Why I Think It Was Always Be Good Most Often, The Golden Rule and Not "The Platinum"
Consider that in living evolution disease is almost absent. I would consider the golden rule to be an important sign of health because it's more economical in terms of overall power to stay out of trouble than cause it (when this option is available, and evolution would have remembered us, or we wouldn't be here). 5/6 of the time, the heart, the most active muscle, is spent resting, if all our time was spent in overactive living like war we would have used up all our power.
In the Great Courses Series this month (October 2007), volution of behaviour, it says a few strategies emerge in research, most of them simple. "One strategy is, no matter what your competitor does, dishonor it, Always Do Bad. Another simple strategy of this so called is to always cooperate, no matter what. This is Always Do Good no matter what. And Whatever the opponent's move is, return it, Good for Good bad for bad was another strategy that was tried. In 1980 a tournament was held among all the strategies in the Iterated (many move form) and, the winner was Good For Good and Bad for Bad, with a number of years of competitions."
If you consider this a bit more in depth, it seems improbable. If whatever the boss did we do the same, where would we be? If the boss tries to fire us it's a good idea to withold on firing the boss in retort, (if the boss splits the cash 50/50 you got from watching reruns of CMT, so be it the boss may say, if it's in unmarked cash, all the Visa I spend is!) The Theory of Evolution of Behaviour says the most important behaviour is about Hawks and Doves, Carnivours and Herbivours, Bad and Good. Consider a chess competition where I was always brought up on the motif of no Like for Like if the opposition had the advantage and was up in power. The reason is, with an advantage of power, if the side without the advantage just favored a piece for a piece, a move for a move, with all moves the same, eventually the side with advantage of more pieces or resources has more power to win with. This would be why Like for Like is not as much of worth in general as the Always Be Good. Most people aren't the boss just by usual ways of the world (in business like evolution, there were always more of the good Elfs than CEO's) so while the boss may like Like for Like, most people would achieve more with Always Do Good, while patiently defending without overedefence, being worthwhile employees (in whatever sense of the word).
I think the reason Like for Like seemed to win the bout was with all the motifs competing they were all an the same level, sort of like employees going to the dogs with no boss around. Like for Like seems to lack the idea that truth is higher than false, and this way of distinction has been the power of science, and science has won well. If it were Like For Like always, Good would be just as much of worth as bad, and the good of the Always Good motif would be unimportant, and all the religions of the world, the banks, and the charities would be of no valor. Where was this in the 1980 tournament? All the programs were given the same amount of power when they started. In life, this is rare. So I think, if all the programs were given unequal power at the start, the winners would be the Bad somewhat (because bosses are needed, we couldn't live without some pain and labor in life) and mostly Always Be Good in a larger amount, The good would win out more eventually, because life is more about the many employees than the one boss. If it were about the one and gravity mostly we would all just be imploded down to the one dot of heck and we are not. If it's about the many, this is what life is more about. All of our compounds of life and our breath are made in almost all respects of the many of the electrons and protons of thermodynamic stuff of our life.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
.
What I've Learned In 2500 Years Or 500, about Ancient Run Flat Wheels
.
What is the worth of consideration of what was going on in the ancient world? It's good for the value of the great culture, but I think the main thing we may learn is about a way to stop the the general decline so history won't repeat itself, this may be far more of worth than the culture and civilization. The civilization was great, but being able to sustain it may be just as great, without stopping what caused the ancient world to decline we may have it worse. While I think history is of worth to research, evolution may be of far greater value. Some historians think Aristophanes' play "The Clouds" was what caused the death of Socrates in Ancient Greece who had to take hemlock because of the conservatives of Athens like the sophists. In 'The Clouds' Aristophanes was critical of many of the Athenian innovaters and innovations like Euripides and Plato, and the war Athens was fighting to the S. Though he was at the height of ancient greek civilization, Aristophanes wasn't moral to his audience, in truth he used humor as a way to be unworthy more than for a good cause. So Plato says Socrates wasn't uncouth to Aristophanes when he found out, but he knew Ceres had done him right when she won all the All Stars! While Aristophanes wasn't actually the murderer of Socrates, it was how one event led to another. If he was sorry for authorship of The Clouds because he damaged Socrates who said "no wrong will ever come to a good person", this would be good for Aristophanes' reputation today (he may improve in another thou, he wrote lots of IOU's). If he wrote "loose lips sink swirling ships, with oars they have smooth shores, if they use shore recognition softwear!" he may wish others read his favorite; not Reader's Die-jest for thousands of perscriptions.
No doubt, even the genius of the ancient world would be of the same worth if overpopulation with incereased competition for decreased resources was the actual the cause of the decline. While it's good and great about the greek world while it was in glory I think either way the ancient world would have lost with time. (CLICK HERE for complete motif about based on evolution of behaviour.) While I think well of wisdom about the ancient world when it was great and in brilliance, some truths are more of worth than others. By lowering levels of the density with reduced overpopulation we would win if the problems caused by increased competition for decreased resources were well appreciated, and the unhealthy living conditions it creates would be our source of hope of what to learn to reduce the density just like learning any other skill, the same tricks except where we win more than lose because of how evolution may not achieve justice, but it tends to moderate itself. After all we're just as good as an ancient, we're much better at sorting our envelopes at higher speeds thanks to parcel post, well, we have wrist watches without sand we would wind! More of worth I think than just the glory of greece is to find ways to not have the same luck the ancient world had. If we added more country to the city as in the link, I think we would be more in control than the ancients than even when they were headed higher. I think reducing the overcrowding at lower than ancient AD levels would allow indefinite numbers of brilliant events of civilizations like the greeks, none tragic, all more humerous and comic than my mom's mouser named Restophanes, a mouser at rest remains active while at rest!
Evolution's balance for millions of years was between life and death, just as there is no good without evil, there would be moderation of life, because of just so much room to live. If there were any way to add unlimited lift and life, one of the billions of advanced civilizations would have found it (actually there may have been an infinite number because mass and energy is not created or destroyed, so the cosmos has existed forever). So we would look up and all the cosmos would be ruled by the one or two advanced civilizations or so who had found how to add life on life unbounded.
.
So you could say it must be just one in a billion that we'll win this bet, or much more reduced in the wager than this, so something of influence is involved in evolution or physics that hasn't been considered. We couldn't live without sex and we couldn't live without room either. My life is where I think moderation like in evolution is what's most bright and moral. I don't hunt, but I think to eat fish in moderation is alright even though it's based on a sort of hunting because in evolution we ate fish in moderation for millions of years and did well..And I think the living should be blessed, but the creation of life also should be limited and in moderation or we like most of the advanced civilizations would run out of room to breathe, and the outward pressure would be turned in sort of like how glaucoma has pressure on the eye that harms vision, or too many woods in the forest without the fires common in evolution that cleanse the forest. This is so each tree is not so starved of nutrients and light that they're ill which is not what I think evolution was like. Click here for my Health, and The Common Sense of Evolution page.
The main problem with unlimited life where we we live in 50 years, If we each take up perhaps 15 ft of volume, with population doubling all the time soon we'll run out of room up to the roof of the atmosphere, and we may find out what other advanced civilizations did if people don't know this about evolution. Space stations or life on Mars seems unviable because of collisions, explosions, leaks, radiation, too much heat and cold, and so on. When Malthus published his truth that population will always increase faster than the land and resources there was a big uproar. This is easy to see in the 18th century world he lived in, most were so cozy with lower pressure so it wasn't an exorbitant price to pay both economically and otherwise with out so much competition for decreased resources that they all felt bad enough to want to adapt to evolution. These days it would be amazing if no one listens to my explanation of what I think is actually going on with the pressure continually increasing, because we don't have the excuse they did. If you ask a group of people in New York how many of them have been robbed in the preceding 5 years they will almost all raise their hands, if you ask the same number of people out in the country, almost none of them have. One of the solutions may be like Mexico's, where they slowed the rate of overpopulation via TV shows managed by the Soap Dish.
.
What I've Learned In 2500 Years Or 500, about Ancient Run Flat Wheels
.
What is the worth of consideration of what was going on in the ancient world? It's good for the value of the great culture, but I think the main thing we may learn is about a way to stop the the general decline so history won't repeat itself, this may be far more of worth than the culture and civilization. The civilization was great, but being able to sustain it may be just as great, without stopping what caused the ancient world to decline we may have it worse. While I think history is of worth to research, evolution may be of far greater value. Some historians think Aristophanes' play "The Clouds" was what caused the death of Socrates in Ancient Greece who had to take hemlock because of the conservatives of Athens like the sophists. In 'The Clouds' Aristophanes was critical of many of the Athenian innovaters and innovations like Euripides and Plato, and the war Athens was fighting to the S. Though he was at the height of ancient greek civilization, Aristophanes wasn't moral to his audience, in truth he used humor as a way to be unworthy more than for a good cause. So Plato says Socrates wasn't uncouth to Aristophanes when he found out, but he knew Ceres had done him right when she won all the All Stars! While Aristophanes wasn't actually the murderer of Socrates, it was how one event led to another. If he was sorry for authorship of The Clouds because he damaged Socrates who said "no wrong will ever come to a good person", this would be good for Aristophanes' reputation today (he may improve in another thou, he wrote lots of IOU's). If he wrote "loose lips sink swirling ships, with oars they have smooth shores, if they use shore recognition softwear!" he may wish others read his favorite; not Reader's Die-jest for thousands of perscriptions.
No doubt, even the genius of the ancient world would be of the same worth if overpopulation with incereased competition for decreased resources was the actual the cause of the decline. While it's good and great about the greek world while it was in glory I think either way the ancient world would have lost with time. (CLICK HERE for complete motif about based on evolution of behaviour.) While I think well of wisdom about the ancient world when it was great and in brilliance, some truths are more of worth than others. By lowering levels of the density with reduced overpopulation we would win if the problems caused by increased competition for decreased resources were well appreciated, and the unhealthy living conditions it creates would be our source of hope of what to learn to reduce the density just like learning any other skill, the same tricks except where we win more than lose because of how evolution may not achieve justice, but it tends to moderate itself. After all we're just as good as an ancient, we're much better at sorting our envelopes at higher speeds thanks to parcel post, well, we have wrist watches without sand we would wind! More of worth I think than just the glory of greece is to find ways to not have the same luck the ancient world had. If we added more country to the city as in the link, I think we would be more in control than the ancients than even when they were headed higher. I think reducing the overcrowding at lower than ancient AD levels would allow indefinite numbers of brilliant events of civilizations like the greeks, none tragic, all more humerous and comic than my mom's mouser named Restophanes, a mouser at rest remains active while at rest!
Evolution's balance for millions of years was between life and death, just as there is no good without evil, there would be moderation of life, because of just so much room to live. If there were any way to add unlimited lift and life, one of the billions of advanced civilizations would have found it (actually there may have been an infinite number because mass and energy is not created or destroyed, so the cosmos has existed forever). So we would look up and all the cosmos would be ruled by the one or two advanced civilizations or so who had found how to add life on life unbounded.
