Supernova From Experimentation At Fermilab

[Walter L. Wagner]

If he is the person who posts on PhysOrg under that name, then he is completely clueless and certainly doesn't warrant being called a 'physicist' any more than my postman does.

Welcome to SciForums, AlphaNumeric

If you are the person who posts at PhysOrg under that name, then you are completely clueless to my postings at SciForums. Your recent [January 6, 2008] join date, and few posts, show you to be very un-read in the doings here at SciForums. You would do well to show a little common courtesy before attempting to detract from someone whose posts here you've not even read. My posts at PhysOrg were fully supportable, but were not intended to be fully educational on the topic posted.

As I recall, I was stating in PhysOrg that cosmic rays that impact earth, if they create novel particles such as Micro Black Holes, would cause such novel particle to have a relatively high velocity [due to the high velocity of the incoming cosmic ray, and requirement for conservation of momentum]. This is standard physics, and if you have a problem with it, you need to explain yourself rather than merely mouth off.

Indeed, the idea that mini black holes travelling at high speed should transit earth [or other celestial body] relatively unimpeded, while gloming on to perhaps a few nucleons, is nothing new. Lots of physicists have postulated such, with good reason. Indeed, many still believe that such primordial black holes still exist, virtually undetectable due to their small diameter and blackness. Only if they exploded via Hawking radiation [rather like an H-bomb going off] might we detect them with the GLAST satellite. Those that happen to transit earth would simply pass right through, absorbing only those nucleons in their immediate path, which cross-section is extremely tiny due to the tiny Schwarzschild radius. We'll know more about that after the GLAST has obtained information in that regard.

If you've got a problem with that, perhaps you should state your problem.

Best regards,

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, CERN, BROOKHAVEN AND LOS ALAMOS

The production of Type Ia Supernova from breaching the potential barrier towards de Sitter space will access the energies descibed in the following paragraph. The topological covariance of de Sitter space indicates that at every point in our spactime a sufficient energy will form a transition towards
de Sitter space.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3 , converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation. This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere, the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger for their release.

All the children will thank you for your kind actions on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixion, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[Asguard]

you people do realise he is never going to respond dont you?

 

[Billy T]

... the energy density of de Sitter space is ... 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3 ... it would be quite unlikely that energies of this order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. ...

That is an energy density too impossibly high for human comprehension. It would seem that no barrier could withstand that pressure.

To make a crude attempt to get some concept of this pressure, imagine a concrete dam, holding back a water reservoir, with the height of the dam (and depth of the water in the lake behind the dam) much greater than the distance to the moon.

I do not see how the barrier dam could hold back that huge pressure, even if it were a trillion trillion times smaller (a factor of E24 less but the energy density is still 3x10^69 grams/ cm^3 ) – Still far greater than possible for any human to imagine what that really is, even if it were again reduced a trillion trillion times more! Knock it down again by another trillion trillion times, and then at 3x10^21 grams /cm^3 perhaps being “only” 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 more concentrated mass/energy than in lead, someone (not me) might be able to imagine what that means.

Continuing the water dam analogy, the energy that humans can make with their most energetic opposing beam collisions in accelerators is like a fire hose directed on the "down-stream" side of the dam. Why should we be worried about this feeble jet of energy humans can make against our side of the barrier dam, when there is a pressure on the other side unimaginably greater?

What is the nature of the barrier that makes it capable of rupture by man's feeble efforts and yet it remains unbroken by unimaginably greater stress from the De Sitter space side of the barrier?

I have asked this question before, but Asguard is correct. There has been no answer from Paul and I expect none will ever come.

 

[Asguard]

dont feel bad billy, this thread was already here when i first joined. He has NEVER answered. He just keeps posting the same crap forever

Thats why i thought he was a bot but aparently not, hes just a wako

 

[Dinosaur]

I wish nobody would post to this thread. It would be interesting to see how often he would post to keep it alive. Perhaps if nobody posted, he might eventually give it up.

 

[Billy T]

I wish nobody would post to this thread. It would be interesting to see how often he would post to keep it alive. Perhaps if nobody posted, he might eventually give it up.

that is impossible to enforce. For some long periods he is the only poster - perhaps an unbroken chain of 10 posts.

Several have suggested that he is a major contributor to sciforums. I do not know, but if that is true, I hope he continues. - I occasionally post here, as I do in many threads, to try to expose logical flaws and other errors, but I know too little about all this to be more than 99.995% sure his point is stupid and illogical, so I just asked my never-to-be-answered questions occasionally.

 

[Vkothii]

I occasionally post here, as I do in many threads, to try to expose logical flaws and other errors

Well, at least all the children will thank you for your efforts (on someone's behalf).

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, BROOKHAVEN, CERN AND LOS ALAMOS

Highest energy physics is an experimental science and the determination of the threshold towards de Sitter space and the generation of Type 1a Supernova is now being approached via laboratory work. Where the energies now observed at Fermilab and soon at CERN approximate those found at the point origin of the Universe, it may be postulated that we are very close to the threshold values for the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.

Please review, Quantum tunnelling towards as exploding Universe? (Malcolm
J. Perry (1986) Nature 320, p. 679) as well as Dragging of Inertial Frames
(Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) We note: "Classically,
transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the
existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the transtion from the
continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of energy. The source of
energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the implosion of a stellar
envelope, conditions existing in the early Universe, or via high energy
physics experimentation. We now have an empirical experimental test of the
generalization of the equations in the General Theory of Relativity in the
Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed paid for with billions of
our tax dollars. We, therefore, await the tragic confirmation of the
Exploding Universe via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in March 2008 at
CERN with those energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. Please note, Perry (1986) "Classically, transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the
transition from the continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of
energy. The source of energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the
implosion of a stellar envelope, conditions existing in the early
Universe, or via high energy physics experimentation. We now have an
empirical experimental test of the generalization of the equations in the
General Theory of Relativity in the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is
now termed paid for with billions of our tax dollars. We, therefore, as
noted above, await the tragic confirmation of the Exploding Universe via
the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in May 2008 at CERN with those
energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. The excellent, Dragging of Inertial Frames, article in its review of the findings concerning The General Theory of Relativity indicates the confirmation of the theories
predictions up to the limits of current astrophysical observational
measurement Let us not confirm this theory once again with the
generation of a Type Ia Supernova in our planetary neighborhood.

Alas, we have achieved energies great enough to breach the potential barrier towards de Sitter space as indicated above and release energies sufficient to outshine our galaxy for some weeks of time.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely

 

[Reiku]

We already detect neutrinos from the Sun at much much lower energies. Let's see your workings.
Strangelets are not gravitationally based.
If he is the person who posts on PhysOrg under that name, then he is completely clueless and certainly doesn't warrant being called a 'physicist' any more than my postman does.

That's harsh... not so much from my stance... your idiotic dogmatism and narcy comments will not travel far round here. Dr Wagner is a brilliant physicist... moreso after this terrible conclusion.

 

[Dinosaur]

Paul's last post contains two copies of almost the same verbiage. Perhaps some cut & paste software did not notice that one article was quoting the other & copied both of them?? Does he have mental problems? does he use some software to cut & paste for hem?

 

[Reiku]

Come on now dino... no need for that.

 

[Billy T]

Paul's last post contains two copies of almost the same verbiage. Perhaps some cut & paste software did not notice that one article was quoting the other & copied both of them?? . ...

I did not notice. I have learned that when Paul's posts fill only part of the page they are just cut and past jobs not worth reading again.

 

[nixxy]

This evening at about 9 PM pst from CA. I observed a star on the eastern horizon theat was twinkling with very prononced colors of blue, red, off white, and regular star-like brightness.
I'm 51 and have never seen anything like it. Am I over the hill, or can someone explain what I seeing?

 

[Asguard]

billy, i would LOVE to do something to stir him up like a post saying "we will close this thread if you dont tell us not to" for instance

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB. CERN, BROOKHAVEN AND LOS ALAMOS

In postulatiing the origin of Type Ia Supernovae as having generation from intelligent species much like our own, it may be necessary to demonstrate the possibility of terrestrial habitats close to that found in our Solar System on our planet. As a supporting hypothesis for this postulation, we may ascribe to the uniformity of nature across the observable universe. In this sense, therefore, the current findings of planetary systems which may have rocky planetary bodies in similar confiigurations to our solar sytem would be supportive evidence. Wiith the discovery of such systems now extant, this finding may be generalized without too great a stretch of the imagination to the trillions of possible locations in our galaxy and in other galaxies where some exemplars of Type Ia Supernovae have been observed.

Please note: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331107,00.html or
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3041220.stm

Let us not plunge blindly into the unknown and through a laboratory mischance create a Type Ia Supernova at Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois or now at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts in their behalf

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, CERN, BROOKHAVEN AND LOS ALAMOS

Please review this presentation on Type Ia Supernovae.

These supernovae are sufficiently uniform as to be used as standard candles in observational cosmology. While they are believed to form as a neighboring star has hydrogen siphoned off of it to form sufficient mass to produce the implosion necessary for supernova generation from a white dwarf, there is no trace of hydogen at the time of maximum light. Also, the process of ignition is not known. The hypothesis that sentient entitites much like ourselves
create Type Ia Supernovae is therefore brought forward. Should we be the only ones to create Tyoe Ia Supernova this would in a sense go against the uniformity of Nature. If on the other hand, they are noted arising as uniquely bright events that outshine their respective galaxies of origination throughout the cosmos, this would indicated that the possiblity of causing a Type Ia Supernova from experimentation is a frequent and uniform event. At this time all of the major leaders in high-energy physics are familiar with this postulation. May we therefor call for a moratorium on this line of research until the parameters controlling a transition towards de Sitter space are better understood.
http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~pmricker/research/type1a/

We may combine this information with the preceeding post regarding the
current observation of planetary systems now being discovered.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[Dinosaur]

An interesting thought on this issue.

Type 1A supernovas are used to estimate distances because their intrinsic brightness is known. Hence the observed brightness can be used to estimate distance.

Due to the above, cosmologists as well as observational astronomers study & know of many of these super novae. I wonder how many are in the habitable zone of the galaxy containing them. Any not in a habitable zone are not candidates for being caused by the activity of an intelligent species.

I think Paul's concept is bogus & this might provide another rational argument against his notions.

 

[MetaKron]

I repeat, we can't get that lucky.

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, CERN, BROOKHAVEN AND LOS ALAMOS

A natural question in this connection is why are these experiments being conducted. It may be noted in this connection that the world we see is constructed from just six particles, three matter particles (up quarks, down quarks and electrons), two force quanta (photons and gluons, and Higgs bosons, There are three sets of particles where each set is heavier than the preceeding set with the interactions of the particles in each set being the same as the preceeding set. The standard model cannot explain these differences. (Kane, G. (2005) The mysteries of mass, Scientific American 293, 1, 40-48) We may postulate that the vast explosion at the point origin of the universe may have produced at lest three wave actions that are reflected in these increasing masses of these fundamental particles as three separate waves propagated in the fields which embody electromagnetism, as well as the weak and strong interatomic binding forces. May we recommend more theoretical work in this connection rather than empirical to leave our world intact for every child as they grow older.

Every child will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Every Best Wish !!!

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation