Silverback
Registered Senior Member
LOL! Ok, now you have to invent a name for this "beyond spam" product.Nasor said:
Supernova From Experimentation At Fermilab
- Thread starter Paul W. Dixon
- Start date
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
All good thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
So far these communications have extended for the past 28 years regarding the possibility of creating a Type Ia Supernova from high-energy physics experimentation. In all of this correspondence over these many years, there has been no refutation of this postulation regarding the creation of a Supernova via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space. This correspondence has included the entire world of science. It may, therefore, be recommended that this notification continue since there may yet be a chance, no matter how remote, that this final, awful cataclysm may yet be averted!
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
All good thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
So far these communications have extended for the past 28 years regarding the possibility of creating a Type Ia Supernova from high-energy physics experimentation. In all of this correspondence over these many years, there has been no refutation of this postulation regarding the creation of a Supernova via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space. This correspondence has included the entire world of science. It may, therefore, be recommended that this notification continue since there may yet be a chance, no matter how remote, that this final, awful cataclysm may yet be averted!
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Last edited:
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FEMILAB
All thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
As mentioned previously, high-energy physics experimentation is an empirical science. The most respected and reliable theory in the realm of science is that of relativistic cosmology. It is this theory which predicts supernova generation from high-energy physics experimentation.
We can continue to increase the energies in the collider at Fermilab and elsewhere and in this way verify the predications of relativistic cosmology. Or more sensibly, we can take the prudent course, and declare a moratorium on such research until the parameters underlying relativistic cosmology are better understood. In this way, we can preserve the life of all mankind and assure a future existence to our children.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
All thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
As mentioned previously, high-energy physics experimentation is an empirical science. The most respected and reliable theory in the realm of science is that of relativistic cosmology. It is this theory which predicts supernova generation from high-energy physics experimentation.
We can continue to increase the energies in the collider at Fermilab and elsewhere and in this way verify the predications of relativistic cosmology. Or more sensibly, we can take the prudent course, and declare a moratorium on such research until the parameters underlying relativistic cosmology are better understood. In this way, we can preserve the life of all mankind and assure a future existence to our children.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
My god this is BIG!!! What a discovery of immense and emanate nature! It has now been found on this forum something of truly revolutionary thinking: the discovery of… the characteristic of being beyond spam!!!
we are making real progress here!
we are making real progress here!
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
Many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
It is essential to continue with the ongoing public notice of the experimentation at Fermilab else all is lost. Since there has been no reply to the theoretical derivation from relativistic cosmology that this line of research will create a Type Ia Supernova, it is essential to bring to the attention of the general public that this kind of research will lead to species suicide.
Al the children will thank you for your prompt efforts on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
It is essential to continue with the ongoing public notice of the experimentation at Fermilab else all is lost. Since there has been no reply to the theoretical derivation from relativistic cosmology that this line of research will create a Type Ia Supernova, it is essential to bring to the attention of the general public that this kind of research will lead to species suicide.
Al the children will thank you for your prompt efforts on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL BEST WISHES,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Uh, Paul - "species suicide" would suggest that every living organism within a species would commit suicide.
This thread has obviously outlived its usefullness. Paul is doing nothing but repeating the same thing over and over. Any other thread under these guidelines has been closed. The same should apply here.
Paul is therefore spamming this forum and should be warned.
This thread has obviously outlived its usefullness. Paul is doing nothing but repeating the same thing over and over. Any other thread under these guidelines has been closed. The same should apply here.
Paul is therefore spamming this forum and should be warned.
Paul has been on this crusade for 28 years (see a recent post). When the hydrogen bomb was being tested in 1950-1955, there were some who claimed that a runaway fusion reaction would be triggered causing all the hydrogen in the oceans to fuse. This would not be as catastrophic as a Type 1A supernova, but it would be very unpleasant.
I wonder if Paul, or perhaps his father, was part of that protest.
I wonder if Paul, or perhaps his father, was part of that protest.
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
Many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
So far in the recent values in the CDF at Fermilab have been at 42.96E30 luminosity with energetics at near 2TeV. Though this is not a moratorium on all high-energy physics research this shows some moderation at this point in time.
In a review concerned with the very existence of our planet and our species, it would be hoped that a reply would be made to the scientific principles brought forward in this thread rather than to semantic arguments that do not address those scientific questions of import. As mentioned previously, this is a sciforum and therefore a refutation in matters of science should be given.
