Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Astronomers Discover Surprising Clutch of Hydrogen Clouds Lurking Among Our Galactic Neighbors!
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Double-A
May 21, 2013, 8:18:37 PM5/21/13
to
"May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
Double-A
astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
Double-A
Brad Guth
May 21, 2013, 8:41:26 PM5/21/13
to
matter.
Sam Wormley
May 21, 2013, 10:04:01 PM5/21/13
to
On 5/21/13 7:41 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> According to mpc755, all regular matter condenses out of aether/dark-
> matter.
Brad you should know that general relativity, and studies of the CMB
> According to mpc755, all regular matter condenses out of aether/dark-
> matter.
indicate that all the Momentum-Energy of the observable universe is
finite, fixed and unchanging.
Furthermore there is no indication that baryonic matter "condenses"
out of anything including dark matter.
Brad Guth
May 21, 2013, 10:15:13 PM5/21/13
to
seem to suggest otherwise.
Are you suggesting that enormous energy such as within a BH exhaust
(aka polar jet) can not create cosmic molecular bindings nor otherwise
directly convert into matter?
Are you otherwise suggesting that a Big Bang can not create ordinary
matter?
David Staup
May 21, 2013, 11:16:34 PM5/21/13
to
On 5/21/2013 9:15 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> cosmic molecular bindings
WTF
hey goofy I think you're lost
Are you otherwise suggesting that a Big Bang can not create ordinary
matter?
LOL where did you come up with that one? ALL matter and energy were
created by THE big bang.....come on goofy even you can't be that STUPID
just a glance at your history proves you are in fact that STUPID
let's see
structures on venus
a hollow moon
towing the moon
have I left anything out?
oh yea the new one ...cosmic molecular bindings
LOL
> cosmic molecular bindings
WTF
hey goofy I think you're lost
Are you otherwise suggesting that a Big Bang can not create ordinary
matter?
created by THE big bang.....come on goofy even you can't be that STUPID
just a glance at your history proves you are in fact that STUPID
let's see
structures on venus
a hollow moon
towing the moon
have I left anything out?
oh yea the new one ...cosmic molecular bindings
LOL
nartrof seven
May 22, 2013, 11:35:19 AM5/22/13
to
be an expanding universe. Given that the expansion of spacetime has
expanded 13.7 B light years, to a current diameter of 56 B L.Y., then
dark matter created during a period of rapid inflation in the early
universe has been moving backwards in time for 13.7 B light years.
Since 75% of the dark matter has already converted itself into dark
energy, then that must mean that the dark matter has now retreated,
perhaps to the same diameter of 56 B L.Y.
It must be that the quantum world of the hydrogen atom is picking up
territory, at the same time the universe is loosing it.
Brad Guth
May 22, 2013, 12:02:17 PM5/22/13
to
fly(given off from stars as well as including what's created within
and leaking away from Earth and most other planets, moons and
asteroids), and also remember that helium doesn't bind to anything
(including itself) has to be considerably more common than initially.
Brad Guth
May 22, 2013, 12:03:18 PM5/22/13
to
Sam Wormley
May 22, 2013, 2:01:57 PM5/22/13
to
On 5/22/13 11:02 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Not to forget about good old helium that's getting created on the
> fly(given off from stars as well as including what's created within
> and leaking away from Earth and most other planets, moons and
> asteroids), and also remember that helium doesn't bind to anything
> (including itself) has to be considerably more common than initially.
1. Primordial Helium Abundance and the Primordial Fireball
> Not to forget about good old helium that's getting created on the
> fly(given off from stars as well as including what's created within
> and leaking away from Earth and most other planets, moons and
> asteroids), and also remember that helium doesn't bind to anything
> (including itself) has to be considerably more common than initially.
> https://software.rc.fas.harvard.edu/pairitel/talks/PrimordialFireball.pdf
2. Has the abundance of He changed over time?
We all know from our knowledge of Hydrogen fusion in stars that
Helium is created and this is well measured in stars. But the question
is--is there a measurable change in evolved massive clouds outside of
galaxies? Not measurable... yet!
Sam Wormley
May 22, 2013, 2:23:05 PM5/22/13
to
On 5/22/13 10:35 AM, nartrof seven wrote:
> Repulsive gravity from within the hydrogen atom causes what appears to
> be an expanding universe. Given that the expansion of spacetime has
> expanded 13.7 B light years, to a current diameter of 56 B L.Y., then
> dark matter created during a period of rapid inflation in the early
> universe has been moving backwards in time for 13.7 B light years.
> Since 75% of the dark matter has already converted itself into dark
> energy, then that must mean that the dark matter has now retreated,
> perhaps to the same diameter of 56 B L.Y.
>
> It must be that the quantum world of the hydrogen atom is picking up
> territory, at the same time the universe is loosing it.
Clarification--it is space is expanding EVERYWHERE. Strong, Weak and
> Repulsive gravity from within the hydrogen atom causes what appears to
> be an expanding universe. Given that the expansion of spacetime has
> expanded 13.7 B light years, to a current diameter of 56 B L.Y., then
> dark matter created during a period of rapid inflation in the early
> universe has been moving backwards in time for 13.7 B light years.
> Since 75% of the dark matter has already converted itself into dark
> energy, then that must mean that the dark matter has now retreated,
> perhaps to the same diameter of 56 B L.Y.
>
> It must be that the quantum world of the hydrogen atom is picking up
> territory, at the same time the universe is loosing it.
Electromagnetic forces dominate the sized of atoms and molecules, etc.
and gravitation hold solar system, galaxies and clusters together.
hanson
May 22, 2013, 2:35:59 PM5/22/13
to
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip crap>
Clarification--it is space is expanding EVERYWHERE.
gravitation hold solar system, galaxies and clusters together.
>
hanson wrote:
>
So, Sam, if gravitation is holding those items together
in said space domains, why then should space itself
expand?.... and what does space expand into?
What is the matrix called , that background in which
your (expanding) space is embedded in?
nartrof seven
May 22, 2013, 3:12:27 PM5/22/13
to
Finite
The expansion you are referring to is an illusion, caused by mirror-
matter. Ulm University scientists have found evidence suggesting that
the Universe is small and finite, with time shaped like a 3-torus
(doughnut), and space shaped like a dodecahedron.
They used three techniques to compare predictions of how the cosmic
microwave background's temperature fluctuations in different areas of
the sky should match up in both an infinite Universe and a doughnut
one. In each case, the doughnut gave the best match to the Wilkinson
Microwave Anisotropy Probe data.
An infinite Universe would contain waves of all sizes. The WMAP did
not see any very large waves. This points to space being finite - for
the same reasons that you don't see breakers in your bathtub.
The best explanation for these observations is that the cosmos is a
Poincaré dodecahedral space, says a team led by Jeffrey Weeks, an
independent mathematician based in Canton, New York. Mathematical
models of a spherical, solid Universe edged by 12 curved pentagons
produce the patterns seen in the background radiation without any
special fine-tuning. "It fits the data surprisingly well," says Weeks.
The team has even been able to pinpoint the probable size of the
Universe: 56 billion light years across.
ref.
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080523/full/news.2008.854.html
http://www.nature.com/news/2003/031006/full/news031006-8.html
Brad Guth
May 22, 2013, 8:32:44 PM5/22/13
to
On May 22, 11:01 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/22/13 11:02 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > Not to forget about good old helium that's getting created on the
> > fly(given off from stars as well as including what's created within
> > and leaking away from Earth and most other planets, moons and
> > asteroids), and also remember that helium doesn't bind to anything
> > (including itself) has to be considerably more common than initially.
>
> 1. Primordial Helium Abundance and the Primordial Fireball
>
> >https://software.rc.fas.harvard.edu/pairitel/talks/PrimordialFireball...
> On 5/22/13 11:02 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > Not to forget about good old helium that's getting created on the
> > fly(given off from stars as well as including what's created within
> > and leaking away from Earth and most other planets, moons and
> > asteroids), and also remember that helium doesn't bind to anything
> > (including itself) has to be considerably more common than initially.
>
> 1. Primordial Helium Abundance and the Primordial Fireball
>
>
> 2. Has the abundance of He changed over time?
>
> We all know from our knowledge of Hydrogen fusion in stars that
> Helium is created and this is well measured in stars. But the question
> is--is there a measurable change in evolved massive clouds outside of
> galaxies? Not measurable... yet!
The average main-sequence star is second generation, as well as many
> 2. Has the abundance of He changed over time?
