SmallIsPower

On further reflection......... Victory over entropy unfortunately seems to be only temporary, even though it exists soon after the explosion of a black hole. It's unlikely that the Universe has a geometry that could continue this cycle in perpetutity. If the Universe expands forever, much of the energy will not be recycled through black holes, in a closed Universe, there will be a Big Crunch. In a flat Universe, without dark energy, there will be plenty of radiating black holes, whose orbits will shrink until they collase into one huge Singularity.

I get it! There is no inflation.... The Universe sucks!

The movie's ideas have to be critically anylised, some may be true, some overly extraploated, some untrue: peptides: create the chemical computer that is refered to as the subconcious, a good deal of evidence backs this up. Personally, I've found that after a few harrowing months, cleaning up my body and thoughts have helped me get past trauma. hado - I haven't found any evidence this has been replicated -most likely false. Fred Wolf - He wrote in one of his books that the universe contains at least 3*10^80 dimesions. I think he's got to lay off the LSD for a while. The information on biology & petpides makes the ideas quite valuable, even though some of the physics is off.

To those who are certain that time travel is impossible - take another look at relativity - not only isn't it considered a possibility, time's dimensionality is very similiar to space.

I doubt the mothers of the dead servicemen can be convinced that their sons are less important than someone who's still in North America.

I guess you don't consider the 2500 dead American troops as a "United States target", that's almost as many as died on 9/11. Considering Iraq wasn't behind 9/11, I'd say that's a disaster only Bush could create. If they wanted Osama, they'd have him. Come on he's a 6''5" Arab with the most infamous face since Hitler, and on dialysis. He's still our man, they'll only sacrifice him in extreme circumstances.

Sure looks like an alien to me

Then the derviation of Hawking radition is incomplete, from the standpoint of calculating entropy in our Universe. Saying it's thermodynamic begs the question, the early Universe was quite thermodyamic too, in the instant the exploding black hole was created there is a dramatic reversal in entropy, after which, I agree the energy will degrade. You've created a trillion degree location in a 3 degree universe without degrading any of the 3 degree CMBR. Why is looking for errors in Newton's or Einstein's laws OK, while entropy is sacred? IMHO, it's the same prejudice that reinforces that taking is better than cooperating, because there's a limited slice of pie. [Yes, I know that both will cause entropy, I'm talking in the philosphical sence here.] I'm not sure that this discussion can go any further, as it looks to me as if entropy itself has been redefined solely to fit The Second Law.

Thanks for asking the question. In addition to discussing it, we need to ask ourselves it. I did when I first went on the net, but 3 years and 2000+ posts on various forums have jaded me. Maintaining quality in forums can spark plenty of innovation: I've used info from the engineering forum to talk to politicians about renewables, I attempted a chain letter in international political forums to talk about Bush's mistakes to forums in swing states (since his approval rating is about 15% outside America in 2004). The net has some wild possibities, let's start using them to their fullest.

Yipeee! That being said, Far more terrorists have been mobized because of the war in Iraq, then have been disuaded by Zaquwi's death. The beneficiaries Bush's "leadership" of the war on terrorism have been Al Queda, and the military industrial complex.

Norman Alber has written papers for NOAA on dark energy, so he fits my definition of expert. From his PMs at least I know I'm not doing nuts, even though I'm waiting for a conclusive statement, on way or the other: ################################################################################ Folder : Sent Items ################################################################################ ================================================================================ From : SmallIsPower To : Norman Alber Date : 2006-06-06 13:48 Title : Want an expert's opinion in physics -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This question has always puzzled me, the answers given me seem too simplistic, your papers have convinced me you can give a competent answer. and if a black hole sucks up microwave background radiation and explodes in gamma rays can it be consered negative entropy? What if a reflective dyson sphere is set up around it to contain the gamma rays, with ports to allow space ships out as they got charge from the explosion to replicate in soon-to-be-exploding black holes? ################################################################################ Folder : Inbox ################################################################################ ================================================================================ From : Norman Alber To : Date : 2006-06-06 19:12 Title : it all -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not ready to say much specific to your offering, but I'll certainly say I am seriously screwing around with the theory of the virtual radiation field which is a major part of our theoretic analysis at singular surfaces. I think we are a mess here. ================================================================================ From : Norman Alber To : Date : 2006-06-06 19:18 Title : thoughts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps explodes is not a good word here. If there are emissions they are steady Hawking radiation, or generated by infalling matter................Now if you tried to capture the outgoing high frequency stuff, would you not also block the ingoing? ================================================================================ ================================================================================ From : SmallIsPower To : Norman Alber Date : 2006-06-07 15:18 Title : Re: thoughts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not talking about when part of the mass is lost as matter falls in, I'm talking about when it's lost so much mass that it ceases to be a black hole, and it explodes. IIRC in 10^66 years for a solar mass black hole. Thanks, Russ ============================================================= From : Norman Alber To : Date : 2006-06-07 15:25 Title : Re: thoughts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then you are cooler than I here! Thank heavens, it pisses me off to think that they might last forever. The last I heard they get pretty small and then? I shall read further, though I am happily busy as you can read in my thread today.

Wind is competitive with conventional power, and those deserts make Australia good for solar. The most expensive power in the US is in New Hampshire, at least partly because of decommisioning a nuclear plant. Uranium is also a quite limited resource, since all of it was formed in supernovae, unless you go breeder or fission. There was one American breeder plant, a book was written about it titled, "We Almost Lost Detroit", as it almost went supercritical, with many times the fallout of a nuke. Oh, yes there was Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. On the positive side, a nuclear spill in Australia would kill far fewer people than in the denser nations that currently have them.

IMHO, some science questions are answered too fast as true or false. I won't deny that there are many crackpot ideas, especially on relativity. The debate: Is biology a science? thread pointed out that neigther biology nor physics has ironclad logic. Science has acknowledged many degrees of uncertainty: Speculation Conjecture Hypothesis Theory Law We should not throw something out as "untestable" if it has partial, as in the afterlife we should just acknoldge there is some evidence, but it's lacking in proof. While this probably belongs in philiosophy, let's talk about how we'll turn in into something more conclusive. After all, Einstein is said to have used intution in relativity, although he got himself in trouble with "God doesn't play dice."

I have read of a handful of partial tests, it's good to see another come down the pike. Relativity has survived lots of challenges, odds are it will survive this one.

Arthur C. Clarke said that "negative mass" (actually it's negating longer vibrations of the vacuum flux), by pushing four electrons together. Since repulsion increases by the inverse square, and the Casmir effect increases by the inverse fourth power, it seems energy could become available.

You're right, that isn't much. Room temperature is 300 degrees Kelvin, and we've had cermic superconductors around for 20 years.

I'm glad there are alternatives to "dark energy". It's an observed phenoma, calling it "dark energy" assumes its an actual force.

The vaccum flux is what makes black holes explode. The physics classes I took indicated that the gamma rays produce some usable energy.

I'd think its a lot better than "clean coal". We'll probably be employing that soon enough.

You can always generate electricity. From what I've read, and it isn't enough to be sure, wind is going to be the chapest power, but energy from wind is proportional to its velocity cubed, so it'll be out often.

That the Casmir effect has an effect on why water has such a high frezing and boiling point, why surface tension is so great etc.

If there's such a huge amount of energy, there's got to be a way of harnessing a useful amount of it. Anyone who insists otherwise, without proof, is like someone who in 1905, saw E=mc2 and claimed the only energy that was available from matter was chemical.