A formal request to David Watanabe to review this form of censorship is, therefore, made.
Those who find irrefutable evidence that the high-energy physicists are about to destroy our planet disturbing should perhaps address the media about this possibility. To not acknowledge this possibility through censorship, is to use the ego-defence mechanism of Denial. A Dr. Johnson, a well-recognized geologist refused to leave the summit of Mt. St. Helens, stating that he wanted to stay and observe the eruption. He then perished as the volcano exploded.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL GOOD WISHES!
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most tragic concern.
So far in the recent values in the CDF at Fermilab have been at 42.96E30 luminosity with energetics at near 2TeV. Though this is not a moratorium on all high-energy physics research this shows some moderation at this point in time.
In a review concerned with the very existence of our planet and our species, it would be hoped that a reply would be made to the scientific principles brought forward in this thread rather than to semantic arguments that do not address those scientific questions of import. As mentioned previously, this is a sciforum and therefore a refutation in matters of science should be given.
A formal request to David Watanabe to review this form of censorship is, therefore, made.
Those who find irrefutable evidence that the high-energy physicists are about to destroy our planet disturbing should perhaps address the media about this possibility. To not acknowledge this possibility through censorship, is to use the ego-defence mechanism of Denial. A Dr. Johnson, a well-recognized geologist refused to leave the summit of Mt. St. Helens, stating that he wanted to stay and observe the eruption. He then perished as the volcano exploded.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls.
ALL GOOD WISHES!
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
lets all get to finding a name for this new form of super spam.
Paul sez:
In a review concerned with the very existence of our planet and our species, it would be hoped that a reply would be made to the scientific principles brought forward in this thread rather than to semantic arguments that do not address those scientific questions of import. As mentioned previously, this is a sciforum and therefore a refutation in matters of science should be given.
Paul, that has been done on countless occasions over the 3+ years life of this thread and you have chosen to ignore those arguments, especially the ones that refute your claims. And over all that time, not one single person has ever agreed with you. Shouldn't that ring a bell somewhere?
At this point, all you offer is spam.
In a review concerned with the very existence of our planet and our species, it would be hoped that a reply would be made to the scientific principles brought forward in this thread rather than to semantic arguments that do not address those scientific questions of import. As mentioned previously, this is a sciforum and therefore a refutation in matters of science should be given.
Paul, that has been done on countless occasions over the 3+ years life of this thread and you have chosen to ignore those arguments, especially the ones that refute your claims. And over all that time, not one single person has ever agreed with you. Shouldn't that ring a bell somewhere?
At this point, all you offer is spam.
Hold it right there Q.
I agree with Paul! How could someone named Paul W. Dixon be wrong? He is right we are about to erradicate the planet!
(Just kidding he's a nutter)
I agree with Paul! How could someone named Paul W. Dixon be wrong? He is right we are about to erradicate the planet!
(Just kidding he's a nutter)
what ever a mooninite says must be right, right?
Three Strikes and I'm Out
I have posted this same refutation twice before so this the last time. And really people it isn't hard to follow. A given amount of energy in a certain volume is energy density. In this case the units of energy are electron volts (eV) and volume is cubic centimeters. The transition into de Sitter space relies on reaching enormous energy densities. Not that it should make a difference to my argument, but I do have a Ph. D. in physics from a Big Ten school and have been working in a government lab for many years. And don't be swayed by Dixon's vague terms like "energetics", that is not physics. And luminosity is not a unit of energy either. So here it is:
Energy density in the early universe versus Fermilab beam.
In a very readable little book called 'The first Three Minutes' (1977) by Steven Weinberg (Nobel prize in physics), he describes the conditions of the universe shortly after the big bang. The earliest he believes we can really describe is 0.01 seconds. At that time the temperature was 1E11 degrees K and the energy density was 21E41 eV per cubic cm.
The Fermilab beam is made of bunches of protons and antiprotons traveling in opposite directions. The highest energy density in the beam is when one bunch (2.7E11 protons) overlaps with a bunch of antiprotons (3.0E10 antiprotons). The length of a bunch is about 8 nanoseconds which at the speed of light is 240 cm long. Some of these data come from the reference in my earlier post, but the others came from other spots on their website. They are able to focus the cross-section of the bunches down to 0.015 cm by 0.015 cm. The better the focusing the more interactions there are between the particles. The energy per particle is 1E12 eV (1 TeV).
So the energy density for two colliding bunches is 3.0E11 particles times 1E12 eV per particle divided by the volume (240 cm * 0.015 cm * 0.015 cm).
Fermilab beam: 5.6E24 eV per cubic cm.
Early universe: 21E41 eV per cubic cm.
The energy density of the early universe is almost 18 orders of magnitude larger than the Fermilab beam. The beam is almost a million million million times weaker so there is nothing to worry about!
Strike, strike, strike !!!!! No more posts until Dixon addresses this refutation!
I have posted this same refutation twice before so this the last time. And really people it isn't hard to follow. A given amount of energy in a certain volume is energy density. In this case the units of energy are electron volts (eV) and volume is cubic centimeters. The transition into de Sitter space relies on reaching enormous energy densities. Not that it should make a difference to my argument, but I do have a Ph. D. in physics from a Big Ten school and have been working in a government lab for many years. And don't be swayed by Dixon's vague terms like "energetics", that is not physics. And luminosity is not a unit of energy either. So here it is:
Energy density in the early universe versus Fermilab beam.
In a very readable little book called 'The first Three Minutes' (1977) by Steven Weinberg (Nobel prize in physics), he describes the conditions of the universe shortly after the big bang. The earliest he believes we can really describe is 0.01 seconds. At that time the temperature was 1E11 degrees K and the energy density was 21E41 eV per cubic cm.
The Fermilab beam is made of bunches of protons and antiprotons traveling in opposite directions. The highest energy density in the beam is when one bunch (2.7E11 protons) overlaps with a bunch of antiprotons (3.0E10 antiprotons). The length of a bunch is about 8 nanoseconds which at the speed of light is 240 cm long. Some of these data come from the reference in my earlier post, but the others came from other spots on their website. They are able to focus the cross-section of the bunches down to 0.015 cm by 0.015 cm. The better the focusing the more interactions there are between the particles. The energy per particle is 1E12 eV (1 TeV).
So the energy density for two colliding bunches is 3.0E11 particles times 1E12 eV per particle divided by the volume (240 cm * 0.015 cm * 0.015 cm).
Fermilab beam: 5.6E24 eV per cubic cm.
Early universe: 21E41 eV per cubic cm.
The energy density of the early universe is almost 18 orders of magnitude larger than the Fermilab beam. The beam is almost a million million million times weaker so there is nothing to worry about!
Strike, strike, strike !!!!! No more posts until Dixon addresses this refutation!
Steven23,
Let me clue you in here: the man is a bot! All he is is a program that post this carp, it can't responded! After 3 years nothing been done about it, there we have found that this is spam beyond all other spam and this phenomenon must be given a name worthy of its characteristics.
Let me clue you in here: the man is a bot! All he is is a program that post this carp, it can't responded! After 3 years nothing been done about it, there we have found that this is spam beyond all other spam and this phenomenon must be given a name worthy of its characteristics.
rmascatello
Registered Member
In my fictional short story written in 1995, I describe a situation whereby the Fermlab tevatron is upgraded in such a way as to utilize cosmic rays into a collector and superconducting magnets to generate 10 to the 33 electron volts which is enough energy to create a wormhole. I visited the Fermilab and was invited to a private tour. Also discussed concept with leading scientific authorities. I know this to be true. I somehow stumbled upon it by intuition and 2 years of research.
I think that this link will help you see that there is nothing to worry about
http://www.world-mysteries.com/toi_esavov.htm
http://www.world-mysteries.com/toi_esavov.htm
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNVOA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
Many thanks to everyone for your continuing efforts in this most tragic concern.
The energetics at Fermilab are now at luminosity 48.27E30 at slightly under 2 TeV. We need to continue with these efforts at Fermilab until a moratorium is declared on all further reserarch as long as the essential paratmeters for forming a transition towards de Sitter space are unknown. In this way, a most tragic laboratory mischance may be avoided.
Please take a moment and approach the directorate at both Fermilab and CERN with the WEAK/PUNY Fermilab energetics hypothesis.. It is from these laboratories that the assertion comes that the energetics now employed are those found only some trillionths of a second after the point origin of the Universe, i.e., the Big Bang.
