Mike Smith Cosmos

The end of the Dinosaurs

Essay and Ophiolite I am a little over awed ,at the moment , by all these , images, time periods , oceans forming, mountains forming, over huge periods of tme. One thing that seems to be coming through , if I am not mistaken , is that what I have been looking for, by Way of evidence , by old evidence of RIVERS and INLAND OCEANS are out there in the Atlantic Ocean . Somehow! Mike With all this ' iapetus ocean ' Scotland, avalonia , etc I am trying to form an image in my head ,...As to what I would see... If I was on a river bank and a shallow inland warm sea , by way of life,. Namely what plants , creatures I would see. And what skies I would see ? Then I can paint it ! E.g. One I painted , a while ago , when I was on ' mass extinction events '

Introducing Just the subject of Increasing and Decreasing entropy . Posted 1 March 2014 - 12:33 AM An Objective test. 100 individual aspects of the Universe across Space and Time From below the surface of the EARTH to: The Largest Structure in the Observable Universe ( Space ) and The Big Bang ( Time ) . TESTING FOR THE DIRECTION OF ENTROPY ( INCREASE , STATIC , DECREASE ) with Values . Rather than concentrating on the thermodynamics aspect of entropy , with its concentration on useless energy distribution, I wish to concentrate on the opposite concept of useful, patterns of effective and practical systems of order. The Definition of Entropy that I used was Taken from :- the COLLINS ENGLISH DICTIONARY Essential edition Pub 2006 under Entropy ( en-trop-ee) entropy n 1. formal . lack of pattern or organisation 2. physics. a thermodynamic quantity that represents the amount of energy present in a system that cannot be converted into work because it is tied up in the atomic structure of the system. [ Greek word turning towards ] the Concise Oxford Dictionary adding under entropy ; measure of the degradation or disorganization of the universe Posted 4 March 2014 - 02:13 PM This is a Standard Deviation Grid where :- the x axis is MY Entropy number ( between 0 = order , 10 = disorder ) as defined on post # 129 . The Y axis is the Sample count , where each sample has a value of 1 unit Obviously this is only for the first two samples. it would not expect to show any meaningful information apart from trends until between ( 30 - 100 ) samples. Example only : Bell curve Quantify of Entropy As explained this is a self defining scale ranging from Order =0 to Disorder =10 The following list is/will be, used as a discrete value chart : - 0= Order Patterns, alignment, symmetry, compact, ........................beauty (?) 1= 2= 3= 4= 5= 6= 7= 8= 9= 10=Disorder Chaos , Random, fragmented, featureless, spread out,....... Ugly (?) Ophiolite Said I have been somewhat surprised nobody has coined another quality of nature, the opposite to formal entropy. Or if they have its not in common useage,. If there were a discipline or word , somebody would have already thrown it back at me saying " what you are talking about , has already been done its called " ugyvyn" I have asked about a bit ? This is a little strange, that the concentration has been on the downward path of entropy , rather than considering, or in addition , an upward path of " ugyvyn" . It's present there in ' natural selection in biology,' and is only just being spoken about at a cosmological scale.. After all Entopy is a movement toward Disorder It seems to me it would be nice if there were a Universal discipline and a description , at least by Word , going in the opposite direction ( reducing entropy is just not good enough . ) It seems to me we are leaving it a bit late in not having already made an investigation into the very subject that I was proposing, looking at the state of the 'antithesis of entropy' [ not yet even giving it a name ] . All this when we are so close to wrecking our planet. {what with endangered specise, pollution, starvation, depleting resources, and goodness knows what }. So my two pennyworth is talking about that opposite direction to ENtropy called " ugyvyn " across the whole universe , starting with the Earth. ---------- " Generation " as being the opposite to " Entropy " ...............................................|.........................................................| Davidivad said Posted 7 March 2014 - 02:53 PM Life being a Generative process , goes in the opposite direction to increasing entropy , namely it reduces the value of entropy (disorder ) to more order. This also occurs with Gravitation and Open Systems mike I have retired to a quiet place to think. ! ..................................................EUREKA ! ...........................I have it !

----- ------ Nobody is perfect but a team can be . ------ ------ An educational physocologist friend of mine once introduced me to the following article when I questioned the radically differences of approach people take ! Link :- http://www.vscht.cz/document.php?docId=8286 . . originally from the Observer It not only enabled me to reconcile my approach , but also to learn to accept others with their diagonally opposite approach. A particular introductory paragraph ,in discussing managers , explains well, why how we are all different :- Quote " " Any attempt to list the qualities of a good manager demonstrates why this person cannot exist: far too many qualities are mutually exclusive. They must be highly intelligent and yet not be too clever. They must be highly forceful and at the same time sensitive to people's feelings. They must be dynamic but also patient. They must be a fluent communicator and a good listener. They must be decisive but also reflective; and so on. And if you do find this jewel among managers, this paragon of mutually incompatible characteristics, what will you do when they step under a bus or go to live abroad, or leave to take up a better job with your principal competitor? " " Unquote Mike PS. I have been in University for 8 years, in and out of industry/business for 30 years, teaching for 10 years. I have a library of mostly read ,scientific books by leading proponent of Scientific thought both here in the U.K. and another in Italy . I am 70 years of age, If I do not have anything to offer, a few worthwhile ideas on the understanding of the Universe by now I want shooting. Perhaps that is not a bad idea !

I was quite surprised that some of the explanations mooted in ( Wikipedia and some of the arxiv,etc quotes) invoked philosophy as an ingredient. Much as I am more than happy to think in this way , I was none the less surprised. To quote " wikipedia Big Bang ( note 'Big Bang ' not ' The Big Bang ' ,which is a TV show ) Main article Wikipedia Big Bang ' section : Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory So as not to invoke ,that debate here . I am more than happy to leave the INPUT requirement for going from nothing to vast quantities of energy to a black box output. Namely accepting that some form of ingredient was required. What was required that would enable the " singularity, or whatever it was , " to have in its store house ( 10 to the 69 joules of useable energy) remains the question / statement . " we do not (yet ) know " often quoted when discussing the Big Bang. Mike Appendix . Black boxes, Each have an input ,and an output, and a transfer characteristic . Where the internal mechanism remains unspecified. Each of these ingredient Black Boxes 'could ' contribute one aspect of the requirements for the singularity( or whatever ) to furnish the Big Bang. As a Start . Taking First one important requirement Energy. Say Energy being one requirement. If i were designing it ( the source of Energy ) in view of my own individual experience . ( In Business and Electrical/Electronic engineering ) . I would create Great Positive and Negative Potentials. That is , great Wealth in the Plus countered by Great Debt of equal quantity.in the negative. ( whatever wealth is when one is making a Universe). Similarly with electrical potentials ( massive voltage + and -). Thus (Vast Substance with attractive and repulsive forces ) This would require a Net Balance of Zero .In other words I could afford it . Whatever it cost . Substance and Charge.

I have read through quite a lot of your quoted papers and other refs to the Big Bang including wikepedia. Many many time the expression comes " we really do not know " " we do not know the answer to that " Where did all that energy come from ? " we really do not know ! " So . I go back to a comment I made earlier , it all came out of ' that time ' , so we should be able to get clues from what we have now, even if it has changed state, or temperature , or distribution , or many many things . Firstly, there is the matter of ENERGY . How or where did it come from ? Nothing .......then 1,000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Joules ( some diet ! ) Mike

I Can not get over the fact that it takes me just half an hour to slip down to the coast at Exmouth. The far East end of the beach is ORCOMBE POINT. On setting foot there is a Huge Public Presentation " You are at the Oldest rocks Of the Jurassic coast, of the world heritage Site. Reading from the information placks " Although the red rocks are the remains of a baking hot desert. we also know that GREAT RIVERS sometimes flowed across the sand. These POWERFUL RIVERS torrents of gravel and pebbles out into the desert. You can see thick layers caught in the cliffs to the East, near Budleigh Salterton. ......cliffs reveal that SHALLOW LAKES sometimes formed ,when rivers flooded the desert. " Seeing as we are at the end of the Permian period at Orcombe Point ( then some 250,000,000 years ago ) We were much nearer if not on the Equator. So these rivers with their warm lakes in the desert would contribute to the scene of great rivers and inland shallow warm seas. Just some 250,000,000 year old rocks I picked up from the sea bottom while swimming snorkeling on Sunday . The red ones ( iron coloured ) are how Orcombe Point looks like The pebble beds east at Budleigh Salterton. ( part of Jurassic Coast )

Welcome aboard . I hope you find what you are looking for. I have been and still am to a minor extent now a " motorcyclist" . No doubt we can discuss bikes sometime. I went from first bike 125 cc , then 200cc, then 350 cc. Then 500 twin cc. .Honda cb 250 twin Latterly Honda cx500. Now scooter . Lots of variations in addition along the way like moped, motor cycles and side car , AA bike 500 cc single cylinder. Etc. .Lots of fun . I still love the open air , open road. Though drive a car for family purposes. Mike

Thanks! There is a lot to read, a lot to think about. I will get back when I have managed to read digest and think Afterthought . What we do know is , what we can observe now , by way of what came later, even now currently to us . For instance if you could catch a lightning strike , in theory the last .0.00001 mm worth of the strike should be measurable as say one volt of a 3,000,000,000 volt strike at some vast current . So by looking at the cosmic background radiation we can look at 6000degrees k ( then, at the recombination event, some 300,000 years out from BB ) as 2.7 degrees k locally to us. I imagine this represents a massive thermal energy content, if we were to calculate this across a sphere surface of the whole current expanded universe? . I appreciate there are great dark or hidden areas. Where what was going on is hidden . But none the less the "stuff" still came out of the primeval whatever. Perhaps the "stuff" can give us the clues. Like looking at a crashed aircraft .(bits) ? Mike Ps I suppose your first paragraph is a typing error ( should be 10 to the +69 joules not 10 to the - 69joules as typed )? ( I have to be sure where everything is so darn big or small or massive or zero , as the case may be ) ? Mike

Some of the most natural photographs ever presented are those where the persons photographed were completely unaware of their being photographed ( observed ). That must say something. Eg. If someone wanted to observe us seriously , there is likely to be no evidence of the observation. Candid Photography Candid photography is a type of photography that focuses on informal, unplanned snapshots rather than a lengthy setup. Associated with impromptu and spontaneity, candid photography does not look to stage situations for shots, but rather capture life as it happens (Wikipedia). This is an example of a candid shot in Banff this past summer, the man walking down the street had feathers sticking straight out of his hat, and completely unaware of the fact of the several pictures of him. mike

Time moving from past ( bottom) through present (centre line ) to future ( top section ) second version. Today Abstract interpretation on the three stages of time . Past . Present . Future

So was the Big bang . a State of immense potential , compared to some ground state which sped ahead of the universes expansion, Be this represented, both in charge and gravitational potential ? Has the evolving or emerging of the universe been one of releasing energy through all the different chains of energy conversion. Be they Heat, Light, Sound, Movement, Chemical, Electrical, Strain ,whatever, from and away from this starting potential energy, bound up in that initial ( BANG, Plasma Ball, Quantum Soup/fluctuation or whatever it was ) ? Mike

Those interested in the development of Prof. Lee Smolin,s proposal on the Nature of Time as a Paradigm Shift ( From Nateuralism 1 to Naturalism 2 ) LECTURE A Lecture given recently link :- Mike

Presumably , the input of vast quantities of joules of energy at the big bang ,had the effect of making Potential energy at an extremely high level in various forms (Mass and Charge) to collapse as kinetic energy toward a ground state of potential energy , in the form of heat held yet diminishing in temperature as the expansion occurred.? mike.

Well I appreciate your caution on both our parts. But he is suggesting we all should join in a new age of discussion, imagination, open conversation of audacious ideas. He is saying ,we should open the windows of closeted discussion only among high brow professors. I am sure he is pointing to a bygone era , when scientists walked with one another, had coffee in Swiss cafe,s ,argued in public . Much as to some extent you are openly disagreeing with me , in public. ( you could be kind to me occasionally ! ) However , unless I am terribly mistaken ( I am reading his book ' Time Reborn' ) , he is himself audaciously saying , We all must, if we are to deal with " the economy, the climate , human civilisation, physics understanding, and a host of Big Subjects " must all not be afraid , and be given the space to air audacious ideas , lest we miss out on some good thoughts, due to reluctance to step outside the strictures of the established protocol . I have followed Lee Smolins ideas over the years , as he developed ideas around the cosmos as a whole, particles , quantum gravity, and currently time . I find his approach , a breath of fresh air , greatly needed. Let's fling open the doors of scientific discussion , of course being mindful of the need to keep established science preserved and well documented. Mike

Surely if Energy is defined as " Energy makes things happen " then it follows that :- - Energy is Potential - . Potentials are needed for something to move, turn, change, or whatever . A quantitative difference in value. Mike

Prof Lee Smolin of Princeton University offshoot The Perimeter Institute. In Canada ( home of a lot of forward thinking scientists ) , Has reasoned that the axiom that ' the laws of physics are constant across all space and time ' , where the passage of time is considered an illusion, is wrong on both counts. He reasons that although there can exist a certain degree of continuity across time and space. That this is not necessarily so. Time is moving forward across a cusp of NOW. What is Now has the ' current evolved set of laws', governing what happens at this cusp of the present. Time moves into a past condition and is set and the moment is gone. The future can be imagined, predicted, and anticipated but at the present moment this is not certain. The past is certain as it has happened. He does allow for an amount of reversibility at very small atomic scales, but reasons that this is not true for non atomic scales. mike But this is precisely what Smolin is saying. We must use this time to think and say audacious ideas. Imaginings that sound audacious. He reasons that had we as a race not played with fire, ( used our imagination for the uses of fire ) ,rather than be safe and avoided fire , we would never have learned to use fire to keep wolves at bay . So my comments are often by design ( not always ) deliberately audacious , which you interpret as fatuous or not thought out. Unless I and a fair number of others are mistaken, now is the time to take risks with ideas, not being afraid to think and speak audacious ideas. To sail the dangerous waters of inter island voyages. I genuinely believe there is a massive region of a 'new science ' just over the horizon . I believe we cannot reach this island unless we adopt some new way of reaching out ,researching out ,imagining out , toward an area of 'science' that none of us ,at the moment really know what it is , but have a deep hunch that it is there for the picking. It is exciting, a bit frightening , but nothing more than daring explorers have done before us. Mike Definition: ... audacious :- recklessly bold or daring . Imprudent or presumptuous . ( Latin audax bold ) Abstract illustration time moving from the bottom of picture ( .past ) through middle region ( present ) to future ( top region )

An Abstract interpretation of the nature of Time The nature of time . As illustrated here : Bottom:- ... With lined structure is the past .The present moves on to the past. Middle :- .. Activity ,Around the center line, at the focus of the picture is Time Now , the very real aspect of time . Top half :- Future time. Imagined, anticipated, predicted , but not yet real Based on an interpretation of time by Prof Lee Smolin Recent Book " Time Reborn - From the crisis of Physics to the Future of the Universe " Mike

While you are waiting for your books . Here is an experiment in physics you can do while you are waiting.Arcameadies said you can lift weight to the amount of water displaced by the boat. I used to do this with my physics class that I used to teach physics to. If I remember a paper boat (a4 folded and sellotaped) , could support about 400 grams. Here is the design . Have a go. If you do not build it very well it will sink. Try 500 grams , 600 grams will definitely sink . Picture :- Let me know how you get on . If it works build a 10 foot version ! In marine plywood . By my reckoning it should be quite stable ! Mike

I have tried to think what I was like at your age. I have picked two books which go right across science in small chunks .One just 2 pages per subject, the other a chapter per scientist. Both across Physics, Biology with just a little chemistry. Very easy to read , both books. Can be read easily one subject/ scientist as a single module, in short time. 1. little Book of Big Ideas SCIENCE by Dr Peter Moore isbn 0-7136-7494-6 cost £9.99 2 pages per subject 2. The Ten Most Beautiful Experiments. By George Johnson ISBN 978-0-099-46458-7 1 Chapter per Scientist. £8.99 Mike [ ok. have a good time with the books ]

INTRODUCTION OF A PARADIGM SHIFT IN THINKING on TIME ( There is only NOW, " the present " thats ALL there IS ) by . ..Prof Lee Smolin TIME REBORN Link :- The Philosopher Lucretius also pondered the nature of things . ... .In his works " lucretius de rerum natura " Link :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_rerum_natura Thank you Lee Smolin and Lucretius.....That was a near thing ! Mike. ...... Don't listen to me. Listen to the comments of Prof Lee Smolin and Lucretius This is ,' be kind to mike fortnight ' as he has had a battering . Kind words and gracious awards needed to mend wounds. mike

You just did get started. By having the courage to openly state your desire. Now ,have a good look about at say ( animals, plants , the environment, humans ) observe a little , and think is there anything that particularly interests me in what I see. ..that could become your interest in Biology. Do the same with ( stars, sun, clouds, things generally , radio, television , computers, machines, cars, water, fire, the sea , electricity, particles etc ) , observe a lot, and think . Is there anything that catches your mind.! That could become your interest in physics. Then go get a book( s) on those two subjects. Then find someone else ,who is interested in the same thing that you find fascinating , and have a good conversation or two with them . The ball has started rolling. Mike Ps . when I was exactly your age, I noticed radio waves , somehow moved across air/ space , invisibly . It fascinated me then and still does. I made my life , a search in electronics/ electrical/Radio. I am still fascinated with these subjects, still searching ! When I joined a famous electronic company at 19 years old , I was shown around the labs as a new apprentice. In a dingy underground laboratory ,researching some device, in low tones my guide pointed out a man pacing back and forward through the lab , he had a grey beard. I asked my guide , " who is that man ? And what is he doing " The reply was , " Oh! He is a thinker " ...... I reflected ,and mused ' I want to become that man ' ..... ......... ...... I have done quite some interesting things amongst the electrical/ electronic industries throughout my life , some big, some small.........( mostly small) ... .... Today , I have a grey beard , and am 70 years old , I think a lot , I became that man . ( for what it is worth ) ? ( not rich , but satisfied ) Find your ...thing .... The thing you find really really interesting , say within your. Biology or Physics .. And follow your .....thing Ask yourself the question " What really is this thing , and how does it work " " Ask anybody and everybody ? " Mike

We could do with knowing the mass of the galaxy ( without dark matter) . All the Baryonic matter in all the stars ,dust , plantets etc . Mike

No. I am sorry you misunderstand me . I am not saying we should not have the LHC or super computers . I am saying , in the mean time , those of us that do not have access to these devices can still do experiments ourselves to investigate some natures of reality , at the same time. As above with the water. Also electricity. Both are models of gravity potential , in a gravity well extending to the centre of the earth. However mass must also be included in any model of gravity ? So ? One could ask what is the equivalent of mass in the water and electric model?

A very interesting model. Is that involving gravity. I was speaking to a water engineer, asking how water actually knows it is slightly higher in order to flow, even when only a small difference in height is present. His answer was that it all depended , not on the depth of the water but on the shape of the ground under the water. In other words he said it was the difference in ground (under the water ) ,that gave the potential difference for flow. He said ( which made my ears prick up ) that it was like Electricity. In other words (he said ) , it was merely the potential difference that counted. Not the potential. Having worked more with electricity than water, it made complete sense as a model. So electrical potential and current flow is a really good model for water based on gravitational potential. This is the opposite way round to that which I had been used to on myriads of times ,having used water as a model of electricity , in education . Thus in order to plot , inspect, and examine gravity , and hence the surface of a gravitational surface existing in front of our eyes ,we need only look at the surface of the water, sea ,or lake, to sea the surface of a unique gravity field . Mike What this means for water flow based on the contour of the ground under the water or water current , means for gravity , I have not yet thought through . But now one has a model in electricity , it has exciting opportunities. Note . The only water that gives rise to flow or current is above the underwater contour only . Not the vast bulk of water . Only the small potential difference. What then makes up the reality ? ( gravity ) not water or electricity .