>
> We all know from our knowledge of Hydrogen fusion in stars that
> Helium is created and this is well measured in stars. But the question
> is--is there a measurable change in evolved massive clouds outside of
> galaxies? Not measurable... yet!
(perhaps 10%) being third and forth generation. The vast majority of
stars are red dwarfs averaging perhaps .1 Ms, and those red dwarfs are
essentially holding at roughly the same as they started out 13.75
billion years ago. That's a lot of hydrogen fusion as having taken
place and having created helium.
Sam Wormley
May 22, 2013, 9:11:41 PM5/22/13
to
On 5/22/13 7:32 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> The average main-sequence star is second generation, as well as many
> (perhaps 10%) being third and forth generation. The vast majority of
> stars are red dwarfs averaging perhaps .1 Ms, and those red dwarfs are
> essentially holding at roughly the same as they started out 13.75
> billion years ago. That's a lot of hydrogen fusion as having taken
> place and having created helium.
The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
> The average main-sequence star is second generation, as well as many
> (perhaps 10%) being third and forth generation. The vast majority of
> stars are red dwarfs averaging perhaps .1 Ms, and those red dwarfs are
> essentially holding at roughly the same as they started out 13.75
> billion years ago. That's a lot of hydrogen fusion as having taken
> place and having created helium.
slow motion compared to stars like our sun.
Furthermore, any helium produced in a red dwarf star's core does not
escape--it's still there. Same is true for our sun.
Moreover, the only new helium spewed into the interstellar environment
comes from exploding stars. One per galaxy per century on average.
Brad Guth
May 22, 2013, 11:58:23 PM5/22/13
to
fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:01:14 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
> fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
> and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
>
Nevertheless,
>
> I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
> fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
> and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
>
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:06:43 AM5/23/13
to
those Sirius stars.
BTW; where did the considerable mass of the molecular/nebula Sirius
cloud go?
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:11:21 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/22/13 11:06 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Gravity also holds our solar system as unavoidably associated with
> those Sirius stars.
Our solar system is gravitationally attracted to every body in the
> Gravity also holds our solar system as unavoidably associated with
> those Sirius stars.
universe, Brad, but the force is pretty weak. For examples Sirius
will be moving away from our solar system in an other 60,000 years.
The two systems are not bound in any way.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:30:27 AM5/23/13
to
How many trillion tonnes of helium did Sirius(b) contribute?
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:35:19 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/22/13 11:30 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> How many trillion tonnes of helium did Sirius(b) contribute?
No Brad. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> How many trillion tonnes of helium did Sirius(b) contribute?
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:36:06 AM5/23/13
to
Poutnik
May 23, 2013, 12:39:32 AM5/23/13
to
Brad Guth posted Wed, 22 May 2013 21:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
> On May 22, 9:01�pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
> > > and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
> >
> > � �Nevertheless,
> >
> >
> > � �The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
> > � �slow motion compared to stars like our sun.
> >
> > � �Furthermore, any helium produced in a red dwarf star's core does not
> > � �escape--it's still there. Same is true for our sun.
> >
> > � �Moreover, the only new helium spewed into the interstellar environment
> > � �comes from exploding stars. One per galaxy per century on average.
>
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
I would agree than many helium get to interstellar space
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
from ordinary stars. But that helium is in very majority
from initial H : He 3 : 1 universe mix.
Helium fused in a star core stays at a core.
--
Poutnik
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:40:21 AM5/23/13
to
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 1:45:30 AM5/23/13
to
On May 22, 9:39 pm, Poutnik <pout...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Brad Guth posted Wed, 22 May 2013 21:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 22, 9:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > > > I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
> > > > fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
> Brad Guth posted Wed, 22 May 2013 21:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 22, 9:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > > > I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
> > > > and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
>
> > > Nevertheless,
>
>
> > > The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
> > > The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
> > > slow motion compared to stars like our sun.
>
>
> > > Furthermore, any helium produced in a red dwarf star's core does not
> > > escape--it's still there. Same is true for our sun.
>
>
> > > Moreover, the only new helium spewed into the interstellar environment
> > > comes from exploding stars. One per galaxy per century on average.
>
> > Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> I would agree than many helium get to interstellar space
> from ordinary stars. But that helium is in very majority
> from initial H : He 3 : 1 universe mix.
>
> Helium fused in a star core stays at a core.
>
> --
> Poutnik
Helium as continually increasing, whereas hydrogen has been
>
> > Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> I would agree than many helium get to interstellar space
> from ordinary stars. But that helium is in very majority
> from initial H : He 3 : 1 universe mix.
>
> Helium fused in a star core stays at a core.
>
> --
> Poutnik
continually reduced, doesn't seem so insignificant.
Helium doesn't stay entirely within a stellar core, it doesn't even
bind with itself, especially when stars explode or even when they
convert into white dwarfs. perhaps 5+% of stars are white dwarfs.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 1:47:27 AM5/23/13
to
your closed mainstream status-quo mindset.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 1:51:09 AM5/23/13
to
molecular/nebula cloud, and that's a hell of a lot of nearby gravity,
of which this original mass is still surrounding us.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 1:53:07 AM5/23/13
to
and electrons. Why do you always make stuff up. Are you not interested
in learning how the world works?
Poutnik
May 23, 2013, 1:54:41 AM5/23/13
to
Brad Guth posted Wed, 22 May 2013 22:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > I would agree than many helium get to interstellar space
> > from ordinary stars. But that helium is in very majority
> > from initial H : He 3 : 1 universe mix.
> >
> > Helium fused in a star core stays at a core.
> >
> > --
> > Poutnik
>
> Helium as continually increasing, whereas hydrogen has been
> continually reduced, doesn't seem so insignificant.
>
> Helium doesn't stay entirely within a stellar core, it doesn't even
I do not say entirely, but mostly.
> Helium doesn't stay entirely within a stellar core, it doesn't even
There is much more helium in core than at surface of stars,
where majority of helium is older than star.
> bind with itself, especially when stars explode or even when they
> convert into white dwarfs. perhaps 5+% of stars are white dwarfs.
A star death is different story.
--
Poutnik
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 1:57:23 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 12:45 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Helium as continually increasing, whereas hydrogen has been
> continually reduced, doesn't seem so insignificant.
The effect is not measurable with current technology.
> Helium as continually increasing, whereas hydrogen has been
> continually reduced, doesn't seem so insignificant.
>
> Helium doesn't stay entirely within a stellar core
massive than hydrogen. In red giant stars, most helium is fused
into carbon, oxygen and nitrogen. Gone!
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 2:01:58 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 12:51 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Those Sirius stars started off with perhaps 2.5e37 kg worth of a
> molecular/nebula cloud, and that's a hell of a lot of nearby gravity,
> of which this original mass is still surrounding us.
No Brad -- Nothing like that nearby. Sirius is a recent interloper
> Those Sirius stars started off with perhaps 2.5e37 kg worth of a
> molecular/nebula cloud, and that's a hell of a lot of nearby gravity,
> of which this original mass is still surrounding us.
during the history solar system. The Visit is a very short one.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 10:27:16 AM5/23/13
to
respect to our sun.
Some CMEs contain 10% helium.
Hydrogen binds with other elements, helium does not bind with anything
(not even with itself).
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 10:30:39 AM5/23/13
to
is also out there but hasn't been a growing or that of an expanding
element.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 10:32:55 AM5/23/13
to
cloud in order to generate or give birth substantial stars like those
of Sirius, is noted.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 10:42:21 AM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 9:27 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> Some CMEs contain 10% helium.
> The ejected material is a plasma consisting primarily of electrons
>
> Some CMEs contain 10% helium.
> and protons, but may contain *small quantities* of heavier elements
> such as helium, oxygen, and even iron. The theory of heavier element
> emissions during a CME is speculative information and requires
> further verification. It is *highly unlikely that a CME contains* any
> *substantial amount of heavier elements*, especially considering that
> the sun has not yet arrived at the point of helium flash and thus
> cannot begin to fuse elements heavier than helium.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronal_mass_ejection
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 10:44:14 AM5/23/13
to
Give it a try.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:03:11 PM5/23/13
to
has been reducing as of 13.75 billion years worth of gradually
converting into helium. Helium is also created by the gradual process
of radioactive decay. Most planets and moons tend to lose their
helium to space, and the solar winds can blow it away from the solar
systems.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:05:00 PM5/23/13
to
half of it.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 12:06:21 PM5/23/13
to
approved.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:28:25 PM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 11:03 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Helium concentrations have been growing, and the element of hydrogen
> has been reducing as of 13.75 billion years worth of gradually
> converting into helium.
So you keep saying, but you have NO DATA!
> Helium concentrations have been growing, and the element of hydrogen
> has been reducing as of 13.75 billion years worth of gradually
> converting into helium.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:41:40 PM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 11:05 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> White dwarfs blow off the majority of their helium, perhaps more than
> half of it.
No Brad -- Stars are mostly hydrogen and helium, as in the
> White dwarfs blow off the majority of their helium, perhaps more than
> half of it.
interstellar medium. When any star blows of its outer layers,
that gas rejoins the interstellar medium.
What you should know is that Helium generated in a stars core
is fused to create Carbon and Oxygen in the red giant phase.
> White dwarfs are thought to be the final evolutionary state of all
> stars whose mass is not high enough to become a neutron star—over 97%
> of the stars in our galaxy.[5], §1. After the hydrogen–fusing
> lifetime of a main-sequence star of low or medium mass ends, it will
> expand to a red giant which *fuses helium to carbon and oxygen* in its
> core by the triple-alpha process. If a red giant has insufficient
> mass to generate the core temperatures required to fuse carbon,
> around 1 billion K, an inert mass of carbon and oxygen will build up
> at its center. After shedding its outer layers to form a planetary
> nebula, it will leave behind this core, which forms the remnant white
> dwarf.[6] Usually, therefore, white dwarfs are composed of carbon and
> oxygen. If the mass of the progenitor is above 8 solar masses but
> below 10.5 solar masses, the core temperature suffices to fuse carbon
> but not neon, in which case an oxygen-neon–magnesium white dwarf may
> be formed.[7] Also, some helium white dwarfs[8][9] appear to have
> been formed by mass loss in binary systems.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 12:43:17 PM5/23/13
to
Double-A
May 23, 2013, 7:11:40 PM5/23/13
to
On May 22, 11:35 am, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip crap>
>
> So, Sam, if gravitation is holding those items together
> in said space domains, why then should space itself
> expand?.... and what does space expand into?
> What is the matrix called , that background in which
> your (expanding) space is embedded in?
Sam often poses the rhetorical question concerning universal rotation,
"What is the universe rotating in relation to?
He might further ponder the question, "What is the universe expanding
in relation to?"
Double-A
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip crap>
> Clarification--it is space is expanding EVERYWHERE.
> gravitation hold solar system, galaxies and clusters together.
>
>
>
> hanson wrote:
>
>
>
>
> So, Sam, if gravitation is holding those items together
> in said space domains, why then should space itself
> expand?.... and what does space expand into?
> What is the matrix called , that background in which
> your (expanding) space is embedded in?
Sam often poses the rhetorical question concerning universal rotation,
"What is the universe rotating in relation to?
He might further ponder the question, "What is the universe expanding
in relation to?"
Double-A
Jeff-Relf.Me
May 23, 2013, 7:43:52 PM5/23/13
to
Re: What is the universe expanding in relation to ? As entropy thins the cosmos, spacetime itself is stretched. SpaceTime is MassEnergy proper. You separate them in your mind, but nature does not. Again: The oldest light comes from the cosmic HORIZON. From our vantage point, natural clocks there/then don't tick, same was what we'd see at the event HORIZON of a black hole. Note, this is merely OUR HORIZON, not a real edge. What's more commonly known as "The Big Bang" is more properly known as: Lambda/Cold⋅Dark⋅Matter. "Cold Dark Matter" is slow moving, UNSEEN MASS. The value of Einstein's Lambda ( a.k.a. The Cosmological Constant ) is only now being established, some 100 years later. Earlier in Einstein's life, back when he didn't know better, back when NO ONE KNEW better, he imagined a Lambda that would insure a static Universe. Later, he called that "My greatest blunder". Today, we know that the size of the cosmos is expanding exponentially. He didn't know back then, no one knew, so I don't blame him. Likely, the accelerated expansion is due to lost eXergy✼. [ ✼: Quality energy; i.e. energy that can do work. Gravitational eXergy is equal⋅and⋅opposite to all other forms of eXergy. ] "Randomness" is just ignorance, "God [Nature] doesn't play dice"; so ALL of nature, the entire timescape, never changes. [ Points along the timescape differ, obviously ] Time is a spatial dimension, though we don't perceive it that way. "God" is nature, nothing more, nothing less. Nature is at once everything and "nothing", changeless and choiceless. Einstein wrote A LOT about this, it's nothing new.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 9:44:59 PM5/23/13
to
generated, and it also specifies how helium doesn't bind with
anything, but otherwise helium can offer a very good cosmic conductor
(especially when ionized).
Are you suggesting that galactic and intergalactic helium doesn't get
ionized?
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 9:51:48 PM5/23/13
to
other half gets blown away. Actually, making it 2/3 blown away and
1/3 retained could be a little closer to the truth. Sirius(b) likely
started off at near 9 Ms, or at least worth 8 Ms, so there was a lot
of helium to get rid of before turning into its white dwarf phase.
Brad Guth
May 23, 2013, 9:55:18 PM5/23/13
to
so how about you go first?
Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting mountainous area
of Venus, using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or
magnify this extensively mountainous terrain of Venus that I’ve
focused upon, really shouldn’t be asking too much. Most of modern
PhotoZoom and numerous other photographic software variations tend to
accomplish this enlargement process automatically (including iPhone
and Safari image zooming), although some extra applied filtering and
thereby image enhancing for dynamic range compensations (aka contrast)
can further improve upon the end result (no direct pixel modifications
should ever be necessary, because it’s all a derivative from the
original Magellan radar imaging of 36 confirming radar scans/pixel,
that can always be 100% verified).
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 23, 2013, 10:20:06 PM5/23/13
to
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 23, 2013, 10:25:35 PM5/23/13
to
typical Minkowskian blowhardism about merely phase-spatial diagrams;
use teh paper for a God-am flipbook!
time is awareness of all dimensionality, and
this is really too obvioous to state, although Bucky did it.
thus quoth:
use teh paper for a God-am flipbook!
time is awareness of all dimensionality, and
this is really too obvioous to state, although Bucky did it.
thus quoth:
Time is a spatial dimension, though we don't perceive it that way.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 11:23:10 PM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 8:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Yes, roughly half of of the original helium becomes carbon, and the
> other half gets blown away. Actually, making it 2/3 blown away and
> 1/3 retained could be a little closer to the truth.
Wrong again, Guth--look up what the data shows!
> Yes, roughly half of of the original helium becomes carbon, and the
> other half gets blown away. Actually, making it 2/3 blown away and
> 1/3 retained could be a little closer to the truth.
Sam Wormley
May 23, 2013, 11:24:31 PM5/23/13
to
On 5/23/13 8:55 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> You can't even see what's blatantly obvious on the surface of Venus,
> so how about you go first?
Try it Brad, try making your claims based on observational data!
> You can't even see what's blatantly obvious on the surface of Venus,
> so how about you go first?
Brad Guth
May 24, 2013, 1:30:27 AM5/24/13
to
your conditional observation kind.
Why did you clip-out/exclude the Venus stuff?
Brad Guth
May 24, 2013, 1:36:40 AM5/24/13
to
On May 23, 7:20 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
for the same reason why 99.9% of K-12s don't even realize Google
Groups version of public viewing Usenet/newsgroups is available.
Do you not have any methods or software means of zooming in or
enlarging the image?
I can provide additional methods and links if you're interested.
wrote:
> so?... the other two did not surface.
>
>
> > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Then your server or its intranet has been intentionally blocking them,
>
>
> > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
for the same reason why 99.9% of K-12s don't even realize Google
Groups version of public viewing Usenet/newsgroups is available.
Do you not have any methods or software means of zooming in or
enlarging the image?
I can provide additional methods and links if you're interested.
Sam Wormley
May 24, 2013, 1:50:00 AM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/13 12:36 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Then your server or its intranet has been intentionally blocking them
No Brad. The images aren't being blocked by anybody!
> Then your server or its intranet has been intentionally blocking them
Brad Guth
May 24, 2013, 1:53:56 AM5/24/13
to
viewers seem to not have access, and damn certain that 99.9% of K-12s
are getting their access either blocked or moderated to death.
Sam Wormley
May 24, 2013, 2:05:05 AM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/13 12:53 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Obviously that's not always the case, because some Usenet/newsgroup
> viewers seem to not have access, and damn certain that 99.9% of K-12s
> are getting their access either blocked or moderated to death.
There you go again, Brad, just making stuff up. Is your life that
> Obviously that's not always the case, because some Usenet/newsgroup
> viewers seem to not have access, and damn certain that 99.9% of K-12s
> are getting their access either blocked or moderated to death.
pathetic?
