This data is and was available to the United States Government prior to the great Pakistani Quake. I did my best and the government did not listen. Ten's of thousands died. In the records of DIA and my DSS security file there are also my comments prior to 9/11 when thousands died. In both cases I warned. Sound science, sound intelligence and sound geometry. Like ripples in the pound these predictions and work spread out around the globe until they come to lap at the stairs of the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court. This time I decided to publish my predictions and diagrams. I leave the rest to the scientists and PHDs to figure out. I have a wild boar to hunt and some mountains to climb and a family to care for. In my spare time I also hold an A average in college despite brain damage. Now you know what faced the Soviets during the Cold War. I was just one of the best and brightest of that generation. During that war I hunted Soviet Operational Manuever Groups and Independent Tank Battalions with Nuclear Weapons if I had to I would have destroyed most of Southern East Germany and Czechoslovakia. According to all rating charts I am 80% disabled. You should have seen me before I was poisoned with nerve agent. When I go boar hunting I will be on the ground with a black powder rifle and one shot to face the boar. When I pull the trigger I expect to hit what I aim at. Ed Chesky | ||
| Anonymous |
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/edwardchesky/detail?.dir=/66d7&.dnm=11f0re2.jpg&.s rc=ph http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/GreekScience/Students/Tim/Quadratrix.html http://mathworld.wolfram.com/IsoscelesTriangle.html In looking at Ed's solution to the Billiard problem depicted on the website above I duplicated the steps to generate an isosceles triangle within a circle. It's clear that in doing so the curves generated which form the arcs in the center of the circle which contains the triangle are respresentations of the Quadratrix of Hippias. It is not exactly the solution as envisioned by the ancient Greeks but is worthy of further study and would form the basis of a thesis for a PHD. In summary it is clearly a brillient piece of work. As a point of reference I have attached a link to Dr. Nash's home page. http://www.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/ Dr Nash's page in its simplicity and its content mirrors that of Ed's page and his postings on this site. Who is to say what insight these types of minds have had into the nature of creation. That is a debate best left to other forums in my opinion. It is interesting to note that all of these minds from Newton, to Einstien have all shared some of the same traits and said much of the same type of thing. The difference however with those that work with geometry is that they generate a result that can be checked and which, over the course of time, opens doors to places that other minds can venture. I also note that Dr. Nash's career mirrors that of Ed's including employment by major defense firms, in Dr. Nash's case that was the Rand Corporation and in Ed's case a number of other major defense corporations. In both cases what we observed was the functioning of minds that understood the theories of War Gaming and higher mathmatical and geometric functions. The exception being one had a PHD and one did not. Also in Ed's case what he did was also demonstrate and application of War Game Theory to Terrorism, Counter-espionage and Network Theory. His insight into the dynamics of Social Network Theory, War Game Theory Counter-espionage and Terrorism are clearly also worth more investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_theory http://www.istheory.yorku.ca/socialnetworktheory.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-espionage Again masterful work and worth more study. I wish Ed well and will hope for the best. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
When I go boar hunting I will be on the ground with a black powder rifle and one shot to face the boar. When I pull the trigger I expect to hit what I aim at. Ed Chesky Posted on Wednesday, August 23, 2006 - 04:32 pm: Anonymous Dear Ed, I pray that you return with the boar as trophy. I believe you plan the wild boar hunting to verify whether your ability to discern patterns is in tact or not. Should you test your recovery putting yourself at risk? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boar === The boar spear was fitted with a cross guard to stop the enraged animal driving its pierced body further down the shaft in order to attack its killer before dying. === Are there no other ways? How about predicting the ‘hourly weather’ beyond 48 hours? You had helped your doctors to identify the correct medicine combination to counter the neurotoxin given by the enemy. As I understand the modern medicine it normally fights the symptom but does not eliminate the cause. I am on ‘black cumin’ only from 1986 and God has kept me alive and reasonably healthy. See http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=cumin&translator=1&search=1& book=&start=0 In some places the black cumin is known as ‘onion seed’ and thus being a product of nature it causes no side effect. When I was in Riyadh, I got the black cumin investigated through the good offices of my neighbor in the King Faisal Research Hospital and was informed that the oil has no toxic effect at all. So in my opinion it is safe to take along with any other medication. By its very nature the black cumin would restore your health to the pre-toxin days, if you take it one month for every year that you had suffered the toxin. This one month per year of suffering is advocated for a natural medicine and it is my hope that it applies to the black cumin. My solution to m-secting an angle does not use the quadratix as I did not know about it until a few minutes back. Enjoy your vacation and do contribute even by joining the government. I do feel sad when our talents are misused, but we contribute in the hope that one day it might lead to immense benefit. | ||
| Ivan |
GETING WARMER ON 'DARK MATTER' This NewScientist article, Sky survey nabs four new Milky Way satellites, has an interesting quote: "Different models of dark matter make different predictions about how easily it clumps together. The particles in so called "warm" dark matter models move too quickly to be easily pulled into clumps by gravity, while slower-moving "cold" dark matter particles congeal into clumps easily." Note how there is now a growing distinction between "warm" and "cold" Dark Matter? That's the first glimmer of understanding what this is all about. But it's not really "Cold Matter" but merely how gravity G behaves in warm versus cold pockets of the intergalactic space. If the stars fail to generate sufficient radiant energy, then it is a "cold" region where G acts on matter as to give it more gravitational mass, or what we commonly call "Dark Matter". But if this region is made up of more hot stars, then it is getting warmer, so the Cold Matter is not so gravity mass intensive. At least, that's how the quantum side of the Axiomatic Equation equates it with the gravity side. Far from hot stars, Dark Matter exists because G is very high; while close in to hot stars, there is no such animal. Well, there's the Pioneer Anomaly which fits G growing in linear fashion by the ratio of 1G per 1AU, but otherwise, we see very little of this Cold Dark Matter effect here. Gaseous atmospheres is about the only other evidence betraying something is wrong with a universally constant G, even Mars has a thicker upper atmosphere than expected (see last sentence in article), but that's a whole other story. Reason fails with a universally constant Newton's G, but makes a lot more sense with a variable G. The fact stuff like this above quote now appears in print shows we're getting warmer... Ivan | ||
| Anonymous |
Srinivâsa Aiyangâr Râmânujan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan Sometimes a mind walks onto the world stage and forever changes it. Ramanujan had no degrees, was self taught and yet out performed the PHDs of the time. Last night I took a compass and ruler and reproduced the triangle in a circle Ed came up with. It is a very elegant solution. Cheers | ||
| Ivan |
Thanks Cheers, for that fascinating link to Ramanujan, what a mind. Sometimes I get weird brain storms, like the one that's been plaguing me for past few weeks. So I sat down with paper and pad, lots of statistics on Mercury and the Sun, and worked out Mercury's precession as a function of a 'transfer of momentum' from the Sun to Mercury's perihelion orbital 5 day period, per the inverse square law. Surprisingly, and I will go over all the numbers and math before I post it here, but it seems the results are nearly identical to the 43" per century, only short by a few hundred kilometers per century. I'll work it some more, but the slight difference may be accounted for my using only 5 days at perihelion. Still, rather intriguing. Will post when I'm ready, if all is correct. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
CAN MERCURY'S PRECESSION OF 43" PER CENTURY BE MERELY 'SOLAR MOMENTUM TRANSFER'? I worked out some numbers that show there is an alternative (and perhaps simpler than Einstein's General Relativity related solution), to understand why Mercury's orbit precesses by about 43 arc seconds per century. This idea had been on my mind for some time, but of late it got a boost when I read a post on BAUT astronomy forum, posted by Richard, aka 'publius', Aug. 30, 2005, which gave a reference I was looking for. This was the 'solar angular momentum' which came from a paper on gravitomagnetic precession: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0507/0507041.pdf , in which the value for solar momentum is: L_sun = 1.9E+41 m^2 kg s^-1 (1) [Note: I'm not totally clear as to what this value represents, whether it is the sun's equatorial spin momentum, or its momentum traveling in space relative to other stars; I found both are related to a velocity of about 20 km/s, spin as well as travel velocity; so I used it as a value of solar momentum, without knowing exactly what it is. However, this solar angular momentum seems to yield results.] If I were to divide this value of solar angular momentum, per the inverse square law, by distance squared from Mercury's perihelion, which is d = 46.0E+6 km, as d^2 = 2116E+12 km, which reduced to meters becomes d^2 = 2.116E+18 m. Now taking L_sun divided by d^2 we get: L_sun/d^2 = 1.9E+41 m^2 kg s^-1 / 2.116E+18 m = 0.898E+23 m kg s^-1 (2) I see this value as the 'transfer of solar momentum' to Mercury's orbit at perihelion. However, this result now needs to be divided by Mercury's calculated mass. [This mass was derived from Newton orbital dynamics using a constant universal Newton's G; though I think this G at Mercury's orbit is much lower than on Earth (about 0.39G), it does not affect how this equation computes, since we are consistent in our units, which are Earth based; so Mercury's mass is what we calculated it to be, though in a smaller G its structural density would be greater than now assumed, but same planet mass.] This gives us a delta for "??" at perihelion: L_sun/d^2/m_merc = 0.898E+23 m kg s^-1 / 3.302E+23 kg = 0.272 m s^-1 (3) I have a "??" here because I am not totally certain what this number represents, except it is meters per second, hence "velocity". I suspect this velocity is what is added to Mercury's perihelion velocity, where V_merc_perih = 58.98 km s^-1, or in meters, V_m.p. = 58,980 m s^-1, so at perihelion, the full velocity (for the 5 day period it is at perihelion) is V_m.p. = 58,980.272 m s^-1. Now, if taken over a five day period, this 'extra' delta velocity, what is being transferred from the Sun's angular momentum, works out as follows: (delta) V = 0.272 m s^-1 * 5 days (432,000 seconds) = ~117,504 meters (in 5 day period - per earth year) (4) So distance traveled (d=vt) becomes the 'extra' distance Mercury will be 'carried' by its close proximity to the Sun's angular momentum in that 5 day perihelion position. It should be considered that Mercury's year is only 88 Earth days, so this 'extra' distance traveled will not be exactly right for Mercury's year, but if using a time scale of Earth years, meaning this is netted out for our time scale, then in one century, the extra distance traveled, at Mercury's perihelion, is: (delta) d_century = ~11,750,400 meters/century, or ~11,750.4 km/cy (vs. real 11,944 km/cy - see below) (5) This valuation of necessity is "rough", an approximation at best, but it helps illustrate how the Sun's angular momentum transfers over to Mercury's orbital behavior at perihelion. Thus, it gives us a working number, one which can be adjusted for Mercury's full orbit within its 88 Earth day time period, so the final number should be higher. When I compared this result with the distance traveled in one century, 43 arc seconds, per this reference on the Perihelion Advance for Mercury, I find 43" = 11,944.44 km/cy. This is fairly close, though higher, than the rough calculation made above. The full quote is: "The animation below is not to scale. It takes 60x60x360/43 = 30,140 Earth centuries for Mercury's perihelion to advance one full circle. (One ellipse = one Mercurial year = 0.24 Earth years)." If we take Mercury's full 360 degree orbit, which is d = 360,000,000 km, and divide it by 30,140 centuries, we get: d_cy = 43" * 30,140 = 360 degrees (full orbital cycle), where divided by centuries, the 43 arc seconds become: 360,000,000 km / 30,140 cy = 11,944 km/cy (6) When this is compared with the "rough" calculation above, where (delta) d for Mercury is approximately 11,750 km/cy, we are in the ball park. In fact, the real number is higher, as it should be, though we are not equipped here to fully calculate precession for Mercury's full orbit, so only focussed on 5 days at perihelion, where this effect is greatest. [In fact, this may be only affecting Mercury's orbital behavior for less than 5 days at perihelion, but balances out over the full 88 days where outside perihelion the effect is much lessened, to coincide with Earth's observed 43" per century.] So the solar angular momentum may be a very limited effect at most of Mercury's orbit, but concentrated at perihelion. In any case, the point of this rough illustration is to give an example of where General Relativity's assumption that "... the increase in the planet's mass increases its velocity," (per Perihelion Advance paper referenced above), which explains Einstein's take on the matter, in fact the truth is much less exciting. Some have accuse Einstein of plagiarizing Paul Gerber's equation (from same paper): "The Perihelion Advance of Mercury is perhaps the most discussed of all in the solar system, in part due to its high eccentricity and visibility. Whilst the other inner planets, Mars, Earth, and Venus, are more predictable, Mercury has defied a satisfactory equational description for several centuries. A wide spread fallacy is that only Einstein's Theory Of General Relativity can accurately predict the PA of Mercury. In fact, German school teacher, Paul Gerber, first devised the equation Einstein used in 1898 - 18 years before General Relativity was published. Just like Einstein, Gerber offered no mechanism. Einstein is here often accused of plagiarism, as the GR equation for perihelion advance of Mercury is identical to Gerber's, including identical use of letter symbols, and identical use of upper and lower case. Einstein never mentioned Gerber." Of course, none of this proves my approach right (which may be coincidence), but it does illustrate that there may be a much simpler, and less "sexy" approach, to understand why Mercury's orbit precesses at 43 arc seconds per century. It may be no more than a totally natural transference of our main star's angular momentum to its nearest planet at perihelion. In conclusion, from all the above, I do not know if the 'solar angular momentum' is from the Sun's spin, or from its travel through space in relation to other stars as it makes its way around our galaxy, at about 20 km/s, though I suspect spin. It is this 'momentum transfer', in my opinion, that controls Mercury's behavior at perihelion, not some fancy mathematical formalism as Einstein concluded. Mercury's orbital precession is just a transfer of our Sun's angular momentum of spin, and surely not planet "Vulcan" as was once assumed. Newton's law holds here rather well. Ivan [Ps: There is probably more here than meets the eye, but that is all I can muster for now. I still suspect Mercury's response to the Sun's gravity at perihelion may have some relationship to how its gravitational mass is 'lower' in how it is affected by angular momentum, which 'accelerates' it briefly, though its planet mass is same. The rest of Mercury's orbit is barely affected, once this brief encounter is transferred, so remainder of orbital mechanics are same. The fact this also affects Venus and Earth, and other planets, at much lower values, is intriguing. But that will have to wait for another time.] Additional References: Minute of arc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcsecond Perihelion Advance: http://www.autodynamicsuk.org/PerihelionAdvance.htm Mercury (planet): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_%28planet%29 Sun: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun Anomalous Precessions: http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-02/6-02.htm Einstein's math on Mercury's precession: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticTwo-BodyProblem.html PPs: "At certain points on Mercury's surface, an observer would be able to see the Sun rise about halfway, then reverse and set before rising again, all within the same Mercurian day. This is because approximately four days prior to perihelion, Mercury's angular orbital velocity exactly equals its angular rotational velocity so that the Sun's apparent motion ceases; at perihelion, Mercury's angular orbital velocity then exceeds the angular rotational velocity. Thus, the Sun appears to be retrograde. Four days after perihelion, the Sun's normal apparent motion resumes." (bold mine) - from Mercury page, the planet - FYI. I mention this here only to illustrate that something unusual happens at Mercury's perihelion, where spin and orbital velocity are equal for a few days. 'Tidal lock' near perihelion? -IDA | ||
| Anonymous |
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MarionsTheorem.html http://mathworld.wolfram.com/HexylTriangle.html http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ExcentralTriangle.html In looking at Ed's generation of an isosceles triangle within a circle and his generation of hexagons while applying the Quadratrix of Hippias to the trisection of the angle and billiard problem it appears on the surface to indicate a linkage to Marion's Theorem, the Hexyl Triangle and recent work with Excentral Triangles. In all a good bit of work that that is on par with that produced by some of the best mathmaticians today. Cheers | ||
| Anonymous |
Thanks Cheers It was called thinking outside the box. In order to solve it I have to go outside the circle and work my way back in. Ed | ||
| Anonymous |
Triangle geometry is the study of the properties of triangles, including associated triangle centers, triangle lines, central circles, triangle cubics, and many others. These geometric objects often have remarkable properties with respect to the triangle. An amazing number of connections between geometric structures occur in triangle geometry, prompting Crelle (1821) to state, "It is indeed a wonder that so simple a figure as the triangle is so inexhaustible in its properties," and J. Wetzel to remark that triangle geometry "has more miracles per square meter than any other area of mathematics" (Kimberling 1998, p. 1). Triangle geometry lay dormant for most of the middle of the 20th century, but has recently arisen "from the dust and ashes that history has piled on it" (Davis 1995) by the use of computers to systematically study and geometric structures and their properties (Davis 1995, Kimberling 2005). In addition, experimental investigations using numeric approximations coupled with exact verification using computer algebra have resulted in remarkable productivity in triangle geometry (Kimberling 2005). | ||
| Naive |
Since we assume light is a particle (photon) that propogates at a constant speed, and that constant speed is not enough to escape a black hole, we also assume that gravity is a medium which affects the propogation of light (as we have already seen). Question: How can we really assume light travels at constant speeds across the universe if we do not understand the nature of the material it propogates through (or on)? Question: Shouldn't the gravity around us (solar interactions, and our own gravity) cause us to observe light speed at a constant as it reaches us (even if it does not travel at a constant through other gravitation forces elsewhere)? Question: Can't we turn our deep space probes' "eyes" back upon ourselves and measure the propogation of some light source from earth to the probe? If so, we might see the effects of (less of the sun's) gravity on light. I need clarification. | ||
| Ivan |
Does light travel differently through gravity? You ask interesting questions, Naive, on the speed of light through gravity. The assumption, Einstein's second postulate in his Special Relativity, is that light is constant while traveling through a vacuum at velocity c. I think all signal measurements from distant space probes are made using this assumption. The second affect on light traveling through space is its Doppler redshift. It was the anomaly of this Doppler redshift in the Pioneer signals sent and received that clued the team of LANL scientists, Anderson, Nieto et al, that something was wrong. The expected redshift wasn't right. I would think after a certain period of time, if the Pioneer probes are being drawn back to the Sun at a constant acceleration, that the signal should also return sooner than expected. So turning out deep space probes back towards Earth and exchanging signals already happened. But this did not confirm whether or not electromagnetic signals traveled at anything other than c. If gravity redshifts light, which we know it does, then can this be interpreted as slowing it down? I suspect not, that light is still traveling at c, even while redshifted gravitationally, same as it travels at c regardless of the velocity of the signal generated. I also wondered if perhaps light traveling through deep space, where potentially gravity is orders of magnitudes greater than on Earth, as measured by Newton's G, that this may affect how fast light travels. Does it slow it? Redshift acts as if it does, since the signal's full information will act as if it were 'time-dilated'. An observed event registering in our instruments, let's say a supernova, will take longer to fill the information received than how long it took to generate it, because the signal is stretched, or redshifted. This means if the supernova took 10 minutes at its origin, depending upon how far it traveled to get here, the signal would show observationally that it took 15 minutes, or something like that. Of course, understanding that the signal is stretched can help us reconstruct the actual time sequence, which is in a way what Einstein's time dilation does. The part about the universe expanding complicates this, though the expansion may be illusory, that no such space expansion is taking place; rather all distant cosmic light will redshift if G is so much greater for all that space dust and gas in between galaxies. So my hunch is that light travels, as an electromagnetic wave, at the velocity c, as Einstein postulated, but that if gravity is not a universal constant G, as postulated by both Newton and Einstein, then perhaps the redshift resulting from a variable G, greater in intergalactic space, gives us an automatic 'time-dilation' though no such dilation actually happens at the source. This makes time-dilation merely an observational artifact, which means that there is no Doppler expansion of space at all. It merely looks that way, which is illusion. So how can we measure light speed in deep space, such as at great distances between galaxies, or in relatively short distances as within our solar system? We know light bends around massive objects, which is why gravitational lensing works. And we know light slows traveling through a transparent material medium, such as glass or water, but that's about all we know. The medium slowdown may be due to atomic interactions, so light photons have to 'bounce' around before exiting, which would account for its slowing, but this is not the condition encountered in space. We now think light bends around massive objects because of gravitational effect on its velocity, but this then goes against Einstein's second postulate. I never understood why physicists found this explanation acceptable, since it violates Einstein's second. The only thing that makes sense to me, if G is variable, is that while light, or any electromagnetic signal, travels from high density G, then to low density G, and back to high density G again as it leaves the galaxy or star region around which it bends, then this may act more like a 'lens' to give us gravitational lensing. It would be like the reverse of entering a dense transparent medium and leaving it again, so the two would not be identical. Light is deeply redshifted in deep space, but less redshifted around a radiant body (i.e., it 'speeds up), but then more deeply redshifted again once leaving that radiant region. We see this in gravitational lensing where rather than getting a concentrated image we get multiple images instead, so they are different from a glass lens, for example. But this still does not answer the question as to whether or not light velocity is affected by this. So, without knowing any more than this, and some of this not even accepted by current physics, I would say there is no way to measure for light speed outside our little Earthly environment, such as in a lab. Does light propagate at different velocities over the great distances of space? At one time I thought it might, but never figured out how. So at this point, I would rule that this is an unknown. Probably not, but we just don't know. Of course, if there is something about this you know we don't know, share it by all means. Okay, all that said, in re-reading what I wrote, I had thought: if light is deeply redshifted in deep space, does it redshift less upon entering our radiant solar region, where G falls off (at ~1G per 1AU), so by the time it reaches Earth is it less redshifted then it was in space? Now that really throws in a monkey wrench, because then the Einstein time-dilation, as a function of square root (1-v^2/c^2) no longer holds true! The time dilation is thus reduced. So what are we actually measuring in the Pioneer Anomaly if light is less redshifted, and less time-dilated by the time it gets to Earth? So the space probes may actually be closer in than we think! Perhaps at this short distance, out to the Oort Cloud, it does not make much of a difference, but we may have the Anomaly wrong. It should be greater than -a=8E-8 cm/s^2... Now I'm really confused... Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Ps: After sleeping on this, I'm still not sure if a variable redshift, per variable G, would really make a difference. If the signal goes out and redshifts progressively on its way to the Pioneers (which are now silent, btw), then it would redshift less on the way back, so null result in terms of 'time-dilation'. If there were a probe launched with an 'eye' back on the Sun from beyond Kuiper Belt, and it was pre-programmed to send a signal, perhaps that would clarify things, since we would know in advance from the distance this signal is coming from. In effect, the Pioneers are probably where we think they are, and the anomalous acceleration is most likely close to what it should be, even in a variable redshift scenario, per variable G. My next question is: how far will the Pioneers (traveling at 'escape velocity') travel before the anomalous acceleration tugs back enough to put them on a very large elliptic orbit around the Sun? | ||
| Ivan |
Light faster than light? I found this article in LiveScience: "Light Travels Backward and Faster than Light" by Robert Roy Britt http://www.livescience.com/technology/060518_light_backward.html See both the graphic and video animation, and it shows how light wave pulse has a mysterious quality to it, like it 'knows' instantenously what it is doing, though the pulse itself may only travel at c. This is not gravity related, but illustrates that there is still more to be learned on what is light, or any electromagnetic propagation in any medium, space included. (My original source for above) | ||
| Ivan |
Ps: Solar redshift problem at the limb of Sun's disc: http://astroneu.com/refs/solar-redshift/ Gravitational lensing and solar redshift: http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/EinsteinTest.html "In the 1960s, a team at Princeton University measured the redshift of sunlight. Though small, given the Sun's mass and density, the redshift matched Einstein's prediction very closely." This solar redshift effect may also be a function of what I mentioned above, that light coming out of a very low G into higher G (Sun's <<G, at near 0 AU is unknown, but may be much lower than Earth's 1G, at 1AU) so there results a natural redshift of light coming into Earth's slightly larger G, which is our 1G (believed a universal constant, which it may not be) of G=6.67E-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2. So this solar light shift may be natural, if G is a variable. I also suspect that light velocity c is what our instrument receptors will always register, if measured in a vacuum, because that is what the 'light constant' represents. Do we know that such light constant works the same way billions of light years away, as it does here on Earth? If we postulate the universe is 'isotropic and homogenous' then we assume it does. But we do not really know this. In this paper, http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/6-1/Pope.pdf , by Viv Pope (Journal of Theoretics Volume 6-1, Feb-March 2004), it says: "The physicists’ first consideration, then, is matter and space, and only secondarily light, which may or may not travel in the space between those various bits of matter. This was anathema to (philosopher George) Berkeley. How, he would say, could we know of those bits of matter and the space they occupy other than in the light by which we see them? And as for any idea of light travelling in that space which is nowhere but in the light, what else could that be but pure nonsense? If only Berkeley had not stated his dictum ‘to be is to be perceived’ in the subjective way he did, the history of modern physics might have been very different. For instance, if by ‘perceived’ he had quite legitimately included not only human perception, with particular emphasis on the sensation of sight, but also the observations scientists make by means of instruments in all the ranges of response that instruments are capable of, then since just about anything is an ‘instrument’ in this sense, nothing whatever would be excluded. ‘To be is to be perceived’ would thus have been the tautology he intended it to be. For physicists ‘the boot’ would then have been ‘on the othe defensive. We've come a long way from the 17th century philosophical speculations on light, but we still do not seem to really understand how the 'information' in packets of photons gets transmitted. It may be that the receptors already get the information instantaneously, but are forced to register it as v_c = 2.99E+8 m/s because of the spacial characteristics of how distance is perceived by us who use this velocity in our eyes, and instruments, to determine space. We are limited by our observations in how we are able to receive light, so all our spacial relationships are determined by this limitation of c. If we could perceive light as 'instantaneous', a kind of 'spooky action at a distance' reported by Quantum physics, then our perception of space and time would be different. However, we are designed to recognize a three dimensional universe, which is why it appears to us the way it does. But not knowing more about light scientifically than our present knowledge, we once again revert to philosophical musings. So now it gets more interesting in the Machian sense: "For Berkeley’s phenomenalist successor, Mach, this implied a universal holism in which everything is directly and instantly connected to everything else, a consequence which relativists have embraced as ‘Mach’s Principle’, although not necessarily accepting – or even understanding, in many cases – the philosophy on which it was based. One of the physical consequences of this holistic principle is that masses do not move independently of one another, with free momentum mv, in straight lines, as Newton assumed, but are automatically paired and balanced in angular momentum cycles of the sort we observe in the orbits of all astronomical bodies [5]. This makes redundant the idea that all masses are connected by an in vacuo ‘gravitational force’ without which, travelling independently of one another in straight lines, they would inevitably disperse towards infinity." Who's to argue? Maybe both light and gravity have an instant interrelationship factor to which we are blind? Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
PPs: Concluding remarks in same Pope paper ref above: "But if there is so little practical difference between the two, then what advantage can there be in switching from the classical mechanistic into the neoBerkeleyan, quantum-informational way of thinking? One might as well ask what were the advantages of switching from the original Ptolemaic to a Copernican worldview. The answer is the same: that reversing the order of ‘light in space’ to ‘space in light’ is at least as significant as cancelling the idea that the sun goes around the Earth and replacing it with the modern view of the Earth going round the sun. Such conceptual shifts fundamentally change man’s relationship with nature. In the Copernican case the earth lost its Biblical uniqueness and became no more than just a very small body among countless others in the universe. In the neo-Berkeleyan, quantum-informational case the change is from thinking of the world as a machine to thinking of it as something more like an organism." Now we're really getting philosophical! But I think he has a point. It is also one more step towards seeing the universe as an organic holistic whole, in effect, a 'living' universe. I think it is, not 'God' per se, but in how it interacts within itself, infinitely. | ||
| Naive |
I was thinking about the nature of light, gravity, and the black hole which lead me to think about the very nature of the atom. It seemed the speeds and interaction within an atom must be driven by very strong forces. Earlier you mentioned that there may not be a "strong" or "weak" force simply the varying degree of interaction between energy and gravity. This made sense to me. After reading about Hawking Radiation and the way a Black Hole may recycle matter into energy I began to think: If something can escape a Black Hole it should carry with it properties of the Black Hole. I thought maybe within the nucleus of the atom itself is something like a Black Hole. Searching the Web I came across someone named Sarkadi (www.angelfire.com/wi/HolisticScience/atom.zip.) who says this as well. Perhaps gravity exists as function of every atom having a black hole at its heart. This reminded me of the "Fireball" experiment in which the collision atomic nucleii produced Black Hole like qualities. This reminded me of neutron stars which in effect seem like to be the smashing of electron shells down toward the nucleus of an atom (but on a stellar scale). Then I came across the Scharwzchild Radius as a measure of when any body of mass may become a black hole through this same condensation of mass (for lack of a better word). I don't know. I am not a physicist or mathematician. I just like theorizing after reading things. I am really interested in this topic and will probably continue searching for the answer until an answer presents itself. Anyways an elegant picture is forming in my mind in which nothing can exist without gravity on very cosmic and atomic levels. Furthermore it is interesting to see that atomic ionization works to continue this building block process of creation when the effects of gravity from large bodies (like earth or sun) cancels out the atomic gravitational effects. I just want to get your insight on this model of a Black Hole existing within the atomic nucleus. Is there mathematics to support or disprove this? What would it mean in terms of your axiomatic equation? What kind of spatial dimensions would have to exist for gravity to be instantaneous (the article on faster than light also got me thinking about this instantaneous stuff)? And can electrons really travel faster than C (as it says in the Sarkadi paper)? Thanks again for the patience and help, Naive P.S. The above interactions involving gravity and ionization as the building blocks of all creation as we know it, has a very divine quality to it. I'm beginning to think a few variables are missing from Einstein's famous theory. One as you have already pointed out is gravity. The other . . . is thought/perception. But that is a grand topic for another time. | ||
| Anon |
Naive, In what seems like ages ago I came to this website because I had an idea about the possibility of a micro blackhole existing in the heart of the sun. While exploring this concept in my mind I began to explore the nature of creation and gravity. This lead me down many different paths some of which included taking a trip across an Einstien Rossen bridge in my mind through the heart of a blackhole where time and space themselves take on a new meaning. In doing so I was only able to grasp fragments of what I saw. To say the least it was a very enlightening and frustrating experience. with compass and ruler I have replicated a tiny fragment of what I saw. When my wife was recovering from cancer surgery I gave her a poem, a card and note with a trisected angle on it to show her that nothing is impossible when you approach the problem from outside the box and have the help of some of the best specialists in the world. In the great scheme of things geometrists do something and then the mathmaticians and scientists like Einstien take it the next step using the work of the geometrists as a steping stone to a greater understanding of the universe. Such is the pattern down through the ages. Sites like this are important because they allow us to explore concepts that are out of the mainstream. I hope you will stay a while and continue the discussion from another point of view. My Best Ed | ||
| ANON |
Euclidean wormholes http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=000998FD-65C6-1C71-9EB7809EC588 F2D7 | ||
| Ivan |
IT'S A HOT TIME IN OL' - 'BLACK HOLE' -HOT TOWN Huge Black Holes Stifle Star Formation" "Galaxies can contain a large amount of hydrogen gas. If that gas is sufficiently cold and dense, clouds of it collapse to form young stars. However, if the gas in elliptical and lenticular galaxies has been heated to very high temperatures, it becomes unavailable as fuel for star-formation." This may be only anecdotal, but where huge hydrogen gas surface areas are 'hot' star formation is restricted; while where 'cold' the gas clouds more easily collapse (because higher gravity G) into star fusion combustion. This article gives evidence that near a huge Black Hole, it is hotter than previously thought, so star formation becomes rare. This fits the pattern of an 'inverse relationship' between radiant hot energy and gravity 'remainder' of this energy's interaction with the strong force of atomic nuclei, so gravity is what is left over: low radiant energy yields higher gravity per mass, and vice versa. We live in a very low G region, being so close to our 'hot' Sun. This pattern is explained also by the Axiomatic Equation, as described here: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/70/166.html ___________________________________________________ This is an aside, that perhaps the 'Big Bang' microwave background radiation may not be what we think. Personally, I am quite sure BB never happened, that cosmic light redshift is a gravitational phenomenon of deep space high G, so space (Doppler) expansion is an illusion. However, it does not explain why we register CMB of nearly equal distribution in any direction we look. Of course, it could be what was discussed earlier, that perhaps how light redshifts by the time we see if from Earth, the very low wavelength and temperature CMB may be a totally natural phenomenon, what registers here from all directions of an infinity space; by the time all ambient light from the most redshifted zones, say 13+ billion ly away, this is all that remains, CMB. But for now just a guess. Big Bang Afterglow Fails An Intergalactic Shadow Test ======================================== Naive, I agree with your earlier post, above (Monday, September 04, 2006 - 12:54 pm): I too see the analogy between the atom's nucleus and massive galactic black holes. How both are modified by the ambient light should be a subject of greater study, I suspect. I think of what we think of gravity as being no more than atomic in nature, what is left over from the formation of the atom, as modified by electromagnetic wave action in the region where these atoms exist, with each atom then having a tiny 'remainder' left over, what we feel as gravity. But this is not physics as we know it, for now, so needs further study and confirmation to become anything more hypothetical. Until we find evidence of this, not yet a physics theory, IMHO. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
"Roadrunner" makes a 'thousand trillion' calculations per second, and counting! http://los-alamos-news.newslib.com/story/1696-3231539/ Brought to my attention by friend Dale, LANL news: "IBM to Build 1.6 Petaflops Super for Los Alamos" http://los-alamos-news.newslib.com/story/1696-3231535/ "If IBM can pull off the Roadrunner design and deliver it on schedule, IBM will beat Cray to breaking the petaflops barrier. (One petaflops is equal to 1,000 teraflops, which is in turn equal to 1,000 billion floating point operations per second.) The biggest supercomputer in the world today, as measured by raw processing capacity on the Linpack Fortran benchmark test, is IBM's BlueGene/L supercomputer, which is installed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and which is currently rated at 367 teraflops of peak performance." "Petaflops" is a lot of calcs! Like 10^15 flops... and counting. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Are we strange in science? See my post in another thread: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/90.html?1158068425#POST1881 | ||
| Ivan |
Fascinating, Mohideen. It seems that we and Neanderthals are not related after all, at least not genetically, though we may step from the same tree. Their main limb was cut off, so we are the side limb that became the dominant branch. I wonder if the Neanderthals didn't simply die out, extinct due to natural forces or disease? Or did we kill them? At this point, I don't think we know. I came across this article in Physics News: Smallest Pyramids in the Universe http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/split/789-1.html Someday, this discovery may yield 'super' materials, far stronger than anything we have today, maybe 'metals' as light as mylar fabric but tough as tugsten steel; or with conductivity properties that work with the natural electrical currents of our body, like keeping us warm when in the cold, or cool in heat? We've come a long way from those early stone flakes in the hands of Neanderthals, or our own ancestors huddled by the fire some million years ago, listening to hungry tigers growling in the bush. | ||
| Ivan |
Mercury's 'spin' at its precessional moment, perhaps explained? Something not before considered by me. I wrote something on planetary spin and 'zero-point energy' back in 2004-2005, where I worked out the black body temperatures vs. orbital solar radiant energies of the planets to show there may be a relationship to the planet's spin. (See March 2, 2005: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/70/145.html and preceding posts) What this hypothesis said, in essence, is that if the inner and outer energy levels for a planet were identical, there would be virtually no spin; but if the planet's interior energy was higher than its orbital solar irradiance energy, then there would be positive spin (like Earth's); but if the planet was cooler than solar orbital energy, then it might have a reverse spin. Though this was never formalized into a simple equation, and remains a crude construction, because it is worked out with a series of cumbersome ratios to show the relationships, it nevertheless showed a relatively consistent relationship of solar irradiance energy at the orbital phase and interior heat. The more heat inside a planet, vs. its solar region energy orbital region, the greater the spin. This is not something easily explainable, though I have my suspicions why it works this way. However, it occurred to me, just today, that it may also explain Mercury's very slight spin, oddly enough. Here is how I think it affects Mercury: In my above post, Friday, September 01, 2006 - 03:26 am, I showed how Mercury's precession may be no more than how the Sun's 'solar angular momentum' transfers to Mercury's orbital (average)* velocity for the 5 day period it is at perihelion. But in that post I also copied, without future pretensions, this in the PPs: ""At certain points on Mercury's surface, an observer would be able to see the Sun rise about halfway, then reverse and set before rising again, all within the same Mercurian day. This is because approximately four days prior to perihelion, Mercury's angular orbital velocity exactly equals its angular rotational velocity so that the Sun's apparent motion ceases; at perihelion, Mercury's angular orbital velocity then exceeds the angular rotational velocity. Thus, the Sun appears to be retrograde. Four days after perihelion, the Sun's normal apparent motion resumes." (bold mine) - from Mercury page, the planet - FYI. I mention this here only to illustrate that something unusual happens at Mercury's perihelion, where spin and orbital velocity are equal for a few days. 'Tidal lock' near perihelion?" This was the key, that "something unusual happens at Mercury's perihelion", that made me come back to it. It made me think: What if the 4 days prior to absolute perihelion (which I read somewhere lasts about 5 days) the planet's spin is identical to its orbital velocity, so that in that short period, there is in effect 'no spin'? This is why in the past, before we had space probes there, that Earth astronomers would always see the same face of Mercury as it was most visible just before reaching perihelion, so it was believed (wrongly) that Mercury's spin is locked tidally to the Sun, same is our Moon locked tidally to Earth we we always see the same face. However, upon later study, it was discovered that Mercury actually does have spin: " The original reason astronomers thought it was synchronously locked was because whenever Mercury was best placed for observation, it was always at the same point in its 3:2 resonance, hence showing the same face. Due to Mercury's 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, a solar day (the length between two meridian transits of the Sun) lasts about 176 Earth days. A sidereal day (the period of rotation) lasts about 58.7 Earth days." (from above link, Mercury) So the planet spins, in a resonant manner, its rotation is about 1.5 times its orbital period, which means for the 88 (Earth) days of one orbit, it rotates once in about 58.7 days. So there is rotation, though it is very slow. But what is most interesting is that this rotation always brings it back to the same 'tidal lock' facing the Sun just prior to perihelion. Why? Is there something perfectly natural going on here? If we go back to my original musings on spin and relative radiant energies, the orbital solar irradiance vs. the black body radiation temperatures, then it begins to fall into place: When Mercury is approaching its perihelion, it is entering its closest position to the Sun, so that both its internal and external 'heat' are nearly identical, so at that point, there is virtually 'no spin'; but as it regresses away from the Sun into its highly elliptical orbit, it is entering progressively 'colder' regions, at greater distance from the Sun, so that its interior heat is now greater; hence it recommences spin. And this could be significant! But as it returns back towards the Sun, in its elliptical orbit getting closer again, and into a 'hotter' region, its spin again slows down to where we see it once again 'locked' into the Sun's tidal force; so from our Earth based observation, we see the same face again. In effect, this may be one more piece of the puzzle of why planets spin, that they are spinning relative to their position to the Sun's radiant energy. If so, there should be a very slight, nearly unmeasurable, slow down of Earth's spin at its perihelion (very slight because Earth is so far removed from the Sun, per the inverse square law making it a very weak effect), and a slight speeding up of rotation at its aphelion. Has anything like this been noticed? It is worth looking for, I should think. So Mercury, that mercurial planet closest to our main star, is once again yielding a surprise, that not only does it measurably advance at perihelion, of 43 arc seconds per Earth century, but its spin may also reveal the radiant energy relationship that may be powering all planets. The very high spin planets are the gaseous giants, which may be internally 'hot' but live in a relatively cold region of our solar system; while Venus, which actually has a slight regressive spin, may be slightly cooler inside than the zone in which it orbits (Venus has a nearly circular orbit, which makes it something of an odd ball), if this explanation should prove correct. But in the case of Mercury, the only time its interior and exterior region radiant energies are nearly equal is at perihelion. It is as if the Sun has determined Mercury's interior heat by its radiance there, but this heat then stays within the planet as it migrates further away into a cooler region, so the slightly warmer interior gives it a slight spin. Of course, this is all conjecture at this point, and not known science. In fact, I may add, that all the musings within these pages of Humancafe on gravity and spin are just that, hypotheticals scribbled in notes left behind. Perhaps someday, with the help of competent scientists, all this can be pulled together in to a full thesis. But I want first to know whether or not gravity, as expressed in Newton's G, is a variable, as it was described by the quantum equation I called the "Axiomatic Equation". First things first, the rest can wait. Ivan *(I think to get a really true measure of what Mercury does at its perihelion period, we need to land a probe with which we can communicate to measure the level of its acceleration as it approaches perihelion, and deceleration as it recedes from it; otherwise, all we can really work with is an 'average' velocity dragging it into precession through its orbit in response to the Sun's angular momentum.) Ps: BTW, here's the real mathematical solution to Mercury's precession, though devoid of cause: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticTwo-BodyProblem.html | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Someday, this discovery may yield 'super' materials Posted on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 - 07:18 pm: Ivan True. But I am rather disappointed by their extremely short life. Are we not finding strange properties in carbon nano-tubes? | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
It seems that we and Neanderthals are not related after all, at least not genetically, though we may step from the same tree. Their main limb was cut off, so we are the side limb that became the dominant branch. Posted on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 - 07:18 pm: Ivan Don’t you think moving closer to the root of the genetic tree increases the genetic distance between us and the branching point? If we are not genetically related to Neanderthals whom we resemble, how could we be genetically related to any other species? | ||
| Ivan |
Good point, that we are genetically related, but that relationship ended when our branch separated from the main trunk. After that, it seems there was little if any, and perhaps none, of the kind of genetic mixing I'd expect from interbreeding. I think this was the point of the article, but I may have misunderstood. In other words, we do not have Neanderthal specific genes carried in our genetic makeup. Otherwise, we are related only up to the point where our family branch sperarated, if I understand this correctly. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
… when our branch separated from the main trunk. Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 09:33 pm: Ivan It is an assumption that all life has the same root. That assumption needs to be proven by the evolutionists. It is my contention that we are the new seed of another tree of evolution. I claim so based on the genetic distance between us and other species whether current or extinct. It is possible that we shall be space colonizers and thus take life to every nook and corner of the universe. Such a capacity did not evolve from the earlier trunk is my claim. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
One pyramid to another! http://www.nuclearpyramid.com/great_pyramid.php The above article proposes that the Great Pyramid was a plutonium plant and that the plutonium was taken to Mars. Is it possible that the Martians colonized the earth when they abandoned Mars and that we are their descendants? How does one verify such a proposition? | ||
| Ivan |
Groundwave Radio, or Geomantic Energy. I came across this paper by serendipity, but it may have something of interest, if this writer is correct: http://www.icehouse.net/John1/groundradio.html Some experiments are mentioned, which would be fun to try. This is the first time I ever heard of this, had no idea such Earth energy existed. Can we use it? Can we tap this energy to run our electronics? I wonder, or is this another internet misinformation? Anyone know anything about this? If this is true, it would be revolutionary. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Charting 'islands of genius': Savants http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/09/06/savant.genius/index.html Ed, this one's for you. Keep up the good works. | ||
| Ivan |
I have to assume, Mohideen, that you posted this 'tongue in cheek'? Or maybe not?
I read this with great interest, since I had been inside the Great Pyramid, and it truly is awe inspiring. I remember pausing inside the great passageway and wondered, why is it so steep, why the peg holes along the sides, why the three large granite stones plug? I had no answers, but I was awed, even the large granite sarcophagus in the center of the bare room, vaulted by large granite slabs, it was something wonderful. It does make one want to believe this great achievement was other worldly. Or the mundane answer is that the king first had his burial chamber undergroud, covered by a flat topped pyramid, which was then the custom, and only later changed his mind and built the gargantuan Great Pyramid, perhaps at a great cost to himself and his kingdom. Anyone who had done any home remodeling can relate to that. He then moved the tomb higher up, with the airshaft aligned with Sirius, the Dog Star, which is a known fact. In reading this paper, I did have questions about any artifacts found that might betray the authors' hypothesis. Did they find traces of Plutonium? Are there are metallic artifacts that could not be explained by conventional archeology, something that didn't belong there? I remember the pyramid had no hieroglyphs of any kind, which is strange if this was to be a great king's tomb. However, in re-reading the paper, there was a word that kept jumping out at me, "obviously", and whenever I had encountered this word in the past it always made me pause. Is it really so obvious? Here are the lines that made me think that perhaps the authors are pulling our leg with their nuclear pyramid idea, pg. 9: "Obviously, if the Great Pyramid was a plutonium mill, it produced a great many tons of plutonium. ... The logical answer is obvious: the plutonium was taken off planet." How do you clean out all the plutonium, something that is 'hot' for a hundred thousand years? At that point, my interest waned, so I could no longer take it seriously. I enjoyed the hydrolic ideas, since I had seen other way out papers on this pyramid as a gigantic syphon pump. But then why none others were ever built like it? Or was this the only pyramid of note, and all others were copies, in a kind of ancient Egyptian 'cargo cult', waiting for the aliens to return? Regardless, the engineering and marvel of this construction will keep us guessing for a very long time. So I have to assume, tongue in cheek myself, that you posted this paper to amuse us, or perhaps the Meta Research people had that same idea. Regardless, thanks for sharing it, very interesting. I wish it were aliens, but my wishing does not make it so. Why Mars? Why not Zeta Recticulum? So 'obviously' we do not know what this pyramid was all about. My suspicion is that it truly was the work of ancient Egyptians, clever and hard working, incredible mathematical and practical engineering skills, but never duplicated again. The only thing larger than the Great Pyramid might have been its architects' and king's egos. Otherwise, who knows? My tongue is still in my cheek. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
RELATIVITY 'ONE LINER' Here is the Dictionary.com defintion for Relativity: 3 results for: Relativity I would have a much simpler 'one liner' to explain Einstein's Relativity: Relativity is a function of all observations being constrained by the speed of light c, so that any great distance or greatly accelerated velocity must be observed within the parameters of this constraint; if it were possible to observe 'instantly' such relativity would not exist, because there would be no light c constraint on observations. I think this is the defining principle that separates 'observational' relativity from 'physical' relativity: the universe may not be constrained by our light c constraint in terms of how it interacts within itself at either great distances or accelerated high velocities, in that it 'knows' itself instantly. By this definition, Relativity is merely a human construct constrained by the fact that we have no way at present of observing physical phenomenon with anything other than electromagnetic energy, which is constrained by the speed of light c. The exception to this is either quantum 'spooky action' at a distance, or perhaps gravity, which may be (contrary to Einstein's) felt as 'potential' instantaneously. This has two ramifications: 1. if we find a way to measure at a distance instantaneously, or 2. inertial systems exist only as a function of the light c limitation to observation, then it means that Relativity as a 'real' phenomenon does not actually exist, but functions only as an Observational-Relativity using light as the delivery system for information transferred, from the source observed to our observational instruments. In effect, Relativity is a human construct to accommodate our light c limitation on observation, but is not a real physical effect that may be applied to the physics of our universe. Therefore, the universe does not use Relativity if it 'knows' itself informationally instantaneously. Time does not dilate with accelerated velocity if information is transferred instantaneously; then time is merely a measure of action over distance, e.g., change, and not relative but absolute. What we observe may not be what it actually is doing, if so, except as an observational 'illusion', which means Relativity is only an observational science. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Gravitational solution to the Pioneer 10/11 anomaly, by Moffat & Brownstein http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/...11/0511026.pdf I came across this paper in my readings, which the authors seem to entertain the idea that gravity G is a variable, though they have it growing out at about Saturn, peak out some distance beyond, and then flatten out into a MONDian curve fitting that math. The G variability is a function of distance from the Sun, but not specifically defined as to why this variable should exist. In any case, the pattern fits Pioneer Anomaly, though not sure about the part where it 'peaks', since in mine the variable G keeps increasing steadily until about 50,000 AU, where it flattens out as a constant, which would make it more 1/r rather than 1/r^2, if gravity grows at 1G/1AU. Still, interesting that nearly two years later, others are beginning to look at this same possibility of a variable G. Ivan | ||
| Naive |
"Relativity is only an observational science". I've always thought this! How can we make predictions about the physical universe with only our senses as guides? Imagine a new set of sensory organs, and a whole new science appears. For example, we don't have "gravity" vision thus we can only see the effects of its affect. Our eyes only see electromagnetic radiation at a certain wavelength. And we actually believe we almost have the physical realm figured out? Perhaps instead of examining what we can observe, we should examine our sensory organs. We are limited by them. They are only suitable for survival in our little earth environment. We need to think outside the sensory box. Indeed our very notion of dimensions is strictly dictated by what we can visualize. I wonder if Ed (being the spatial savant) has any further insight into the paradoxical idea of categorizing physical laws through subjective observation? Indeed why do we have to take Einstien's word for it when it comes to curved space? For that matter, why is the sphere seemingly the "shape" of gravity? Is gravity causing spin and thus spherical shapes? Or is gravity a state of spin, or in a state of spin? Ed I think we need your help on this one! Naive | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
But then why none others were ever built like it? Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 12:30 am: Ivan The authors have suggested a test of the chambers of the Great Pyramid to verify their conjecture. Even if societies do not take the suggestion seriously, one tourist could take a Geiger counter and check the levels of relative radioactivity. Having said that let us speculate why none else was built? Hypothesis 1: After the monument Taj Mahal was built it is claimed that the emperor cut off the thumbs of every artisan involved in the project so that no other work of similar beauty would be built. Likewise whoever got that Great Pyramid built might have destroyed the skill after it was built. Hypothesis 2: The aliens built it and found that it worked but not well enough. They realized that the environment of earth interfered and produced a product they did not desire to have. They reduced the radioactivity to a harmless level and left. Hypothesis 3: They indeed transported all the produce to Mars. They designed the mill so well that there was no need for a second mill. As regards their carrying ultra hot products of the mill, we might surmise that they had the technology of transportation developed before they built the mill. Don’t we do that with respect to our own space exploration? | ||
| Ivan |
Dead stars provide Einstein test http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5356910.stm Interesting double neutron star system only 2000 LYs away, closing in on each other at 7 mm per day, while doing a revolution in 2.4 hours. Einstein's predictions of slowing clocks and expected 'gravity waves' have a ready stellar laboratory. The article's writer seems satisfied, but until LIGO shows actual gravity waves, I remain skeptical, though good results for Einstein's theories otherwise. However, this may be no more than what Naive and I mentioned above, an artifact of 'observational science' constrained by the speed of light c, which is what Relativity is about. As Naive pointed out, our eyes cannot see 'gravitationally' so we are blind to it, and are restricted to seeing with the light spectrum of electromagnetic waves. If LIGO was designed to register gravity waves, it should 'see' them here. However, if gravity is not traveling at c, but instantaneous, then nothing will show, since there would be no 'waves' in the e.m. sense. As far as time dilation and slowing clocks is concerned, these are natural gravitational phenomena, same as GPS satellites traveling around the Earth's gravitational field slow. Slowing atomic oscillations is a form of gravitational 'redshift'. I think there are easier ways to deal with Einstein's relativistic phenomena than his complex Lorentzian math, and that simply measuring light or e.m. red-blue shifts will yield the same effects. That said, if Newton's G is 50,000 times greater (as I postulated elsewhere) in intergalactic space than Earth's orbital G, then all light passing through space diffused 'vacuum' of gases will redshift naturally at near the Hubble constant. Measuring redshift and its associated time delay would give us a more accurate reading of Einstein's relativity than the highly complex math he created. The math is a model, so it may or may not approximate reality; while reality is what it is. Measure the light shifts, and you're getting a direct observational 'relativistic' reading. Sounds easy. Why had it not been done? Naive, Ed, Mohideen, Anons, maybe we'll have to work out the math ourselves, if others hadn't done it yet. How hard can it be? Ivan | ||
| anon |
I offer the following as an example of how far and fast Technological Society is progressing with regards to treating diseases and exposure to toxic agents. In my case I was exposed to 1200 times the normal level (a lethal) dose of organophosphate based neurotoxins, Sarin and Tabun military spec type nerve agents during the 1st Gulf War. To conteract this I was taking PRALIDOXIME CHLORIDE or 2 PAM Chloride for short. This drug provided protection against exposure to these agents and delayed the onset of symptoms until my body purged itself of the chemicals. While serving in Mexico I was given a second lethal dose of nerve agent following the theft of my laptop. Long term symptoms from these twin exposures included affects on the Central and Peripheral nervous System and Autoimmune System efects. These effects were confirmed by detailed testing of my CNS, peripheral nervous system and auto-immune system. These tests were performed using advanced experimental investigational techniques performed by some of the best neurological and autoimmune specialists in the world at some the best and most advanced medical institutes in the United States. Subsequent treatment following my exposure to these agents included advanced experimental/investigational automimmune therapy to counter act the effects of the nerve agent on my CNS and peripheral nervous system and tailored steroidal therapy to assist in regeneration of nerve coatings. In addition to this I was given an advanced drug compound to restore balance to the neuro-transmitters in my brain (CNS) that had been disrupted by these exposures to neurotoxins. Supportive therapy following the my drug treatment protocal included physical and mental rehabilitation to restore as close to full functioning as possible along with counseling to deal with the stress of the assault and damage I sustained to my CNS and peripheral nervous system. Subsequent long term testing and evalution have confirmed that the damage to body's systems has been arrested, that the coating on my nervous system has regenerated, and that normal functioning of my CNS has been restored. Total Cost for the evaluation and treatment I recieved has run in the millions of dollars. Spin off from the success of the treatment I recieved have the potential to lead to break throughs in the treatment of a variety of neurological illness and injuries such as MS, ALS, and Parkinsons Disease. Such are the advances that are being made in science and technology each and every day. One day once again I will pick up compass and ruler and explore geometry. Until then I have much other work to do. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
The Equinox Error: The Fallacy of Fall's Arrival http://www.space.com/spacewatch/060922_equinox.html Hmm... Today is Fall Equinox, by the calendar, or at least astronomically in how the Earth is tilted straight up with the Sun, so day and night are of equal duration. However, that apparently is not the whole story. If you watch sunrise and sunset, you would notice the 12 hour exact day and night actually happens some 4 days later. Today, on Equinox day, there is about an 8 or 9 minute difference! How can that be? As the above article shows, the astronomers are not wrong about the date, only the visually observable effect of that date shows up later. The explanation given by the author is: "The reason is the Earth's atmosphere, which bends the sunlight around the horizon. It is somewhat like peering around the corner with a periscope. The atmosphere bends the Sun's light around the horizon slightly, such that the Sun appears in the East a couple of minutes before it actually rises. In the evening the reverse happens—the Sun's light is bent around the horizon to cause the Sun to remain visible for a few minutes after it has really sat." Well, maybe that's it. Or maybe it's something else? So I got out my China made calculator, the kind you find at the "99 cents" store, and started punching. Let's see... the Sun's light takes about 8 minutes to reach Earth. Okay, how many minutes in a 24 hour day? 1440 minutes. Divide 8 by 1440, you get 0.005555. Okay, Let's multiply this by 365 days in a year, and times 2, because there are two solar events, sunrise and sunset. So we get 4.0555 days. Hmm... coincidence? I bring up this little equinoxical exercise, like standing up an egg on end, to show that the explanation given for why the delay in visually observed Equinox may not be the best, but in fact the better explanation, if not mere coincidence, is that there is a relativistic effect here, of the time delay for the Sun's light reaching Earth. If the Sun's rays reached us at sunrise and sunset instantaneously, the Equinoxal 12 hour day and night would fall on today. But because there is a time delay for the light to reach us, of about 8 minutes, the visually observed 'equinox' falls about 4 days later. Of course, this is all relative because if the Sun's light were "space warped accelerated" to reach us 8 minutes earlier than the event, in a kind of inverse-space-time Einsteinian universe, then the visual 'equinox' effect would happen 4 days earlier! But I jest and digress. Ivan Ps: in fact, thinking about this some more, if the article is right, that atmosphere causes 'curvature' of sunlight at sunrise-sunset, the visual effect should be earlier for sunrise, but later for sunset, so the effect would cancel! Hmm... I wonder if the author thought of that?.. Nahh, can't be right, since the days register as longer... | ||
| Ivan |
Compromise is called for, re Equinox anomaly above? The article says: "The reason is the Earth's atmosphere, which bends the sunlight around the horizon. It is somewhat like peering around the corner with a periscope. The atmosphere bends the Sun's light around the horizon slightly, such that the Sun appears in the East a couple of minutes before it actually rises. In the evening the reverse happens—the Sun's light is bent around the horizon to cause the Sun to remain visible for a few minutes after it has really sat." -- bold mine I think both things are at play here, both the light's curvature through atmosphere as well as time delay of light reaching Earth. Let me explain. The author's tally, if only 2 minutes at sunrise but "a few minutes" at sunset, is inconclusive, since if both effects have a 2 minute time span, that amounts to only 4 minutes, which is half of the 8-9 minutes difference. However, if in mine it is only figured for a 24 hour day event, rather than split into to 12 hour periods (remember I multiplied by 2), the effect is halved. So my effect delays the visual observation is half of the 4 days delay, while the other 4 minutes go to the atmosphere's effect. Taken together, both the atmospheric 4 minutes effect and the light's 4 minutes time delay effect, added together becomes the full 8-9 minutes observed, or the 4 day delay. Well, that's enough of a brain tease for this Equinox, my head hurts. Check back in 6 months. | ||
| Anon |
The delay in the time it takes the sun's light to reach us causes us to observe sunrise 8 minutes later than it actually happens but likewise causes us to observe sunset 8 minutes later. The net result has no effect on what day we observe an even 12 hour day/night split. And the calculation you did is a coincidence. If you keep multiplying numbers together eventually you can produce any number you like. | ||
| Ivan |
Thanks Anon, I appreciate the 'coincidence factor' as always. You never know what strange coincidences may yield, however, in the long run. Random typings on the keyboard may yield the same. Still thinkin' about it. My point was that if light reached us instantly, we'd see the exact equinox effect today, but since it takes time to get here, everything is moved over by a couple of days; the other two days are accounted for by atmospheric lens effect. But still thinkin'... something to do with Earth's sidereal rotation: Sidereal rotation period (hrs) 23.9345where the difference amounts to about 0.00262 from 24 hours, time delayed, factoring in the 8 minutes solar light delay. If the Earth were not moving in orbit, yours would be correct without doubt. But since it is in motion, I suspect mine has application to delayed equinox observation by a couple of days (half of what I originally posted), with the other half taken up by atmospheric lensing. Ah well, it was an exercise for this auspicious day. | ||
| Ivan |
Can Mercury's full orbit be responsive to solar angular momentum? More on Mercury's orbital precession, per post above, Sept.1,2006: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/97.html?1159038064#POST1733 (and later, Sept 12, 2006, on spin: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/97.html?1159030758#POST1887) These are just some random notes, not a real hypothesis: I mentioned parenthetically as a Ps: "I still suspect Mercury's response to the Sun's gravity at perihelion may have some relationship to how its gravitational mass is 'lower' in how it is affected by angular momentum, which 'accelerates' it briefly, though its planet mass is same." The assumption here is that if Newton's G at Mercury is a hypothetical ~0.40 of Earth's known G, so not a universal constant at Earth's G (though it may be 'universal' at a much higher, 10x^5 G, for intergalactic space, which is most of the universe - which would explain the Hubble constant redshift), then how would such a low G affect transfer of momentum 'drag' in relation to Sun's equatorial angular spin onto Mercury's orbit? Per Equivalence Principle, demonstrated by Einstein, gravity G and mass have an 'equivalent' relationship. So in lower G, as per Mercury's orbit (where G grows at the constant rate of about 1G per 1AU), the 0.40G would mean it would take less force to move it using kinetic energy, such as a rocket ship pushing on it, only 40% of force needed; and likewise, gravitationally, the Sun's angular momentum would exert only 40% transfer to Mercury's mass (mass stays the same, same planet). However, Mercury's mass is 2 1/2 times less 'responsive' to this momentum transfer, because per Equivalence, it is 40% gravitionally-equivalent 'lighter' in response to this transfer of momentum. If we use these ratios applied to Mercury's orbital behavior, here is what it may look like: 1. Assuming a 5 day (Earth days) period for Mercury's perihelion time of precession, by convention, how many (Mercury's orbital period) days will be where the activity is actually affecting Mercury's orbital behavior? These random musings are not exact, only to illustrate that something may be happening at Mercury's orbital G region that we had not figured on before. Is Mercury being dragged by the Sun's angular momentum, however slightly, all through its orbit so close to the Sun? This effect may be already minimal by Venus and the further planets, but it may be measurable at Mercury. Should we probe this further on future space missions, to see if Mercury's orbital behavior is not only all centered on perihelion, but also throughout its orbit? Lastly, I don't know if Einstein's GR addressed this issue, but it probably could not, since he figured Newton's G was a universal constant at Earth's 1G, as assumed Newton, rather than a variable in linear proportion to distance from the Sun. Furthermore, the issue of 'solar angular momentum' was not included in his theory. It was the Pioneer Anomaly that gave us the first clue, long after Einstein, though at this point the issue is not yet resolved. I don't think this this can be fully resolved without measuring for a 'variable G' in the outer solar system, however, and until we do, we just can't know. Our model of the universe is built on a 'universal constant' Newton's 1G, and if G is discovered to be variable, the model would need to change. But all this may be mere 'coincident' philosophical musings anyway. I leave it here as a note in an 'open notebook' of ideas, unresolved. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Face on Mars, so called. From this well defined photo by Mars Express orbiter, it seems clear the 'facial' features of this mound are natural erosion. What is intriguing is that given Mars's smaller mass, meaning less gravity pulling down the rock, why should there be such erosions, especially in the absence of rains? If the hypothesis that Mars, at about 1.5 AU has a greater G at work, around 1.5G of Earth's, then this erosion begins to look more like solid mass flow. Bouguer gravitational anomalies on Mars, allegedly, show higher readings for mountains and ridges than expected. This may be cause enough to enable solid matter, held loosely by Mars lower gravity, to flow down faster from higher anomalous G regions, such as mountains. In effect, if so, on Mars rocks fall flow 'cascading' resembles more like Earth's water enhanced rock cascading flows. It is possible the 'face on Mars' is just a natural phenomenon due to a higher 1.5G condition, enhanced by the Bouguer anomalies there, to resemble greater erosion than would be expected from 1G gravity. Anecdotal at best, but the 'face' may be one more clue for a variable, and higher, Newton's G on Mars. | ||
