(A Cause OF FASTER THAN LIGHT WAVE MOTION NOW FOUND IN THE LAB By CHEN'S EXPERIMENT)

..

High Speed Wave Motion & Relativity;

..

It was once thought that travel faster than sound would be impossible in airplanes, so when you would say something to the lady in the cushion ahead of you in the plane, many physicists believed at faster than sound the sound wouldn't reach. If relativity is about the speed of light and is therefore much about electromagnetism, it's already been believed by other physicists that a high speed starship may go faster than light if the lines of the electromagnetic field were simply shielded or cut. (My idea was the cosmic ship would be need to smoothed because even if the lines were cut, the electric field is in all the cosmos. While cutting the lines of force of water with a submarine where the field is all around speeds up the boat, there's no interface like the air above the water a fast starship would be able to go with high speed like a foil so a fast ship to the stars would have to both cut the lines of force and perhaps smooth the field for reduced slowup by introducing a fluid of light at the right wavelength that would flow around the ship, the same way boats go at 5 X the speed by a layer of air from the exaust piped around the outside of the machine from the leading edge.) This about faster than light wouldn't violate the slowup of watches on the starship because a bubble of field just like the air in the airplane would be maintained in the ship. If a ship went all the way from here to a distant realm of the cosmos and back in a second without slower shiptime, a second would have passed and the ship would be a second older, and the slowup of watches and mass boost and other motifs of Einstein's theory on the ship would be canceled at the same time if the field lines were cut if electromagnetism and the speed of light were the cause of the mass augmentation of relativity. Seperate disconnected points of space and time would be unified and this is necessary for energy conservation because mass energy is neither created or destroyed so has existed and will exist for all the ages (even without grand opera!). If gravity travels at light speed or slower, it couldn't unify the cosmos and outdistance the centrifugal force with Special Relativity's seperate points of space time. If they are disconnected by a slower speed of light, the thermodynamic entropy would be the explanation of centrifugal force. Gravity is non expansive like centrifugal force, so gravity itself can't be the cause of the centrifugal force. If gravity counteracts inertia it would seem to be of higher speed. Special relativity is about linear motion and the speed of light, thus with outward acceleration of such as the moon, the linear motion is from thermodynamics the only other force than gravity long range. Disconnected points on the outside edge of the universe would have evaporated out and energy would be lost, so over infinite eons the cosmos would have lost or won infinite power and the fastest "weigh" of ship travel would be faster than light. So the idea that the speed of light is absolute and the highest speed violates energy conservation, and the idea of fast travel of signals and ships perhaps will be a high speed cosign of the times. Gravity would go faster than light to connect the power up and save the cosmos for the Savannah Fire Ants! The lighter you go the faster you are because of the law F=ma. So if the mass m is zero the speed a of the force can be any speed and the mass is the general mass density of the force, and would be directly determined by this. Gravity may go much faster than light without relativistic effects not because the field lines are cut or shielded, rather in my formulation gravity would interact so weakly it would pass through the electromagnetic field without much interaction. The implosion of the usual electric or magnetic component of the electromagnetic field (depending on whether it was a + or - charge) would be the electrogravity of Einstein, and the longer range component would be a more pure gravity at much higher velocity, the electrogravity would go faster than light but not as much as the lower power field. This "motive" component of the field would be the gravity of the wavelengths of worlds or the cosmos. Most astronomers have seen the idea of the faster than light motion of gravity is of general value in the causology of black holes. The light of a massive sort of behemoth of this sort is inside the flow inward because the gravity would go so much faster it would always outdistance the light. Black holes are found powering radio sources and other high power masses with high speed jets. If the speed of light is the top speed of a black hole, it would always flow in involution and no mass of any sort could escape it. The top speed is also a fundamental measure of the top mass density. The higher the top speed, the faster the particles may spin around and the more centrifugal force is available to stop gravity. This is necessary to uphold energy conservation, otherwise here too mass and energy would be dissappearing from the cosmos with unlimited inward implosion. Energy conservation is the most well proven idea in the history of science. The force to power the jets would be stronger than any force known to outpower this much compressive force. So the idea that gravity is faster than light explains how no light is seen from many massive gravity sources, how the energy that falls in the massive body is not lost to the cosmos, and the power source of the jets that with the gravitational field would be saved for the cosmos (and my boom box always will!)

-

The faster than light motion would also explain the astronomer's observation of the great wall and Wilkenson. Eric Lerner in his book "The Big Bang Never Happened" says the great wall is a huge wall of galaxies that would not have had time to form from the central expansion of the cosmos if the speed of light is the top speed of the force that hadn't stopped it. The Wilkenson space observatory found on the largest distance maps the cosmos has a pair of "ears" on either horizon, this would be explained by gravity's cohesive force that would be faster than light. If the force were at the speed of light it wouldn't have formed in the ages since the expansion of the mass in the cosmos observed by astronomers. It's a regular motif and a wave carrying information about it would be the only explanation I'm aware of, a Marm would say she can just go halfway in the woods because after this she's going out. I'm not out- I was just always where I live!

.

