Was Einstein Wrong About Reliable Connections?

..Einstein considered himself a Spinozan. Baruch Spinoza was one of the most well read determinist philosophers. Einstein believed the Uncertainty Principle and the collapse of the wave function were only coincidence and some of the recent "low energy quantum experiments" seem in truth the support his conclusion. He believed the Uncertainty Principle was not just common rather it is uncommon sense. I believed in Einstein's idea in years before because it seemed random to assume the illuminating ray has to have a near energy to the measured particle influencing it to the degree that it was agreed by others than Einstein that "to measure was to observe". My belief was that it's just coincidence the forces in subatomic physics are not of great distinction is energy and mass. While the fine structure constant (the ratio of the strong force to electricity) is just 1/137, there's no real reason it might be much larger or smaller because all the fields seem unified by the conservation laws less to more, so the given low energy field of gravity can have any degree of resilience or resonance and thus the forces derived by it that all obey energy conservation, ect, are derived from it but I believed the actual value of the resonances of the higher forces could be of any relative strength. Thus like a cushion and a ray of red yellow and blue like my mom's shelf was scorched by, the ray of illumination could be of any value whatsoever it seems.The light ray is hugely smaller than the cushion and it doesn't have to be the same. Einstein asked, "Do you really think the moon isn't up there when you look up to see it?"

 Einstein's idea was we might find a low energy particle to "go around"the Uncertainty Principle, then I thought, the Uncertainty Principle wouldn't seem to violate doubt. More than doubt is out.. 

 Einstein believed if the low energy particles were found the universe would be deterministic, a clockwork cosmos of the celestial musicians restored to sound bytes, physics not magic would once more win. As I say I agreed with Einstein before.

  I've changed my mind more recently based on the experiments; We can say a particulate cosmos is more predictable than a wave cosmos. If you have the particles of a gas you can time reverse them in a simple way, the movie looks the same in forward as reversed, in truth any movie you can do this with would by definition seem deterministic, this is an important test for cause and effect being well in union. It may seem the lack of Spinozan determinism would have more complexity than we can control. This may seem to be a limit on building a time machine (Einstein actually considered time travel and he thought we couldn't go beyond when the time machine was built into the past, my own conclusion was that we could perhaps find a good record to copy (as in embedded in the history of entanglement encoded in the heavy quanta of the world) but the machine would have to be giant to visit say 1982, because the past doesn't exist now, so we would have to "Rebuild it" atom by atom, and this would be woe to waits in the RN's room. Actually complexity if finite wouldn't be a limit, just more now than we may eventually reach via machines, no doubt Einstein's time machine won't be built real soon in 1995!). 

  Entropy has branches which have weighted values, each with it's own worth, rather like the branches of the math from ancient to modern times. Even so while this might speed up the randomness so determinism couldn't reach by unpredictability, there is no guarantee from the foundation of physics determinism would win by this observation. We imagine if there was a good enough resolution of our sensors to find all the particles there at any given time, "in the past" as Einstein considered (if Einstein's low energy particles actually existed) and we could actually find some way to actually even have a place to put the ancient world we might create somehow (without lots of people in the present losing a lot of money and stuff and without disagreeing if they would have no ancient place to go to the old world!) and so on, When we reset the machine to another time, what would happen? We imagine that even if we had a perfect copy of the machine and all the chemical stuff was exactly the same as it was, all the world, it would still be not deterministic. If we let the world run forward from there history indeed wouldn't repeat itself, and history as taught in schools was bunk or will be. No two histories of the world would repeat. To see why this is so, consider a horse race. By Einstein's determinist method we imagine all the particles of the horse, the air around the horse, the dirt, all the rest or more. In his wondrous way Einstein may have the world where each moment of time even of the waves that the mass is made of are themselves seen by the low energy sensor Einstein considered. At each instant of time each small wheel has one event and say five possible ways the wave may collapse. If we wonder how to know what the collapse would be, there's no guarantee Einstein was correct. The old problem has remained in subatomic physics, which is more fundamental waves or or particles? Einstein himself also came up with the original idea of waves and particle equivalence, one of his brilliant ideas, how so, if truth and false can't both be true, by this you can see why the wave particle duality has not been proven true just measured to exist in the near realm of the physics he realized. I believe waves are indeed more fundamental because it seems impossible for a truly fundamental particle to emit and absorb waves. If the wheel has five possible ways to roll why can't we know what they are? I think there are two reasons. First because waves are lower energy, matter waves, this makes the connection a loose connection. Second these waves are the low energy quanta I imagine the basic field including the mass is made of. Going from higher energy like light to the lower power field I believe there may be a phase change where the quanta are more like a saucer instead of a deep wall, and this may allow a sudden increase in speed, if faster than light. Here's my Physics Synopsis for you. Feynman himself believed the matter waves may move faster than light e.g. to cause the speed of light escape velocity of massive black holes, and Van Flandern and I also agree for reason of causality. The lower resistance would allow the field to act like a superfluid in a phase change so the problems of relativity like infinite mass wouldn't be common. Like two antenna of different size, the electric field like via Einstein's speed of light and the lower power matter field wouldn't have direct influence like the higher energy fields, this would be how superfluidity and the statistics of bosons themselves would arise. The main cause of the indeterminism would be not so much the loose connection, rather the faster than light speed of the waves, and there's no guarantee the particles can catch the waves because the waves are more fundamental. I consider the cosmos to be a set of concentric spheres of fields at least the longer range fields of gravity and electromagnetism, the outer sphere would be gravity because it has lower energy so longer wavelength, with electromagnetism at much nearer radius (even though more than 20 billion light years). Thus electromagnetism is ultimately out of reach of the gravitational field and also out of the influence of the inner matter waves inside the quanta of QED, electromagnetism and the other fields than gravity are based on Einstein's Emc2 and this is particulate, because Emc2 is fundamentally bound to quanta, change the radius and the mass and energy always adapt to fit this (derived from relativity because the more speed or energy there is the more mass there is). Quanta are particles by definition. If waves are more fundamental and gravity is perhaps mostly wavelike because it's more fundamental and has attraction (particles being more discontinuous would only account for the higher energy physics) we might believe there has to be a realm like the outer sphere and higher speed where particles may not have influence. Einstein's low energy particle might have the optimal energy to measure the waves, but there's no guarantee of this. The low energy experiments that prove Einstein more recently are not so numerous as the many examples of Schrodinger's. I believe while Einstein was actually not completely wrong no doubt.. even so waves may be more important. The lower energy fields may seem to have a "life of their own". More recent improvements of Feynmann's famous method of finding all the possible options that would cancel out by real laborious slide rule and other ancient business machines, where we can't know them beforehand may seem to have been improved by the use of "twistors" where the calculation is simplified out to a more certain reality like Einstein might have liked, by finding symmetries. In my belief the particles don't know how they will collapse before they do, so the twistor method will always be general, and like the idea of number or complexity in math may never be made exact, in truth the wave foundation would be why. When the particles collapse they themselves wouldn't know beforehand because the particles can't keep up with the waves, only by following the lead of the waves which would be at FTL would they labor through the calculation. I actually imagine this may be related to how gravity waves may attract by quantum entanglement. Recent experiments show that entanglement is common, particles are found to stay entwined in many complex ways long after they blend well. This would be how attraction works. As I puzzled over the problem of entanglement I realized it seems to need both a FTL signal and a unique entanglement for each particle in order for the other particle to see if the other particle has been changed as in quantum codes. When two particles are entwined they would have real internal structure, even an electron may be complex and the reason no structure has yet been found would be because of the low energy of the waves and the super high speed. To the electromagnetic field the matter wave would just be a blur, and look continuous, even so the waves may have extremely complex lower energy resonation for each heavy quantum to find the other entangled quantum by resonance of the low energy particles. If Einstein's gravity waves are  nonlinear per se an acceleration, I thought they may first change wavelength, then speed, then wavelength, and so in a loop, causing the acceleration of gravity by entanglement (this may be soon in our reach by the IP machines that may use a shock wave as by protons to generate a known gravity wave as expected). If gravity is out of reach of quanta, then I wondered if at the extremes of gravity if it actually may be the prime improbable mover, winding the cosmos to never run out of power by the entropy. Gravity doesn't violate energy conservation, there's acceleration nearby often and it doesn't violate energy conservation. Gravity would try to speed the quanta by acceleration but they have just so much they can hold of the field. Einstein proposed to see if electrons would gain mass with time in a field of gravity, old electrons are found to weigh the same as new ones however by the experiment and this makes sense if the earth isn't gaining huge mass of the electrons, as Einstein might have known... The electron seems like a cup and it holds just so much field. I believe there may be more of the field left over that flows past just as in a usual cup in the stream and like Einstein I believe this may reradiate in a low energy field that may be the cause of 10 recent otherwise mysterious observations in physics (like the Pioneer anomalies, universal acceleration and so on as I say HERE.). The earth doesn't speed up or slow with the acceleration of the gravity because the quantum wells hold just so much force and the rest would reradiate, unused. So gravity is a one way valve for force (I believe this itself may be explained by a particulate way to be the cause of the rest of gravity because there's no need to assume Einstein's low energy particles are completely gone at that realm with low energy quanta, somewhat discontinuous nonetheless to build up the higher energy particles out of the basic field, this has a cause here too. Particles would be the cause of the radiance of centrifugal force by their discontinuous radiance like particles of a gas, the equivalence principle shows gravity and inertia are much alike, thus gravity may have an important particulate component in it's mechanism. The flow of a particulate field at 32 ft per second would explain why no force is felt while you fall, by balance all around, but the force we feel at rest would be by way of the particles. Newton and Maxwell both tried to explain gravity by the way of particles, my more modern way to hope to explain the way gravity might work based on a foundation in later 20th century science I'll explain in another post. I'll try to explain how the leftover field might exert pressure on the way down but no force on the way up, so the Earth wouldn't be speeding up even though there's extra field because gravity is the cause of all change in the universe). The acceleration and resistance also may be the reason why particles spin never stops, no matter how friction is added they never run out of spin. The interior field being an acceleration and the acceleration being fundamental, spin and time being derived from the spin being an acceleration like a small clock is eternal. I believe the universal duration is infinite because for quanta held by gravity energy here is neither created or destroyed, like Lerner, I believe the Big bang is not the entire universe, my own cosmology is a hoped for improvement of perhaps others ideas (not sure where I got the idea so I can't claim priority, though I think I've improved it much by predictions, ect to what I've named COSMIC JET Jet Cosmology.) about a circulating field like the earth's electromagnetic field that would have continuous loops from the poles powered by the gravity forever while energy is conserved via local radiance and implosion. Gravity really would be perpetual motion here in it's own special power to wind up the cosmos even while at higher energy it would fit in other fields, the ghost in the machine of the particles, the particles the machine, gravity the oil, but more cosmic because it also would be oil that would power the machine. About entanglement, if the acceleration was continuous like gravity we might expect particles like protons or neutrons to oscillate and change indefinitely from emission to absorption, in truth in neutrino astronomy, they oscillate a bit then settle down in transit to a reliable measure of the events that made them with emission in the dense realm, say a gamma ray in a star, thus here the acceleration is limited, and in truth there must be both resilience and viscosity of all fields, even so beyond a certian point the latter may be the foundation, at the point where it overcomes all other radiant types of entropy, this would be the reversal of sign in GWD that may mark the opposition of gravity and relativity. Electromagnetism (like the speed of light) radiates to the many and gravity implodes to unity.