Hägar
May 24, 2013, 2:59:24 PM5/24/13
to
"Double-A" <doub...@hush.com> wrote in message
news:bf410f4f-aac9-4cab...@oj8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
"May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
Double-A
*** Only a dunderhead like you would be dazzled by that.
Astromomers at times can't see the forest for the trees ...
I remember the broohaha when the first exo-planet was located by the Swiss
and finally verified by Geoff Marcey ... they thought it was a miracle. The
fact that our own Solar System has at least 9 Planets and about 65 Moons,
some of them bigger than the smaller of the planets, didn't ring the bell of
foreboding with the learned morons. The Universe is full of round things
orbiting bigger round things who in turn orbit even bigger ... well, you get
the drift.
Now they are excited about finding Hydogen in space ... wow ... did they
know that right after the BB the Universe, or Ether, as BeeertBrain calls
it, was filled with 75% Hydogen. Seems that not all of it fell victim to
the clutches of gravity, much to the dumb-foundedness of the star gazers ...
makes you wonder where their head are ... I can guess ...
Brad Guth
May 24, 2013, 3:13:53 PM5/24/13
to
nose and your closede mindset that's perfectly FUD worthy.
What's to make up, when K-12s are so mainstream indoctrinated and/or
snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return, just the way
you, GW Bush, Dick Cheney and Hitler like them.
Brad Guth
May 24, 2013, 3:17:09 PM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 11:59 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Double-A" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message
But they can't seem to identify all the helium that's also out there,
and unavoidably growing by measurable amounts. Go figure.
> "Double-A" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message
and unavoidably growing by measurable amounts. Go figure.
Sam Wormley
May 24, 2013, 4:33:59 PM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/13 2:13 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> What's to make up, when K-12s are so mainstream indoctrinated
You are just jealous because K-12s know more than you do!
> What's to make up, when K-12s are so mainstream indoctrinated
Sam Wormley
May 24, 2013, 4:44:43 PM5/24/13
to
On 5/24/13 2:17 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> But they can't seem to identify all the helium that's also out there,
> and unavoidably growing by measurable amounts.
No Brad -- If one looks back at all your kookery over the year, you
> But they can't seem to identify all the helium that's also out there,
> and unavoidably growing by measurable amounts.
seem to cycle between Sirius, Venus, Moon and Helium. Oh, I probably
left out a few... but the kookery pattern is strong!
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 24, 2013, 5:47:23 PM5/24/13
to
just tell us, what you found, and how it is that
you know that a)
it is not as silly as Hoaglan'ds crap, and b)
it is not an artifact of imaging.
I am not saying that all of Hoagland's crap is a)
crappy, or 2)
wrong; just what I was actually able to "see
with my own two eyes,
not "live from Mars!"
you know that a)
it is not as silly as Hoaglan'ds crap, and b)
it is not an artifact of imaging.
I am not saying that all of Hoagland's crap is a)
crappy, or 2)
wrong; just what I was actually able to "see
with my own two eyes,
not "live from Mars!"
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 24, 2013, 5:49:17 PM5/24/13
to
only works til the fifth grading; after that,
forget it.
forget it.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 3:02:57 AM5/25/13
to
On May 24, 2:49 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
it's all pretty much mainstream status-quo or bust. One step out of
line, and you're done for.
Some 6th graders are still required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance
at the beginning of each and every school day, as are most scouts and
even those of sporting event related teams, as well as having to
recite parts of our Constitution as a perfectly closed indoctrinated
mindset should. From that point on they are essentially afraid to ask
questions, or even to deductively interpret anything other than
whatever their oligarch peers have set forth.
In some ways this is a very good thing, at least according to GW Bush,
Dick Cheney and Hitler, not to mention a few dozen others that wanted
to dominate Earth so that they and their fellow oligarchs could live
large and get all the credit for anything good that ever happened.
wrote:
> only works til the fifth grading; after that,
> forget it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > You are just jealous because K-12s know more than you do!
Exactly right about that, as once indoctrinated past the 5th grade,
> forget it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > You are just jealous because K-12s know more than you do!
it's all pretty much mainstream status-quo or bust. One step out of
line, and you're done for.
Some 6th graders are still required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance
at the beginning of each and every school day, as are most scouts and
even those of sporting event related teams, as well as having to
recite parts of our Constitution as a perfectly closed indoctrinated
mindset should. From that point on they are essentially afraid to ask
questions, or even to deductively interpret anything other than
whatever their oligarch peers have set forth.
In some ways this is a very good thing, at least according to GW Bush,
Dick Cheney and Hitler, not to mention a few dozen others that wanted
to dominate Earth so that they and their fellow oligarchs could live
large and get all the credit for anything good that ever happened.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 3:06:05 AM5/25/13
to
Most everything you've posted as topics or replies has been
plagiarized. Is that supposed to be a good sort of mainstream brown-
nosed thing?
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 3:09:11 AM5/25/13
to
obviously accelerated above and beyond ordinary brown-nosed status of
being snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 3:16:51 AM5/25/13
to
On May 24, 2:47 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
GuthVenus (Guth Venus) is just an extremely interesting set of hot
rocks that tend to look exactly like a complex setting of
infrastructure.
That enormous clover shaped reservoir could be something perfectly
natural, but easily utilized for commercial/industrial uses. Other
symmetrical items seem just a wee bit too geometric and rational
community like, to be of something entirely formulated from natural
geology.
I could go on, but perhaps you should deductively interpret some of
this for yourself.
wrote:
rocks that tend to look exactly like a complex setting of
infrastructure.
That enormous clover shaped reservoir could be something perfectly
natural, but easily utilized for commercial/industrial uses. Other
symmetrical items seem just a wee bit too geometric and rational
community like, to be of something entirely formulated from natural
geology.
I could go on, but perhaps you should deductively interpret some of
this for yourself.
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2013, 12:26:50 PM5/25/13
to
On 5/25/13 2:09 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Clearly I missed out on my K-12 indrotrunation
And as a consequence, you just make stuff up. Try basing
> Clearly I missed out on my K-12 indrotrunation
your comments of observational data.
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2013, 1:19:08 PM5/25/13
to
On 5/25/13 2:02 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Exactly right about that, as once indoctrinated past the 5th grade,
> it's all pretty much mainstream status-quo or bust. One step out of
> line, and you're done for.
Translation: When Brad makes outlandish claims *contradicted* by
> Exactly right about that, as once indoctrinated past the 5th grade,
> it's all pretty much mainstream status-quo or bust. One step out of
> line, and you're done for.
observations... Well, you all know what happens.
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2013, 1:20:30 PM5/25/13
to
On 5/25/13 2:16 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> I could go on, but perhaps you should deductively interpret some of
> this for yourself.
Or better yet look up the actual science.
> I could go on, but perhaps you should deductively interpret some of
> this for yourself.
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 25, 2013, 3:46:37 PM5/25/13
to
"one nation, under God," is redund, ant.
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 25, 2013, 3:49:09 PM5/25/13
to
deductive is not going to get it;
Hoagland makes these kinds of errors, "all
over the map," merely with ratios of pi, e etc.
ad vomitorium; that way lies nothingness --
the original concept of zero!
Hoagland makes these kinds of errors, "all
over the map," merely with ratios of pi, e etc.
ad vomitorium; that way lies nothingness --
the original concept of zero!
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:13:48 PM5/25/13
to
On May 25, 12:49 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
In other words, you haven't actually looked at the image of GuthVenus,
and probably have no PhotoShop or any other method(s) of digital image
zooming/magnifying the original image.
Have you ever flown as a passenger, crew or pilot, and having taken
notice or pictures of the ground below (preferably at 45 degrees down-
angle)?
Can you post a link to your enlarged image of GuthVenus, so as to
demonstrate how good you actually are at photo enlarging?
wrote:
and probably have no PhotoShop or any other method(s) of digital image
zooming/magnifying the original image.
Have you ever flown as a passenger, crew or pilot, and having taken
notice or pictures of the ground below (preferably at 45 degrees down-
angle)?
Can you post a link to your enlarged image of GuthVenus, so as to
demonstrate how good you actually are at photo enlarging?
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:16:13 PM5/25/13
to
status-quo mindset.
You can't honestly step out of line without getting into big serious
trouble, can you.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:17:19 PM5/25/13
to
oligarch established path, or else.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:18:27 PM5/25/13
to
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:25:27 PM5/25/13
to
On May 23, 8:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/23/13 8:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > Yes, roughly half of of the original helium becomes carbon, and the
> > other half gets blown away. Actually, making it 2/3 blown away and
> > 1/3 retained could be a little closer to the truth.
