Starship Asterisk*

Harry,

Somewhere you asked me if there was an answer as to "Why, does inertia exist" ahh in the APOD forum about spaceship coasting @ 10,000 mph forever. Here's the reply, it is from John Dobson's book "Beyond Space and Time" (2004)


"What we call the philosophy of Vedanta (and I don't mean the practice, but the philosophy behind the practice of what we call Advaita Vedanta) was apparently invented by some very sharp physicists in India a long time ago. A great deal of that old physics, including the identity of mass and energy (the understanding of which, in modern times, went through Swami Vivekananda to Nicola Tesla and Mileva Einstein) is built into the Sanskrit language, and the Sanskrit language is very old indeed. Those physicists discovered some very interesting and important physics, which we desperately need to know now if we're going to figure this thing out; being, What are the constitutional constitutants of this Universe?

The Sanskrit word for this Universe is Jagat, the changing. Those old physicists were smart enough to see that since change is seen against a background of something that is not changing, there must be, underlying this changing visible universe, a fundamental existence which is Changeless ! This underlying universe, to the universe which we do see, in addition to being ‘not changing’, they reasoned it must also be ‘not finite’ and ‘not divided’. This would place the underlying existence of the universe, ‘not in space’ and ‘not in time’; which would therefore make the underlying existence Changeless, Infinite, and Undivided !
And that, they called Brahman.

The problem then arose, "How then, do we see change? If what exists is changeless, how do we see a Universe of change?" and they said, "It can only be by mistake." And so they studied mistakes; if they hadn't studied mistakes, they might have missed the successful path to revelation.

For example, they pointed out that in order to mistake a piece of rope for a snake, (on the roadside at dusk in India) there are three mistakes that one must make. First, one must fail to see that it's a rope. (This they called the veiling power of the mistake, Avarana Shakti.) Next, one must jump to the wrong conclusion that it is a snake. (This they called the projecting power of the mistake, Vikshepa Shakti.) But finally, one must have actually seen the length and diameter of the rope, as the shape of a snake. (This they called the revealing power of the mistake, Prakasha Shakti.) This third part is what is so very important to our physics. It is because of the revealing power; that the changeless, the infinite, the undivided, must show through into our physics. Because if one did not notice the ‘rope’ at all, it never would have been mistaken for a ‘snake’.

Those old physicists sometimes referred to these three aspects of a misperception as black, red and white. Black refers to the veiling power by the darkness of evening twilight; red to the fact that the misperception was colored by the projecting power of imagination; and white to the partially revealing power of the light of twilight (if you hadn't seen the rope in the first place, you never would have mistaken it for a snake!).
They also referred to these three aspects, as the three Gunas (Tamas, Rajas, and Sattva)."

And that is the 'why' of why Inertia/Momentum exists; this is how The Changeless shows thru into this Universe which we see, and we see the Changeless as inertia/momentum.

And you must agree, that Inertia and Momentum are both doing their darndest to be as Changeless as they can possibly be.

Hello Kovil

Just read your posts.

I will come back to it later,,,,,,,,must go to work.

Hi Harry,
thanks for reading.

This day I was googling 'oort cloud'.

After reading all the sites on 3 google pages, the idea struck!

Our sun was a multiple 'chuffer' it had several 'puffs' to its nova (as the new theory of solar modeling describes, iron core sun, neon and xenon in meteorites and jupiter's atmosphere)

One chuff made the Oort cloud, another the Kupier belt, and another the asteroid belt and planets. (now of course long term gravitational actions have modified and perhaps even structured these three, but it was an interesting thought)

Like a wood stove, when the door is open a little and the fire is just starting to really takeoff and the damper is a little too closed in the pipe, it chuffs and makes a series of puffs out the door of smoke, and sometimes the door moves a little back and forth. Open the damper a little and it stops, or close the door a little, or a little of both. Our sun was just the right conditions to make several puff offs.

Hello Kovil

Can I put you on a thinking path.

Just before a supernova, we observe an hour glass image, This hour glass image spreads matter into the future solar system. Working back words. If the surface material of the star is distributed the furthest and the core matter distributed close than you would expect a difference in planet make up.

Now! Your discovery is to find the difference in the planets. Our solar system.

You do not have to.

But! your findings may help me.

To make things not work, if the solar system goes through a nebulae than it will effect the results.

Harry,

In reading about the Crab Nebula and even todays APOD, it is not star death

<<The nebula is composed of material cast off by a dying sun-like star as it enters its white dwarf phase of evolution.>> APOD

It is star birth ! A star giving birth to a stellar nursery.