.
So you could say it must be just one in a billion that we'll win this bet, or much more reduced in the wager than this, so something of influence is involved in evolution or physics that hasn't been considered. We couldn't live without sex and we couldn't live without room either. My life is where I think moderation like in evolution is what's most bright and moral. I don't hunt, but I think to eat fish in moderation is alright even though it's based on a sort of hunting because in evolution we ate fish in moderation for millions of years and did well..And I think the living should be blessed, but the creation of life also should be limited and in moderation or we like most of the advanced civilizations would run out of room to breathe, and the outward pressure would be turned in sort of like how glaucoma has pressure on the eye that harms vision, or too many woods in the forest without the fires common in evolution that cleanse the forest. This is so each tree is not so starved of nutrients and light that they're ill which is not what I think evolution was like. Click here for my Health, and The Common Sense of Evolution page.
The main problem with unlimited life where we we live in 50 years, If we each take up perhaps 15 ft of volume, with population doubling all the time soon we'll run out of room up to the roof of the atmosphere, and we may find out what other advanced civilizations did if people don't know this about evolution. Space stations or life on Mars seems unviable because of collisions, explosions, leaks, radiation, too much heat and cold, and so on. When Malthus published his truth that population will always increase faster than the land and resources there was a big uproar. This is easy to see in the 18th century world he lived in, most were so cozy with lower pressure so it wasn't an exorbitant price to pay both economically and otherwise with out so much competition for decreased resources that they all felt bad enough to want to adapt to evolution. These days it would be amazing if no one listens to my explanation of what I think is actually going on with the pressure continually increasing, because we don't have the excuse they did. If you ask a group of people in New York how many of them have been robbed in the preceding 5 years they will almost all raise their hands, if you ask the same number of people out in the country, almost none of them have. One of the solutions may be like Mexico's, where they slowed the rate of overpopulation via TV shows managed by the Soap Dish.
.
COMICS V
If you want the assurance of life after death, will power is the way!
The coast of Arizona has just two sides; The InArizona side and the OutArizona side!
How many laps are in a marathon? Sometimes thousands, Before, lots, after, more linear!
I was in the store the other day and this lady had a perfume filled purse, what a whiff! I said I'd do anything she said!
This may actually be a good use of perfumes and other colognes. If the wife likes to gossip, it would be fresh air if when she's in the room she is real sweet, if she's your rich fiancee there would be special ones you would wear so you'd cash in! The teacher would know more about your genius at business when you are around in the room and nonsmokers would have herbs that would help the smoke so the air is so good you can read the SMOKING sign. Aromatherapy of many types that changes sleep, memory and more, may be the perfume of the 21st century. With cheap computer noses of just two wires that move for just the specific aroma they have you would be able to find out why you know your numbers and 15th powers up to 1000 just when you're near the math marm at lunch also!
A treadmill for when you sleepwalk would be a good invention! The machine would just go 55 miles per hour, and has a good jogers side air cushion!
It says on Yahoo Today
"Pottery vessels dating from about 1100 BC in Puerto Escondido, Honduras pushed back by at least 500 years the earliest documented use of the basis of the chocolate industry."
Some physicists think we may be able to influence the past from the present! While I don't think so, Hershey's shure wakes me up.
The cheap way to a comfortable shave is, most cost cutter brands won't even cut, the warranty goes on 1000 years, so you outlive most of the gyp!
.
I saw this boost for the horse tracks, said it was good for our schools, how many in the 8th grade are millionaires?
I read where they say science proves that if you just think about marathons without actual exercises, you'll actually be ahead of the sauna belt in improved heart rate and fitness about 21 months, then if you do pushups you'll outrun the rest! What a way to lift brightbells!
What's the only sandwich you can't make without bread? A wish sandwich, Mamma VVI and the Hug Station has all the rest!
....
-...
If you want the assurance of life after death, will power is the way!
The coast of Arizona has just two sides; The InArizona side and the OutArizona side!
How many laps are in a marathon? Sometimes thousands, Before, lots, after, more linear!
I was in the store the other day and this lady had a perfume filled purse, what a whiff! I said I'd do anything she said!
This may actually be a good use of perfumes and other colognes. If the wife likes to gossip, it would be fresh air if when she's in the room she is real sweet, if she's your rich fiancee there would be special ones you would wear so you'd cash in! The teacher would know more about your genius at business when you are around in the room and nonsmokers would have herbs that would help the smoke so the air is so good you can read the SMOKING sign. Aromatherapy of many types that changes sleep, memory and more, may be the perfume of the 21st century. With cheap computer noses of just two wires that move for just the specific aroma they have you would be able to find out why you know your numbers and 15th powers up to 1000 just when you're near the math marm at lunch also!
A treadmill for when you sleepwalk would be a good invention! The machine would just go 55 miles per hour, and has a good jogers side air cushion!
It says on Yahoo Today
"Pottery vessels dating from about 1100 BC in Puerto Escondido, Honduras pushed back by at least 500 years the earliest documented use of the basis of the chocolate industry."
Some physicists think we may be able to influence the past from the present! While I don't think so, Hershey's shure wakes me up.
The cheap way to a comfortable shave is, most cost cutter brands won't even cut, the warranty goes on 1000 years, so you outlive most of the gyp!
.
I saw this boost for the horse tracks, said it was good for our schools, how many in the 8th grade are millionaires?
I read where they say science proves that if you just think about marathons without actual exercises, you'll actually be ahead of the sauna belt in improved heart rate and fitness about 21 months, then if you do pushups you'll outrun the rest! What a way to lift brightbells!
What's the only sandwich you can't make without bread? A wish sandwich, Mamma VVI and the Hug Station has all the rest!
....
-...
Friday, January 12, 2007
A Geologist's WWW~How to Dig Deeper...The deepest ever dug with drill bits is about 4 miles. They've drilled no deeper because when they dig deep, for more depth, they have to pull up the bit. And when they put the bit in at the same the depth, the rock is so hot at that depth by that time it flows in the well where the bit was before they can drill deeper. No more depth is reached with the fluid flow of the rock at that depth. Huge amounts of power from geothermal heat may be dug if it was cheap enough to drill. For a band a mile wide and deep all away around the earth at 350 degrees it would be worth 900 billion barrels of oil, and that's just a one mile band.
Current plans involve using drills and atomic or conventional blasts to shatter the hot rock and then pump in water that somehow would be pumped back to the surface by quenching the hot rock with water. Two problems are it's tough to drill so deep and the water may be unpredictable to know where it would flow.
Atomic powered drill bits have been invented to solve this. The bit would be a tubular atomic power plant in the well that fits up say, 20 feet of the well. It might have heat at the tip of the bit that would also cut with sharp teeth both powered by the fission. This would operate by a sort of downward implosion by way of both the the weight of the U238, the melting powered by the Uranium using the heat of the bit to make it red or white hot, and cut of the drill bit, so pressure from above wouldn't be necessary. Another way to make the atomic bits weigh a lot in small volume would be to use hadron solids like protons in the right density to make it via the optimal amount. To drill economically the machine would also have collectors that would store the heat from the sides and charge up supercapacitors or flywheels, and after the stop this would be used to aid the atomic power and go for more depth than otherwise, or indefinitely. At the top of the bit (near us) a modular uranium pack has also been invented, so if the power goes low, one pack would go up and then another would descend to continue the drilling, each one half width of the well, or two cylinders, one inside the other would be used, so the operation would be continous of the drill. (While one goes up the other can go down by passage since they fit in the width of the drilled conduit.) The pipe to connect with us up here would be more flexible if it didn't have to be solid and so could be in large round wheels of the tube (like a lawn hose) that could be set up at the site by helicopter. This would make it so they could drill deeper, just set up the drill, bit and pipes, and the drilling is automatic.
With the problem of digging deep solved, to make the water flow well, seperate shafts would be dug and then a blast at both wells would shatter the rock, and the shafts would be close enough the zone of shattered rock would be continous between the blasts, forming a shattered zone of oval or tubular geometry. If 3 or more shatter zones were lined up, the water would just be pumped from the blast zones on each end of the zone continously along the tube of shattered rock. The area of the zone to the outside would have no circulation of the water so it would use a more continuous zone of many blasts than just one or two, more or much more of the water flows from the injection well at one side to the extraction well. There would be at least some rock in the earth at that depth without layers (strata) so the long zone of shattered rock would hold the pressure to pump out the heat without leaks. This would solve the problem for the most, of not being able to make the water flow well.
Another way would be to use concentric wells, the inner would would be for water in and the outside well would absorb the heat and return it to the surface. This machine (the atomic drill bit) would pay for itself as soon as the first depth was reached also in this plan. When the depth was reached and the water was pumped from this main conduit, the atomic bit could branch out by going in and out and these would make more and more profit with time.
Please remember in the following, I'm speaking of simple machines and the more distant years ahead, perhaps 200 years, but much of the same science may be used for both the above and the following plan used, with no discontinuity between the as we reach deeper and deeper via the plan above and this for geothermal power;
If just one larger atomic bit like just one of perhaps 20 used to desalinate the water of a big port city was used to make a wider tunnel, concievably a train well could be built all the way from the US to Japan in a mostly linear path. You may say if a submarine can just go to 1000 feet below the ocean waves it would take a superstrong material, and I think this would be the proton solid a solid made of protons (stronger in compression than the strong nuclear force, which is only attractive, or its attraction would cause indefinite implosion because the strong force is only attractive). It may seem no material would be this strong about the conduit, but obviously there is at least one other common material that is easy to find that is strong enough-and that's the rock itself, it doesn't collapse. The protons would always out achieve the maximum pressure of the outside atoms because they are much denser than this, and proton solids would be a good insulator because heat would be at a much longer wavelength, and with no holes, the heat of more usual thermodynamics couldn't pass through the protons. The earth's pressure is at most 42 million pounds per square inch and the density of a proton is much higher, a thousand trillion times that of usual matter. And machines that use the pressure from heavy masses on collecters would generate power to improve efficiency at lifting the load or for other useful labor like the earth using the pressure of weight to continuously squeeze out the heat. In my Gravity Powered Machines (GPM) this pressure may be used to generate electric power by such as electric collectors, and this would be used to strengthen the arch by way of electro "flexors", sort of like a how a bicycle motor reuses part of the downward spin to go up the hill after, the same with much of the flow of the heat. (GPMs would also be of use for making high rise buildings safer by using them to collect some of downward force and putting it into good use strengthening beams. And the large weights they have in many high rises to add stability if there was a quake would be even better with big computerized motors that would stabilize more. This is because the average motion overall would be at random and so even if the big weight averaged most of the motion, at random there would be usually extra motion left to one side or the other so the building that just had a passive weight and no machines too could be unweildy in a quake. While there may be many other uses of this invention, GPMs of which the power of the pressure to collect with the atomic drill bit via the water pipes may be of most import.)
For our advanced world civilization to eventually drill all the way from one side of the earth to the other would use cassions, since they would be of more width and wouldn't be as easily moved to the site in a roll to achieve more strength. The drill bit would extend its reach as usual with digging like water conduits and then the cassion made of proton solids would shore up the progress. Once the machine was launched it would just repeat the same lengthening processs over and over, the drilling with heat, then the tube, so it would be simple. Another way, since protons are simple, would be for the drill which is made of protons to continously extrude the well as it would dig, the outside of the machine would support the pressure as it was extruded, perhaps in strong layers. Other than the drill and the mills to make the proton solids, which would be simple, the only other cost would be transport of the cassions to the drill site, but protons are easy to reach, and the proton solids would be with much higher strength to weight than other materials for transport. Since weight would of the bit be a help, the tubes would be sunk from both sides of the earth to meet in the core, to make a continuous metro!
When you were in the train you would fall half the way and no doubt some of this motion would be used to make it up the other side. The radius of the solid iron core is just 800 miles but the earth's total diameter is about 8000 miles, so just a slight arch of the passage would bypass the solid iron core (above is fluid iron, and higher up is more solid mantel). The spin of the core might be of use to accelerate the trains in the tunnel as they would pass by it by way of electric machines. Since the outer core is liquid, all the drilling would be in the mantle, and a bit in the crust. The tunnels below the mantel would go through the fluid to reach the other well in the opposite mantle to one day build this the metro underground of the world village using the super solids and good machines.
In the bestseller Cosmos, Carl Sagan says more advanced civilizations may build space elevators Goddard and Tsiolokovsky invented in the early 20th century to reach a wheel in orbit circling the earth. But the September 11th attacks on the US in 2001 imply that this may not be politically viable because of risk of terrorist attack, at least if overpopulation is causing increased Competition for decreasing Resources, and the strain is causing social pathology. If the overpopulation continues so will the social problems, if my explanation about Supply and Demand holds. So digging a metro in perhaps 100 years like this may be more sustainable than the spoked wheel or the tower, since it would be fortified more easily. It would use just the known atomic science for the drill, and the proton solid simple to make in large volume because it's just protons that are self assembling since of simple stuff, and the gravity power would be the only three types of science needed other than cooling machines, these may use the pressure to collectors to coolers. If the proton solid turns out to be a good conductor, it's bad, but the pressure could also be used to cool it well.
If this were ever achieved the world would have a much safer cheaper way to ship from West to East, and East to West, the train would be super linear so super high speed. It wouldn't increase risk of war like the tower wheel, and with the gravity free fall, research into 0 gravity would be achieved without having to go up in the shuttle. 0 gravity has been the main hope of payoff for the International Space Station. A much cheaper source of gravity modulation for us now (without the WEIGHT!) may be by way of centrifugal force.
And by way of this atomic drill and the proton solid, voyages in the future may have a special "iron" submarine to go in the outer core of the earth's magma. They say the core of the earth on it's outer surface has a canyon much huger than the grand canyon, this would be explored in the sub. By the atomic drill, small robots might be sent if the main metro was still to expensive at that time.
Another use would be to blast out spheres in the center or to the sides of the solid core and use this as a waste dump, dropping stuff in and collecting the power from it's fall before it would be forever sealed away by gravity, a sort of afterlife for radium. Or this would just be in boxes that would be injected to melt in the liquid core. At the bottom of the passage, a sort of one way valve for the boxes could be used to make sure no lava flows up. This would be if power sources like the atomic motor turn out to be unfeasable. (The atomic motor is a wire of protons held in tension by their opposite magnetic fields; a collection beam at right angles to the protons spin, goes inside the proton's field and out changing the beams wavelength and power, this is then collected and rewired around to the source of the beam, completing the curcuit, these machines would be small, super strong and cheap if assembled by the usual chemical motifs.) The atomic motor could also be used for better recycling and as a power source. If the atomic motor or other fusion machines are viable geothermal heat would not be necessary, and the super metro would be the plan of most import about the atomic drill bit. If fusion is achieved many more materials could be recycled including Uranium and other radioactive waste, or, with more power, just boosted safely out of earth orbit. This is not considered feasable now with the necessity of high speed (and explosive) boosters to overcome the earth's gravity, the risk of explosion on a launch of like a Titan booster is about 1 in 250. As I say in my post about the space tower the armys idea of lightcraft, boosted by beams from the ground, would be much safer and cheaper than chemical booster per pound of payload, they would be more safe because no fuel is onboard the ships so if the beam goes out the lightcraft just coasts lazily to the earth. It will be interesting to see what happens when the army builds more than the small prototype of these they have.
If proton solids are viable they would so dense the right weight combined with perhaps the optimal amount of heat or drilling would make it so it would be used as a probe through the mantel in our own 21st century.
Thanks to divorce laws, the odds are 5 to 1 you'll leave Reno with your wife!
It was so hot last summer, I went to buy some pistachio, and when I returned my chrome, hubcaps, and wheels had melted! So Hot, it's when you go out at 11 and the rocks and houses are all radiant!
R:"Where's the cashbox where you win the most?"
D: "The slot machines?"
R: "No, the fizz machine, more options!"
.
.
Current plans involve using drills and atomic or conventional blasts to shatter the hot rock and then pump in water that somehow would be pumped back to the surface by quenching the hot rock with water. Two problems are it's tough to drill so deep and the water may be unpredictable to know where it would flow.
Atomic powered drill bits have been invented to solve this. The bit would be a tubular atomic power plant in the well that fits up say, 20 feet of the well. It might have heat at the tip of the bit that would also cut with sharp teeth both powered by the fission. This would operate by a sort of downward implosion by way of both the the weight of the U238, the melting powered by the Uranium using the heat of the bit to make it red or white hot, and cut of the drill bit, so pressure from above wouldn't be necessary. Another way to make the atomic bits weigh a lot in small volume would be to use hadron solids like protons in the right density to make it via the optimal amount. To drill economically the machine would also have collectors that would store the heat from the sides and charge up supercapacitors or flywheels, and after the stop this would be used to aid the atomic power and go for more depth than otherwise, or indefinitely. At the top of the bit (near us) a modular uranium pack has also been invented, so if the power goes low, one pack would go up and then another would descend to continue the drilling, each one half width of the well, or two cylinders, one inside the other would be used, so the operation would be continous of the drill. (While one goes up the other can go down by passage since they fit in the width of the drilled conduit.) The pipe to connect with us up here would be more flexible if it didn't have to be solid and so could be in large round wheels of the tube (like a lawn hose) that could be set up at the site by helicopter. This would make it so they could drill deeper, just set up the drill, bit and pipes, and the drilling is automatic.
With the problem of digging deep solved, to make the water flow well, seperate shafts would be dug and then a blast at both wells would shatter the rock, and the shafts would be close enough the zone of shattered rock would be continous between the blasts, forming a shattered zone of oval or tubular geometry. If 3 or more shatter zones were lined up, the water would just be pumped from the blast zones on each end of the zone continously along the tube of shattered rock. The area of the zone to the outside would have no circulation of the water so it would use a more continuous zone of many blasts than just one or two, more or much more of the water flows from the injection well at one side to the extraction well. There would be at least some rock in the earth at that depth without layers (strata) so the long zone of shattered rock would hold the pressure to pump out the heat without leaks. This would solve the problem for the most, of not being able to make the water flow well.
Another way would be to use concentric wells, the inner would would be for water in and the outside well would absorb the heat and return it to the surface. This machine (the atomic drill bit) would pay for itself as soon as the first depth was reached also in this plan. When the depth was reached and the water was pumped from this main conduit, the atomic bit could branch out by going in and out and these would make more and more profit with time.
Please remember in the following, I'm speaking of simple machines and the more distant years ahead, perhaps 200 years, but much of the same science may be used for both the above and the following plan used, with no discontinuity between the as we reach deeper and deeper via the plan above and this for geothermal power;
If just one larger atomic bit like just one of perhaps 20 used to desalinate the water of a big port city was used to make a wider tunnel, concievably a train well could be built all the way from the US to Japan in a mostly linear path. You may say if a submarine can just go to 1000 feet below the ocean waves it would take a superstrong material, and I think this would be the proton solid a solid made of protons (stronger in compression than the strong nuclear force, which is only attractive, or its attraction would cause indefinite implosion because the strong force is only attractive). It may seem no material would be this strong about the conduit, but obviously there is at least one other common material that is easy to find that is strong enough-and that's the rock itself, it doesn't collapse. The protons would always out achieve the maximum pressure of the outside atoms because they are much denser than this, and proton solids would be a good insulator because heat would be at a much longer wavelength, and with no holes, the heat of more usual thermodynamics couldn't pass through the protons. The earth's pressure is at most 42 million pounds per square inch and the density of a proton is much higher, a thousand trillion times that of usual matter. And machines that use the pressure from heavy masses on collecters would generate power to improve efficiency at lifting the load or for other useful labor like the earth using the pressure of weight to continuously squeeze out the heat. In my Gravity Powered Machines (GPM) this pressure may be used to generate electric power by such as electric collectors, and this would be used to strengthen the arch by way of electro "flexors", sort of like a how a bicycle motor reuses part of the downward spin to go up the hill after, the same with much of the flow of the heat. (GPMs would also be of use for making high rise buildings safer by using them to collect some of downward force and putting it into good use strengthening beams. And the large weights they have in many high rises to add stability if there was a quake would be even better with big computerized motors that would stabilize more. This is because the average motion overall would be at random and so even if the big weight averaged most of the motion, at random there would be usually extra motion left to one side or the other so the building that just had a passive weight and no machines too could be unweildy in a quake. While there may be many other uses of this invention, GPMs of which the power of the pressure to collect with the atomic drill bit via the water pipes may be of most import.)
For our advanced world civilization to eventually drill all the way from one side of the earth to the other would use cassions, since they would be of more width and wouldn't be as easily moved to the site in a roll to achieve more strength. The drill bit would extend its reach as usual with digging like water conduits and then the cassion made of proton solids would shore up the progress. Once the machine was launched it would just repeat the same lengthening processs over and over, the drilling with heat, then the tube, so it would be simple. Another way, since protons are simple, would be for the drill which is made of protons to continously extrude the well as it would dig, the outside of the machine would support the pressure as it was extruded, perhaps in strong layers. Other than the drill and the mills to make the proton solids, which would be simple, the only other cost would be transport of the cassions to the drill site, but protons are easy to reach, and the proton solids would be with much higher strength to weight than other materials for transport. Since weight would of the bit be a help, the tubes would be sunk from both sides of the earth to meet in the core, to make a continuous metro!
When you were in the train you would fall half the way and no doubt some of this motion would be used to make it up the other side. The radius of the solid iron core is just 800 miles but the earth's total diameter is about 8000 miles, so just a slight arch of the passage would bypass the solid iron core (above is fluid iron, and higher up is more solid mantel). The spin of the core might be of use to accelerate the trains in the tunnel as they would pass by it by way of electric machines. Since the outer core is liquid, all the drilling would be in the mantle, and a bit in the crust. The tunnels below the mantel would go through the fluid to reach the other well in the opposite mantle to one day build this the metro underground of the world village using the super solids and good machines.
In the bestseller Cosmos, Carl Sagan says more advanced civilizations may build space elevators Goddard and Tsiolokovsky invented in the early 20th century to reach a wheel in orbit circling the earth. But the September 11th attacks on the US in 2001 imply that this may not be politically viable because of risk of terrorist attack, at least if overpopulation is causing increased Competition for decreasing Resources, and the strain is causing social pathology. If the overpopulation continues so will the social problems, if my explanation about Supply and Demand holds. So digging a metro in perhaps 100 years like this may be more sustainable than the spoked wheel or the tower, since it would be fortified more easily. It would use just the known atomic science for the drill, and the proton solid simple to make in large volume because it's just protons that are self assembling since of simple stuff, and the gravity power would be the only three types of science needed other than cooling machines, these may use the pressure to collectors to coolers. If the proton solid turns out to be a good conductor, it's bad, but the pressure could also be used to cool it well.
If this were ever achieved the world would have a much safer cheaper way to ship from West to East, and East to West, the train would be super linear so super high speed. It wouldn't increase risk of war like the tower wheel, and with the gravity free fall, research into 0 gravity would be achieved without having to go up in the shuttle. 0 gravity has been the main hope of payoff for the International Space Station. A much cheaper source of gravity modulation for us now (without the WEIGHT!) may be by way of centrifugal force.
And by way of this atomic drill and the proton solid, voyages in the future may have a special "iron" submarine to go in the outer core of the earth's magma. They say the core of the earth on it's outer surface has a canyon much huger than the grand canyon, this would be explored in the sub. By the atomic drill, small robots might be sent if the main metro was still to expensive at that time.
Another use would be to blast out spheres in the center or to the sides of the solid core and use this as a waste dump, dropping stuff in and collecting the power from it's fall before it would be forever sealed away by gravity, a sort of afterlife for radium. Or this would just be in boxes that would be injected to melt in the liquid core. At the bottom of the passage, a sort of one way valve for the boxes could be used to make sure no lava flows up. This would be if power sources like the atomic motor turn out to be unfeasable. (The atomic motor is a wire of protons held in tension by their opposite magnetic fields; a collection beam at right angles to the protons spin, goes inside the proton's field and out changing the beams wavelength and power, this is then collected and rewired around to the source of the beam, completing the curcuit, these machines would be small, super strong and cheap if assembled by the usual chemical motifs.) The atomic motor could also be used for better recycling and as a power source. If the atomic motor or other fusion machines are viable geothermal heat would not be necessary, and the super metro would be the plan of most import about the atomic drill bit. If fusion is achieved many more materials could be recycled including Uranium and other radioactive waste, or, with more power, just boosted safely out of earth orbit. This is not considered feasable now with the necessity of high speed (and explosive) boosters to overcome the earth's gravity, the risk of explosion on a launch of like a Titan booster is about 1 in 250. As I say in my post about the space tower the armys idea of lightcraft, boosted by beams from the ground, would be much safer and cheaper than chemical booster per pound of payload, they would be more safe because no fuel is onboard the ships so if the beam goes out the lightcraft just coasts lazily to the earth. It will be interesting to see what happens when the army builds more than the small prototype of these they have.
If proton solids are viable they would so dense the right weight combined with perhaps the optimal amount of heat or drilling would make it so it would be used as a probe through the mantel in our own 21st century.
...........
Thanks to divorce laws, the odds are 5 to 1 you'll leave Reno with your wife!
It was so hot last summer, I went to buy some pistachio, and when I returned my chrome, hubcaps, and wheels had melted! So Hot, it's when you go out at 11 and the rocks and houses are all radiant!
R:"Where's the cashbox where you win the most?"
D: "The slot machines?"
R: "No, the fizz machine, more options!"
.
.
Why The Ether May Have a Moderate Density....
..
Maxwell used the assumption of a resilient medium to predict the speed of light exactly, the more or less dense, the faster or slower the light. One reason Einstein abandoned the idea of the ether, this medium, is that the faster a wave goes the more snap back it has, the more snap back the more dense the water, the solid or the presumed medium like the ether would be. Light by any measure has an extreme speed of 186,282 miles per second so with the high speed goes a high density of the field, much more strong than steel, based on the assumption that a wave through the ether was exactly the same as a wave through a usual solid. The planets would somehow plough through this superdense field without resistance. How to use Maxwell's way to predict the exact speed of light without this superdense field? Let's be good to Poor Rich's Almanack and Rich Poor Maxwell! I think the solution may lie in this connection between the speed of light and the field density.
Perhaps it's just that a small wave like light, is like a guitar at the highest, the wave is fast without high density a low pitched wire has. The balance of the opposite charges that Maxwell used the constant force density to predict the constant speed of light with allows more for relative change so the pressure would be more balanced like the air around us, it weighs tons but because it's balanced on all sides it's easy to move through. And the voltage of the air is about 200 volts but it too is based on relative change. While almost no one believed in air other than the breath of the gods in ancient ages, it's measurable by how much pressure it exerts. I think if it exists the pressure of the ether is not huge, it's just the pressure of resistance a rocket's exaust encounters with accleration and with how much ease it moves on the other side through the field. This is a more comfortable density for the ether, comparable to the density air has, because it doesn't take much more rocket exaust to than jet exaust to move a starship or airplane.
The distance between here and a star is the same for the most part, I think of distance of this type as a sort of balance between the disconnectivity of electromagnetsim by the slow speed of light and the attraction by gravity, these are the only two forces present at the greater distance scales, if one or the other were more or less the distance between us and the stars would change. Einstein believed in empty space time, so with no medium between here and a near star or between here and a more distant star it would take the same time to travel to both stars, or no time at all with no field to plough through. The assumption of a resilient field like the ghost theory explains this while Einstein's explanation is insufficient here too.
Perhaps it's just that a small wave like light, is like a guitar at the highest, the wave is fast without high density a low pitched wire has. The balance of the opposite charges that Maxwell used the constant force density to predict the constant speed of light with allows more for relative change so the pressure would be more balanced like the air around us, it weighs tons but because it's balanced on all sides it's easy to move through. And the voltage of the air is about 200 volts but it too is based on relative change. While almost no one believed in air other than the breath of the gods in ancient ages, it's measurable by how much pressure it exerts. I think if it exists the pressure of the ether is not huge, it's just the pressure of resistance a rocket's exaust encounters with accleration and with how much ease it moves on the other side through the field. This is a more comfortable density for the ether, comparable to the density air has, because it doesn't take much more rocket exaust to than jet exaust to move a starship or airplane.
The distance between here and a star is the same for the most part, I think of distance of this type as a sort of balance between the disconnectivity of electromagnetsim by the slow speed of light and the attraction by gravity, these are the only two forces present at the greater distance scales, if one or the other were more or less the distance between us and the stars would change. Einstein believed in empty space time, so with no medium between here and a near star or between here and a more distant star it would take the same time to travel to both stars, or no time at all with no field to plough through. The assumption of a resilient field like the ghost theory explains this while Einstein's explanation is insufficient here too.
What is the Ether Made of In My Explanation, General Wave Dynamics (GWD)?
Low energy particles like the Higg's (a most or more elementary particle predicted by Higgs 40 years ago) most physicists believe exist. These would flow in the earth continually exerting pressure on us and causing gravity, much like a boat at anchor in a river feels pressure, but if it's flowing with the field so it feels no force. This is the belief of the ghost particle explanation, which has the particles of 0 mass, I don't believe in the "ghosts" of this type as much as some physicists because they would have internal attraction and inertia to exert external pressure on us downward to cause gravity or expansion of centrifugal force. They would need to have mass to exert pressure, but with a comparable pressure to air pressure, if they actively attract, gravity would be much stronger. So in my physics the attraction would be caused by a much lower density field that would flow between the ghostly field, smoothing and imploding it so it would flow without loss of power and with energy conserved.
Wouldn't the earth put on weight with the inflow of the particles of this field (even if moderate density)?
Since to have the earth not gain weight, the particles would have to both flow in and out somehow, and if they cause gravity by pressure, it would seem they would cause antigravity by the outward pressure. Just as the earth or the sun has gravity in at one wavelength and heat out at another without overall expansion, the particles may flow in as more as mass and out as more energy, so this is no objection to the ghost theory. If we can't measure the field because it's too low in energy with our physics of the early 2000s (although it's been seen by the Lamb Shift for hydrogen in a more roundabout way, and other events like induction) the inflow would be as possible as the outflow, and energy exerts less pressure on mass as it expands. The ghost particles must have mass to exert pressure of gravity and centrifugal force and so the earth would put on weight if there was no outflow.
Another possible way out one can see for the ghost explanation would seem to be that it was so efficient at conversion (with gravity's lack of shielding and so on) all the inflow's mass would be converted to just the usual thermodynamic heat the earth radiates out. While the small outflow of the earth's heat is small if the efficiency was high enough this wouldn't be impossible.
All this may be of worth because Maxwell's theory predicted the speed of light exactly, and Einstein just fit all his theory in the frame of the speed of light. With the wave particle duality, the wave explanation of light wasn't dead even in Einstein's time with all the large number of motifs it describes so well. Seems alive more often than usual, as you may see on this page because of paradoxes about the infinitely small with the elements that build up, waves being without the paradoxes, and gravity being more wavelike, I think waves are more important than particles in general and so are more fundamental. So a wave theory would be a more valid foundation of the cosmos and relativity derived from it.
Obviously the speed of the waves of light has been of import to special relativity, so waves would seem to be of more import to a more general theory of physics than Einstein's. My explanation I name General Wave Dynamicss or GWD, and because it uses an extension of Maxwell's already good idea of wave density being the main way to predict the speed of a force, Einstein's explanation can be derived from it and not vice versa. I hope to extend Maxwell's theory with more or less dense fields (the strong force and gravity, angular and linear, and the high and low density two plusses and two minuses so both speeds would be faster than light) via refinement of Chin's experiments with faster than light and the strong force, and the waves from jets of massive bodies which might move distant stars, almost instantaneously if gravity is much lighter than light so it's much faster than light. Both would offer definite proofs that would only be true if GWD is. I don't absolutely believe gravity would go at much faster than light, but I consider it more possible or probable than not, and the experiments would be easy to achieve with modulation of cheap existant machines, so I think it's worth a try. See My Physics Synopses page about my conclusions vis a vis the possible Speed of Gravity and The Speed of The Strong Force for more.
*******
"On Nov. 7, a 901-foot container ship, the Cosco Busan sideswiped the shore gashing its hull and dumping 58,000 gallons of sludge-like bunker fuel. It was the worst oil spill in years and closed fishing for more than three weeks; authorities lifted the ban Thursday after determining eating fish caught in areas hit by the leak has no health risk."
.
Right, fish restuarants are rich in good oil, 0mega 3000!
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)