.Einstein said if one of his motifs go they all go. One of the proofs he used for Special Relativity was that with a magnet and a coil of wire the motion of either was the same and relative, it didn't matter which was moving or at rest. This proves that Einstein was more a wiz than would seem, he had a good zoom insurance and was safe from earthquakes, with antishake film! I think Einstein was only half wrong, about General, not Special Relativity. Special Relativity would hold as usual. Machines that generate subatomic motes like mesons and baryons in the LHC and the slower lives of high speed masses in the cosmos are proof of Special Relativity, without Special Relativity all the machines would run out of physics. Whatever Einstein thought of gravity there is no doubt that special relativity is well proven. Gravity and higher speed travel of waves would not be a disproof of Einstein and not really an extension either because gravity would be somewhat like electromagnetism, obeying energy conservation, and in other respects it's own law. Just as Relativity isn't disproof of Issac Newton's belief about gravity, no one will ever disprove Relativiy, rather it will be extended to other more general physics. Einstein's belief would only be so if both General and Special Relativity were proven, if the General Theory is well founded also. General Relativity may be relativity in name only because e.g. gravity implodes to a point with the acceleration and the change in the speed of light, and the linear motion and centrifugal force of Special Relativity tends to expand out to many points so gravity and the linear motion of centrifugal force are the opposite, and the same math for both fails. General Relativity uses Einstein's motif of acceleration not linear motion based on relative motion of the earth and a heavy and light mass being dropped at the same rate and this is then proven by the one or two experiments only of accelerations (not uniform motion) such as the observation of the shift of the rate of fall of Mercury over time and the Mossbauer effect where the wavelength of light at the top of a tower on the earth is greater at higher level than the lower because of a change in the redshift of light, important to Special Relativity. Einstein holds two opposite truths. His explanation of gravity starts with what Galileo found about his proof that different masses fall at the same rate near the earth. Einstein seized upon this as a proof of the relativity of gravity because if you held the two masses level and didn't drop them but instead accelerated the earth's surface up at the usual rate of fall as if by millions of giant rockets instead of the masses falling with the motion relative, the two masses would touch the upward sped surface of the earth at the exact same moment. If it was unimportant whether the earth or the masses were moving and that the masses were unequal, the relative motion was all that was important and they would fall at the same rate. There are just two errors here-the causology and the experiment! The moon falls at another rate around the earth than the earth around the moon, a rock falls at a different rate to the earth than the earth to the rock, and if the masses were known as the same relative to gravity energy wouldn't be conserved because in subatomic physics the conservation laws show that each force going from weaker to stronger has all the properties of the force below it in power plus some more properties conserved. Each force would thus be an energised version of the force below it in energy. So gravity would be the mother of all forces, the basic force which would operate mostly by connection of the seperate points of space time explaining the conservation of energy being in all the cosmos. All of the cosmos operates more by change than lack of change. Exercise is a better way to lift weight than diets. Energy conservation is conservation of quantity of linear and angular motion. So if gravity is the foundation force and all force is measured by change if two masses are not the same and gravity operates by acceleration they will fall at different rates. At first I believed the reason they haven't found this in experiments may be as if comparing the light of a 5 watt lamp and a 10 watt lamp beside a huge 50 million watt light; relative to the huge mass of the earth the two 5 and 10 pound masses are almost the same, almost but not quite. My later way of unifying the moons motion with the two different masses falling near the earth at the same rate is by way of force, force is more important than rate of motion, because force always changes motion, but motion can be without change of force, thus when you lift the rock and a TV the rock being lighter (often we hope!) can be lifted higher, so when you drop them both the lighter mass falls further and faster like the moon and the heavier mass like the TV falls slower and sooner like the earth. So I think Einstein was assuming what he was hopung to prove that the masses are the same when dropped from the same height was because the masses were the same, they aren't. Energy conservation operates by action reaction pairs, the union by which all is measured. If you put a mass such as the moon on one side of a scale and the earth on the other and weighed them, this is the same when two unlike masses are attached to each end of a beam and thrown up in the air spinning. The smaller mass whirls around.with more speed just like the moon and the larger mass like the earth spins slower. This is in accord with the idea of F=ma. The force is balanced and so the smaller mass m has a greater rate of fall. This may be the real general law instead of the speed of light being the top speed by axiom because the speed of light would be just about electromagnetism. Conservation of linear and angular momentum would be about energy conservation and would apply to both gravity and perhaps other forces. So if a small mass is weighed on a weigh in station like the moon the center of mass of the rock earth system would be much nearer the center of the earth (if the moon was not present) but the rock via it's own force would move it just a bit more to the rock than the earth would have. If you take a second stone of another mass the center of mass by energy conservation would not be exactly the same because the mass of the rock is not the same. If they were the same and the rocks fell at the same rate by Einstein, the moon and the earth would fall at the same rate also about a central center of mass and so would all masses. Einstein has no description of how it is we fall at another rate on the moon or other worlds, and in General Relativity the Equivalence Principle says they fall at the same rate. The proof of this in Einstein's theory is that Mercury falls at a changing rate. This is the opposite of saying they fall at the same rate, the main evidence Einstein's General theory of Relativity is based on. Einstein based General Relativity on the idea of the giant rockets boosting the earth's surface up to reach the different masses at the exact same moment. If this were so the Earth would expand and we would be at the speed of light in less than a year, and while Special Relativity is sound and may be extended General Relativity I think is in error. This is also the disproof of expansion theory of Mark Mcutcheon, which in its most general formulation makes no predictions Einstein's theory doesn't already make. (Expansion physics explains gravity and all the other forces as the result of expansion of all the fields.) Obviously some fields expand and some attract and they aren't equivalent as Einstein held, or gravity would travel at just the speed of light and the relativity of gravity would be proven by the rate of fall of Mercury. If many rates of fall are allowed, some observers are more convenient than others. The more mass you have the more gravitational you are and the earth is more at rest than the moon, and the sun is more at rest than the earth and moon. Einstein said all observers are equally valid, although not all are equally convenient. I think this is like saying "All values (like the word valid) are the same and all prices are not, but of what worth are prices?" When a starship zooms through the cosmos and no observer is at rest more than in motion, all observers are as valid and the same as the rest. In usual life you won't say "Why go to Ohio, When Ohio will be here in March." are the same. This is disproof of the relativity of motion but only with other forces than would be measured by a constant speed of light alone. Actually motion is mostly relative, but the more mass a body has the more reliable it's field is for use as a foundation of rest, so motion is relative, but rest would tend to be more and more absolute. By F=ma, and these considerations the speed of gravity (of the motive type) generally might be found by the inverse of its intrinsic strength, or 10 to the 37 times the speed of light. In my use of Maxwell's method he used to predict the speed of light exactly, by F=ma the lighter the wave the faster it would propigate, to travel fast you lighten up .

.

.

EXPERIMENTS FOR PROVING OR DISPROVING IF GRAVITY IS FASTER THAN LIGHT AND A NEW WAY TO MEASURE TIME WITH HIGHER RESOLUTION

.

In my physics of General Wave Dynamics (GWD) gravity has two components, a longer wavelength much faster than light component (the lighter you go the faster you go by F=ma; if the mass, m is small, the speed, a, can be much faster than light for a finite Force, F) and a slower speed field component made of particles like the Higgs boson. The predicted speed of this component of the gravitational field is 10X 10 to the 32nd power of speed of light, the lower the density, the higher the speed would be by F=ma. If the infinitely small mass density were 0 the speed would be infinite, but gravity has finite power so it would have a finite though great speed. This speed may be proven or disproven by finding the wave from a solar storm (the most explosive event in the solar system) and then seeing if a machine like The Torsion Balance machine would register the gravity wave from the distant solar boom much faster than the wave of light from it. To know if it's of worth before we build it a scaled up Torsion Balance machine (used since the 1800's to prove gravity) would have the distant mass or near with its waves, the mass of weight in the machine to find the waves and the distance between them with just these three components in the usual way they change. The proof of whether a gravity wave telescope will be of worth is found by this simple motif. If out of range of this sort of machine at this time or others, this tells us just how massive our machine would have to be to achieve it. Since gravity is so fast it may have a high frequency, much higher than light, so time measurement to find more resolution than just the general wave may necessitate time resolution of much faster speeds (see about time resolution for how).

..

Another way the high speed of the lower energy component of gravity might be definitely proven is via observation of the motion of high speed motion of distant large masses like the outflow of such as strong Radio sources or BL Lacs. The jets would be perhaps a thousand light years from stars, and the stars would move a bit with the motions of changes in the lumps of mass in the jet (or other high speed source of strong gravity). Instead of the motion of the stars and jets changing in a thousand years, they would be in more harmony and the oscillations of the redshifts of the stars might show the connection at the more distant realms than the speed of light being the highest speed.

This unified motif of motion may also be found for the two large "sides" of the cosmos of the Wilkenson probe, if one changes a bit the other would move a bit with it. The above would be almost instaneous, but the motions of the masses on both sides might prove the predicted speed of my theory with enough wait with the large distance of seperation of the source.

.