<<Planetary nebulae are important objects in astronomy because they play a crucial role in the chemical evolution of the galaxy, returning material to the interstellar medium and enriching it in heavy elements and other products of nucleosynthesis (such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and calcium) when stars nova and supernova. In other galaxies, planetary nebulae may be the only objects observable enough to yield useful information about chemical abundances.>> Wikipedia

- - - -

Now I forgot the morning thought. Ah, yes, so if the Crab Nebula is about 1000 years old and 11 light years is size. And NGC 2440 is 1 light year in size and "one of the hottest surface temperature stars known, at about 200,000 Kelvins"; How old is it? It must be very young, I presume.

If we consider our sun as being a nova of some sort, which later accumulated a lot of hydrogen, perhaps when it passed thru a hydrogen gass cloud or nova remnant from another nearby star in the past, could that be the same time the Earth and Mars accumulated their water? Earth managed to keep most of the hydrogen it gathered by gravity, Mars lost most of it over time. The sun kept huge amounts and developed its present atmosphere above the pulsar core. Based on the rotation of NGC 2440 and Crab, pulsars slow down rotational speed over time on a fairly steady rate of decrease, albeit in rather dramatic jumps at times. Our sun based on its rotation rate, can an age be guesstimated by this method? Of course the atmospheric drag throws a big window into the mix, but 27 days is equatorial period? That's one damn slow pulsar !! considering Crab is 30 times a second.

I am seeing novas as star 'birth' rather than 'death' today.

The data remains the same, the viewing of it has taken a shift of attention.

Also maybe that same time is when the comets accumulated their coating of ice? and Hyperion too.

Viva la Cosmos !

Hello Kovil

There are varies theories as to the origin of our solar system.

The composition of the planets may give some form of evidence.

Prof Olover Manuels papers may give some form of theory.

I have been warned not to give links in his name.

If you look in the past posts you will notice a logical explanation other than the standard model.

It may take you some time to get a a handle on what he is trying to explain.

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

You are correct in what you say the death of a star is not the death, its a phase in the evolution.

Many of these dwarf stars get rejuvinated again and again by the matter within the nebulae and along the journey through space.

The dating process is effected every tine the star goes through a Nova or supernova.

The inner core of stars is the key to the process. Particularly effecting the life of a star. Low density core mean short life. High density cores mean longer life with stability.

The question is what inner core density is required to keep the star from over heating and keep the solar envelope in shape and not expand.

There is a theory that the elements within the star segregate into possible layers. Iron near the core and the lighter elements near the surface.

When the star starts to release its shell it form an hour glass shape. The lighter elements are far and the heavier lements are near the core.

If this is true than the outer planets are made from lighter elements and the inner planets made from heavier elements such as Iron and Nickle.


It will be a number of years before we have a theory that will stand up to critics.

Theories without evidence are GONE WITH THE WIND.

What ever links I post, does not mean I agree with. I just want people to be aware of the options and question the standard models rather than just agreeing with them, a common mistake by many.

Thanks Harry,

Yes I bookmarked your postings page and downloaded most of the papers from those sites. Wonderful stuff !!!

I like Prof. Manuels papers, they make a lot of sense, especially with the gathering of supporting data from Jupiter's atmosphere, the meteorites on Earth, the solar wind particulate collections and identifications, and the HELIOS and SOHO satellite data of solar observations. The replacement model for the standard solar model is very immanent.

Your latest comments about the bell shaped structure prior to nova/supernova; This indicates something is changing within the inner structure of the star, from the long previous life span. This is what is setting up for the conditions leading to nova/supernova, or is the result of that settingup. The bell shape is our best clue.

Magnetics are what focus plasmas, so a strong magnetic field is developing, one that wasn't there before? And the jets of matter? What's causing them, guess there's still some homework to do !

Hello Kovil

Plasma cosmology is the way to go. Google for the info.

I will list some links, but! I think they will be blanked by moderators.

Something on red shift
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/k ... 2/05138613


Plasma
http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Harry you're the best,

Ingenta, ! but $2 a page for a 21 page article, hoooh
tho each page is probably worth more than two bucks.
(and it's only viewable for 48 hours, no copying)

I did not quite realize the resources of mainstream electronic publishing in the scientific fields. In order to theorize and publish I need a fullscale data gathering enterprise, computational sort and organize, and some assistants!

Relegated to being an espontano on the fringe of a flotilla of torreadors,
for a while still, I suppose.

Hello Kovil

The more papers I read, I find that the more I learn the less I know.

The next thing you need to research is the abilty of matter to be compacted.

Neutrons and protons make up and the wave structure of matter.

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

What is your opinion of the recycling process?

Wikipedia.com - the free encyclopedia
search - john dobson - choose the first one, john dobson (astronomer)

Has a nice bio of John, and gets into his "non-standard cosmology"
(since when did anything non-BBT become heresy?)

At the end it describes John's recycling process with implications.

= = =

<Neutrons and protons make up and the wave structure of matter. >
Actually I see it as " electrons and protons kiss and make up neutrons".
a neutron is a pregnant proton ,

= = =

<What is your opinion of the recycling process?>
It's good for the environment !

This is where philosophy and science collide on the far side of the circle. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle postulates that one cannot know EVERYTHING about a particle/wavefunction's energy/momentum component AND its location component simultaneously. At the border of our Awareable_Universe (that portion of the Universe of which we are able to receive light speed information about) at that border (and it is a subjective border) particles/wavefunctions are going away from us at the speed of light, driven by starlight pressures etc. ; we finally will not receive any information from them. This defines the border of Our Awareable Universe, this is the magic moment! By the postulates of Heisenberg we now know everything about the momentum or energy component, so we therefore cannot know anything about the location component. (as one components knowledge goes to 100% the other components knowledge goes to 0%) By this reasoning John infers that the particles/wavefunctions can 'tunnel' back into this universe and virtually appear anywhere inside the sphere of 'our awareable universe'.
This may take some time to 'prove' . LOL (please don't ask me how to 'setup that solution for solveature'.

Get John's DVD "A Sidewalk Astronomer" for more about this and about John etc. Oddly I watched it yesterday for the 4th? time. Each time it becomes more clear. The change of scenes is disruptive to the viewing process, but listen to the words, they are in a smooth flow from one scene to another. They had to edit it to get the flow, and that meant several different time/locations of filming John at lectures, starparties, Vedanta talks, backyards etc. Vedanta bookstore in Hollywood used to have 'A Sidewalk Astronomer', not sure where to get it otherwise, maybe Amazon.com John's book "Beyond Space and Time" (2004) gets into this even more.

Here is where religion joins philosophy and science on the 'farside of the sphere', as I call it , (religion and science and philosophy all are going in different directions from where we are, 'here', on this side of the circle or sphere; once they get far enough away they all 'collide head on' on the far side of the sphere). One definition of a 'living organism' is "that which self directs a stream of negative entropy upon itself". Meaning it feeds itself a source of energy to keep its living process supplied with energy, just like we eat breakfast. The Universe is ALIVE !!! It is suppling a source of negative entropy upon itself by having the particles/wavefunctions tunnel back in from the border. Thus clouds of primordial hydrogen can appear in the void spaces between the superclusters of galaxies by the tunneling process of the uncertainty principle. As Nature abhors a vacuum, the voids between superclusters are an appropriate place for tunneling to appear, and start the entire supercluster formation process all over again, in the very long timespan that the universe has for its processes to take place.

IT'S ALIVE !!! ITS ALIVE !!! THE UNIVERSE IS ALIVE !!!

That odd quote from the 1960's is now more understandable.


And to go another step further, perhaps the Universe has always been here, and life has always been alive, because one concept states "that life only comes from life". So life is just as eternal as the Universe is. They both arose at the same time, so to speak.

Hello Kovil

You said

And to go another step further, perhaps the Universe has always been here, and life has always been alive, because one concept states "that life only comes from life". So life is just as eternal as the Universe is. They both arose at the same time, so to speak

Life has always been in the universe.

If the universe is infinite and endless, your statement makes sense. Good on you.

and if so there is no start or end to the universe and life.

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


Did the Universe Have a Beginning?
http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/DidTh ... inning.asp

ABSTRACT

The big bang theory postulates that the entire universe originated in a cosmic explosion about 15 billion years ago. Such an idea had no serious constituency until Edwin Hubble discovered the redshift of galaxy light in the 1920s, which seemed to imply an expanding universe. However, our ability to test cosmological theories has vastly improved with modern telescopes covering all wavelengths, some of them in orbit. Despite the widespread acceptance of the big bang theory as a working model for interpreting new findings, not a single important prediction of the theory has yet been confirmed, and substantial evidence has accumulated against it. Here, we examine the evidence for the most fundamental postulate of the big bang, the expansion of the universe. We conclude that the evidence does not support the theory; and that it is time to stop patching up the theory to keep it viable, and to consider fundamentally new working models for the origin and nature of the universe in better agreement with the observations.

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

John Dobson
I have a few links on him.

We discussed him earlier in one of the topics
Maybe if we go to search it may come up.

Darn it did not work

Harry, If you're serious about learning more about Dobson's point of view, click on my name to get my profile, then click on view all messages, and scroll all my posts, there are numerous ones that are mostly Dobson. Or get his book, or dvd. (tho I think I laid out his idea fairly well, but there are more details of the workings, like the fluctuation in the rest mass of the protons that causes a variation in the starlight engine of what drives the expansion and that is how the governor aspect works. I did an entire posting on just that)

As John says, the BBT is dead. It has been for 20 years, but it will take a generational change to acknowledge it.

BBT is alive or being kept on life support, because it dovetails with the Church's position so nicely, they support it covertly.

The recycling theory for the universe works, and it's good for the environment !

John's replacement for BBT is; The Steady State Recycling Universe with a Governor.
(and it is a most brilliant conceptual cosmology!!! It has the ring of truth about it, and got my attention immediately)

wikipedia.com - the free encyclopedia, has a good page on John Dobson (astronomer)

I fear we have moved into origins of the universe territory again.

As John says, the BBT is dead. It has been for 20 years, but it will take a generational change to acknowledge it.

I think you'll find that rather than a generational change being needed to get rid of the BBT it is the extreme old guard that are still clinging on to "steady state" and other non standard cosmologies.

eg
John Lowry Dobson (born September 14, 1915)
Halton Christian Arp (born March 21, 1927)

These guys remember when the Big Bang was a new theory and have chosen never to accept it.

Hello All

Cosmo said

I think you'll find that rather than a generational change being needed to get rid of the BBT it is the extreme old guard that are still clinging on to "steady state" and other non standard cosmologies.

Mate its not the old or the new, its a combination.

Regardless each theory has its own merits.

For now its important to look at the workings of the universe as we observe it rather than trying to fit it into a theory that we love to have and hold for better or worse.

I admire people who think oustside the circle and go where no man has gone before.

Hello Kovil

I have found the post on Dobson.

Thanks mate.

Harry,

You are eternally welcome.

Hello All

How's the reading going?


These compact cores are the key to the functioning of stars and black holes and the recycling process.

Another point is that, black holes ejecting seeds as in compact cores for future stars. Just a thought. The size of the seed would only be probably the size of a tennis ball or maybe a soccer ball.

Keep in mind that preon particals only need to be the size of the soccer ball to have the same mass as our sun.

Imagine if there is electron compaction, you maybe looking at a golf ball.

Some may see this as to far fetched and rather think of a singularity as in a pin size having millions of sun masses.

I do not think a singularity is possible.

Why? because we are still dealing with finite wave points and therefore an end finite object.

Michael !!! Super great website !!!

The laymans paper has much more than the professional paper. It gets into the silicone and neon layers and how they interact, which the professional paper does not do. (I'd read the pro-paper some weeks ago)

Upon reaching your conclusion paragraph, the idea crossed my mind that Quasars and radioactive elements are similar. They both are produced in high gravity environments and that is where the 'surplus' energy comes from. Radioactive elements have extra neutrons packed into them from the energies of the stellar explosion, nova or supernova, and spend millions of years letting go of that_environments gift of energy to them. Quasars are also products of high gravity environments and have some_kind of superdense material that is formed in AGN active galactic neuclei, from which all kinds of 'surplus' energy is bleeding off as radiation of various kinds, and that is how Quasars shine.

What a totally trippy view of how the things work ! (to use a 60's phrase)

I can see that this really is what is truly happening. It makes sense on so many levels. Arp really was on to something very important back then, but it was so revolutionary the establishment was completely unwilling to look at his ideas seriously as it upset their entrenched beliefs, which is understandable.

Like Paul Feyerabend says, every 500 years or so Science throws out 90% of what it held dear, and replaces it with a new theory of what is happening. We are on the cusp of one of those times right now. BBT and the SSM are being thrown out in favor of the Universe as John L. Dobson proposes and the solar model that your paper proposes.

Hearty congratulations on your hard work with Professor Oliver Manuel and others; all of your work is about to be recognized and further substantiated by ongoing observations.

Bravo !!!

Hello All

I'm reading through the link

The Surface Of The Sun
http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/

Fanatastic work Michael.

Hello All

"Fantastic" smile,,,,,,,,,,fanatastic!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for your link.

Hello Michael

I have to get this point.

How can a solid exist in super hot zone, with all the EMR convectional currents?

Another point if the elements are segregated into layers. Where do the layers start from?

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/
The Surface Of The Sun

Fortunately a host of new satellites and the field of heliosiesmology are starting to shed new light on this mysterious transitional layer of the sun that is located about 4800km beneath the visible photosphere. In addition, recent studies of solar wind suggest that solar wind also originates on the same transition layer under the photosphere as do the electrically charged coronal loops. NASA's SOHO satellite and the Trace satellite program have both imaged this transition layer of the sun that sits beneath the photosphere. These 21st century satellites and technologies now enable us to peer behind the outer plasma layers of the chromosphere and photosphere and allow us to study the rocky, calcium ferrite transitional layer with incredible precision.

I want to understand:

What type of matter acts like a solid and moves like a superfluid?

We know that all are FLUIDS. Question of how rigid.

Could the reaction be similar to what happens to water when it is subjected to 70000lb psi? Water, at that pressure, forms a solid behaving similarly to Ice but is at a temperature above boiling. Sounds odd "Boiling hot Ice"...