WHAT'S AT THE CENTER OF THE COSMOS...A POSSIBLE SOLUTION BY WAY OF "COSMIC JET COSMOLOGY"

What might we see at the center of the universe if we look up? Licensed cosmotologists say we can't fall out of the cosmos! 

First of all consider the center of the universe.

 Conventional cosmological wisdom tells us that in the cosmos space itself is expanding and at every point.. everything's accelerating away from every other point so there is no center.

 This reminds me of Einstein's idea that gravity has no source, yet if you take a pendulum and you let it oscillate it continues and stops towards the center of the Earth, it has a source and this is one of my ideas about why relativity for gravity at any rate may be incomplete. Einstein like Mach believed that gravity is essentially the same thing as the inertia, and inertia has no source so Einstein then concluded the gravity has no source.

 Here Einstein says because inertial forces have no source and move in many directions and because Mach and Einstein believed gravity and inertia are essentially the same thing, inertia has no source, inertia is gravity, so gravity like the pendelum has no source. 

 The universe has no center? I don't necessarily agree..

 We can imagine a hand grenade or other explosive event and our cosmos' outward radiance is also powered by a radiant explosion of something like gas from the center. If we think of the shrapnel as like the galaxies or other points to the cosmos we can say that every point is radiating away from every other point powered by the gas also causing the explosion, but this in no way means there is no center.

 One cosmological solution that has been devised is called cosmic jet vortex cosmology. And while I'm not its author I was having a fast month months ago! Edison and Sir Issac Newton were both common improvers. I think jet cosmology is an idea that has potential value, and as you'll see in this post I've made  improvements about it as with my ideas about how relativity, gravity and inertia may be much involved with cosmology.

  Vortex Jet cosmology hopes to compare what we might find out about the universe to the idea that the physics on the most huge scale we might find yet or eventually, are reasonably much like what we find on the level of the galaxies or even the gravitational and magnetic field of the earth.

 In Cosmic Jet Cosmology therefore the same magnetic fields like the Earth has are involved. There are two poles and we're inside of one of them radiating outward, this is the cosmic expansion and acceleration powered by the huge magnetic fields of the cosmos. There's a cosmic equator of the disc as the WMAP probe may have found and this version of the cosmos doesn't violate energy conservation because it has a connecting loop of the field, so energy is neither created or destroyed. I consider this possibility to be a major advantage if it is proven as more evidence is found.

 The magnetic fields may be coordinated and accelerated by the dark energy which I would think may be the same thing as what's causing the pulsars to slow down for which they won the Nobel prize by way of the gravity waves. This is the low energy reradiant electromagnetic field that Einstein thought was the cause of the balance of the cosmos so it didn't collapse into zero over long periods of time.

 

 I think of this inertial radiation as electromagnetic and so it's at the speed of light and fits well with relativity and its speed as by LIGO.

 More particularly, since Einstein thought of light as a particle unchanged from emission to absorption in special relativity, LIGO particles radiate out not in, and because they have sides so they're disconnected like particles of gas, they are at the speed of light, and I believe faster than light in waves that may be inducing the particles outward. In any physical system there's a fundamental need for both waves and particles (or waves at any rate. Einstein said it's impossible to imagine a fundamental particle that can both omit and absorb waves).

The particles of LIGO move out at the speed of light but the waves may change phase and move much faster by Maxwell's method, you lighten up to move faster and the flexing of the field combined with a phase change may wrap around the quanta so relativity is not as much involved. This might give the low energy field enough power to power cosmic acceleration outward, also explaining the early rapid expansion at faster than light of the cosmos.

ABOUT THE HUBBLE SHIFT

According to the Hubble evidence and later research like the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the cosmos is completely isotropic about the galaxies. This doesn't disprove the possibility of Jet Cosmology, because we can imagine it's a reasonable assumption that if we're in the jet as it begins to expand outward and upward in a cone so it's possible we would be near the center top of that cone just by a random bet.

  By cosmic jet cosmology this would say even while it looks like the distribution of the mass around us is uniform, even if with more distance it isn't because we're at the top central area of the cone even if  this may seem like stretching the idea that we're special in science. 

 In the history of science, first the Earth was thought to be the center of universe, then the solar system, then the galaxy and the idea that we were special was more and more uncommon.  

 It might seem improbable that just by luck where we are in the cosmos is right at the center of all this expansion where the motion of the matter and the jet looks like it's more uniform as we look outward into the cosmos. Even so it would seem a near probability we would be in the cosmic disc if it exists, but there seems to be as much probability we are in the jets as the disc. But it might be 30% we are in the jet. However like a stream flowing most at the center the chances might only this much. For eclipses it's just luck that here and now the moon fits the sun in size. Events like this aren't uncommon.

At the same time this may solve the problem of how you can't pull the universe out of a hat because it would violate energy conservation at the beginning. If the universe has always existed and is more like a symmetry than an event with time in general, it's existed forever at any rate in time with respect to energy conservation and so there was no necessity to solve the moment of creation. 

This could also solve the problem of why there's more matter than antimatter all around us. When physicists create matter in the lab with particle accelerators they also create just as much antimatter and yet all around us all we find is matter supposedly. 

 This could be explained with cosmic jet cosmology if like the jets of galaxies one of the cosmic jets that we're in has matter, plus the other one the other side has antimatter as the strong force in the center of the cosmos may separate the two charges like a giant Van de Graaff generator.

 

 It's not yet known but I believe if this is so we will look to the jets of galaxies to see if one is matter and the other is antimatter.