| Ivan |
Global Positioning System - as a follow up to mine and Naive's above "Relativity is only an observational science". In the Wiki page on GPS, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gps there is a short quote on Relativity as it applies to 'time dilation': "Time dilation I find this quite revealing, that though there is a 'relativistic' type effect of clocks traveling above the earth at high speed through a gravitational field (where here are said to 'speed up') the actual relativistic effect is essentially self canceling. Earlier in the article it said a mathematical formula was used to compensate for the light speed ranging Doppler effect: "To understand how this works, consider a local clock that is off by 0.1 microseconds, or about 30 meters (100 ft) when converted to distance. When the position is calculated using this clock, the range measurements to each of the satellites will read 30 meters too long. In this case the four spheres will not overlap at a point, instead each sphere will intersect at a different point, resulting in several potential positions about 30 meters apart. The receiver then uses a mathematical technique to calculate the clock error that would produce this offset, in this case 0.1 microseconds, adjusts the range measurements by this amount, and then updates the internal clock to make it more accurate." - (bold mine) So in essence, though Einstein's relativity explains this phenomenon within the 'domain of applicability' its mathematical formalism describes, it nevertheless is easier to simply measure ranging light shift and mathematically correct for it, which is what the engineers at GPS do. Observationally, this is all that is really needed, the 'slowing or racing clocks' is simply an observable artefact of what happens to them when they travel at high speed in orbit, traveling through a gravitational field. Ivan Ps: Here is another revealing paper showing 'null results' for SR in GPS engineering: GPS AND RELATIVITY: AN ENGINEERING OVERVIEW | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1768846.ece === 'Weightless' surgery performed for first time The specially converted Airbus took off from Bordeaux-Merignac airport yesterday morning and returned three hours later. During its flight, it performed 25 steep climbs and dives to create 22-second periods which resembled the zero gravity, or weightless, conditions experienced by astronauts in space. The surgeons operated only during those periods. === The total duration is 180 minutes. The weightless duration is 550 seconds, that is, a mere 5.1% of the total duration. The surgical patient experienced weightlessness for 5.1% of the time and experienced gravity, possibly more than gravity, for 94.9% of the time. Is it not a stretch of imagination to claim the average of 94.9% under gravity and 5.1% under no gravity as an operation carried out under weightlessness? Don’t forget that it is the patient that is the most important actor; most of the biological functions of the patient would have been under normal gravitational influence as the body responds to the average stimulus rather than instantaneous stimulus. | ||
| Ivan |
Dream Location on Mars, Rover's there at Victoria crater. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5388058.stm Actually, I find this very exciting, being a desert rat. Water, water! Amazing these tough little Martian rovers are still 'walking', wich I were there. | ||
| Ivan |
LIFE IS UNIVERSAL, ALL OVER THE PLACE! Here's some eartly evidence that life does not have to be oxygen breathing, nor sun worshipping, like ourselves, but can manifest in some rather bizarre environments: "Gold mind holds life untouched by the Sun" http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10336-gold-mine-holds-life-untouched-by-th e-sun.html If life can happen there, or in deep oceanic volcanic sulfur vents, then why not all over the universe? Perhaps it may not look like us, but universal evolution may yield some rather strange life forms, even some intelligent enough to talk to us. Though, they may not wish to share a table at dinner with us, unless we take a liking to sulfur soup. Try not to slurp dear. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Some Things about Gravity, and Gravity Communications. The search is on for 'variable G' in earnest. Here's my post on BAUT: http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=848288#post848288 (nutant gene 71) Read the thread from the beginning, quite interesting about LLR moon orbital data. * * * Something else, about the 'speed of gravity'. per Tom Van Flandern's calculations, gravity operates at much faster than lightspeed c, though not infinitely fast. The result seems to point to about g_v > 2x10^10c, which is ten orders of magnitude greater than the speed of light. If so, a quick calculation for how fast it would cross the length of our Milky Way, about 100,000 light years, yields this: c = 2.999E+8 m s^-1 g_v = ~2E+10c Milky Way distance (MW_d) = 100,000 LY MW_d = 9.46E+20 meters g x c = ~6E+18 m s^-1 so that: (9.46E+20 m) / (6E+18 m s^-1) = ~1.577E+2 seconds That's fast! So if we could develop 'gravity based signaling', we could communicate with the other side of the galaxy within some 158 seconds? Wow, that's about 2.6 minutes or less to cross the whole damned Milky Way! No wonder SETI can't hear anything using electromagnetic signals. Why would any advanced civilization be stuck at signals traveling at slow c, when they can get signals traveling at ten orders of magnitude faster than c? Obviously, we're not only on the wrong wavelength, we're not even in the loop of all the universal chatter going on out there. Of course, we have no capability to even send Morse code at gravity speeds, alas. So "hello? anybody there?"... silence.... Until we can build receivers that get 'gravity vibes', we're in the dark. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
More on variable G, a conundrum. I've run into something of a conundrum on this variable Newton's G idea, which I cannot at present resolve. When I was called upon my error in computing the variability of G for Earth from perihelion to aphelion, by Tassel's post on BAUT, he rightly showed how my numbers were way off. In fact, whether taken as a percentage of eccentricity of Earth's orbit, which varies between about 147 million km and 152 million km, or about 1.67% off the mean, G would vary by about 0.11E-11, vs. 6.67E-11, for Earth's G. However, nothing like this had ever been registered, so it leaves it a puzzle, as to why Earth's G should be so constant, given if a variable G is correct. Of course, it may not be, and I would have given it no further thought had the Axiomatic Eq. not yielded a result so close to the Pioneer Anomaly. However, when I worked out the Axiomatic for Earth's eccentricity, I got an even higher result, more like 0.2E-11. So this leaves either that a variable G is something very different from what my calculations, matching closely the Pioneer's acceleration towards the Sun, show or that Earth's orbital dynamics somehow mask the effects of a variable G. The fact that such a difference in Earth's G was never measured, I am forced to look for other reasons why this is so. All I can come up with, at present, is that it all nets out, treating Earth's orbit as one value for G, regardless of distance from the Sun, though I do not know why. For the record, it remains a conundrum. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Third time lucky on Mars? They missed finding life, almost, on the Viking mission 30 years ago, and still not finding it with current rovers, but they may finally hit pay dirt on the next try. Looks like Martian water is a peroxide, so highly evolved life forms should sport golden blonds. But for now, keep the probe's nose close to the soil, where microbial life is most likely doing domestic chemistry, or bounding around like little Mexican jumping beans. Viking landers may have missed Martian life\ http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn10361-viking-landers-may-have-missed- martian-life.html Third time lucky if we meet up with these guys flying around? Or "take me to your leader." | ||
| Anon |
You've calculated the Pioneer anomaly as a function of a variable G? I'd like to see that. | ||
| Ivan |
Hi Anon, I posted a mini-paper on it here, on the forums. The result comes in within half an order of magnitude for a variable G overlay, where per Equivalence the gravitational-mass of Pioneers 10 & 11 is increasing at about the rate of 1G per 1 AU. Of course, until we find real evidence of a variable G, the result may be coincidence. So at this point, my use of a modified Quantum de Broglie equation, E = hf, remains conjecture. At least, that's how I see the 'Axiomatic Equation' for now. If the Greek lambda "l" does not show up, try using Navigator, or the paper is hard to read. Cheers, Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
More Variable G and LLR, something else on variable gravity 'big' G. dG/dt measurement and the timing of lunar laser ranging observations by Kenneth Nordtvedt This is not proof Newton's G is variable, though the sinodic periodicity of G'/G shows even within Earth's orbital range, seems to be some variability, albeit very small. The author also mentions using similar ranging for our solar system, though at present this is still beyond our capability. Final Demystification of the gravitational constant variation Blaze Labs Research has an interesting paper on variable G, though don't necessarily agree with why this is happening. Note pages 2-4 showing Newton's G ranges about 1% within Earth's measurements. I don't think this was ever correlated to Earth's positioning relative to the Sun, though I suspect that the near sinodic wave of G's range through the year may have a similar effect. However, I would expect G to be slightly lower at perihelion (winter northern hemisphere) and higher at aphelion. Did anyone ever find this so? Again, the range is very small, but measurable, from upper G = 6.74E-11 to lower 6.635E=11, or about 1.6%. The balance of the paper deals with variable mass, per Einstein-Lorentz relativistic velocities, not too convinced of that. A variable G cum Equivalence is the better bet, in my humble opinion. Ivan Ps: Another paper: Seasonal oscillations in length-of-day http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/bib/pub/str9603/9603.pdf | ||
| Ivan |
Why not just a transfer of angular momentum? Here's what 'dragging space-time' looks like, per Einstein's theory: "The satellites orbit Earth so that they cross each other's paths, making the shape of the letter "X." Each orbit has its own plane, the imaginary flat field around which the satellite circles. The two researchers determined the central plane of the combined two-satellite system. The University of Maryland member of the team, Erricos Pavlis, says the laser beam measurements of the satellites' location showed that the swirling space and time around Earth caused a shift in this plane of about two meters per year in the direction of the Earth's rotation. Mr. Pavlis says the measurement agrees 99 percent with what Einstein's theory predicted, with a margin of error of five to 10 percent. "Now, obviously it would have been much greater news if we had proven Einstein was wrong, but I think we are very satisfied with the present result to a 99 percent correct prediction and confirmation of that prediction," said Mr. Pavlis." -bold mine. http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2004-10/2004-10-21-voa131.cfm?CFID=660872 69&CFTOKEN=23651146 But why could this not be merely Earth's mass angular momentum transferred onto the orbiting satellites? After all, they are both in the same direction. I think Ockhams's razor would vote for the latter. Another idea: Does Earth's spin vary? Does it slow ever so slightly at perihelion and accelerate slightly at aphelion? Anybody know? Here is the closest I could get to an answer on this question, notice the annual variations, but it is still not a good enough answer, explanations foggy: http://geology.about.com/library/weekly/aa090797.htm Blaming the seasons, or weather? Really! Not. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
"But why could this not be merely Earth's mass angular momentum transferred onto the orbiting satellites?" This is right on the money. A transfer of Earth's angular momentum is what was measured in this experiment. It's a consequence of general relativity known as the Lense-Thirring effect. | ||
| Ivan |
Cool! The Lense-Thirring effect sounds simple enough, and totally sensible. The angular momentum of a larger mass is transferred onto the orbital behavior of a smaller mass. How is that different from Mercury's precession? I would think they are the same. Could this not be explained in some easier methodology than relativistic math? I should think it doable, or as Henry David Thoreau had said "simplify." | ||
| Anon |
"Could this not be explained in some easier methodology than relativistic math?" This would be kind of circular as the framework of general relativity provides the mechanism for the momentum transfer in the first place. Newtonian physics does not provide a mechanism for momentum transfer across a vacuum. Like much of general relativity, this effect isn't so much explained by relativity as it is predicted by relativity. Lense and Thirring in studying general relativity realized that if it's right, this effect must be present. That it seemingly is present is very strong evidence that general relativity is fundamentally correct. This effect is no doubt a factor in Mercury's orbit but it is very small. Other relativistic effects contribute much more towards Mercury's perihelion advance. | ||
| Ivan |
Hurricane on Saturn? Ivan's hypothesis. Saturn's Freak One-Eyed Monster is a hurricane of mega proportions. This tempest is 5,000 miles wide with a clear eye in the center, and about some 45 miles deep. But it is stationary, much like Jupiter's Big Red, which also appear stationary within the 250 mph cycling atmosphere. It is the 'stationary' part of it that is such a puzzle here, not necessarily its huge girth. Also a mystery is that other smaller storms can form and merge with the larger one, or in Saturn's case, many small vortex like storms, or 'pearls', following the atmospheric bands. On Saturn, these pearl lie storms seem very common at some latitudes, such as picture here. I think the Saturn 'hot spot' has a lot to do with this storm. Here is my 'hypothesis' on this mega storm: I suspect that unlike Earth, but also like Earth's ozone hole over the Icelandic volcano, there is a planetary 'hot spot' relationship between what is happening on Saturn, and Jupiter, where rage those mega storms. In the case of Jupiter, the Giant Red Spot is stationary, or anchored to the planet's rocky core, or it seems, and the same seems true for the polar mega hurricane on Saturn. So the apparent hypothesis is that these storms are generated by 'hot' atmospheric conditions over these particular hot spots. On Earth, we do not have the same dynamics as on these gas giant planets, and this could be once again anecdotal to different Newton's G readings, where on Earth it is a very light 1G, while on Jupiter an already significant ~5G, and Saturn still greater ~10G, so the dynamics are different. What seems to power storms on Earth is oceanic temperatures, causing for example the tropical storms off the coast of Africa, then picking up energy over the warm waters of the eastern Atlantic, turning into hurricane storms over the Gulf, or riding the warm Gulf waters up the coast of the Americas. On these gas giants, because of a hypothetical higher G, the dynamics are more rooted to the planet's surface than to the shifting oceans, if any, so that a 'hot spot' such as on the souther pole of Saturn, or underneath Jupiter's vast atmosphere, will generate storm conditions that on occasion become super storms, or hurricanes for their atmospheres. Different G worlds gives different dynamics, so we do not get hurricanes forming over hot spot volcanoes on Earth, as a rule, but may be getting just that result on higher G planets, such as the gas giants. So Jupiter's centuries enduring Big Red may be one such raging hurricane storm just at the surface over a hot spot, but though extended and very large, it is not deep enough but rather diluted over the atmosphere over a large area, so that a visible 'eye' of the storm is not apparent. Unlike this Big Red, the smaller polar Saturn storm is more concentrated on its hot spot, in a more concentrated Saturn G, so it rages tightly around a visible eye. This hypothesis satisfies these two conditions, of a raging storm over gas giant planet core hot spots, but it does not answer why there are mini storms created that seem to float in the atmosphere and sometimes merge with the larger storms. I think once a storm is created over a hot spot, it can either have a life of its own and drift within the atmosphere, much as Earth hurricanes do, or it can remain fixed over the hot spot. In the case of Saturnian pearl like storms, they obviiously drift, but remain locked within the Saturnian jetstreams, so they band around the planet; in the case of the great Big Red Spot on Jupiter, it remains anchored to the surface hot spot; and in the case of smaller storms on Jupiter, they tend to drift with the latitudinal and elevation within which they are formed, so at times will merge with other storms into larger storms. These are atmospheric dynamics not witnessed within Earth's low 1G, but may be possible within the gas giants's greater higher Gs, so different storms for different planets. One more anecdotal evidence of higher ~10G on Saturn is the fact that its rings, though of very low physical mass, have an atmosphere, as noted here. So higher G means denser gravitational-mass, which means denser atmospheric behavior, and the end result is super massive storms over rocky planetary core 'hot spots' for the gas giants. Anyhow, this is the model that seems to make the most sense, per my hypothesis of higher G in the outer solar system's gas giants. Now, let us watch for more empirical and observational evidence, if this is true, fingers crosed. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
We might have been banged more often than we know, like a cosmic pin-ball solar system. Here's relatively new evidence: Ancient Crash, Epic Wave http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/ancient-crash-epic-wave/2006111412140999002 0?cid=2194 There seems to be evidence of very large, much larger than imagined, waves crashing on our shores. I personally have seen large deposits of marine sea shells in the foothills of the Cleveland National Forest, about 25 miles in from the Pacific shore. Not just some pockets here and there, but whole hillsides full of shells. I couldn't imagine a wave that large, but after reading this article, it might have been possible. The shells were not fossilized, but still calcium shells, so must have happened in thousands of years rather than millions of years ago. Yikes! That could only happen from a deep impact hit, it would seem. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Ed, any earthquakes triangulating on the California coast? I'm seeing a lot of Pacific rim activity last few days, including small but persistent activity along the lower San Andreas fault. It feels like there's a good one coming, maybe 5 or more. Here's the page with world activity: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/ See the list of 2.5 mag or better, and then also check out the USA listing, lots of little ones down by the Salton Sea and Mexican border. Note Mount St. Helen's yesterday, 3.4, pretty shalow, maybe indicating movement of tectonics: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsus/Quakes/uw11190420.php Anything coming up on your scope? Thanks. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Ivan, I have not looked at the California data in detail but have a nagging suspicion from looking at the press reports that a 5-6 quake is building when I don't know. I am and remain concerned about Mexico city and the quake activity and volcanic activity in Colima. A recent 5.7 just occured there. With the pumping of water from the aquifer under MExico city and the geological structure of the subsurface the Mexicans have increased the danger of an earthquake by increasing the amplifying effects of earthquakes by pumping the water out. As they pump the water out, the substructure becomes more subseptable to vibrations. Each new earthquake in the region then has a greater affect on increasing the stress on the faults underlaying mexico city. That is what I am currently looking at the present time. Hope this helps Ed | ||
| Anon |
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20020801gravityfield.html SATELLITES REVEAL A MYSTERY OF LARGE CHANGE IN EARTH'S GRAVITY FIELD I think it important to note that what I have been doing with earthquake prediction in the macro level has been based upon an evalution of the effects of the gravitational bulge at the earths equator and the stresses of Post Glacial Rebound coupled to solar and lunar tidal influences with regards to quake prediction coupled to historical data on the amount of energy locked in earthquake faults. Roughly 6 hours after I posted my assessment of that a 5-6 quake was building a 6.0 quake hit the pacific plate Region: CENTRAL EAST PACIFIC RISE Geographic coordinates: 4.491S, 104.752W Magnitude: 6.0 Mw Depth: 10 km Universal Time (UTC): 19 Nov 2006 18:57:33 Time near the Epicenter: 19 Nov 2006 11:57:33 Local time in your area: 19 Nov 2006 13:57:33 To assess the data for risk of earthquakes IAW my model of gravitational influences on crustal faults is time consuming and fatiguing with everything else I have on my plate at the moment. Ed | ||
| Anon |
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/figures/PIA04652-fig1.jpg The link posted above is to a gravity map developed from the latest NASA satellight mission. The gravitational hotspots coincide with the areas I was predicting earthquakes for using the data feeds and historical databases I had access to at the university. I note one gravitational hotspot lays in southern CA. To do what I did with earthquake predications I had to work in the blind until the map I posted above was created. It is with some relief that it matches my assessment of gravitational field interaction based on all source analysis Ed | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/jul/HQ_03244_gravity_success.html Now I know what made him one of the best analysts in the DOD and the history of Cryptology and why KGB poisoned him to take him out of the game to get his laptop. With nothing but a home computer he charted the earth's gravitational field with nothing but his mind, in the dark alone using open source data available to everyone on the planet. What a mind Friendly Ghost | ||
| Assemblies of God |
A gift from God, Osama used his gift at engineering to bring dowm the Twin Towers, our Embassies in Africa, and damage the USS Cole. A Christian used his gift to chart the gravitational field of the Earth and the forces affecting it and predicted earthquakes that matched a map created by the finest and most advanced of NASA and European Satellights. The Christian used his gift to lift us up to a new level, while Osama took us down. Such gifts are rare and come from God. May God Bless the United States and its Scientists A Senior Leader in the Assemblies of God | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Roughly 6 hours after I posted my assessment of that a 5-6 quake was building a 6.0 quake hit the pacific plate. Ed Posted on Monday, November 20, 2006 - 04:49 am: Anon May I call upon the academics who read this post to prepare evacuation strategies by the hour for the population centers of USA if not the whole world so that loss of lives could be avoided even if we could not avoid the loss of infrastructure. May I request Ed to publish his predictions in this page as soon as he makes them in so far as such predictions affect the population centers? With prayers to God. | ||
| Anon |
When I looked at the gravity map and compared it to my predictions of earthquakes something from the Bible came to mind. I think it appropriate to mention it at this juncture. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day The quest for knowledge is often terrifying to those that seek the truth. The forces of creation are more powerful than can be imagined. Greater than all of the nuclear weapons on the face of the planet. In the great dance of forces we have through our actions upset the balance of the systems of systems that governs this planet. With our contributions to global climate warming the great forces are seeking a new equilibrium. Until that is reached we face change on a scale not seen before. Earthquakes, floods, fires, pestilence and disease are to come. This is not new we have endured and survived them in the past. With advances in technology, alternative fuels our technological civilization will endure the change. What comes after has yet to be written. With the launch of the Gravity space probe and its map we have been given a glimpse into some of the forces that influence our world. Einstien, Newton and the rest of the greats of science saw these same forces yet lacked the technology to paint a picture as NASA has done. They used the tools of the time words, math and geometry to paint a picture of what they saw. From it our technological civilization rose. In time our understanding of gravity will grow and we will embark on the great journey to the stars in fulfillment of our destiny. To our decendents that live through this time of change our wars of ideology and religion will look like madness to them. On the great starships that will someday be built men of faith will continue to argue over the nature of god, looked after by technocrats that guide the ships to their destinations, where we will raise new nations, and build our mosques, temples and churches as we continue to explore the universe that our God has given us. Of this I am sure. Ed Chesky | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
I think it important to note the the Great Boxing day (christmas eve) mega quake occured during the old pagan winter solstice. This was an old pagan time of celebration that was incorporated into christianity. True Christians know that Jesus of Nazareth's birth was at a different time to claim that this quake was divine punishment for some sects or people's actions is abserd. However, the winter solstice comes during a period when the earth has reached the furthest point in an orbital change and forces acting upon it change their relationship to it. Ed has clearly had an insight into the nature of gravity and like Newton, Einstien and the rest it has had a dramatic effect upon him and his view of religion. This effect is colored by his religous upbringing and as such influences the way he looks at things. Osama too, I think, has had such a glimpse of something, like Ed. I suspect it was based upon his understanding of structural forces and what could be achieved with explosives. This coupled to his views on religion and gift for use of political forces made him what he is. Whether God had a hand in any of this I do not know. But I suspect it will be argued for generations to come. Of the two men opposing each other one argues for science, peace and technological advancements and promotes the concept of evolution and challanges us to understand the forces of creation on a mega scale rejects temporal or poltical power. The other would take us back to the stone age in terms of thinking. Of the two, it is clear that one values life, freedom and the other death. Which I would choose to follow is a private decision, I have made. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
Thank You Ghost for interjecting some rational thought into this discussion. While I am a Christian, I seek to impose my views on no one. Nor do I have any desire for temporal power. What I seek is employment in a field where I can help others. I hoped to teach others what is possible with an understanding the forces that influence our planet. In time the flux's and tugs of gravity will become known and our understanding of gravity will increase. I sat there with feeds from satellights, gravity sensors, historical databases, solar and lunar tidal effects charts and made some predictions based on years of skill and training and a gift for integrating data. I and my wife are the products of selective European breeding that has been going on for over 1400 years. The strong servived and weak perished. Due to this heritage we have both skills, abilites and strengths, as well as weaknesses. Trade offs were made. I was once told that a Japanese master craftsman always puts a minor flaw in his work; for to achieve perfection in anything is seen to be an insult to God and likely to bring misfortune. Like that concept some in my family suffer from a very rare disease, like the descendents of the Japanese Nobility, due to limited breeding pools. This disease makes it difficult to retain calcium in the body. For over 1400 years the nobility of Europe has used selective breeding to breed certain traits into the aristocracy, after that nobility fell from power the tradition continued in terms of who was acceptable to wed. My wife and I are the results of such a legacy. For her it manefests itself as gift for language, she speaks several languages, she also has a gift for mathmatics, and an IQ of 145. Like all gifts it comes with a downside as well and a lesson about what Christian Nobility did for over 1400 years. As I sit here I look at a picture of an old KGB agent laying in a hospital bed fighting for his life against thallium poisoning. By rights he should be dead and incoherent. For me I look at the minor intermittant tremor in my left hand and weakness around my eyes from the damage I sustained to my nervous system from neurotoxin. Yes we have gifts, weaknesses and strengths, it is part of evolution and makes us human and subject to the same flaws, wants and desires of the human race. As ny wife tell's me each of us is different and we have different tolerances to things. She is a very wise woman. Ed Chesky | ||
| Anon |
In the time I have before I go to a class on Ageing In Society, I am reminded of what it took to pull together the data for the prediction of earthquakes. I did a briefing slide on the subject in time that seems like ages ago and projected the quakes based on huge amount of data and years of experience and training by the best minds possible. I built upon their work, without which it would not be possible. When I looked at the gravity map it was the crowning achievement of years of study and work. Just like the Billiard Problem. I once had a dream of working at NASA or continuing to work at for a major defense contractor in Flordia. Due to downsizing and games played by people at risk of losing their jobs for failure to produce, I was let go then brought back and then let go again and again. Will I once again be part of a team building the future in terms of advanced technology? Only private industry and the Federal Government knows the answer to that. The industry I am currently in wishes to keep me where I am to profit from my skills at projecting quakes and damage. I was never cut out for this particular industry and I hope to get picked up by something more in my line of work. I was never cut out for the private sector in general. I have no concept of money or profit or loss. But until something better comes along then I continue to pursue my advanced degree. My Best Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Harmonic earthwaves and earthquakes. I've been thinking of how some sounds generate harmonics so other materials will vibrate with the same frequency. This led to the possibility that earthquakes generate harmonic waves that have the ability to travel great distances over the Earth's crustal plates. When I looked at the Pacific plates earthquakes world map, I noticed some strong activity over the past few days in the northwester Pacific at Kuril Island, and again in opposite direction to southeastern Pacific, South America, also in Central America, then a large arc over the western-southwestern regions from Japan to Polynesia, as well as small but frequent activity in the Alaskan peninsula and southern California. With compass and ruler, I started to draw arcs to see how these connected in line of sight with each other, and found that there is one point of intersection that fits just below the Hawaiian chain, and another way off the coast of South America, where recent activity had been registered, out in the deep south Pacific. But the real concentration was north of New Zealand, as one end of two convergent arcs, while the other end was just off the coast of southern California, near San Louis Obisbo, about 100 km off shore. When I checked the fault-lines map, there was a terminal of a fault-line coming down from Monterey, CA, that ended in the water just north of where this convergent point was off the California coast. This led me to think that this particular fault lies underwater, but had not been active for a long time, so not on the map. It would run down the coast through Santa Barbara inland, then towards just off shore Los Angeles, somewhere near Catalina Island, all the way down to San Diego. (Looking at a map shows Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz islands as being possibly once a large land mass now underwater.) So this would turn out to be a massive fault, like the San Andreas, but submerged and only infrequently violent. Now, that causes a problem: if the earthquake harmonics of activity around the Pacific plate should converge, not necessarily all at once but over periods of days and weeks, on that specific point near the coast of California, it may trigger that fault to snap, with potentially violent results. Being underwater, it has an additional violent capacity to send water way inland. (The Indians living around Santa Barbara told the Spanish missionaries in early 1700s that water once came very far inland, many leagues, in a big wave.) A large tsunami on the California coast could be devastating. Watching the activity in the Pacific basin makes me apprehensive that this could be a potentially great danger, if that unnamed fault snaps, which would affect the coast from Monterey to San Diego, if it should happen. With the increased activity seen recently, we may be not too far off from this happening, which would be a tremendous catastrophe, if it should be on a large magnitude, since the earthquake harmonics seem to be converging there. It could rival or surpass the damage witnessed in the south Indian ocean, when an earthquake of high magnitude hit underwater off the coast of Aceh, Sumatra. It may snap at anytime, which would be devastating, billions of dollars of loss, and thousands of lives lost, potentially. So the Pacific plate tectonics need special attention, if their activities increase. The coastal region of southern California may be at risk of the 'Big One' not inland, but off shore, which could also send tsunami waves all the way across to Hawaii and the western Pacific islands. This underwater coastal fault-line may make the frequently rumbling slippage San Andreas fault look like a pussy cat when this one snaps. That could be the surprise Big One. But when? Is increased activity in Pacific basin an indicator? Could stress be built up through constant harmonics bombardment from both the crustal surface as well as beneath the crust? It could happen any day, alas, or not for another hundred years... We have no hard science on this yet, not even sure the fault is there. Here's a clickable map of faults in California: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults/ca/index.php Same clickable map of the USA, by state and region: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults/usmap.php This is an interactive Google map, try the 'hybrid' version with both satellite and road map, for any part of the USA, coastal regions, and in fact the whole world (zoom out, then zoom in again where you like): http://local.google.com/ (I just zoomed in on my condo in Rome, near Pantheon, another earthquake prone zone!) Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Mohideen Ibramsha, I thank you for your kind words regarding my work with visulization of gravity and advances in Geometry When I travel to the Middle east come the spring I look forward to engaging in a peaceful dialog with the peoples of the UAE when I am there. Unlike the military industrial complex, civilian sector and government of the United States, and its security services, the people of Europe, the Middle East, Asia and India have always treated me with curtesy and respect. As I travel through Europe to the Middle East and on to the Indian Ocean region, I look forward to blending my network of contacts and efforts of the team I raised to bring down George Bush with those of other networks working to bring peace to the Middle East. Some of which we have addressed here in this forum. Being under surveillence of the United States Government I expect communication will have to be via coded communications. What I will be looking for is hard data regarding Iranian nuclear capabilites, and state of the opposition within Iran and true views of the people of the nation towards its government. From the elements of data I recieve I will begin to assess key pressure points within Iran that the students can use to bring about change. Since I was denied security clearance by the Bush administration and have full knowledge of all military and nuclear weapons capabilites within the region, as well as all of our advanced technology, command and control systems, weapon systems and nuclear forces, I expect to be able to converse in technical terms with the appropriate specialists that I may meet. As I demonstrated with my visualization of gravity I have the capability to integrate large amounts of data and build a picture of a situation from which I can make accurate projections and estimates. Israel has contacted me and offered me a position within Israel if I wish to relocate, however, I am a loyal American and am intending to use my skills for the benefit of all mankind. What I have done with my visualization of gravity and prediction of earthquakes is part of my work towards contributing to a FTL Drive. My wife and our contacts are engaged in this project. What we offer is to expand our network into the Middle East to bring into the net moderate Islamic scientists that can work with us in unlocking the mystery of and FTL Drive. AL Hazam's billiard problem was one of the keys that allowed me to unlock some of the secrets of gravity that I have demonstrated. My wife through Israeli contacts is keeping abreast of the Isreal U.S. laser missile defense effort. We have also opened a dialog with Isreali specialists in advanced physics. Do I have all the answers? No I don't what I demonstrated with my predictions and the NASA gravity map is a capability to put an understanding of Gravity to practical use. Because I have been locked out of the American Research and Development Industry I and my wife have gone international with this project. We use the story of Noah to cover our work in this area and use it to exchange data between Christian Church groups regarding the breakthrough in visualizaation of gravity and prediction of earthquakes I have demonstrated. My Best Ed Chesky | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
Contrary to popular belief, Einstein never claimed that it was impossible to go faster than light: it was assumed from his equations. He however has no objections to accepting that spacetime fabric can travel faster than light. It is hypothesized that at the beginning of the universe, spacetime fabric travelled faster than light. Therefore, if we could bend spacetime, we could travel faster than light. Miguel Alcubierre theorized that it would be possible to "warp" spacetime by shrinking spacetime in front of you and expanding it behind you. Such warping would require a source of negative energy which would act as anti-gravity. A possible candidate is the dark energy of cosmology. However it is not clear if dark energy even exists and if it does what its properties are. The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity Miguel Alcubierre 1994 Class. Quantum Grav. 11 L73-L77 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/11/5/001 http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/11/5/001 In his visulization of gravitational effects as it relates to stresses on the Earth Ed, along with a host of others, has opened a door to a better understanding of gravity. My mind can not grasp what he saw in Geometry. But I hope for the best and pray his team finds a Faster Than Light Drive. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
Thank you Friendly Ghost. What I presumed was that if gravity was the result of quantum forces that fluxuations at the quantum level might have measurable effects on other forces such as gravity, electromagnetics, probability and a number of other things. When I opened up all the data feeds, electromagnetic readings of the sun, earth magnatic field and other measurements I attempted to find a causal realtionship in the data. This coupled to the stresses on geological faults which exist in areas that we may refer to as gravity sumps led me to predict that when these forces were in flux that it could impact on the realworld in terms of manefesting itself in terms of earthquakes. Such is what I saw and did, working blind without the NASA gravity map what I was doing was charting the gravity sumps and the interaction of forces that were impacting on them. I hope this helps. ED | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Because I have been locked out of the American Research and Development Industry I and my wife have gone international with this project. Ed Chesky Posted on Monday, November 20, 2006 - 10:31 pm: Anon The sustenance of every life is guaranteed by God. Sometimes God delivers the food directly as He did to mother Mary, peace be upon her. Often humans deliver the food as wages for work. In the nature of society some play the role of master and others play the role of servants. I believe in God’s estimate every work gets rewarded. By locking you out the American Research and Development Industry lost its exclusive hold on your work. Now your work benefits the American Research and Development Industry also as they too are part of mankind. My prayers. | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
ESA European Space Agency http://www.esa.int/gsp/ACT/physics/technology_studies_CMP.htm "An older study investigated a topic at the interface of condensed matter physics and gravitation, which was conducted by the relativity group at the university of Cologne. The results are quite surprising for anybody not intimately familiar with the subject: Neither for the post-Newtonian approximation nor for the background of a gravitational wave a general non-relativistic derivation of the coupling of a fermion to both the electromagnetic and gravitational fields exists. Hence the coupling between the gravitational field and a mesoscopic system cannot yet be predicted from our current knowledge because we even do not know yet how a single electron behaves. In principle, the derivation of the relevant interactions seems possible in a straightforward way. It is certainly a desideratum of gravitational physics. Despite this theoretical uncertainty the researchers who conducted the study consider it rather unlikely that surprisingly big couplings should be the outcome of the derivation." ESA has been investigating the possible interaction of gravity, electromagnetics and quantum forces. In the extract above they say, "Hence the coupling between the gravitational field and a mesoscopic system cannot yet be predicted from our current knowledge because we even do not know yet how a single electron behaves. In principle, the derivation of the relevant interactions seems possible in a straightforward way. It is certainly a desideratum of gravitational physics." In comparing all of the data he had available Ed has found a relationship between the forces described above. What it is he found is unknown at this point as he said because the math processing center of his brain was damaged by military medical incompetance. But in demonstrating it here for us he offers those that understand this type of stuff insight into these forces as data from satellights, sensors and experiments begins to roll in. MY BEST TO AN OLD WARRIOR. Unlike Osama he took no life and opened a door to a place we may travel. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
Ivan, A very interesting piece of work with regards to the compass and ruler work on earthquakes. If we overlay that on top of the NASA graity map we find a correlation as well. As friendly said as data comes in we can begin to build a picture. I said long ago I hoped that the space probe data was done asap as it would be like an MRI of the planet. In the complex system of systems that make up this planet change has been introduced. What the end result of that change will be we are just now begining to understand. I am sitting here looking at the gravity map, your posting and work with compass and ruler and a cup of coffee. Like Friendly Ghost I don't do well without it. I see him from time to time in Dunken Donutes in the morning near where I work. If we compare the past series of great quakes with the gravity map and consider your thoughts we have some reason to be concerned. I note that Iran lays on a major gravitational hotspot and that further quakes their are highly likely. Ed | ||
| The Poet |
We are but children in the eyes of God In this forum three men discuss issues of God, Science, Faith, and the truth before the eyes of the world. WIth simple tools, maps and historical data they ponder the forces that shape our planet and the universe. One argues from the perspective of the Muslim, One from the perspective of the Agnostics and One from the perspective of the Christian. For a time a Jew joined the discussion. Bad science, geometry, mathm mumbo jumbo, fiction and truth have been woven into this discussion. In the end like a great magician of old the Christian unveils the truth to the audience as by slight of hand, opening our eyes to something we but dimely grasp. Did the Magi of old truely die? Or did they pass the torch to the Children of the Emeril Isles in days long past. Majic, science, religion and truth. What we seek is a long journey like the one the three Magi that bowed to Christ took so long ago. | ||
| Ivan |
This is most interesting that they are trying to find a solution to incorporate Quantum physics with Gravitation physics, and after 50 years have not yet resolved it. ESA may be interesting in seeing the Axiomatic Equation's treatment of this, where a deBroglie quantum hybrid equation yields a gravitational result showing Newton's G is a variable. Here is the paper where this was worked out for the nine (now eight?) planets, including how this is evident in the Pioneer Anomaly: http://www.humancafe.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=6&post=300#POST300 (may need to use Navigator if lambda 'l" symbol not showing in equation - important) In ESA's article there is an interesting observation towards the end: "Modern physics rests on two pillars: Einsteins theory of general relativity and quantum theory. While the former successfully describes the gravitational field and its coupling to matter, the latter is the established frame for the fundamental (microscopic) description of non-gravitational forces. A major unsolved issue is the consistent combination of both into a theory of quantum gravity. Although various approaches exist (quantum general relativity, string theory), no final theory is known." Thanks Friendly Ghost for this interesting article, including the embedded links to science papers on Quantum-Gravity. We may be on our way to a whole new energy source, one which will not only zip us fast through space, but perhaps power all our energy needs from the space-vacuum itself, here on Earth. All we need to do is cancel lambda (on a point!) and we're there, if the Axiomatic is right. Ivan | ||
| ANON ANON |
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030723.html A spinning 3D gravity map is posted above. God what a mind that charted this and predicted earthquakes using only a home computer!!!!! ANON ANON | ||
| Ivan |
 There's the spinning 3D in ANON's post, quite amazing! | ||
| Anon |
As I sit here following a thanksgiving Day feast with friends and family. I look upon the spinning 3D model of the earth's gravitational field and think back to the thousands that died in earthquakes. It is a bittersweet momment for me. A child's compass lays on my desk. From it I took a trip in my mind through Non-Euclidean space across a Einstien-Rossen bridge and looked upon the forces of creation. From my desktop PC, a Laptop and several univeristy computers I looked at the data readouts from solar observing satellights, gravity meters, the earth's magnetic field and saw a pattern in events. To little to late to save the 74,000 dead in Pakistan. When we master FTL drive they will be remembered. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Human Genes show surprising differences? http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/new-human-gene-map-shows-surprising/2006112 2180809990012?ncid=NWS00010000000001 This came out of the blue, since we all thought we're all 99.9% the same genetically. Per the article: "One person's DNA code can be as much as 10 percent different from another's, researchers said on Wednesday in a finding that questions the idea that everyone on Earth is 99.9 percent identical genetically."This puts a new wrinkle on the idea of human homogeneity, especially if Neanderthals are 99.5 similar to modern humans. Could we have interbred? All those tough stocky people out there, descendants? | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Horror of horrors! http://www.womenfitness.net/whatisleukemia.htm === Potential leukemia-causing chemicals in tobacco smoke include benzene, polonium-210, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). === http://www.acsa2000.net/HealthAlert/lungcancer.html === Association Researchers say that the interdiction of cellular apoptosis by Nicotine, which prolongs mutated/damaged cells lives further (apoptosis insures longevity by causing damaged cells to die and replace with new regenerated cells, in the body), plus the long term consequences of Polonium 210 from the Tobacco plants, which provide over 75 mRads of Radiation Per Day (that's the same as between 3 and 50 Chest-X-Rays will give you, every Pack of Cigarettes you smoke) applied directly to the Lungs, and the resulting damage to your Lungs, prolonged by the Nicotine, lead to virtually ALL Lung Cancers among Smokers today. === It seems tobacco smoke is a silent killer because of the resultant polonium particles in air. Is it not in order that the medical industry considers a cure for the infection by polonium 210? Would immune system boosters help? Could one extract polonium from tobacco smoke using centrifuges? If that could be done, we don’t need nuclear reactors to produce polonium 210. | ||
| Anon |
"One person's DNA code can be as much as 10 percent different from another's, researchers said on Wednesday in a finding that questions the idea that everyone on Earth is 99.9 percent identical genetically." As I read the above I am preparing a 25 page paper on Human Behavior in the social environment, a 7 page paper on Aging in Society and working 50 hours a week existing with minimal sleep. At work today I just finished dealing with a cardiac fibrilation among other things. This is inaddition to having suffered brain damage to my central processing centers of my brain, been poisoned with a 1200 times normal dosage of nerve agent and suffered a C Spine injury. I expect to achieve a 3.4 to 4.0 GPA in both of my classes. I also note that despite this CNS damage I was able to accurately predict the outcome of the NASA gravity mission by charting earthquakes, predicting the effects of Huricane Katrina and a number of other things like solve the Billiard Problem. My first cousin who has been suffering from advanced terminal brain cancer has gone into remission following treatment with the cancer being reabsorbed into the brain. His family shares a number of genes with mine via a common grandmother but sufferes from a inherited genetic heart defect due to Royal Russian descent and is prone to heart attacks and strokes. There are a number of mysteries that have yet to be uncovered in the Human Races genetic heritage. Neuro-regeneration is but one Ed | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3714992.stm Medieval surgeons were advanced The peasant's skull had been operated on Surgeons were carrying out complicated skull operations in medieval times, the remains of a body found at an archaeological dig show Over a thousand years ago Medieval surgeons were performing advanced brain surgery. Thousands of years before them the ancient egyptions were doing the same. Just what capabilites the ancients had and used to modify the warrior cast over the ages? Just what were the capabilites of the ancient priest/king/warrior cast of old? Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
Friendly Ghost, The ancient Egyptions laid the foundation for our understanding of the human nervous system. However, brain sugery may or may not have been conducted in ancient Egypt. It was however, being conducted as far back as the neolithic period. Off to class Ed | ||
| Anon |
Its early morning and I am here sipping my coffee. I have just finished scanning the news and note that AIDS is becoming one of the top killers in the world. I also not that stem cell research in the United States is limited compared to other countries because of religous considerations, yet Iran presses forward with stem cell research and has through it given movement to a limb in a rat that was paralized. Scientists are bound by the law to due no harm, however, they are currently constrained by limits set by overly religious leaders that limit our ability to find cures to the most pressing problems that face our society today. We have mapped the code to HIV resistance in the European Population and we have seen neuroregeneration induced as a result of stem cells, and on a limited basis in human beings, due to a quirk of genetics. AIDs currently killes 8 million every year, but is expect to kill nearly 120 million a year by 2030 with most death occuring in the developing world. That the human race is still evolving is quite clear. In the age old battle of the human against the evironment the strong survive and the weak perish. Due to cultural practices in the Middle East Muslim birth defects are rising dramatically in the Islamic nations. Seven of the 10 countries with the highest birth defect rates are Muslim nations with a tradition of intermarriage of blood relatives, accounting for at last 20 percent of deformities there. This is in addition to birth defects induced as a result of lack of prenatal care and poverty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding Intermarriage in European royal families is no longer practiced, due the current understanding of the negative consequences, as well as the growing tendency to marry commoners. Also, it is not necessarily the case that there was a greater amount of inbreeding within royalty than there is in the population as a whole: it may simply be better documented. Among genetic populations that are isolated, opportunities for exogamy are reduced. Isolation may be geographical, leading to inbreeding among peasants in remote mountain valleys. Or isolation may be social, induced by the lack of appropriate partners, such as Protestant princesses for Protestant royal heirs. Since the late middle ages, it is the urban middle class that has had the widest opportunity for outbreeding. Just some thoughts on what is facing the world. By their cultural practices Muslim peoples are reproducing today the same mistakes of the ancient European Nobility so long ago. In Ryhad one night as I was at the mall a bus pulled up and let a group of Children out to go shop at the mall. They were all albino's and had other defects. The Saudis there pretended not to see them. As we move into this next century, the question is will the people of Islam evolve or devolve? Ed | ||
| Anon |
As I sit here after work in my study mussing on life I hear the television downstairs playing. I leave it on when home alone to give the house an illusion of life, while I wait for my wife to return. I just got back from an annual checkup and the doctor has started me on a course of medication to control mildly elevated blood pressure, stemming from too much weight and lack of exercise. These two items I am resolved to change over the next few months. The medication is coursing through my body as I type this altering the balance of chemicals in my blood, lowering the blood pressure. I can feel the subtle difference as the medication takes hold, dropping blood pressure throughout my body. My left hand has a minor twitch that comes and goes. More an annoyance than anything else. The technical term for it Tardive Dyskinesia affecting the fingers of the left arm. It is a non-progressive side effect of the advanced medication I take to restore the dopamine balance in my brain, disrupted due to neurotoxin exposure. Of some note I have one of the highest recorded levels of neurotoxin exposure in history. A small price to pay for exposing the penetration of our intelligence and security services by KGB agents and their use of poison. I suppose it is a miracle of science of sorts. As I sit here I am reviewing my scientific achievements in the area of predictive analysis and visualization of forces, geometry and cryptographics, I reflect upon my life. The walls of my study are lined with achievements enough for three men. These awards were awarded to me by some of the most powerful men on the face of the planet. On one wall is copy of the military service record of my great-great-great-grandfather who fought in the Civil War. (I also have a copy of his disability pension in my desk). My grandfather’s service record from WW II is hung next to this service record. Above these two service records is a copy of a painting of the signing of the Mayflower compact so long ago and the name of my ancient ancestor who boarded that ship before this nation was even formed. I have much work to do on my papers for school in order to complete my advanced degree in Social Work, with a specialty in working with the disabled population. I am also reviewing some journal articles dealing with pre-Columbian contact with the America’s and possible Carthaginian influences. I have been invited to go on a field trip to look at some ancient stone works on the 3rd of December, but have a conflict with a concert I am going to attend given by the great blind tenor Andrea Bocelli. I saw him once on television singing for the pope. I would not trade the opportunity to hear him for a trip to see all the ancient stone works on the East Coast. Enough musings. My Best and I wish you well over the Christmas Season. With compass and ruler imagination and intelligence tradecraft we assisted in changing the political landscape of the United States. Ed | ||
| Anon |
AN EARTHQUAKE IN TEHRAN MIGHT COLLAPSE IRANIAN REGIME By Mahan Abedin* BEIRUT, 7 Jan. The earthquake that destroyed the ancient city of Bam in southeastern Iran on 26 December has focused attention on the incompetence of the Iranian authorities. http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2004/Jan_04/iran_earthquake_7104.htm As I write this I note that geological stress is building in Iran from the shift of techtonic plates stemming from the Great Sumatran Quake. Following the Great Quake, the Indian Plate moved north increasing stress on the ancient faults that had been locked in the north. This resulted in the Pakistan Quake. Additional stress was tranfered to the Iranian faults. It may be that change will come to Iran in an unexpected way Ed | ||
| Anon |
Predicting the Next Big One The team's new method differs from existing techniques in that it takes into account the small "chains" of tremors that often occur before a major earthquake. When a long chain of related earthquakes is discovered in a region, the team analyzes the area's history, in search of various seismic patterns. If other patterns are discovered, the group announces a nine-month forecast. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,61828,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2 This pattern recognition is what I did to predict earthquakes and what Ivan has seen as well. Although I tied it to other factors as well Ed | ||
| Anon |
I have been looking at a recent pattern of earthquakes and note that a recent string of them occured along a line running from the area of Sumatra, to Indonesia and then into the Medeterrainean Sea out into the Atlanic Ocean. Just on surface analysis it looks as if stress is building in India, Pakistan and Iran with regards to potential earthquakes. The earth is now finishing its shift into winter and stress from that coupled to other factors such as stored energy in faults. The effect of the release of energy of the Sumatran Great Quake and the influces of tidal gravitational forces, make me uncomfortable with the likelihood of a quake in Turkey the Medeterrainean Sea, Iran India and Pakistan within the near term. Stress building could also indicate the possibility of an euruption of volcanos along that area. Ed | ||
| Peace and Freedom |
I have taken a look at the earthquake activity in Iran and a number of small earthquakes are occuring along the fault lines that run as I indicated. The main stress appears to be building on the east coast of the Persian Gulf along the faults that run parallel to it. I expect that this could result in another major quake within the next 6-12 months if not sooner in the areas I outlined. Ed | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Due to cultural practices in the Middle East Muslim birth defects are rising dramatically in the Islamic nations. Ed Posted on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - 05:13 am: Anon Islam does not recommend marriage among blood relations. Islam simply indicates the forbidden alliances. These two Verses indicate the prohibitions. 4:23 Prohibited to you (for marriage) are: your mother, daughters, sisters, father's sisters, mother's sisters; brother's daughters, sister's daughters, foster-mothers (who gave you suck), foster sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship born of your wives to whom ye have gone in, no prohibition if ye have not gone in; (those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful. 4:24 Also (prohibited are) women already married except those whom your right hands possess. Thus hath Allah ordained (prohibitions) against you: except for these all others are lawful provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property desiring chastity not lust. Seeing that ye derive benefit from them give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if after a dower is prescribed ye agree mutually (to vary it) there is no blame on you and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise. Only cousins are not excluded. The Arabs in their desire to preserve the wealth within their families have resorted to marrying cousins as far as possible. When a prohibition is given it is better to move away as far as possible rather than just sit at the boundary. The Arabs have practiced blood relative marriages as close to the boundary as possible. If they suffer birth defects it is not because they understand the spirit of the Holy Quran and follow it. What needs to evolve is to understand Islam and practice it. Islam by itself needs no evolution. | ||
| Anon |
As per my assessment a 4.8 mag quake occured north of India along the plate boundry. This coupled to geological stresses indicates that stress along faults on the plate boundries of India, Pakistan, Iran, the Medeterrainean Ocean, out to the Atlanic are being to reach the breaking point. How and when the next 5-7 mag quake occures I don't know but expect is soon. I would alert the Iranian people to expect a quake within the next few months or sooner. Ed | ||
| Anon |
Magnitude 6.3 quake hits Sumatra No immediate reports of damage or injuries http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15979620/ The stress along the crustal boundry from Sumatra to India, to Pakistan, The Mediterraean Ocean to the Atlantic has reached the breaking point. Additional large quakes are expected, where along that fault line I do not know as I don't have access to the data necessary to make the projections. I also suspect that quakes 5-7 will erupt along the adjacent pacific plate in the near term. Ed | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
Well done Ed, I have been watching the line of quakes from Antartica to Europe. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpegMod/PIA04652_modest.jpg Gravity Map http://www.iris.edu/seismon/ Seismic Monitor http://www.seismo.ethz.ch/GSHAP/global/gshapfin.gif Global Hazards Map Solar data indicates major solar storm underway. http://www.n3kl.org/sun/noaa.html http://www.sec.noaa.gov/pmap/Plots.html Large Fluxuations in Earths Magnetic Field http://www.iranica.com/articles/v7/v7f6/v7f654.html Historical data on Afghanistan, Iran, Central Asia earthquakes. http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/pacalc.html Lunar Perigee and Apogee table The above is a sample of a portion of the data set I use to assess the risk for earthquakes. Within Iran there is a cycle to major earthquakes based on historical data with them occuring at an average interval. Couple this to changes in stresses induced by the Great Sumatran Quake and we are entering a window for another significant quake in Iran Hope this Helps Ed | ||
| Alliance of Patriots |
For the people of Iran. That a great quake will happen in the future is without doubt. That your government has neglected you in terms of preparing for it is without doubt. When it comes much loss of life is to be expected. Know that we will stand by to aid you in that dark time. Alliance of Patriots | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
5.0 Quake hits Afghanistan. Looks like its breaking along the line Ed said. Now what about Iran? Friendly Ghost | ||
| Anon |
Thanks Friendly I like the IRIS Monitor because it integrates the sun's movement over the area giving and indicator of the solar tidal effects. Ed | ||
| Anon |
As I sit here looking at the IRIS siesmic map I note that the quakes are breaking along the plate boundries as I indicated from Antartica to Indonesia to India, Pakistan, Iran the Med and then on. I have stayed away from anaylzing the pattern of quakes because it is time comsuming and painful to do it. The earth is a system of systems and it is out of balance. Change is coming and everyone senses it. Those that long for the Apoclypse (Change) are many. They see signs and indicators of it in everything and live in fear. Other see it as divine punishment and long for its coming for they feel they will be among the choosen few. These types that long for its coming fall into caategrories, some are terrorists that seek to bring it about, others spin out doctine and predictions of doom and capitalize on the fears by creating works of fiction sold as prophecy. http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/BookReviews/left.htm Tim LaHaye (with Jerry Jenkins) Book Review* The Left Behind Series I hoever maintain that the Change that is coming is nothing that we have not gone through before and that we will weather it and go on to new hieghts of technology that we can only dream of today. It is with this in mind that I posted many of my thoughts and my analytic work. Within the music of the spheres and the threads of historical data I saw a pattern that was like looking upon the tapestry of creation itself. In doing so I hope I have in my small way assisted in raising human conciousness to a new level. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Ed, that Seismic Monitor map really shows what is happening in the Pacific plate region, almost real time, especially in the full screen mode. One just popped off the coast of Baja California. Really popping all around the Pacific, even up in Afghanistan, down in Indonesia, south America, Alaska ridge in north, antarctic ridge in the south, Easter island, lots of activity. Thanks for this map, Ivan | ||
| Anon |
You welcome Ivan, I concur the plate boundries have become much more active. Per my assessment quakes have hit, Crete and Iran, with a lower mag threshold 4-4.8 range than I anticipated but in line with my assessment. I expect further shifts on the crustal plates with a potentially great quake mag 6-8 range in the near future. Ed | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
May be this is superfluous. The Mullahs might not organize relief efforts when the next quake occurs. We, those who desire a peaceful change in Iran, must start the planning for relief efforts now instead of waiting for the big quake predicted by Ed. How about sending help to our friends inside Iran through appropriate channels - food that could stay good for long periods of time, materials for tents, dresses of various sizes to protect the surviving population from the biting cold etc? Is it not time to act? | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2005/Sep05/sumatra.htm EXPERT TO DISCUSS THE GREAT SUMATRAN EARTHQUAKE With regards to the Great Sumatran Quake, "Sieh believes that the segment that ruptured during these two quakes is now "safe" for the next several hundred years. But danger remains on the same megathrust to the north in Myanmar and India, and to the south in the part of Sumatra south of the equator. He says that these lengths of the megathrust will be crucibles in which our ability and willingness to mitigate future great disasters will be tested." http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050827/bob9.asp Earthshaking Event Lessons from the temblor that produced tsunamis and other global effects http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2005/01/05/impact_of_events_may_h ave_altered_indias_geography/ Indian geologists were also concerned about the possibility that the tectonic plate known as the India Plate may have shifted north, affecting the region's seismic vulnerability. http://www.planetark.com/avantgo/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=29762 Shifts in tectonic plates have submerged India's southernmost point, split one island in two, destroyed beaches and villages, fuelled social pressures and even threatened the habitat of an ancient and isolated tribe of hunter-gatherers Then came the great Pakistan Quake. The entire dynamics of earthquakes have been changed throughout the world. With the shifting of the great tectonic plates we are in more danger from earthquakes than ever before. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Ivan |
Do we live in a Bacteria Universe? This NewScientist article is fascinating: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10758-oxygen-boom-fuelled-explosion-of-com plex-life-.html Life on Earth lay pretty much dormant for billions of years locked up in bacteria until about 550 millions years ago when it suddenly exploded in an evolutionary 'fast forward'. Oxygen was released from phytoplankton activity after the last total ice age, which first populated the seas with filter-feeders, and later oceanic life using the newly released oxygen in water and atmosphere. My suspicion is that this process is universal, where all planets have some form of microbial life no more advanced than the bacteria stage, but that under favorable conditions, these simple life forms can explode into a fast moving evolution (fast in geologic time) to produce great varieties of multicelled life, some of it perhaps even intelligent. I feel totally comfortable with this idea, that life in the Universe is bacterially universal, though the next stage of development takes a combination of chance and survival. In a word, Bacteria'R'Us! Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
