Supernova From Experimentation At Fermilab
- Thread starter Paul W. Dixon
- Start date
joepistole would like to see your calculations that it would take mere generations.
Which black hole model are you using? http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2019950#2019950
What is the definition of minimal size?
What is the cross-section for formation at the RHIC? at the LHC?
Is it possible for black holes in that model to grow at terrestrial densities?
How long, in SI units, will it take?
Which black hole model are you using? http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2019950#2019950
What is the definition of minimal size?
What is the cross-section for formation at the RHIC? at the LHC?
Is it possible for black holes in that model to grow at terrestrial densities?
How long, in SI units, will it take?
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN
A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.
Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.
Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.
There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.
Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.
From the LHC Machine Outreach
The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.
The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.
As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.
May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.
Update on the research progress at CERN.
End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.
We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm
The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/
Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)
It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.
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.
With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.
This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.
From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.
All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.
Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.
Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.
There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.
Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.
From the LHC Machine Outreach
The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.
The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.
As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.
May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.
Update on the research progress at CERN.
End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.
We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm
The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/
Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)
It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.
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.
With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.
This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.
From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.
All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
And yet Fermilab never did destroy the Earth. So hardly 'inevitable'. And you continue to lie about the energy of the collisions.
Must be depressing for you, having to lie so much about science, your qualifications, your claims and even scientists. I guess that's why you stopped entering into discussions in this thread and ignore everyone who shows you are a liar and a fraud.
You do know "Paul" is just a bot? He sometimes comes in as a human though. The thread will exist as long as paul donates money to the forum, on another note I was reading though this thread and it follows the evolution of me, its brings back memories.
Last edited:
I challenge you (or Paul) to find even once in this long thread where Paul directly responded to even repeated direct questions. Paul could not have "stopped"- he never did enter into discussions.
AlphaNumeric's work just got easier:
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=38313#38313
This challenge seems pointless.
He does? That explains why the thread is not in pseudoscience or locked, particularly after so long.
http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=38313&postcount=3
Wow, the third post in this very thread! You really do dive in head first without even an iota of thought, don't you?
Here, in blue, in its entirety, is that post you site as “discussion”:
"... Dear Crisp,
Alas, as is well known, the energies now employed at Fermilab are equivalent to those found at the point origin of the universe, i.e. the "Big Bang." This energy level is not found in the examples which you have provided. Please send your email address to <dixon@hawaii.edu> for further information.
A very common defense mechanism used in this kind of difificulty is that of denial. There was a very famous geologist who remained on Mt. St. Helens at the point of its cataclysmic eruption. When asked why he was not leaving, he said he was just staying to observe. He perished at the time of the great eruption. His name was Dr. Johnson.
Many thanks for your kind interest in these matters. Let us proceed in these matters before all is lost.
Yours sincerely, Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation ..."
It is as usual. Paul is just repeating his claims, not making any discussion. Just because it starts "Dear Chris" does not make it "discussion" (of physics). Nor does simply telling someone they are wrong make it discussion. I admit that there is much of this thread I have not read, but you are going back seven years to find this so called "discussion."
I know from trying that Paul does not respond to direct questions about physics. At least not in the posts I have read has he ever done so. It is not something one needs to think more than an “iota” about. - I have some years of experience before you were even active here. I based my comment that Paul “could not stop to discuss” on that - namely he never has discussed points of physics I and others have raised. He just repeats his claimed danger, occasionally increasing the level at which it is to be expected as energies higher than his last "danger at hand now" levels are exceeded.
SUMMARY:
Paul has not stopped discussing as he never did start.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you trying to redefine the meaning of 'never' to be 'not in the last 6 years'? The fact of the matter is that Paul read and replied to peoples' posts at some point in the past. Yes, he wasn't very talkative but he did respond to peoples' questions. After a while he went into 'Bot-mode' and for much of the last 6 years he's been failing the Turing Test.
Perhaps if you were a little less polarised in your comments you'd stop putting your foot in it?
No. I only point out that the post you cited is not discussion. It is only the same as most of Paul's posts - regurgitation of his claims that we are in danger, others are wrong, etc. I quoted your link in its entirety - where is there any discussion of a physical objection someone has raised* in it other than repeating his claims, as he has for 7 years.
---------------
*For example I have pointed (and your have later repeated some of these points) out:
(1) Cosmic rays make much more energetic collisions
(2) Very old, GenIII, type II supernovas have been observed - long before intelligent beings existed anywhere in the universe. (Assuming they cannot be made for hydrogen and helium gases alone.)
(4) The if the De Sitter barrier were ruptured the energy on both sides would reach a common temperature
(5) That there is no plausible reason to expected the rupture to self heal - I called this the "little Dutch boy" problem.
(6) That if it is total energy rather than the single collision energy that is the danger then the Queen Marry at full speed has more.
(7) That the duration, t, of each collision in the colliding beams is very short compared to the time between collisions, T. I.e. that t <<< T. To make this clear I imagined a "time magnifier" which expanded t to be one second and then show the next collision would be at least a week later and the typical one months later so it was silly to treat them all as one event.
Never to even one of these seven objections did Paul directly respond. He does not discuss the physics that has been raised against his arguments. If you can find any example of him doing so, then it is reasonable for you to say he has stopped doing so. Again you can not stop, if you never started.
Last edited by a moderator:
Shifting goalposts is not kosher as every Oxbridge goyim knows. For shame, Billy T!
It was AlphaNumeric who set up the discussion, lamenting the fact that Paul rarely posts other than the non-responsive, pre-composed rubbish we see. You contested his claim that Paul had ever been responsive in this thread which was poor position to take. Now you try to claim that you wanted to restrict your challenge to just "physics discussions" and yet, it was AlphaNumeric who introduced and defined the topic.
You were free to offer a different wager or challenge, but when you co-opt AlphaNumeric's terms without challenging his definition, you are not then allowed to change the definition of the terms at a different date. Thus, "changing goalposts."
AlphaNumeric is perfectly away that Paul Dixon is a reasonably accomplished Professor of Psychology at the University of Hilo (if I may judge the work of someone who has already obtained the status of professor) and who has only recently decided he has something important to say about mathematics and physics. But for the most part, what Paul Dixon wants to say about mathematics and physics is philosophy and not so much mathematics or physics. AlphaNumeric's desire to discuss with Prof. Dixon is not so much for physics (since the proper place for that is in the journals) but as to motivation. Quite possibly, AlphaNumeric wishes to question the psychology of Prof. Dixon's practice and the philosophy of his position.
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~dixon/PaulDixonCV.html
It was AlphaNumeric who set up the discussion, lamenting the fact that Paul rarely posts other than the non-responsive, pre-composed rubbish we see. You contested his claim that Paul had ever been responsive in this thread which was poor position to take. Now you try to claim that you wanted to restrict your challenge to just "physics discussions" and yet, it was AlphaNumeric who introduced and defined the topic.
You were free to offer a different wager or challenge, but when you co-opt AlphaNumeric's terms without challenging his definition, you are not then allowed to change the definition of the terms at a different date. Thus, "changing goalposts."
AlphaNumeric is perfectly away that Paul Dixon is a reasonably accomplished Professor of Psychology at the University of Hilo (if I may judge the work of someone who has already obtained the status of professor) and who has only recently decided he has something important to say about mathematics and physics. But for the most part, what Paul Dixon wants to say about mathematics and physics is philosophy and not so much mathematics or physics. AlphaNumeric's desire to discuss with Prof. Dixon is not so much for physics (since the proper place for that is in the journals) but as to motivation. Quite possibly, AlphaNumeric wishes to question the psychology of Prof. Dixon's practice and the philosophy of his position.
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~dixon/PaulDixonCV.html
I was not trying to "shift the goal posts." I was in original also thinking that "discussion" should be responding to the many others who have raised objections to his physics. Perhaps that was not clear in my original post; however Paul rarely discusses anything from the weather to the prices of eggs.
He just repeated posts the same line, often the very same words. I have removed the words "of any physics" I added at one point in my last post, but all must understand they are implied (and always have been - no shift of the goal posts). - This is a thread in the Science / Astronomy Exobiology, & Cosmology section so it is reasonable to assume that "discussion" should not only be about physics but even related to that more restricted area of physics.
If you can find an example where Paul has discussed even one of the many physical objections various people have raised to his POV – objections someone has made based on physics. Please post a link to it.
As far as I know, he has never responded to any of the seven objections I listed in my prior post, despite my and other's repeated requests for him to do so.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the sound I'm hearing is the sound of you trying to back peddle out of the hole you just dug.
Even if I were incorrect and Paul had never replied to anyone's posts on these forums, the fact he clearly puts so much time and effort to posting here, taking CERN to court and picketing outside Fermilab but cannot even retort the queries and questions of members of this forum, the majority of whom have no more physics knowledge than a high school leaver shows that he's scared to talk to us directly. How did he or Walter think they'd fare against the likes of John Ellis, one of the best physicists alive, in a court of law when asked to discuss their physics claims, if they cannot even retort (or in Paul's case even dare respond) to people like myself or Rpenner? We've got much less physics knowledge than Ellis yet we manage to expose the ignorance and lies of Paul and Walter at every turn. If I were going to take a multibillion dollar organisation to court I'd make sure I've got ALL the work done well in advance to justify my arguments. Despite toiling for more than a decade Paul has only lies to spout and Walter has no calculations to back himself up. He doesn't even appear capable of them. If you disagree, link to a post of his where he does relativity and/or quantum theory to at least graduate level, though I doubt he's posted quantitative to even high school level.
I found that out years ago back when I was a mod, I begged Porfiry (former admin) to close the thread and he said to me in PM he couldn't because paul was donating money, I forgot about that until I decide to read through this thread again. Now I feel this thread should stay, purely for sentimental reasons.
Paul W. Dixon
Registered Senior Member
SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN
Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:
Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)
"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."
A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.
Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.
Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.
There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.
Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.
From the LHC Machine Outreach
The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.
The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.
As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.
May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.
Update on the research progress at CERN.
End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.
We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm
The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/
Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)
It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.
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.
With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.
This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.
From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.
All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:
Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)
"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."
A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.
Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.
Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.
There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.
Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.
From the LHC Machine Outreach
The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.
The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.
As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.
May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.
Update on the research progress at CERN.
End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.
We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm
The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/
Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)
It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.
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.
With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.
This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.
From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.
All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.
Yours sincerely,
Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Last edited:
Hi Paul:
Your recent post, 1677, had some interesting and relatively new parts at the start. Your text:
"... These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. ..."
needs to be corrected. Surely you do not wish to claim that CERN is producing energy equal to all the mass energy in the entire universe. I did not try to check your numbers but am sure what you must be speaking of is "energy density" not total energy. When you make obviously false claims you weaker everything else of you argument.
IMHO, you need to tell not only the energy (288.89 E 41 eV) but also the volume in which these 288.89 E 30 particle interactions occur. When this is done I think you will find that the energy density of a single very high energy primary cosmic ray colliding (interacting with) the nucleus of one of the atoms in an O2 molecule is much greater. I.e. you are making false statements when claiming the converse.
This is very obvious to many - why many new comers to this thread cite the cosmic ray "counter example" to you, unaware that it has been cited by others previously. I will not go back and try to determine how many times this has happened but it is approximately 10 times, I think.
Less common is the objection to your argument which is based on the few very ancient Type II supernova. - Those that occurred in the death of the first typically much larger stars, but when the only matter in the universe was hydrogen and helium. It surely is not possible for any intelligence to exist and conduct high energy experiment if the only matter is these two gases.
Another objection is the treating of all the 288.89E30 events as if they were one event. On human time scales this seems reasonable as duration is so extreme short; but if one estimates the duration, t, of each particle/particle interaction as the time required for them to pass by each other even as 10 times the transit time at the speed of light thru a distance only as large as a nuclear diameter and also estimate the typical time T until the next particle/ particle interaction occurs one finds that T >>>> t. To transform this into time scale that humans can understand, I imagined a "time magnifier" which boosted t to be one second; Then T was on the order of one month. It clearly is silly to treat a sequence of events that last only a second and typically have several weeks delay until the next occurs as if they were one event.
There is also the unexplained mystery as to how the "perforation in the potential barrier" seals up. I.e. of this rupture has occurred thousands of times as you suggest terminating the existence of prior advanced civilizations, why is not there now thermal equilibrium of energy density in our universe and De Sitter space? I sarcastically have postulated that there are "little Dutch boys" stationed thru out de Sitter space who quickly repair the ruptures so energy can flow into our universe only for the very brief period on a cosmological time scale of the supernova.
There are several other objections, but in your planned video, you need to at least attempt to refute these four challenges that have been publicly made. At least you are now mentioning cosmic rays, but do so with the very obvious error of "energy" not "energy density" as discussed in the first part of this post.
If you intend to use your video in your legal challenge, it is best to anticipate what your enemy will say to weaken your case and have creditable replies already included in your presentation.
Your recent post, 1677, had some interesting and relatively new parts at the start. Your text:
"... These energies to be generated at CERN are those seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. ..."
needs to be corrected. Surely you do not wish to claim that CERN is producing energy equal to all the mass energy in the entire universe. I did not try to check your numbers but am sure what you must be speaking of is "energy density" not total energy. When you make obviously false claims you weaker everything else of you argument.
IMHO, you need to tell not only the energy (288.89 E 41 eV) but also the volume in which these 288.89 E 30 particle interactions occur. When this is done I think you will find that the energy density of a single very high energy primary cosmic ray colliding (interacting with) the nucleus of one of the atoms in an O2 molecule is much greater. I.e. you are making false statements when claiming the converse.
This is very obvious to many - why many new comers to this thread cite the cosmic ray "counter example" to you, unaware that it has been cited by others previously. I will not go back and try to determine how many times this has happened but it is approximately 10 times, I think.
Less common is the objection to your argument which is based on the few very ancient Type II supernova. - Those that occurred in the death of the first typically much larger stars, but when the only matter in the universe was hydrogen and helium. It surely is not possible for any intelligence to exist and conduct high energy experiment if the only matter is these two gases.
Another objection is the treating of all the 288.89E30 events as if they were one event. On human time scales this seems reasonable as duration is so extreme short; but if one estimates the duration, t, of each particle/particle interaction as the time required for them to pass by each other even as 10 times the transit time at the speed of light thru a distance only as large as a nuclear diameter and also estimate the typical time T until the next particle/ particle interaction occurs one finds that T >>>> t. To transform this into time scale that humans can understand, I imagined a "time magnifier" which boosted t to be one second; Then T was on the order of one month. It clearly is silly to treat a sequence of events that last only a second and typically have several weeks delay until the next occurs as if they were one event.
There is also the unexplained mystery as to how the "perforation in the potential barrier" seals up. I.e. of this rupture has occurred thousands of times as you suggest terminating the existence of prior advanced civilizations, why is not there now thermal equilibrium of energy density in our universe and De Sitter space? I sarcastically have postulated that there are "little Dutch boys" stationed thru out de Sitter space who quickly repair the ruptures so energy can flow into our universe only for the very brief period on a cosmological time scale of the supernova.
There are several other objections, but in your planned video, you need to at least attempt to refute these four challenges that have been publicly made. At least you are now mentioning cosmic rays, but do so with the very obvious error of "energy" not "energy density" as discussed in the first part of this post.
If you intend to use your video in your legal challenge, it is best to anticipate what your enemy will say to weaken your case and have creditable replies already included in your presentation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Paul is reading what people say, since he said he'd like to know what Perry thinks about all of this, after I've said I'd ask him if I bumped into him (which I didn't). Yet he deliberately avoids editing the lies in his post. Is this not pretty much the definition of a liar, a fraud and someone not interested in honest scientific discussion?
merkababozo
Registered Member
Alphanumeric/rpenner and other most seemingly intelligent types,
My word, Paul W. Dixon 'Ph.D' (Phoney Delusionoid ?) - until I read the outpourings of this peta-cretinoid nutmaster, I'd honestly thought ubavontuba was the quintessential overlord of pathetic LHC rabid paranoia/ignorance .... but, good heavens no!, this malfunctioning, mentally messed-up moron makes even uba's inane contributions to this brand of idiocy appear paltry. This galloping twit is 33k protons short of a hydrogen ion.
My word
, Paul W. Dixon 'Ph.D' (Phoney Delusionoid ?) - until I read the outpourings of this peta-cretinoid nutmaster, I'd honestly thought ubavontuba was the quintessential overlord of pathetic LHC rabid paranoia/ignorance .... but, good heavens no!, this malfunctioning, mentally messed-up moron makes even uba's inane contributions to this brand of idiocy appear paltry. This galloping twit is 33k protons short of a hydrogen ion.