How Would Super Safe Pleasure Drugs Change The World? "Cotinine and Its Value"

  The opioid crisis has been a burden for society and some think that there may be replacements to solve this by methods like lab research about the cocaine or the heroin vaccine..

 Research has shown that smoking can be cured in lab mice by science. But how do you get a mouse to huff and puff? A 200 LB mouse! 

  Some think these issues may be solvable by something like cotinine, which is like nicotine "with the same letters spelled sidewise sort of". It's a derivative from tobacco, but it's non drowsy, not habit forming, and so far research shows that it doesn't have any adverse events, truly a smokeless cigarette not to chew on..

Valentine Escheverria is currently doing research in South Florida and has gotten patents. Clinical trials are underway.

Click Here for the Justia site if you like and we hope you may feel good eventually for clicking this link!

 

 Cotinine is actually now available by prescription as the safety is becoming established though it's not yet widely available.   

 There were those who believed in the 80s that by now we would have super safe pleasure drugs and so they would make us all feel lucked out and all isv well. You know, I love my life, hug the world. 

 However Imagine 2 Neanderthals in evolution..

 And Grog, he feels bad part of time. So he goes out and he stops all the bad press. The bison will Stampede wherever they go, and people who follow are thriving and flourishing.

 But Greg on the other hand, he feels so good that he doesn't do a darn thing much. And as time goes on, he doesn't survive as often. So it's sort of built into our genes not to have super much pleasure.

 Like the lottery winners after they win.. three years later, research shows that they feel about the same as they did before or even just that 3/4 of them also either spend or lose all their money in 5 years.

 

 Even so if most people couldn't feel extreme pleasure this way it would still be valuable for people who have brain health issues.

Cotinine heals brain illness, reversing even late stage memory loss and Alzheimer's and it could help people reduce the influence of heroin, help people with overweight or debt or other stress related events such as nicotine overuse. I  imagine cotinine might be added to every food there is including soft drinks to way out do caffeine.

Even so I think while cotinine may be a step in the right direction for people who are stressed, it might ruin other people's lives. They may make us feel too darn good!

I would think having good brain health in general would outweigh feeling good all the time. I mean almost!

Because pleasure and living is a sort of strength, since cotinine doesn't cause drowsiness or addiction it might be a true cognitive and fitness booster and won't slow people down and make them relax but make them feel they're more like a genius.

(Research shows that geniuses aren't shy and retiring but rather continually light their on fire with ambition not smokes.) I'm a musician and I see these ads where they say how to play music even if I have no skill! If so, Nobel prizes for all in audio!

 

 

Convenience in Relativity.

Einstein like Mach believed that the concave surface in a bucket of spinning water was because of the relative motion of the cosmos. By relativity all observers are equally valid so the point of view that the universe is spinning when you spin a small wheel is equally valid to say that the wheel is spinning though not as convenient.

By relativity the relative motion of the two masses is all the counts. The problem is about changing force on the small wheel and this would presumably cause huge torsion forces on the universe as well as huge centrifugal force and motion faster than light relative to the wheel if both are equally valid.

Here convenience becomes of huge import because it's usually more convenient to say that by having more mass the universe has a more valid frame of reference relative to the wheel, or certainly we could say this is true as far as the concept of rest is important.

About relativity since the cause of the Lorentz contraction is not mechanical and only a given by the speed of light, there is no way to distinguish motion from non-motion.

There is no low energy Higgs' field with relativity and so the Lorentz contraction has no cause. (Einstein said if the low energy field is found relativity will be disproven.. but as I say on my other posts I believe Einstein was wrong because the dark energy and dark matter Fields May both cause centrifugal and centrifugal force and inertia but also change phase to be faster than light as well as not interact much with the high energy fields like the classical electromagnetic field lines, because the dark matter and dark energy waves which are pure and low energy might go in the lines between the electric electromagnetic field lines making them coherent and so they stay unified and don't break or bunch up. By this relativity is not disproven but rather it's extended or at least certainly I believe that the relativity of acceleration and forces of this type are not viable. 

Many of most people didn't believe in relativity at first and I think this was not a coincidence.. because while special relativity is good as far as it goes and explains a lot of things, I believe it's incomplete because there are all kinds of events around us that don't seem to match up to relativity and as I say on my other posts there seemed to be about 40 and more of these as I write more of them here often I had found.)

  By relativity about rotation we can also say the water in the bucket can't know if it's spinning or not and cause the distinction of the surface of the water as the bucket rotates if it's not active we comparing itself to the field around it.

The "inconvenience of convenience" about relativity reminds me of gravity and in philosophy how the employer is not the same as the employee in business.

The employer favors convergence down to a point like gravity. Think about a commercial where the boss has set it up to converge on the point where someone pays for this, a customer, not a dummy we hope!.. this about gravity is non-relativistic where all points of view are equivalent..

The equality of the laborers is more about a sort of consideration where with near distance it seems all the observers are more equivalent. Gravity seems important and the boss has the advantage of the economy of scale or more convenience to do business.

In some of his books Bertrand Russell had a chapter called "What's Seen and What is Felt". For special relativity no star or mass in the cosmos in general can be said to be at rest more than any other or in motion more than the other as the motion is without friction and at high speed. Light and sight are what are so important to special relativity and not contact forces.

But when we have the speed of light being constant because light is a particle uninfluenced from emission to absorption as Einstein held, this means nothing would ever wear out or run down because in special relativity light has no interaction or contact force as it moves.

Yet by friction in the frame of the Earth all kinds of things are running down and wearing out all the time.

Much of this is because gravity is converging things downward and then they reradiate back out.

As an author I once wrote a story I named "Flatland". Flatland is like being in youth because the resources were seemingly unlimited in a way without much gravity or weight involved and so the geometry is linear like in special relativity and because of this most observers are equal..

As we grow older however it's apparent that resources are limited and this is literally because the world is round "like the boss" well who says so..

This means that resources and the possibility that all observers are not equivalent becomes obvious..

We might ask why we go to work day after day because the boss has more convenience and we "say we think it has something to do with rent!"

While relativity tells us that all observers are equivalent and this is indeed based on energy conservation and the first law of thermodynamics, it doesn't tell us about the second law and this is about how convenience becomes involved with the physics.

Einstein was saying in some of his later writing that he believed time didn't even exist, and by the great success of special relativity of course by the in and out waves of energy conservation exactly balancing.. if the boss is equal to the employees and all the observers are the same we would also say that by energy conservation there is such balance that all events can be reversed with no problem..

As an engineer and inventor I once asked..

If we had a blast to seek out the explosion of something like a volcano, could we actually just totally stop it from erupting by "using it's own force against it" by using something like a nuclear blast that implodes..

 What can we say about Einstein's idea that time can be reversed?

I started to think what we might need to reverse an explosion..

At first I thought of a nuclear blast imploding inward.. But then I started to look at Einstein's idea about this and just as a thought experiment I realized it would need something more complex, and for this I started to think of ideas like setting up an MRI as the blast went outward to polarize the atoms so then sending in electrons with a second beam might then convert more of the radioactive protons in the neuclei to neutrons. 

These no longer attract the nucleus by the strong force and radiate out as neutrons and decay in 12 minutes to protons and electrons which become like useful hydrogen to convert more of the radiation outward from the blast for useful energy and and then doing something like then sweeping them up with another high energy beam like a laser, and this ended up turning to need four or five super high energy beams..

While this thought experiment might seem useful to do something like stop nuclear blasts by this roundabout method, this by no means means it's reversing the time. By this thought experiment it became quite apparent to me that Einstein was wrong about time not existing..

My sister's fiance was saying he was working in demolition and that they had implosives for buildings like white powder that made them implode.. so I looked this up on the web and this is a sort of demolition myth because like with cooling you need a working fluid to move inward and I even believed that we might be able to use a large machine that implodes a lot of air inward rapidly with a motor to actually achieve this. (It also needs somewhere for the imploding air to go and I thought of using an exhaust pipe for this type of use.) Even so reversing the flow of an explosion can be really a complex event and I think it relates directly to the evidence that shows that it's much easier to convert mass to energy than energy to mass.

Mass and energy are conserved but they aren't converted and I would hold that if relativity was complete it would be easy to convert them easily in a time symmetrical way.

Einstein was a Spinozan and by this he believed that if you had a bunch of particles and you controlled all the particles you could reverse time and control the whole system with no problem no matter what.. so Einstein believed in determinism.

Many types of events are not easily reversible or controllable as if they were only particles. A bit of reduction here of Einstein's idea because of his other idea.. the one I think that was wiser, was his quote 

 "it's impossible to imagine a fundamental particle that can both emit and absorb a wave"..

 so waves are ultimately going to be more fundamental and they're more complex, and Einstein by saying this apparently wasn't a Spinozan. He wrote over 200 books and when he finished each he revised his memory!

If the in and out waves were strictly balanced by energy conservation and the volcano could just be reversed by nuclear implosion, like the equivalent rotation of the universe or a small wheel I would say this would be a lot more convenient but also not much probable.

But if we say that the spinning bucket is comparing itself by its rotation to the constant Higgs' field even while time is not so reversible by this at any rate, we still have a way to distinguish motion from non-motion and also the mechanical cause of the Lorentz contraction by mechanical compression with the field as a mass accelerates forward and this is lacking in special relativity.

An experiment I propose is that instead of the universe rotating by small changes in the wheel instead we find ways to try to change the constant Higgs' field..

I think we might be able to do this by some kind of electromagnetic influence since like gravity and the Higgs' these three fields are long range so I think these might have the best way that we could change the influence of the field. We might need a high energy source to change it but then we would also change it by way of the electromagnetic field from this source.

My belief is that we could set the bucket or its equivalent wheel spinning and measure the centrifugal force and by changes in the Higgs field itself externally we might have a lot more chance of changing this than we have of changing the entire universe just by spinning the wheel..that is to say the wheel is spinning relative to the field and its immediate vicinity and by no means is the entire Cosmos spinning, and if we can change the field around the bucket and change the bucket then by changing centrifugal force we may see that relativity is not complete.

We see that the round wheel is comparing itself to the more constant Higgs field. The recent finding that pi is non-random and has non-periodicity of the repetition of say the number six is only 20% likely to repeat with the next loop.

This might be because the constant Higgs field is a lattice and it has edges so the round wheel has less resistance moving with the side of the box but when it reaches the edges they're jagged and at this point the measure of Pi is not random because it's not as stable.

This may be one reason why the lattice confinement calculations of the strong force have been successful because it's measuring the lattice at higher energy. (By changing the size of the units of the lattice the strong force changes phase from the strong force to electromagnetism at just the right energy as it radiates out in space just like the change of phase of a crystal that melts.)

With higher energy the boxes of the field are larger in the spacing and this might imply that at short radius like nuclear radii centrifugal force may not be the same strength as with more distance.

If we succeed in changing centrifugal force by this method of changing the Higgs field a prediction of this idea would be that we can change it by different amounts for different sizes of the wheels because the flat field stays the same while the size of the wheel changes.

 Electrons in atomic orbitals don't have centrifugal force so it seems not impossible we could change it. On the larger scale because the spinning wheel has much larger size relative to the small size of the lattice which stays the same, it seems that gravity and centrifugal force both may be changed and the non-randomness of Pi might therefore be why the galaxies are rotating much faster than they should be without exploding outward and as a solid body, something relativity doesn't allow.

 

Mach and Einstein believed that since both the motion of the wheel or the cosmos are equivalent that somehow the spinning bucket of water is connected to the distant mass of the universe and so if we could somehow remove the mass and energy of the rest of the universe, the bucket of water would be constant with acceleration.

But the problem of the huge torsion force on the universe by the small wheel could be easily solved if we can prove that the wheel is only interacting with the field beside it.

I've had some chats with AI about this as you see on my other post about the electromagnetic motor made of the asteroid and spinning around the moon for lots of energy, I was asking AI about anything else I would need for this kind of plan and the AI says "I ask great questions!" No problem!

So I started to ask about my ideas about relativity and the AI is saying that while my perceptions were quite perceptive and insightful it comes up with this and repeats this more often..

"Low and high energy light bend exactly the same in a gravitational lens as by distant light sources".

 ..even so this tends to be something I wanted to improve about relativity.

First I noted about how in relativity you have the two masses falling at the same rate in the gravitational field and so Einstein is saying that it's equivalent to say that the Earth's field is rushing up to meet it at 32 ft per second.

My objection was that we would be at the speed of light and with infinite mass by way of special relativity in less than a year (this cause by special relativity is well proven and there's no problem with this, and the low energy field itself doesn't disprove relativity).

It seems arbitrary that we lift the masses to the same height because if you use force to determine what the change is and use the same force on the different masses they rise to different heights and fall at different rates just as otherwise the Earth around the Moon should fall at the same rate by relativity because they're both equally privileged.

So here is where I thought I had found my answer and that is that different masses really do fall at different rates.

And of course I say Right.. the high and low energy light do indeed bend by the same amount (because both have zero rest mass) and yet the masses within that frame can accelerate at any rate we want.

  Relativists have argued because the speed of light is constant in the gravitational field and it all gets back to the speed of light by way of energy conservation, this idea of convenience having any import is actually trivial.. supposedly the constant acceleration of the light is about space and time itself and this cannot be changed. But I would ask the same question why is it that this works for light with zero rest bass but not for bodies with rest mass?

So the constant bending of light is one idea which I hold is the general frame by energy conservation of the physics where the waves balance as by relativity and yet even so the local change by way of convenience seems to be a way we can add on to relativity by more physics because relativity seems incomplete if the wheel spins more definitely than the cosmos.

The essential truth would seem to be that relativity describes the first law well and works well for it but not the second law and if you ask any employer or employee convenience also is not to be ignored.

  

"Unifying REM Sleep"..

SLEEP UNIFIED BY WHISPER AND BRAINWAVE

 

 It's believed that we won't be able to synchronize our R.E.M. sleep..scientists have asked whether we could dream the same dream as others but with no correlation found yet for this.

It's been known that you synchronize your brain waves with the other person when you're talking to them. So this wouldn't work because when we're awake we're talking and while our brain waves are synchronized we're not thinking the same words.

Researchers have also found that for speech actually you can't think a verbal thought without whispering a bit with your voice box.

 I thought one use of this would be to amplify phones so you don't have to wave your arms around with audio AR, VR and  visual AR. I think this may make it so that you can find the words while you dream and thinking in sleep and perhaps also correlate with the brain waves by the machine that also changes the brain waves.

 It's been known that while you sleep you think of words all the time but you have amnesia so when you wake up you don't remember them. But a machine might amplify this by the sound.

 

 It's been found that alcoholics while they're asleep learn uncomfortable words while everyone else is learning words to heal. 

 Words are some of the most powerful prescriptions and I think this might unify brain waves of sleepers and it might influence the dreams so the wife can dream the same dream as her wedding and deja Visa saved for her rich event once more!

 AI FOR CELLPHONE OVERUSE 

****************

We read of how the teens are suffering online because they have distractions, harassment from strangers, "bad" websites and constant scrolling through mindless junk the tech providers call "content". Researchers finally figured out how to bypass the code of tech providers who had hoped to hide what's actually going on.

 All the teens surveyed said they would do without the internet if they could.. The parents don't actually know and the teens say they envy their parents about not having to go through this. 

  And so I'm hoping we can be older and wiser about this because I think we could use AI to basically make a sort of shield to reduce overuse.. Teens spend half their day this way and 57% in general have web overuse. 

A solution may be..Not just a website filter, but a more powerful AI anti overuse filter of more value, basically it's programmed just by asking it for more than the browser would want.

For example, if  using sites without much value the app automatically would be limited, but also by gradual methods so they can gradually say no. This would be lile a sort of guardian anjel with words of warning, advice, and inspiration.

Overuse can't just say no right away because they try to give them timers to reduce video overuse as in China. And instead of doing like 8 hours a day they overuse 10 hours a day. So something needs to be done so it's more predictable and reliable, (gambling overuse has been linked to randomness) and the machine might say what they should do if the browser visits of the same sites without too much value.

  So the AI knows and tells a joke or inspirational defense or warning and encourages surfers to do more valuable things that the AI will know about. So this is another way they can maybe make it so they could find out what's really going on with teens. And I know, I'm the world's most wise teen and at my age, I'm what teen years old!

This AI automatically shields the eyes and maybe even has a gradual tinting out feature so that the surfer can relax in the world calm web, not wild anymore. 

 I would think a mist might be sprayed in our eye for dry eye, and also to remember to blink (actually while I'd been told dry eye was incurable and my ophthalmologist didn't give me anything for it, I found years later that it was an allergy and a simple trick that really cured it almost completely years later is to put some Benadryl in my eyebrows and not your eyes ( this can hurt your eyes).)

 The AI would be of general use for overuse and internet gambling, 2/3 of video gamblers are addicted.

 A Plan to Orbit an Asteroid Around the Moon Used as An Electric Motor to Achieve a Simple, Clean, Safe, Cheap Future Source of Vast Energy..

..Also about Mining the Mineral Wealth of the Asteroid Phobos (or other asteroids)  for The Treasure of its 4000 Quadrillion Dollars Worth of Precious Metals, Plus a Scientific Treasure of Finding More About the Asteroids and the Solar System by bringing the asteroid nearer to us.

 Goddard and Tsiolokovski were two rocket pioneers of the early 20th century who built the first rockets. Goddard built his rocket at his aunt Effie's house in Auburn, MA. It was a contraption with pipes and a rocket motor and it ushered in the age of rocket propulsion.

 Although the Chinese had used  fireworks, they tried to build the first airplane with kites powered by fireworks and it caught fire. Even so they had such as water pumps for mills, and they had 30 major industrial inventions 1000 years before they found them in the W by way of travel by the ocean around the world, and the flow up method!

  So Europe was catching up, with the Chinese and their industry doing business, from which rockets, clocks, silk and ocean going navies were devised.   

 Tsilokovsky and Goddard wrote detailed descriptions about how they believed we could build the elevator to orbit.  Basically the centrifugal force holds the elevator up while even so a super strong material is needed.

  Recently materials strong and light enough to build the elevator have been found by engineers like graphene solids that are carbon. Space junk would be no problem because they just move to one side, and the tower is intact. Meteorologists can predict from weather space junk reports if space junk "or a meteor" is coming to move the elevator to the side. With the light weight, if the elevator fell simulations show would be no more impact than if newspapers fell on the reader!

  It's believed the first nation to build the elevator will be getting a lot of wealth and power because they'll be able to earn by launching payloads cheaply and safely to orbit and also charging other nations for their payloads if used. So any nation that builds an elevator will have major power and economic advantages. 

 

  The asteroid Phobos has 4000 quadrillion dollars worth of precious minerals on it and around it, it's enough to pay the US debt 100,000 times.

Engineers have found ways to move asteroids by taking a small mothership and then small bots ..these go out with lasers to zap the asteroid.

  One asteroid often has 1/5 of the water of the entire oceans of the Earth. Blasting with the ablation of the steam and dust outward with just four small lasers has as much propulsion as the space shuttle to power the asteroid where they want to move it. So I thought we might move  into the orbit around the moon and we're harvesting all those minerals while we're doing science. 

  In my belief we could use the magnetic properties or attach magnets to Phobos and send them into the moon either landing or spearing large electromagnets into the moon like the Japanese moon program where they're using this method to put the sensor inside of the crust instead of a lander..they won't have to worry about crash landing!

  With this type of engineering we spear or land the cheap electromagnets into or on the moon and into the asteroid with the asteroid in orbit around the Moon. As it goes around, it generates a lot of power, huge amounts of energy. It's like a motor as it orbits around. 

 While fusion may seem to hold promise this might help whoever reaches Phobos first to earn enormous wealth in addition to the great science value. (We  might use another asteroid with the right minerals and perhaps with more water for steam power and not Phobos because Phobos orbits around Mars. It might be much cheaper than going against gravity of Mars to move Phobos our way and instead to find other asteroids that are headed in the general area of the Moon and then just gently nudge them towards the moon orbit saving a lot of money because of the large weight of the asteroid, even so the general idea would be the same.)

It's been said that we may be headed for a dark age of the shortage of like electrical power.

 Current nuclear fusion generators will cost a lot to build, and a moon motor would be certainly hugely less to achieve the same amount of energy than solar power arrays. Solar power to be viable enough would take much of the area of the world other than perhaps the new transparent solar panels..Even so the payoff for investors or pay per dollar spent would be hugely more than other ways to find energy.

 Other methods like putting heat collectors out in the desert might take a lot of infrastructure and other woes to build and maintain and studies have shown solar in the desert also permanently damages the ecology. Using the asteroid motor would be a much faster way to achieve a lot of energy and money.  

An advantage of having the mineral wealth of an asteroid in orbit around the Moon by this method is that other than setting up the machines, the cost of sending the payloads of metals or other materials back to the Earth could easily be paid for by the energy that the asteroid creates..  

     

   How to Move the Energy from the Asteroid Motor to Us Here.. 

For the near future I think we could send packages of either molecular gyroscopes or perhaps ultra capacitors to safely bring the energy to us without harming the atmosphere. 

 I originally thought we could send microwaves to the Earth from the moon. Then I realized this might harm the ecology and the electrical layers of the ionosphere or the ozone layer..

  That's why I'm not in favor of sending microwaves from stellar collectors, which are like solar collectors in orbit. And engineers can always catch up on enough shade at night, and sunshine for astronomers, no sunshine in the shade!

Often in the history of technology and science a lot of inventions that are thought to be the best are improved and bypassed by better machines.

  If ever built, the elevator will be by far the largest machine people have ever built and would be expensive. Other technology has been developed that may be a cheaper safe way to go to orbit...

  For example lightcraft are machines like a saucer with the payload above that has a reflecting base and from the ground a laser lifts it up. For a usual launch with current methods it takes the fuel to pay for the fuel so otherwise the first three seconds of a rocket launch are 97% of the cost of the mission.

 If it's ever built, this is my favorite way we might bypass the elevator, if it's never built! As in the history of science and engineering there is a vast graveyard of interesting but incorrect ideas, or perhaps here "not so much wrong" as "not yet the best".

    Because of this recent improvement by way of the light craft I think the tower may never be built. Even so I still think it's a possibility.  

 The asteroid motor would generate huge amounts of energy. Consider the jet stream..it's been proven to have 600 times as much power perhaps by using kites (an airship kite might be best) as we'll need for the United States. And that's just like with lightweight air moving only a few 100 mph.

 Orbital velocity around the Earth is around 67,000 mph and the orbital velocity of the Moon is 2,286 mph so the asteroid would be moving at high speed. 

 It's got hugely more mass than the air of the jet stream since the momentum is the motion multiplied by the mass. It's got 10 to the 16th power kilograms of mass or about 10 trillion tons. So we're talking about all the energy we might need at least for any time in the near future.  

  It would seem to be safe from terrorists because asteroids are difficult to move in general and it would take a long time for anyone to change it and we would have advanced notice.

 It may be easy and cheap to extract the energy from the asteroid, attaching motors to them and then collecting the power other than about beaming the energy back to the tower.

 Packages on the lightcraft could be used containing molecular gyroscopes or perhaps ultra capacitors set down gently and easily using the light craft. And so the laser from the ground reflects it up and eases it downward gradually and gently, and as is known about light craft if it runs out of power, it just glides down to the earth. 

One advantage of the Light craft is that it's safer from explosion because there is no fuel on board and it can also move slower.

Another way to make a reentry safer would be to boost the packages ahead of the motion of the Earth so they land with a relative velocity that's really low. This is a method that's been proposed to land large payloads on Mars.

  It costs not much or nothing extra to send it ahead of the motion of a body like a planet to move with it when it reaches the surface of the planet.

     A cheaper method of building an elevator might be to first use a rocket to send up the line and hold it there and then small bots each with a payload on it to pay its way by the economic value with a thin coat of line making it stronger with each travel of the bot and each day it gets more more built up.

 One important reason to build the elevator or use other methods like this maybe because Recent research about the SpaceX rocket has shown that it blast a large hole in the stratosphere and this may be harming everyone's help if we don't find other methods of bypassing rocket boosters as a way to send and receive materials from orbit.

    So as you see, it may be quite easy to extract large amounts of energy from the asteroid using simple electromagnets and one trip to Phobos to move it into orbit around the Moon. 

If this is built in the future it would be a safe simple cheap way to achieve lots of power.