Currently it's believed by astronomers that the jets have matter and some antimatter but they are mostly matter. I would think the cosmic jets may be with somewhat modulated physics and with so much energy they might make more pure antimatter and matter jets. A possiblity is that one jet of each galaxy is mostly matter and the other mostly antimatter. If we looked at the higher power jets and this is more distinct with more change like this, it may imply that it may also work on the cosmic level and this may be possible to find with more research.

 Carl Sagan would say strong claims need strong evidence. Hawking's idea that the cosmos began in nothing and ends in nothing in a way contradicts all the evidence there is anywhere around us. All around us are connections by energy conservation, one of the most well proven ideas in the history of science (or the most if we disagree with general relativity, which I tend to). Instead of the beginning and end cut off by artificial evidence or no evidence, Jet Cosmology offers a loop connecting the beginning and end, so like the electromagnetic fields in all the events around us, connection is maintained.

And what about the evidence about the isotropic low energy microwave field?

 I think this might be related directly to dark matter or gravity which is more spherical around the galaxies and if it's faster than light then it's connecting by it's ability to smooth itself out more continuously, not because of the inflation event necessarily but because gravity is connecting it up. 

 Even so I believe that the low energy microwave field itself may be slightly anisotropic more towards the area of what might be the cosmic jet.

The main reason we can't even see yet the edge of the jet may be because of the huge scale of the cosmos. Historically this isn't to be unexpected.. most people in history had no idea how huge the cosmos already was going to be!

 The reason everything seems to be expanding out in all directions might be because the central part of a stream moves the fastest and so there's considerably more probability that we are in the center of the jet where it's starting to expand out the most to the side and earlier on it would have been expanding more by the jet than by the sides, in a more linear or tubular flow like that of the jets of some masses like black holes.

 The jet will slow down the acceleration as the galaxies move outward by simple change of the radiant energy from the center of the cosmos. Some preliminary evidence seems to show a possible reduction of the acceleration. CLICK HERE or see link at the end of post for the phys.org page about this.

But as I say due to the phase change on the cosmic scale the jet of the cosmos would be more fizzled out and so it doesn't look like a solid jet as by the galaxies.

One idea I've had is that as the cosmic inflation event took place, part of the fields of more massive quanta like the baryons were moving faster than light by way of events like Chou's tunneling experiment.

He found the speed of the tunneling through nuclei measured on a shelf top machine was about 1.3 times the speed of light.

Chou himself believed that while the information component of the wave was partially moving faster than speed of light as long as it was trimmed off it would seem to still fit relativity, but I tend to believe that relativity tells us there's nothing to trim.

 If the tunneling is about 1.3 times the speed of light this would fit the idea that the fractional charges of QCD are lightening up that much lighter to travel faster than light as by Maxwell's idea. The fractional charges average out to about a third lighter than 100% like an electric charge and so in my idea GWD  they move about that much faster than the speed of light. I suggest that people with machines like Chou's look for evidences of changes in the spectra associated with the tunneling. I'm not an experimental or mathematical physicist but I am good with lots of machines and to me physics seems to be a good machine to be involved with.

For cosmology this might imply that during the time of the inflationary event (which actually will be a continuous event for that part of the energy of the jet as we might look towards the center of the cosmos) the heavy quanta might be accelerated faster than light by the superfusion jet from the center of the cosmos, and so we might look for fractional charge spectra related partially to both jets of masses like black holes and briefly about supernova at the time their reverse the inward to outward force as I say and also perhaps even in lightning on Jupiter type worlds in other exo star systems which may be from the same source as cosmic rays and so we might look in the cosmic rays for also for evidence of superfusion in the spectra. 

Physicists have believed that there's no limit to the number of forces possible, so my belief is that perhaps in addition to the spectra of the fractional charges from the inflation event as we look towards the center of the cosmos, we might also see evidence for faster motion at higher energy yet and so there may be many complex types of spectra as we look to the center of the cosmos none of which may be caused by conventional physics.

 

You may ask what about the friction of the particles and as I say on my general physics page (see the link below if you like) this could be solved by having the particles around what I call the radius of action (ROA) of the heavy quanta, and in addition to a generating the code of the EPR that only those two quanta find, this small constellation of particles around each quanta would also generate a sort of torsion force that would make the waves flex outside the radius of action (ROA).

 So by way of the force, the small particles around the ROA of the electron and positive charge generate a force between them conveyed by the waves that moves the light by way of Maxwell's idea that there's a resilient medium there.

 The tension itself may be maintained by a phase change inside the heavy quanta that makes it faster than light and gives the heavy quantum more massive spinning energy. By relativity rest mass has no more more than plus or minus one with the electric charge of the spin of the quanta merely at the speed of light, but if mass is indeed spinning energy we have the cause of rest mass relativity doesn't explain.

  The waves themselves are made of dark matter and dark energy and if they have the change of phase so while they aren't easy to find there's a lot of roundabout evidence this might be something to do with this as the entire generation of mathematical physicists devoted themselves to consideration of what they thought was not an improbable belief about this.

Einstein said if the low energy field is found relativity totally fails but I strongly believe special relativity is not going to fail, so instead I believe the waves simply have a change of phase and operate between the lines of the classical electromagnetic field lines so that their interaction with those lines tends to not be picking up a lot of relativistic mass and the other effects we can see with machines like accelerators.

 I can compare my own ideas to those of established cosmologists, and the idea of Hawking was that the center of the cosmos was a black hole and will end in a black hole.

  But this relates to what I think about T hooft's idea and others. T hooft, the Nobel Prize winner, believes that, as I do too, the center of a black hole actually doesn't have a singularity where everything disappears because it would violate energy conservation here and this would explain why you can have different size of black holes because they have different masses and they aren't all infinite as as astronomy shows and thus often aren't the same.