Why be good to evolution and move to the country? The answer may be of worth to you, Click Here.

For More click here..

MORE ABOUT OPSINS

Opsins, small cellular pumps that can be used as cellular electrodes seem to have great potential. It's believed they may be a cure for brain illness like mental illness, retardation, or Parkinson's by making the neurons fire as might be most of worth, in a precise controllable way, not like the too general broadbrush way of drugs that are neither permanent or exact, with more risk of harm by side effects, ect. Already opsins have been used to turn Parkinson's on and off by just changing the frequency of the firing of the neutrons and have yielded an important insight about schizophrenia, the types of cells involved are the ones that were believed to be overactive, and changing the opsins have proven this to be true, proven by no other method before now.

There are those who have imagined there might come a day when nano dust from above might fall from the heavens, clothing the poor, healing the sick and feeding the hungry via the power of a supercomputer in a drop of mist like a sort of manna from above. These would be nano robots for many uses. The military is already believed to be using nano dust dropped from planes in Afghanistan to identify personnel and enemies more reliably.

One problem with the war in Afghanistan is about opium, the Talaban is getting most of it's money from the opium, and 85% of the people of Afghanistan are estimated to be addicted. It's generally thought that Afghanistan is an endless money pit for the Allies, because the opium being a cash crop will keep the Taliban in Power for the poor there. A military solution seems unviable or we would have already seen it. This may seem reminiscent of the American Revolution when the British were pouring endless money into a distant realm, with the Americans deeply entrenched. History doesn't always repeat itself with more new science, we wouldn't even be in Afghanistan if it weren't for the drone missile power we have. Perhaps life's an opsin if we are optimists. That is, if there may be no military or economic way to have a definite win, opsins may be our answer. Opsins may soon be used to cure addiction,
you may say, addiction, isn't this replacing natural receptors in the synapses with other receptors say for small cigarette receptors in your brain (what's a filter!). Newer science with cigarette addiction is using what's called cotinine, a totally non habit forming derivative of tobacco that's so powerful it's believed it will be used to not only cure tobacco addiction, but may be of use to lose weight (I drop my 10 and 15 lb weights, a fast method of math!). The idea here is that just increasing pleasure centers and making you feel wise like scientists and professors would always say smoking made them feel (later research has shown they were telling the truth, B vitamins like nicotine boost IQ 87%).

If counteracting pain in one part of the brain like to be thin (and save for a luxury machine of your own not the pizza van) with more activity via another is powerful, all addiction may soon be cured with opsins, just by stimulating the pleasure center of the brain more than the pain will allow otherwise. If it's strong enough to overpower food cravings and cigarettes, perhaps opsins will be strong enough to cure all or most addictions..

To win in Afghanistan instead of waiting perhaps indefinitely for a military solution and in finding no other economic solution like encouraging other cash crops and building schools and plants and other ways to boost resistance and so on perhaps the way to win the war may soon be to add opsin dust to the air, curing the addiction that keeps the Taliban in power. We think of the people in their misery being grateful for being cured (perhaps not, even so many believe a good deed is it's own reward) and they might help us win the war from there.

And about the future of opsins we imagine not just mental illness and addictions being cured. Another side of ospins is about control of behaviour. If an opsin pill was developed or was of worth for many uses, we think of the time when an ugly man who loves a woman to slip her the opsin, and suddenly she's in love for the rest of her life, and she knows why, "Why did I fall in love with him he knows math so!" Indeed opsins could be used in any competition where one person wants another to do their own bidding. We imagine societies like the communists who would give opsins to control the will of the proletariats, and our own method of dropping opsin nanobots to change the society to not so much revolt as for peace to break out. Conservatives thrive on discontent and poverty, if we "stimulate the pleasure centers of other brains" this may help solve communism. If most feel great and there's good health, most win more than lose, this was evolutions way for millions of years because research has shown disease is virtually absent in living evolution. A problem with this is it would be more a cheap solution than solving the increased competition for decreased resources that seems to be causing the worldwide deficits. I think there's no more basic than supply and demand, and the stress the deficits are about seems to be natures way of telling us the overcrowding caused by our excesses in the past few hundred or thousand years to evolution isn't nature, there is no more basic than supply and demand. The overcrowding may thus be what causes communism. If we find a way to think it's alright and we feel good about the pleasure centers of our brain this may be like cutting the wires to the oil lights of a car and feeling fine till the engine blows even though we are wiser to save ourselves from more severe problems about common sense to evolution. It's true that all the life of the earth isn't needed to live well, extinctions are common in evolution, and the ecosystem flowed around the hurt and healed the wound and continued computation at another level to higher evolution. Even so beyond a certain level of common science we would say there may be more to think of than short term oil lights.

In truth even if we feel fine about this problem via the opsins, sooner or later (not too soon if we use opsins for other use) say 50 years, people won't have enough room to move or breathe, I think evolution is trying to tell us something important by way of communism, but good news if we use opsins to stimulate other pleasure centers than for sex, so the crowding is reduced. Pleasure of other types might be increased so much it would overpower interest in sex after the two children that would not be "out of evolution's world" were concieved, like listening to songs, or exercise! I believe if the overcrowding was reduced to nearer evolutions golden level, the world could return to an age like in the 1500's right after the overcrowding was reduced to evolution's degree by the plague. In the 1400's wages rose 87%. So too the rise and fall of the ancient world and other civilizations seems to correlate with the general level of overpopulation, for example England in about 1800 and the ancient world had about 1 million in the more large urban realms when the decline of both was. Thus if we reduce overpopulation communism may be reduced and the societies who otherwise use opsins to the goals of communism may not tend to use them for overcontrol, so the problem of general misuse of opsins by societies could be solved by better use of opsins. There have been numerous examples where the society tried to reduce the overcrowding, most notably in Mexico where a program using soap operas reduced the rate of increase by 2/3. Almost no other method has won to reduce more, and so it may be of real worth in the future of the world to use opsins. Here's my First Opsin page.

Click Here for more about evolution, overcrowding, and its historic influence.
..
...

Two Disproofs, Two Ways to Prove or disprove Van Flanderns Exploded Planet Hypothesis (EPH) and Reasons To Believe in My Moon Capture Impactor Scenario (MCI) for the Origin of the Moon.



Tom Van Flandern was a brilliant Harvard physicist who died in 1997, who seems to have reached some of my conclusions in physics about gravity perhaps moving at much faster than light. Van Flandern speaks of many ideas used in physics like what Maxwell and Newton hoped to achieve with a particulate physics for the way of gravity. I hope to carry on with the brilliant line of Van Flander's work. CLICK HERE for my physics synopsis for you.



The other main line of research I'm aware of by that author is about the Exploding Planet Hypothesis. This was Van Flandern's hoped for spin on the belief by other authors that each star or planet may actually have a natural fission powered reactor in the core, like the natural reactors found from billions of years ago in geology where a lump of one kind of lava flowed into another and both had radioactivity to ignite the reactor. The lumps of the lava in the core would perhaps be separate from formation (the Earth's core from sonar sounding has been found to actually have a giant canyon, magnetic fields are constantly changing and so on.) Van Flandern shows by simple computation, there is enough power in the lump of natural reactors to explode even a smaller planet like Jupiter, and then goes on on his site to describe how Mars' higher and lower altitude N and S realms were caused not by a great moonlike impactor like some have believed; rather the distinction here would have been because Mars was originally a satellite of one of the pseudo Jupiters and the explosion may have merely burnt one side of Mars, which then moved to its present zone of orbit.




TWO PROBLEMS


Jupiter and Saturn were both found by the 70's to be radiant (after the moon, Jupiter is the brightest object in the radio wave (heat) realm of energy seen in the heavens to astronomers). It's been believed by those who were enlightened and "radiant with glowing" reviews at the time about the how Jupiter and Saturn were formed in the 70's article I read, "A Star is Born, Almost" comparing the birth of Jupiter and Saturn to the old Barbera Striesand cinema, there is lots of sand on the celestial beaches like Sagan would speak volumes of, at any rate.

Those who believe in the natural reactors of planets or stars have tried to claim the cause of dark matter as being merely that stars without the uranium that could have formed never did without enough power to ignite the fusion. The problem is if f the stars were like Jupiter and Saturn they would give off much radio and microwaves. We look up to above the galaxy and we know by the way of the bending of starlight that 97% of the mass of the galaxy is in the round halo, where almost all the dark matter would seem to be, if it were no more than common stars that didn't fuse there would be radio and microwaves we could see easily. Thus the natural reactor can't claim it's the author of dark matter. I believe any cause of the bending of the light would attract common mass, if it attracts itself to hold together, and the light too, there seems to be no reason it wouldn't attract other mass also, and this mass would have the same problem of vi sable radiation. My solution here is what that the halo may be made of gravitons, light enough by their own motion to stay of overall lower density yet heavy enough via all their huge number to have the mass to change the starlight as seen. This is my own explanation and the only explanation I've ever heard of that fits all the observations in a cool sort of way! Click Here for my complete page, including all the other things this could be the cause of as observed, ect.


The Science News article's conclusion was that Saturn and Jupiter are actually putting out lots of energy not by coincidence, rather they actually were almost up to the level of ignition by the more common method of fusion. If the exploding planets were actually the size of a Small Jupiter and they did explode, the core uranium is heavy. As I say, Contrary to what General Relativity says, a massive body attracts more than a light, so more uranium from the same creation would presumably have gravitated to Jupiter. The problem would be that if we assume the average attraction for a given mass is mostly constant, more mass would have that much more uranium and other radioactive elements, adding that much more power to the explosion, so we presume Jupiter and Saturn would have also have exploded. If they can already be accounted for by fusion, even a small extra amount of fission would seem to have also have exploded Jupiter and Saturn. Jupiter and Saturn have mostly a solid core but it's small in relative size so it might not blend and it might be more fickle. Thus the question of core viscosity to mix the lumps, a balance between explosion and viscosity may be important to the EPH. Since Jupiter type planets are common we may be able to calculate the probablility of explosion. If planets like Jupiter and Saturn are usually near explosion which the Exploding Planet hypothesis involves in geologic time why haven't they if they're larger?

My second objection to the Exploding Planet is about the asteroids and Mars. The two proto planets are believed by van Flandern to have been in the orbits of Mars and the Asteroids. If so the asteroids can't have been formed before the planet in it's orbit because they would been swept have out of the orbit by the planet. We might also imagine if the asteroids were formed after the planet in this realm if they are all in the one orbit, they must have all been formed out of just one or a few proto bodies of thier own. Kuiper argued that explosion or tidal breakup of the proto asteroid planet itself was not likely, and the most probable cause may have been an impactor. Others have tried to show that this isn't likely because "it can be shown" that if there was a single impactor proto asteroid event all the paths of the asteroids today would pass through the single path of the point common to this impactor explosion. The orbits are actually found to be in "familys" of orbits so the concensus has been that there were actually five planetoids that broke up by slow collision of medium proto starstones of this type, no **** or *$^&! This was an earlier conclusion and has been disproven by a closer look at the surface of most asteroids with many large dents and craters, all those impacts would have easily deorbited most of them and the more that were changed the more would have been changed. It seems there is no necessity that the one body and planetoid scenarios are actually exclusive of each other. The problem is that if the proto exploding planet was actually in the orbit occupying where the asteroids were to settle, after the explosion, the proto asteroids would have to have somehow all moved to this orbit and then broken up. At the least I would believe only one large proto asteroid planet would even possibly have settled into the orbit now seen, not several. Thus the only form of the proto Ceres (goddess of baseball in arenas in Sh Booms) or Juno (goddess of What do you Know) would be one proto planet settled into orbit left unoccupied by the EP giant planet, and then was broken up by an outside impactor itself. (The single proto impactor planet is possible because the same idea that many medium sized bodies broke up by their own friction can also be used to change the orbits of all of the smaller bodies from the parent planetoid. The argument that there is no 3 body problem for masses like Ceres or Juno doesn't necerally hold over the solar system's duration of evolution, the gravity alone would randomize all the orbits, collisions even more. After all this is how all the other 99% of planetoids from the original mass are presumed have been deorbited from the realm between Mars and beyond. Even a few collisions would seem to be enough for complexity to arise, rather like the lever arm of time for our own events where the small virus that caused FDR to be stronger than otherwise may have changed our world by his triumph in WW II. The idea that the asteroids all must pass through a single path if from a single source seems implausable. This is why the combination of first the asteroid planet from either the EP or Archeotex (what some have named the asteroid planet) alone being broken up to medium sized blocks by an impactor and then the gradual wearing down of these by the convention in use seems to fit the observations best.)

If there was one original planet that formed the asteroids to then break up into medium sized planetoids that then formed the asteroids while the orbits can be grouped into 5 familys of common orbit, the chemical and physical composition of the asteroids is actually of just two mostly continuous general groups, with a line of relatively sharp seperation, as if from a central core and the outer mantle with some blending. There would seem to be five families like the great distinctions between the satellites of Jupiter or saturn not two if the outside of these masses can be changed by changes in orbit after they break up while the inside speaks of more ancient events.

As Kuiper says the original 1 (asteroid forming) body seems better than the scenario of many planetoids that were unable to form into a larger body, which seems unlikely. As calculations show, the parent body would have been 100X the mass of the asteriods themselves, enough to overcome the resistance to cohesion. The satellites of Jupiter and Saturn are of smaller mass than the presumed protoasteroid planet, and the tidal forces between the two moons of Jupiter, Europa and Calisto is so strong it causes enough tides to cause constant eruptions of sulphur from Io the most volcanic planet or satellite of any kind in the solar system. If the asteroid planet actually was more massive, the tides in the present realm where the asteroids were otherwise presumably limited in formation to five smaller bodies would have been not nearly strong enough to cause the gravity to not form them into one planet, the asteroid planet.

Thus one proto asteroid planet seems best, and this leads to my second objection to Van Flandern's idea. Mars and the asteroids are presumed to have come from the explosions of two giant proto planets of Van Flandern. By the above we assume Mars and the asteroids came from the original orbit of one body each. The explosion of each Exploding Planet by internal radiance at the seperate time of each explosion would have suddenly have left Mars and the protoplanet to exit at their original general orbital speed, ect. that formed planetoids like Vesta and Ceres we see now. We assume four probabilities for each, either of the two can roam in towards the sun or out towards more distant realms. The other two probabilities are either retrograde or prograde orbits. Of these four, only one, prograde is seen at present, the probability of this is just 1/4 X 1/4 or merely 1/8, a low enough probability to be what I consider to be evidence against the Exploded Planet hypothesis.

My own belief is that Archeotex was in the original orbit there, and with the Earth's protomoon orbiting it, a high speed impactor from outside the solar system blew up Archeotex aided by the moon's own tides (outside so higher speed otherwise no cause of the explosion that would liberate and librate the moon) then roaming at the right speed already to be captured by the Earth. The breakup of Archeotex would be the source of both the protoplanets themselves and the late heavy bombardment.

The idea that the moon aided the breakup of the asteroid planet by way of tides combined with a higher speed impactor fits in with the idea that Venus always keeps the same face to the Earth because it was hit by an impactor at some time in Venus's evolution and didn't explode. It's believed Venus has been hit by something huge so the Earth's tides align Venus to us. If Venus didn't breakup with a large impactor perhaps it's not so natural for other palnets to either, if the gravity was great enough to form the planet perhaps it takes special conditions to undo the process, like the impactor and tides of the proto moon combined.

That the asteroids are found in just two groups chemically, and neither of them shows signs of extreme igneous processes would be evidence that Archeotex itself wasn't an exploding planet even though it would have had moderate pressure and heat on division by an impactor in the interior, combined with the pressure and tides of the proto moon. The moon has a place of origin, important because if it were blasted away from a giant planet it would have been vaporised or blasted to bits at the same time due to the large gravity needed to remove it, the binding energy is too extreme to allow any more than several impacts of just the right size hitting it just right which is not probable.

Two Distinctions between EPH and MCI (Saving on Calls To The Higher Realms)

Both have an initial explosive event. The distinction would be in how much radioactivity was in the planetoids and elsewhere. Van Flandern proposed that there are no rocks left over from the radiant explosions because of the extreme heat of vaporization. MICS has some radiation, needed to explain why the moon has an outer few miles of radioactive uranium, thorium and plutonium dust. If this were constant to the depths, there would be so much heat the moon would overheat. There would also be radioactive rocks inside the planet Archeotex and the extreme pressure and the tides and the impactor also would produce radioactive dust throughout the solar system. If there was the EPH and the asteroids broke up with the radiance, it would merely coat the outside of each asteroid they being not so radioactive generally due to less mass than the Jupiter sized EP. Even so like the Earth Archeotex would have had considerable radioactivity inside the core and inside each asteroid from the core to also explain the dust.

Van Flandern believed that Mars has asymmetrical N and S zones would have been caused by the explosion of the EP, one side was facing the EP reducing the altitude with the explosion.

If the explosion of just Archeotex was separate from the conventional impactor that most believed caused the asymmetry, the radioactive dust would also have probably reached Mars at another angle and from a greater distance, without the two sides aligned, dust and altitude.

ADVANTAGES of MCI

The moon would have a place of origin, inside the solar system, of the right density and mass to fit the realm of where it would have been formed in the solar system, it would have been at the right saving on MCI rates to have the right speed to have then been captured by the Earth (this is the general concensus among those in selenogy (moon research) based on the moon rocks found in the 70's.). A proto moon at interstellar speeds would have blown the Earth to bits and it's believed the moon actually almost did. (The interstellar speed would have been much higher yet and the increase in speed from original orbit around Archeotex added to the speed of falling inward towards the earth is in the right range of speed to fit the capture scenario.)

And MCI also would explain how the stars got rich in gold at Reno!

MORE ABOUT POSSIBLE USES Of MRI;

On site here I write about the possible uses of MRI as a lie detector and more. There is another possiblity that "may be amazing"; Here's my line of reasoning;

As you may know, MRI can even be used on not just a brain in the airport, it's also used on just one cell, like a neuron. Thus my conclusion that we may be able to find the memory from all the life store of memories of the brain with MRI or short distance sensors like microcopes. In brain research it was found in the 1920's that all the memory of the brain is stored in small units, as on the site sybervision.com no matter how small the amount of the mouses brain was cut the mouse had complete memory. Therefore if the volume of brain tissue needed to build all the memory is small, it's possible memories of mere small amounts of brains of someone like Einstein, whose brain we have, might be used to reconstruct the entire life's memory Einstein lived through, day by day, year by year. In other words, MRI combined with this about small units containing lots of memory found from brain research might be a real way to illuminate sciences like history, forensics, anthropology, or even paleontology, if a small enough amount of the brain tissue was enough to "read". It's possible we might read the synapses of mummies, ice men, or frozen mammoths, ect. Some paleontologists have found what they believe to be evidence for preservation for soft tissue in some dinosaur fossils, and the possibility of preservation of ancient tissue at least in some cases has been seen in the revival of the world's oldest living thing, a cell revived from a salt mine in the late 1990's that was ''fossilized" about 300 million years ago, revived in the lab with nutrient broth (and a giant yawn, you might say!). The ancient tissues found were combined with antibodies and this was considered to be evidence they were indeed original tissue, because they reacted in the same way to known tissues of this type. I think even some neurons from dinosaurs might be found if some of the fossils were preserved by a more unconventional process of being hermetically sealed. This was how we know about the dwellers of ancient Pompeii, citizens of ancient Rome. They were hermetically sealed by both the mud and lava so more of the tissue was preserved. Certainly we have bread from Pompeii and bread from ancient Egypt, ect. The first footprints of our own ancestors were preserved when they walked in mud 3 million years ago in Africa and a nearby flow of a volcanic ash covered the tracks. Old DNA has been found from termites 37 million years ago, an old house has no cement. All this leads us to conclude it's at least possible we might find enough neurons (perhaps even a synapse will do) to actually do an MRI scan of a dinosaur eventually. If we find at least one neuron of worth the life of the dinosaur might then be ours to read, not just to find the behaviour of one dinosaur, this would illuminate the behaviour of the thousands of other dinosaurs the dinosar lived and walked near, with complex behaviour not otherwise seen by mere tracks, and clues about where the fossils are found the best (only other) way we have to know about dinosaur behaviour now. I think it's possible we might find not only the colors of and movements of the dinosaurs, we might even find the sounds they make if someday this rosetta fossil of paleohistory were found..

This would be the most extensive use of MRI used to read ancient neurons. While this might be possible, at the least we might make use of this method to reach nearer eyewitness accounts of history, as a day to day witness of the life of Einstein and this would be just the start if viable because if we find the neurons from eyewitnesses of ancient events, this would be much more illuminance than just the 1% of ancient documents "still in print". We could hear what ancient greek music sounded like (historians have been dumb to the "absurd", which in latin means deaf) and we could find out 100% what "lost" ancient greek sculptures and murals looked like from the eyewitness in the original language, and since the neurons record feelings, we would have a much more living way to see the events if ways to influence our own emotions are improved, you go to a cinema and see with feeling, like a sort of glorified breath of life..



Historic mysteries might be solved like who shot JR (who knows? TV's so dumb, read on for more anti TV!) why wasn't Shakespeare at the major events like the coronation of James II, and so on.

This use of MRI of course would have the potential to revolutionize much of forensics, or perhaps weather prediction by extending our record of weather millions of years by way of some actual eyewitness weather accounts of the ancient conditions. In the improvement of science like geohistory for 600 million years and the archeozoic, the record of life has been has been of worth, and certainly an important way to correlate other ancient data with what we know for a more complete picture we wouln't otherwise have.

The use of MRI with old neurons might be of worth to give nations without a written tradition a history, the word "prehistoric" means essentally, "without writing". We could find out what the 3000 american indian languages sounded like, and vast realms of history would be improved in reliability. If it turns out small enough bits of ancient neurons are actually readable old neurons may not only tell tales, that they may tell us more truth than some biased or perhaps otherwise unreachable ancient witnesses by other methods. And it would make a great simulation of the ancient worlds, while Einstein considered time machines, this would be much cheap. If time machines were going to be built it would seem we would have been visited from residents of other ages.

Even so on this page I consider three of Einstein's ideas about time, and light.

P.S. A Wow! High speed find (after millions of years) is an ancient"Dinosaur Mummy" found in ND USA. Click Here for the site..
PS
PS...

How MRI Machines Might Change Society

We read where MRI machines are being used by some as evidence in courts because they are nearer to being used as lie detectors, and the conclusion is that they have the potential to change society in dramatic ways. One definite problem with the MRI methods for this use is that they don't yet work reliably enough to be of any real worth as evidence in court. It seems possible that this will be solved sooner or later.

Even so we imagine in the early days of the use of MRI as lie detectors for this use there will be many false alarms, like the person in the airport who has been watching a bad movie on television or the web and the machine picks up the thought (they now have MRI that can do this without training with the machine rather like you used to do with speech recognition software) and from a distance.

Another problem is a new find in research where the person can't even remember where he got the memory. Research with showing movies to people who were then asked if they did what they saw in the movie often said they did or the actual events had occurred, even though they didn't.


To get around the problem of where the memory was from like the cinema last month you saw, we might imagine smarter MRI machines that can find the context of the memory itself perhaps by also using MRI to read the pattern embedded in  the neurotransmitters themselves, to read your entire memory store of your life so far. Sort of like finding the faint evidence on a computer or tape even after the machine has "erased" the evidence that can be achieved by more recent methods. I think this may be possible with MRI because MRI has been used down to the cellular level to research cells in life, it's high resolution as well as being good to measure the general brain changes. Other sensors than MRI might be best for this. i believe if the sensors could actually find the neural information even of old neurons embedded in e.g. neurons from say 100 years ago, this might be used to "revive old memories", even from ancient times, perhaps great for archeology, click here. Or see link at bottom of page. 
It's been found that a person can't even think a thought without a foundation of the buildup of events for the thought.. When some with disabilities were tested and were told they were taking an intelligence test "they failed", but when they were not told it was about this, they did fine on the same test.

The problem of the memory not being able to be created at the start by limits in the environment might seem to never make anyone guilty as in the other research about the intelligence tests, except this is often the method used in police interrogations, so this seems important in other legal aspects.

I imagine a future where they may actually invent MRI that's portable, linked to the web where decisions about the worth of who's lying or not being processed reliably by the web. We would see in some old movies like comedy where someone had invented a truth machine, and what the results would be, comic and more. Certainly the MRI used in general law would be profound. Even so I believe the use of a reliable portable truth machine eventually might lead to mini lawsuits. You go to work and someone fibs, you ask them yes or no, if they're lying, you win five payable to your credit card, and so with a range of possible uses of the MRI from these suits up to the general uses already in R and D.. Evidence shows when a boss yells at an employee it's harmful to health. We might imagine where the child is being spanked and mom says, "this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" and the child suing for lunch money if mom was being a bit silly!

 These seem to be plausible mores of the MRI machine. If not MRI perhaps machines like improved sensors to pick up faint sounds. Science has well proven that any thought has a physical change in the body, e.g. for a dog or cat, which has identical neurons to humans except we have more of the neurons, when they are sitting or sleeping and we see their whiskers twitch and it's as if they are dreaming, this is indeed what has been proven with MRI machines, they are either remembering early events of anticipating new events, just as pet owners had always told us. Officials are using machines to actually find the signature heartbeat that only the individual has who has that pattern of heartbeat and respiration even through wall with cheap radar as proof in law they were there at that time. Your heartbeat and respiration are like a signature, and the radar can find the evidence. Firefighters are using other machines to boost signals small sounds of words worn around the shoulders and then sending the audio signal by radio to the other firefighters in the fire with audio boost so they can actually hear above the roar of the fire and in other loud situations where these "subvocal amplifiers" are of worth, and it's possible these might be improved in combination with MRI. If the sound wasn't there because of e.g. walls, the radar could still amplify the breathing and thus the verbal thoughts of the other side of the wall, with a simple cheap headphone, and no training or large MRI machine would be needed, because the mind and body always correlate with a definite change and a verbal way to always sound out thoughts would always be to "whisper" to sound out, no matter what it was. New science shows that how your body is influences your thoughts. If you are strong, you think a hill is level compared to people who aren't so strong, as in synthetic life where the computing the life does always needs a physical hardware to solve problems, the finding that life always needs a surface to exist as in exochemistry where the molecules for life are only found where there is a surface e.g between stars on like asteroids, and so on. And it's being found that language  influences thought, in some languages where the compass direction the speaker uses to know where a spoon or dish is, e.g. the spoon is SE of the dish or mom is NW of Betsy, they know where N or S is in a room more than thirty Nobel Phds present. In Spanish "se rompio la flore" means "the vase is broken", but in Spanish they don't then know as often who broke the vase because the language infuences the thought, or I would say also with any thought, there will always be a physical change that then might be imaged by a simpler method than like MRI merely by finding the simpler change in the actuation method that might seemingly usually go with it.

 Computerized machines can actually pick up the sound of the wheels of an engine of a vehicle and count the gear teeth of the wheels to find only that machine was there, rather like on the old action shows where sometimes the hero could find a van just by the sound of it's engine. Another technology actually listens to the sound of a person who types in the password and uses the other software to actually find the password by the sound of the typing with computer sensing of the sound. All these machines imply that the small changes that research shows always are found with all processing of the brain and other events may be found and used to prove who is lying or not and if actual harm is intended, the winner would more often be the defender in common events.
It's possible if the magnetic field is needed to know what's up people may soon use MRI shields, rather like call blocking except for thoughts, and no doubt the password sound problem might be solved with noise shielding or jamming, (AN). If we might block calls lots of people would want to block more intrusive events, if, e.g. MRI itself could be used to find passwords.

  Can we imagine a world where all were telling the truth, where doctors, others, and landlords were being moderate? We read where research shows most people lie about 3 times a day. If you go somewhere and can prove you were telling the truth and it costs someone 5 where they wouldn't have had to pay, word would soon be round and a lot people who don't lie would suddenly have a real advantage otherwise not found.

  Even so there is a downside to a world of more truth, small lies used to good causes, like a temporary good lie to the landlord so the tenant wouldn't go out on the street, or like in WW II in Germany where good people often lied to make it out of that oppressive situation. I once met someone who was a pioneer in defence computing in the 1950's who used software about what was known about the evolution of behaviour, here near where I live. He said he actually met Von Braun and I said, Von Brain? Wow! And he said no, Wow, nobody near here even knows who Von Brain was and I said my mom was a journalist who interviewed him and who hasn't read about Von Braun. My neighbor helped build an industrial city in Kuwait before the first gulf war named "Industrial city named so many words it's already here by the time you say the name of it!" After a day of labor on the industrial city he would go under the waves to swim and be cool in the ocean, because there was often pressure from the people who were in power there to be unkind to the US citizens, so I asked him what he believed about truth and he said he would actually have told the untruth to make it out of an oppressive situation if he was imprisoned for this if there was trouble. My neighbor Named Rob H. was a good person and that he also was willing to risk untruth to survive seems like anyone, mere mortal no doubt.

 Perhaps if lying is so common like the eight lies a day per person it's like a dog needs to bark to stay healthy, and the lies might be better rationed out, say 3 white lies a day, no more. Another problem might be if a man loves a woman and he tells her a sweet lie and she finds the truth and says no often a lot of love would be lost to her she might have only have been zealous in promotion of that suitor otherwise.  The use of MRI for finding truth would change herstory to another if all the time in a general sense we are exchanging one option for another and in this sense MRI to find truth would be the same. The world is always held in balance by gravity, so there wouldn't be infinite seperation of truth from lies. Those who were lying for a good reason, love sweets or beauty would still be near. MRI is not a substitute for words of love in conversation to win like in the old world, more precious not less like life for its finite moment.. About the MRI we might say what's wrong with more options like the wildcard of lying to make the real world more worth caution and this seems indeed the reason to limit the truth machines if they are developed. The best use of the machines may be to merely stop the most important centers of corruption. For instance the medical and legal fields are in need of moderation, medical is the only big business where the consumer has no right to the worth of what he receives, hospitals don't even have to report deaths, and doctors routinely make sweetheart deals with drug makers, and so on. I think of heaven as not as worthwhile as real life (not yet or when) because, life has lots of suprises, rather like dirt makes the immune system stronger and healthy. This may be the truth about the truth machines. We read of when the microphone was invented and many musicians who couldn't sing were more able because they didn't have to yell all the way to the other side of the arena for others to hear them. These machines seem much like amplifiers of truth, and as the musicians were improved, the advantage to the world was more than the disadvantage. Though truth is not all good there may be no other option if these machines are developed than for us to live as we must. If used in moderation and even with the risk I believe the advantage of truth may outweigh the down side because so much of what is bad in the world is under cover of valor. More truth may be of much worth to the poor, and no doubt the immediate impact of MRI may be felt in legal and medical realms. Mobile MRI might not be developed, even so larger machines might be used like in places like stores if wifi wired to the web, with the more max value of defenders if small laws are also passed to reflect the illumination of the MRI or other machines, or the machines in combination.

Here's my link for MRI For History and Archeology, ect. 
..