What's wrong with Gravity? Discover Magazine had been running some articles last few months asking this same question. It seems Newton and his wild haired successor Einstein were still missing something about what was going on. Milgrom's modification to Newton's famous F = ma equation seems a suitable patch to explain why the greater universe acts as if there was 'dark matter' in it, something invisible to light but gravitationally present. However, this patch in effect violates Einstein's Equivalence Principle by modifying acceleration so MOND's 'equivalence' now reads as: F = m a^2/ a_o, where a_o is an acceleration constant. (Coincidentally this a_o matches up with acceleration needed to reach speed of light over the age of the universe, viz. ~13.7 billion years, but this may be truly coincidence, since that age is also the distance at which our universe becomes invisible to our light, so no dice; the coincidence may be due to deep space gravity G orders of magnitudes greater than Earth's G will redshift light as if it were 'invisible' at 13.7 BLYs away, so it ceases to 'exist' from our point of view.) Now, wouldn't it be nice if Milgrom's F = m a^2/ a_o proved the Axiomatic Equation right? After all, Pioneers 10 & 11 seem pointing that way... that Newton's G is not a universal constant, but a variable inversely proportional by distance from a hot star, our Sun. Some more readings on Mordehai Milgrom vs. Albert Einstein, Discover: Nailing Down Gravity http://www.discover.com/issues/oct-03/cover/ Nice Going, Einstein http://www.discover.com/issues/aug-06/features/einsteinwrong/ The Einstein Dilemma http://www.discover.com/issues/aug-06/cover/ Dark Matter for Consideration http://www.discover.com/web-exclusives/mond-dark-matter-dialogue/ Dark matter is no more than higher G molecular mass in deep space, per Axiomatic, but we're ahead of our times. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
... deep space gravity G orders of magnitudes greater than Earth's G will redshift light as if it were 'invisible' at 13.7 BLYs away ... Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 12:20 pm: Ivan Does not the existence of variable gravity leave the question of the age of the universe wide open? Could we try different non-linear models for gravity and see what might be the real age of the universe based on multimodel results? | ||
| Ivan |
The Age of the Universe, according to the Big Bang 'theory' is about 13.7 billion years. But this must assume of necessity that observed space expansion is a Doppler phenomenon, whereby running the clock backwards the universe had a 'beginning' at point zero, where space-time was (magically) created. If this reasoning is wrong, meaning the observation of space expansion is not due to Doppler effect of light redshift, but rather that light over great cosmic distances redshifts for another reason, then the whole exercise of running time backwards is moot, and pointless. I suspect gravity is what is now misunderstood, thinking that it is a universal constant. My calculations show that gravity is a variable, is very high in deep space far from hot energy sources, and that light passing through space gasses in deep space will (gravitationally) redshift naturally, to give us an illusion of expansion. If this is found in the future to be right, then the age of the universe is an unknown mystery that cannot be solved by our present knowledge, nor calculated in any meaningful way. I worked this out here: July 10, 2005: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/70/108.html (scroll down, at bottom of page) Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
My calculations show that gravity is a variable, is very high in deep space far from hot energy sources, and that light passing through space gasses in deep space will (gravitationally) redshift naturally, to give us an illusion of expansion. Posted on Monday, December 11, 2006 - 10:21 am: Ivan In physics we studied Kelvin temperature and that zero degree Kelvin is the temperature where all atomic vibrations die leading to superconductivity. We also studied that the temperature in the interstellar space is zero degree Kelvin. How does that ultimate cold affect the gravitational constant? (I looked at your equations. At this point in time I decided not to look deep into them. May be I would never do.They look too complicated at least now!) | ||
| Anon |
After all, Pioneers 10 & 11 seem pointing that way... that Newton's G is not a universal constant, but a variable inversely proportional by distance from a hot star, our Sun. This cannot be correct. The Pioneer anomaly is interpreted as an unexpected constant acceleration towards the sun. You're speculating G increases in a linear fashion. However, gravity follows an inverse square relationship with distance. Mathematically, you cannot produce a constant acceleration anomaly by adding a linear modification to an inverse square function. Post your math and we'll find the error. | ||
| Friendly Ghost |
Beliefwatch: Cosmology http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16126932/site/newsweek/ Davies has devoted his career to searching for the equation that will reveal what he calls "the mind of God," the metaphysical foundation for everything there is. The universe is far more complex than can be imagined. 4000 years ago Hippias developed a curve that could be used to trisect the angle, square the circle and as later demonstrated solve the Billiard Problem. In doing so this curve indicates that there exists a comon complex relationship between the solutions and these problems. By doing so it also indicates that there is some order to geometry, math and physical reality that we don't yet understand. Is Ivan's math correct or incorrect? I do not know. All I know is that we have barely scratched the surface of exploring what the ancient greats of geometry, math and physics achieved. That is what forums like this are all about. Friendly Ghost | ||
| Ivan |
Math is posted here: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/6/23.html#POST300 Think of it this way: Gravitational force works in the inverse square law, true. Now what happens if Newton's G increases linearly with distance from the Sun? F = GMm/r^2 is still operative as before, except the small 'm' is (per Equivalence) increasing in terms of 'gravitational mass' so its inertial mass is increasing with distance from the Sun. The end result is a growing 'mass' aboard the Pioneers being pulled back towards the Sun in a constant (linear) manner, of about 1G per 1AU. That's the theory behind the math referenced above. The reason why this happens is more complicated, has to do with Quantum theory, and why atomic mass has gravity at all. Thanks for posting, glad to hear more later. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Math is posted here: http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/6/23.html#POST300 Well, that's just a mess. For starters, you need to do a unit analysis on that math. Your result is not in m/s^2. Think of it this way: Gravitational force works in the inverse square law, true. Now what happens if Newton's G increases linearly with distance from the Sun? F = GMm/r^2 is still operative as before, except the small 'm' is (per Equivalence) increasing in terms of 'gravitational mass' so its inertial mass is increasing with distance from the Sun. The end result is a growing 'mass' aboard the Pioneers being pulled back towards the Sun in a constant (linear) manner, of about 1G per 1AU. Even if Pioneer’s mass was growing as you describe, it wouldn’t matter. Galileo showed this several hundred years ago by dropping two objects with different masses and noting that they hit the ground at the same time. The same principal applies to Pioneer: the acceleration Pioneer experiences due to the sun’s gravity is the same regardless of the probe’s mass. This is because the mass of Pioneer (or the rocks, in Galileo’s experiment) is so much smaller than the mass of the sun (or the Earth, in Galileo’s experiment). Also, the equation above is not the correct one to use in this instance. We’re not interested in force. We’re interested in acceleration due to gravity, so we use a=Gm/r^2, where m is the mass of the object who’s gravity is causing the acceleration. But let’s prove it with numbers. In the case of Pioneer, we would figure out the acceleration caused by the sun’s gravity tugging on the spacecraft and then, to cover all our bases, find the acceleration caused by Pioneer’s gravity tugging on the sun. Pioneer’s mass is 258kg and it is currently somewhere around 90 AU (1.34E13m) from the Sun. Acceleration felt by Pioneer from the sun’s gravity: a=6.673E-11 * 1.98E30kg / 1.81E26m^2 a=7.32E-7m/s^2 Acceleration felt by the sun from Pioneer’s gravity: a=6.673E-11 * 258kg / 1.81E26m^2 a=9.56102E-35m/s^2 That’s a very small acceleration! So the net acceleration of Pioneer towards the sun is 7.32E-07m/s^2 + 9.56102E-35m/s^2 = well, basically 7.32E-07m/s^2! Now let’s multiply Pioneer’s mass by 1000, just to prove a point, and see how hard it tugs on the sun now: a=6.673E-11 * 25800kg / 1.81E26m^2 a=9.56102E-33m/s^2 Naturally it’s still very, very small. Again, if you add the sun’s acceleration due to Pioneer’s gravity to Pioneer’s acceleration due to the sun’s gravity like we did above and compare the results, you would have to go out over 30 decimal places to see any difference at all. The anomalous acceleration we see happening with the Pioneer probe, which is already very small, is much larger than this. So we see that we can’t even come close to reproducing the Pioneer anomaly in the way you describe. Even if we multiply Pioneer’s mass by 1000, the change is still many orders of magnitude too small. However, none of this addresses my original point which is that you can’t produce a constant acceleration by modifying the inverse square relationship in a linear way. This is really simple logically, if you think about it. As the probe moves away from the sun, we expect it’s acceleration to decrease with the square of distance. You’re adding back some acceleration linearly with distance. It’s easy to see how the further out it moves, its acceleration is going to continually drop faster and faster while the rate at which you are adding back to it is going to remain the same. We could prove this with numbers as well by picking a few points in space at varying distances from the sun and comparing the acceleration predicted by Newton versus the acceleration predicted by varying G. Let’s take a point at the orbit of Jupiter. How would I calculate the acceleration felt by Pioneer at the orbit of Jupiter using your variable G idea? | ||
| Ivan |
Not so, they're different. One is a different mass, while the other is a different G, which is the 'ratio of pull' between masses, so not the same. The rest will be addressed later, since cannot do so at present, rushed for time. Thanks. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Oh, OK. It's just that you said this: The end result is a growing 'mass' aboard the Pioneers being pulled back towards the Sun in a constant (linear) manner, of about 1G per 1AU. I interpreted that to mean your proposed mass increase was your explanation. I'll wait for a more detailed explanation. Thanks! | ||
| Ivan |
MONDian modification of Newton's gravity per Axiomatic Equation's gravity G: a possible Pioneer Anomaly solution. Per the variable G paper, http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/6/23.html#POST300 , there are some rough spots on the universal standard units, which come up somewhat 'unstandard'. Never had to work with a 'universal constant' before that is variable, so bear with me until I can really sort it out. Anon, in yours: I looked at it from a different tack, see if this helps resolve some of what you expressed in calculating anomalous acceleration towards the Sun. As said earlier, my wording was perhaps not the best, since 'mass' does not really change (same craft mass as when it left the gantry), but only its effective 'gravitational mass', which translates into 'inertial mass' per Equivalence, is what is affected by entering higher G territory of the outer solar system, and beyond. So I revisited the "Einstein Dilemma" in Discover Magazine, http://www.discover.com/issues/aug-06/cover/ , where on pg. 2 it says Milgrom's MOND modifies Newton's Force Equation, F = ma, as thus: "If you took high school physics, you may remember having Newton's most important equation pounded into your head:When Milgrom applied this to outer galaxy rotation curves, it fell into place. So I thought we might be able to apply this Force equation to something predicted by the Axiomatic Equation, that Newton's G grows at the rate of about 1G per 1 AU. So per MOND's Force, we get the following: F = ma^2/ a_o For Newton's Force regarding gravity, we get: F = GMm/ r^2 Now combine these two, both as equation of Force, and you get: F = ma^2/ a_o = GMm/ r^2 Now here it gets interesting, because according to the Axiomatic equation in the paper referenced above, G is a variable with distance. So to modify the right side for this variable, dropping out the small 'm' both sides, we have what I suspect is an equation that may work. G is increased with distance 'r', but only by the definition that 1G = 1AU, so to compensate for this, we need to multiply G by r, but divide by 1 AU's r. I'll write it this way: a^2/ a_o = G(r) M / r^2 AUr So this is a MOND version, combined with Axiomatic version, of Newton's: a = GM/ r^2 where it simplifies into: a^2 = GM a_o / r AUr and taking square root, we get the delta of acceleration for very large distance away from the Sun: (delta) -a = (GM a_o/ r*AUr)^1/2 So this equation, strange as it looks, should give us an acceleration towards the Sun (minus sign) for a space probe leaving the solar system at escape velocity, where the delta '-a' should remain constant regardless of the distance 'r' traveled. This can only happen if the above portion of the equation is equally proportional with the lower portion, as a constant negative acceleration for any distance. I do not know if this is true, since have no way to plug in the value for a_o at this time, but will check back on it again in the future. But if MOND works as stated, and if G is variable as stated, then this equation should give us a constant acceleration towards the Sun. I think the reason it needs to be square rooted is because of the Equivalence principle, where any change to G will impact the 'gravitational-inertial mass' in a square root fashion, like two forces interacting on each other. So the point, if there is a point, is that it is not 'mass' that is growing with higher G, but only the effective 'gravitational or inertial mass' that is growing, which means it responds to the Sun's receding gravitational pull, though at 1/r^2, as if it were being pulled back, per MOND and Axiomatic's 1G per 1AU, at a rate of 1/r. This is what MOND shows for outer galaxy rotation curves, and it should also match what is happening to Pioneers, both of which happen to relate closely to the Hubble constant. They should all be from the same cause, a variable G that grows in a linear fashion with distance from the Sun, something our measurements should be able to spot from about Jupiter outwards. The reason we never saw it was because we had measured everything in the solar system from orbital dynamics ASSUMING Newton's G was a universal constant, which was his assumption too. Different G will not change the results of our measurements from a constant G, when adjusted for a variable G (same mass for same planets) except in how these masses manifest their density locally, ie., heavier atmospheres in higher G, like for Saturn's moon Titan. But that's a whole other story. Well, that's all I can figure for now, and had also posted something similar on the Astronomy forum. They are quick to spot errors and tear them apart, so I hope they can do the same on this as well. Watch them eat my lunch! Here's the page where I posted on BAUT, as NG71: http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=885397&postcount=280 Still confused myself over this, not easy to figure out a variable G scenario, so stay tuned. Furthermore, I could be all wrong! Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Secondary Fault Line Appears to becoming more active. I have noticed a major fault line that runs from the Lake Baykal Region to Central Asia north of India to the Caspian Sea out to the Mediterrainean appears to becoming more active. I am concerned about a shift in stress on this plate following the great Sumatran quake. I saw a similiar pattern of quakes before Bam Quake in Iran occured. Couple this to existing stress on this fault and I think we are entering a period of increased risk of a major quake along that line which includes Tehran. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Hi Ed, keep an eye on this world map of earthquake faults. http://www.iris.edu/seismon/ Click on central Asia, and you'll see the fault line that runs as you described, from eastern Siberia, Lake Baykal region down to Tajikistan, with a continuation of the faults into Iran. Why is 'God' always testing those Allah countries with hardship and disasters? There's a lot of activity out there around the 'Ring of Fire' and now into Siberia as well. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Thanks Ivan, I was running some estimates today and felt that a quake in Iran was likely. It occured today at a low magnitude about 3.4, Shook some buildings but that was about it, thankfully. I am also keeping an eye on the situation along the fault lines. In terms of stored energy a massive amount of energy on par with that of great quakes is stored in the area north of the Indian Plate. With the shift that this plate underwent following the Great Sumatran Quake I am concerned about other great quakes in this region and a domino effect. In an aside I just got my grades from this term at university. I got two A's One in a course about Aging in Society and one in a course about Human Behavior in the Social Environment. Not bad for a brain damaged genius. The fight to regain my cognitive functioning was painful beyond measure. The university provides me a venue to relearn facts and data that was damaged via the neurotoxin I was exposed to. I am having to rebuild entire entire sets of data in my mind that were errased by the neurotoxin, at my age this is somewhat diffcult but is something I have to do. My speach and verbal skills are improving and I am regaining my vocabulary. Spelling has always been a problem for me, but it is improving as well. As the new neural networks I have had to forge in my brain mature learning function becomes easier for me. The math center of my brain is damaged to and remains functional at a limited level. I learned in my aging in society course that this area declines as we age and that damage to it is likely irreversable. Geometric centers of my brain, however, have increased in development likely by way of compensation. Over all it has been a very informative semester at the university for both me and my instuctors. My Best Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Here's a follow up post on MONDian gravity, posted today on BAUT forums: http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=887293&postcount=296 As you can see, there is some sort of MOND effect from variable gravity G and in some fashion similar to Pioneer Anomaly. However, this is far from conclusive proof. I had not yet worked out the numbers for all the planets, but in the case of Jupiter and Saturn, the first two gas giants, the acceleration towards the Sun is a delta -a = 8.417E-7 m s^-2 + 0.002, so neat, but not quite same as Pioneer anomaly. Pluto's at first showed up anomalous, later corrected, due to arithmetic error, so same as others. Interesting that they had not yet "eaten my lunch". Here's one more page where I listed this idea to be challenged, astronomy forum. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Universe's First Objects Possibly Seen  http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/061218_first_objects.html We're talking about images 13 billion light years away, which means that these stars and galaxies are less than a billion years old, if the Big Bang started 13.7 billion years ago*, as postulated. However, surprise surprise of surprises, the universe is also poplulated with loads of stars and galaxy clusters, some stars much larger than our own sun, as if they had been there all along. Scratching their heads, but they can't quite understand how this can be, that stars and galaxies can form within a few hundred million years, when our own Earth is estimated to be about 4.5 billion years old. What's the story?! I think the real story is that the universe is infinite, zillions of years older than the so-called Big Bang, that there was no such animal, and that what we as the 'early universe' is actually nothing more or less than where light redshifts naturally (due to very high space gravity G) and basically peters out of visibility. End of story. Still, I enjoy reading the contortions astronomers must go through to explain their 'BigaBanga'. *(Note, recent research shows universe may be 'older' and larger than estimates, more like 15.8 billion years old and 180 bly wide, assuming there was a Big Bang.) Ivan | ||
| Naive |
What about the possibility that our 13.7 billion year old "big bang" is just one "local phenomena"? This bang might simply be the universal equivalent of a supernova. There might have been, or still are big bangs happening all over the universe 60 billion, 100 billion, 900 billion, etc. light years away. Once again we base everything upon our own limitations. Naive | ||
| Ivan |
If Newton's G is variable, then it must have a limit. Following up on this post on MOND equation for force and gravity: (delta) -a = (GM a_o/ r*AUr)^1/2 ... as derived from Milgrom's F= ma^2/ a_0 http://www.humancafe.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=88&post=2764#POST2764 which gave the answer when worked out as delta -a = 8.417E-7 m s^-2 + 0.002 http://www.humancafe.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=88&post=2816#POST2816 there must be of necessity some limiting factor where G stops growing, at it's cut-off 'frequency' per Axiomatic. I had worked this out elsewhere, that maximum G is reached at about 50,000 AU from our Sun (which is about 1/5th way to the next nearest star system, Alpha Centaury, ~270K AU) and where its magnitude reaches at about 10X^-6 (vs. 6.67X10^-11 here on Earth), so that in all intergalactic space G for all molecules and 'dead' matter out there is very high (which is why cosmic light redshifts traveling through that space, at the Hubble constant). So when the 'r' of the modified MOND equation is very very large, while the AUr, the distance of 1 AU, remains constant, the G grows to its maximum of about 10X-6 Nm^2kg^-2 in deep space, and so the F value stabilizes at F = GM/r over very large distances in deep space, such as galaxy outer rims, etc.. More on this as it develops, where MOND's equation for gravity matches (approximately) variable G as postulated by Axiomatic. Note: This limiting high G is for deep space only, and not for a galactic center where G is at its maximum possible mangitude, and all light ceases to be visible around the black hole. Where all light and energy lambda cancel on a point, such as all ambient light and energy of a galaxy, then that G is no longer modified by this electromagnetic energy, so it reaches its extreme high, G = c. This does not happen in deep space because there is always light energy modifying G down to its limit. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Yes Ivan we did have major quakes along the two fault lines we were discussing the one along the pacfic plate and the one along the secondary major fault linte that includes Tehran. http://www.iris.edu/seismon/ As I said earlier I am concerned about a major release of stored energy along the fault lines in the near future. I will be keeping an eye on these developments as things progress, but we are I fear in danger of further significant quakes in the near future. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Ed, indeed there's a lot of activity both in Pacific 'ring of fire' and Central Asian plateaus. Noted that Southwestern Australia just had a good shake, which lines up with the Phillipines shakers. Taiwan just had a bad one on Boxing Day: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/12/27/asia/AS_GEN_Taiwan_Quake.php Tsunami watch? Apparently none generated from these shakers, though a meter high one was expected, then called off. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Yes Ivan activity is high along the fault lines. As you and I have seen the great quake had world wide effects. In the briefing I threw in the post box after being laid off by the Government, and following the Great Samatra Quake, I indicated with a series of arrows the likely location future quakes long the Ring of Fire along with increases in volcanic activity. The quakes have been breaking in accordance with that estimate. I also note my predication of quake activity matches the gravity map produced by NASA. Not bad work for a couple of guys with home computers and life times of experience. As to myself I am doing much better since I was poisoned in the line of duty. According to one of the doctors that evaluated me at Duke University I had the highest recorded levels of neurotoxin in my blood stream seen to date. The only other case that approaches mine is that of a young boy that had 800-900 times the normal level of nuerotoxin in his body following years of exposure to industrial grade pesticides. My exposure level is recorded at 1200 times normal and is the subject of a Journal article in a periodical that deals with toxic exposures. That article is as follows: Abou-Donia, M.B. and L.K. Garrettson (2000). Detection of neurofilament autoantibodies in human serum following chemically induced neurologic disorder: A case study. Environ. Epidem. Toxicol. 2:37-41. The fact that I survived this disorder and have gone on to achieve Dean's list performance in a Master's degree program, along with my other achievements, is reguarded as something of a medical miracle. By rights according to science I should be dead. In effect a dead man according to science is typing this note. The boy who suffered an 800-900 time normal level exposure to nerve agent also suffered from serious neuro-muscular and CNS deficiets. My wife bought me a Celtic Christian Cross ring from Ireland as one of my Christmas presents. I wear it as a sign of my faith and what the Churches took in broken and left to die by the enemies of this nation and cast out by the Bush Administration. When I walk in a Church the ministers bow their heads to God and Christ and speak of miracles while the scientists write journal articles and do presentations at international medical conferences. For the Federal Government and Bush Administration that locked me out of the research and development field and military industrial complex. I wanted to show them what helped win the Cold War and just what type of games I could play from the streets using access to the internet and 24 years of Intelligence and covert operations training. My wife and I decided to do a photo safari to Africa this year instead of visiting the Middle East. The following year we are going to Italy and the Vatican. When I stand in St Peter's square the Pope in Rome from his window will look out on a man that helped coordinate the downfall of the Repulicans and who walks with a lethal dose of poison in his viens and Celtic Cross on his finger. When I do so it is intended to remind the Pope of things long ago when Christianity First Came to Europe and that the Celtic Catholics still exist as force to be reckoned with. It is also to remind hime of what my wife's and my family have done down the ages in service to Christianity and debt that the Federal Government and United States Private sector owes us for our services and the theft of our dreams. My wife until the cancer robbed her of career was being considered as a mission specialist on the space shuttle. I until the corrupt, greedy intelligence community and Bush Administration got a hold of me, was helping build high technology systems and would be now working at NASA living in my dream home in Florida. Such are the man and woman that will stand in St Peter's square benneath the Pope's window. When he looks out he will see the decendents of the men and women that stood with the Saints and fought before the Holy City and faced Saladeen the Great. Strange Anomalies of Science indeed and a lesson to the enemies of the United States and the American Leadership of what a man armed with science and religion can do when he sets his mind to it. My Best Ed Chesky | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Where all light and energy lambda cancel on a point, such as all ambient light and energy of a galaxy, then that G is no longer modified by this electromagnetic energy, so it reaches its extreme high, G = c. This does not happen in deep space because there is always light energy modifying G down to its limit. Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 10:21 am: Ivan Is there a minimum value for light intensity below which is must become zero? For analogy, in computers we have a smallest floating point number below which the floating point number must be zero. If there is such a minimal light intensity, can we estimate that? As a corollary, does it mean that the black holes are the cause of energy becoming less than the minimum rather than it having infinite gravity and absorbing all radiant energy making that black hole as a massive object? Let us hope that this New Year helps us understand the 'Black Holes' better and chart our path for space colonies. Happy New Year! | ||
| Ivan |
Black Holes Happen. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6231623.stm Black hole found in ancient lair This is just what happens to large amalgams of hot stars, that inside their energetic environment's center, where all ambient energy comes together on a point, the canceling effect of lambda converging releases the very high gravity that exists without electromagnetic energy, so forms a 'black hole'. The reason it is a 'hole' is that gravity reigns supreme there, and the reason it is 'black' is because all light lambda cancels there, so it becomes invisible. That's how the Axiomatic Equation tells it, and I agree. Ivan Ps: "Is there a minimum value of light intensity below which it must become zero?" Good question, Mohideen, but I'm not sure such a thing exists, at least not in terms of intensity, or energy density, that I know of. In mine aboves, the idea is that when the wavelengths (lambda) cancel out, the light e.m. energy disappears, and what re-appears in its place is its gravity nemesis. I discussed something like this on this BAUT page, talking about the 'cosmic microwave background' or CMB. So you see, the universe is a 'duality' at its core, if this is right, and e.m. energy modifies atomic mass gravity, so no energy means all gravity, i.e., black hole. | ||
| Ivan |
Leaving 'Dark Matter' in the dark. There's no end of confusion over what this ellusive mythical Dark Matter stuff is, though I suspect it is nothing more than higher G ordinary matter. But, no matter, here is what this article says: Radio Telescope Could Make Dark Matter Visible... oh, ah hum... http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070103_tw_radiomap.html , this is the best they can do? "Scientists think the stars and glowing gas visible to optical telescopes make up only about 10 percent of the matter in the universe. The rest is thought to be a mysterious form of non-luminous matter called "dark" matter.Right, the 'dark age' for 'dark matter' is about how I see it too. Of course there is 'dark matter' because of gravitational lensing, since those 'cold dark regions of space' sport a much higher G for any atomic matter there, which means they can be used for gravitational lensing. Now, I ask, why doesn't it penetrate to our scientific astronomy savants that "if gravitational lensing is caused by 'dark matter' that maybe the gravity of that 'dark' hydrogen gas and other gases in cold deep space is due to GRAVITY being so much greater there"? No, too much to hope for, I suppose, until they actually measure for G variance, and then maybe, just maybe the light will turn on... So here's something cute until then: http://home.kimo.com.tw/liourongfenq/19_99.swf Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
So you see, the universe is a 'duality' at its core, if this is right, and e.m. energy modifies atomic mass gravity, so no energy means all gravity, i.e., black hole. Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 10:22 am: Ivan Is not this the same as the famous equation E = m x c x c governing all nuclear power? You are applying the equation in the reverse, stating that absence of energy means all that is there is mass. Am I right? If that be so, EFTV Energy From The Vacuum follows as a corollary as vacuum is the absence of mass and thus must be full of energy. | ||
| Ivan |
Famous Energy equation revisited.
That's what it appears to mean to me too. If there is an absence of 'energy', that quantity we call 'mass' is all there is, which then means only the 'gravity potential' exists. This showed up in the simplified version of the Axiomatic Eq., viz: E = hf = hc/L(prot_m) = mc^2 = (1-g)c^2 [note, may need Netscape browser to view it correctly] where h = Planck's constant, f = frequency, c = likghtspeed in vacuum, L = e.m. lambda, (prot_m) = proton mass, g = proton gravitational constant; and where m=mass is always 'one' in any unit of measure desired. Since we use kilograms in our standard units, the mass is represented as 1 kg, though more correctly it is represented as kg/kg = 1. * It's the (1-g)c^2 that defines mass as energy, a modification of Einstein's famous E = mc^2, whereby the more energy there is, the lower the g, and higher 'energy content' for atomic mass, but lower gravity; conversely the less energy there is, the higher the g, so mass is composed of more gravity per atom. This is the condition encountered far from a hot source of e.m. energy, like our Sun, so gravity grows, expressed as Newton's G, the farther you go from a star. Out in deep space, because all energy is reduced to a very low level, i.e., 2.7 Kelvin, as all background energy of deep space, energy is very low; if so, then G must be very high. This was explored, though not yet conclusively accepted as theory, on the pages to do with Axiomatic Equation, also at E = 9e+16 J, which represent's Earth's orbit solar energy level for ths equation. Planetary spin with regards to ZPF/ZPE which fits this theory was explored here; and other pages explored these ideas some years back both on New PeoplesBook Forums and Outta this World Physics. This exploration continues, so any new ideas are very welcome. At this time, the supporting evidence for how Energy and Gravity are a 'duality' relationship shows up in the Pioneer Anomaly, gas giant atmospheres, including their moons' atmospheres (tiny Titan has 10 times Earth's atmosphere), very large elliptical comet orbits (gassing out, or de-compacting, by Jupiter's orbit), Earth's anomalous spin (slows at perihelion), so-called neutron stars very high spin, tiny Pluto's anomalous atmosphere, all of which point towards a much higher G out there away from the Sun's energy. There are others, like why all galaxies have a 'black hole' at their center, or MOND outer galaxy flat rotation curves, but all this is now in exploration phase, still need to measure for G in outer solar system. Someday I'll write a small book to put it all together. It all started here, when we asked if there could be a "Theory of Everything" as a philosophical question; the answer appears to be "yes", if the universe has a duality where energy is inversely proportional to gravity. So you see, Mohideen, a lot of work had gone into developing this idea, not yet a theory, and the progression of this idea can be found in this Bread Crumbs link. As you said, the 'vacuum energy' may have a lot more hidden in it than we know at this time. Ivan *(Kilogram is an Earth based measure of mass, is different for other orbital regions and needs to be adjusted when calculated for other regions, which is why kg/kg works better, so it is then universal.) | ||
| Ivan |
Distorted 'dark matter' universe, a pix worth 1000 words Hubble makes 3D dark matter map http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6235751.stm  "According to one researcher, the findings provide "beautiful confirmation" of standard theories to explain how structures in the Universe evolved over billions of years." I doubt it, but let's keep looking. There is no mystery, simply higher G between 'hot' galaxies of lower G, so simple. Here's another article on the same, with more details: http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn10903-dark-matter-mapped-in-3d-for-first-time.html , where it says: "Some areas show clumps of dark matter that do not have galaxies in them... Other areas show concentrations of ordinatory matter with no corresponding dark matter, 'a puzzle'..." Well, duhh, no kidding! How about the two as 'mutually exclusive'? Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
From the link given by Ivan: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6235751.stm === "What would be an enormous puzzle would be to find big, luminous galaxies sitting out there in the middle of nowhere with no dark matter around them. That really would be shocking." === Given the dual wave - particle of nature it is natural to find packets of interference patterns where the light intensity is high. The expectation is that there should be plenty of such interference points where light has high intensity. Whether the lump is big is a matter of definition. It would be nice to put some size on 'big' so that we know when we reach a milestone. Just for curiosity, from the history of science how long did it take to agree the duality in light - the wave and particle nature of light? | ||
| Anon |
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 02:37 pm: Yes Ivan we did have major quakes along the two fault lines we were discussing the one along the pacfic plate and the one along the secondary major fault linte that includes Tehran. http://www.iris.edu/seismon/ As I said earlier I am concerned about a major release of stored energy along the fault lines in the near future. I will be keeping an eye on these developments as things progress, but we are I fear in danger of further significant quakes in the near future. Ed _________________________________________________ Yes a massive quake did occur along the Pacific plate IAW with what I said less than 30 days ago and the briefing slides I threw in the Post Box. As I sit here drinking coffee, I am glad that a massive loss of life did not occur. The federal government threw me out of the militiary industrial complex and all I had was compass ruler and my brain. With 1200 times a normal dose of nerve agent in my body I fought back against all odds of recovery to achieve a 3.5 GPA in college, while working 60 plus hours a week in a mentally and physically demanding job. Now you know what helped win the cold war and took on director of CIA, a president and a congress over a security clearence. I have also been trained in nuclear and guerilla warfare. Given access to a nuclear launch system I could rupture seismic fault lines, collapse continental shelves and other features to induce earthquakes and tidal waves on top of the nuclear blast effects. Such is the mind that the Federal Government threw to the wolves. Osama's bringing down the World Trade Center is child's play for me. As I sit here sipping my coffee I look down at the Celtic Cross and the tree of life on my ring. Be thankful I found Jesus Christ and accepted his teachings. There are a host of governments in the world that would be me large sums of money for the data contained in my head. Be also thankful I am decended from the founding families of the United States and would never betray this nation. I have over 24 years read every Top Secret document I could get my hands on regarding weapons development, military forces, geo-political forces and environmental developments. If the government could classify me and lock me in a vault they would. When I finish my studies at Univeristy I expect to be rehired by the federal government. Before then I will be taking a trip to South Africa and the Vatican in Rome. During those trips I will speak to a number of people on a number of subjects. Until I walked out the door on the Federal Government I used to have to get permission to travel to foreign nations due to the nature of the information I have in my brain. I expect that the Federal Government security specialists in NSA, CIA and the rest are having fits at this time over all of this and the danger to national security posed by me being off the federal payroll. I like to think of the stress the security officials experience when I travel and about what I may say as punishment for their failure to follow the laws or man and god with regards to how they treat those in their care and custody, be they terrorist prisoners or illegal immigrants trying to better themselves by doing the work our citizens refuse to do. Ed | ||
| Ivan |
Hi Ed, thanks for update on the big earthquake of the coast of Kuril islands. There was a Japan tsunami warning issued, but since called off: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6258167.stm "Small waves reached the north-eastern coast of Hokkaido Island at 1452 (0552 GMT), about 90 minutes after the quake which had a magnitude of 8.2." A possible warning was also given for our west coast, but fortunately it did not materialize. I am surprised by the number of earthquakes the Kurils experienced recently, this last one at sea, 8.2, was a big one. Keep us updated, thanks. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
Your welcome Ivan, As the melting of the polar caps increases the entire system of systems that is the earth is undergoing stress. Changes in the position of mass, and other factors have caused strain to be placed on areas of this planet that can not withstand that strain without reacting to it. At this juncture all we can do is prepare for the worse and pray for the best. A I type this the temp outside my house is well above normal for this time of year. It is an unprecidented development. It is just a sign of what is to come. To face the damage to come we will need to reform our system of insurance, disaster relief and improve our communications capabilities. I expect down the road after picking up my certifications at the university I will be working with various organizations to include church groups doing and supporting international relief missions. What the federal government threw out, the state turned down for employment and the private capatalistic industry abused and exploited the churches picked up. When I travel to South Africa, I will be staying in Kruger National Park and traveling throughout the country side. I am looking forward to the trip. Instead of a gun I and my wife will be taking a digital camera. My days of carrying a weapon are over. As I look at the gravity map produced by NASA I note that but for the Bush administration I would be ,in a few years, working at NASA helping build the moonbase. Instead I will be in a few years, traveling the world aiding and comforting the injured and dying suffering from the effects of global climate change, natural disasters and war and terrorism. It is funny how fate works. For over 1400 years my family has served the churches, defended them, fought for and against them and aided the sick and dying. During the plauge years we gave last rights to the victims and brought out the dead and comforted the survivors. Such is what I will be doing in the future and am in training for. God is harsh but fair task master and some are called to bring aid to his children, while others are selected to develop the technology that will free us from this planet and the missery of disease and poverty. To salvage our civilization both sets of people will have to work together as the ravages of global climate change manefest themselves. The great storms are coming and after them will come a winowing of peoples. Into this darkness, I and others will walk to aid the fallen and injured. In this battle to come we fight for the survival of technological civilization itself. My Best Ed | ||
| ANON ANON |
Take a guy that has read nothing but Top Secret SCI documents for 24 years and then walks out on the federal government. Then that guy travels around the world unsupervised. He also then survives poison, goes on to trisect the angle, solve the billiard problem, predict earthquakes, storm tracks, perform huricane damage estimates and then posts a list of everyone in the federal government on the Church door that screwed him over on his security clearence for everyone and his brother to read, in a move that reminds everyone of Martin Luther. I have attached the rules regarding the movement of SCI cleared personnel around the globe below. Just what exactly is going on here? Just what is the Federal Government trying to cover up and what was in the blood tests, MRI and CAT Scans that have them so scared of one individual? What DNA mystery is operating here and what did the NIH find that has them shaking their heads? ANON ANON "If you are approved for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) or selected Special Access Programs (SAPs), you have additional requirements relating to foreign travel. Your security office should be advised well in advance of your departure, if possible. Risks During Foreign Travel provides threat awareness information for foreign travelers but necessarily deals with those general threats that apply broadly to many countries. Specific criminal, terrorist, and intelligence threats differ greatly from one country to another and are changing constantly. Before traveling, you should have the most current information pertaining to the countries you will be visiting. Following your trip, complete any required post-foreign travel forms and report any unusual incidents that occurred during your travel. Foreign Contacts: All cleared personnel must report contacts with individuals of any foreign nationality, either within or outside the scope of their official activities, in which: "Illegal or unauthorized access is sought to classified or otherwise sensitive information. The employee is concerned that he/she may be the target of actual or attempted exploitation by a foreign entity." Persons approved for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and selected Special Access Programs (SAPs) have additional reporting requirements as discussed in Reporting Foreign Contacts. A problem often arises in trying to follow policy on reporting foreign contacts. Many people do not recognize they are a target until the assessment and development process is quite far advanced. It is difficult to know when a foreign national who establishes friendly contact with you has an ulterior motive. To check whether you might be a target, see How Do I Know When I’m Being Targeted and Assessed?" | ||
| Anon |
For Anon Anon, You raise a good question Anon Anon. The government's scientists and doctors probed and found something they could not explain. During that probing they opened a door to a place they were affraid to venture. I and my family members have walked through that door many times as we lay dying from wounds and poison. On the other side of that door is another form of existance and in it exist beings that were once worshiped as Gods. Then came the coming of Christ and the world changed forever. In Building 100 at the Joint Analysis Center Molesworth England is a wall of |