Evidence for Dark Matter In Common Physics
Recent astronomy has found that dark mattr not only exists, it also helps explain why the milky way has a warp caused by smaller dwarf galaxies. These dwarf galaxies act as much stronger sources of gravity than the visible mass, and it's inferred the otherwise unexplained missing dwarf galaxies the milky way should have like other galaxies. The milky way is much larger than most galaxies (I didn't know till I found out!"). The visable light from the missing dwarf galaxies is much smaller than the mass seen.
Dark matter seems common, and calculations with particles like gravitons account for most of the extra gravity, but not all. In my belief, the rest of the extra strength of the gravity if from the almost completely wavelike nature of the lower energy field. Although particles can explain why we feel no force when in free fall in the Earth's gravity because the particles are moving along with us and they are particles, when we are at rest after the fall the particles also then exert the pressure of gravity. I hold that the lightness of gravity would mean it was much faster, explaining such features as the two sides the universe has as found by the recent low energy maps of the universe, if there are large scale regular structures of the cosmos, there are just the two long range forces known gravity and electromagnetism, and light is too slow. Other problems as Van Flandern believed like no displacement of gravity of the Earth toward the sun like light has, as if gravity is much faster than light could be because gravity is lighter than light so faster than light. Click the link on the upper left for my Synopsis.
I believe dark matter (gravity) has two components a wavelike much faster field that unifies the other physics because waves are in union, not particles, that only radiate, not being in connection by waves otherwise!
But as we might expect if gravity is universal and all the other forces are waves and particles too, gravity must have a particulate component, or at least somewhat particulate to be the cause of the other particles it might energise up to.
About The Clepsydra
The clepsydra is an ancient device that has worth in our knowlege of gravity. The word is from grab or "clamp" water "hydra", and other uses of the clamp word are like in French where if you eat spinach, they say, "Ah la cledwah! Ah lah cledwah!" Eat with your hands! Without this method is thought bad in France! Not via your spoon. The clepsydra was used in ancient times to move water from the barrel to the jug. It has two parts, a hollow sphere at the bottom with small holes there and the sphere connected at the top to a narrow hollow tube by welding. To move the water the user only had to grab the tube which was welded brass to the sphere without his thumb over the top, then insert the sphere into the water. the water flows in the sphere. The user puts his thumb over the tube sealing the connection, and then lifts the water from the barrel to the cup or jug. But what's holding the water up when you lift it from the barrel to the cup? Einstein believed there was nothing there. But nothing has no ability to exert attractive force. And strong attractive force is needed here to lift the heavy mass of the water! Nothing has nothing. If there is a somewhat massive field here we can conclude in order to exert the force it must be mostly wavelike to exert the continuous attraction. Another observation here is that if you remove your hand from the top the water flows down. There must be a signal sent through the field. If you don't move your hand there is no change, if you do there is. Third, this isn't gravity, because the flow of gravity is inward to the earth. The field connecting the water and your hand isn't flowing downward like the gravity, if so the water would fall at the usual 32 feet per second.
If we take two masses say 2lb and 5 and balance them on a boom either l shaped or linear, we notice the usual point of the center of rotation if we spin them up and around in the air is also by science like Archimedes principles of the lever, more mass has the distance to the center of spin moved to it according to the distance, mass times distance to the center of both masses is the same. This seems to imply a field that is compressed by the mass is present also in attraction. Here too it can't be gravity because if the boom is removed, the masses don't spin around each other when we toss them up, gravity is just for like the Earth and moon, ect.
I believe this means that although gravity is an attraction there is also a higher energy "aurora" around all masses and this may be important to how gravity operates. A single particle has a weak field of gravity. If gravity was compressed to the size of the particle to act it would have the same or near wavelength and thus the same mass and energy and there would be no gravity. But the aurora would be an intermediate field. I had wondered how gravity seems to have reversed entropy from the other forces. It winds up continuously in implosion and the other forces radiate out in disconnection. I was wondering if gravity might do this by aligning its particles so fast it would overcome the radiant tendencies of its own particles, aligning them and winding them up before they had time to radiate, even though the particles as above are needed to explain part of how gravity might cause no force in your rest frame as your fall, and to explain particles in general.
There are those who hope to save relativity from the inconvenient observation of the galaxies moving away from us on both sides by the expansion of the cosmos. They are moving faster than light and this is saved by the use of empty space. To "create more space" for storage rooms and other business we presume, or for good intent to physics perhaps by those who say this, this superluminary motion is believed to be explained by the empty space being created out of nothing and being nothing. There is nothing there so nothing relative to which to move so there is no relative motion of the galaxys we see at faster than light. I certainly would hold that there is no way the light can move faster than light. My question is about gravity. Where there is gravity strong enough to influence like superclusters are the galaxys on both sides under the influence of faster than light gravity. Observations may sooner or later prove or disprove this, my ideas about what I call General Wave Dynamics, GWD.
If we have the particles around each mass and they are so low energy they more easly resonate with the waves to overcome the entropy, they also may solve the problem of the gravitational sling. If there are all these particles around the Earth and gravity operates by implosion of the particles to the sun, calculations show that by the friction of the particles the earth would fall into the sun in just a few million years. A mostly wavelike aura around the Earth could change phase more easily to overpower the entropy. The atmosphere of particles was invoked by Galileo to explain why if you throw a stone upward it falls radially inward to the earth. The atmosphere is at rest relative our motion with it.
Another problem with the particles is about motion through the field in special relativity, why no friction as we plough through the field slowing us down? The ability to overcome most of the friction by the same kind of entropy reversing reaction allows for all but the inertia for which I follow Maxwell's method of the balance of the two forces of the electric charges being proportional to the speed of light. The speed of light here is constant because in GWD the quanta of the charges are creating the density of the resilient media that's frozen in for constant frames of motion but that is always present and seen in acceleration when pressure on the field is exerted by rocket motors, ect. Note that the two forces in balance of the charges can be any two forces in general, and if the force is much smaller like gravity, the force might be much faster than light. If there are all these virtual particles, not mostly waves as some have believed there would be huge resistance to motion and no way to overcome the entropy by the more wavelike though still somewhat particulate lower energy physics of GWD.
..
Friday, September 16, 2011
POSSIBLE METHODS OF STEERING HURRICANES...
Away from land we presume...saving lives, because they now say the risk of hurricanes hitting cities like New York where more people have moved would cause four times the damage of a hurricane like Katrina and New Orleans. Other cities are also at risk. Experts say it's not a question of if but when this type of disaster will happen.
It's well known that friction by the land changes the paths of hurricanes. Often as the hurricanes spin near the shore they "bounce off" or other changes in the general motion takes place. Bill Gates has tried to develop boats that have giant refrigerators on the deck to hope to cool the water on the side and thus perhaps move the hurricane reliably.
In the N hemisphere in the Atlantic the amount of dust in the air changes the number and intensity of hurricanes, so I had considered the possibility of dropping or adding dust to one side of the hurricane, or even finding a source of cheap aimable dust by using a laser, ect to move a small asteroid then using it's gravity as it whizzes by a larger one or ect. to move the asteroid into the path of where we might want the dust as it would burn up by way of the asteroid entering the air. Even though this is creative of me there are several problems; it would take a long time to move the asteroids, we might have to move a lot of them, other nations might object to possible military use of this method, and it would be polluting. Even so the more basic plan of just adding dust might be cheaper than refrigerator ships, it's already proven to work the question is how much dust could we afford or need to add, and how would we add it, to what side of the storm, what type, ect.
A third method that I may be the original author of (though I'm not sure, I may have arrived at this independently by confluence of evolution and invention) is to use an iceberg from the arctic after breaking off a piece with explosives or saws for more stability perhaps and then moving the iceberg to the hurricane or perhaps storing it in insulation nearer the tropics in a harbor or offshore somehow, collecting the freshwater like for the desert while waiting to the storms to start. Once the storm was near, the iceberg could be moved toward the storm and the reaction force as the iceberg would implode to the center might be used to steer the storm (the air implodes to the center and then rises; tropical storms are a sort of heat engine they cleanse and cool the tropic by about 30 degrees. For some reason I don't know tropical storms occur in all the tropical oceans of the world except the S Atlantic, perhaps heat rises "up" North.) Once the iceberg is in the center it will plug up the eye of the storm, theoretically having some or no effect. Did you know the burner on a stove is also called the eye? I found out when I got a new one for 50! Ouch, burns real good though! The iceberg might cool the storm and also stop the flow of the air perhaps "throwing a wrench" in the way the storm acts, as a heat engine.
A problem might be the high cost of bringing an iceberg from the N (but where would we find the giant jug of Coca Cola Orange ?). Another problem is about the relatively small kick the implosion of the iceberg for just a few hours would give, then it would stay in the center, thus the "wrench" would perhaps be the main value here because this method would have more stopping advantage than steering, although the advantage of both might be much better than nothing. The winds might be changed but because the zone of high winds often reaches out for 150 miles. Some of the largest icebergs ever calved in Antarctica are about the size of RI, the ocean state, or about 100 miles narrow. Moving them might take giant barges, and the slow travel would have more melting, at higher price yet. Strong wind might actually eat up the iceberg and this part of the plan might be off.
All the hurricane steering plans could be practiced in places like the S pacific with cyclones, with few people nearby.
There is a patent on a machine that uses ships that they describe in the IP as using a giant water spray to the side of the eye once inside in hopes of "side steering" the hurricane. The amount of water needed would be voluminous. I thought of using nuclear powered submarines to also generate pressure on the water with propellers in hopes of steering the storm by both the spray and pressure from the more solid water below (this is why your pipes squeak, water is considered to an incompressible solid by physicists a room temperature). The physics of wave motion are rather like a wave, a 10 foot wave reaches about 10 feet above and below the surface of the water and there's not much wave motion below that. Thus a submarine might be in easier reach of the center of the storm without risk to the crew. (The top speeds near the center of storm are not well known since not even most anerometers can be strong enough to withstand the winds. Huger machines like ships are more at risk per se.).
These methods have both advantages and disadvantages, but the disadvantages seem considerable, not so inconsiderable when the scale of the machines and methods and cost needed to achieve control with. Small disadvantages in large engineering have larger cost, an important consideration here too.
Another method has been devised, two submarines robot or manned, are used instead of one, both with large propellers or propulsion to exert large pressure on the water. The twin machines are connected by a large line or hawser. Both machines are between a large turbine that spins about the center of the line which is held tight by the two machines. The top of the turbine is above the water held up by a machine with bouyancy. The two submarines or boats that hold the hawser are moving the line at right angles to the general rotation of the winds, exerting friction and force to hopefully steer the storm. The advantage perhaps here is the greater leverage a longer lever arm has over just central force like the ships with jets. As with new pliers they have that take less grip to do more power, an easier lever arm exerts more force with the same input, more control for less.
The turbine generates power in this idea by its friction with the storm to power the propellers of the submarines, saving cost, and adding control. In the center are strong forces in balance, but balance is not always easy to change without more leverage.
Another method that's been devised recently is to use a large "sailboat" that has a long and low profile. The wind by the sail causes a reaction force, the sailboat has a weighted keel for stability is held up by bouyancy via two floats on either side. Motors below exert pressure on the sail by the water. Due to high wind speeds the sail might not have to be of height, reducing risk of wind damage. Even so the surface area of the long sail would be enough to steer the storm by air pressure.
Initially my plan was to use the known evidence that friction with the land changes the paths of hurricanes to make large fins near the shore to hope to steer the storm. The problem is there's no way to know where the storm will hit so large numbers of the giant fins would have to be built at large price and it would not be beautious even so the fins nearer shore might be good for wind power all the rest of the time when not used for control of the storms. I'm a painter and I once dreamed of a cool retro fan with streamers as you look up the E coast, the storm is to the lower right, and the upper right has all the cool airships and two winged planes sailing between the layers of blue air and precise clouds blended in with like NY, ect. Perhaps someday like the musicians typewriter, the dream of just blowing the storms back out to sea with fans might one day come true. Even so to build high enough fans to withstand the wind might be unfeasible, and this isn't using the leverage of the two submarine turbine method which would also allow more portable control so the storm is never near the land.
..
Away from land we presume...saving lives, because they now say the risk of hurricanes hitting cities like New York where more people have moved would cause four times the damage of a hurricane like Katrina and New Orleans. Other cities are also at risk. Experts say it's not a question of if but when this type of disaster will happen.
It's well known that friction by the land changes the paths of hurricanes. Often as the hurricanes spin near the shore they "bounce off" or other changes in the general motion takes place. Bill Gates has tried to develop boats that have giant refrigerators on the deck to hope to cool the water on the side and thus perhaps move the hurricane reliably.
In the N hemisphere in the Atlantic the amount of dust in the air changes the number and intensity of hurricanes, so I had considered the possibility of dropping or adding dust to one side of the hurricane, or even finding a source of cheap aimable dust by using a laser, ect to move a small asteroid then using it's gravity as it whizzes by a larger one or ect. to move the asteroid into the path of where we might want the dust as it would burn up by way of the asteroid entering the air. Even though this is creative of me there are several problems; it would take a long time to move the asteroids, we might have to move a lot of them, other nations might object to possible military use of this method, and it would be polluting. Even so the more basic plan of just adding dust might be cheaper than refrigerator ships, it's already proven to work the question is how much dust could we afford or need to add, and how would we add it, to what side of the storm, what type, ect.
A third method that I may be the original author of (though I'm not sure, I may have arrived at this independently by confluence of evolution and invention) is to use an iceberg from the arctic after breaking off a piece with explosives or saws for more stability perhaps and then moving the iceberg to the hurricane or perhaps storing it in insulation nearer the tropics in a harbor or offshore somehow, collecting the freshwater like for the desert while waiting to the storms to start. Once the storm was near, the iceberg could be moved toward the storm and the reaction force as the iceberg would implode to the center might be used to steer the storm (the air implodes to the center and then rises; tropical storms are a sort of heat engine they cleanse and cool the tropic by about 30 degrees. For some reason I don't know tropical storms occur in all the tropical oceans of the world except the S Atlantic, perhaps heat rises "up" North.) Once the iceberg is in the center it will plug up the eye of the storm, theoretically having some or no effect. Did you know the burner on a stove is also called the eye? I found out when I got a new one for 50! Ouch, burns real good though! The iceberg might cool the storm and also stop the flow of the air perhaps "throwing a wrench" in the way the storm acts, as a heat engine.
A problem might be the high cost of bringing an iceberg from the N (but where would we find the giant jug of Coca Cola Orange ?). Another problem is about the relatively small kick the implosion of the iceberg for just a few hours would give, then it would stay in the center, thus the "wrench" would perhaps be the main value here because this method would have more stopping advantage than steering, although the advantage of both might be much better than nothing. The winds might be changed but because the zone of high winds often reaches out for 150 miles. Some of the largest icebergs ever calved in Antarctica are about the size of RI, the ocean state, or about 100 miles narrow. Moving them might take giant barges, and the slow travel would have more melting, at higher price yet. Strong wind might actually eat up the iceberg and this part of the plan might be off.
All the hurricane steering plans could be practiced in places like the S pacific with cyclones, with few people nearby.
There is a patent on a machine that uses ships that they describe in the IP as using a giant water spray to the side of the eye once inside in hopes of "side steering" the hurricane. The amount of water needed would be voluminous. I thought of using nuclear powered submarines to also generate pressure on the water with propellers in hopes of steering the storm by both the spray and pressure from the more solid water below (this is why your pipes squeak, water is considered to an incompressible solid by physicists a room temperature). The physics of wave motion are rather like a wave, a 10 foot wave reaches about 10 feet above and below the surface of the water and there's not much wave motion below that. Thus a submarine might be in easier reach of the center of the storm without risk to the crew. (The top speeds near the center of storm are not well known since not even most anerometers can be strong enough to withstand the winds. Huger machines like ships are more at risk per se.).
These methods have both advantages and disadvantages, but the disadvantages seem considerable, not so inconsiderable when the scale of the machines and methods and cost needed to achieve control with. Small disadvantages in large engineering have larger cost, an important consideration here too.
Another method has been devised, two submarines robot or manned, are used instead of one, both with large propellers or propulsion to exert large pressure on the water. The twin machines are connected by a large line or hawser. Both machines are between a large turbine that spins about the center of the line which is held tight by the two machines. The top of the turbine is above the water held up by a machine with bouyancy. The two submarines or boats that hold the hawser are moving the line at right angles to the general rotation of the winds, exerting friction and force to hopefully steer the storm. The advantage perhaps here is the greater leverage a longer lever arm has over just central force like the ships with jets. As with new pliers they have that take less grip to do more power, an easier lever arm exerts more force with the same input, more control for less.
The turbine generates power in this idea by its friction with the storm to power the propellers of the submarines, saving cost, and adding control. In the center are strong forces in balance, but balance is not always easy to change without more leverage.
Another method that's been devised recently is to use a large "sailboat" that has a long and low profile. The wind by the sail causes a reaction force, the sailboat has a weighted keel for stability is held up by bouyancy via two floats on either side. Motors below exert pressure on the sail by the water. Due to high wind speeds the sail might not have to be of height, reducing risk of wind damage. Even so the surface area of the long sail would be enough to steer the storm by air pressure.
Initially my plan was to use the known evidence that friction with the land changes the paths of hurricanes to make large fins near the shore to hope to steer the storm. The problem is there's no way to know where the storm will hit so large numbers of the giant fins would have to be built at large price and it would not be beautious even so the fins nearer shore might be good for wind power all the rest of the time when not used for control of the storms. I'm a painter and I once dreamed of a cool retro fan with streamers as you look up the E coast, the storm is to the lower right, and the upper right has all the cool airships and two winged planes sailing between the layers of blue air and precise clouds blended in with like NY, ect. Perhaps someday like the musicians typewriter, the dream of just blowing the storms back out to sea with fans might one day come true. Even so to build high enough fans to withstand the wind might be unfeasible, and this isn't using the leverage of the two submarine turbine method which would also allow more portable control so the storm is never near the land.
..
Wednesday, September 07, 2011
Methods of Stopping Pirates, And Inventors Hopes for Higher Values
The pirates in Somalia have limits because of low tech methods the ships in travel use like lookouts and faster travel through the gulf. No doubt in the long term the solving more of the problems of the people involved would be a better solution, because they are desperate due to overcrowding leading to reduction of resources like water. For more about overcrowding and solutions possible, click here for my site Evolution Overpopulation and its Historic Influence. The Russians are promoting the possibility of a NE passage to bypass the pirates and I think this could be improved with a high speed bridge in the N hemisphere by new science, a possible sort of super NE and NW passage at once for the future. Another plan is to use lasers that can sense the pirate ships from a distance, and if they are too close, the beam blinds the pirates for two or three hours. I wonder if this plan won't work because they could just wear reflective sunglasses.
Another plan devised for on the ship is large pepper jugs on the sides of the ship, to spray the pirates if they attempt to board the ship, sort of like mace. I think this also is incomplete because the pirates could still shoot at the people on the ship and board the ship. They have like 500 hostages, and a two for one sail on hostages!
Another invention is a shield system, using sensors on the ship to find bullets and so "skeets" are launched almost parallel with the ship high and low to stop bullets in the side. Each bullet even from machine guns would be stopped. A more advanced system might use skeets that return under power so fewer of them are used, or even skeets with exploding or electric armor in each skeet if reusable so cheaper. These could use also use gyroscopes to shield and for guidance.
Hi Rises To Reduce Risk of Airliner Collision
The Empire State Building was hit by an airplane in the 1920's but was adamant because in those days the hi rise buildings like the Empire State Building were built with brick and stronger materials than the WTC towers. Even so the WTC tower builders weren't dumb and they built the towers to withstand the then common 707 but not the larger 747s. Current planes are 80% larger than this. Now it seems as more supertalls are being built just this year than in all the times before the need for a relatively cheap method to defend these towers may be better. Though we can't build them of superstronger materials than they already are or rebuild them with piles of money, an inventor has devised a system that uses the ancient gladiator trick of nets. The net or nets are stored in a motorized ring a few stories above the ground. Sensors sense when a possible collision is at risk, and if the plane is too close, the nets are launched, held stable as they travel by rockets, Hopefully the nets slow and stop the plane, or more exactly they would move the plane to the side to always miss all the buildings, and then the computer actuated rockets at the top lift and move the plane to land. This system might be used to stop any type of plane including accidental colission like the Empire.
Click here for More Hi Rise Defences Being devised
NEWS And Comments
Reader's Digest Health says they have a band-aid in a bottle. You spray blue goop in a cut. And it dries transparent and peels off after it's healed. I say great! Great!! When the spray on umbrella..
Cheese has fat salt and cholesterol. Milk has none of this stuff. You might say milk is the best "whey" to get your cheese.
The new invention is the bite counter, you wear like a wrist watch and it counts each bite as you lift your arm, ect. This is like ladyfingers! Or KFC in china has the slogan, "Eat Your Fingers Off" instead of Finger Lick'n Good.
Why is it of worth to tap your bottle of water? Because tap water is cleaner than bottled water!
I like to drink reservoir brand bottled water, it's 10,000 percent more luxurious. The value is just the same.
And there's the Beercan Museum in Boston, an actual museum. You go and stare at all the booze while you dream of fizzology.
..
The pirates in Somalia have limits because of low tech methods the ships in travel use like lookouts and faster travel through the gulf. No doubt in the long term the solving more of the problems of the people involved would be a better solution, because they are desperate due to overcrowding leading to reduction of resources like water. For more about overcrowding and solutions possible, click here for my site Evolution Overpopulation and its Historic Influence. The Russians are promoting the possibility of a NE passage to bypass the pirates and I think this could be improved with a high speed bridge in the N hemisphere by new science, a possible sort of super NE and NW passage at once for the future. Another plan is to use lasers that can sense the pirate ships from a distance, and if they are too close, the beam blinds the pirates for two or three hours. I wonder if this plan won't work because they could just wear reflective sunglasses.
Another plan devised for on the ship is large pepper jugs on the sides of the ship, to spray the pirates if they attempt to board the ship, sort of like mace. I think this also is incomplete because the pirates could still shoot at the people on the ship and board the ship. They have like 500 hostages, and a two for one sail on hostages!
Another invention is a shield system, using sensors on the ship to find bullets and so "skeets" are launched almost parallel with the ship high and low to stop bullets in the side. Each bullet even from machine guns would be stopped. A more advanced system might use skeets that return under power so fewer of them are used, or even skeets with exploding or electric armor in each skeet if reusable so cheaper. These could use also use gyroscopes to shield and for guidance.
Hi Rises To Reduce Risk of Airliner Collision
The Empire State Building was hit by an airplane in the 1920's but was adamant because in those days the hi rise buildings like the Empire State Building were built with brick and stronger materials than the WTC towers. Even so the WTC tower builders weren't dumb and they built the towers to withstand the then common 707 but not the larger 747s. Current planes are 80% larger than this. Now it seems as more supertalls are being built just this year than in all the times before the need for a relatively cheap method to defend these towers may be better. Though we can't build them of superstronger materials than they already are or rebuild them with piles of money, an inventor has devised a system that uses the ancient gladiator trick of nets. The net or nets are stored in a motorized ring a few stories above the ground. Sensors sense when a possible collision is at risk, and if the plane is too close, the nets are launched, held stable as they travel by rockets, Hopefully the nets slow and stop the plane, or more exactly they would move the plane to the side to always miss all the buildings, and then the computer actuated rockets at the top lift and move the plane to land. This system might be used to stop any type of plane including accidental colission like the Empire.
Click here for More Hi Rise Defences Being devised
NEWS And Comments
Reader's Digest Health says they have a band-aid in a bottle. You spray blue goop in a cut. And it dries transparent and peels off after it's healed. I say great! Great!! When the spray on umbrella..
Cheese has fat salt and cholesterol. Milk has none of this stuff. You might say milk is the best "whey" to get your cheese.
The new invention is the bite counter, you wear like a wrist watch and it counts each bite as you lift your arm, ect. This is like ladyfingers! Or KFC in china has the slogan, "Eat Your Fingers Off" instead of Finger Lick'n Good.
Why is it of worth to tap your bottle of water? Because tap water is cleaner than bottled water!
I like to drink reservoir brand bottled water, it's 10,000 percent more luxurious. The value is just the same.
And there's the Beercan Museum in Boston, an actual museum. You go and stare at all the booze while you dream of fizzology.
..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)