>
> Wrong again, Guth--look up what the data shows!
Your mainstream certified data is entirely subjective, and otherwise
fully canned with no option of ever getting revised without a good
deal of bloodshed.
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents
and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with
it." / Max Planck
There is a lot more helium out there than initially when there was
mostly(99.9%) hydrogen.
Are you suggesting the Big Bang had also created every stinking
element as is?
> On 5/23/13 8:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > Yes, roughly half of of the original helium becomes carbon, and the
> > other half gets blown away. Actually, making it 2/3 blown away and
> > 1/3 retained could be a little closer to the truth.
>
> Wrong again, Guth--look up what the data shows!
Your mainstream certified data is entirely subjective, and otherwise
fully canned with no option of ever getting revised without a good
deal of bloodshed.
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents
and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with
it." / Max Planck
There is a lot more helium out there than initially when there was
mostly(99.9%) hydrogen.
Are you suggesting the Big Bang had also created every stinking
element as is?
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2013, 5:29:01 PM5/25/13
to
> ftp://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/planetary/magellan/mgn_c115s095_1.tiff
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
Magellan radar image of lava channels north of Ovda Regio, Venus. This
image shows the Lo Shen Valles, a system of channels and large collapsed
source areas. This left-looking image from cycle 1 forms the left side
of a stereo pair with the cycle 2 right-looking image C1-15S095;201.
(Magellan C1-MIDR 15S095;1,framelet 18)
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
Magellan radar image of lava channels north of Ovda Regio, Venus. This
image shows the Lo Shen Valles, a system of channels and large collapsed
source areas. This left-looking image from cycle 1 forms the left side
of a stereo pair with the cycle 2 right-looking image C1-15S095;201.
(Magellan C1-MIDR 15S095;1,framelet 18)
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 5:41:24 PM5/25/13
to
On May 25, 2:29 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >ftp://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/planetary/magellan/mgn_c11...
the high resolution GIF format image of 225 meters/pixel has to offer
(mostly of viewing hot rocks and perfectly natural mountainous
terrain).
Some computer image zoom functions automatically resample and thereby
deliver a lot better look-see, whereas yours probably only offers raw
1:1 pixel enlarging and does nothing else, even though each pixel is
actually a derivative composite of 36 radar scans.
> >ftp://nssdcftp.gsfc.nasa.gov/miscellaneous/planetary/magellan/mgn_c11...
> >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
>
> Magellan radar image of lava channels north of Ovda Regio, Venus. This
> image shows the Lo Shen Valles, a system of channels and large collapsed
> source areas. This left-looking image from cycle 1 forms the left side
> of a stereo pair with the cycle 2 right-looking image C1-15S095;201.
> (Magellan C1-MIDR 15S095;1,framelet 18)
Very good. Now, go right ahead and zoom in order to better see what
> >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
>
> Magellan radar image of lava channels north of Ovda Regio, Venus. This
> image shows the Lo Shen Valles, a system of channels and large collapsed
> source areas. This left-looking image from cycle 1 forms the left side
> of a stereo pair with the cycle 2 right-looking image C1-15S095;201.
> (Magellan C1-MIDR 15S095;1,framelet 18)
the high resolution GIF format image of 225 meters/pixel has to offer
(mostly of viewing hot rocks and perfectly natural mountainous
terrain).
Some computer image zoom functions automatically resample and thereby
deliver a lot better look-see, whereas yours probably only offers raw
1:1 pixel enlarging and does nothing else, even though each pixel is
actually a derivative composite of 36 radar scans.
1treePetrifiedForestLane
May 25, 2013, 8:18:17 PM5/25/13
to
why should I believe yours,
if Hoagland's cannot convince me?
however, things can be learnt, even
by looking at a freaky thing as Haoglan'ds
if Hoagland's cannot convince me?
however, things can be learnt, even
by looking at a freaky thing as Haoglan'ds
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2013, 10:14:39 PM5/25/13
to
throw away information. Magellan had a angular resolution of about
30 meters.
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 11:30:57 PM5/25/13
to
Brad Guth
May 25, 2013, 11:32:33 PM5/25/13
to
On May 25, 5:18 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Except you are not even trying to interpret anything. Why is that?
wrote:
Poutnik
May 26, 2013, 1:42:03 AM5/26/13
to
Sam Wormley posted Sat, 25 May 2013 21:14:39 -0500
> First rule in image manipulation -- one can't add information, only
> throw away information. Magellan had a angular resolution of about
> 30 meters.
already existing information more appearant.
--
Poutnik
ah
May 26, 2013, 4:03:05 AM5/26/13
to
On 5/23/13 12:30 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
> On May 22, 9:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
>> > fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
>> > and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
>>
>> Nevertheless,
>>
>> The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
>> slow motion compared to stars like our sun.
>>
>> Furthermore, any helium produced in a red dwarf star's core does not
>> escape--it's still there. Same is true for our sun.
>>
>> Moreover, the only new helium spewed into the interstellar environment
>> comes from exploding stars. One per galaxy per century on average.
>
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> How many trillion tonnes of helium did Sirius(b) contribute?
1,397 Imperial.
--
a "<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPhxmAIj4p4>" h
> On May 22, 9:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/22/13 10:58 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I never once suggested that red dwarfs are helium contributors, in
>> > fact I'd specified just the opposite. Obviously you intend to spin
>> > and FUD everything to suit, and does that make you feel superior?
>>
>> Nevertheless,
>>
>> The very fact that those reds are dwarfs, means they do everything in
>> slow motion compared to stars like our sun.
>>
>> Furthermore, any helium produced in a red dwarf star's core does not
>> escape--it's still there. Same is true for our sun.
>>
>> Moreover, the only new helium spewed into the interstellar environment
>> comes from exploding stars. One per galaxy per century on average.
>
> Ordinary main-sequence stars spew loads of helium on a regular basis.
>
> How many trillion tonnes of helium did Sirius(b) contribute?
1,397 Imperial.
--
a "<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPhxmAIj4p4>" h
ah
May 26, 2013, 4:05:57 AM5/26/13
to
On 5/23/13 10:25 PM, 1treePetrifiedForestLane wrote:
> typical Minkowskian blowhardism about merely phase-spatial diagrams;
> use teh paper for a God-am flipbook!
>
> time is awareness of all dimensionality, and
> this is really too obvioous to state, although Bucky did it.
>
> thus quoth:
> Time is a spatial dimension, though we don't perceive it that way.
>
> From our vantage point, natural clocks there/then don't tick,
> same was what we'd see at the event HORIZON of a black hole.
>
> Note, this is merely OUR HORIZON, not a real edge.
>
The awareness of all dimensionality is timeless.
> typical Minkowskian blowhardism about merely phase-spatial diagrams;
> use teh paper for a God-am flipbook!
>
> time is awareness of all dimensionality, and
> this is really too obvioous to state, although Bucky did it.
>
> thus quoth:
> Time is a spatial dimension, though we don't perceive it that way.
>
> From our vantage point, natural clocks there/then don't tick,
> same was what we'd see at the event HORIZON of a black hole.
>
> Note, this is merely OUR HORIZON, not a real edge.
>
The awareness of all dimensionality is timeless.
ah
May 26, 2013, 4:09:04 AM5/26/13
to
On 5/24/13 3:13 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> On May 23, 11:05 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/24/13 12:53 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously that's not always the case, because some Usenet/newsgroup
>> > viewers seem to not have access, and damn certain that 99.9% of K-12s
>> > are getting their access either blocked or moderated to death.
>>
>> There you go again, Brad, just making stuff up. Is your life that
>> pathetic?
>
> Apparently not 0.1% as pathetic as is your oligarch approved brown
> nose and your closede mindset that's perfectly FUD worthy.
>
> What's to make up, when K-12s are so mainstream indoctrinated and/or
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return, just the way
> you, GW Bush, Dick Cheney and Hitler like them.
>
Fight!
> On May 23, 11:05 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/24/13 12:53 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously that's not always the case, because some Usenet/newsgroup
>> > viewers seem to not have access, and damn certain that 99.9% of K-12s
>> > are getting their access either blocked or moderated to death.
>>
>> There you go again, Brad, just making stuff up. Is your life that
>> pathetic?
>
> Apparently not 0.1% as pathetic as is your oligarch approved brown
> nose and your closede mindset that's perfectly FUD worthy.
>
> What's to make up, when K-12s are so mainstream indoctrinated and/or
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return, just the way
> you, GW Bush, Dick Cheney and Hitler like them.
>
Fight!
Brad Guth
May 26, 2013, 7:45:11 AM5/26/13
to
information and simply adjusting the dynamic range can make numerous
details pop right out, like that enormous clover shaped reservoir that
is obviously connected to the upper single round reservoir that
clearly contains something of a radar absorbing fluid.
Resampling composite pixels can also reveal numerous details that
already existed, but had been too easily hidden by the compression
methods utilized by our NASA-Magellan team when they put so much of
their radar pixel information as packed into each pixel, as in this
case of 36 radar scans or looks per 225 meter pixel would put any
number of details out of reach but it would help confirm larger items
with much greater accuracy.
HVAC
May 26, 2013, 10:00:13 AM5/26/13
to
On 5/21/2013 8:41 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
>
> According to mpc755, all regular matter condenses out of aether/dark-
> matter.
Who cares what he says? MP3 is (almost) as fucked in the head as you.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
>
>
> According to mpc755, all regular matter condenses out of aether/dark-
> matter.
Who cares what he says? MP3 is (almost) as fucked in the head as you.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
Brad Guth
May 27, 2013, 8:38:14 AM5/27/13
to
On May 21, 5:18 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> "May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
> astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
> clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
> Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
> of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
> a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
> could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
>
> Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
>
> Double-A
An initial star like our sun likely started off at 2.2e30 kg, quickly
getting rid of 2e29 kg worth of elements heavier than hydrogen and
helium within the first months or possibly even within the first few
days, whereas some (less than 10%) of that tossed or centrifugal
ejected mass became planets, moons, planetoids and assorted asteroids,
with a great extent of everything else sent packing as ISM blown away
by those initial solar winds of 3000 km/sec.
If the IGM offers ionized hydrogen, then it also has to offer helium
and pretty much a little of everything else to speak of, along with
more of the same arriving as stars explode.
5e11 galaxies, each producing 2 stars worth of SN per century
13e7 centuries X 2 = 2.6e8 X 5e11 = 1.3e20 MS
1.3e20 X 2e30 = 2.6e50 kg (many would likely round that up to 3e50 kg)
of ISM + IGM contributed to whatever was already available. BTW; most
SNs are those stars of much greater mass (10+ MS), so that’s yet
another tenfold multiplier of what’s getting dumped back into the ISM
and IGM, making the SN contributions worth 3e51 kg..
Supposedly it takes a minimum of 1e3 SM worth of molecular/nebula mass
in order to produce a given star, though many of astrophysics
expertise would also consider 1e6:1 as necessary for creating those
stars of greater mass than our sun, and of course the vast majority of
stars are those smaller and more red dwarf classified. So, probably
the average ratio of IGM and ISM per star is somewhat closer to 1e4:1
(possibly worth 1e5:1), and most of that original IGM+ISM by rights
should still be out there as ionized particles along with a great deal
lf rogue/nomad helium because that’s an element being continually
created on the fly.
Matter initially ejected from stars, as added to the existing
inventory of ISM and IGM gas, combined with ongoing stellar ejected
material, and that's seriously a lot of stellar mass released as ISM
and IGM in addition to the already substantial ISM and IGM of
molecular/nebula gas (mostly hydrogen and helium) that simply had to
already exist to a very large extent. So, as far as I can tell, if
anything our universe has too much mass to contend with, which
eventually is going to represent a very bad thing as galaxies upon
galaxies merge back into the likes of the relatively nearby Great
Attractor, whereas thousands of galaxies will merge and likely form
yet another hoard of quasars, like the Huge-LQG of 6.1e18 SM.
A little extra deep thought, is that without helium our planet would
be dead in the water, so to speak, and for the most part it seems that
our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue. Without that very
special element of helium, most of modern science, physics and medical
advancements couldn’t have happened, and if Earth suddenly ran itself
out of helium, we’d be in a world of hurt as well as our planet being
of less mass and a world measurably colder without an active
geothermal core of uranium and thorium necessary for creating helium.
In other brief words, an exoplanet w/o helium is likely a very dead
planet, or at best poorly advanced.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but then it would have
also pointed out the artificial ventings and their enormous thermal
waste taking place, and Big Energy wanted none of that to come back
and bite them. Once again, our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the
time they’re in charge, it’ll once again be too late.
> "May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
> astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
> clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
> Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
> of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
> a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
> could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
>
> Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
>
> Double-A
An initial star like our sun likely started off at 2.2e30 kg, quickly
getting rid of 2e29 kg worth of elements heavier than hydrogen and
helium within the first months or possibly even within the first few
days, whereas some (less than 10%) of that tossed or centrifugal
ejected mass became planets, moons, planetoids and assorted asteroids,
with a great extent of everything else sent packing as ISM blown away
by those initial solar winds of 3000 km/sec.
If the IGM offers ionized hydrogen, then it also has to offer helium
and pretty much a little of everything else to speak of, along with
more of the same arriving as stars explode.
5e11 galaxies, each producing 2 stars worth of SN per century
13e7 centuries X 2 = 2.6e8 X 5e11 = 1.3e20 MS
1.3e20 X 2e30 = 2.6e50 kg (many would likely round that up to 3e50 kg)
of ISM + IGM contributed to whatever was already available. BTW; most
SNs are those stars of much greater mass (10+ MS), so that’s yet
another tenfold multiplier of what’s getting dumped back into the ISM
and IGM, making the SN contributions worth 3e51 kg..
Supposedly it takes a minimum of 1e3 SM worth of molecular/nebula mass
in order to produce a given star, though many of astrophysics
expertise would also consider 1e6:1 as necessary for creating those
stars of greater mass than our sun, and of course the vast majority of
stars are those smaller and more red dwarf classified. So, probably
the average ratio of IGM and ISM per star is somewhat closer to 1e4:1
(possibly worth 1e5:1), and most of that original IGM+ISM by rights
should still be out there as ionized particles along with a great deal
lf rogue/nomad helium because that’s an element being continually
created on the fly.
Matter initially ejected from stars, as added to the existing
inventory of ISM and IGM gas, combined with ongoing stellar ejected
material, and that's seriously a lot of stellar mass released as ISM
and IGM in addition to the already substantial ISM and IGM of
molecular/nebula gas (mostly hydrogen and helium) that simply had to
already exist to a very large extent. So, as far as I can tell, if
anything our universe has too much mass to contend with, which
eventually is going to represent a very bad thing as galaxies upon
galaxies merge back into the likes of the relatively nearby Great
Attractor, whereas thousands of galaxies will merge and likely form
yet another hoard of quasars, like the Huge-LQG of 6.1e18 SM.
A little extra deep thought, is that without helium our planet would
be dead in the water, so to speak, and for the most part it seems that
our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue. Without that very
special element of helium, most of modern science, physics and medical
advancements couldn’t have happened, and if Earth suddenly ran itself
out of helium, we’d be in a world of hurt as well as our planet being
of less mass and a world measurably colder without an active
geothermal core of uranium and thorium necessary for creating helium.
In other brief words, an exoplanet w/o helium is likely a very dead
planet, or at best poorly advanced.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but then it would have
also pointed out the artificial ventings and their enormous thermal
waste taking place, and Big Energy wanted none of that to come back
and bite them. Once again, our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the
time they’re in charge, it’ll once again be too late.
hanson
May 27, 2013, 1:44:30 PM5/27/13
to
.... ahahahaha... Good one!.... HAHAHAHAHAHA....
>
Astrophartist "Brad Guth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
ISM blown away as the IGM offers 1.3e20 MS of ISM + IGM
contributed to BTW most SNs is getting dumped back
So, as far as I, Brad Guth, can tell, the nearby Great Attractor,
will form hoards Huge-LQG SM without helium. .
A little extra deep thought, our planet would be dead in the water,
for the most of our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but Big Energy
Brad, since you forgot to tell the K12ers what it was too
late for, all the K-12 students ROTFLTAO and said:
"Brad Guth come back and bite us"
>
Thanks for the laughs you splendid speculator, Brad.
Now go and take some remedial night school classes
with Sam Wormely, to catch up with the K-12ers....
ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
Astrophartist "Brad Guth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
ISM blown away as the IGM offers 1.3e20 MS of ISM + IGM
contributed to BTW most SNs is getting dumped back
into the ISM and IGM, making the SN contributions worth
SM of IGM and ISM per original IGM+ISM created on the fly.
So, as far as I, Brad Guth, can tell, the nearby Great Attractor,
will form hoards Huge-LQG SM without helium. .
A little extra deep thought, our planet would be dead in the water,
for the most of our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but Big Energy
wanted none of that to come back and bite them. Once again,
our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the time they’re in charge,
it’ll once again be too late.
>
hanson wrote:
our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the time they’re in charge,
it’ll once again be too late.
>
Brad, since you forgot to tell the K12ers what it was too
late for, all the K-12 students ROTFLTAO and said:
"Brad Guth come back and bite us"
>
Thanks for the laughs you splendid speculator, Brad.
Now go and take some remedial night school classes
with Sam Wormely, to catch up with the K-12ers....
ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
Brad Guth
May 28, 2013, 1:01:55 PM5/28/13
to
On May 21, 5:18 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> "May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
> astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
> clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
> Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
> of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
> a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
> could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
>
> Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
>
> Double-A
There’s lots of cosmic produced iron going every which way, plus more
> "May 8, 2013 — In a dark, starless patch of intergalactic space,
> astronomers have discovered a never-before-seen cluster of hydrogen
> clouds strewn between two nearby galaxies, Andromeda (M31) and
> Triangulum (M33). The researchers speculate that these rarefied blobs
> of gas -- each about as massive as a dwarf galaxy -- condensed out of
> a vast and as-yet undetected reservoir of hot, ionized gas, which
> could have accompanied an otherwise invisible band of dark matter."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130508131700.htm
>
> Isn't this what Fred Hoyle said? Hydrogen will condense out of space?
>
> Double-A
of just about everything else making new stars, planets, planetoids,
moons and otherwise exploding stars plus numerous collisions creating
those pesky asteroids by the trillions per year, not to mention the
ongoing creation of helium which doesn’t naturally bind with anything.
An initial star like our sun likely started off at 2.2e30 kg, quickly
getting rid of 2e29 kg worth of elements heavier than hydrogen and
helium within the first months or possibly even within the first few
days, whereas some (less than 10%) of that tossed or centrifugal
ejected mass became planets, moons, planetoids and assorted asteroids,
with a great extent of everything else sent packing as ISM blown away
by those initial solar winds of 3000 km/sec.
If the IGM offers ionized hydrogen, then it also has to offer helium
and pretty much a little of everything else to speak of, along with
substantial initial mass that simply self-terminate by exploding.
5e11 galaxies, each producing 2 stars worth of SN per century
13e7 centuries X 2 = 2.6e8 X 5e11 = 1.3e20 MS
1.3e20 X 2e30 = 2.6e50 kg (many would likely round that up to 3e50 kg)
of ISM + IGM contributed to whatever was already available. BTW; most
SNs are those stars of much greater mass (10+ MS), so that’s yet
another tenfold multiplier of what’s getting dumped back into the ISM
and IGM, making the SN contributions worth 3e51 kg..
Supposedly it takes a minimum of 1e3 SM worth of molecular/nebula
astrophysics expertise would also consider 1e6:1 as necessary for
creating those stars of greater mass than our sun, and of course the
vast majority of stars are those smaller and more red dwarf
classified. So, probably the average ratio of IGM and ISM per star is
somewhat closer to 1e4:1 (possibly worth 1e5:1), and most of that
original IGM+ISM by rights should still be out there as ionized
particles along with a great deal lf rogue/nomad helium because,
creating those stars of greater mass than our sun, and of course the
vast majority of stars are those smaller and more red dwarf
classified. So, probably the average ratio of IGM and ISM per star is
somewhat closer to 1e4:1 (possibly worth 1e5:1), and most of that
original IGM+ISM by rights should still be out there as ionized
that’s an element being continually created on the fly.
Matter initially ejected from stars, as added to the existing
inventory of ISM and IGM gas, combined with ongoing stellar ejected
material, and that's seriously a lot of stellar mass released as ISM
and IGM in addition to the already substantial ISM and IGM of
molecular/nebula gas (mostly hydrogen and helium) that simply had to
already exist to a very large extent. So, as far as I can tell, if
anything our universe has too much mass to contend with, which
eventually is going to represent a very bad thing as galaxies upon
galaxies merge back into the likes of the relatively nearby Great
Attractor, whereas thousands of galaxies will merge and likely form
yet another hoard of quasars, like the Huge-LQG of 6.1e18 SM.
A little extra deep thought, is that without helium our planet would
be dead in the water, so to speak, and for the most part it seems that
our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue. Without that very
special element of helium, most of modern science, physics and medical
advancements couldn’t have happened, and if Earth suddenly ran itself
out of helium, we’d be in a world of hurt as well as our planet being
of less mass and a world measurably colder without an active
geothermal core of uranium and thorium necessary for creating helium.
In other brief words, an exoplanet w/o helium is likely a very dead
planet, or at best poorly advanced.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but then it would have
also pointed out the artificial ventings and their enormous thermal
waste taking place, and Big Energy wanted none of that to come back
Matter initially ejected from stars, as added to the existing
inventory of ISM and IGM gas, combined with ongoing stellar ejected
material, and that's seriously a lot of stellar mass released as ISM
and IGM in addition to the already substantial ISM and IGM of
molecular/nebula gas (mostly hydrogen and helium) that simply had to
already exist to a very large extent. So, as far as I can tell, if
anything our universe has too much mass to contend with, which
eventually is going to represent a very bad thing as galaxies upon
galaxies merge back into the likes of the relatively nearby Great
Attractor, whereas thousands of galaxies will merge and likely form
yet another hoard of quasars, like the Huge-LQG of 6.1e18 SM.
A little extra deep thought, is that without helium our planet would
be dead in the water, so to speak, and for the most part it seems that
our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue. Without that very
special element of helium, most of modern science, physics and medical
advancements couldn’t have happened, and if Earth suddenly ran itself
out of helium, we’d be in a world of hurt as well as our planet being
of less mass and a world measurably colder without an active
geothermal core of uranium and thorium necessary for creating helium.
In other brief words, an exoplanet w/o helium is likely a very dead
planet, or at best poorly advanced.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but then it would have
also pointed out the artificial ventings and their enormous thermal
hanson
May 28, 2013, 3:14:42 PM5/28/13
to
.... ahahahaha... Good one!.... HAHAHAHAHAHA....
>
Astrophartist "Brad Guth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
ISM blown away as the IGM offers 1.3e20 MS of ISM + IGM
>
Astrophartist "Brad Guth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
contributed to BTW most SNs is getting dumped back
into the ISM and IGM, making the SN contributions worth
SM of IGM and ISM per original IGM+ISM created on the fly.
So, as far as I, Brad Guth, can tell, the nearby Great Attractor,
will form hoards Huge-LQG SM without helium. .
A little extra deep thought, our planet would be dead in the water,
So, as far as I, Brad Guth, can tell, the nearby Great Attractor,
will form hoards Huge-LQG SM without helium. .
for the most of our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue.
The OCO mission would have been a great help, but Big Energy
wanted none of that to come back and bite them. Once again,
our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the time they’re in charge,
it’ll once again be too late.
>
our K-12s don’t have a clue, and by the time they’re in charge,
it’ll once again be too late.
>
Double-A
May 28, 2013, 7:31:03 PM5/28/13
to
On May 23, 4:43 pm, Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> wrote:
> Re: What is the universe expanding in relation to ? As entropy thins the cosmos, spacetime itself is stretched. SpaceTime is MassEnergy proper. You separate them in your mind, but nature does not. Again: The oldest light comes fromthe cosmic HORIZON. From our vantage point, natural clocks there/then don't tick, same was what we'd see at the event HORIZON of a black hole. Note, this is merely OUR HORIZON, not a real edge. What's more commonly known as "The Big Bang" is more properly known as: Lambda/Cold⋅Dark⋅Matter. "Cold Dark Matter" is slow moving, UNSEEN MASS. The value of Einstein's Lambda ( a.k.a. The Cosmological Constant ) is only now being established, some 100 years later. Earlier in Einstein's life, back when he didn't know better, back when NO ONE KNEW better, he imagined a Lambda that would insure a static Universe. Later, he called that "My greatest blunder". Today, we know that the size of the cosmos is expanding exponentially. He didn't know back then, no one knew, so I don't blame him.
I'm not blaming him. But having nothing outside the universe to
compare things to, for all we know instead of the universe expanding,
we might all be shrinking!
Double-A
> Re: What is the universe expanding in relation to ? As entropy thins the cosmos, spacetime itself is stretched. SpaceTime is MassEnergy proper. You separate them in your mind, but nature does not. Again: The oldest light comes fromthe cosmic HORIZON. From our vantage point, natural clocks there/then don't tick, same was what we'd see at the event HORIZON of a black hole. Note, this is merely OUR HORIZON, not a real edge. What's more commonly known as "The Big Bang" is more properly known as: Lambda/Cold⋅Dark⋅Matter. "Cold Dark Matter" is slow moving, UNSEEN MASS. The value of Einstein's Lambda ( a.k.a. The Cosmological Constant ) is only now being established, some 100 years later. Earlier in Einstein's life, back when he didn't know better, back when NO ONE KNEW better, he imagined a Lambda that would insure a static Universe. Later, he called that "My greatest blunder". Today, we know that the size of the cosmos is expanding exponentially. He didn't know back then, no one knew, so I don't blame him.
I'm not blaming him. But having nothing outside the universe to
compare things to, for all we know instead of the universe expanding,
we might all be shrinking!
Double-A
Jeff-Relf.Me
May 28, 2013, 8:34:14 PM5/28/13
to
Unlike you Double⋅A, Scientists have measured the acceleration of the expansion of space, going back 13.8 giga⋅years. Honestly, what make you think your (non)measurements are better ? ! The closer to the cosmic horizon, clocks tick slower. It's been measured.
Brad Guth
May 28, 2013, 10:20:56 PM5/28/13
to
On May 28, 5:34 pm, Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> wrote:
> Unlike you Double⋅A, Scientists have measured the acceleration of the expansion of space, going back 13.8 giga⋅years. Honestly, what make you think your (non)measurements are better ? ! The closer to the cosmic horizon, clocks tick slower. It's been measured.
Those being sucked into the Great Attractor might consider that their
> Unlike you Double⋅A, Scientists have measured the acceleration of the expansion of space, going back 13.8 giga⋅years. Honestly, what make you think your (non)measurements are better ? ! The closer to the cosmic horizon, clocks tick slower. It's been measured.
part of the universe is shrinking.
Sam Wormley
May 28, 2013, 10:26:48 PM5/28/13
to
On 5/28/13 9:20 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> Those being sucked into the Great Attractor might consider that their
> part of the universe is shrinking.
Remember, Brad, the Great Attractor has been downgraded considerably.
> Those being sucked into the Great Attractor might consider that their
> part of the universe is shrinking.
I know... you forgot!
Brad Guth
May 28, 2013, 10:40:04 PM5/28/13
to
nartrof seven
May 29, 2013, 11:05:58 AM5/29/13
to
On May 22, 2:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/22/13 10:35 AM, nartrof seven wrote:
>
> > Repulsive gravity from within the hydrogen atom causes what appears to
> > be an expanding universe. Given that the expansion of spacetime has
> > expanded 13.7 B light years, to a current diameter of 56 B L.Y., then
> > dark matter created during a period of rapid inflation in the early
> > universe has been moving backwards in time for 13.7 B light years.
> > Since 75% of the dark matter has already converted itself into dark
> > energy, then that must mean that the dark matter has now retreated,
> > perhaps to the same diameter of 56 B L.Y.
>
> > It must be that the quantum world of the hydrogen atom is picking up
> > territory, at the same time the universe is loosing it.
>
> Clarification--it is space is expanding EVERYWHERE. Strong, Weak and
> Electromagnetic forces dominate the sized of atoms and molecules, etc.
> and gravitation hold solar system, galaxies and clusters together.
One easily makes the mistake of limiting only *what can be observed*
with an E6, or six-dimensional, toroid of the expanding universe, as a
closed torus manifold, when according to parallel universe theory, the
dodecahedral version suggests that with e-neutrinos or tachyons, the
repulsive and attractive forces of gravity are the manifestation of
the same thing, just being inverted to one another across dimensions,
so that there are 5 observable, 1 contra-turning, and 5 unobservable,
totalling 11 dimensions for the current observable (and unobservable)
dodecahedral universe. M-theory backs this up.
As 1/2 of the observable space-time expands, so does the speed of
light increase in the super-atomic world, but not without causing a
subsequent dilation in the quantum world, right under it.
In other words, as dark matter seems to be seeping into the super-
atomic world, ZPE is seeping in to the quantum world as photon energy,
providing the repulsive gravity in the form of G(+) and G(-),
repulsive gravitons. The only way that photons could be speeding up
over time, is that these repulsive gravitons within the dilated
structure of photon(s) inside the atom, are increasingly inhibiting
the interaction of their graviton fluxes, with the free gravitons of
the aether, thus pushing the expansion of the super-atomic aether,
while crushing the sub-atomic world back into the ZPE.
Dark matter simply represents the areas of the universe where photons
have escaped into the sub-atomic world and are moving backwards in
time as scalar photons, thus amplifying the supersymmetry of the
"potentially observable" subatomic graviton fluxes, with their "non-
observable or dark" subatomic, super-symmetric partners in the 11-
dimensional, double-dodecahedral universe.
> On 5/22/13 10:35 AM, nartrof seven wrote:
>
> > Repulsive gravity from within the hydrogen atom causes what appears to
> > be an expanding universe. Given that the expansion of spacetime has
> > expanded 13.7 B light years, to a current diameter of 56 B L.Y., then
> > dark matter created during a period of rapid inflation in the early
> > universe has been moving backwards in time for 13.7 B light years.
> > Since 75% of the dark matter has already converted itself into dark
> > energy, then that must mean that the dark matter has now retreated,
> > perhaps to the same diameter of 56 B L.Y.
>
> > It must be that the quantum world of the hydrogen atom is picking up
> > territory, at the same time the universe is loosing it.
>
> Clarification--it is space is expanding EVERYWHERE. Strong, Weak and
> Electromagnetic forces dominate the sized of atoms and molecules, etc.
> and gravitation hold solar system, galaxies and clusters together.
One easily makes the mistake of limiting only *what can be observed*
with an E6, or six-dimensional, toroid of the expanding universe, as a
closed torus manifold, when according to parallel universe theory, the
dodecahedral version suggests that with e-neutrinos or tachyons, the
repulsive and attractive forces of gravity are the manifestation of
the same thing, just being inverted to one another across dimensions,
so that there are 5 observable, 1 contra-turning, and 5 unobservable,
totalling 11 dimensions for the current observable (and unobservable)
dodecahedral universe. M-theory backs this up.
As 1/2 of the observable space-time expands, so does the speed of
light increase in the super-atomic world, but not without causing a
subsequent dilation in the quantum world, right under it.
In other words, as dark matter seems to be seeping into the super-
atomic world, ZPE is seeping in to the quantum world as photon energy,
providing the repulsive gravity in the form of G(+) and G(-),
repulsive gravitons. The only way that photons could be speeding up
over time, is that these repulsive gravitons within the dilated
structure of photon(s) inside the atom, are increasingly inhibiting
the interaction of their graviton fluxes, with the free gravitons of
the aether, thus pushing the expansion of the super-atomic aether,
while crushing the sub-atomic world back into the ZPE.
Dark matter simply represents the areas of the universe where photons
have escaped into the sub-atomic world and are moving backwards in
time as scalar photons, thus amplifying the supersymmetry of the
"potentially observable" subatomic graviton fluxes, with their "non-
observable or dark" subatomic, super-symmetric partners in the 11-
dimensional, double-dodecahedral universe.
Sam Wormley
May 29, 2013, 11:31:14 AM5/29/13
to
On 5/29/13 10:05 AM, nartrof seven wrote:
> One easily makes the mistake of limiting only*what can be observed*
> One easily makes the mistake of limiting only*what can be observed*
> with an E6, or six-dimensional, toroid of the expanding universe, as a
> closed torus manifold, when according to parallel universe theory, the
> dodecahedral version suggests that with e-neutrinos or tachyons, the
> repulsive and attractive forces of gravity are the manifestation of
> the same thing, just being inverted to one another across dimensions,
> so that there are 5 observable, 1 contra-turning, and 5 unobservable,
> totalling 11 dimensions for the current observable (and unobservable)
> dodecahedral universe. M-theory backs this up.
Woah -- word salad made up of made up stuff.
> closed torus manifold, when according to parallel universe theory, the
> dodecahedral version suggests that with e-neutrinos or tachyons, the
> repulsive and attractive forces of gravity are the manifestation of
> the same thing, just being inverted to one another across dimensions,
> so that there are 5 observable, 1 contra-turning, and 5 unobservable,
> totalling 11 dimensions for the current observable (and unobservable)
> dodecahedral universe. M-theory backs this up.
Brad Guth
May 29, 2013, 11:48:05 AM5/29/13
to
that's moving or vibrating at FTL.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages