Speed of light

[harry]

G'day Aris

Do you read alot?

Just keep on reading until it clicks. Keep you mind open and hungry for information.

I'm a book worm, But years ago I thought I knew what ever had to be known.

Than a mentor asked me if I wanted to understand the workings of the universe.

I said yes in more ways than one.

So he gave me a reading pile of papers.

After reading them, I understood very little about the science, but! I started to get the GIST of them.

After years of reading, I know more than ever that I know very little.

So! Month after month I read and the flavor of the month is Magnetic reconnection. First I read the 2009 papers.

Trust me, I'm not a smart cookie.

[harry]

G'day Aris

Smile

If you could only bottle the excitement and the interest.

Aris what topic are you interested in?

[JimJast]

if I read him correctly, he says the universe is not expanding

But then what is in it new in relation to Einstein's theory in which the universe is not expanding neither, and the alleged accelerating expansion of space is due to the illusion casue by the action of the principle of conservation of energy as I keep demonstrating sice 1985? See http://geocities.com/jim_jastrzebski/sci/3266.pdf

[aristarchusinexile]

I think you might've neglected to consider that Earth (or even the solar system) isn't the 'place of origin' for any of the material of which the Pioneer probe is constructed. Any hydrogen in its makeup has likely been around since the beginning, and the rest of the heavier elements would've been manufactured in various stars and supernovae located nowhere near where we are now (and would've found their origins in primordial hydrogen, as well).

You're right to make that proposal, even if it is only a theory; but while the molecules may or may not have been formed in that way, the lumps of gold and aluminum etc. which were used in the spacecraft are formed on earth, unless they were the rare kind brought to earth in meteorites, and I include meteorites only to be all inclusive. Plus, all the elements in the spacecraft have probably been subjected to high temperature recyling by earth's formation and/or geological functions.

Actually, I was near exhaustion when I wrote the post, having just ended three weeks of often heavy labour from 9:30 p.m. to 6 a.m., and dealing with a month's abuse from an aggresive drunk in our rooming house (I ended the abuse by promising I'd call the police);and my tiredness and conflict caused me to write "matter" when I was really thinking "thing" .. the spacecrafts are 'things', constructed here on earth. I knew I shouldn't have said Matter, but as I said in another post, 'will' can overcome intention. Also, in my thoughts I was including the human interest in the spacecraft, including design and fabrication and assembly, as well as affection of those people, but I thought if I inlcuded 'affection' my post wouldn't have a hope of being allowed discussion. So ..

I've thought of a simple test of the idea of non-local attraction: Find or build a maze of small rooms and hallways, a large research facility would do, and in one room have people genuinely interested in the test design and build or simply reduce to components and then reassemble a small, battery operated, random-guided wheeled or air-supported mobile device like one of those automatic vacuum cleaners which changes direction when it bumps into something. In the maze, eliminate gradient influences, and reduce as far as possible electrical, magnetic, and airflow influences, and see if the device finds its way back to the point of assembly. Divide the test into segments with the people involved stationed in the room of assembly, and also place them together in other rooms to see if the non-locality would return the device to the room of assembly or to the assemblers. The research facility might not be the best location for the test, as scientists and technicians would be curious about the device and results, and their interest might skew results.

The test would have to be repeated numerous times of course, and an all powerful and intelligent Creator can foil any test, still, if I had the resources, I would do the test.

[BMAONE23]

Actually, before the Big Bang there was God, Eating a Burrito. And was suddenly struck by an attack of gas. "Wham" when he turned around he observed: "Dang, now there's another one of those Universe things that I'll have to keep an eye on. Guess I'll need to stop eating them Burrito thingies"

[aristarchusinexile]

Actually, before the Big Bang there was God, Eating a Burrito. And was suddenly struck by an attack of gas. "Wham" when he turned around he observed: "Dang, now there's another one of those Universe things that I'll have to keep an eye on. Guess I'll need to stop eating them Burrito thingies"

BMA has hit on the answer to what is that huge gaseous glob in the early universe?

Hey God .. haven't you heard of Beano

[aristarchusinexile]

G'day Aris

Smile

If you could only bottle the excitement and the interest.

Aris what topic are you interested in?

Howdy Mucker. All this stuff is good. I'd like to go to Mars with a little plastic shovel and bucket. The beaches in Aussie must be grand.

I was thinking of non-local attraction when I wrote the last post.

[aristarchusinexile]

if I read him correctly, he says the universe is not expanding

But then what is in it new in relation to Einstein's theory in which the universe is not expanding neither, and the alleged accelerating expansion of space is due to the illusion casue by the action of the principle of conservation of energy as I keep demonstrating sice 1985? See http://geocities.com/jim_jastrzebski/sci/3266.pdf

That's why I find your stuff interesting even though I have only vague understanding of it .. you present it well, and it deserves more discussion here so that people like me might better understand it.

MOG seems to say gravity increases instead of decreases at some distances farther from the source.

[aristarchusinexile]

G'day Aris

Do you read alot?

Just keep on reading until it clicks. Keep you mind open and hungry for information.

I'm a book worm, But years ago I thought I knew what ever had to be known.

Than a mentor asked me if I wanted to understand the workings of the universe.

I said yes in more ways than one.

So he gave me a reading pile of papers.

After reading them, I understood very little about the science, but! I started to get the GIST of them.

After years of reading, I know more than ever that I know very little.

So! Month after month I read and the flavor of the month is Magnetic reconnection. First I read the 2009 papers.

Trust me, I'm not a smart cookie.

You are a smart cookie, Harry, and that's not flattery.

I read large amounts in short periods of time during our cold winters, and then read very little for long periods of time when I'm enjoying the outdoors. This winter, besides reading several books on cosmology as well as general science magazines I read several books and magazines on paddle sports, fishing, wilderness survival, mushrooms, and edible vegetation. Perhaps I should say 'many' instead of several .. I'll have to look up several in Wikipedia .. okay .. have looked up 'many', 'several', 'few' .. I would say this winter I read somewhere on the high end of several and low end of many .. I'm not good at approximation .. "a half of a little bit" is as close as I generally come. I'll have to look magnetic reconnection up in Wiki ..

okay "It is a violation of an approximate conservation law in plasma physics" interesting .. violation does not mean immutable. I found it interesting that plasma is likened to organic life .. and the eddies .. I couldn't picture eddies in energies as high as plasma .. but all things are relative (perhaps). Must get to the bank.

[harry]

G'day Aris

Plasma is not what you think, to understand it you will need to do a bit of reading.

Wiki is a start, but also missleading.

These are the papers that I have read in the last week. Not all of them, but I got the GIST out of it.

Magnetic Reconnection 2009
http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+20 ... /0/all/0/1

This is just 2009, if you wish to read further than alter the date on the link.

Plasma Cosmology
http://www.plasmacosmology.net/bb.html

Try to understand the properties of plasma and the double layer and the Zpinch of magnetic fields.

As for being smart, its going to take me another two years of reading just to understand the process and mechanisms that create the supernova and jets.

[harry]

G'day from the land of ozzz

Moffat is no monkey, he has written quite a few papers

Here is just 4 from the many.

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0610162
Positive and Negative Energy Symmetry and the Cosmological Constant Problem

Authors: J. W. Moffat
(Submitted on 13 Oct 2006)

Abstract: The action for gravity and the standard model includes, as well as the positive energy fermion and boson fields, negative energy fields. The Hamiltonian for the action leads through a positive and negative energy symmetry of the vacuum to a cancellation of the zero-point vacuum energy and a vanishing cosmological constant in the presence of a gravitational field solving the cosmological constant problem. To guarantee the quasi-stability of the vacuum, we postulate a positive energy sector and a negative energy sector in the universe which are identical copies of the standard model. They interact only weakly through gravity. As in the case of antimatter, the negative energy matter is not found naturally on Earth or in the universe. A positive energy spectrum and a consistent unitary field theory for a pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian is obtained by demanding that the pseudo-Hamiltonian is ${\cal P}{\cal T}$ symmetric. The quadratic divergences in the two-point vacuum fluctuations and the self-energy of a scalar field are removed. The finite scalar field self-energy can avoid the Higgs hierarchy problem in the standard model.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0608675
Gravitational Lensing in Modified Gravity and the Lensing of Merging Clusters without Dark Matter

Authors: J. W. Moffat
(Submitted on 30 Aug 2006)

Abstract: Gravitational lensing in a modified gravity (MOG) is derived and shown to describe lensing without postulating dark matter. The recent data for merging clusters identified with the interacting cluster 1E0657-56 is shown to be consistent with a weak lensing construction based on MOG without exotic dark matter.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0608074
A Modified Gravity and its Consequences for the Solar System, Astrophysics and Cosmology

Authors: J. W. Moffat
(Submitted on 15 Aug 2006 (v1), last revised 17 Dec 2006 (this version, v2))

Abstract: A relativistic modified gravity (MOG) theory leads to a self-consistent, stable gravity theory that can describe the solar system, galaxy and clusters of galaxies data and cosmology.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0412195
Gravitational Theory, Galaxy Rotation Curves and Cosmology without Dark Matter

Authors: J. W. Moffat
(Submitted on 8 Dec 2004 (v1), last revised 5 May 2005 (this version, v3))

Abstract: Einstein gravity coupled to a massive skew symmetric field F_{\mu\nu\lambda} leads to an acceleration law that modifies the Newtonian law of attraction between particles. We use a framework of non-perturbative renormalization group equations as well as observational input to characterize special renormalization group trajectories to allow for the running of the effective gravitational coupling G and the coupling of the skew field to matter. The latter lead to an increase of Newton's constant at large galactic and cosmological distances. For weak fields a fit to the flat rotation curves of galaxies is obtained in terms of the mass (mass-to-light ratio M/L) of galaxies. The fits assume that the galaxies are not dominated by exotic dark matter and that the effective gravitational constant G runs with distance scale. The equations of motion for test particles yield predictions for the solar system and the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16 that agree with the observations. The gravitational lensing of clusters of galaxies can be explained without exotic dark matter. An FLRW cosmological model with an effective G=G(t) running with time can lead to consistent fits to cosmological data without assuming the existence of exotic cold dark matter.

The plot thickens, its not as simple as it looks.

[harry]

G'day Aris

The beaches in Australia are some of the greatest beaches in the world.

The Beaches vary from every type of sand, pebbles, boulders, shells, you name it.

Up North, they do become a bit dangerous with jelly fish and crocidiles.


================================

Please explain further non local attraction.

[Chris Peterson]

Plasma Cosmology
http://www.plasmacosmology.net/bb.html

A reminder that plasma cosmology falls squarely into the category of pseudoscience, and is off-bounds anywhere on the Asterisk.

Plasma cosmology should not be confused with plasma physics, which deals with things like stellar burning, relativistic jets, and other non-cosmological plasma processes.

[JimJast]

... I find your stuff interesting even though I have only vague understanding of it .. you present it well, and it deserves more discussion here so that people like me might better understand it.

Unfortnately the purpose of moderated fora is not that people like you might better understand anything but that people like you buy books that are trying to convince them that the universe is much more complex than it really is. Then you buy even more books to understand the fomer ones. As I once did until I realized that all those stories are made up just for this purpose and what is really out there is just a boring Einstein's universe, no expansion except the illusion of accelerating expansion. Since what would you buy if you knew that all those stories are made up and space is not really expanding just looks like it because the boring principle of conservation of energy prevents the space from expanding but not from illusion of accelerating expansion and this illusion can be explained in a few minutes as most other illusions can even on the high school student level of understanding physics.

You can see how much more interesting it is right now, when everybody and his brother tries to convince you that laws of gravitation are still not known, that the unverse can't be Einstein's, since Einstein didn't know a thing about it (yeah, right ). All those conflicting theories fighting each other. And if you knew that gravitation was already explained almost 100 years ago by Einstein alone and no sane person works in it any more would you buy those books? If it could be explained in 15 minutes what the true theory of gravitation is and why? Why the things look like attracting each other while they don't? This is what moderated fora are trying to prevent: people losing interest in things that are easy to explain. And that's why tings easy to explain are not allowed to be discussed in those moderated fora.

[harry]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz

When we get to the point of pseudoscience directing science,this is where science goes mad.

Chris I have seen alot of crank pots in this forum, but you take the cake.

What do you know of Plasma Cosmology?

What part of the science is a problem?

[Chris Peterson]

What do you know of Plasma Cosmology?

I know it is baloney. More to the point, and the reason for my warning, is that discussing it in this forum will get a topic locked, and has gotten posters banned.

[harry]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzz

Why do you say baloney?

Is there something there that is not scientific?

What I'm against is people controlling the flow of information because they are hooked on one model.

It could be baloney.

But I want to know why.

[JimJast]

I think people forget, we are all on the same team...

There is a team #1 of those who write and sell books (the thicker the better so they better be stuffed with SF). A team #2 of those who buy those book and pay for SF not realizing that it is SF. A team #3 who knows it is SF so it doesn't buy those books (in our case they are mosly physicists). A team #4 who knows that it is SF and wants to warn team #2. It places from time to time the info on the internet where it is available for free. Finally there is a team #5 (the readers of the books produced by team #1) who doesn't know what the reality is and it places it's ideas about it on the internet too, raising the level of noise over there. Which team you think we are on?

I used to be on team #2 and then on #3 studying the subject, while now I'm on #4 (unfortunately undistinguishable from #5) while the esablishment supports only teams #1 (since this is where the money is) and tries to suppress #4 (but luckily burning those people at stake as it was in fashion earlier is now illegal). That's why Einstein is all but forgotten despite him recognizing the reality almost 100 years ago when he desribed his "Einstein's universe". This situation is only in cosmology which interests almost no one. Now consider all the other fields of human activity

[harry]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

This paper from Moffat is also interesting.

Modified Gravitational Theory as an Alternative to Dark Energy and Dark Matter
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403266
Authors: J. W. Moffat
(Submitted on 10 Mar 2004 (v1), last revised 26 Aug 2004 (this version, v5))

Abstract: The problem of explaining the acceleration of the expansion of the universe and the observational and theoretical difficulties associated with dark matter and dark energy are discussed. The possibility that Einstein gravity does not correctly describe the large-scale structure of the universe is considered and an alternative gravity theory is proposed as a possible resolution to the problems.

Einstein would be the first to note of a mistake or errors in thinking. Science takes priority over emotional "I'm right " attitude.


As for TEAMS, wow!! thats a great idea, imagine what you can do with many hands.

[The Code]

Everything i know an love about the cosmos, has been through Einstein,s eyes. With out him i would know nothing. Stepping out into the cosmos without Einstein to guide me, is like stepping into the dark. The man worked it all out, when we had nothing back in the early 20th century .. No computers, no mobile phones, No discovery channel. The man either spoke to god, or was Genius, I believe the later. I,d have that man, Einstein in my team cos without him, your just having a stab in the dark. Every idea i have, is from a stepping stone Einstein created. 100 years has past and out of hundreds of thousands, nobody has proved him wrong.. And i doubt they ever will.

Mark

[harry]

G'day Mark

Einstein was and is still one of the greatest scientists the world has ever seen and yet he would be the last to say do not make way for new concepts.

His works have been read out of context in many fields and not undertsood by many.


So! tell me what point did you have in question?

[The Code]

Hi Harry

JimJast wrote:( All those conflicting theories fighting each other)

Is why i wrote, people all need to work together as a team. Stray to far from Einstein path we will get lost.

Mark

[bystander]

Einstien was just a man, not a god. I'm wondering, with all that is known, and with the resources available, how much different Einstien's theories would be today.

[The Code]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... verse.html

thought you guys may like to read this.

mark

[aristarchusinexile]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... verse.html

thought you guys may like to read this.

mark

Which led me to this http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... roras.html