But instead there's this force inside converting to the reaction force in action reaction pairs with the gravity and what I call superfusion and superfusion is a stronger force. So it explains the cosmic jets of galaxies or even supernovas by brief reversal of the force that goes inward to then reradiate the supernova outward. No other known physics theoretical or not can explain this about supernova reradiation. 

 I think superfusion is not stable, that is to say it would fizzle out really fast in the supernova. So we don't find the superheavy superfusion quanta around us and for the supernova at any rate we can't find much evidence of unusual spectral lines for this event, so I believe we might also look for this in the spectra of the cosmic jets as well as the supernovas or perhaps in lightning from like Jupiter type worlds where perhaps most of the cosmic rays might also come from.

 So we might look in the spectra for evidence of superfusion. And instead of looking to the center of universe where we just see nothing, we'll see instead structure. This is because cosmic energy is not created or destroyed.

 By way of cosmic jet cosmology at any rate we would be merely in the center of one of the jets like the jets of galaxies yet on a giant frame and these are powered by superfusion. So the cosmic radiance outward will be powered by superfusion but it has structure inside. 

 The singularity, by Hawking's or Einstein's idea, would just go to zero. There's no structure at all. And still we might find complex structures, like they find some black holes that have jets and others that don't. In my belief as Maxwell said because of the uniformity of all the physics around us, all the waves and quanta of all sizes and energies, are manufactured not created. And if this action reaction creates all the quanta we find around us and then it radiates out of the jets to reach us, this is essentially from gravity and so if it fundamentally relates to the other forces, gravity is not simple as Einstein believed.

This might be because it may have shielding from the particles inside the event horizon perhaps. So it points to a more complex structure than Einstein thought because gravity is more complex. And if you look at the galaxies, they're really small compared to the size of the cosmos.

And so I think that maybe there's a phase change for the jets of the cosmos that make it so that the galaxies are smaller on the more cosmic level than the giant blobs we see for galactic jets and for this I think there might be a change of phase. 

While the galaxies all rotate as solid masses and also they're spinning faster than they should be, they should explode by centrifugal force. This may be because the gravity is faster than it should be otherwise because  the radial lines of centrifugal force are like the classical electromagnetic field lines that lay down the tracks outward for the gravity to follow in and so it rotates as a solid body but faster with the gravity stronger and also the inertial lines are stronger with the gravity so it spins faster than it should and the phase change is causing that. I think this relates to my idea that gravity is faster than light, so it's actually not radiating out like they found with LIGO.

In my belief they found only the inertial particles which are radiating out only at the speed of light by relativity, which is so important about inertia and uniform motion. 

 Relativity can't describe acceleration well. Because like mass and inertia an acceleration really isn't is the same thing as linear motion.

  I've been saying for years and  experiments now show that hot and cold, heat and cooling are not the same thing as had been believed. You can't just reverse them 100% in time. And so there's something fundamentally different to a considerable degree like I believe about mass and energy also. 

 It's easier to convert mass to energy than energy to mass. While mass and energy are conserved and not converted, this seems like relativity is incomplete.

 And I think that the galaxies are changing phase. So what you have is a sort of inward radiation of the gravity particles at the center of the universe and other masses following the classical electromagnetic field lines and the inertial waves might also radiate inward with the inertial particles outward causing the force outward of cosmic acceleration, which are like the lines of inertia, but they're both much stronger and they're powered by superfusion also.

So the superfusion is going to power the giant magnetic fields and this would explain the cosmic acceleration.

At the center of the cosmic jet we might see faster motion like a stream or a river where the center flows the fastest.

We can't see the cosmic disc because  refraction of light through the jets as the shear force might change from the inside to the outside of the jet. Even so I think some of the light might be able to reach us.

Supposedly the WMAP probe has found a cosmic equator that this isn't yet consensus by astronomers.

 In the Cosmic Jet Cosmology this might be because by one jet of matter and the other of antimatter and they bend over to reach the cosmic equator where they then release a lot of energy as they combine. So in cosmic cosmology we might look at this for the anti-matter matter interaction. 

Superfusion is unstable in the mass and energy around us because unlike in relativity the more mass you have for the quanta in subatomic physics it's half life is generally reduced. Relativity tells us mass slows down time but more mass makes the small quantum clocks spin faster and they have a shorter half life to they're less stable. I  believe that superfusion could only be stable inside the singularity because of the disproof of relativity by this method or certainly by extension. The superfusion quanta are spinning faster than light and this is the only way they could develop enough centrifugal force to withstand the super strong gravity at the singularity.

Superfusion is the only force strong enough to power the jets. Fusion because it's not strong enough has already been ruled out and gravity is only attractive. I believe that the same spectrum may be present for superfusion and also the cosmic jets nearer to the center of the universe.

 If the universe is a giant black hole as some have believed then we would all be accelerating at the speed of light to the center not outward.

About the Multiverse I would tend to think we only consider evidence that explains things we already know of and makes predictions which mostly the Multiverse doesn't do. 

 One reason those who promote this idea believe the universe is much much larger than we see is because of the inflation event.

If it was actually high speed on a large scale then the Multiverse idea especially Eternal Inflation implies that there's essentially no limit to the expansion at faster than light.

At least anyway this would seem to be a logical event if we accept the inflation event. And this also seems to be evidence against inflation, why didn't it continue at faster than light?

But if we have a jet at the center of the Cosmos due to the gravity moving inward to power it by the reaction force it's not infinite.

Anything infinite in the cosmos would overpower All the Rest by its Absolute Energy and so we couldn't be here by the Multiverse inflation idea.

If instead the cosmic jet is powered by gravity moving inward and radiating back outward, it's finite and this both solves the cause of inflation, and also means it's not infinitely outward. We can accept based on the evidence of the universe may be considerably more vast, but since there's no evidence yet for any kind of infinite inflation I believe just like everything else around us we see that the universe is finite.

