deleted as unnecessary
Last edited:
Runaway Global Warming
- Thread starter Facial
- Start date
No. only you consider the great attractor to be an anomaly. Its mass was over estimated initially by about a factor of 10 back when a much larger mass, the Shapley Supercluster, was not known. Neither is an anomaly. - Both are very consistent with known physical laws. (More in blue text below.)
On (1a) No two different centers of mass (for the same set of masses) are not possible as that would be inconsistent with the DEFINITION of Center of "A" where "A" is a well defined set of items.
On (1b) I have no idea what you are speaking of and doubt you do either. What sort of math describes these things? Are skilled in the use of it? What is this "hyper surface of the present"? For me the "present" is the junction between the immutable past and the unknown future in my inertial frame. What is you definition of "present" that mixes in ANY other frame, space, or "hyper surface of the present"? Are you endorsing the "parallel universe" idea - that with every QM wave function collapse a new complete universe comes into being, which is not observable as in some "hyper space" ?
The "great attractor" is just a larger version of the "local group" of gravitationally interacting (probably mutually bound at least for many trillions of years) galaxies (Ours, Andromeda, and about 28 others), but it is not even the largest such group of mutually bound (by very well understood gravity forces) masses. If scientifically advanced life exist on some very distant planet, but not too far away, they may call this group of 30 galaxies: "The little attractor." Perhaps they even have a not well informed CC there claiming it is an "anomaly."?
The only "anomaly" here is in your head and based on ignorance, I assume, as the causing facts are known, but there is still considerable uncertainty about the total mass in the great attractor and exactly how far from our galaxy it is because to "see" it in telescopes is impossible as they must look thru the mass of stars in our own galaxy. The details of the geometric distribution of its individual mass concentrations (there relative locations wrt each other) is totally unknown still.
On (2) Man understands little about the nature of Dark Flow - not even sure it is anything but a name for some not yet understood observations. Thus this ignorance does not PROOVE anything. No we understand what we are measuring, observing, just not what is the physical cause and are assuming one (other than the "hand of God") does exist to be discovered.
Not my logic or conclusion. I.e. I agree the great attractor exists but it is not the largest distant concentration of masses. In fact I computed with gravity's inverse square law for forces and the inverse cube law for tidal stresses that your great attractor, as main cause of global warming instead of CO2, was more than a 1000, trillion times less important than CO2's effect on global warming.
My computations show that even the tiny (0.144 solar masses) Barnard's Star was much more important than the Great Attractor, both of which can only act on the solar system (earth's separation from sun / its orbit) via their gravity fields (assuming we rule out magic and the Hand of God). Are you POSTUALTING FOR YOUR "PROOF" that when large masse are mutually bound some "fifth force" begins to operate? Only four are known.
More NON-SENSE from your fertile imagination. The great attractor is a mutually interacting, probably bound, set of masses with some part still in the gasses phase, not yet condensed into stars, but its mutual gravitational inter actions quite possible can eject one current member from the cluster, if time extends "for ever." That will even happen to some members of our solar system in the very distant future. A large set of gravitational bound masses tend to exhibit this "ejection of a member" if you wait long enough. I.e. many mutual gravitational "scattering" can eventually give some member the "escape velocity."
You can hold an opinion, with zero supporting evidence - many do about existence of God, some about the existence of "witches" etc. but I prefer to hold beliefs with supporting evidence. Again, very little is known about "dark flow" - It is only a name referring to some measurement, observation, results not yet understood - not evidence of any violation of well established laws of physic.
Physic is a "work in progress" not a completed area of knowledge. All the observations we don't yet understand usually are opportunities for new refinements to it. Ignorance* is not a proof that what is known is wrong. At this stage of man's understanding, it is highly probable that new understanding will only slightly revise the huge body of acquired knowledge, like Relativity did for classical physics, but that revision is normally so small that the old knowledge is still very useful. For example classical gravity laws are what is used to send space craft into orbit around Mars, etc.
* Certainly not yours nor even the ignorance of well qualified Ph. D.s in physics.
Last edited by a moderator:
No we are still at cross purposes.
Try this example:
Time machine is developed and sends something backwards in time a set amount, creates a situation that requires the present moment to change to suit the now changed past. The present fades as it reconfigures to suit the new past. During this process there are at least two COG's for any mass.
Gosh you know the ole time paradox often referred to in fiction don't you?
The anomaly I speak of involves t=0 and t=0' occurring simultaneously in the present moment. The inertial COGs relates uniquely to each simultaneously. The separation being in time not so much distance. [however distance would be involved marginally]
The anomaly I refer to generates a time paradox. Thus generating two COGS in an inertial frame that have been forced apart and are now attempting to reunite as they must [heal], hence our planets warming and climate change is a part of a universal self justified reunification process.
