Mike Smith Cosmos

So are you saying the difference between opaque and transparent is due to " resonance " . I remember at uni a prof saying something like that , but it slipped past me. .I think he was talking about fibre optic cables at the time . ? mike

well no because , the photon does not dilute as an individual, as far as I know. the single Photon ball ( even if it is only an effect , like a ball effect ) , just keeps on a going, unless something gets in the way. But the concentration or density of photons just gets less and less in line with the inverse square law [ from the area on the surface of a sphere. {but you probably knew that ] . but sooner or later the neighbouring photon is going to be a long way away ! If it ( the photon ) was not a ball or quantised particle like . It would dilute like a stone thrown ripple in a pond . mike

Well I am your man ! mike [ oops ! copy courtesy Acme ]

Well Swedgen lives in Australia . So he can pop out and have a check up ! Mike

Fairly comprehensive set of pictures . Ta Mike

Well I think you are right , but there appears to be a bit of a theory about that , an impact by a, or a series of asteroids impacting even on the other side of the earth may have triggered the Siberian traps. I will try and find the quote. I think the thing lasted quite some time , dare I say 1000's even more years . I think . Wiki pedia quote half way through article [ " Possible impact sites" ] link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event See also Studio links next post Mike

It would help if one knew the relative size of everything . Eg a neutrino coming along would not notice anything at all. .Nearly total empty, perhaps for something to the side a long way a way . ... Now as I approach a plank of wood , I see a solid wall of wood . no access. The neutrino would not know the plank was there. Now [ how big across is a photon of 100 Mhz E-M wave ]. What does it see when it approaches a plank of wood . what does a yellow photon of light see, approaching a plank of wood , then a block of glass , when it goes right through. Does it see the atoms with gaps between to go through. This simulation helps get proportion of the relative sizes mike

I had no Idea BBC i player not available in USA . I will try and find bits elsewhere - Documentary scientists taking part in discussion :- I feel I let the side down . Do not understand why it is so difficult to get this sort of information out there. The BBC Horizon program was put together with Dignity . Mike

You will need to go through this " Lorentz invariant. " for me to put my flat earth atlas down and get E-M propagation part of my brain engaged..( again ) At least i am working in Euclidean geometry ,. nice clean Right angles and 3-D Space. mike

Surely with temperature there is a flow of energy from , high temp to low temp , thus an out flow of energy some goes to useful work , some goes to the environment and is lost or unusable . Surely with attraction there is a falling of potential , say from one high energy electron band to a lower energy band pure energy in the form of a photon is given up and out for use . No waste . Gain of energy. Opposite flow to entropy . Your energy flows away into the universe as waste heat, down the pan, heats up the surface of Mars , and is lost non recoverable ( higher Entropy. ) My Pure photon shines out of a nearby star ( the sun ) down to earth , causes Photosynthesis . My living trees flourish and grow into fresh supplies of obtainable energy for timber [ equivalent of or opposite to Entropy ]. a buildup of new positive potential energy. { in the form of freshly cut Timber } Surely ! Everybody is happy ! Mike

Yes, I do understand about the E and the M being self supporting and restoring each other. But I have a problem with , the dreaded 'nothingness' as if E-M. Waves could travel through absolute nothingness. ( this I have my serious doubts on ) Yes in a vacuum , which still has 3 D. Space allocated to it somehow. And I get the feeling the allocation is via wilczek Quantum space , with all sorts of things in it including energy . If that is required to create space , then there is something there, and even though E-M waves are self restoratory they will react somehow with the contents of space , thus it must be in a "sort of " if not medium , a something, not absolute nothing . Mike As above reply to Studiot .

.The idea of the opposite of temperature has made me think a bit. Temperature is very integral with thermodynamics and entropy. " Temperature " was involved with the early part of the universe with some humongous high temperature at the ' start ' fading down to today's 2-3 degrees kelvin . Causing the universe and Energy to flow outward. And a spreading out. Looking for an opposite ! I would say a net force of " Attraction " would be called for . Demonstrated in all attractive forces such as Gravity, Electro, Magneto, Strong, Weak, this in Newtons . Causing things to move inwards , and come together . Hence an ingredient for ' emergence of order ' in the ' generating ' process described earlier . Mike

Although different entities feel the effects of different forces , often there is a net effect of either:- ATTRACTION. or. REPULSION. or . NEUTRAL ( no effect ) So in moving about the universe along or about the field lines , allows for a mapping to be achieved , and thus being able to produce a diagram of both the " tubes of opportunity " and " the mould " that has/ have a significant effect on the ways things move about the Universe. Eg " MOULD" stones shaped into niche Eg " TUBE OF OPPORTUNITY " river flow between banks Eg " some "Tubes of opportunity " set for 1000's, 1000000 's years , both laid down by water and eroded by water . ( one side of the tube ) Eg " ( other side of the tube )far bank Mike

To me this has been a most thought provoking set of statements from well recognised Physics scientists for some time! . VIEWING -------- ENDS TODAY Mike

This is what I am painting today ACME, THIS IS A PENCIL AND COLOURED PENCIL DRAWING , THAT I DID SEVERAL YEARS AGO. Oops ! Caps lock on ! I am outside our cafe, on the pavement painting, or attempting to paint , .It was while I was studying up complexity, right up your street ACME. It was to try to illustrate, symmetry breaking and the delicate junction as a phased transition exposes a highly creative, generative zone. If you look carefully you can just make out some generative items appearing in the calm , sensitive area between the two edges. Notice the similarity. To this photo I took this morning while walking the dog by the local stream . Nature seems to take advantage of these sheltered areas . Mike The painting I am going to do now, will be brighter and in acrylics and possibly more abstract. Oops a bird just s... On my I.pad . I am just sending this to you. And tar and anyone else interested. Must get on Ps Tar, do not worry about God or any of that , it is all in a black box, with its input ,transfer function, output. It can remain there for later or never,or ( willing suspension of disbelief ) or whoever cares to open the black box and have a look. There may be anything in there , or nothing , or maths (perish the thought) , God or chaos, that is another issue . What is the issue at the moment is " what is going on" ? I will worry about what I may or may not have put in the black box, may be I will never be forgiven ! Oops! Again Mike

Acme I wish you stop keep taking offence, Where none is intended or meant. My mind genuinely went to my First 10 years of life , Lifting problem ,[ When I read the Link to Loftstead.,] it fired up my memories where I struggled to get my head around , why when running down a grass slope could I not put my hands between my legs, and pull like mad , and take off, as I ran down the grassy Slope ( clearly a miss spent youth,} So no offence meant. The only bit, a post or two ago, was about " revival salts " for you because of Tar and I's .way out speculations. But that was meant as a friends jest . I thought, after you started talking to me about ART we had bonded and become friends. { I hope so] . -- Now back to warring debate! -- link :- http://en.wikipedia....ki/Terraforming for terraforming link :- http://en.wikipedia....tion_to_entropy for Entropy Mike

Don't get all up tight!I just thoroughly read your sitation about hofstead. I thought about it . I don't happen to have the book . And kindly took your invitation to read it. Which sounds a good suggestion on your part. When I have taken of the waters you kindly led me toward. I will get back to you. Give me chance! I have not even got out of bed yet . It's only 6 o'clock in the morning here , and I have taken the trouble to answer you , before I have got up. Pitty sake ! Here is studios link re maths not used to prove a point . Link. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/82082-sound-question/ ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- ---------- .An interim conclusion :- link :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming for terraforming link :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_entropy for Entropy mike

Just read your ref. about the strange loops. Sounds a little bit like " pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. " which used to fascinate me as a boy , ' why can I not pick myself , up ? ' . Interesting ! I am surprised that you like it . As you do not seem to like , some of my speculative ideas. I , have never been embarrassed to say " what if ? ". Even if it often proves WRONG. As without ever 'trying the what if ' One could miss out on a possible good idea , that would otherwise get overlooked , for fear of sounding stupid or misinformed! However, it seems to raise your 'ire ' if that is the right word. Not trying to offend. Just eager to make some form of progress. I should never have offered the smelling salts ! Here look at this interesting pattern I saw on the same rock face yesterday/ today ! Some life getting together ! Pic :- Mike Ps. I think clinging to maths , as the absolute ingredient for progress 'might ' keep Us grounded. As if the maths is not yet uncovered or is not actually required for a particular , phenomenon . Then by seeking something ,that will never be found , could be a miss step. Studiot has just highlighted to me a particular illustration of where maths was not ALL Link :- http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/82082-sound-question/ .

Today , I went to the coast to make some observations of the rock strata. There were two examples 1. Of entropy causing disorder 2. Order in the making by molding many fragments of stone into a niche . Should it remain Undisturbed . 1. The boat smashed to bits in the recent storms . 2. The niche holding fragments maybe permanently in time , because of its mould like position. The dog could not care an iota ( neutral .control data ) Mike

I am still a bit off ,firming up on the name descriptor, however things are becoming a little clearer. As the life aspect definitely has a supportive slice of evidence toward the concept of something moving in the opposite direction to entropy, I do feel it needs to go further. There is another 2 to 3 ,000,000,000 years of activity on earth without life, preceding life which also has some characteristics of a slower yet similar movement toward order , an access ability to energy, and other features opposite to entropy. This was all contained in the core, mantle, crust, erosion-sediment , volcanic , freezing , continent building, and general activity at a mineral , liquid and gas level. Whether we can call this overall process TERRAFORMING, I am not sure, but when it includes life , the whole picture seems a very valid candidate for a process that can be considered working in an opposite direction to entropy. ACME, MAY REQUIRE SOME SMELLING SALTS BY NOW You better go and revive him! Mike

Although I have not quite the word yet , but it is something to do with Generation - regeneration . In dwelling on what has happened on Earth before we went into the Industrial Age. The machines we invented to take out coal and oil from the environment . Our machines based on entropy , steam engines coal fired trains , lorries and motor cars . We have been utilising 1000's of years of the natural environment having generated all the trees , all the fish and plankton that fell the the bottom of the ocean and made oil , and we have harvested these resources. Now we are well on turning a lot of this energy into an unusable form . Entropy increasing. Yet the natural environment had been Generating , these resources for millions of years. A look at a national geographic presentation of the formation of our environment since 4.5 billion years ago , shows nothing but systems generating everything we now use, . Water, oxygen, soil, algae, plankton mammals, plants man and the whole ecosystem . Then think of Mars . Desert dry inert. If we ever go to the next available planet to use we would need to terraform in a similar way that earth has developed. What a project. It would no doubt take a long time but, we now know how it's done . Generating a new world Mike

Hi aclin , Sounds like you have a good project there. And a good attitude to wanting to look after the planet. The chap flinging his arms about , came to me saying he wanted to grow lots of trees and he wanted lots of sources of money to do so. The book highlighted " the emerald planet " points at trees as being the earths "lungs" . I thought that was brilliant, and anyone thinking of doing things with trees, like you . Is think leaves. Think of the tree as an open lung if that does not sound too crazy. Think of all the breathing either going on or being cut down or choking on fumes. Now think how can we get more leaves breathing. Mike

Well I did study the Michelson Morley experiment at uni, and as far as I remember, but I have to admit to a rapidly failing memory, so please excuse me if I am wrong. The experiment was arranged with two independent paths , at 90degrees to each other. But what they were checking was we're we moving through a fixed ether so that the earth was moving through it. The result was no ! We were not moving through a fixed ether. What I was asking? Could it not be possible that matter like the earth carries its own fuzzy medium in the local proximity I am not sure it is fair to say Frank Wilzek is pop science. I heard him give his Nobel prize related speech at Princeton or Cornell university. He hinted then about this subject of the grid. Now he seems to have come right out with it. I do not mind if you say it is all wrong. It is just that those couple of points I mentioned have bothered me a bit over the years , and I was rather relieved to hear that the idea of a grid like aether (ether) is back . But if it's not I will have to go back to feeling uncomfortable, Mike

The point I was making with Einstein and the Brownian motion was just that scientists at that time were unaware of Quarks, Strong and weak forces, Neutrinos and all the very small, dark matter, dark energy, Higgs and a lot of recent discoveries.. Thus it was 'medium or no medium,' not could light interact in any way with all the things mentioned above, because they did not know they were there, [ Quarks, Strong and weak forces, Neutrinos and all the very small, dark matter,dark energy, kasmir effect, Higgs and a lot of recent discoveries.] The issue that niggles at me, just niggles, is that everything else in waves travels through a medium . Also if an ' item' an actual 'Photon ' particle , labeled 'Photon with an x on it ' is supposed to set off at the speed of light, as a particle and head out across the universe, and arrive at 100,000 light years across the galaxy with its 'x' figuratively marked on it. I can not rest easy with it. , I suggest the mark 'x ' is still at the source ,where the wave originated. [figuratively]. But if it is just a pulse, that as a bump [ with an 'x' on it ] creates a wave , with no content, no matter, no substance travels out, that just moves out like a wave on the sea [ but quantised] , the effect , or pulse ,is what moves, then fine. It is the effect or pulse that arrives 100,000 light years away. But of course for this to be possible, it would require something to be there to pulse or effect . Wilczek seems to say there are all these loose quarks, and virtual quarks everywhere in space creating a field.[the grid ] which is already wobbling and already has a field there in existence . Surely this would make a suitable medium for light to travel in ? Is this not what he is saying ? I realize that the m-m experiment has a negative contribution answer (that we are not moving through a medium), but maybe there is a miss diagnosis of what is happening with the m-m experiment . . Maybe the medium is there, everywhere, with all matter and all space, and just not orientated. I do not know, but I think something is there to be disturbed somehow, even if the pulses are bubbles of wave?. ( like a bubble of joined up fields of electric and magnetic type.Inter reacting in the way Studiot quoted in the last post . changing from electric field to magnetic field and back and forth . [ I know studiot is similarly saying it requires no medium ] Mike

Yes, I am familiar that there was this (in and out ) of medium in the 1880-1920 period. Ending with the Michelson-Morley experiments testing for movement or otherwise with relation to space. With the removal of medium . Two things bother me slightly. 1. During that era .. The scientists like Einstein were looking at pollen grains floating on water ( for Brownian motion - atoms being buffeted ) and the like. You could still actually see things still, or in the case of the pollen [ the atoms nudging]. I have done the experiment using smoke from smoldering corrugated paper , put in a smoke cell and peer at it with a low magnification microscope. Spectacular ,( kids loved it ) . Things were still of human sized ,orders of magnitude. Nowerdays we are dealing with neutrinos of such different orders of magnitude , we live in different world , or might just as well do. So many billion neutrinos going strait through the earth and us , without them even noticing us, or us noticing them. Also we poddle around on earth , while the structures in the universe 13, billion light years away makes us so puny by account as regard size as to not be relevant. The whole universe at that distance could be moving relative to something millions of kilometers per hour , we would not notice anything , at least for 13,000,000,000 years. ( and chances are I would not be standing in the same spot ! ) So ,it's a bit rash to think that there is no possible medium in all the space from neutrino size to universe size. 2. I have a problem with absolute nothing . Totally void of anything ( which is possibly how we used to think of space ) , which we now think of ' space' , being the stuff Frank Wilczek is talking about . If absolute nothing was somewhere , I really do not think E-M would enter nothing or cross nothing , as there would be nothing to cross. Light seems to behave differently in the medium of water and glass , so maybe there is a medium many , many orders of magnitude different to us . So tests in things around our size , like people , the earth, the space just outside earth are not a fair enough for a survey for medium , possibly ! I really do not see an individual 'particle photon ' travelling all that way across space. But I can see the ' medium' being touched or disturbed , and a ' photon style wave ' moving as an effect , across vast distances. Mike