 Click Here for the phys.org page that offers evidence the cosmic accelerstion may be slowing down as predicted by the Jet Cosmology.

CLICK HERE for what I consider to be my more advanced physics page. Some of my earlier pages were considered to be incorrect because they weren't up to date and so I thought more about why I believed for example why there are 40 reasons to believe that relativity is incomplete and you see what I've come to think of as my more mature point of view about physics of this type on the post of the link.

 

LANGUAGE AND INTELLIGENCE Building Language From the Foundation Up

LANGUAGE AND INTELLIGENCE 

As they say, words like medicine are  some of the strongest prescriptions, and research has shown that if you speak a given language, your  thoughts are shaped considerably by that language. For example, they found people of aboriginal origin in Australia who don't say "Mother is the left or right of father", they say mothers in the northwest, father's in the southeast. And on the plate on the dish they say this is the West of the South, or to the Southeast of the North!

 And so they take these people who are from Australia, and they put them in the room with the Nobel Prize winners and they asked them what direction is East? And, they all know that the Nobel Prize winners will have no clue! So language can influence your behavior quite considerably.

For example, in Spanish the word se rompa la flore means the vase is broken like flore is a vase because it's like a flower...And so, in Spanish when you break the vase, you don't say you know who broke the vase. So in Spanish they don't know who broke the vase. And as by research I believe that language also may shape other activities. And in this respect, are the Orientals really smarter people?

And we might say, well, the Maya and Inca, they descended from the Chinese and they didn't invent the wheel other than children's toys, although they had a calendar more accurate than ours. And they did have a high kind of art, although I hadn't thought it was as as elevated as like ancient European art. (Even so I think of the Maya architecture as the greatest of any time in the history of world architecture April, Maya, or Juna!)

 In the magazine the Sciences they say the reason that Europeans colonized the rest of the third world and not vice versa may be because the Eurasians had a larger ecological house to plunder, provided by the Eurasian band of good weather. All the inventors of technology and stuff of that large band of Eurasia weather retained the progress of all.

 So they got the first advantage and from this they were able to colonize the rest of the world because of the larger house. But they're plundering the house because they were being unkind to evolution. And evolution is about supply and demand at the most fundamental level of territory. 

 So the Eurasians had a larger area and this provided the illusion of safety about harming evolution, so at first they're really unaware that it wouldn't show up as stress caused by decreased supply in relation to demand for the resources.

So we think of this as a measure of something fundamental about money, for example. And this is why money crisis tend to be severe, like the crash of 29, because they're like just supply and demand in the most fundamental way. And there is no resource without room to move or breathe. It becomes severe when there is no room for people to live in. In history when people lose their land they're not part of history after that. 

So the idea that the Maya were not necessarily as smart as the Chinese, may not be so, not because they're inherently dumber, but because they had a smaller house (they were plundering just as the Eurasians) which gave the illusion that they could get more nourishment and stuff from the same ecology essentially by being unjust to it.

 Like the Dutch are the tallest people in the world not because they're below sea level and can't breathe without a ventilator! It's because they have better nutrition than everybody else in the history of the world so far, I would believe. Not because they're below water. Although Holland is below water Holland is not in other Netherlands in the water!

So I believe, the Maya and other Amerindians only had a small house of plunder and beyond that like the Europeans in the Middle Ages they began to turn against each other by Increasing Competition for Decreased Resources. So by the time that Columbus reached the new world, the Indians were already poor. 

They never got out of the Stone Age  because they never had stopped competing with themselves so much when they were trying to wage war. War was common after AD 1,000 and not before among the American Indians as they were trying to outcompete each other and they got fewer resources per person.

 I think it wasn't that the Indians were inherently dumb, after all they were descended from the Chinese and we get the vast majority of our food crops from the cultivation the Indians excelled with and were as brilliant presumably as the Chinese. By this Chinese are with the same knowledge and and often, high culture, often enough! 

So there was less time for a classical age to be there for the Indians because of a smaller amount of resources per person to start with in the north-south axis of the the Americas not because of a lack of brilliance. As they discuss in the magazine The Sciences, the Eurasians  colonized the rest of the world with that large band of good weather which is a sort of resource of computing really by all the patents of the inventors and painters being retained over time while the other continents have a more NS land area and this essentially limits computing of what would otherwise presumably be a higher civilization. 

In other words while there are distinctions between people in the world we could say that the Eurasians had the same tendency to turn on themselves and create higher civilization also if given the chance as the other civilizations.

And while just luck with what distinguished Eurasians from the rest of the world we can also say that if there are enough resources everyone could become great. Each of the people of the world has their own particular advantages also in their particular adaptation to where they live.

 More particularly I've noticed that resources correlate closely to the greatness of a civilization in history.

I measure five of what I call "Foundations of History" access to water travel, good weather, moderate crowding levels, no overcrowding etc. ...And then I measure what I call the Greatness of History for example Wars won, level of culture like creativity, wealth etc. And there's a strong correlation between these two sets of patterns like 90%. And while this seems to show that guess what having money and having wealth is valuable, it also means that we all have a lot of potential to be great.

CLICK HERE for my post or see the same link at the bottom of the post if you like about Foundations of History and Greatness of a Civilization.

  The Maya were descended from the early Chinese, we would say. But that isn't necessarily as simple as it would seem by the idea that language can influence behaviour. Perhaps the Chinese language as I'll show you is what actually has given them a lot of their brilliance.

So I asked this question, you know, language, can it actually influence how smart you are? And I would think it probably could. And the reason I would think that the Orientals might be smarter is several reasons about their language actually. First of all, they have a tonal language. Tonal languages are like pitch languages, where they're singing, and like me in the shower with the volume down! And when they sing and they have perfect pitch and the tonal language, they have more time to be good at music we would say. 

So with music comes goodness at math pretty often. And this is not just a wishful or washflo! event..in research, with learning, when you learn something really well not by magic or something, it makes it so that you are also good at other truths you can learn without so much effort. You know the more virtues you have, the more you tend to have and the more advantage you tend to have.

If you have like know what, it's not just know how, but know what is like knowing what your goals are also and not just how you choose them. And so when you're learning a lot of things like this, if you learn music, you tend to be good at math because great musicians tend to be good at math because the many of same brain areas are used for math as for music and it uses many of the same skills. You know music lights up your whole brain. Not sure what math does! But if you're good at math you're good at music more often.

 And Chinese has lots of puns. One of the things about having a lot of puns is although you can get more bad results and words sooner if you're not careful, you can also say a lot more a lot faster with more meaning. Chinese poets could rhyme at 300 mph!

And also Chinese is like the Japanese, by picture writing. The Japanese originally invented the facsimile machine or they used it the most. They developed the fastest facsimile machine because they had the picture writing. They couldn't type the Chinese typewriter or Japanese typewriter at like 10 words per minute. And so with the slowness of writing, when you write with a visual language,  you're making it so that you're thinking about each word, all word counts count. It's like a new adventure in, uh, Rand D.! And so you find, umm, you know, you find those words and uh also umm, I find that making exercise of the words is good for, you know, learning! So creative!

I use like acronyms, the 1st letter of every word to make exercise out of it for memorising. And so all these things I think may combine together. They're good with math, they're good with words, they're good with music, they're good with pictures, they're good with drawing.

When you're drawing, you influence your personality with your handwriting..certainly I would like to have the influence of drawing $1,000 at the bank! So I think if they're really involved with handwriting a lot, this sort of multiplies what they're good at, all they tend to be good at. So I think the reason that the Orientals may be considerably smarter, may be perhaps because of how they had evolved their writing and their language and maybe quite considerably so..

We say the Chinese they're involved with communism now. And this seems less bright. 

 I think this part of our modern world is like the after the rise of the overcrowding that brought down the classical world the first time, the middle ages of Europe. And so there's increased combination for decreased resources. Living in the most crowded regions of the world doesn't mean they're inherently dumb and the idea that the Chinese are dumber because of communism isn't inherently true.. It's been said "There are no bad people only bad situations".

Some scholars of the Chinese say that after communism it's doubtful that China could ever go back to the way it was before. But I think this is like saying after the Middle Ages were over in Europe because of the reduction of the overcrowding by the plague in the 1600s they still couldn't possibly have returned to something like it was before the Dark Ages. But wages went up 87% and a golden age began.

Another reason this is not necessarily true is because the original Chinese were 1000 years ahead of all the rest of the european inventions like industrial inventions..About 30 of them the Chinese had, they took 1000 years to trickle down to Europe or trickle up! And so for this reason I think  languages can have influence on what we think. So I use acronyms as I say they say "A be quiet! A sit down!" and the acronyms are the 1st letter of each word and I make exercises out of it and this is how I memorize each day, great for brain health. I write like 4 letters per line on the side of the encyclopedia margin or other comedy machine! And doing this actually makes it so that I can make exercises with words that are more reliable to remember by alternating between the letters and words. 

And so I think this may influence our brain quite a lot to reliably learn words well. Actually studies have shown that memorizing can dramatically improve cognitive ability. But the idea here we might learn about is also that we could perhaps copy the Chinese  methods of doing our language. We might be able to make exercises that are specifically like the Chinese use to learn their language and to speak and more. We might add songs to  our words. We might start having our own language of song and add music to it.

I have a song code, this for the tune that automatically fits into what I'm trying to memorize. And when you do like the acronyms, the 1st letter for each word, you're controlling the rest of the word. And so you're basically making it so that you can memorize it well, you know more exactly what you remembered or not when you can easily repeat the word and letter loop. I learned about this for memorizing math. So it's good for math and music also because as I say, music involves many of the same methods used for math.

As promised, Here's My Post About Measures of The Greatness of Civilizations and how they correlate with resources historically available.

   

 Where Did Our Ideas about Beauty Originate? Beauty in evolution. 

 There is a lot of awareness about beauty, for example science has shown that the bone structure of your face has a lot to do what people think about you, and we hear also about people who say the only way to be beautiful is to be loving. 

Certainly work and labor of love conquers a lot and the ability to work is often more important than looks. 

Even so with the first beauty pageant In the 1800s they were saying "Of course Beauty opens every door." 

Beauty researchers have found  beauty does seem to help in life. For example teenage women who are good looking have survival advantage over the women they are competing with because they are more likely to be married to men who have money and this can remove them from poverty otherwise.

 In evolution beauty obviously was an advantage like love at first sight. Love like beauty is a force and the more women were liked, the more they were copied by others, a measure of survival fitness at any rate to some degree.

 In evolution good looks may not only have opened more doors for those who are blessed by this but also have closed doors on predators. This is because being the social animal, our ancient relatives were in groups and we were often being chased by predators. 

And here evolution was going to great lengths for example to make the mother giraffe or the mother cheetah look like the rest of the giraffes when being chased by the predators. For example research  is being conducted in how to find ways to reduce preclampsia of women who are pregnant (with high blood pressure) by studying giraffes and cheetahs. The giraffe and the cheetah and humans presumably also had to be able to run as fast and look as good as the rest to do well. 

I hold to this hypothesis because other research shows that women's faces that are averaged out and smoothed by the computer software are considered to be more beautiful by more men who were asked. That is, the women who look more like the rest are more beautiful and this would be because being chased regularly by predators in prehistoric times often was a life or death event.

 So while beauty isn't absolute we can see why people in the history of science like Aristotle believed that beauty was a sibling of truth. The latin proverb "a beautiful face is a large advantage" asks us why looks look good! 

  It's been said that no one was ever honored for what they had received but only for what they earned. And lots of fashion models disprove this with so ooh and ahh!..most others than Aristotle have believed that looks aren't as important as truth or beauty.. it's not just like "congratulations about your face"!

I would say that many of the people who say that looks don't count are common and those say that money is un important are the ones with wealth. If you want to know what god thinks of usual looking peaple, remember he made a lot of them. While any animal can have good looks, even so it's been shown the success or failure of a marriage is directly proportional to a simple formula where the number of fights a couple has each month  subtracted from the number of times they make love is a real event.

If the wife says, "Which do you like more about me my natural beauty or my gorgeous body and the husband says well I "well I do love your natural beauty and gorgeous body but I like how you like to celebrate the most!"

 And the formula may have to do with looks somewhat but ultimately they say for the first three years of marriage looks are enough but beyond years it must be replaced by other value. 

In a way looks are for youth and a lot of us aren't movie stars or famous and we're doing fine without movie stars on screen!

One other point is that while averaged out faces in the science were found to be more beautiful, and the ancient greeks said Nothing in Excess, this would seem to be also tending to boredom and the reason it's not boring is because there were a lot of beauty wrinkles the lion could't see because it never got near. So we find special looks in our life that are caused also by evolution not boredom!

 

HOW BRAIN SENSING PATENTS MAY HAVE INFLUENCE On Future SOCIETY

 About the future of truth sensors, pain sensors and other advanced methods of finding out who's being kind or not as by AI or other new patented technology may have value.

Mri, Lie Detectors, Truth, Evolution, Ethics, Real Estate, Nature, Evolution of Behavior, Technology, Pain sensors, Healthcare, Brain health, Neurology, Economy, Economics,

MRI may be used for truth sensors.. my belief is more portable machines that amplify the voice using a small handheld radar that can pick up both breathing and pulse event and thus the verbal thought may be possible. This is because recent studies have shown that you think verbally by making motions of your voice box. 

 All thought has been seen to be connected to physical change in physiology so it's probable that something like verbal thought may also be associated with a sort of area where the thought is defined well to improve the value of the event.

Also this is about AI. As speech recognition becomes more powerful apps to sense word content may be important because 60% of the poor people say when they go to the doctor they feel that they are being harassed. The United Nations is working on an app to sense who is saying kind words or not.

 Antinoise also known as good old sound cancellation like solid golden ancient times on FMs may be valuable because it's an old saying that the truth abounds in quiet places. We could say that who has to listen to what may be definitely changed by this method.

 Pain sensors that can tell who's really in pain or not may also be valuable. Huge legal battles are going on between patients and their doctors. Patients and their lawyers may love it when they relax and want to be rich at higher speed! Doctors may not be so thrilled about it. 

  The minimum settlement for example for a medical malpractice suit where the lab work is unreliable is a million dollars. Hospitals make on the average four medical mistakes for hour and they stay in business by settling these lawsuits out of court. Even so of course most doctors are legitimate and do mean well.

This has been a year of many brain sensing patents in 2023! Giant brain sensing anyhow! About 40 patents have been issued.

 Any of these type of events about the patents presumably will be getting stronger  with time. 

 Studies have also shown your brain shows little distinction between behavioral pain or discomfort and actual physical pain. So when people go to the doctor and are sometimes denied care and are in pain as well as harassed for that, these machines may help with both of those causes.

 Another improvement in people's ability to improve brain health has been with new pharmaceuticals like cotinine, a tobacco metabolite. This is like a b vitamin for the brain.

When people would smoke cigarettes in the old days they said they felt it makes them feel like a rocket scientist. This turned out to be true.. cotanine acts like nicotine but without the addiction and with no drowsiness. It even reverses memory loss in late stage Alzheimer's.

 It's being studied for use as a  painkiller, a way to lose weight and a great way to feel real about infomercials! We must have saved more!

 Many of these patents may be valuable to find out people who do immoral things when out of the sight of most.

For example people who are involved with domestic abuse, doctors who may cause harm, and for the 20,000 or so slaves being held housebound in the United States for which it's been said there was little hope of rescue, may also find improvements sooner or later with these sensors

In the old days experts say it was the age of great health and now this is "the age of great disease". Doctors are now the leading cause of death mostly with accidents caused by prescriptions.

You could say doctors were leading the way upward for life and now they're leading the way down to death.

Unexpected medical bills are the main cause of debt even though 97% say they are insured enough. The health care system is the only big business where the consumer has no say in the quality of the product they receive.

 While a lot of healthcare professionals have good intent a lot of people would like things like this to change so society is able to better defend itself. It seems not improbable that a major percentage of the deaths caused by doctors are not by accident but rather because the doctor wants to secretly cause harm. So patients may find much more delight and this may literally save the lives of millions of people.

One question that many have asked is about the MRI sensors or other sensors that may be used in the future as lie detectors. How would this turn out? And I looked up on the web, where is it? I found the internet to be, bright right here!

  Where's the sci-fi story about what this will be like? And you can't find one. So here I like to write a bit of Fi of my own since I can read a lot of hi-fi and have faith in optimum audios. 

 And so here- rewind me up!- as they say they may start with sensors like MRI in the  corporations at the top where the money can pay for a good enough sensor. And then they'll work their way down by way of "trust", from where machines are most viable and the money to see who's telling the truth or not about what.

And so that's the start. It'll be I think where we'll look in the headlines and we see "Wow, the truth sensors are lighting up the world".

 And from there they say it may proceed by leaps and bounds to get more and more powerful sensors.

 Soon they'll have them, and after that, I think will be used for events like removing healthcare fraud. 

 And they say in the the top businesses like in the car automobile fraud business, like bogus parts, this will help the customers with the automobiles they're selling, I want to be a customer who's selling real automobiles, with wheels!

 Also I think in the healthcare industry they're going to remove the most harmful elements because they say it's where most of them hide out. 

And beyond, what what will happen once the sensors become more established?

I think we can imagine that for example about realtors, they want to know who's telling the truth about what. So they might start having mandatory testing, exams with the truth sensor when the tenant signs up. And so this would be where they'll find out the history of what kind of things that are bad about the tenant. 

  We can imagine though that they'll only do that for a while where they accept that's the way they have to pay perhaps more as they go. But mostly they won't be wounded.

  They'll recover and then they'll be stronger for it because this will stop a whole lot of the other stuff that goes on between Realtors and their "employees"!. And there's a lot more that goes on. It's like daily violations of trust by way of small lies, fibulas, or liettes!

It's not illegal to lie. Even so, I think this would be a major boost for the poor people when they're dealing with people who are lying so often that having the truth being proven would be  more powerful for a lot of people. A lot of people might get a whole lot of money, like from doctors for cheating on them. Like the poor person goes to the emergency room and the doctor is 20 times less likely to give them anesthesia if they've broken their leg or whatever.

  Other research has shown how the police are arresting the poor people 20 times more often than others for marijuana in the city even while other studies have found they use it no more than the other people. So this is perhaps how the self-defense of the poor people and people in general would evolve. And we ask what's the nature of the truth? 

I wish life was like the Andy Griffith Show!

You may have seen the episode where Andy is telling Opie, he's going to start a newspaper there in Mayberry.. and he says, “Always tell the truth”. So he starts listening to all the gossip around town and writing about this and what and who says she is the mother!

 And they get so upset about it, he says, "Let's throw away that darn paper, freedom of speech. Who cares about that what's the truth worth, right?” And then at the end of the episode,  Andy and Barney secretly go down to the dump and they are down there trying to secretly read the gossip and find others like themselves also "down the dumps" where they buy software! And what's so funny about this? Well, because the truth has value. 

 We hear this in the United States. By U.S. law, it's not illegal to lie. And we have the freedom to be imperfect.  We can make some mistakes and not be where there's a lawsuit going on.

There have been lawsuits according to the Radiolab show such as the one about a student in the subway in New York who was attacked, and the police were in a  room in front of the subway and they knew that he was there but didn't help them. He was being attacked by a serial killer and he got stabbed in the face about five times. And he finally wrestled him down and won after the killer killed 5 people before. But the police didn't help him, so he tried to sue them, but he didn't win the trial.

 And also another lawsuit was about a lady whose estranged husband was really mad at her. She knew he was going to try to cause harm and she called the police repeatedly and they didn't help. And so finally her husband killed their three beautiful daughters and he then ended up shooting the police station and he died after being killed. 

  So the lady tried to sue also for people to say, look, she deserved protection. She also lost this lawsuit.

She said she felt like her children had been murdered twice..and Radiolab says that this is ultimately part of the cost we pay for freedom.  Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers would say leave the people alone. Because even though people do have things like that happen sometimes, they can't force the police to help them. The founding fathers believed that in general freedom has more value than perfection after all perfection doesn't exist right away, maybe in a few months!

And they say, what's the job of the police? As they say on the show,” there are few laws that say exactly what the police should do."

 It's like the ungoverned part of the the justice system or the government. The rest of the government has laws and statutes governing each event.

 And they're saying on the Radio Lab episode that they really don't have anything like this for the police much.

 There are a few of them here and there in different states, different counties, but they don't have anything near to a uniform way of saying what they should do about what.

 And so on that episode, they call up about 50 police officers around the country in their stations, and they ask them what their job is and they say, oh, they hurt with the guilty and to help the guilty stop! Or help the innocent more.

And they say "to protect and promote", right. But when you think about it, what the police do mostly, they investigate claims and they try to basically find who's guilty and who's innocent. And in that most basic and most important sense of what they do, they really are protecting and promoting. 

And the police weren't wrong in saying that when they called up them up and asked them what they do. They are protecting the innocent and stopping the guilty. Even so, we ask what would the police be able to do if they had a really good truth sensor.

 And surveillance, it's sort of a dream come true for the police, but where would they stop?

Like one of the store managers where I live in the store near here, wants to be wealthy! She's there one day and the police stop and say can I see your business license and she says, right. But what happens if the police had a really good sensor as they get cheaper and lighter and portable and they could ask her more questions without the CEO even really knowing it. 

 We're not allowed by the Constitution to testify against ourselves. I think the sensors are not really like that because just so they're not asking them what their stuff is in their house, they can search their house. They're not really asking them to testify against themselves, to search their house if they have the right or a necessary cause to search the house. 

So I think this is not a fundamental objection to the truth sensors. Even so what will keep the police from having more elaborate searches?

And as I say, the Constitution allows us to have the freedom to be imperfect. And so on the end of the Andy Griffith show following where Opie is telling the truth about those people and they're so upset, this sort of shines a harsh light on the truth. It could make it so people are really quite uncomfortable, I'm sure. And I could see why. 

In the Constitution, it's the ability it seems to be forgiven for our imperfections more often than in other countries. And so the law is sort of forgiving a lot of us and also it's tough to enforce laws 100%.. The police can't just arrest anybody for jogging. Watch exercise shows in rewind and put on 15 lbs! They wouldn't about minor goofs, they can't always..

And so I would ask what's the value of forgiveness. So they would have the machines with perhaps a weighted value of what they would overlook or not.

 You know they ask the questions, but they don't ask them so much that they're harming privacy. And this could be done by a weighted value. And we ask, well, how could they do that? The police might not be held accountable because there are all these laws where the police are being held less and less accountable. 

But I think the way society can do that is actually to have truth sensors also keeping track of the police by a peer-to-peer sort of truth network like Wikipedia, the Marms Alarm! And so there'll be reduced cheating and the truth will have a boost in value. And this might seem to be theoretical, but it's hardly out of the question.

This is a possible way to solve the problem "What's to keep the police from searching too much?"

Whatever we may say the value of sensors like this are, due to the balance of the evidence and other 

events I think like an a legal sense this may be the way it will work out.

 Other technology like this or reducing overcrowding as I say may cause other changes, but this kind of technology maybe with us indefinitely. It's going to definitely be causing changes we might want to learn to anticipate for the best result.

This is how the future may be, the way they're improving these machines, I think this might be the real wit about wit sensors!

THE DEEPER EVIDENCE

My belief is while sensors may have value like this, there's a deeper way to solve how doctors and others in society have changed as in ancient Rome when Juvenal asked, "Who watches the watchers of the watched?"

 The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, and I think this may have to do with how people have treated the world in general. People have been really abusive of the ecosystem and with the predators removed, overpopulation has been increasing.

This is a fundamental change about territory and all the resources in it because it's changing supply and demand. With decreasing room per capita, competition increases in an artificial way and all other resources are also limited like by an economic limit.

 Most people are losing money on this and this may be the deeper cause of the increased division between people like doctors and their patients or the rich and the poor. This is essentially evidence of illness. And we ask why would the rich want to burden most of the rest? This seems unnatural and immoral. After all in the evolution of behaviour good and evil not smart or dumb or good or bad looks are most important. Due to this, lack of morality is the weakest behavior. So to ask why a few wealthy or powerful people may want weakness would be answered because people have been unjust to evolution, and evolution's balance is returning by causing this. 

 Reducing the overcrowding may be a way to make those who want oversurveillance not to be intrusive by it being more like in earlier history. Sensors may offer some relief for a while from this problem, but I think nothing would satisfy like reducing population to levels like it was as the ancient world was ascending, or in the 1600s after the plague had removed a thousand years of squalor. If people are wise they may reduce the overcrowding and go back to more golden ages.

If people have done something really unjust to nature it's not surprising the conservative or "bad" people would say that they couldn't deserve to all these luxuries, rights and conveniences. Most "miracles" to me seem to be by the Golden Rule, all the miracles like sensors or science that people have may be no match for it. I believe the use of science like sensors may be good but only if we cooperate with evolution so she will cooperate with us. Otherwise most people may have it like in china where the sensors are being used against them.

If life in the desert is measured by water, the ability to have room to move or breathe is going to have profound influence on most aspects of most people's lives.

  For more about about this and how we can reduce the overcrowding for example with GE like CRISPR before the overcrowding more completely chokes off most people's source of advantage and other wealth. 

HERE'S THE LINK to my post about Evolution, Overcrowding and it's Historic Influence..

 

WHY DO PULSARS SLOW DOWN YET MORE MASSIVE BODIES SPEED UP BY "GRAVITY WAVES".

 Pulsars may slow down not the Galaxys because the pulsar has strong inertia or centrifugal force yet the galaxys have more gravity plus centrifugal force. If inertia and gravity are not the same but related the pulsar will slow down much faster if what it's really emitting is inertial radiation like for centrifugal force which is much stronger than gravity that presumably moves at the speed of light as by relativity as found by LIGO but it's radiating outward not inward like gravity.. a prediction is that the rate of radiating out of the energy of pulsars and galaxies with time should show a slight decrease in the rate of decrease because the gravity waves are radiating in and tending to speed it up (and thus not slow it down fast!) with time. Masses of cosmic size would add mass with more spin with time in their evolution.

  We might ask if all the masses around us have attraction and seem to be radiating both inertial waves and gravity waves like this, how much are nearby masses around us in the lab losing or absorbing energy by gravity waves with time? If the waves that LIGO has found are essentially about centrifugal force or inertia I would hold that a centrifuge like an ultra centrifuge may  actually be losing energy with time at the rate predicted by LIGO (not for the rate of gravity radiation which would not be changed much at all because gravity would be so much faster than the spinning gyroscope and without as much gravitational mass like the galaxies.)

Actually the gyroscope might be spinning slower as predicted by LIGO radiation yet not quite as slow because of the tendency to otherwise speed up of the gravity waves. This could be definite proof of my idea that gravity and inertia are not the same as Einstein held in relativity. 

 To get the most pure measure of the gravity radiation we might want to at least move it away from a massive body like the Earth.

 If my theory is correct common masses around us will be emitting much more energy by inertia as LIGO has measured and like the pulsar, it's general energy change at any rate! in the rate of spin (probably not weight because it's been disproven) may be offset by a small amount by the tendency for the gravity waves to increase its mass and slow down at a slower speed  yet not spin faster with larger masses like 100 or 200,000 light years.

 

I believe the reason the pulsars are spinning slower while the galaxies are spinning faster may be because while pulsars are radiating out inertia as found by the speed of light waves of LIGO, the galaxies are also doing this and are rotating as solid bodies, but also absorbing much more gravity because they aren't the same thing.

 While it might seem improbable to  find gravity wave radiation for masses around us, but this is actually what Einstein thought for old electrons.  He predicted that old electrons would change mass in the gravitational field of the Earth.

 It would seem we might measure inertial waves with LIGO and so measure changes in the mass around us by the same event..