I might add, I have reason to believe that evidence to support what I am saying is currently evolving and may present itself with in the next 12 months. Organic and non-organic.
The dramatic increase in vortex type atmospheric weather phenomena [hurricane, typhoon, tornado, spouts etc] and seismic build up, should peak sometime in the next 6 months or so.
I am not entirely sure, but you may wish to hold on to your hat as it could get a tad rough...
Last edited:
this is why i wrote:
I do not intend a criticism but merely stating what is already accepted.
Yes but QQ is working on his Ph.D. (Non-Sense Pilled Higher & Deeper.) with this idea multiple simultaneous times that are the same present time (T1, T2, T3, .... all the same instant but different.).
Last edited by a moderator:
Barycenter could do quite nicely. I often refer to the center of a system as being a COG however Bary center could be used I guess.
Unless you have reason to think other wise?
actually the limit to my "insanity" is for only two time lines occurring with in all mass and not more... t=0 & t=0'
Irony:
But if you want you can have as many as you like Billy T....[ indirect reference to: SRT : Relativity of Simultaneity
]
Last edited:
Well .. I am in good company. You believe that "length contraction" aka SRT, can be accepted (over 100 years) with out underlying mechanism explained like most theoretical physicists, do you not?
The metric for what is sane and what isn't sane ain't that clear now is it? Especially in today's world, or hadn't you noticed!?
Last edited:
I was going to create an animation but I see wiki has already got one that will do:
You will note the obvious.
That the Bary Center, indicated by the red cross, is slightly off center from the COG of the larger mass and is rotating.
If we imagine the larger mass is a star made up of plasma attracted to it's core COG and that the planets that orbit provide another COG referred to as a Bary Center.
Over all the two COG's are in play and interacting with each other. Generating tension and in a stars case possibly a stable nuclear fusion. [based on the premise that if there was no cog conflict inside the star fusion would not be taking place.]
Hypothesis: ( waiting for conclusive evidence)
Now along comes an anomaly that introduces another set of COG's (t=0') that closely imitate the existing set and the dynamic stability of the system is altered to accommodate the extra cog conflict provided.
Result: Fusion reaction increases. Dynamic range increases.
Premise: All matter was in a state of stable fusion.
Outcome: All matter show signs of slight extraordinary heating as a result of anomaly. [thus hyper thermia demonstrated in organics]
Planet and all life over heats from with in, due to increased nuclear Fusion reaction, with initial high level spike in 1985/86.
Results in:
Massive climate change
Massive diminishing health (both physical and mental) of global human population.
*research note: changes to metabolism, food <=> to energy <=> obesity <=> diabetes <=> (severe) Nodding Disease in Nth Uganda.
and more....
You will note the obvious.
That the Bary Center, indicated by the red cross, is slightly off center from the COG of the larger mass and is rotating.
If we imagine the larger mass is a star made up of plasma attracted to it's core COG and that the planets that orbit provide another COG referred to as a Bary Center.
Over all the two COG's are in play and interacting with each other. Generating tension and in a stars case possibly a stable nuclear fusion. [based on the premise that if there was no cog conflict inside the star fusion would not be taking place.]
Hypothesis: ( waiting for conclusive evidence)
Now along comes an anomaly that introduces another set of COG's (t=0') that closely imitate the existing set and the dynamic stability of the system is altered to accommodate the extra cog conflict provided.
Result: Fusion reaction increases. Dynamic range increases.
Premise: All matter was in a state of stable fusion.
Outcome: All matter show signs of slight extraordinary heating as a result of anomaly. [thus hyper thermia demonstrated in organics]
Planet and all life over heats from with in, due to increased nuclear Fusion reaction, with initial high level spike in 1985/86.
Results in:
Massive climate change
Massive diminishing health (both physical and mental) of global human population.
*research note: changes to metabolism, food <=> to energy <=> obesity <=> diabetes <=> (severe) Nodding Disease in Nth Uganda.
and more....
Last edited:
Yes, two different sets of mass points will have two different COG. But still no one set of masses can have two different COGs as you have claimed as that violates the definition of COG (or the general definition of "center of any A" where A is a well defined set, as I have twice told and defined for you.
You will note the obvious. That the Bary Center, indicated by the red cross, is slightly off center from the COG of the larger mass and is rotating. ...
I told and illustrated that here (for the second time):
That is all your illustration is showing: different mass distribution have different COGs.
There are no "gravitational anomalies" and no gravitational force in or assembling from a gas cloud a mass collections the size of Jupiter or less can cause fusion. It id not gravity that causes fusion in the solar core but the high temperature (very high kinetic energy per hydrogen which has a distribution of energies, the extreme "high energy tail of the distribution does had enough KE per particle that it two from the tail of the distribution function happen to be headed directly at each other (very rare event) the can get close enough to each other despite the electrostatic repulsion of the two positive nuclei, to enter into the range of the extremely short ranges of the nuclear force and that fuses them to He.
Gravity in the sun has nothing to do with this process, although many millions of years ago when the sun to be was a gas cloud, it was the gravitational energy released as those gases "fell together" under mutual gravitational attraction that heated the core up to >100,000 C temperatures required for any fusion.
Last edited by a moderator:
and the rest of my post indicates why there may be as I claim...
center of any system A = t=0
center of any system A' = t=0'
combined effect = system A(') = t=0 + t=0'
System A(') = t=0(')
Last edited:
I don't know it there is any sensible content to this or not. It seems to be just ill defined "symbol soup." !!!
I do know that any gravitational "combined effect," comes from ONE combined gravitation mass set and it has one COG.
To me it is not all that important.
What is most important is that the fear [paranoia] of an Earth extinction event that is running wild in the world's collective mind today**, be mitigated with the "idea" [ true or not ] that what we as a race are experiencing is a world that is in the process of healing itself from a fundamental anomaly [time paradox] manifesting around the 1980's. That the ride may be tough and rough but if we learn to manage our fear, co-operate and help each other better the outcome will be less tragic than would other wise be the case.
There is evidence that this "healing" or re-unification is making progress which is why I am bothering to mention the anomaly at all.
Two key factors:
The significant drop in the number of SIDS cases [re: 1988]
The inexplicable cessation of new case diagnosis for the inexplicable (by conventional medicine) Nodding Disease, Nth Uganda.
Sure what I am writing seems like madness on the surface and I can wear that if I must... the proof as they say is in the "pudding" any how.
I believe whether correctly or not that the sheer fact that my daughter, born 1984, is still alive today even if suffering chronic asthma, is direct evidence of a world healing itself of SIDS.
** the apocalyptic, End times, ISIL activity in Iraq and Syria
***The worlds reaction to the Ebola crisis in West Africa.
What is most important is that the fear [paranoia] of an Earth extinction event that is running wild in the world's collective mind today**, be mitigated with the "idea" [ true or not ] that what we as a race are experiencing is a world that is in the process of healing itself from a fundamental anomaly [time paradox] manifesting around the 1980's. That the ride may be tough and rough but if we learn to manage our fear, co-operate and help each other better the outcome will be less tragic than would other wise be the case.
There is evidence that this "healing" or re-unification is making progress which is why I am bothering to mention the anomaly at all.
Two key factors:
The significant drop in the number of SIDS cases [re: 1988]
The inexplicable cessation of new case diagnosis for the inexplicable (by conventional medicine) Nodding Disease, Nth Uganda.
Sure what I am writing seems like madness on the surface and I can wear that if I must... the proof as they say is in the "pudding" any how.
I believe whether correctly or not that the sheer fact that my daughter, born 1984, is still alive today even if suffering chronic asthma, is direct evidence of a world healing itself of SIDS.
** the apocalyptic, End times, ISIL activity in Iraq and Syria
***The worlds reaction to the Ebola crisis in West Africa.
Last edited:
I believe that the reduction in SIDS has been caused by prevention of SIDS through better infant care.
This is true but most of all it was because parents were monitoring their children during their sleep considerably more. [Baby heart monitors were being used as well]
Global consciousness that something was wrong generally made people more proactive in regards to the threat of SIDS.
The Red Nose Day campaign made a big difference IMO.
However medical science still has no idea what was causing SIDS and on that basis they have no idea of what caused the sudden drop in the number of deaths around 1988 either.***
Similar for Nodding disease in Nth Uganda ( an utterly bizarre and bewildering condition )
*** in most cases the baby "over heating" in the cot was intuitively suggested. (which proves my point about hyper thermia being present)
*** one of the treatments for sudden and acute onset asthma symptoms is "cold" bath immersion as well to minimise over heating during an attack.
and I might add the docs. don't know what causes asthma either...
nor why asthma is in huge decline [ good news also]
http://www.asthmaaustralia.org.au/Asthma_rates_decline.aspx
Last edited:
Actually, they do. They know that good sleep positions reduce the risk of SIDS, as does using sleep sacks, small blankets (small enough to not occlude all air when placed over the head) and "clean" (uncluttered) sleep areas. When these mitigations are used, SIDS is reduced. Since these mitigations were begun in the late 1980's, they resulted in the reduction of SIDS incidents.
But they do know that steroids and bronchiodilators can reduce the effects of asthma, and thus know why asthma deaths (not incidence, but deaths) are down.
Perhaps of you look at the distinction between "cause" and "treatment" you might wish to reassess your retort.
Not really. They have a very good idea of what caused the sudden drop in the number of deaths around 1988 - effective prevention.