Here are two other ways gravity waves may be proven. The cheap method may be just to take a small mass and send a gravity wave through it generated by atomic blasts, this mass would be like a beach ball in ocean waves, a more reliable way to find the waves when the ball rises and falls with the ocean waves. The usual methods of gravity wave telescopes they have used may be like trying to find the waves with a large ship instead of a small mass, if the waves are small compared to the ship they would just level out and the boat would stay about the same. They use big machines with lots of mass to look for the wave. An electron or proton would be the small mass. It would move much faster than a big mass since it has reduced inertia so is more easy to be moved by the wave. (If gravity waves travel at the predicted speed and other speeds perhaps down to the speed of light, here they would they resonate with the electromagnetism so the points of the field are connected up for energy conservation, with no gaps in wavelengths of the basic field so all mass may attract. If gravity is heavy and the opposite of light and electromagnetism gravity might travel at a different speed and wavelength for any difference of the mass. Relativity has the constant speed of light. So gravity would have a changing speed of gravity being an acceleration with changes in the mass if it were the opposite and non relative. With the small mass, finding the wave would be more achievable especially if it was moved just a bit by the wave, so higher time resolution would be achieved (by reducing the force of the blast if it was so much it jolted the sensor too much). To measure between two of these sensors or more the usual method of atomic clocks would be slow. The speed of light (actually somewhat above by the recent experiments by Chen) would seem to be a limit of atomic clocks and thus the power of time resolution. Small lasers or electron beams that would spin or oscillate may allow a more sharp method of achieving this, since they may be beamed to distant collectors that multiply up the amount of distance lit up by the beam with each unit of time. If you spun a laser around you may sweep out an arc of any size, if you had collectors all the way around this arc, with the laser wired up to measure change A at time A, by making the arc much huger than the laser itself, you've made it so by use of usual sensors around the wheel. The time unit is hugely divided up so an hour is in much sharper focus. Rather than a giant set of collectors around the giant wheel, a large planar or lightweight lense might be used with air inside it. These would have a light sensitive surface perhaps like a TV tube. The fast beam from the wave mass sensor would oscillate the way a TV is. So the resolution would be just as high as a big wheel but would be cheaper. After shielding from all other radiation from the expolosion, the gravity wave would be generated by the atomic blast, the small masses would find the wave, this would be beamed out by the lasers, one would find one point on the tube and another would find another on its tube. Even if the speed of gravity turns out to be slower at the near electromagnetic wavelengths, GWD would allow much higher speed of the wavelengths of more length. The lasers would be at the same point of spin by interferometery, they would send out the beam from the tube lense sensor at distinct times if the gravity wave from the blast arrived at the sensors (allowing for the distinction in power at each tower by the distance/radiation law) at not the same time exactly. Much power would be saved by making it so only when there was any change only between the two lasers would the beams go out to the point of the tube that would be at the the same time.. This method has no limit in how well it may divide the time, and it may be more of value yet by using mirrors to multiply up the distance the beam travels without having to build too big a machine; one beam of the main two between two points would reflect off an inflatable mirror, the beam already sidewise of a faster than light path would go much faster than that yet when reflected off the mirror, and then it would be measured perhaps at the earths surface so it would be easier than a "starships high maintenance". Atomic clocks don't have the time so well like this, and it's better than soaps, and would improve timekeeping machines, my suds machine has a damp dry cycle, Wow!

.

The second gravity wave counter may be to use lots of pressure on both sides of a machine of high resolution because of the pressure on both sides like power steering in a vehicle. If you make the wheel like the wheel of your van with lots of pressure on both sides even small waves like gravity waves might be found just as you can move the wheel of the van fast without much force of your hand. (The speed and not just the sensitivity to move the wheel as if with small power of your hand would be multiplied up.) I think a good method here would be to find the waves by the atomic blast and laser method, then see if we can scale up the machines to the room above. And with all the room, more giant than a condensed milk plant!

.

MORE PHYSICS

MAIN PAGE

.

How The Weather Woman May Save More Stamps

OUT INN This WEATHER

I've heard they are developing hot and cool beams for outdoor use. The beams would be via electric heating and cooling. The cooling was developed in the 1960's and the same beam goes from cool to hot at the speed of Xmas when its the national anthem and the wheels whirl in the air and go shboom shboom. The source of the beam would be on the roof of a SUV or tractor (also good about porches for the neighbors, since it would heat a much smaller volume of room it would be much cheaper than a heated porch). The wearer like a UPS lady or other would wear a special winter outfit that the heat from the beam (perhaps just usual focused summer type heat) would go through and the inner layer would heat up, the outer layer would retain the heat and shield from the wind. It would be lighter than usual outfits, and much more agile, in the outdoors it would be paradise by the dashboard light- and heat! For safety it has overheat stop, or they could just go near or far from the van. While it won't reach to the far realm of the wearer just the usual walking around may be enough to be warm on all sides. A portable wheeled robot beam source that downloads power from the van to find the right angle may aid the outdoors' most radiant personality as she walks with you. Or the suit would have special pads on perhaps the knees and arms that would collect the heat from the beam and use this to power the rest of the outfit by wires or heat pipes. For cool in the summer they say a special cool absorbing outfit may be worn, valorious for UV40 reports with PR jog!

I got the power actually around 2005; I decided to make just this Resolution twice this year; To stop visits to the store for Fizz, To win millions in the big cashbox; and the Third resolution was No More Resolutions- of Super Size is cheap till June 27!
.
I never win anything, even in weather like this! I hear severe weather advisories, and it's always in another code!
.
Did you hear about that luxury sized woman who is in a lawsuit to stop TV stations from just hiring small anchor women? What a woman earns should be like Maureen O'boyl! She's an anchor and a good power dreamboat!
.
.

.
Venus In Her Blue Jeans and Pearls

In the history of life on Earth 99 percent of the life that once existed is now extinct. This is found in the fossil record over geologic time. By this it would seem a contradiction in terms that we are here. With just a one percent bet we would be here, how is it we are here on this path we walk? The ecology seems to always support the life that evolves, and the life here and now has been in no great pain in the wild for millions of years. If the environment is so harsh most life perished it wouldn't have stopped there and the one percent of the life we are also would be extinct. If you look at the number of digits- on our hands, we have the same number as the ancient fish of the cambrian because they had five fins per side. The fish are another species but we owe them some real tribute. And our DNA has lots of virus DNA that merged with our own when we were in prehistoric ages. How much we and the virus are alive is not all the way alive. Three fourths of the viral DNA may be retained so it may be said the virus is three fourths alive. If life were defined in terms of the species alone, there would be a sharp line and even at the atomic level evolution favors elements that don't have sharp jolts of power like the metals for chemical building blocks of life. An idea of absolute life also would not describe sleep well because we would be either alive or dead with no Weather Station to humerous us up! The theory of Memes says that copying is the foundation of the world, with such motifs as , "Say Me" and "Copy me". The Meme theory however says that this is possible not just in genes but in the frame of any machine made of just usual mass. This is why it's so much of import about being able to copy well from the web. The main idea of the meme theory is that the survival power of an idea is the ultimate measure of its value. Of the theory of evolution and the Meme Theory, the more general of the two is the Meme Theory. If you take a virus and powder it for 20 years it won't move or bat an eye or catch 40 winks, if you add H20 it is alive once more and going to a Stones' reunion! Darwin's theory may be extended to the idea that just as a IsuzuMazda is a machine with many inventors many of whom are praised and collecting residuals, in a real sense most of the 99 percent of the life is alive and well and much of it is here and now with you and me. Your grandmother and father are with you now and are much more alive than Darwin would have thought. They say the question of when computers will be alive is like this, they are already alive, just not 100% and no definite point will be when they are alive.

If life is both more alive and may be also 3/4 alive or resting and alive like the viruses this may be why they haven't found the explanation of the major fraction of human DNA that seems to be just random with no connection to older and wiser persons. The random DNA may be "sleeping" and be active just some of our lives. Sleep and rest are more common in evolution than otherwise. For example the heart, our most active muscle is at rest 5/6 of the month and when we talk on the wire more of the time is silence than talk so they would use the quiet breaks to send much computer info on the same line. Possibly the DNA is active just part of our life so just in a month of lab tests they wouldn't see the change, or perhaps the DNA just didn't shout loud enough! So this is my theory of life. My mom knows all about it, she's a pro, I'm just her son, she did all the heavy labor! My theory of life adds more to the definition of life, this is the cybernetic theory that all is information. This explains why the ancients believed in gods and goddesses because all is alive and if you interact with your what's in your "ecology of information" if you're strong you regard this in what it means to you, and hoping for more which is obviously in favor of survival of the individual, more is what's human, and what's more human are higher life like a goddess. The ancients believed that our every move is watched and has meaning of cosmic import and since research knows that the brain makes little distinction between any image we dream or see and an actual physical event, Darwin's theory was that in evolution even small motifs would make us vincable or invincable. All this would explain why the belief in gods and goddesses in history is so usual. My theory of heavan itself is that civilization is just a big computer that retains all the achievements of all the previous wins, like afterlifes were concieved by so many, it's just what the theory of evolution unallows since it's the inheritance of all (or most) achieved advantages. This is what the idea of the afterlife "to be remembered after we are gone because of what we did while alive" would be from. The memory of civilization, a much better memory than other animals have would be the origin of the idea that it's more absolute and eternal than even reruns of way stations. So if heaven is the creation of civilization and animals don't have this this would explain why ill societies disavow the afterlife. After all if heaven is essentially an agreement to be civilized between persons, if no agreement is reached because of woe of some sort it would be common for reduced belief in the afterlife. Just as computers can now measure beauty and brains, evidence of science about who believes who went to heavan may tell us more about the afterlife. If heavan was always considered of value by many civilizations but has no actual physical life after death (the ancients believed in the afterlife and are now in NE) and is a creation of bowlers who have lots of high life, the real URL is actually perhaps in the thoughts and agreements of the living. The afterlife may have added the value of survival in the old days to believers in tough times. So the proof of how belief in the afterlife is so usual in healthy civilizations may be by measuring the real changes in the brain where heavan lives (to me) and how much each type of belief adds how much to the health and wealth and how much survival value is achieved by real belief.
.
.

Business; Rent A Luxury Mazda for 200 an Hour!

.
How A Rolls May Make You Rich

And may make you the world's nicest boss! By taking out a low interest loan on a Rolls (a good used Rolls is cheaper), and with classified ads for your service to such as lawyers, doctors, and moms (she's worth it!), you can start with just a small ad in the paper and multiply up as you make more mucho. A good rate is 100 or $200 an hour.Your own rate may be higher or lower, The first hour of the month you pay the loan and then you may make 200 an hour for the rest of the month for your labor.You may know some professional who you could ask for the money to start first for advance pay of the loan plus more. And for your peace of mind, repetition of this advanced booking plan would insure that you could always pay the loan, or just go on a luxury ship splurge that month if Rio welcomes your gold, investment diamonds, and condo in Miami Beach you are so rich! Be sure to find out the rates for other towns in your area and if you're good at sales and know the people you can build a foundation of your life if you'd rather earn more than Box Lots has foam on December 22th!

This commercial I saw, It said, "Barking dog leaving you up at night? Simply push a button when the dog barks, the stopper puts out a tone to deliver a safe and harmless bark stop.". It's bark recognition softwear!

The theories and ideas on this site are, to the best of my knowlege, my own explanations, uses of existing technology, my own inventions or humor. For aid or information please call 276 228 3465 Individual results may vary. This site is not intended to diagnose cure or prevent any condition. Am I your Dr Pibb of Fizzology?- No I just wanna be your favorite author- me! instead.
.

Evolution And Repeating Waves of Boom And Box

The reason we are uncomfy in the winter is because it's not how it was in the wild for millions of years. We lived in the tropics till the invention of fire. This is why studies find that alternation of heat and cool is theraputic for the immune system and more. In prehistory sloshing around in the waves would have been necessary in all of our life. And in the tropics without fire there would have been heat also, so our ancient inlaws would have always or usually had a ready source of hot and rain and the necessity of oscillation between them. A good use for this would be in stores or houses with the programmable thermostats, which could alternate in cycles. If you go in the doctors office in August and about catch influenza because of the air conditioner the nurse has the perfec herb for this, a jug of fizz to ward off the chill of the AC. They say if the weather is so so, "Wait a few minutes and it will improve." Finally a weather report for the inner me. And this is also good for listening to CD ROMs on the MP3 Rio shore. By resting between sounds it saves batteries, is a real ear exercise, and would be more optimal especially for the brain. My reasoning is about how they've found that the big winners in memory research are the calm persons who rest between the exercises. Memory is a major part of the life of all thought so this is no suprise. If resting is this important, why would we have time for other activities, because activity is good for power and rest is good for activity! So a wokman that would play a song and then rest about a song or so would help the doctors and nurses feel better and sigh. Because of memory and all the other activities being improved by the right amount of rest, this method of cycles of rest may be of great import and could and should be incorporated in many activities.

They now have the world's most accurate watch, it resets by a beam of light from the stars and uses levers instead of bits to multiply up the precision and the bits won't lose a second in 10,000 years. If you passed out with this alarm watch, when you woke up you'd stretch a thousand months!

.
Evolution of Woman

We were arboreal before the ice age. When it started they say we lost the trees to amber waves of brain, so we stood up or walked out to stand up in the ocean by the shore to stay out of reach of wolves, some think. This theory of a woman I read in the 80's explains why we have no hair like the elephant, the manatee and the dolphin, who also went into the water sometime in their evolution and are smart too. Swimming is good for me. It may save a goddesses causology of evolution! This is in the book c 1975, The Descent of Woman, sort of like Darwin's book The Descent of Man. I thought it was a good or even great book, explaining much well, I was a teen then though, so this may have just been my brain and lots of exercise!

Orin Hatch supports a bill that would damage a person's computer from a distance if they downloaded illegal music, my neighbor saved and saved-her MP3 is now a boombox!
...
....

Atomic Spin Motor

The Power of Mass Is Spinning Energy

Many machines may be more achievable by safe atomic power. All the nuclear spins are powered by the strong force. The problem of fusion generators has been that they are trying to use something "light" in subatomic physics (the electric field) to hold down the strong force, which has much more power. If mass is just spinning energy, I think a safer source of atomic power may be found. Instead of the fusion method trying to blast the strong force particles at each other and hoping they slam in just right, here's how the spin of the strong force and the centrifugal force may be harnessed. The proton has electric charge, so if the spinning proton was made stable and the electric field connected to the shorter range strong force were tapped, the atomic power of each proton could be drained off at our leisure with much reduced risk of explosion or radioactivity. To make this motor protons could be self assembled in chains of a few, and the chain would be held stable by pulling on each side so the chain is under tension balanced in traction by the opposite magnetic poles of each proton, alternating. To tap the power an electron beam would go by the spin of the proton doing work by the field so the beam generator on one side and the collector on the other would be wired on the other side all the way around the proton chain to create a net flow of closed circuit power from spin of the protons field. Protons only are used for the machine because with both protons and neutrons which have opposite strong force fields, they would be more unstable and if a roaming particle hit the chain it would destabilize the machine and cause a nuclear explosion that could then spread to other nearby chains. And the neutrons have no electric charge so they would not have the field to tap out the strong force from the protons. For the same reason fusion power generators are considered safer than fission, since this idea has just protons which are decayed into just hydrogen building blocks, radioactivity would be low. The dream of the use of the formulas of relativity where it was thought a handfull of any mass, not just uranuim, would be enough power for a month in the country in the city would be achieved, since the power source of the protons is found in all atoms from all realms, not just uranium or hydrogen. (The city in the country is where I like village gossip-especially the world village! Aloha Island Air helps me breathe well if I'm at 30,000 when I recieve X-rays from the nurse). The protons could be seperated with a bit of power for use in the atomic motor and then the much greater power source of the protons themselves would be the power achieved. Or just as with fusion generators hydrogen could be used. Why not just use the atom itself to tap the spin of the protons and neutrons via the arm of the electrons which spin and are attached by the field to the spin of the hadrons in the atom? Because the spin of the center of the atom is random, and the proton and neutron spins mostly cancel, so more of it's wasted. And the distance of a beam close to the links of the motor would not be as much so it would also tap a lot more of the power and be a much more compact power source. It's a more atomic power source. A usual atom would get some of its spin from the hadrons but mostly the connection wouldn't be nearly so high power.

.Even with the protons seperate from the neutrons without shielding there would be a risk of an outside hadron zooming and hitting the chain and causing instability. My solutions are insulating the chains in small lead "cells" or perhaps proton solids of much smaller size or other shields and making the proton chains of few number of protons. So if the inevitable hadron makes it through the shield, it would cause just a small reaction and the lead would shield this from outside the explosion so even if it were destabilized the radioactivity wouldn't reach the other shielded cells.

. The applications of atomic spin power would be numerous. It would totally alter the world's economy, for example it would make the billions of tons of gold in the world's oceans finally within reach with a large power source to power the "filters". Instead of trash compacters all rooms could have incinerators that would divide up the compounds of the trash to the level of just hydrogen, or recombine the elements of the trash to any useful compounds, and power a miniature plant that would make for example outfits out of your metal. No more power bills, they would pay you. Radioactive waste would be boosted to the stars. You would go to the station and pick up a power box and it would cost as much as ethyl but would power your 200 mph van 10 years. (In the near term some have thought they may improve electric vehicles by power packs that they would rent at the station and the already charged packs would be reduced in mass and wait, and they've invented a slow charge up from orbit with collectors on the vehicle.) All goods would be at much lower cost since the shipping cost of trucks on the road and boats on the ocean would be reduced. With a much stronger safe power source like this travel to and from mars and the moon would be much cheaper. The price of just going to mars now is estimated in trillions. The cost of living in space stations is estimated at 1 million per person. It would be like the early days of derigibles, sooner or later a big explosion or collision would happen. It's thought even with the US Space Program any big collision or explosion would slow down the program 25 years. It may be a lot better to spend most of our colonization time out of orbit and going to and from the moon and mars with people, the only time people would be inside outer space, all the rest of the time they would be safe and sound in the rooms below the surface, for satellites and such it may be a lot safer and cheaper to do all the repairs of such as TV or cellular satellites by computer-rised machine. We may already have a good enough lighter than air lightship, the army is building "light craft" powered by lasers from the ground that are much cheaper per pound to boost to orbit, cheap power combined with this may make going to mars or the moon feasable. Light craft will be much safer in transit because no fuel to boom is on board the ship. And they may even have a cosmic speed limit in near earth orbit since the ship has enough power to go up slower at this price without having to use the high speed centrifugal force to counteract the gravity, reducing the risk of collision or crash. Once the space junk is cleared out with laser zaps to burn up the fluff, nets on rockets to boost the big stuff down for safe burnout over the ocean, we could reach the Ramada on the moon in orbit.

AUTHORS NOTE; This invention I consider of possible reduced value as of November 06, due to more consideration about the field of particles like protons and other hadrons. A main problem is that even if the inner field of hadrons is flexed by the strong force, the outer field of hadrons would spin just at the speed of light to obey the conversion of the strong force to the usual Emc2 of Einstein. (The "c" is the important number in the equation, it's the conversion number in all of relativity of mass to power. As if you have to speed up all mass to the speed of light to wring all the power out of it.) But motion of the hadron's field is not the same as work, and if the outer charge is always just at the speed of light it would just move around and not do work on the Visa. This is also a main disproof of the Hydrino Theory of Mills. If you got usual matter to achieve force changes in the electric field at more distance it would have a huge amount of power constantly being radiated out of the earth. AND it would also change all the spectra of all the stars. So a strong reason why hadrons can't be contracted to a small size may be that the centrifugal force of the strong force flexing against the electric field can't make the field go faster than light outside the hadron, so the strong force is limited by the speed of light and the charges in just multiples of the usual 1 or -1 (The reason you can add more multiples of the electric charge and go at 100%, 200%, 300%....or more of the speed of light with more charges added on is because the spin which much related with the charge, goes at say 15 degrees, 30 degrees, 45 degrees....and so on so as you add more charge none of the added spins go at faster than light. You would have them layered on like this so they would always have the electric field converting the mass to energy in the usual speed of light conversion of Emc2). So if the outer spin is just in motion mostly without much extra atomic power of faster than light it might seem the atomic motor and the molecular conveyer belt motor and so on are disproven, but wait there's more! Although by this idea the atomic motor conveyer may not be feasable without extra power to make the surface do work, the atomic spin motor may be feasable. It would be easy to construct by assembling compounds in the jug, and the improved atomic motor would have the electric beam that would go by the outside of the proton's field and zoom in and actually blend in with the field so it would be pick up a lot more of the atomic power collected from the ricochet. This is like in realtor ads, wow to be rich without stepping in a room? Be a copy Chateau! If the proton won't interact by usual outer charges being in the same rest frame, bevel in and it's power. Both these types of machines would be of huge worth and are they are worth looking into. US Law says I'm the only one who can patent it since I'm the inventor, but I'm willing to consider other's donations. If you're interested, why not call 276-228-3465. I just have a year since I disclosed it to patent.


Faster Than Light, Evidence, Causology and Simple Ways To Prove or Disprove; What I call GWD General Wave Dynamics, Hopes to generalize Maxwell's use of field density/resiliency he used to exactly predict the speed of light.

Evolution, Ethics And Overpopulation

.
MY EXPLANATION OF WHY OVERPOPULATION IS THOUGHT TO BE THE CAUSE OF THE FALL OF THE MAYA AND OTHER CIVILIZATIONS

There are three ages when about the same level of population density was found in history to be followed by a decline of those civilizations. The Maya, Ancient Rome in 1 AD and after, and the decline of England after about 1776, the major urban areas had about 1 million in Rome and London and the Maya, followed by a decline. What caused this high density seems to be  inconsideration of what had evolved by ourer hunting of predators. It's obvious that there is truth here in the proverb, there is no bad which does not bring good, and research shows with overcrowding most  higher animals become ill. This in evolution would then have reduced the population, and they would have then been more healthy and this would then have added to the population with cycles that conditioned us to well established limits of just how much any one animal or human may achieve by more or reduced overpopulation. It's found in research that social pathology is more common in the city, and of course with not enough people in the country it would be more common. In evolution before the invention of fire we all lived in the tropics and had the optimum number of neighbors near and dear because we wouldn't have been living in the city or out in the country in houses and no one for miles, with the conditions most optimal for life in the outer realms of the cities, and this explains why. Another way of looking at this is the same general theory of Supply and Demand in economics, if there is more overpopulation, there would be either more competition (Demand) than than the evolved amount of competition needed for the same resources (Supply) than they would have gotten cheap in supply in all ages past leading to strain. Or the same motif rearranged; reduced resources of supply for evolution's usual amount of demand that would have won in all other times for the same labor, which would also be a strain, either way most city dwellers would lose. All there is is based on balance of action and reaction, good and bad, hot and cold, most of the life in the world is near the surface, where the forces are level. If one of these is out of balance, evolution will know. This would explain why the plague of the 14th century was followed by the brilliance of the Renaissance. Since the time from the start of the plague to the rebirth of the 14 hundreds was just one 14th the time from the start of the decline of the ancient world to the 14 hundreds, it's improbable to have been just coincidence. Even the conditions in the dark ages weren't enough to lower the overpopulation enough to revive civilization. So all around us, the high civilization before and hopefully after us may owe perhaps 90 percent of it's power just to the plague. If the dark ages were too overcrowded, and the plague hadn't reduced the overpopulation that improved the more general health of Europe, it might have stayed in the dark ages for 1000 more years.

  A rather startling conclusion; we may owe our wealth and power, and the golden age of painting, literature and music, the invention of science, to mice! (This was how the plague was in ships and reached the west.)And if the overcrowding is with us today this is why half the world is in communism now. All we are is based on our relationship to land, so I think communism isn't gone, just sleeping. The overpopulation is higher than all ages past, and this would be why they have it worse in Russia now than before Vlastnost. This is why the ideas of How to Solve Overcrowding on this site may be of import to our future. Even if this method of more room is a real Win on our MSN account it wouldn't be sustainable without some real sort of reduction of overpopulation. It would buy time via the room but the problem of the pressure of Supply and Demand would return, if the same number of people per unit of room, the pressure is the same. If the number of people increases a lot we would soon use up all the room found on the moon or Mars. Space stations aren't considered an option since it would cost a million dollars per person, and they have problems with being flimsy like explosions, leaks and radiation. So I consider methods of creating more room for us to be just a temporary way out for a while. Good deeds were common in the wild for millions of years or evolution wouldn't have gone uphill. If this is proven by supply and demand, any advanced civilization would survive by voluntary limits on their numbers. All the resources would be used up otherwise. Imagine if in 50 years we all have just a foot of room. With our numbers going up, there will be a definite time when the agriculture will be outpaced by our numbers, with the land by more people always reduced for agriculture. We may reduce our number of people per unit of room by finding more of the room above, buying time enough to limit our numbers and never letting them go higher than like levels of 1800 or 1900 from that time on out. This would be salvation for those who have made a bit of error about how our ecology is, our own world, but who with a bit of effort and the power of science, could achieve the most golden exultation as good as any in the history of all neighbors-mine all are! If we have just goals and can't help us how can we help others? Even if there's no way to bring our Eden back, the way to Aurora, OH should always be North. A way to prove that overcrowding is the cause the present social pathology not found in evolution would be to take healthy volunteers who lived in the suburbs all their life and move them to the city with the same amount of money for a few years, and measure how healthy they are about fatigue, stress hormones, blood pressure, and so on. They say blood pressure goes up when a person talks. I think it may go up higher when listening to others talk, this may be of worth research for sweetheart to sweetheart talks. If you have to live in the city relief from the noise may soon be available for you without having to leave the city. They now have chips that cancel out most of the sound by an inverse wave worn as an audio. With the chip speed doubling fast, these headsets may give you sweet smooth rest. These AN machines like heads up will be in widespread use in education in just a year or two.


 It's already well proven that social problems are several times more common in the cities, many would say this is not a proof of cause. They may say many of the people are poor there so this may be the problem, and drugs are used in such realms, and so on. If healthy people were moved from the country to the city with the same amount of cash, no drugs, and so forth, this would be a prediction the theory of overpopulation would prove. Of all the science and creativity on the internet, I consider this  explanation of Competition and Reseouces by far the most important- all else may be worthless without life lived well and room of our own. I hope you remember I think this may be of more value about the rest of our lives than any other at this time in our history. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for riches.

 Encyclopedia Americana says that most countries have more the problem of urbanization (moving to the cities) than overcrowding. So we have another solution to buy more time and slow the overcrowding if we move to the country. This is my belief, if you want to help save the world, and sleep sound, move to the suburbs of the world village, you won't have to shout, and you'll hear the rain on the roof and see the stars. While the plan may save us for a while I think the only real solution my be by voluntary reduction of our numbers-just like a usual advanced civilization would!
.
.Without the plague, history would have been much like watching The History Channel All Month. Constantinople, the Rome of the east had much of the documents held over from the ancient world. If the Merovingian era had continued a thousand more years it's probable sooner or later Constantinople would have fallen (it fell in 1453). Without even this 1/100th of the ancient world's authorship saved on a giant computer, the ancient sculptures and vase paintings would have stayed safe in bogs and dirt, (a Venus much saved is a Venus much urned!) while with a 1000 year delay for a reawakening, authors like Shakespeare would have had to reinvent the word processor wheel. Copernicus or Newton would not have had the guidance of the ancients like Aristarchus as foundation of the heliocentric way that the earth goes around the moon "somewhat". No serious scientist after Aristotle believed the world was not round, so a latter day Columbus would have had reduced hopes of wages from the royals to find the US. Whether the western world would have been found would have been more luck; a continued age of slow life when all were in their 50's would have both reduced explorations, but increased invasions, like nations who are "having a bad day" sometimes do, because of the plague and mice. While there are obviously other influences in history (please see this link )Any important balance from millions of years of evolution by this would seem of highest worth.

.

ESP; A Possible A Possible Proof or Disproof

Please see this link; http://lvsound.blogspot.com/ Thanks More Power Than an Exercise Machine has in A Cushy Wave FM Sofa!

Relief For Depression Possible Via MRI

COMBINATORIAL CHEMISTRY MAY LEAD TO LOTS OF COMEDY!

MRI may be used to find a good herb for depression (depressed persons come out of the MRI machine laughing and joking) by finding what part of the brain is stimulated and then rapidly custom engineering a drug that would cause the same change in the brain the MRI does if the change is simple or perhaps more complex. The chemical would be engineered fast by combinatorial chemistry (this is where they take a batch of chemical building blocks that are already of promise, combining them rapidly, and then using criteria (this time, it heats up the part of the brain the way the MRI does, chemically and so on)) to select to find the best compounds and, then repeat this same process of "theory and research" to rapidly 0 in on the compounds of value. This may perhaps cure depression, of major import to the economy.
-

Entropy History and Fusion; Time Machines

  There's no theoretical objection to building a time machine even to the past, Einstein considered this "at times". I believe if our record of where all the mass and energy was at a given day in history we might envision a giant machine that would use this ability, like a glorified 3d printer to revisit this age.

 The problem is not about the idea itself, rather it's about feasibility..The past doesn't exist now so the only way to reach it would be by building a giant machine to rebuild that moment in history, hence building a giant machine would be costly. 

Another problem would be where would this rebuilt world we replace the old with go if we could find a good enough record on which to base the old world after we build the machine? Lots of people would object to "reduced resources". 

The common objections about paradoxes about time travel to the past themselves may not be disproof because there are contradictions all around in e.g. Newton's Third Law, life, hot and cool, and in general.

 Like in comedy, contradictions are common (by breaking the rules without malice one of the leading ideas about comedy.) If there were no value in this most employees would not rather have a boss with a sense of comedy and vice versa for the boss hoping and hoping for comical employees! A marriage also is more probable to do well if one or the other in the marriage has a sense of comedy. And in other research just anticipating a laugh improves efficiency. So it seems there is not just trivial evidence that incongruence is all around us. I'm serious about my comedy!

  The paradoxes would be possible without disproof of the machine Einstein considered. Consider going to an age of an older history (with me this would be easy I know somewhat!). If you go to the old age of say 1987 and you influence not being with parent so your life is re edited or edited out a bit, you are just moving the "old you" to older times, and the older time from which you came is not in existence there so it has no influence. The "old you" there would just be mass and energy moved to another realm of space time without deep concern of the higher information about where you came from. (I think this is an error in information science or complexity, the assumption is that information is always mass and energy, if so it couldn't be created or destroyed, yet higher information is being changed all the time, a forest of wood can be a shelf, or a box the higher information is more ephemeral.) Time order wouldn't be necessary with the large machine. I believe if the world was changed in the past by the machine, this would reedit what would have been the future, even with contradiction of the higher information.

..
The large machine seems possible by the relocation of particles of energy and mass from one region of space and time to another guided by a stored record of the history on the month or hour the time machine would visit, by a glorified 3 d printer, the teleportation machine..  

The Wikipedia site about Teleportation says that as the science advances there is no reason to believe these machines would be impossible.

Events of matter and energy in space and time are all the world and us are made of, so if we know where by the history of a point where it was at a given time and move it there this is a simple time machine, to go to an ancient hour in history would be the same idea except on a large scale. As above, the big problem is that a world changing time machine would have to be built- to visit an ancient time the world would have to be rewound to have a place in time to visit since it doesn't exist now, and this would take a big machine. 

  

TIME AFTER TIME, REWIND MY AUDIO!

 This about the 3d printer if used as a personal time machine and the other Relativistic Time Machine (my idea of slowing time in the lab by high speed electric fields relative motion, a sort of relativistic wind tunnel of the field) may also be of use for future starship travel instead of hibernation for ages while waiting to reach other star systems. 

 One of the main problems about even a small machine like this is about the extraction of the information about the source the record of the hopeful time to visit. I have agreed with Einstein that there may be a low energy particle (the Low Energy Higgs' a particle predicted and recently found in the lab) to get around this problem about the measuring or sensing ray also otherwise causing this interaction problem. I think if we could use what I call a Higgs' laser a tube of atoms with the Low Energy Higgs's resonating inside, this might go underneath the quantum energy as Einstein believed and it might enable us to find the record on which the 3d printer might base the buildup of the machine.

Consider that a mere atom may change the whole course of history (the polio virus that made the US stronger in World war II because of FDR's power of determination he may not have had without resistance to the illness that made him defend well, a barking dog is more of power than a sleeping lion). 
  

 In one type of classic machine the time traveller would have no options like a movie the same forward and in rewind. This would tell us nothing new since time without the machine allows volition, the main purpose of the big machine if it ever could be built would be as if to make it where the so more months might be ahead if you always sell your old Isabella the 27ths sofas..return to Sears next month!

 To make it where the time machine visitor would go and convince Ferdinand and Isabella to stop Columbus, we would make changes in history and be able to prove or disprove what would have happened.

 Carl Sagan comments that history would then be an experimental science. If volition is allowed for the time traveller he would go to the age to visit and history would be restarted at that hour and would influence the future. But the future he was from would be another future to which he could not return without a power wind fast foreword, without all the future returned to his own world by the time machine's read only fast forward alone from that point. 

 By changing history if just a bit in the time of the past he visited, he would be changing the world ahead if the masses motion like of atoms and molecules was not influenced by the machine. Insubstantial changes in the flow of the events would multiply the months ahead in ways they wouldn't have otherwise. Complex combinations would be unique and the randomness of each restarted moment from the rewound age in history to be visited would be so by the usual physics of times flow.
 
   Einstein's belief in a Spinozan cosmos was if we know the momentum of each particle, all that would be needed to find all the rest in a machine like universe would be simple. One reason I disagree with Einstein here here is because time at least with waves is not easily reversible.. simple particles, like pool halls and the big cash box are easy to time reverse, but not if the cash waves are complex. And if all is in quanta, all is unchanging, and where does all the change around us come from? 

 My belief is there is a fundamental randomness, based on nonlinear waviness, more like gravity, more fundamental than the quanta. You put in one input, you get out five nonpredictable outputs in quantum science, this would make each result of Einstein's resetting the time machine also unpredictable, even if the setup was exactly the same.

  This would arise out of the basic nonlinearity of gravity and the low energy fields and this would make up the basic fields by overlapping complexity, an acceleration you set in one phase by particles and the waves cohere internally to give a different output each time.

  (This relates to attraction via waves and repulsion by particles, waves being more fundamental to attraction since they are continuous and particles causing radiance by being discontinuous. To attract waves would have two sources and the wave is like a line that attracts by motion, the more motion by waving the wave, the more force is exerted by change in speed and frequency of the waves and work is done; repulsion takes place by particles, one mass throws the more solid weight and this causes recoil, first of the source and then the absorbed second radiant observer. 

 Note that waves are lower energy like gravity, while particles are with more mass and momentum. This is why the IP of momentum transfer machines are considered to be a way to reach Mars in just a few weeks, by throwing the mass to the ship, and then the machine throws the mass to the cosmic shore. The interaction is stronger because the low energy waves are compressed enough to make the particles. Without the waves holding the systems together they would fizzle out to low density; thus gravity and waves are more fundamental even though particles are important.)

  I believe if gravity is lighter than light it may move much faster than light as I say in my PHYSICS SYNOPSIS (see upper left of page) in my hopeful generalization of Maxwell's method, who Einstein admired the most in physics.

HISTORY By WAY of Neurons

These methods of travelling like by relative motion of the field in the relativistic wind tunnel or essentially, Einstein's consideration of the teleportation machine method above are not yet viable. The retrieval of the ancient light by consideration of Einstein's other ideas about it as I say above has some possible worth or perhaps a lot depending on the light. My favorite time travel method of these seems to be a more immediate method of simulation of the time, ancient time at any rate..

As found by the brain science of the 1920's each neuron contains all the memory of the entire brain. It was found that trimming the brains of lab mice showed no limit about memory. 

So I believe sensors like MRI or other sensors to find the information in old neurons and revive eyewitness accounts of ages past for use e.g. in forensics, paleology, and to make cool computer simulations of ancient events, this may be the best machine of all that we may see here in the 21st century. CLICK HERE for more.

.

  I would think using neurons to find older eyewitness accounts of history would make a good ancient history simulator via a heads up type machine, ect. What to say to a historian, What's up? Or to an astronomer, "What's broadband?!"

A Perfect Record of History?


 To visit ancient ages by computer simulation, another possibility (other than recreation of the past world of the Big Machine by the same method of the machine scaled up for giant use and so on) may be that the light reflected from the sun on any day in history at the speed of light mostly as an unchanged particle (or the image of distant stars would be changed or unseen) since it was reflected at that month in history so it might be retrieved and used to find what actually happened on that hour. I call this a Perfect History. This would then be put in the computer to make history computer simulations based on much more information than historians have laugh lines and old comic celebrations, (like the history kid who said let bygones be bygones, or astronomers who say see you around!) It may be lots cheaper than the Big Machine if they may find a way try to find this from radiance from the Earth at any given day in history and use this information found to then make virtual historical visits with just usual cyber headsets and other such methods. Historian marms would love me, or optometrists who will see me now or dietitians who won't!

As promised my edit and improvement of this is about the use of two of Einstein's ideas;


  Einstein predicted both that light is unchanged from emission to absorption so it has constant speed and also radiation pressure and other change of the light over a great distance by interaction with other light, one was the proven experiment yet the other wasn't. (I believe low energy light may change less with distance due to the Higgs' that act as stabilizers of the bosonic field; the low energy stabilization fields are at low speed like for the acceleration of gravity nearby for both particles of lower energy light, even so the majority of the two rays of energy have their energy stored in the Higgs' at slower speed relative to each other. Thus Einstein was wrong that the two high energy rays of light would impact instead of going right through each other, if no low energy field is present they being of high energy also might have radiation pressure.)


  Since there is radiation pressure at high energy yet not at lower energy of the light, obviously beams of X Rays at right angles will have impacts of the particles like radiation pressure but low energy waves are without this.

  I would say the zone between the particles of light seen and the lower energy "real" light might both have the information of the record yet be enough like the high energy particles to interact with the light from two regular distant light sources where they cross and subtract out the signal from each enough to hopefully find the record or some of the record. (If the low energy light interacts less to hold the record of the history but still interacts enough to find it (as was to Einstein's dismay but perhaps he was also right here also!)) it will perhaps "erode" and with older light it would be more and more uncommon as the radius from the time in history increases. So the possibility of the "perfect" record may be more like a fossil, eroded, mostly there in times of good visibility, and so on. 

  One of my motivations to find if the record could be found by the first method was how to get the information if it's there, to us here?

 Gravity waves or the EPR were my first idea because as I say I was in a hurry at the time! If they are possibly of high speed and somewhere near the energy of the matter waves, I reasoned these methods might be combined. One beauty of the light method is however about timing. To find the distant light if it interacts in the median zone where Einstein was both right and wrong about the light, say to find the light from 50 years ago, we find the light rays crossed at just 25 years out, this means there is no wait to find the light from that day, all we have to do is find the right angle if the interaction zone has enough information and is also readable!

  For example if we want to find the information in light from 100 years before, we might look for light interacting with it from the distant regular source at just 50 light years out. And for 50 years we may look for the other sources that cross at that angle. This means angle may be important. 

 Regular sources at the given angle would be a given by nature. We can't move them and only these ways to illuminate history may be how to know more about what was going on then, at least if other methods aren't enough to know. I'm only saying this is one way we may find out about history, this isn't the only way, but it may turn out to be useful.


(To build a giant optical telescope, we might use my idea of a rotating ray of light to sweep out the area of this "lense". The ray could have two standing waves that change the resilience of the medium, that is, the refraction and then another smaller sensor finds the light. This might be of worth for communications, finding the "perfect" record and also the lights of distant advanced civilizations, and for finding Earthlike worlds, all real cheap compared to a giant conventional machine. 

 Another "cheap" method of building giant telescopes I envision may be to use giant gas filled lenses, much lighter and cheaper to orbit, and no doubt an optimal method of using arrays of them could also be of worth and these could help us heat worlds nearer for colonization, saving the earth from asteroid impact by ablation and radiation pressure to move the impactor, or even solving the onset of a future ice age.)


My belief is that if a good memory machine was available, even if the power source would need to be large like fusion, there would be no limit to how far the Big Machine could rewind all the way to the start of the Earth even, because it would be the simple process of finding the record, storing the info and then using it to build up the ancient age to visit with a giant decoder. 

  However, because of no way to find the information about what was going on in the old ages before the Big Machine was built, I see no way rewinds could be achieved before when a big machine was built without more record because most of the information about the ancient ages can't be found, even if the information in the outward bound light was retrievable as I say may be possible herein, because it would be incomplete for half of the 24 hours the light was low frequency, and more information of worth is in other wavelengths than light.. 

  Others have considered the possibility of finding the ancient light. If we actually were able to retrieve the light, we may improve from there, but like when a fossil is dug often much is not viable to find about the ancient life and no guarantee would be that just the right information to make the Big Machine reliable would be found.

  Perhaps some other way than via the historic record in the light would be found for rewinding the Big Machine. Einstein believed the machine would not be able to travel before the information is encoded, and feasibility issues would be of import even if a power source like fusion were available.

 Feasibility aside if the machine is essentially a 3d printer based on a good enough record, and these are the two main elements, Einstein was wrong because this has nothing to do with when the machine was built. Of course even so feasibility would be the main limit for a large machine.

 

 Eric Lerner and others are inventing fusion motors that use imploding electric fields to generate force that fuses well with a much more controlled flow when the protons are imploded by surrounding atoms. I think the problem with surrounding atoms is they will fuse with the fuel generating radioactive waste, other inventors like me have devised cleaner methods (see the atomic spin motor ). For my bestselling reducing radioactivity site click here. 

 If the light is like Einstein believed, or if the record in the quanta by the Higgs's laser were viable and a large source of the materials to rebuild the time to be visited with were achieved (in the time since the record was built) of where the machine could save to rewind was available, I think The Machine would be not impossible.

 Physicists aren't dumb, and I think the problem of having to rebuild an ancient world to revisit it is why physicists haven't already built a time machine that has any worth to reverse it. The use of a one man time machine that would reedit smaller regions than the world by these methods from the teleportation science being developed may have future "value in the past"..

 THE WAVE FUNCTION AS A SOURCE OF DATA FOR TIME SIMULATION AND LEARNING ABOUT ANCIENT LIFE HISTORY ETC..

Einstein and others believed that the collapse of the wave function was the cause of time. As I say (on this post CLICK HERE or see the same link at the end of the page you like) I believe that this can be proven to be only part of the cause of time because a lot of the events are encoded in the electromagnetic fields. 

  In other words as I say on the link we could take a crystal and send in the microwaves as with quantum computing in order to collapse all the wave functions at once. Time would radiate inward by the idea that the collapse of the wave function is fundamental, but actually as with thermodynamics we can't know the future yet because the energy from the Sun hasn't reached us yet to supply us with energy for time computations.

 Nonetheless I believe that a major part of the contribution to the entropy that we are involved with with time is about the collapse of the wave function as Einstein believed. 

More particularly I believe if we collapse the wave function of all the quanta of the crystal we get the results of our computation which is stored as the bond angles and the energies of the electrons of the atoms of the crystal. This might be how time computes and so the result would be that the collapse of the wave function and the entropy of the second law of thermodynamics both combine to give us the weighted values of the branching out of the thermodynamic entropy (otherwise of unknown cause).

 This combination method would be how time computes. 

 In order to find a large amount of evidence about history like every day in history I think what we could do is simply take the quanta of the earth after they've collapsed the wave function of each and then read that like we're reading a quantum computer to find the information about every day in history. 

 Earthquakes, cosmic ray showers, lightning strikes, friction of different sorts all may combine to create a unique signature for the collapsed wavefunctions of that moment in history. And this may enable us not only to have value for legal use but also we can find out about the behavior of ancient life like dinosaurs.

 While of course it seems improbable that we can build a large time machine anytime soon like Einstein or Wells considered, this might give us a way to make a really good simulation of time in history!

WILL SUPERMASSIVE BODIES EVER BE OF WORTH AS TIME MACHINES?

  Some like Kip Thorne or Stephen Hawking who hope to use the relativistic speed of acceleration of  black holes and other massive bodies as a time machine of sorts..I think they are limited by the lack of complexity of the massive fields. 

 While my idea of using the relativistic wind tunnel to perhaps slow time in the lab nearer to us would be about relative field motion and would be more viable to us, at least to slow time, using the field to speed it up or reverse time without a machine seems improbable. 

 Most of the information about our lives is of electric charges and electricity and caused by billions of years of evolution so you can't reverse complex electricity with simple gravity of massive fields because gravity won't act on all the particles in an exact rewind method like The Machine. 

 In evolution, computers and most other genius, the motifs start simple and go complex, this is how we evolved. Being wavelike, a massive source of gravity in GWD is just a sort of blob of mass. The field of our life is much more complex and would have to use precise relocation of points of mass to cause the teleportation.

Gravity pulling down to onennes, being the opposite of thermodynamics that lifts us up in my ideas of General Wave Dynamics GWD reverses time in general, but not exactly; acceleration of complex nonlinear waves seem necessary to hold the cosmos together and in GWD they wouldn't be via the *slow* speed of light which isn't a wave uninfluenced from emission to absorption as by Einstein's belief so the speed is constant unlike the acceleration of gravity.. I believe acceleration won't fit relativity.

As promised above the link is below!.. My page about how we may finally prove if the collapse of the wave function exists which is still in doubt after 100 years. On this post I also discuss how I think we can finally prove the weighted values of thermodynamic entropy as well as perhaps use the crystal as a cheap room temperature quantum computer with self-assembly in the test tube and also as a possible room temperature superconductor.

Click Here For More..