Also presented, is the poetical notion that the enrtire Universe consists of series of whorled patterns, only at different dimensional scales. This is a beautiful conceptual framework and only needs more work to harmonize it with physical reality. May we term this the, "Whorled Beauty Hypothesis," for universal origins.
ALL BEST WISHES
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Many thanks to everyone for your continuing efforts in this most tragic concern.
The energetics at Fermilab are now at luminosity 48.27E30 at slightly under 2 TeV. We need to continue with these efforts at Fermilab until a moratorium is declared on all further reserarch as long as the essential paratmeters for forming a transition towards de Sitter space are unknown. In this way, a most tragic laboratory mischance may be avoided.
Please take a moment and approach the directorate at both Fermilab and CERN with the WEAK/PUNY Fermilab energetics hypothesis.. It is from these laboratories that the assertion comes that the energetics now employed are those found only some trillionths of a second after the point origin of the Universe, i.e., the Big Bang.
Also presented, is the poetical notion that the enrtire Universe consists of series of whorled patterns, only at different dimensional scales. This is a beautiful conceptual framework and only needs more work to harmonize it with physical reality. May we term this the, "Whorled Beauty Hypothesis," for universal origins.
ALL BEST WISHES
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
Many, many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most salient concern.
The chart of Collider Run II Peak Luminosity shows a point of inflection at 50E30. Should we continue with this work we may be able to keep the luminosity values at this level or less. This would be a major factor in keeping this research at a safe level until the theoretical thresholds for a transition towards de Sitter space have been derived from Relativistic Cosmology.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good Goc have mercy on our souls.
EVERY BEST WISH!!!
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Many, many thanks to everyone for your prompt actions in this most salient concern.
The chart of Collider Run II Peak Luminosity shows a point of inflection at 50E30. Should we continue with this work we may be able to keep the luminosity values at this level or less. This would be a major factor in keeping this research at a safe level until the theoretical thresholds for a transition towards de Sitter space have been derived from Relativistic Cosmology.
All the children will thank you for your prompt actions on their behalf and may the good Goc have mercy on our souls.
EVERY BEST WISH!!!
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB
Many, many thanks to everyone for your most prompt actions in this tragic concern.
We may note in this conection, the current values for the Tevatron are in the
50.00E30 range at some 2 TeV energetics. Monitoring of these values is significant from an historical viewpoint since the work at the Tevatron involves plans that extend to the end of the decade in 2009. This planned work is to examine violations of CPT invariance to determine if this gave rise to the preponderance of matter in contrast to antimatter in the observable Universe. This research effort will involve examination of the B meson in modified forms of the CDF at Fermilab. A more complete examination of the generation of the hypothetical Higgs particle, will become operational, it is now thought, around 2007 in the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. Since this continuing research effort will require vast increments in energetics, it is important that there be ongoing monitoring of these increments in energetics from a safety perspective. Since everyone's continued existence is at stake as well as the continued existence of our species, it well behooves us to gather together what resources and mechanisms of international recognition that are necessary for this continuing most vital, emergency, safety effort.
All the children will thank you for prompt and vigorous efforts on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls!
All Best Wishes,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Many, many thanks to everyone for your most prompt actions in this tragic concern.
We may note in this conection, the current values for the Tevatron are in the
50.00E30 range at some 2 TeV energetics. Monitoring of these values is significant from an historical viewpoint since the work at the Tevatron involves plans that extend to the end of the decade in 2009. This planned work is to examine violations of CPT invariance to determine if this gave rise to the preponderance of matter in contrast to antimatter in the observable Universe. This research effort will involve examination of the B meson in modified forms of the CDF at Fermilab. A more complete examination of the generation of the hypothetical Higgs particle, will become operational, it is now thought, around 2007 in the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. Since this continuing research effort will require vast increments in energetics, it is important that there be ongoing monitoring of these increments in energetics from a safety perspective. Since everyone's continued existence is at stake as well as the continued existence of our species, it well behooves us to gather together what resources and mechanisms of international recognition that are necessary for this continuing most vital, emergency, safety effort.
All the children will thank you for prompt and vigorous efforts on their behalf and may the good God have mercy on our souls!
All Best Wishes,
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation