Public Services Home Page

Science, Energy, Environment, Technology, Religion, Society

Most subjects are presented excellently in many other web-pages, encyclopedias and books. I only felt the responsibility to compose the web-pages in this Domain when I, as a Theoretical Physicist, felt that available sources were not strictly scientifically accurate or not complete. So the web-pages linked below are generally different from most other sources, often containing unbearable amounts of math and logic support for statements made.

Unlimited Source of Future Electricity! We do not really need (fossil fuels) coal, natural gas or petroleum to power our society. Nature has provided us with an ideal technology! It's actually just simple Physics! The Sun WARMS a small (20-foot-diameter or 6-meter-diameter), calm pond up to around 85°F or 30°C, using maybe 25 KiloWatts of sunlight power. Some of that warmed water EVAPORATES, which removes around 970 Btu (or 0.28 kiloWatt-hour) of energy per pound (a lot) up out of the water. But then the rising warmed air immediately cools so some of the water condenses out as tiny fog droplets (which are now visible). This now RELEASES a lot of that power (maybe 15 KiloWatts) which had started out as Solar heat. Most of that energy now becomes Kinetic Energy of the air above the warm water SPINNING. This is actually how tornadoes form. (I made more than 90 small artificial tornadoes in 2006, 2009 and 2010. If you have had a cup of (hot) coffee in a cool room, you have seen a wisp of 'wet steam' form and in a dead calm air room, you may have even seen that slowly rising visible steam start to [naturally] twist by the same process!). Then, we use Ultraviolet lights to IONIZE that spinning air which electrically charges it. Many coils of wire are suspended surrounding the spinning charged air, which detect the ALTERNATING MAGNETIC FIELDS which pass through the coils of wire. This generates an EMF, or electricity! 9 KiloWatts of produced electricity is realistic. Electricity is produced as long as there is warm water, even during the night! The device I invented resembles a farm silo, which keeps the enclosed tornado from ever becoming dangerous. Millions of these could quickly and inexpensively be built, to supply all the electricity that mankind could dream of! (2006, 2009)

Extremely Urgent News for Americans. If Congress removes $4 trillion from the Federal Budget, that essentially means ending 4,000 billion dollars of EXISTING contracts with hundreds of thousands of American companies, which will destroy many businesses and employers. Millions of employees will be terminated or laid off by those hundreds of thousands of companies that lose those contracts. Balancing the Federal Budget is a great idea, but trying to do it suddenly would be immensely stupid! (Link uploaded September 2011)

Logic, Truth, Honesty, Ethics, Principles. Where did good behavior go? Why are nearly all ads and promotions so intentionally misleading?

Honest Advertising. A method we suggest to ensure honesty.

Ukraine and Putin, Crimea. Putin has been acting as a bully in simply TAKING Crimea, a part of the Ukraine to become part of Russia. I think there is an obvious and quick way to respond to Putin's illegal actions which might dissuade him from ever considering doing that again. Putin TOOK about 10,000 square miles of land which is Crimea. He clearly WANTS to some day take the rest of Ukraine, about 223,000 square miles for Russia. I think that the European Union leaders should IMMEDIATELY SIGN a document that welcomes Ukraine into the EU. Where Putin now is glorying over taking 10,000 square miles of Crimea, it would be humiliating to him to see that HIS ACTIONS had forced the EU to FOREVER take the 23 times larger Ukraine to permanently become part of the EU. Putin could never get over that permanent loss! (2014)

Red Light Photo Enforced Failures. Shouldn't a driver actually have had a chance to SEE a red light before being Convicted and Fined for having run through one? Human eyes regularly blink, closing off all vision for an interval of 0.10 to 0.40 second, every few seconds. If a driver happens to begin to blink just as a Yellow traffic light is ending, that driver may never even see a Red light if some automated camera detects a Violation of 0.18 second, as had happened to me in 2012. A Judge then dismissed my scientific documents about blinking and the brain and I was Fined $100. In Open Court, that Judge even stated that HE sometimes CHOOSES to run through red lights! Some Judge! He also overtly threatened me regarding my thoughts of Filing an Appeal regarding his decision! I was intimidated by a Judge saying such things so I did not Appeal. They WON and got my money!

Quantitative Easing. For the past five years, the Fed has printed up an additional $85 billion dollars of American money EVERY MONTH which it has given to Wall Street and giant Corporations toward trying to stabilize our American Economy. I believe they have been foolish in that course, where a far better course has been available to them. There are around 75 million families in the U.S. Instead of giving that monthly (new) $85 billion to giant Corporations, which actually have not used it productively, imagine instead that Bernacki chopped up that monthly $85 billion into 75 million equal parts, and he mailed or electronically transferred $1,133 to each and every American family EVERY MONTH FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS! What would have been the result of this? Many millions of those 75 million families would have SPENT much of that 'monthly windfall' and ALL American businesses would have had financial prosperity! Even a more conservative family who might not have wanted to SPEND the $68,000 that the Fed would have given them, might have PAID OFF $50,000 of College Loans, or paid off Credit Cards or similar things. Even though such choices might not benefit American businesses very much, it sure might have improved the current '99%' stresses!

Guns in Schools or Churches? As a Christian Minister, I try to imagine giving a Sermon with six large men behind me, standing along the wall holding Assault Weapons. Would anyone in the Church even notice ME or hear a word I said in my Sermon? The same would certainly be true for sensitive children in a school if they were constantly fearful of large men with guns nearby. No learning could occur!

Safer School Children. In October 2002, I suggested adding tanks of Dentist's 'laughing gas' (nitrous oxide) into the air ducts of a large auditorium in Moscow where terrorists held many hostages. The idea was for EVERYONE to simply doze off and sleep, so Authorities might then enter the building to be able to sort out the good people from the bad. At the time, I asked my good friend Peter Jennings of ABC News to suggest this idea to the Russian government. I feel the same basic idea of unnoticed sleeping gas might be valuable for schools (maybe in entryways or hallways) (and even in Churches and movie theaters).

Safe Guns and the Second Amendment. Unlimited Guns But Perfectly Safe!

We should modify every gun so it becomes COMPUTERIZED and DIGITAL so it could only be fired while an embedded COMPUTER PASSWORD was in effect. That password process could require a biometric thumbprint match. (January 2013)

A gun owner could have as many weapons as desired (per the Second Amendment) but no one could ever fire any of them except for after the Biometric thumbprint-matched Owner activated them (a few seconds), and even that owner would need to 're-new' the password after 12 hours. Therefore, no child could ever find a loaded gun in a closet and kill a sister. No young man could find his mother's guns and take them to Sandy Hook to kill twenty beautiful little children. No one could kill people in a movie theater, or even out at a Congresswoman's visit to a Mall. In fact, ONLY the Thumbprint-matched Owner could EVER activate that gun to be fired.

Are you aware that EVERY YEAR, around 19,000 of the people who commit suicide in the United States use a gun to do it? Think about that. The Thumbprint identified owner is rarely that person! This suggests that this idea might eliminate nearly 19,000 deaths by suicide in the US each year. Just that seems worth doing this! Also, Guns would probably no longer be stolen from homes as they could never be fired by the thieves! Street Gangs might have great trouble in constantly getting the passwords updated for all their weapons, INCLUDING their Assault Weapons.

We believe that EVERY existing gun could be quickly, easily and inexpensively altered or replaced to only be functional for a period of 12-hours by a thumbprint embedded password. Gun owners would have the best of all worlds, in having access to unlimited supplies of the weapons they love, while ensuring that the public will never be injured by any of those weapons. Their only slight inconvenience would be a two-second process of having their thumbprint recognized!

From a different perspective, it seems to me that there are at least two entirely different interpretations of the United States Constitution Second Amendment. I don't see that anywhere in its text is there any reference to being allowed to carry weapons absolutely anywhere. It seems to me that the Second Amendment text instead makes very clear that any American has a right to have and use weapons on one's own property. In other words, as per the stated "right of the people to keep and bear Arms" to defend one's own family and property. NOT to be capable of winning street fights or flaunting one's ego!

An Example of One of my Good Deeds.
DRIVERS

You can be confident that
your vehicle and your license
plate are being videotaped
each time you roar through
this stop sign. If and when a
child is struck, you can be
assured that the Police will be
given a record of all the times
you ran this stop sign.

Have a nice day, and drive
carefully around these kids!

During 2003, I watched as hundreds of cars roared along the 20 mph residential street I live on. Many were going 50 mph or faster and almost none of the vehicles ever slowed to even 30 mph when running through the Stop Sign. Even Village Police Cars ran the Stop Sign at high speed! It seemed obvious that it was just a matter of time until one of those zooming cars would hit a small child who chased a ball into the street. So I made a sign!

Other Attempts at Good Deeds.

Government of the people, by the people, for the people. (Abraham Lincoln) Fixing the U.S. Congress. If even one Political Candidate announces a 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington' attitude, specifically of announcing a Campaign Decision to NEVER accept more than $50,000 per year (as compared to the current $174,000 that the Senators and Congressmen pay themselves, which WE taxpayers pay for), the News Media will certainly ensure that Candidate gets massive free publicity and has a decent chance of Winning an Election! Imagine the attitude of voters about the decision between an existing self-centered, money-centered Incumbent and someone who clearly defines that wealth is not the center of the universe! Even massive Party and Corporate Lobbyist Campaign financing for the Incumbent probably could not overcome such an advantage in the minds of the voters! (2013)


The NSA, Modern National Security, and Snowden. Recent Hearings in Congress have told us that the NSA DOES monitor ALL our phone calls (Section 215), more than a billion phone calls every day or 200,000,000,000 phone calls in each six months where the NSA has learned about ONE potential terrorist plot. In casual conversations, Americans talk about their spouses and bosses where words like 'kill' or 'murder' are mentioned. Out of a BILLION messages every day, certainly ONE PERCENT (TENS OF MILLIONS) of those messages include such words. 'Does the NSA have humans read and monitor every one of those tens of millions of such messages every day?' They pay 850,000 Contractors to do that work! Why could they possibly NEED that many people if they do not need to examine tens of millions of messages (between Americans) every day? Even if they only read 1% of American people's phone calls, that is millions every day. (2013)

New Orleans Saints bad Football Behavior. How many High School Football Coaches teach players how to destroy other players knees and careers? I know of at least one! There is apparently an even larger problem than the New Orleans Saints Coaches which exists. In 1998, I spent my usual weeks around Christmas centered on playing Beach Volleyball around Ft. Lauderdale Florida. We strong players would play from around 10 am to noon, when the College tourist players would start showing up and we had to give up the net. But I sometimes got my Beach Doubles partner to agree to try to hold the net, against the six College guys who wanted to take over. Those College boys never realized how good we were, but I would get them to agree to the 'formality' of the sixes team needing to win the Beach from the Twos team. Our team of two players generally could win game after game against teams of College sixes. On that particular day, a young boy, a 14-year-old High School sophomore had been watching us. When my Beach Partner finally got bored with playing against weak competition and left, I was left with no partner, even though I still had the Beach, so I asked the kid if he knew how to play. He played pretty well and the two of us held the beach for another two hours against the College sixes teams. We only actually stopped because I was getting very hungry and thirsty, but then we talked and I mentioned to him that there was then a restaurant which had a very popular lit night volleyball court, where I went to play each evening. So he showed up there and we were able to play some more and then talk. This was to be my last day in Florida before heading back North for the Winter! But this Sophomore kid described things that scared me worse than anything I had ever heard. In High School, he was on the Fort Lauderdale Football team, but he was rather little, around 140 pounds and so he was made a Defensive Back. But what he told me next was what truly terrified me. He was asking me if I thought it was 'right' for the Fort Lauderdale High School Football Coach to have specifically taught him how to hit the star running backs on opposing teams on the side of their knee, in order to destroy the star running back's knee. He asked me whether that was right to do, just to win a football game! To INTENTIONALLY (my emphasis) destroy some kid's life and career as a football player, just because a Coach decided to teach him how to end that kid's career. Wow! I was so angry at hearing that that I could hardly talk! I thought about driving over to the Principal's Office of the High School the next morning and telling him about what I had been told. But I realized that I was only a stranger, and HIS Football Coach was a CELEBRITY, and there was no chance that the Principal or anyone else would believe what I would say. Worse, at that time, the very idea of INTENDING to destroy an opponent's career in football would never have had any credibility (until recently with the New Orleans Saints Coaching Staff). And the kid would have gotten in a LOT of trouble for 'trying to get the Coach in trouble'. So I did not go to the High School, and simply drove North the next morning. Only NOW, twelve years later after the New Orleans Saints have gotten into trouble for intentionally destroying opponent's lives and football careers, do I realize that there may easily be an enormous problem. I guess I hope that some web-surfer might know how to find that kid who told me those scary things, who now should be around 28 years old. Maybe he would feel safe from any vengeance from that Coach or that High School by now. But I wonder HOW MANY OTHER kids playing high school football are affected by Coaches who are so frighteningly aberrant? Maybe the New Orleans Saints news might get even scarier incidents to the light of day.

Horrible Abuse of Little Girls. In November 1987, I had lived with a nice 29-year-old woman for about six months. One day she told me that she had to leave for a few hours, and then she decided to tell me why. She had a 6-year-old little girl living with us, but she told me that she needed to go to a Birthday Party for her son, who lived in an institution. She mentioned that it was his 17th birthday. She clearly saw that I was confused, regarding how a 29-year-old woman could have a 17-year-old son. That evening, after she had returned, she saw that I was still very confused, so she explained things to me. She told me that her father had been a significant home builder in LaPorte Indiana, and that when she was seven years old, he started 'using her' (her phrase) to entertain himself and two of his (male) friends. So, for the next five years, that horrible man USED his own daughter for sex entertainment for himself and his friends, apparently nearly every day. AFTER ABOUT FOUR YEARS OF THIS ABUSE, she got pregnant when she was ELEVEN (and she did not even know if the father was her own father or one of those other two men!) She was so young that the baby, Alexander, was born with many birth defects, which was why he spent his entire life in an Institution. Once she had told me these things, I was outraged and I wanted to contact the Police about her father's crimes. She would not allow me to do that, as she felt her father was too important a businessperson in LaPorte that all that would happen would be that she would be humiliated. I also had not calmly thought through enough to realize that the Statute of Limitations certainly expired for those three perverts. So, as far as I know, none of them were ever punished in any way. I wonder how common this is, as I have heard of similar arrangements in other families. A 12-year-old girl in Thornton, Illinois was regularly abused by her step-father and several older brothers, for years. IT MUST BE STOPPED!

Warping of Space. Nearly all scientists now believe that the fabric of space is WARPED due to some things which Einstein had said. They are so wrong that it is laughable. And it is all based on really stupid logic! Einstein DID say something along that line, but REALLY different! The usual claim today is that gravity of the Sun causes a warping of the space around it, where third-dimension warps then are shown in artistic renditions. But that is patently ridiculous! Gravity does not and can not SELECTIVELY distort one axis of space in deference to the other two dimensions. It is a ridiculous idea and claim! What Einstein HAD said was that the Fourth dimension, the TIME dimension gets warped by gravitation, which IS true. It is a result of what is called General Relativity. But it is a really tiny effect. The rate that time passes on Earth IS altered by this effect, but it is only about ONE SECOND EFFECT in every seven years of time! So even the distortion of time is incredibly small! Since about 2006, I have tried to get NASA or the ESA to soft-land an atomic (Cesium) clock on the Moon to compare with an identical atomic clock here, to confirm Einstein's General Relativity by confirming that there is a slight difference of rate of time passage on Earth and Moon, but no takers so far.

Ball of Yarn and the basic meaning of life.

Occupy Wall Street developed great enthusiasm, but they did not seem to actually have any plan. There seems to be a very obvious, very Grass Roots direction available. Wall Street NEEDS the many millions of small investors, to provide the countless millions of dollars of Commission money that the Traders count on. With the world's amazing advances in communications in recent years, why doesn't OWS encourage the millions of small Wall Street investors to start using Traders in the London FTSE Market, or the German DAX Market or in an Australian Market, or in any of dozens of other Stock Markets? Such Traders might actually CARE about small investors and actually give great service! If millions of small American investors would transfer their trades in this way, the massive cashflow that Wall Street counts on might nearly completely dry up. American Traders would find themselves in a position to again have to show that they deserve to be chosen as an effective Trader. Occupy Wall Street

The Politics of Global Warming. Why No Leaders Seem to See Urgency in Global Warming! They don't seem to realize that we may have ALREADY sealed the fate of life on Earth. (December 2009)

The Physics Behind Genetically Modifying Foods. Secret labs are free to do foolish and unregulated experiments to alter our foods, entirely for profits and not for our health. And then they keep it all secret from us, the millions of human Guinea Pigs they are using for such experiments!

Delivering Food Aid to Third World areas. Combining $10,000 old Cessna airplanes and Model Airplane Radio Control equipment could provide unmanned drone-type delivery to supply millions of one-pound, air-dropped packets of food and water to remote villages (as separate individual food packets and water bottles), quite inexpensively, safely and quickly. (August 2011)

Gandhi and the Salt March. We can politically and ethically learn a lot today from Gandhi's 1930 march of 200 miles to teach Indian people how to get needed salt from seawater. Self-confidence and Independence for individuals.

Pure Desalinated Seawater for Port-au-Prince, Haiti. 60,000 gallons of pure water per day from atmospheric humidity, run through sealed underground tunnels to cool the air to condense the water out.

Eliminating All California Deaths from Earthquakes. We Can Absolutely Eliminate any California Earthquake Deaths! EVER! A one-day area evacuation and precise mining-like artificially-triggered earthquakes could release accumulated stresses in the Earth, for decades or generations of long-term safety.(first realized in September 2001, first presented on the Internet in March 2011)

Saving 320,000 Japanese from the Coming Nankai Trough Earthquake and Tsunami near Japan. The Japanese government seems willing to concede hundreds of thousands of deaths from a coming (and already scientifically overdue) earthquake. Most of the deaths are expected to be in and near the cities of Nagoya and Osaka. I think that those deaths are unnecessary, and that the Tectonic Stresses in the Earth's Crust could be released by causing an artificial earthquake. A one-day area evacuation of all people and animals, to Free Concerts, Free Baseball games, Free Amusement Parks, Free Food and Beer picnics would get the people to leave the area for one day. Then barges with mine-boring rigs would be floated over the precisely known location of the faultline below the Nankai Trough. Hundreds of boreholes would be made, down INTO the actual fault, and conventional mining explosives would be lowered into each borehole. At a PLANNED time, when all the people were known to be evacuated, the explosives would be detonated. This would both shake the faultline and very slightly spread it apart, maybe just a millimeter. These effects would permit the accumulated Tectonic Stresses to be released. The Earth would then move as it would have moved in an actual earthquake, and it would cause an expected large tsunami. But all boats and ships would have been moved elsewhere, and buildings could be angle-braced if they were liable to damage from either the shaking of the earthquake or flooding from the tsunami. The accumulated stresses in the Earth would be completely released, for decades or generations of long-term safety, peace-of-mind and happiness. (This is an application of the Calquake concept just above, first presented in March 2011)

Auto Market Recovery Seems Peculiar. Vehicle manufacturers seem to allow millions of people who have no income to buy new vehicles, where little money down and interest is required and even no payments for many months or years. Isn't this how the Housing Bubble catastrophe happened in 2008? Are they doing the same thing again? Millions of people who do not even have jobs are qualifying to get loans to buy new cars!

The Physics Behind the 9/11/01 Attacks. All four attacks seem certain to have been dismal failures, as compared to the loss of life that must have been planned.

Making Electricity from Solar, Wind, Water, More. Make All Your Own GREEN Electricity. The CUBE.
Make the 15 kiloWatt-hours of electricity that your family likely uses every day from solar, wind, running or falling water, more. Construction instructions are provided, where a few hundred dollars of locally purchased materials might eliminate all your future electric bills.

Direct Solar Electricity Using Tornado Technology. Extremely efficient capture of solar energy and then using a tornado's technology to convert that into safe, enclosed rotary motion, and then ionizing that spinning air to induce magnetic and electric fields in surrounding coils of wire to generate electricity. (2012)

Eliminating Parkinson's Tremors. For several decades, I have personally suffered from Parkinson's Tremors. Since no one seemed to have found any possible solution, except for digging into my brain to disconnect some sections, I chose to endure. But then, around 2007, I invented a unique glove which has a small gyroscope attached to the back of the palm. A gyroscope uses a unique field of Physics where it has the ability to keep its spin axis pointed in a fixed direction. My gyroscopic glove senses a Parkinson's Tremor and naturally and automatically creates a strong TORQUE which acts to cancel the action of the Tremor. I feel a very minor sensation resembling tickling, but other than that, whenever I wear my gloves, I am Parkinson's Free! Not bad for gloves that cost me less than $35 to make (although they ARE very ugly!) (2013)

A Flying Truck which gets 60 miles per gallon. Extremely Unstable Flight. It only flies at 20 mph to reduce turbulence and Drag! (Aug 2012)

Coming Disaster at the Glen Canyon Dam. In 2005, during a visit to the Glen Canyon Dam in northern Arizona, I had a chance to have a scientific conversation with the main Engineer for the Dam. I had asked him about the very soft sandstone rocks to which the Dam was attached, and he told me about hiking out to see large amounts of water seeping through those porous rocks from the high pressure water deep in the Lake Powell Reservoir. We both agreed that the Dam was certain to come loose and fall over relatively soon, but he explained that the Politics of the situation was that if he would even mention such concerns, he would have immediately been fired and replaced. So no one will or can do anything to keep an enormous catastrophe from happening, where a 700-foot-tall dam will suddenly fall over and release all the water in the 200-mile-long Lake Powell Reservoir to roar downstream to kill everyone then in the Grand Canyon. (2005)

Major Categories

Especially Important

Environmental Subjects

Social Subjects

Religious Subjects

Scientific Subjects

Advanced Physics

Potential Products or Services

Public Services Main Menu



Most Popular Subjects

Becoming Self-Sufficient. Heating or cooling your house, making your own electricity, even natural food refrigeration and freezing, along with many other ways to do things like extracting pure water from humidity and enabling a small greenhouse to produce five times as much food.

Firewood Ratings. Firewood Info Chart. A collection of information from many reliable sources regarding selecting wood to burn in a woodstove or fireplace.

BELIEVE Religious Information Source. Many thousands of scholar-written articles on virtually every religious subject, which often provides a variety of scholarly viewpoints for your contemplation. Also included are around 4,000 full texts of early Christian Manuscripts, to be able to examine early attitudes toward important subjects.

(BELIEVE in Spanish)
CREER Religioso Información Fuente - Español

(BELIEVE in French)
CROIRE Religieux Informations Source - Française

(BELIEVE in Mandarin, mainland Chinese)
相信宗教信息源 - 在中国

(BELIEVE in Russian)
ВЕРИТ Религиозный Информация Источник - Русский перевод

(BELIEVE in Arabic)
نؤمن ديني معلومات مصدر - ترجمة عربي


Christian Arrogance, Self-Righteousness. Confidence and Faith in a religion or a Church is one thing! But when arrogance enters the picture where absolutely anyone who disagrees is always totally wrong, there is something seriously wrong.

Pure Water Supply for Third World Villages. Pure Distilled Water for Third World Village Residents. Standard underground water supplies such as wells are often contaminated by sewage or agricultural chemical runoffs, which keep billions of people from having access to safe water. This approach collects humid air from the atmosphere and then sends that warm and humid air down through a cool SEALED underground tunnel to condense the humidity into water to provide gallons of extremely pure water for anyone. (2008)

Book of Genesis. An example presentation from the BELIEVE site, where a variety of perspectives of different scholars are presented on Genesis, whether Moses wrote it or whether he did not, and even including an interesting Jewish scholarly article. (1992)

Bodyfat, Weight Loss, the Physics of Body Weight Control. Amazingly, how you breathe has a tremendous effect on whether you gain or lose weight! A thorough examination of the Physics involved provides new insights into evaluating the many weight-loss programs sold today. It does not appear that ANY of the thousands of (alleged) weight-loss programs that are sold actually consider the actual science involved! The food you eat is primarily atoms of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. A basic law of science is called the Conservation of Mass, where nothing can just disappear. Getting rid of hydrogen and oxygen is easy, usually as water in sweat, urination, exhaled water vapor, but the human body really only has one easy process of getting rid of carbon atoms, as part of the carbon dioxide molecules your lungs exhale. In a given 24-hour day, you likely eat foods and liquids that contain about 189 grams of carbon atoms. In the roughly 17,000 times you exhale every day, surprise, you exhale about 189 grams of carbon atoms. This normally keeps your weight and bodyfat rather constant! No one seems to know this rather basic scientific fact! Any attempt for you to either gain or lose weight needs to consider this situation. For example, you could exercise to increase your Metabolic Rate and your Respiration Rate, toward losing weight. Simple Physics! (2009)

Déjà vu or Deja vu. A Theory on the Déjà vu Phenomenon. There are a number of subjects where strict science cannot collect accurate quality data, and so few serious scientific attempts have ever been made toward understanding. Déjà vu, Precognition, ESP, Clairvoyance and related fields are considered here.

American Public Education Problems System Problems. Politicians were never in the Classroom so they try to solve Educational problems from a thousand miles away and without actual knowledge or experience. I taught High School for four years and I learned a lot which those Political leaders need to know and understand, IF they are to ever come up with useful ideas. Otherwise they always simply throw billions of dollars at what they see as any problem.(1989)

American Public Education Solutions. Improving the American Public School System Inexpensively. My experience as a Teacher and my logic suggests that we should operate THREE PARALLEL SCHOOLS in each District, but NOT based on any educational standards or requirements, but rather based on student behavior patterns. I call them CALM, MEDIAN and RUDE. You might call the CALM school as being College Prep. The RUDE school might resemble a Technical School and the MEDIAN school might resemble an old-fashioned High School. Most students would have great freedom to attend any of the three schools. (1989)

Presidential Politics - and Barack Obama. In 2007 I realized that Barack Obama was about to run for President. I mailed him some suggestions, such as voluntarily reducing his paycheck to be at Minimum Wage to better bond with average people, and a speech in front of the Capitol Building where he would have emphasized that the Senators and Congressmen who worked there seemed to act as though they owned the building. Obama was to remind everyone that the PEOPLE own that Building, and he would announce a web-site where every wall and ceiling was mapped out which showed that YOU own about a postage-stamp-sized area of surface, which he would have demonstrated with a laser pointer. He would have shown Reporters the area allocated to him, his wife, and his two daughters, mentioning that each American could learn where THEIR area was. He would mention that they have people who clean and maintain every area!

Physics of Global Warming. An examination of the Physics involved indicates that we are confronted with immensely bad climatic situations, where we may even have ALREADY set in motion a course which might end all life on Earth in maybe a hundred years. (2004)

Physics in an Automotive Engine. The Physics and Math of Automotive Engines. Textbooks seem to generally only present the most basic ideas regarding what goes on inside a standard car engine. Here is a more comprehensive presentation of the Physics involved. (2003)

Home Air Conditioning. Natural, GREEN and FREE! You have visited a (cool) cave on a hot summer day. This concept uses the Physics of why that occurs to provide an array of (sealed) underground air passageways, to send your hot house air down there to cool (and also dehumidify) the house air NATURALLY, without any Freon and without any giant electric bill from running a central Air Conditioner. Comfort and conventional wall-thermostat convenience is as wonderful as with standard compressor-driven air conditioning! (1978, December 2000)


Christianity and Science ARE Compatible! Absolutely and totally. Did LIGHT come into existence first? Yes, according to Genesis in the Bible, but also yes according to modern science, as starlight. Were there small plants, then large plants, then fishes, then small land animals, then large land animals and then man? YES according to Genesis but also yes according to modern science. The scientific method of Statistical Analysis proves that the Genesis text of 3300 years ago matches what science has only learned during the most recent hundred years. The Genesis sequence could not have been an accident or a coincidence. That Genesis sequence was actually excellent science before the Greeks even invented science! Christianity and modern science appear to provide insights which aid the understanding of each other. Who did Cain go to live with after leaving Eden? Science seems to explain nicely! (1965)

Electric Cars, Hybrid Cars. Battery-Powered or Hybrid Cars and Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles. Hybrid vehicles DO have some advantages, but they are not remotely like what promoters claim for them. So do Electric Vehicles and possible future Hydrogen-Fuel-Cell powered vehicles. Here is the Physics and the facts regarding these approaches.

Combating Childhood Obesity Through Motivation. It turns out that bodyfat has low density while muscle and bone have much higher density. A rather expensive and somewhat dangerous method called Hydrostatic Weighing can accurately determine bodyfat percentage. This new and simple and cheap method is as accurate as Hydrostatic Weighing but it is kid-friendly, fun, safe and even competitive to do. If two kids use empty Pepsi bottles filled with some pennies to measure their bodyfat each week (floating in a pool), they might have new motivation to exercise or to eat better foods, in a competitive sense. (2003)

Tower Windmills and Electricity. Practical Large-Scale Wind-Generated Electricity, Community Wind.
(1.2 MegaWatts to supply all the electricity for 1000 homes) And more reliable and durable than giant tower windmills and only 1/8 as expensive to install. The equipment pays for itself within about two years, after which all the electricity is free forever! In addition, a hundred good-paying local construction jobs would employ local people to build the relatively conventional construction. Nationwide, this could employ a million Americans and also supply a significant portion of America's electricity supply. (2007)

Preserving Aircraft Tires. Everyone has watched as an airliner first touches down and many large puffs of burned tire smoke are seen, along with many screeches. In February 1988, I discovered a simple and inexpensive way for such tires to last one hundred times as long, by not being burned up on every landing. (1988)

Why is the Sky Blue?. The reality is a little different than most people might have thought. (1997)

Alternative GREEN Furnace. HeatGreen - A Non-Fossil-Fueled Home Heating Furnace System. NO FIRE IS INVOLVED, Your yard now has cut lawn grass and autumn leaves decomposing slowly where they disappear after some months. The Laws of Science confirm that the enormous sunlight used in first creating plants by Photosynthesis cannot disappear. This technology speeds up that decomposition process a LOT and it also COLLECTS the amazing amount of low-grade heat which is naturally given off during organic decomposition, to be used to heat your house and hot water, completely and fairly easily. And you heat your house FOR FREE and in a GREEN manner where you will never need fossil fuels ever again for those purposes. It is currently far below zero Fahrenheit here near Chicago (January 2014) and my fairly large house is very cozy at around the 78°F that I like! (2007)

Medical Anesthesia Can be Safer. Safe, Non-Intrusive, Non-Chemical, Electronic Medical Anesthesia. In February 1999, I tested this on my own hand.

A Partial Explanation of the Obesity Epidemic.

Hydrogen. Hydrogen as a Fuel for Automobiles and Other Vehicles. Hydrogen SEEMS like the ideal fuel for vehicles, especially since it only creates water vapor and no other exhaust gases. But free hydrogen does not occur naturally and it takes a LOT of external energy to extract hydrogen from other chemicals.

A Christ Walk Church - Youth Teen Ministry (1996).

Solar Cells. Photovoltaic Cells, PV, Electricity from Sunlight. Solar Panels are the rage today. News reports regularly describe claimed breakthroughs. But whether flat panels or focusing concentrator collectors, they are very expensive for what they provide.

Advanced Scientific Women's Fashion. Enhancing Women's Fashion with Physics and Calculus. Why do women buy clothes? To look as good as they are capable of looking. Surprisingly, Physics can greatly enhance their appearance!

Eliminating SUV Rollover Accidents. A method to make SUVs the safest vehicles on the road. In the 1960s, luxury cars had suspension systems which used electric motors to level out a car by raising or lowering the rear suspension. In 2005, I applied this concept to allow SUVs to remain tall when standing still or traveling at less than 30 mph, but where all four wheels of the suspension would lower by six inches when the vehicle speed rose to over 30 mph. Rollover accidents are then virtually impossible to occur. (I invented this in 2005)

Eliminating Lower Back Pain Naturally. Around 1967, 45 years ago, I realized that the brains in people who were paraplegics somehow knew how to IGNORE sensory nerve stimulus messages from nerves that no longer even existed. Their brains could not manage all the complexities of life if always consumed by handling endless pain messages that were actually spurious. I decided to see if my brain could be trained to 'ignore' pain messages from my lower back. It took a while to accomplish, but it has been impressively effective, where I have lived 45 more very active years, when Doctors at the time were recommending that I choose which wheelchair I would spend my life in! (2012)


A Flying Truck which gets 60 miles per gallon. Efficient Flight. A peculiar, very slow (20 mph) but useful aircraft (Aug 2012)

A Solution to your Library Porn problem. Lubraries provide computers for the public to use to access the Internet, but they have found that some people use those computers to access porn, in rather public locations where children sometimes see what is being viewed. A Library in Virginia confronted a man for having endangered children in this way but he sued the Library based on his First Amendment Rights and won a Court Judgment of nearly a million dollars! All other Libraries are very aware of that Case and they are fearful of even approaching anyone in their own Library who is viewing porn. Here is a method of NEVER approaching any First Amendment Rights but of simply letting such a viewer know that the Local Police Department 'was aware' and 'was available to come to the Library' if the Patron felt he needed assistance in any way.


(Some) Least popular subjects:

A Dog Birthday Calendar. With seven birthdays per year, this might be important as there might be a lot more Milkbones coming!

Statistical Analysis of Same-Atomic-Weight Isotopes. Nuclear Structure. (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)

Newton, the Apple, and Gravity, Gravitation

High-Speed Transportation. 200 mile per hour TRANS Super-Efficient Transportation System. What about stepping out the door of your house or apartment on a whim in a Chicago suburb and for a $5 total cost, stepping out five hours later to have lunch in a New York restaurant? Without any stress since you have slept or read or played Parcheesi for those five hours? (invented in 1989)

How to Calculate Pi, π, Simpson's Rule. Did you want to calculate Pi to a thousand decimal places? I didn't think so!

Dogapult




Miscellaneous Observations

Subject list 1
Subject list 2
Subject list 3
Subject list 4
Subject list 5


There are people who talk about Infrastructure as the way to create new jobs but they never seem to actually do anything that helps. Community Wind seems likely to provide an IMMEDIATE one million new construction jobs in America (in also providing a significant amount of the electricity that our country needs). Our TRANS system may create around four million new jobs (in the process of replacing highways, railroads, cars, trucks, trains and airplanes with a far more efficient method of moving people and objects around, at 200 mph speed and without using any fossil fuels). These two systems will be so economical as to replace fossil-fuel-burning methods of today where the customer's cost will be LESS than current costs, while also being so profit-producing that they would be owned and operated by private corporations. One result of this is that NOT A DIME of government money would be required (or wanted!) for either one of these important systems, or for several other job-creating presentations in this Domain!

Duh???

Right Now, US Government data collected at the South Pole shows that the Earth's atmosphere now contains
of Carbon Dioxide. It is a big number, but note how rapidly OUR ACTIVITIES of burning fossil fuels are causing the total to constantly rise! details, footnote

THESE are TONS of gases, each comparable in size to entire large houses, ENORMOUS amounts!

It seems important here to mention a Chinese program that everyone seems to be bragging about (early 2012). They have installed many millions of dollars of equipment to try something they call Carbon Capture. In 18 months (a year and a half) they brag about having captured 150 tons of carbon dioxide. That might sound impressive and good, but stare at the changing number above to see what 150 tons of carbon dioxide actually represents. They are not even close to having captured ONE-SECOND'S-WORTH of carbon dioxide in that year and a half of operation. I bring this up here to get the public to realize the SCALE of the problem that WE CREATE, every second of every day, by digging up and burning fossil fuels. Doing impressive demos for Reporters is easy for many processes, where a few pounds of carbon dioxide can be removed from air. For maybe $30 cost, I could do a nice demonstration for you of the Solvay Process footnote, a major industrial method which has been used for more than 150 years which removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to produce soap, glass and other common products, where I could show removing several pounds of carbon dioxide in an hour or two. But a few pounds is not billions of tons, and no one seems to consider the problems of scaling up such experiments by factors of billions or trillions of times!

The burning of fossil fuels added around 15.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere during the year 2008. Actually, we are incredibly LUCKY! The enormous amounts of fossil fuels we burn (coal, petroleum and natural gas) produced and released around TWICE this amount of increase (31.9 billion tons during the year 2008) details. We just happen to be lucky that (cold) ocean water is extremely good at absorbing a lot of the carbon dioxide we are sending into the atmosphere! footnote (these numbers are metric tonnes, and the same numbers in American short tons would be about 10% higher)

As the oceans gradually warm up over coming years, that ability for the cold ocean water to absorb carbon dioxide will rapidly reduce, which will cause the effects of global warming to be occurring faster and faster in the near future. (There is also another downside to this process, as the absorbed carbon dioxide causes the ocean waters to become more acidic, with carbonic acid forming {H2O + CO2 makes H2CO3}, which is a survival problem for ocean fish and plants and corals.)

Also, see Physics of Global Warming. for details regarding the details, facts and consequences.

The real-time carbon dioxide calculator above has been in these web-pages since early 2007. It is EXTREMELY accurate (better than one-tenth of one-percent precision, just check the footnote to see the three simple and accurately known numbers which get multiplied to derive it)! In July 2009, massive news coverage was made of a project where a German Bank spent millions of dollars to provide this same running-total of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in Times Square in New York City. The news reports announced that several experts had spent a couple years doing the calculations upon which their figure is based. Well, the number they show on that expensive display is WRONG! And it took several EXPERTS a couple years to multiply THREE SIMPLE NUMBERS TOGETHER??? YOU could multiply those three simple numbers: [(1) the US MEASURED concentration of CO2 at the South Pole, (2) the Density of carbon dioxide, and (3) the total mass of the Earth's atmosphere] in a couple minutes. And still they got an answer that is around 20% wrong! Maybe you could get a job at a German Bank! The measured concentration of carbon dioxide keeps changing but the other two numbers are fixed. Our Footnote has an example of the actual calculation, which a Fifth Grader should be able to do! But we DO recognize that the great visibility of a huge display of this number in Times Square, even if it is actually wrong, can have great value. But a German Bank spent millions of dollars to hire 'experts' to make significant math mistakes??? If I had any accounts in that Bank, I might get a little nervous!

A quick note: The public is sometimes incorrectly worried that the increase in concentration of carbon dioxide itself might be dangerous. Nope! Inside your (closed) home in winter, you might have concentrations of 4,000 ppmv (parts per million by volume), ten times greater than the natural air outside which is now around 400 ppmv. (This is commonly measured in northern homes in winter!) In old auditoriums which have lousy air circulation systems, a three-hour lecture or Sermon to thousands of people can sometimes result in 10,000 ppmv (which all comes from all those people breathing, exhaling carbon dioxide!), which can have the effect to make many people a little drowsy! the auditorium numbers And you wondered why that happened to you! And in submarines, up to 20,000 ppmv of carbon dioxide is allowable! Carbon dioxide is actually a very safe chemical, and you get it every day in carbonated beverages. The actual main danger is regarding the established fact that the additional carbon dioxide in the atmosphere represents a "blanket effect" to keep heat from escaping the earth. No one actually realized this until about 1960, and we now know this mostly from observing the planet Venus, where its atmosphere of much more carbon dioxide has resulted in a surface temperature of around +860°F (+460°C). That shocked scientists when all the 1960s spacecraft to Venus immediately melted! At that time, scientists had never been able to measure temperatures there and they thought that all the thick clouds would BLOCK the sun from getting through that thick atmosphere down to the ground! They expected the surface of Venus to be COLD at maybe -40°F (which is also -40°C)! The Earth will never have that much carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, but significant heating is likely.

Many Agronomists and Botanists believe that if the average Earth temperature rises to just 80°F [27°C] (it is now around 59°F [15°C]), that plants (crops) worldwide will no longer be capable of lifting sufficient water from the soil to keep their leaves from drying out and dying. If all the plants die, then there will be no food for animals or humans. The fear is that this might occur within one or two centuries. There is a credible possibility that we might have ALREADY set in motion a greater temperature increase than that. Very scary. See Physics of Global Warming.

In general, web-pages tend to be composed by people who consider themselves to be 'EXPERTS'. It used to be that no one was able to get anything published unless a lot of other experts considered them to also be experts. The Internet has changed this, where anyone who has access to a computer can present himself or herself as a knowledgeable person. They often have no greater claim to being an 'expert' than their own opinion of themselves! They rarely seem to have the appropriate College Degree that might support such a claim, and they are rarely considered to be an expert by the thousands of people who DO have such College Degrees. In any case, this then seems to inspire the 'expert' to make many ASSUMPTIONS which are not actually based on any solid science or facts, and to express their own PERSONAL OPINIONS which they then present as being actual facts.

The presentations in this Domain are rather different from that, in generally being based on universally respected texts, such as the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics and Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, and the author of these pages received a Degree in Theoretical Nuclear Physics from the University of Chicago. You might therefore notice some significant differences in the presentations in this Domain. These presentations tend to drive many visitors crazy by extensive equations and mathematics that support statements made in the text of a presentation. These presentations also tend to include a LOT of the logic and documentation for the statements made.

We see this as extremely important, to enable our visitors to recognize the difference between the actual Scientific Method and what is commonly claimed to be science. Our hope is that some young people might choose to pursue careers in science (or Technology) and we want to make sure they can tell the difference, regarding having a productive and successful career in a scientific field.

Strict science is pretty amazing about how carefully it examines facts and considers assumptions. It is normal to ASSUME that gravity is true, based on what science calls ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. All the billions of people who have ever lived on Earth have apparently always dealt with gravity! As far as anyone knows, no one has ever seen gravity to disappear! But THAT is not good enough for strict science! It is still referred to as a THEORY of gravity (or gravitation). Science searches for PROOF and, so far, no one has yet found any really compelling PROOF that it MUST exist. Scientists generally think that such proof will someday be MATHEMATICAL in basis. Scientists are not stupid and we all accept that gravity seems to be really reliable, but it will not advance from a Theory to a Law until more strict proof comes around! This comment is important for a thousand other reasons! You have noticed that people ARGUE over whether Global Warming is occurring. People seem to think that ASSUMPTIONS and OPINIONS matter, and the States of Virginia and North Carolina have governments which are trying to pass laws FORBIDDING Global Warming and even forbidding talking about it! That is terrifyingly silly! It makes me wonder how poorly educated the lawmakers are in those States! A phenomenon is either true or it is not, whether it is of natural cause or due to man-made activities. There are even HUNDREDS of people who have College Degrees in science who are willing to claim whatever some company wants them to say, for a few hundred thousand dollars! Scientists are not supposed to 'sell out' science, but human nature is what it is.

In any case, ALL the presentations in this Domain are based on the best science that is known. Does science 'know every answer?' No. But the entire point of all science is to always strive to learn more, to better understand what, when, where and why of our world. So, do we YET know every detail regarding Global Warming? No. Which is actually why I spent several years in collecting all the scientific facts and logic related to that subject, in Physics of Global Warming. But there are many of those people who are paid by giant Corporations, and others who have terrible science skills, who also claim to tell you truth, when they actually do not. An interesting example that seems to have gotten accepted by everyone these days is regarding the (alleged) Global Warming effects of Methane gas (or buried methane hydrate). It would be interesting if such statements were true, but the simplest examination of scientific facts shows that they are absolutely untrue! Yet those untrue claims get repeated nearly every day by Reporters who do not know the science, and so everyone believes it! I have collected the science regarding that, specifically the optical absorbtivity of methane gas, in Methane characteristics. Either an atmospheric gas absorbs important colors of heat radiation or it does not, and laboratory research regarding that selective absorbtivity identified such effects. It is very puzzling that virtually all scientists and speakers attribute such characteristics to Methane gas, where the actual science is very obvious! So the daily repeated claims that Methane gas 'is twenty times worse a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide' appears to be absolutely complete fiction!

A side note seems necessary here. Modern society seems to only see credibility in the comments of any scientist IF he has either become a multi-millionaire due to aggressive self-promotion and speeches OR if he has gone through the rather interesting process of 'publish-or-perish' in specific publications. I have always been a rather low-key person who avoids publicity and self-aggrandizement and I also have only once been money-centered! In 1973 I invented an extremely advanced wood-burning stove for my own house, but word got out and more than 27,000 people insisted on having one just like it. I tried to find some local company which might be interested in manufacturing them but no one was interested. So I had to learn a lot about 'business' and I set up a unique factory where I manufactured my JUCA woodstoves. Even without actually knowing how to run a company, and virtually without ever advertising them, I manufactured and sold over $11 million of my woodstoves. My ex-wife loved that prosperity, but I found it to consume my life. In a later divorce, a Judge gave nearly everything to her, which was fine.

In any case, the University of Chicago taught me well in theoretical Physics, and my life has included many unique ideas and inventions. Once I knew the things I learned with JUCA, I felt that I COULD HAVE refined about 30 of them into businesses which also would have again made me a millionaire (IF that had any importance to me!) When the Internet arose and I learned of it, I decided to place rather complete scientific presentations on many of them so that others might benefit from things I had found and enjoyed, and all without trying to make a dime from any of them! So, in recent decades, the news media has not been flooded with news of my ideas, and I have not again become rich, so leaders now seem to assume that I am unimportant and to be ignored! Fine, but over the years, hundreds of millions of people have visited and read one or more of my web-pages. I am satisfied with that.

I had also not competed in the impressively aggressive University competition over getting Grants to finance research to support one's career. Each student or scientist NEEDS to constantly be Publishing articles in specific periodicals to enhance their credibility toward getting such Grants, and it is universally known that even Professors who do not regularly Publish have careers that soon fade and disappear. Since I was never into such 'competition' and even hated the astounding FORMAT focus of College Theses, I CHOSE to nearly universally avoid even submitting Papers for such publication. If my typewriter had the 'wrong font text' or I didn't structure paragraphs in some extremely rigid format, my submissions tended to get rejected, even before anyone actually READ any of them! So I lost interest in that, since I did not lust for the Grants that such efforts were all directed toward anyway!

The result of this is sort of amusing! A number of these web-pages presented in this Domain include extremely important information, whether it is about generating electricity by unique and advanced methods or heating or cooling houses and buildings or other useful things like making sidewalks and driveways snow- and ice-free, or the Advanced Physics presentations on the faulty Twins Paradox or the unique research in Nuclear Structure. The 'established leadership' has no interest in my pages! Some day they will, maybe around the year 2030!

So even though many of these pages have been available on the Internet for many years, their advanced Technology and many benefits never seem to show up in popular news media. In a way, that is sort of disappointing. During the past 13 years, at least 19,000 people have installed my 'free, underground air conditioning' in their homes, while hundreds of millions of others still pay thousands of dollars to giant corporations for electricity to run conventional A/C compressors. It is such a simple and OBVIOUS idea (which I invented in 1978 as part of my 100% Solar Heated house) but still only a tiny fraction of people use it. My guess is that those few thousand people who no longer have to pay for expensive A/C will tell neighbors and friends, and by 2030, most houses on Earth will include using my approach to A/C. I just find it all bemusing!

The result is that some thousands of Automotive students have learned about the Physics of Automotive Engines from my page on that, but millions of Auto Mechanics have never learned that stuff! The same in a variety of other fields where Physics is important. Since I never ask for any money for any of these pages, there are also many people who assume that the information MUST not have any value, else I would be trying to 'get rich' from selling it! I find that sort of darkly sad. Anyone visiting ANY web-page does need to be cautious regarding believing some of the outrageous statements that seem to be everywhere, but this Domain has always had extremely strict ideas regarding ACCURACY and TRUTH and LOGIC. But few people seem to accept that! Oh, well! The millions of visitors to my pages are at least entertained for a moment!


I just said that everything in this Domain is strictly based on brutal logic and known scientific laws and knowledge. This single little section is an exception to those rules! As a Theoretical Physicist, I want to believe that all other Physicists are equally as careful and strict, but there seem to be a few specific subjects where I have doubts regarding them having been careful enough! So here is MY list of subjects (all of which arose within either Nuclear Physics or Astro-Physics) where I want to present my IDEA of the ODDS that each of these ideas is true and valid. So this IS SPECULATION on my part! But I feel this is necessary such that quality Physicists in the future might more carefully examine any or all of these subjects.

SubjectOdds of being validMy reasons why
Stonehenge Astronomy95%comments
Pyramids Astronomy95%comments
Dark Energy0%comments
Big Bang30%comments
Black Holes5%comments
Dark Matter2%comments
Gravity Waves30%comments
Universe Expanding0%comments
Universe of Neutrinos0%comments
Neutrons within Atomic Nuclei5%comments
Branes0%comments
Wormholes0%comments
Time Travel0%comments
Twins Paradox0%comments

Here is an interesting example subject. Musical instruments such as the acoustic guitar involve many aspects of Physics and resonance, but most features of lutes, mandolins, violins and guitars were developed prior to modern scientific knowledge. The shape of the hollow body, its length, width and depth, the size and shape and position of the sound hole, the length and orientation of the fretboard and even the species of wood used and the lacquer finish on it, were all simply incremental individual attempts to try to improve previous instrument sounds and performance. In other words, very little actual science was ever involved in the construction of such instruments. From a Theoretical Physicist's perspective, this is all very fascinating, as we KNOW all that stuff as basic Physics! Clearly, most builders of violins found value in using well-seasoned spruce wood for the soundboard, but they made the back usually of well-seasoned maple wood. Lutes (from ancient times but mostly after about 1400 AD), tend to have oval sound holes while acoustic guitars tend to have circular sound holes. Mandolins have a pear-shaped body (which is asymmetric lengthwise), while acoustic guitars have bodies that have a wider and narrower section with a narrower still waist between them. Violins have f-holes for sound holes. Mandolins tend to have very deep bodies, although the mandolins used in American country music tend to be shallow and with relatively flat backs. It is not clear that very much actual logic or science has ever been applied in the design or construction of any of these musical instruments! They seem to have all been essentially trial and error efforts, some of which sounded better and some of which sounded worse than previous instruments! You may have noticed that some acoustic guitars are a LOT larger than others. I personally came to be interested in the similarities and differences of violins and fiddles. But the fact that acoustic guitar bodies seem to have somewhat randomly different patterns regarding the proportions of the dimensions of the different parts of their construction, seems to imply a certain reliance on experimentation rather than actual theoretical design.

As a Physicist, I also find it fascinating that around 300 years ago, Stradivarius created violins which are still considered the world's finest, and even now, no one can identify how and why that is! One popular GUESS is that Stradivarius changed the chemical composition of the shellac he coated his instruments with. Virtually no one seems to see any importance in the fact that he also slightly changed some of the dimensions of his violins from what others have used.

My interest in acoustic guitars is related to the apparent fact that each was built as an experimental modification of previous instruments, where any successful new instruments were then carefully copied. We refer to this as APPLIED Physics, where an actual deep understanding of WHY something caused an improvement or detriment is considered of minimal importance and only the results (sounds) are actually important. In THEORETICAL Physics, we are usually much more focused on WHY a slight change of some dimension has some noticeable effect on the sound. The size and shape of each portion of an acoustic guitar causes resonances and harmonics (along each of the three dimensions). As a Theoretical Physicist, I would study whether the size and shape of different parts of the resonant chamber might amplify resonant frequencies which might enhance third-harmonics or fifth-harmonics to produce sounds which were more harmonious. To simply build a guitar which had some portion which was half an inch wider or narrower, without having any idea of what that might create, seems rather foolish to me. A Theoretical Physicist would do a LOT of calculations before actually drawing anything up. Maybe it would seem important to try having the two halves of the sound box to have widths that were in the proportion of 5 to 3, or 3 to 2, to inspire some desired harmonic in the sound, and also have the waist width in some other resonant fraction dimension. But no one seems to have ever used that approach!

To me personally, I note that all acoustic guitars have the rear portion being the widest, and since no one seems to know WHY that is the case (which might simply be due to copying previous designs or due to artistic appearance), I wonder about the sound of an acoustic guitar which was "reversed" where the greater width part might be near the fretboard, or even possibly a THREE lobed acoustic guitar (with two waists)! And what about two sound holes??? Of different sizes or shapes??? It seems clear to me that if the actual Theoretical Physics behind these matters is not first learned and fully studied, it might take construction of hundreds of three-lobed guitars before one was (accidentally) found to have a better sound!

These comments are intended to explain and justify the field of Theoretical Physics! In the real-world, few people seem to care very much regarding the theory and logic behind any existing technology, and a person might TRY making a minimal change in an existing car engine or other device or product to try to improve performance. That is more of an Applied Technology or Applied Physics approach, which tends to be limited to creating INCREMENTAL improvements (such as in the Aeronautics and Aviation field, Automotive fields and most others). Modern society tends to rely on such incremental improvements. Theoretical Physicists tend to see such approaches as being somewhat blind attempts to create advanced concepts and devices, where we feel that a good understanding of the logic and facts might enable an entirely NEW perspective regarding any subject. You may notice this rather different approach in some of the presentations in this Domain.

Gambling? Here is another Physics thing which HAS affected your life but you never knew! Any game that uses dice is probably sort of "crooked" unless REALLY good dice are used! Only Physicists probably notice that the PITS where the pips (black dots) are made are RECESSED, which means that some of the WEIGHT of the cube is missing there. Specifically, there is a side which has ONE dot and the OPPOSITE side has SIX dots. Do you see yet? The cube is NOT symmetrically balanced! In fact, because the side with the ONE is the heaviest side, that results in the opposite side, the SIX being somewhat lighter and therefore coming up on top slightly more often! Nearly all dice are what I call cheap dice, and they have this statistical flaw. In Physics, it is possible to calculate the Integral of the gravitational weight for a die which has rotated sufficiently, and there IS a slight preference for SIX over ONE. Not a huge difference, but still statistically noticeable if you record a thousand dice rolls (which, of course, I did when I was a teenager). The fact that dice are often translucent makes it harder to insert a chunk of more dense material without it being visible, but REALLY good dice generally have that weight correction inside of each die. REALLY good dice need to be designed and then balanced for both Kinematic and Dynamic Balance, which is rather involved to do! In theory, at Gambling Casinos, they only use the expensive kind of dice, but I wonder whether all Casinos are willing to pay ten or twenty times as much for Statically, Kinematically and Dynamically balanced dice. Somehow I suspect that many Casinos assume that no Guest would know if they had "crooked dice" or not. Mostly since virtually no one but a Physicist would know either the problem or how it is correctly handled in really good dice! See? YOU have certainly played Monopoly or a hundred other games where your chance of winning or losing was not as fair as you had assumed it was!

For people who might believe or disbelieve any of the information presented in this Domain, we encourage having the approach of a Theoretical Physicist at all times, even without any ritzy education. Check ANY facts which strike you as questionable. Try to check ALL assumptions made for the quality of logic involved. As a Theoretical Physicist, I am a real fanatic about these matters. The University of Chicago can claim most of the credit for that, by forcing me as a Physics student to take an entire 13-week Graduate-School-level Math Course which was to either confirm that 1 + 1 = 2 or that it is not correct. Non-Physicists see this as a foolish waste of their valuable time! But we Physicists do not want to take ANYTHING for granted, and want to make sure of even things that seem as obvious as 1 + 1 = 2. Farther down in this home page text is the story of that Course, and why I now have great confidence in 1 + 1 being EXACTLY two! But I became far more alert to hundreds of similar assumptions that everyone simply accepts without question. It contributes toward a VERY cautious approach to all fields of interest, and I encourage any and all readers to be equally careful regarding whatever they read or see or hear, even in this Domain.

I have always been a forever curious person. Little kids are like that, where they notice something that does not seem to make sense to them, and they either ask questions of adults or otherwise try to sleuth it out. I guess I am just a very large kid! As a recent example, I am now fascinated with WHY we were born with a throat which is used for BOTH eating and breathing. Your Pharynx is a short tube in your neck which carries either food or air. You know how to cause food to be sent down your esophagus to your stomach, while you also know how to cause air to be instead sent to and from your trachea and your lungs. The moment you were born, you somehow KNEW how to open and close passages to be able to breathe into and out of your lungs! Ditto about KNOWING how to open and close passageways to be able to get food down into your stomach! I cannot find any evidence that anyone knows WHY we are born like that! Virtually all mammals are born the same way. That seems to imply that there must be some 'survival advantage' but it is beyond me what that might be! You certainly have occasionally accidentally caused a piece of food or a sip of liquid to go down into your lungs, and you have choked and coughed for a while to recover from that. After millions of years of nearly a million generations of us, I don't understand why a few babies were not born with SEPARATE food and air paths, where that seems to me to be a survival advantage. Obviously, I do not understand why we are as we are! I would love to learn the answer to this puzzle!

Text Font Face
.
Text Size
.
Background
Color
.
(for printing)

There is even more bad news than that in the link above! (mid-2008) This has to do with the economy. footnote2


An initial observation seems appropriate here. It seems to me that virtually everything that is sold or promoted or advertised today is presented with intentional distortion, bias, spin and sometimes even outright lies. People seem to really believe that companies are willing to create million-dollar commercials and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars every time they are aired, just so those companies can GIVE people "FREE" carpeting, windows, clothing, millions of dollars, etc. And that those expensive commercials are run every hour to offer diamonds that "are worth double" or SALES that offer enormous (alleged) price reductions.

Doesn't ANYONE realize WHY they went into business in the first place? TO MAKE THE GREATEST AMOUNTS OF MONEY THAT THEY CAN! For the record, that IS the "American dream!" Should we believe that they are actually really stupid in spending millions of dollars just to give even more dollars to us? Duh?

There seems to be a required suspension of all logic in accepting such things! Lots of insurance companies (and other companies that pretend to be insurance companies!) tell you every day that you will receive MILLIONS of dollars in coverage, while also telling you that you will only have to pay $5 or $50 per month for it? How come no one seems to "do the math"? Fifty dollars per month is $600 per year, right? and in your 50 years of adulthood, isn't that a $30,000 MAXIMUM that you will pay into it? Ah, I see! The company is SO WONDERFUL that they are willing to make up for the rest of those millions that you will eventually receive! (Yes, I am aware that interest rates and investments will increase your $30,000 paid in by some amount, a GOOD increase if they are good at investing. But it AIN'T GONNA ever get to "millions" during your lifetime! Yet, nearly everyone seems to simply accept such TV commercials as absolutely trustworthy and reliable! And those companies are SO generous that they are willing to spend millions every day for the air time to let you know about this amazing thing they want to do for you?

And no one seems to think there is the slightest deception involved in any of that! Companies are going around just LOOKING FOR ME so that they can give me FREE cars and piles of money and every other thing that people dream of. It is no wonder that ADVERTISING is such an enormous business! People BELIEVE nearly everything they are told!

(Regarding the insurance companies, there actually IS an explanation. It is that they KNOW that 95% or 99% of the people who will pay in that money will never have enormous claims during their lives! Actually, that probably includes YOU! So if 100 people each pay in $30,000 in premiums, that is three million dollars, which they invest and make extra money but also are then able to pay the million dollar medical bills for that rare person who amasses such bills. But the insurance companies then make enormous profits for their Executives and their investors, and also pay out enormous medical claims for a VERY small number of people who get AIDS or extreme cancers or other expensively-treated maladies. As I compose this, the US government expects to FORCE insurance companies to cover everyone and to disregard previously-existing illnesses. It is amazing that no one seems to realize that act will entirely make their profitable game no longer interesting to them that run those giant Corporations! They will certainly move their investments and efforts into fields where they can see enormous profits.)

It seems to me that virtually NO ONE seems willing to present any product or service or person on WHAT IS ACTUALLY TRUE AND HONEST! Wow! It is clear that virtually EVERY company seems to spend massive time and effort in trying to find ways to DECEIVE people into paying for their product or service! Even when they have good quality products! (In vehicles, they somehow managed to overlook that Jeep CJ5 TV commercial [around 30 years ago] where an eagle-eyed TV viewer happened to notice that a rear wheel had LIFTED OFF THE GROUND in the process of nearly having a rollover accident [IN A TV COMMERCIAL!], and they still managed to get millions of people to buy SUVs, which ALL have that danger as part of their basic design!) And Ford and GM had decided that they could get away with selling Pintos and Corvairs, while knowing that those vehicles of theirs WOULD KILL PEOPLE. They simply set a dollar value on a human life and decided that they could afford to settle claims regarding those deaths because they would have made so much profit from those vehicles! And nearly every politician or other public person insists on "spinning" to make themselves "bigger than life!" I don't know whether we are supposed to conclude from all this that that there are no products or services actually worth buying! It sure seems to be an implication of everything we see.

I realize that the reality is that every company is aware that most every one of their competitors do this sort of thing, and they realize that if they did not also do this stuff, they would not be "competitive" regarding pursuing the billions of dollars of profits that they all lust for. And with only that concept in their minds, it is sort of understandable that essentially every modern company works hard to do as much deception that they feel they can get away with. THIS is what modern society has devolved into!

Here is another example of massive deception, even though it is for a basically good cause. You have seen newscasts which note that the people in Haiti and other countries earn "less than two dollars per day" which is considered to be below survival levels. But I bet you have never related that to the (very expensive) TV commercials that run constantly that show the faces of very sad children to try to get you to send in money. Some Accountant must have calculated that people might not send in money if asked to send in more than $19 per month, so that is what they ask you for. THINK about this! They even TELL YOU that this would cost you LESS THAN A DOLLAR A DAY. Then they list off the amazingly prosperous life that this child would suddenly have due to your dollar per day, including schools, food, safe water, clothes and more. They claim that YOU would somehow provide this amazing prosperity for that kid by giving your less than a dollar a day. Doesn't this strain credibility? If TWO DOLLARS PER DAY is not considered enough to ensure food and health, then how are YOU able to provide these things and much more with far less money?

Those organizations which run all those TV commercials NEVER release any actual information regarding HOW MANY DONATIONS ARE SENT IN TO THEM and HOW MANY CHILDREN ARE THEREBY HELPED. There is so much deception in what they do that it is disgusting (even though I WANT to help such children, I will NOT do it through such organizations. They neglect to mention that around 3/4 of all the money you might send in has to be spent in paying to make more TV commercials and then to air them on thousands of TV stations and cable channels. They neglect to mention that the Executives of their organization are each paid millions of dollars every year! So the reality is that your 70 cents per day that YOU send in barely ever gets to any needy children! Around 55 cents of it gets used up to pay those Executives and to make and air new commercials to get OTHERS to send them money! In my opinion, that whole operation works a lot like an illegal Ponzi Scheme, where constant supplies of NEW donors are required to keep their jobs and activities afloat! I had realized much of this around 30 years ago, but I was shocked at how extensive the deception was that they do! There were THREE different young women I knew who EACH had the SAME PHOTOGRAPH of a very cute child on their refrigerators, along with the EXACT SAME (alleged) letter from that child. However, the three supposed children were allegedly in DIFFERENT African countries and allegedly had different names! It also struck me as amazing that a very young child who had never attended any school [always emphasized in every commercial] had made a hand-written note IN PERFECT ENGLISH, from each of those (alleged) three countries!)

Again, if there was ANY honesty or truth in the TV commercials, it would be fine. But clearly at least FIFTY DONORS must have to be sending in money every month (money that THEY cannot really afford to be giving) such that an adequate amount might arrive for ONE needy child. But they KNOW that no one is going to be sending them $19 every month IF they actually know that they are only one of fifty supporting that child! The disappointing part is that NO ONE KNOWS how many millions of dollars gets sent in to such organizations every year, or whether there is even one child who has materially been benefited in the process. Claiming to be a NON-PROFIT organization allows amazing secrecy about such things, and so they have gotten away with that rather massive deception for more than 30 years so far. They CAN'T ever get into any legal trouble because no one can ever know what they actually do or where the money goes! Amazing!

In a dark branch of this fact of modern society, I find it essentially impossible to find even a CHURCH web-site which is not chock-full of random advertising links. It turns out that if the site is popular regarding traffic, the Church can receive monthly checks larger than what their Collection Plate provides! That universal fact seems to confirm that even Churches see FINANCIAL CASH FLOW as more important that principles or morals or the Lessons they try to Teach! (Our Church's web-site and also the BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site that it operates, has NO such display advertising, never has and hopefully never will.)

In any case, THIS Domain has the intention and goal of actually presenting FACTS, in HONEST WAYS, where NO DECEPTION hopefully exists in any of the thousands of contained pages! Being human, I suppose that is probably not absolutely true, but it sure is as true as I have been capable of trying to make them.

This tends to result in a situation which many people may find unexpected! Nearly every presentation contains BOTH the wonderful strengths of any specific concept or product, but it (hopefully) also contains discussions of the negative shortcomings of those same products or concepts. The point is NEITHER to "promote or sell" any particular view NOR to "rip or denigrate" such things, but simply to try to present BOTH sides of important areas which you may want or need to someday consider or analyze. Hopefully, you will find "about equal" presentations on both or all sides of any specific subject, all based on known facts and on solid logic, such that YOU can then determine any conclusions that YOU think are most valid.

For example, where virtually any other information source regarding tower windmills presents "immensely optimistic" comments or claims, toward "selling" that concept or some specific product, the presentations in this Domain should (hopefully) present HONEST and REALISTIC views of what might be achieved with such a system. Yes, there IS good reason to examine wind power as a possible source of the energy upon which our societies rely. But it needs to be honest and balanced information for anyone to be able to actually make an informed decision! There is currently IMMENSE deception to the public regarding the actual performance of the giant windmills and wind farms! It would be GREAT if they could actually do what the public is led to assume. But the fact that there tends to be a ten-year lead time between contractors being paid to build such things and their eventual daily operation, so the money will be long gone before the public ever fully realizes that nearly all of those tower windmills and wind farms will certainly supply only maybe 1/10 of what is now expected of them. You might want to read Tower Windmills and Electricity, regarding Practical Large-Scale Wind-Generated Electricity for the facts, the logic and the whole story.

Long ago, around 1975, I was amazed that Feature Stories in magazines would be titled "We heat our entire home with a Ben Franklin Stove." Technically, that was true, but it was immensely misleading. The story would describe how the family would have to wake up every two or three hours all night to load more wood in their stove, and then still have to wake up to a 53°F house in the morning, and that the house was extremely small, just four small rooms, around 600 square feet. THOSE occupants considered it acceptable to wake up to a 53°F house! I wouldn't! And the living room I am now sitting in while composing this text is around half the size of that entire house! Maybe I am too spoiled, but I expect to wake up to a house that is around 71°F or 72°F! (At the time of reading such very popular stories in 1975, I had already been fully heating an 11-room, three-story, uninsulated 1896 farmhouse, for the previous three winters, with a very unusual woodstove that I had Designed, Engineered and built for myself, and I would NEVER tolerate having to wake up in the middle of the night just to add more wood! I would also never have been happy to wake up to a house that was not cozy warm at 70°F in the morning. I am NOT a "morning person!") In any case, technically, it was not a lie that that family in the magazine story said that they were heating their whole house with a woodstove. But millions of people were later very disappointed to buy such Franklin stoves and then find that it did a fine job of heating ONE room and possibly two, but never much more unless they lived in Florida! Info on my JUCA woodburners, and woodburning in general, is at Woodburning Furnace. Fireplace, Woodstove - JUCA Super-Fireplaces. As to how it works so well, How a JUCA Woodburning Furnace Works.

So I suppose that I have a grudge against most modern advertising, because I keep looking for SOME commercial that does not wildly exaggerate actual abilities of some product and that does not intentionally deceive viewers/readers into arriving at wrong conclusions. If it were up to me, when ads said FREE, if those very expensive commercials were not ACTUALLY giving away the things they claimed, I would want to see them all sued! Maybe some level of truth in advertising might then re-appear! In any case, THIS Domain makes a serious effort at avoiding such things, and tries to present honest facts and reliable logic, and even tries to AVOID letting readers accidentally arrive at some wrong conclusions. However, it probably will be a LOT more boring than the exciting commercials that tell you that you have already won a million dollars or will win a Hummer or that the promoter is going to GIVE you gold or money or gasoline or whatever!

OK. I DO have some strange attitudes about some aspects of modern society. Several years ago, I was disgusted and astounded to see a TV news segment that described that 200 sports coaches in the State of Washington had been arrested and convicted IN THAT YEAR of molesting the young children who trusted them and whose parents also trusted them. My mathematical mind quickly realized that if there were 200 in just Washington State, and the US has roughly 50 times the population of Washington, that must have meant that there had been TEN THOUSAND sports coaches in the US that were arrested and convicted IN THAT YEAR. And it's hard to even imagine how many thousands of others have gotten away with their aberrant behaviors!

So, MY "strange attitude" regarding such aberrant people? Put them in Prison for a year or two and then release them to do their horrible things again? NO! No one could actually get away with doing this, but just imagine if ONE such convicted pervert was taken into a "Public Square" (maybe on a small stage in Times Square or a similar location) and an accurate machete swing was used to perform a "rapid public operation", probably with a lot of Reporters and TV cameras present to record the gross and gruesome event. Yes, it would be cruel punishment for someone with a machete to "chop off the offending parts" in a fraction of a second. And, yes, a medical doctor would need to be present to stop the bleeding that would certainly occur.

BUT JUST IMAGINE THE CHANGE OF BEHAVIOR OF THOSE THOUSANDS OF OTHER ABERRANT SPORTS COACHES and the millions of others who abuse children. They would certainly all watch it as a video, watched millions of times on You-Tube and FaceBook and elsewhere. The SINGLE example of such a public spectacle, could likely ensure the safety of MILLIONS of children, couldn't it?

(I admit that I got this idea from the sick terrorists who have beheaded people and videotaped it. But I truly believe that if a SINGLE such "public machete operation" was performed and videotaped, millions of men would see that gruesome video on You-tube or whatever, and I think, would DECIDE to never do things to little kids! Would that be worth the severe bending of the Constitution once? Well, I'm not a Lawyer or a Supreme Court Justice, so I do not know. But I really suspect that an "outside-the-box" response like that, JUST ONCE, would certainly make MILLIONS of little kids far safer.)

As to having an effect on that one man, obviously it would, but that would not be the point. The intention would be that such a bizarre scene would never have to be re-enacted. The VIDEO of it being seen over and over by millions of men who might consider doing bad things to little kids, should scare the daylights out of them. The thought that the one part of their body that seems to drive them most, might get viciously chopped off!

Of course, in America, aberrant people all KNOW that such a thing could never happen to them. Even if they get caught doing the most horrendous things to little kids, they get good food and a roof for a year or two while in prison, and then they know they will be released to do it all again, to OTHER unsuspecting little kids. SEE why my "strange attitude" seems to make some sense! But since that will never happen, there will be MILLIONS of children who will be abused in every conceivable way, some of which will occur on the very block on which you live!

I wonder if there might some day be ONE Convicted child molester who actually regretted his behavior and who might VOLUNTEER to be the participant in such a gruesome scene??? With a signed document that said that he knew what he was agreeing to! In such a case, maybe the Constitution might not need to get 'bent' while still achieving the desired goal of safety for millions of kids???


Down to more calm subjects now!

This Domain contains presentations on many specific subjects in science and Engineering. Many visitors seem to think that I just dreamed up the different things. No, a Physicist does not approach any subject that way. And, instead of "searching for many books or web-sites for information to be used for such presentations, that is also not how a Physicist should work. In fact, the bulk of the science and the Engineering and math in the included web-pages in this Domain were based on a total of TWO primary source texts! One is the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. The other is Mark's Standard Handbook of Mechanical Engineering. Those two resources include the data and the equations behind nearly all of Physics and Mechanical Engineering. That information was APPLIED in unique new ways, true. But the point is that virtually all of the presentations in this Domain are actually rather mundane applications of universally accepted knowledge of Physics and Mechanical Engineering.


Here are a few somewhat random recent additions to this Domain (Hundreds of other links are farther down below!):

Do You Believe in God? Whatever your answer, you may find this link worth visiting!
Disposing of IEDs and other Terrorist Bombs
Source of Energy - the Moon. Artificial tides, a Moon-based Source of Energy?
If e-mail stops being answered to the presentations in this Domain, this is probably what had happened.
Possibly a More Accurate IQ Test?
An Illinois Lawyer Can Make an Easy $200,000 or more!
Eliminating SUV Rollover Accidents. A method to make SUVs the safest vehicles on the road. In the 1960s, luxury cars had suspension systems which used electric motors to level out a car by raising or lowering the rear suspension. In 2005, I applied this concept to allowing SUVs to remain tall when standing still or traveling at less than 30 mph, but where all four wheels of the suspension would lower by six inches when the vehicle speed rose to over 30 mph. Rollover accidents are then virtually impossible to occur. (I invented this in 2005)
And another presentation which presents SUV Rollover Accidents (the Physics).
A Possible Solution to the Health-Care Situation in the US
The Physics of Tornadoes. , including How they Form. A Very Odd Possible Energy Source!
Equation of Time. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (very precise) (Jan 2009)
Precession of Gyroscopes and the Earth. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
Tower Windmills and Electricity. Practical Large-Scale Wind-Generated Electricity (1.2 MegaWatt for 1000 houses)
Low-Tech Active Solar Heating for Buildings and Water

The Twins Paradox of Relativity Is Absolutely Wrong (research 1997-2004, published Aug 2004)

Time Passes Faster Here on Earth than on the Moon (but only a fraction of a second per year! It is an effect of Einstein's General Relativity) (Jan 2009)

Equation of Time Calculator. Precise Eccentricity of Earth's Orbit - TODAY
The Physics Behind Genetically Modifying Foods
My Suggestion for Saving the Chile Miners
Quantum Physics is Compatible with the Standard Model (2002, Sept 2006, Oct 2010)


My College Degree was in Nuclear Physics from the University of Chicago. They seem to have done some useful things inside my head! However, the logical and critical thinking that they taught me seems to have no limits! Even within modern Physics, I see assorted things which appear to be enormous errors, nearly always because someone had made UNJUSTIFIED ASSUMPTIONS in (allegedly) solving some previous issue! MUCH of modern Physics is wonderful and very well based in facts and logic, but there seem to be really bad exceptions!

I find it somewhat humorous that virtually all Physicists look down their noses at people who even mention things like ghosts or ESP or UFOs, or anyone who claims to be a Christian, immediately saying that the other person is ignorant in believing things that are not supported by scientific evidence. Well, there are millions of people who have claimed to witness ghosts, or have experienced ESP, and nearly as strong a factual basis for the other two subjects above. But the same Physicists who humiliate people for saying such things, make even MORE un-factual and un-based statements, and consider them to be rock solid! Funny! Modern Physics has DOZENS of subjects which are each results of various people's wild imagination, where there is NO ACTUAL BASIS WHATEVER!

Is the Universe nearly all "dark matter"? footnote56 footnote15 Are there Black Holes? footnote55 footnote16 Is the very popular Twins Paradox true? footnote64 footnote17 Is there good basis for Quantum Dynamics? footnote18 Is the Quantum Defect actually an uncalculatable and irrational factor? footnote19 Do Neutrons exist inside atomic nuclei? footnote60 footnote20 Even something as simple as the fact that even famous Physicists talk about atoms that go into higher energy states having electrons in BIGGER orbits! No, the correct answer is 'smaller'! footnote21


Over the years, I have become involved in a number of projects, each of which has been intended to somehow benefit society, Nature or God. Some presently exist, some are in development, and some are just available for possible combined efforts! ALL are protected by U.S. Copyright protection! The presentations included in the subject lists below give at least an overview of many of these projects. Each is designed to be PRINTABLE. (But you may want to first select the WHITE PLAIN BACKGROUND (W) and an attractive FONT before printing any of them out.) They apply to a wide variety of fields. Some represent possible business ventures (some of which already exist). Most represent new combinations of perspectives or technologies that seem to enable new insights into the subject at hand. I hope that these scientific, social, religious, and intellectual pages might provide seeds of thought on which others could build. If such use is made of any of my pages, I request a notation of credit be included.

The product- or service-related business concepts presented all belong to me, and I have Patented or have Patent procedures in progress for some of them. Nearly all of these are also meant to somehow benefit society. Use or development or marketing of any of them would ONLY be allowed based on a written contract of agreement regarding that particular invention or device or process. NO authority is given to manufacture or promote any of them, based on the mere presence of these presentation pages.


It seems important to try to address the major difference between how a good Physicist looks at the world and how everyone else usually does! Physicists are usually seen as very peculiar, in a negative sense, of not having touch with the real world. I can't speak for other Physicists, but I think I have at least a vague idea of "real life" In fact, I am often amazed that the general public often seems to have so little idea of what is actually going on regarding many subjects! Several examples seem appropriate here, to try to indicate the differences of the viewpoints. I have provided footnotes for each which contain the logic and the data that seems to support the one view. I have absolutely NO idea what supports the OPPOSING view!

Weight-Loss and Obesity

There are THOUSANDS of weight-loss programs constantly advertised, each trying to get you to send them money for some magical results they always (nearly) promise. And people BELIEVE them! Don't people see that even Oprah has failed to find any successful system, after countless attempts? Doesn't anyone see any problem there regarding credibility? Well, I see the problem as being that NO consumer of such programs or products seems to have a Physicist's super-logical viewpoint! So they actually think they are being told the truth, and they assume that the concepts argued are valid! In contrast, consider (this) Physicist's view: One pound of bodyfat in the body (actually called lipids or triglycerides) is made up nearly completely of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, about 77% of it being carbon atoms. footnote Say you decide to somehow remove exactly one pound of bodyfat from your body (without surgery!). That actually means that you have to find some way to discard about 0.77 pound of carbon. This is not quite as easy as it might first seem. We know the body breaks lipids down into simpler molecules (like by the Krebs Cycle) to get the energy out of it. We know the body can get rid of hydrogen and oxygen VERY easily as water and in many ways, by sweating, by moisture in the breath, by urination, etc. No problem there. But how many ways does a human body have of getting rid of carbon? Do you know? No one seems to! The answer is essentially ONE! It must convert the carbon into carbon dioxide (by oxidation, in a process called Metabolism) and then exhale it as a maximum of 4.4% of your outgoing breath. (Dalton's Law of partial pressures) footnote THAT'S IT! It has NO other significant way of dumping carbon! The point being, in order to get rid of that one pound of bodyfat, the body has NO alternative except to have to EXHALE enough breaths in order to get rid of enough carbon dioxide that can contain that 0.77 pound of carbon! (Of course, this is PLUS the carbon that must get dumped due to the body's normal daily Metabolism.) I suppose that you mathematical sorts may have already figured out that the 1.0 pound of bodyfat or the 0.77 pound of carbon would require about 26,400 normal breaths, to get rid of all that carbon! A LOT! The Physics logic seems crystal clear to me, but no one else seems to realize these unavoidable facts. (Physics could not really see all this in any other way!)

It is even easy to confirm this is all true. An average adult man eats (ballpark) around 2,200 Calories of food each day, and breathes about a total of (ballpark) 16,800 times each day. Each average breath is about half a liter of air, which, when exhaled at body temperature, can contain a maximum of about 22 milliliters of carbon dioxide in it, which is about 0.0405 gram of carbon dioxide per average breath. This includes 0.0110 gram of carbon atoms in it. In those 16,800 exhales each day, just multiply to find that means a total of 681 grams of carbon dioxide or 182 grams of elemental carbon can leave the body each day by way of exhaled breath. (Still following?) The 2,200 Calorie daily diet included about 0.40 pound or 182 grams of carbon in the food. That amount of carbon is processed throughout the body in the daily Metabolism. We can therefore see that the NORMAL exhaled breath accounts for the same amount of carbon that had entered the body during eating and digestion, and we even now see WHY the body weight is therefore generally stable!

By the way, virtually no one, including alleged experts, seems to know this fact! Everyone seems to assume that the food that we eat and digest pass through the body to be excreted. It obviously has to go SOMEWHERE, due to the scientific Law of Conservation of Mass! But the reality is that essentially ALL the food that you actually digest eventually leaves your body in your exhaled breaths! NOT in the nastier way that people assume!

You can probably see that if ANY of the variables regarding digestion OR BREATHING are changed, the body weight will likely then also change. Greater Calorie intake (without any increase in Metabolism or breathing rate) pretty much obviously means an increase in body weight. Greater Metabolism and heavier breathing, as, for example, due to a lot of exercise (without any increase in the Calorie intake) and the body weight is nearly certain to decrease. Pretty obvious, isn't it? Probably too many numbers, sorry, but I wanted to build an air-tight case regarding this stuff.

I hope you see that no assumptions were made in the discussion here, and simple and standard scientific knowledge and logic is all that has been used. This line of analysis forces accepting an entirely new (and somewhat bizarre!) set of conclusions! Yes, whether a person is obese or skinny IS related to their rate of Metabolism, but for an unexpected reason, apparently regarding their rate of breathing! A skinny person loses heat more easily from the skin, for having less thermal insulation, and so that person MUST have somewhat faster Metabolism and faster or deeper breathing. The converse is true for obese people, who seem very likely to breathe either more slowly or more shallowly, as a result of this effect.

Exercise CAN certainly contribute toward weight loss, but IF the associated breathing is not sufficient, the body could not actually get rid of the carbon atoms! Isn't that really weird? The consequence is that EXERCISE can get rid of bodyfat ONLY by doing TWO things: increasing the Metabolic usage of energy stores (everybody has long known that) AND INCREASING the breathing rate and depth. EITHER ONE ALONE could not do it! It really does not seem to matter whether you can lift 700 pounds or not! It may not even matter whether you are fit or not, as long as you do some activity that causes your Metabolism to speed up AND causes you to breathe either deeper or faster or both! The faster metabolism part is also the actual reason why things like Cocaine and Speeders (Amphetamines) tend to cause people to become skinny, by doing BOTH of those effects, (although such people often also forget to eat!)

There is another confirmation of this stuff. When Researchers do Metabolism Studies on people, what they actual monitor is the carbon dioxide exhaled in the breath! They make an ASSUMPTION that the instantaneous Metabolic Rate is necessarily proportional to the Respiration Rate, which is actually an extremely solid assumption, as it is necessary for bodily equilibrium. But the fact that we have identified TWO INDEPENDENT PROCESSES here seems extremely important. If EITHER the Metabolic Rate or the Respiration Rate was somehow restricted, the other would necessarily have to also be restricted by the brain, in order to maintain bodily equilibrium.

I suspect that there is an easy Thesis for a Medical student here! Obtain Physical Exam data for at least 1500 people who have deviated septums (obstructed nose passageways) and that for 1500 others who do not. Do a Scientific Statistical Analysis of the BMI number (a crude system of describing fitness by the metric body weight divided by the metric height squared), and it seems certain that the people with obstructed nasal passageways should be statistically heavier! BECAUSE if less airflow can normally occur, then the brain would necessarily restrict Basal Metabolism in order to maintain chemical equilibrium of the body. If Respiration Data is also available, then even better Statistical Analysis could be done.

When a person is obese, it might therefore be because of EITHER a Metabolic Rate that was too low for the food intake (with the respiration rate automatically then being reduced by the brain) OR due to a Respiration Rate that was too low to carry the carbon out of the body (with the brain then automatically reducing the Metabolic Rate in response).

The implications of this seem staggering! Say that your Metabolism was fine and that your particular body simply had developed a habit of breathing 10% more shallowly or 10% less often than most people do. Maybe that is due to aging or a change to a sedentary lifestyle. No one would ever notice this minimal difference. But say that you then could somehow LEARN (again) to breathe just 10% more deeply, with 0.50 liter of air in an average breath rather than your normal 0.45 liter. You might have already learned to restrict your food intake to eating 1,980 Calories of food each day, which might keep you from gaining even more weight, but you could not seem to lose any of the weight you have. But now your body would be able to exhale 10% additional carbon dioxide (equivalent to 2,200 Calories per day). (Remember that you had already learned a pattern of only eating 1,980 Calories each day.) Simple calculations indicate that this simple and easy change could represent a WEIGHT LOSS (of actual bodyfat) of around 0.4 pound per week or 22 POUNDS per year!. It sort of boggles the mind to think that all those expensive weight-loss programs might not be necessary at all, and that many of them are apparently impossible to be effective! And that a person might be able to lose really large amounts of actual bodyfat simply by learning a pattern of breathing a little more deeply (or a little faster)!

A web-page describes the details and the math and science behind this at Bodyfat, Weight Loss, the Physics of Body Weight Control.

There IS a caveat included above! Those larger breaths ARE ABLE TO carry away 10% more carbon. Will it actually do that? Don't yet know! It could happen that if your body has gotten really used to a slowed Metabolism, it might already therefore only be supplying a smaller amount of carbon to the lungs. The CONCENTRATION of carbon dioxide might simply drop lower to carry away the usual amount. So it might not be that your Metabolic Rate would increase just because the limitation of the Respiration Rate was lifted from it. Your brain has to figure this out! Once you have taught your body to breathe slightly more, it MAY then be necessary to also teach your body Metabolic Rate to also increase that small amount. Whether it would do it "because it could" or only after it was re-taught, is not yet known. So it DOES seem important to consider exercise, which would have the effect of teaching your body to increase both.

The footnote also includes some other interesting possible implications.

I recognize that as a Physicist, I am NOT an expert regarding dietary regimens and such, but the above logic is simply LOGIC!

Alternative Energy Devices and Systems

In "alternative energy", there are countless examples of where inventors or manufacturers claim unbelievable things! The fact that neither they nor the public seems aware of the Conservation of Energy, seems to encourage that sort of thing! They actually find ways to keep from being sued by such extravagant claims by describing what is called PEAK POWER RATINGS, instead of any PRACTICAL POWER RATINGS!

I use an analogy of people buying cars that are advertised as having 495 horsepower engines. THAT is a PEAK POWER RATING, describing the GREATEST POSSIBLE POWER PRODUCTION of that engine. It is an irrelevant number, except for a couple seconds at a traffic light! Cars are also described as having a certain fuel efficiency, a number of MPG, which is a far more useful number to know! That same high-powered car actually only produces around 40 horsepower in order to travel at constant speed on an Interstate Highway, where it then gets maybe 25 MPG fuel efficiency. THIS is a way of presenting PRACTICAL POWER RATINGS. The two are EXTREMELY different.

In nearly all forms of alternative energy products, there is commonly a factor of about ten to one of PEAK power to AVERAGE power. ADVERTISING always presents PEAK power ratings, which are impressive! But they are immensely misleading regarding AVERAGE performance which a buyer might actually expect to get!

So battery-powered vehicles always claim amazing performance while also claiming incredible GREENness and also that a standard extension cord can carry enough electricity to recharge it. footnote

In Hydrogen, the claims are even more outrageous, probably because even fewer people are capable of determining whether they are right or not. (Use the same footnote as above!)

In PV, photovoltaics, ditto, where customers are led to believe that they will be generating enormous amounts of electricity for their family to live a normal life. footnote

The footnotes show that with the simplest of examination, of figuring out how much (PEAK) power (energy flux) is being claimed and also figuring out how much (AVERAGE) power is actually likely available from the claimed source, MANY such claims are immediately seen as wild speculation (or outright lies).

The presentations in this Domain virtually always describe AVERAGE performance, what can be EXPECTED by an actual buyer of such products. There are also clear references to PEAK POWER RATINGS when the very inflated promotional claims are discussed.

Astrophysicists and Nuclear Physicists

This kind of questionable thinking even occurs WITHIN the Physics community! Physicists come up with the silliest and wildest speculation, and then aggressively claim it to be true, and NO ONE seems to ever even do any analysis to see if the claims were credible or even possible! There are many of these, and modern Physics seems to be chock full of "theories" which are absolutely devoid of any data documentation or support, and usually the author never even PRESENTED any valid logical case! It didn't use to be like that in Physics! In the old days, you had to provide immaculate logic, mathematics and empirical data to support even the tiniest point. Here is one specific example that amuses me! A few years back, researchers were grumbling about the fact that they had no direct access to rocks or other materials from Mars, in pursuit of trying to find whether there was ever water there, and possibly even ancient life. So, an unbelievably silly idea was presented, and it quickly became absolutely accepted by the Physics community. The premise was that tiny rocks, actually meteorites, found buried in the ice of Antarctica, were (allegedly) all materials that had come from Mars! They claim that either volcanoes on Mars, or incoming meteorites there, caused such explosive blasts that what is called ejecta was launched upward. They go farther and claim that the impact or the volcano was so powerful that the ejecta was launched at greater than escape velocity from Mars, so that the chunks of material were sent into outer space. And finally they claim that those many particles all hit the Earth in Antarctica and they are therefore SAMPLES of Mars that we can study. There have been many Papers published which claim to describe Mars based on study of those small Antarctica meteorites.

I guess in a common sense way, this could sound possible. But they used so MANY speculative assumptions in their story! ANY actual examination of the logic and the numbers shows that to be a truly silly claim! Do they really believe that millions of tons of the Earth were launched out into space when the (alleged) huge meteorite ended the dinosaur's reign? I doubt it, and on Earth, such impacts are far more explosive because of all the water that is around that can boil and create pressure. But even go wild and say that a MILLION TONS of material from the Earth had gotten launched out into space back then. How much of that material would have hit Mars to land there? Well, this is a very simple problem regarding Spherical Geometry. First, consider the Moon, which is very close to us. We can easily calculate that the Moon takes up about five one-millionths of our whole sky. If material had gotten launched out from Earth in random directions, roughly 0.000005 of it should have hit the (entire area of the) Moon. Not that complicated! If a million tons had gotten launched (an astonishingly large estimate!) only about five tons of it would have likely hit the ENTIRE surface of the Moon. At its AVERAGE distance from us, the angular size of Mars takes up about 1/200,000 the angular area of the Moon, also very easy to calculate. So how much of the million tons (allegedly) ejected from Earth would have hit the ENTIRE surface of the planet Mars? Well, that fraction of the five tons, or a TOTAL of LESS THAN ONE-EIGHTH OUNCE of such material spread over the ENTIRE surface of Mars! In the other direction, if Mars had ejected such an enormous amount, a million tons of ejecta, at some point in the past, the situation would have been essentially the same, where less than ONE-FOURTH OF AN OUNCE could possibly have hit the ENTIRE area of Antarctica (smaller than the area of Mars), certainly TOTALLING a size no larger a single kernel of corn! (Keep in mind that THIS would have only been possible if Mars had somehow ejected a MILLION TONS of material!) Such very small particles of material tend to burn up as they enter our atmosphere (as meteors) and only much larger ones usually make it through the atmosphere to land. Yet, those (alleged!) Physicists claim to have found large numbers of such debris in just a very small area of Antarctica. Should DUHH be appropriate? The SIMPLEST of math problems, which you just followed, shows how ridiculous that whole idea is!

It is sad to note that, at the time this amazing claim was made, there were some scientists who wanted to try to convince NASA to give them more money for spacecraft to Mars. Science had NOTHING to do with those alleged 'discoveries in Antarctica'. It was all just politics!

Also, they didn't bother to even try to determine WHETHER material could actually be given escape velocity speed to escape Mars in the first place. That problem is somewhat more complicated, but it easily shows that there was NO chance that any massive amount of material was ejected, (just like as is true on Earth when violent volcanic explosions occur) unless the entire planet of Mars was on the verge of being blown apart into two pieces! And even then, not much of it would have ever gone all the millions of miles to softly land on Antarctica!

There is nothing wrong with SPECULATING about such ideas. Creativity is a good thing! But Physicists are SUPPOSED to immediately do some math and logic analysis to see if what they want to claim is even possible. In this case, it is NOT REMOTELY POSSIBLE, by proof provided by very basic Laws of Science. The really troubling thing is that the entire Physics community endorsed and adopted this insane concept and it is now considered as virtually a certainty! Didn't ANYONE do those simple math exercises we just looked at?

(This HAS been realized as a foolish failure and corrected in the past few years since we have landed several robotic landers that have analyzed the soil of Mars. Those robots have now found chemical compositions of Mars which are absolutely different from the small chunks of (probably normal meteorite) material that were found in Antarctica. In fact, once the chemical analysis of those chunks were finally done [which had NOT been done at first, it was simply ASSUMED], those chunks found in Antarctica seem certain to have been ejected by EARTH volcanoes! An example of rampant incompetence!)

An obvious problem exists in Physics today! There are all sorts of theories thrown around such as where someone claims that some large object hit the planet Uranus so hard that it was knocked on its side to now rotate (very quickly) strangely (sideways). Or that a similar huge collision knocked the Earth into its tilted axis that causes our seasons. Don't those Physicists know even the basics of Gyroscopic Precession where they can easily mathematically prove that such silly ideas are impossible? Or around a dozen other similar claims of powerful impacts that allegedly caused enormous changes in the rotation of some planet. Those things might sound fine to non-Physicists, but in Physics Kindergarten, we all learned about the Conservation of Angular Momentum and its many consequences regarding gyroscopic motions. NO Physicist who has a valid Degree should possibly believe that ANY impact could massively alter the spin axis of any planet. In case they slept that day in Kindergarten, they should get a bowling ball spinning fast, suspend it on a gimbal mount and TRY to throw things at it or fire things at it to cause its spin axis to change. Also, allegedly smart scientists aggressively claim that the many trillions of tons of the Core of the Earth has completely flipped over, to then spin in the opposite direction, HUNDREDS OF TIMES, and even without any such ferocious impacts, for their explanation of why many rocks have evidence of the Magnetic Field of the Earth having reversed. It turns out that a smart guy about 200 years ago named Euler PROVED that cannot be done! And EVERY Physicist or even Physics student can easily do that math to show that such claims are silly! It is not even a very hard problem to prove! How could so many stupid ideas have gotten fully adopted as true?

The Physics community has quite a few other concepts which have absolutely NO actual basis, but which have become universally accepted as fact! Around 1912, Einstein developed a mathematical equation, which another scientist, Schwarzchild, solved in 1916. For one specific situation, Schwarzchild got a mathematical answer that became infinite, because the denominator of his answer became zero, at one specific location. THAT mathematical 'singularity' is the ENTIRE basis for the alleged existence of Black Holes! People added in assumptions, and later Physicists accepted those assumptions as valid and then added on lots of new ones. NO Black Hole has ever been seen or otherwise detected, but now there are many BOOKS written regarding subtle details of their (alleged) functioning! Thousands of Physicists have spent their entire careers trying to (mathematically) prove some new assumptions they want to add in! And there may actually be no such thing as Black Holes at all!

Many or most modern Physicists now believe that the MAJORITY of the Universe is in zillions of tiny objects that we cannot see and will never be able to see. And what is the basis for that Dark Matter or Hidden Mass? A SINGLE thing that confused Physicists of around the 1930s! Hundreds of years ago, a guy named Kepler discovered some patterns in the movements of the planets, and then later Newton mathematically prove why those patterns existed. The result was that Kepler created three "laws" regarding such things. Kepler and certainly Newton absolutely KNEW that those laws were ONLY valid BECAUSE nearly all the mass of the Solar System is inside the Sun, or what is called a point source. During the 1920s on, understanding of the motions of our Milky Way Galaxy were developing. For some incomprehensible reason, the Physicists decided that Kepler's laws must apply for the Galaxy as they do for the Solar System. But that should have been immediately obvious to all of them that the mass of the Galaxy is all spread out, and it clearly cannot act as though all the mass was at a single point. And then they soon discovered that the motion of the Galaxy does NOT comply with Kepler's laws. Unbelievable! They first made a horribly wrong assumption (since the mass of the Galaxy is distributed very broadly and Newton had earlier proved that Kepler's laws should immediately have been dismissed as not applying), and then decided that we had enormous problems because the Galaxy was not rotating as Kepler would have said! How could they have made the first huge error, but then how could so many thousands of Physicists seen all this and not even questioned the bad assumptions? And then dozens of foolish speculations which have all been dreamed up to resolve the (invalid) problems they saw existing! (There actually IS a rather simple and obvious explanation of why the Galaxy rotates as it does, and it is entirely based on SIMPLE gravitation as Newton presented it!)

As often happens, I am rambling! Sorry! I realize that you are an innocent bystander and here is some cranky Physicist railing about an extremely small number of pseudo-intellectuals! But there are half a dozen OTHER major areas within Physics where truly poor assumptions had been made and that NO ONE then challenged them! So, in my opinion, modern Physics is currently pretty screwed up! Physicists seem free to dream up the most outrageous idea and then get silly ideas adopted without much question! It is truly sad.

Please tolerate one more! One you were probably taught in school was the Twins Paradox, where Einstein's Relativity Theory allegedly would cause identical twins to become different ages! General Relativity certainly has many peculiar consequences, but THAT does not happen to be one of them. A Physicist made a really poor assumption in the early 1960s, and no one ever questioned or challenged his claims! It is very frustrating, as Physics is commonly considered as the very pinnacle of intellectual fields. How is it possible that so many very wrong ideas get developed and immediately get fully adopted as true?

I will chill out regarding Physics subjects and move on to things you are probably actually interested in! As much as it is possible for me to do that! I have web-pages about each of those subjects, which are listed in the Advanced Physics link listing section below.


Just to confirm that I am not your average egghead: This Domain contains some really weird things! Modifying a COW to possibly become a SUPER-COW? footnote14 Should this guy be put in a padded cell?


I have discovered a fascinating pattern in people! People who consider themselves to be "important" NEVER have the time to actually READ any things such as my presentations. So they NEVER have the slightest chance of actually learning whether there is anything of value in any of this! In more than 14 years of these presentations being on the Internet in this Domain, countless thousands of people have visited, and many of them have actually READ a presentation or two! But "important" people never Surf the web-in the first place, but even if they do, they seem unwilling to allocate more than 15 seconds to any presentation! So at most, they read a sentence or two. In an amusing related fact, just from those 15 seconds, many of them then ASSUME that they have a COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING of the entire presentation (which often took a number of years to research)! (They are virtually always wrong about that!) There have actually been several dozen of those "important people" who have visited my presentation on Global Warming. I have received some very insulting e-mails from such people (or more often their underlings who can waste the time to send an e-mail to me!) where they rip into me for not understanding the Solar Constant and using a wrong and obsolete value for it (where they never read enough of my presentation to see that I include one of the most comprehensive discussions anywhere on that matter!); or my not understanding the effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (again, they never read enough to find that I again include one of the world's most comprehensive discussion on that matter!). I suppose it is really easy to be spouting criticisms when you simply ASSUME you know what the text of a presentation actually says! Sort of funny, actually! But it essentially results in NO actual leader in any government or major business ever being aware of the contents of these pages! But many thousands of "average citizens" actually read and then (hopefully) actually learn interesting and important stuff! Go figure! (I have a feeling that in ten or twenty more years, some of those people MIGHT actually decide to FIND THE TIME to read one or more of these presentations. In some cases, that will be far too late for any actual actions on their part. I find that extremely sad.

Of course, maybe they are correct in simply blowing all this stuff off. There have been Physicists before me who have only had worthless and garbage ideas! Who can say for sure that I don't belong in that category? It is up to any reader, who ACTUALLY would read any of these presentations, to try to determine that!

An important comment seems appropriate here! I was educated at the University of Chicago as a scientist, and it seems that they did a fairly good job inside my skull. I actually think they FAIL with many of their other students, but for a peculiar reason! Nearly all of my classmates in Nuclear Physics were incredibly arrogant! They simply could not imagine that they would EVER make any error! In my opinion, they therefore probably made lousy scientists!

What an outrageous thing to say! Here is why. ALL humans sometimes make mistakes, make poor assumptions, use poor logic, and arrive at poor conclusions. Even them! Even me! A CRITICAL characteristic of being a good scientist is to NOT TRUST OR ASSUME ANYTHING!

UC (forced) me to take a Graduate-Level Mathematics class which I thought at the time was the dumbest ever! It was a 13-week course, which had a single goal, to prove that 1 + 1 = 2! Do you agree in my initial attitude? The Professor spent the first THREE WEEKS proving in exquisite detail that 1 + 1 was not LESS than exactly 2. Part of the reasoning was, what if we had not been measuring accurately enough, that maybe 1 + 1 actually equaled 1.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 and we just THOUGHT that quantity was 2! Then three more weeks proving that it was not GREATER than exactly 2. Then three weeks more to prove that the sum was not a Complex number (which might have had a Real component of 2 but also an Imaginary component). And more weeks proving that the sum of 1 + 1 did not happen to be in some Other Dimension (where again, the VISIBLE part might have then looked like 2). On the last day of Class in that thirteenth week, the Professor closed out the logic, of establishing that 1 + 1 was NOT equal to any other number or quantity, and therefore BY DEFAULT it WAS proven that it was exactly equal to 2! Why was that Course so important to me? For two separate important reasons. First, as a good scientist, it was CRITICAL to NEVER ASSUME something is true, just because it LOOKS like it is true. (For thousands of years, everyone on Earth believed that the Earth was Flat, and that it could not possibly be spinning at over 1000 mph or hurtling through space at 66,000 mph in going around that bright thing up in the sky [the Sun]).

Second, it is equally critical to NOT ASSUME THAT YOU ARE RIGHT! Sadly, I know many Physicists who have such huge egos that they cannot imagine that they could ever be wrong, and so even when they dream up silly speculations, they insist that they are correct (without providing any proof or support other than common sense.) SOOOOO! I am highly critical of many people who call themselves scientists who have this self-absorbed attitude! The CORRECT attitude of a good scientist is to ALWAYS ASSUME YOU ARE WRONG, and then therefore start doing the math and Physics to try to confirm that you are right.

In my case, I OFTEN have come up with "dumb ideas" which really sounded good to start with, but then when the (mandatory) math and strict logic was applied, showed themselves to be the dumb ideas they were!

So THIS is the lesson of this Commentary: IF you want to be a quality scientist, you MUST generally assume that your ideas had been wrong, and then immediately dig into the necessary math and Physics to try to confirm or deny your ideas! "Let's build a 4,200-foot-long bridge across the Golden Gate waterway." "Will it fall down?" "I dunno, let's build it and find out!". Science (and Engineering) cannot be like that!

The presentations in this Domain often include a lot of (annoying) formulas and calculations! Generally, they are provided so that any reader might then be able to "do the math" to confirm or deny statements made. After all, are you SURE that 1 + 1 = 2?

If a reader of this happens to be an electronics technician or hobbyist, I would have great interest in discussing the possibility of hiring or collaborating on several of these projects that involve various levels of advanced electronic circuitry. It has really been very frustrating for me to not have the necessary advanced microwave electronics skills to get my Rape Prevention System (PSST) to be operational. Microwave is not necessary for the Non-Intrusive Electronic Medical Anesthesia, but I still do not have sufficient skills in those areas. A far simpler system is a game system to encourage children to be extremely active to minimize obesity.

On a different front, if a reader happens to be good at Compositional skills, the weaknesses of these many presentations are pretty evident, even to me! I was trained in College as a Physicist, and my whole life has had strong interests in math and science. NOT in Composition! Rearranging many of the presentations would make them much more readable, no doubt! People usually smile when I tell them that I actually TRY to compose introductory and closing paragraphs, and to not do so much repeating of concepts! I really, really have tried! These are abilities I do not seem to have. In a few cases, the existing web-page is around the fiftieth revision, and you DON'T want to know what the first one was like! So, there are a few which are now "tolerable", but only due to massive efforts! I am absolutely sure that an English Major could re-arrange and re-word a presentation in an hour or less. Volunteers would be appreciated, even if it only regarding a specific subject presentation that interests you! However, the several people who have offered to "re-write" my pages seem to have all been insistent in massively CHANGING concepts or ignoring the science or the math. I have realized that their motives have been good, of enhancing understandability, but why do they seem to insist on introducing their OWN "improvements" to scientific concepts which I had spent months or years in studying? In any case, I cannot say that I really want to convert any of my pages into 15-second sound-bytes which present THEIR ideas rather than my research. So this area has been disappointing so far.

There is yet another situation where a talented writer who understands some science might want to get involved! In 1989, I composed an outline for a story which is technically science fiction but it is so solidly based on actual science that it might turn out to actually be true scientifically! I would think that some talented author who was willing to work with me might make an impressive reputation and career, as well as bushel baskets of money! I have decided to present the basic outline of the first few Chapters (of 25 Chapters of the entire story), such that a prospective author might get a glimpse of the basic ideas of my book. Is this Science-Fiction or is it actual science?

UFO - DNA - Chapter 1 - Introduction, the Invitation
UFO - DNA - Chapter 2 - The Flight to the Luxury Island
UFO - DNA - Chapter 3 - Arrival on the Luxury Island
UFO - DNA - Chapter 4 - Vacation Welcome by the Richest Scientist on Earth
UFO - DNA - Chapter 5 - Beaches, Fun and Dinner
UFO - DNA - Chapter 6 - Regarding Our ET DNA Beings.
UFO - DNA - Chapter 7 - Regarding the Future of Mankind.
UFO - DNA - Chapter 8 - Regarding the History of Life on Earth.

(Remaining 17 Chapters, altogether about 25 Chapters)



. Public Services Main Menu

These Public Services' Author Background
Presidential Politics - and Barack Obama
To FIX the Stock Market!
To FIX the American Economy!
Israeli-Palestinian Situation. A Possible Solution
Dell Computer Corporation. Really Bad Behavior of Dell Computer Corporation endangering at least $300,000 of business, and other interesting subjects!

Citing a Web-Page in the mb-soft.com Domain

And, yes, I realize that the cursor is strange and somewhat annoying, but it also has a cuteness that is entertaining (for a while!) If you are a kid, you might watch to see which is the last butterfly to still be flapping its wings! It might actually be obvious to you if you watch them all for a while! After all, I am a Physicist, and would necessarily make it all logical!

Unusual music! This piece of music is odd enough to get my interest! It is called Pasquinale, and it was composed by the March King, John Philip Sousa, around 1900. Every time I hear it I try to imagine a Marching Band trying to march to it! Or trying to play it!

The US Government owes me $25,000,000!







Especially Important









Scientific Subjects

Advanced Physics









Social Subjects









Potential Products or Services









Environmental Subjects









Religious Subjects




Really Bad Behavior by Some People

.
.
.
.
.
.

The individual presentations generally include the dates of origin and of presentation on the Internet. These pages first started being placed on the Internet in January 1997. Most pages also include a notation of the most recent editing, which is often minor revisions or formatting improvements. Some concepts had originated well before 1997.



C. Johnson






Footnotes








.

US South Pole Research

In 1957, The US government (Scripps Institution of Oceanography) began recording data at the South Pole regarding many atmospheric contaminants. That location was selected as being very distant from any human activities or factories and also from any vegetation growth or activity. It was felt that measurements at the South Pole would be accurate indications of the true condition of the Earth's atmosphere.

At bi-weekly intervals, air samples are collected in sets of three 5-liter evacuated glass flasks, at the South Pole (Lat. 89°59'S. Long. 24°48'W.). They are analyzed for CO2 at SIO (Scripps) using a nondispersive infrared gas analyzer with a water vapor freeze trap. Calibration gases are regularly tested as well to confirm accuracy. The three sample flasks must agree within 0.40 ppmv to be considered acceptable data. Scripps has more thorough description of their procedures and equipment.

The readings are averaged to obtain monthly and annual average values. Our running display uses the annual averaged figures from this South Pole data, interpolated for each 1/10 second.

If the specific interpolated value at the South Pole for an instant were 380.0 ppmv, this means that the atmosphere was then 0.000380 carbon dioxide (by volume). It is accurately known that the total Earth's atmosphere is 5.136 * 1015 metric tonnes. It is also necessary to apply a density factor of 1.529 (of carbon dioxide to the average atmospheric mixture of gases) to convert the ppm (volume) value to ppm (mass or weight).

Therefore, it is simply necessary to multiply these three numbers 5.136 * 1015 * 0.000380 * 1.529 to get 2984.12 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide in the entire Earth's atmosphere at that instant. THIS is the value that is continuously displayed here. The value has NOTHING to do with actual usage or consumption figures of fossil fuels, which actually generally give larger numbers for the annual increases.

What about the accuracy of those three numbers that we have to multiply? The density of carbon dioxide? No problem there. Extremely accurately known. The measurements of the air at the South Pole? Three identical flasks, and when analyzed, they have to have extremely similar values to be considered acceptable. Ah HA! You think that the mass of air in the atmosphere might be off. Well, YOU can confirm it! A Barometer measures the air pressure, right? And you might accept that it is usually around 14.7 pounds per square inch. Do you realize what that number actually means? It means that if you somehow marked out a column of air, one inch by one inch, all the way from the ground to the top of the atmosphere (outer space), that air weighs a total of 14.7 pounds! Cool, huh? So now, all you have to do is look up in some book what the total surface area of the Earth is (in square miles) and convert that to square inches, and multiply by 14.7, to find the exact total weight of the entire Earth's atmosphere (in pounds). So all three of the numbers are really reliably accurate.

In case you don't want to have to do this math, you already know that atmospheric pressure (at sea level) is 14.696 pounds per square inch (or 10332.3 kilograms per square meter). We multiply this (metric) number by the total area of the surface of the earth, which is 5.10101 * 1014 square meters. So YOU can calculate that the total mass of the Earth's atmosphere is 5.270 * 1018 kg or 5.270 * 1015 metric tons. For purists, the actual total mass is slightly less because continents and mountains take up some volume where air might otherwise be, the 5.136 * 1015 metric tonnes used above. (So YOUR answer is actually a couple percent wrong, high!)

(Published Data)

Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived from flask and in situ air samples collected at the South Pole

Source: C.D. Keeling, T.P. Whorf, and the Carbon Dioxide Research Group
Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO)
University of California, La Jolla, California USA 92093-0444

May 2005, August 2007

Month  Jan    Feb.   Mar.   Apr.   May    Jun.   Jul.   Aug.   Sep.   Oct.   Nov.   Dec.    Ann.      Avg.
1957 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 313.37 -99.99 -99.99 313.87 -99.99 -99.99 314.48  -99.99    -99.99
1958 -99.99 -99.99 314.29 -99.99 -99.99 314.52 -99.99 -99.99 315.31 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99  -99.99    314.78
1959 315.09 315.14 315.09 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 315.96 316.22 -99.99 316.32 -99.99  -99.99    315.64
1960 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 316.38 316.69 316.75 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99  -99.99    316.45
1961 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 316.79 316.86 316.94 317.35 317.68 317.74 317.87 317.67  -99.99    317.08
1962 317.45 317.26 317.06 317.11 317.18 317.25 317.27 317.64 318.07 -99.99 -99.99 318.63 (317.62)   317.62
1963 318.13 317.87 317.47 317.90 318.26 318.22 318.26 318.64 318.56 319.02 -99.99 -99.99 (318.32)   318.35
1964 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99  -99.99    318.68
1965 -99.99 318.68 318.56 318.68 318.89 -99.99 319.38 319.67 -99.99 -99.99 320.17 320.27  -99.99    319.42
1966 320.34 319.99 320.05 320.31 320.44 320.46 -99.99 321.08 321.35 321.46 321.56 321.07 (320.74)   320.72
1967 -99.99 321.01 -99.99 320.86 321.00 320.96 321.06 321.83 322.08 321.80 321.82 321.77 (321.33)   321.32
1968 321.53 -99.99 -99.99 321.61 321.47 321.44 321.50 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 -99.99 322.65  -99.99    321.91
1969 322.37 -99.99 322.27 322.30 322.58 322.79 323.24 323.60 324.13 323.95 323.97 -99.99 (323.11)   323.12
1970 323.68 323.53 323.43 323.67 323.78 324.18 324.46 324.72 325.19 325.20 325.23 -99.99 (324.34)   324.32
1971 324.80 324.61 324.33 324.47 324.67 324.91 325.15 -99.99 325.77 -99.99 325.74 -99.99  -99.99    325.12
1972 -99.99 -99.99 325.05 325.17 325.31 325.82 326.13 326.85 326.54 326.79 326.94 326.82 (326.00)   326.00
1973 326.74 326.34 326.36 326.82 327.11 327.43 327.73 328.40 328.69 328.63 328.60 328.58  327.62    327.62
1974 328.30 328.08 328.09 327.90 328.01 327.88 328.46 328.68 328.94 329.04 329.12 328.99  328.46    328.49
1975 328.89 328.90 328.85 328.94 328.93 329.07 329.35 329.83 330.22 330.56 330.46 330.27  329.52    329.50
1976 330.30 330.01 329.91 329.63 329.93 329.98 330.46 331.01 331.39 331.71 331.74 331.43  330.62    330.60
1977 331.26 331.00 330.85 331.32 331.40 331.62 332.05 332.45 332.87 333.10 333.31 333.18  332.03    332.03
1978 332.83 332.71 332.83 332.98 -99.99 333.37 333.82 334.28 334.74 334.82 334.58 334.30 (333.70)   333.69
1979 334.01 334.03 333.82 334.17 334.34 334.54 335.15 335.71 335.88 336.00 336.37 336.04  335.01    335.03
1980 336.06 335.75 -99.99 336.10 336.21 336.90 337.45 337.54 337.87 337.90 337.97 338.04 (336.98)   336.98
1981 337.76 337.48 337.43 337.52 337.67 338.15 338.41 338.76 338.81 339.15 338.86 338.91  338.24    338.26
1982 -99.99 338.65 338.38 338.70 338.99 339.18 339.33 340.11 340.30 340.33 340.03 339.96 (339.39)   339.39
1983 339.86 339.84 339.85 340.31 340.63 341.00 341.41 341.88 342.33 342.29 342.54 342.35  341.19    341.17
1984 342.05 -99.99 341.71 341.84 341.87 342.01 342.80 343.20 343.46 343.50 343.32 343.15 (342.56)   342.58
1985 343.01 342.83 342.73 342.76 343.12 343.45 343.93 344.52 344.86 344.95 344.79 344.64  343.80    343.82
1986 344.63 344.57 344.50 344.62 344.69 345.02 345.54 345.93 346.18 346.16 346.17 346.04  345.34    345.32
1987 345.89 345.79 345.75 346.11 346.20 346.61 347.19 347.63 348.07 348.10 348.19 348.31  346.99    346.99
1988 348.29 348.06 347.87 348.20 348.33 348.58 349.07 349.58 349.75 349.89 349.85 349.83  348.94    348.95
1989 349.81 349.76 349.66 349.73 349.93 350.18 350.59 351.12 351.37 351.30 351.33 350.99  350.48    350.44
1990 350.76 350.40 350.64 350.90 351.36 351.59 352.05 352.55 352.75 352.57 352.83 352.63  351.75    351.77
1991 -99.99 352.34 352.28 352.44 352.54 352.96 353.39 353.67 354.09 353.89 353.95 353.77 (353.15)   353.12
1992 353.56 353.15 353.03 353.23 353.74 354.00 354.61 354.94 355.26 355.37 355.11 354.88  354.24    354.24
1993 354.72 354.49 354.22 354.42 354.50 354.84 355.20 355.70 356.04 356.05 356.02 355.69  355.16    355.16
1994 355.49 355.49 355.51 355.63 355.69 355.99 356.47 357.11 357.61 357.53 357.71 357.52  356.48    356.48
1995 357.45 357.36 357.36 357.63 357.81 357.95 358.34 358.75 359.15 359.29 359.43 359.47  358.33    358.35
1996 359.36 359.30 359.25 359.36 359.40 359.71 360.15 360.52 360.71 360.70 360.74 360.70  359.99    359.99
1997 360.56 360.46 360.32 360.48 360.58 360.90 361.24 361.52 361.95 362.01 362.11 362.15  361.19    361.20
1998 362.10 362.30 362.41 362.69 363.00 363.54 364.04 364.56 364.99 365.02 365.10 364.98  363.73    363.70
1999 364.96 364.75 364.81 364.99 365.05 -99.99 365.66 365.92 366.37 366.51 366.74 366.80 (365.66)   365.65
2000 366.46 366.49 366.76 366.45 366.58 366.78 367.10 367.53 367.65 367.75 367.88 367.83  367.10    367.05
2001 367.81 367.10 367.04 367.36 367.60 367.92 368.29 368.83 369.44 369.57 369.46 369.25  368.31    368.34
2002 369.31 369.50 369.61 369.68 369.99 370.38 370.87 371.46 371.69 371.83 371.81 371.61  370.64    370.66
2003 371.93 371.78 371.71 371.99 372.32 372.57 372.96 373.40 373.90 373.82 373.65 373.61  372.80    372.80
2004 373.59 373.41 373.85 373.88 374.06 374.46 374.85 375.35 375.52 375.60 375.51 375.25  374.61    374.61
2005 375.18 374.98 375.16 375.50 375.88 376.39 376.87 377.29 377.59 377.72 377.79 377.82  376.51    376.51
2006 377.76 377.58 377.65 377.91 378.16 378.43 378.82 379.24 379.48 379.60 379.63 379.58  378.65    378.65
2007 379.55 379.47 379.47 379.73 380.12 380.50 380.88 381.36 381.74 381.86 381.88 381.89  380.70    380.70
2008 381.77 381.71 381.80 381.92 382.04 382.33 382.87 383.32 383.56 383.70 383.66 383.59  382.69    382.69

(Published Data)

Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (ppmv) derived from flask and in situ air samples collected at the Mount Mauna Loa, Hawaii

Source: C.D. Keeling, T.P. Whorf, and the Carbon Dioxide Research Group
Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO)
University of California, La Jolla, California USA 92093-0444

Oct 2009

(this Mauna Loa data is generally slightly higher than that at the South Pole. We have not been able to obtain extremely recent data from the South Pole yet.)

Month  Jan    Feb.   Mar.   Apr.   May    Jun.   Jul.   Aug.   Sep.   Oct.   Nov.   Dec.    Ann.      Avg.
2006 381.10 381.35 381.15 381.96 381.86 381.67 381.64 382.04 382.05 382.40 382.27 382.65  381.85
2007 382.62 382.94 382.92 383.68 383.45 383.67 383.94 383.67 384.04 384.43 384.47 384.65  383.71
2008 385.15 384.90 384.45 384.50 385.40 385.55 385.86 385.88 386.30 386.33 386.20 386.36  385.58
2009 386.64 386.60 387.25 386.77 387.07 387.17 387.28 387.65 388.00                       387.18

Monthly values are expressed in parts per million (ppm) and reported in the 2003A SIO manometric mole fraction scale. The monthly values have been adjusted to the 15th of each month. Missing values are denoted by -99.99. The "annual" average is the arithmetic mean of the twelve monthly values. In years with one or two missing monthly values, annual values were calculated by substituting a fit value (4-harmonics with gain factor and spline) for that month and then averaging the twelve monthly values.

Calibration details are discussed by Francey et al. (2003). Monthly values are calculated as the mean of the daily values from a smooth curve fit to the data using curve-fitting routines described by Thoning et al., 1989, (J. Geophys. Res. 94, 8549-8565).


End of footnote 1






.

Regarding Really Bad Economic Times Ahead

(Written in Oct 2008) As if that news (of the Global Warming link above) is not bad enough, I have more bad news for you! Beginning around 1990, I tried to get people to realize that there were bad implications of the fact that nearly everyone was already living beyond their means, primarily due to the massive use of credit cards. No one seemed to accept that SOME DAY they would have to pay for all those things they were buying and enjoying then! As the (alleged) value of houses kept increasing, AND that banks were willing to give amazingly large loans on all houses, many millions of people started considering their homes to be piggy banks, providing even more money to spend. No one seemed to ever even consider that home values might drop to a more realistic level.

People blame ALL of our financial problems on Banks that gave home loans to millions of people who could not possibly have afforded the homes they wanted to buy. Yes, the Banks have some responsibility, but the PEOPLE who KNOWINGLY were agreeing to get such loans that they knew that they would never be able to pay off were probably even more guilty. There was also a common mindset that ANYONE could buy ANY (expensive) house and immediately sell it for $50,000 more than it was bought for, which APPEARED to create $50,000 cash for the person who "flipped" the house.

During the 1990s, I often described America as having a network of incredibly tightly strung violin strings, where if ANY of them would break, then EVERYTHING would come apart.

I sometimes described an "island economy" where one person mowed lawns and another cut hair and a third made shoes. They charged each other exactly one dollar, and all three were happy! But over many years, they all felt they were not being properly rewarded and they each raised their prices many time. Now, they charge each other $1,000 to mow the lawn, $1,000 for a haircut and $1,000 for a pair of shoes. They are all happy. Are they any better off than at the start? There is no REALITY to those increases, and the fact that they all made the same increases caused there to be no actual effects at all. But now they each have a pile of money to count, which seems to make them feel happy. They seem willing to overlook that a loaf of bread which used to cost 25 cents now costs each of them $250! And they all describe themselves as prosperous! (They are actually wrong about that!)

I have noticed that the "experts" today are all telling everyone to pay off their credit card debts. That certainly is correct guidance, but there are TWO huge problems! The first is that few people have the money around to be ABLE to pay them off or even pay them down! The second problem is even worse, and no one seems to ever mention it! The whole ATTRACTION of credit cards (say, ten years ago) was to be able to have and use products that they knew they could not possibly afford! In other words, GETTING and USING attractive products. The experts today are expecting people to have absolutely reversed that basic characteristic of human nature! They expect people today to PAY FOR PRODUCTS THEY USED TEN YEARS AGO! Which means that they would thereby guarantee that there was NO chance that they would ever be able to get to use MODERN products! Not with credit cards, because they are no longer allowed to. Not with cash, because they would be using up any available cash TO PAY FOR THOSE ANCIENT PLEASURES!

So, among the other catastrophes that we are starting to encounter, a really huge 900-pound gorilla in the room is the fact that the very POSSIBILITY of using credit cards in the future is somewhat unlikely at all. Concurrently, people today figure to be unable and unwilling to buy new things with actual cash, meaning that nearly all markets figure to dry up nearly completely. So, in addition to the problem that many businesses will soon lay off millions of people in order to survive as businesses (by reducing expenses), that problem for the businesses will be multiplied by the fact that there figure to be extremely few customers for their products and services. It is hard to see how ANY businesses will be able to survive this compound problem.

The MAJORITY of American families have absolutely no idea how to live today without being able to put a lot of debt into the distant future on credit cards. It is hard to see how long that learning curve will take before they are again able to live within their own means. Considering that many millions will soon not have jobs at all, their level of "means" figures to be very low indeed.


During 2004, I told a number of people that I thought that in either 2008 or 2009, the Stock Market would drop to below 6,000. Everyone laughed at my ignorance! When it passed 14,000 during 2008, I was seen as an idiot.

But this will get FAR worse!. There is little doubt that by the Summer of 2009, people will be TALKING about similarities to the Great Depression of the 1930s. But it seems likely that around then, millions of people who lost their jobs will be defaulting on their credit card payments, and VISA and MasterCard (and Banks) will get hurt to a level that the current (2008) Wall Street crisis may seem minor! Among other things, all the people who now use credit cards to survive, may then be denied that ability, but the government will likely need to print up several trillion additional dollars to solve that problem.

There will be so many problems which are EACH unimaginably huge, that it is hard to see how even the US government will be able to afford to throw enough money at all the problems to try to solve them. So I believe that by about 2011 or 2012, the entire financial situation in the US may seem absolutely hopeless. It seems certain that the almighty dollar will necessarily be devaluated, maybe to about half of its current value. So IF any people actually had any cash (or stocks), it would suddenly be worth half as much.

It is hard to see how the situation in the US could significantly improve even by 2020. So the situation may be similar to but even worse than the Great Depression. One reason it seems likely to be worse is that in the 1930s, there were only MEN competing for the few (manual labor) jobs, where now the work force is nearly twice as large because of the fact that women are also working. And since the US enthusiastically passed NAFTA and GATT in the early 1990s, there are essentially NO high-paying manufacturing jobs still remaining in the US. Where will the jobs be, for possibly 50 million unemployed Americans who will all be on the verge of starvation, without any home or apartment, and possibly even without any motor vehicles?

A really troubling aspect of this is the immense number of handguns in the US, MORE than the number of people! Say that YOUR family scrimps and saves and you will actually be able to have enough money to buy food to eat. Your neighbors will all know that, especially all of those who do not have jobs and do not have any money or even an apartment. But they will certainly have many handguns. Doesn't it figure that at some point, they will figure it out? That, in total desperation and starvation, they will walk up to YOUR door and demand your food and money. They will get it. The only real question will be whether any of your family will still be alive. And Police will be of no use, as EVERY community will have such events happening every day, and there are not nearly enough Police even now.

Even though the Global Warming catastrophe will certainly be far worse, at least it figures to be a number of decades away, while these economic problems seem likely to begin seriously in 2009 and CONTINUE for at least ten years. Sadly, everyone will become so focused on economic problems that environmental issues may be neglected. However, BECAUSE of the extreme severity of the coming economic problems, at least there can be a dark benefit that far fewer people will be able to be using up gasoline and diesel and Jet-fuel in wasteful vehicles.

Additional note of June 2009: It is really troubling to me that our leaders seem to often have incomplete logic behind their concepts! An excellent example is the Chrysler bailout. Rather than letting Chrysler totally fail and it assets sold off to pay for some debts, the Federal Government decided that would be too disruptive to the weak economy, so they did some tricky things to supposedly enable Chrysler to continue. They got Fiat to agree to take over Chrysler's operation by giving Fiat 6 billion dollars, and even then Fiat knew that it was a bad idea! Chrysler went into bankruptcy, which has always taken at least five months in the Courts in the past, but through some trickery, Chrysler was declared out of bankruptcy in a month! That would be wonderful if that thinking was complete! But it is not!

The vehicles that Fiat makes in Italy cannot be sold in the US, due to our many Federal Regulations. Everyone agrees that it would be at least TWO FULL YEARS before Fiat could ever start building (small) cars in the US that could be sold here. A recent news report announced that Fiat/Chrysler would be able to START making economy cars around December 2011. See the problem? Our government rushed through Chrysler's bankruptcy process, hurting some investors in the process, with the apparent intention of getting Chrysler back into operation manufacturing cars in the US, thereby re-employing all those thousands of workers who lost their jobs in the Bankruptcy. The PROBLEM is: So you put them all back in the factories, but WHAT DO THEY BUILD? The factories are NOT set up to build the little Fiats which can be sold in Europe, so they cannot do that. For two years, they will not be able to even START building the alleged future Chrysler cars which are tiny and efficient. The ONLY vehicles that they are set up to build are essentially OBSOLETE! The giant gas-hogs which made most of Chrysler's profits for many years, but which no one will now buy. And if no one would buy them before the Bankruptcy, even fewer would buy them from a company that seemed clearly to simply be "making work" for those thousands of workers! So unless the Federal Government is willing to buy decks of cards for all those thousands of alleged Chrysler employees to occupy their time with for the next two years, what else are they going to do? And no one can expect Fiat to be spending billions of dollars for that sort of activity, as they are fully occupied in just making and selling their Fiats in Europe!

How can anyone expect that Fiat will be willing to wait for more than two years before re-activating the American factories? How can anyone expect the American workers to wait for more than two years to get jobs back in uncertain factories? And why would anyone believe that millions of customers would jump to buy totally untested vehicles beyond two years from now, where much of any profits that occurred would certainly go to Italy and Fiat Corporate?

With such a poorly thought-through plan, Chrysler is certainly toast. The American public is already upset in paying so many billions of dollars to keep Chrysler and GM afloat so far, and that purse will certainly soon dry up. And leaders will then FINALLY face the unavoidable fact that Chrysler assets will start getting hauled away to Italy! Those assets cannot then even be sold to try to pay off any debts, since Fiat was given full control of them!


Another update, of November 2009: Chrysler's problems are compounding, where they announced that their sales dropped about 35% to 40% last month. The Chrysler Execs finally announced that they recognize that no one wants to buy the giant gas-hogs they have still been manufacturing, and they now intent to START planning to make smaller cars within a few years. Chrysler will never be around that long! I am convinced that the really talented guy from Fiat will give up on this experiment of trying to save Chrysler, maybe around February 1, 2010. Whatever day he flies back to Italy, the next day, Chrysler will disintegrate completely.

But there is a FAR more important fact is recent news. A year ago, gold was selling for about $800 per ounce. Yesterday, they announced that it had exceeded $1500 per ounce. No one seems willing to explain to the public just what that means, and it is REALLY bad and REALLY urgent.

Gold does not actually increase or decrease in value very much, because the world's supply of it is relatively constant. When gold APPEARS to double in cost in some type of currency, the REALITY is that THAT CURRENCY had DROPPED TO HALF ITS VALUE.

Government and leaders do NOT want people to realize this fact. If and when the public realizes this, absolute financial anarchy seems very likely. Why? Because, at some point, Geitner or Obama will have to appear on National TV and announce that the (almighty) dollar is being DEVALUED to maybe half its previous value. At that moment, your paycheck will remain as many DOLLARS as before, but it will be able to BUY only half what it did yesterday. If you think that millions of people are NOW on the verge of bankruptcy and ruin, imagine how much worse it will become that day when everyone's INCOME suddenly only had half the remaining value. STORES will immediately double all prices of all products, in order to be as profitable and stable as they were the day before. But customers would now have to pay $400 for groceries rather than $200 the day before.

This means that SAVINGS, PENSIONS, etc, will suddenly have half the worth as the day before. Everyone will soon have to live day-to-day in real-time, in order to get paid at the increasing rates that will be necessary to keep up with the increasing prices of all needed products.

Imagine how many fur coats will then be sold? Or luxury vacations on yachts? Or nearly anything beyond simply the needs of basic survival.

How did this happen? Well, historians will argue that for decades. It probably was NECESSARY for Bush and Obama and their Administrations to print trillions of dollars of new money to be able to give astounding amounts of money to the banks to avoid the entire economy falling off a cliff. The leaders were all familiar with the Great Depression of the 1930s and they felt it necessary to try to do those things to avoid repeating the Great Depression. In that, they seemed to succeed. However, the fact that they had to print up all that extra paper money, while the actual total value of all money was certainly not increasing at all, and it might have decreased, set in motion the process toward devaluation of the dollar.

The leaders all HOPED that the consequences would not occur. The assumptions were that if they could get all markets to become really profitable, then there would become widespread prosperity and everyone would be happy and secure. There seems that there was a horrible flaw in that logic, in not seriously considering the alternatives. Personally, I have a suspicion that it MIGHT have actually been BETTER in the long run if they had simply stood back and LET the banks fail and the American economic system fall into a deep Depression, probably even worse than that in the 1930s.

Because what figures to happen now seems certain to be far worse. The wild and rapid increases in the value of gold, seems CERTAIN to force the hand of American government leadership, specifically Geitner and Obama, to greatly devaluate the dollar. This has NEVER happened before to America! But when it has happened to other countries, it has often led to a downward spiral that is self-perpetuating. Which suggests that further devaluations will then occur. One really bad part of this is that it can happen VERY fast. In just months, gasoline might be $100 per gallon or more. A loaf of bread might be $5 or $20 or more. And NO ONE will be immune from the effects.

Anyone who DID own any assets or money, would/will use it all up rather fast. And since there will be few customers for any products, how many businesses could survive? Meaning, how many jobs?

One of the reasons for the downward spiral is that governments tend to start printing more and more money, to try to give out enough for people to be happy with. But the printing of trillions of dollars of extra money merely causes more devaluation in its value, and nothing actually changes.

The US government will certainly TRY to keep increasing Social Security payments and Food Stamps, and making sure that military and police are paid. But that is likely to only be temporary solutions.

When we did not go off a cliff at the end of 2008, by very creative ideas, the long term effect might have been that we will soon face a far taller cliff which we WILL fall off of. And the sorts of desperate measures that are generally applied in trying to reduce the bad effects, virtually always actually have the effect of making the cliff taller.

Until this recent gold news, I thought it would be around 2012 or 2013 before we got to the very darkest part of the economic catastrophe that we are now in. I now wonder if that cliff might be just a month or two away, near the very start of 2010. And it is really hard to see how anyone will be able to survive very well, and certainly NO ONE will prosper.


Sorry for the darkness of these comments, but these are not really OPINIONS but nearly certainly COMING FACTS. I actually truly hope that I am totally wrong about these things! But I had wished that I would be wrong about the economic/Wall Street things as well, and those things seemed to have occurred, even more worse than I had expected.

This Domain contains an assortment of fairly simple devices which YOU might make:

A presentation at Becoming Self-Sufficient is a good starting point for those devices.


End of footnote 2






.

Regarding My Concept for Ending the War(s) in Iraq

Observation: These first subjects, regarding Global Warming and ending the Iraq War, seem to me to be incredibly important. Even if my comments contain flaws, I would like to think that they should be at least considered, specifically because no one else seems to have come up with any credible solutions to these two enormous problems. So, after I developed the Iraq solution in October 2006, I mailed out around 70 letters and e-mailed around 340 notes, to a wide range of public figures. To government and political leaders, to many networks, specific programs that have discussed the problems in Iraq, to thirty two Political Science Professors in major Universities, to many newspapers, even to reporters and others actually in Iraq. Doesn't it seem that some of those people should have had at least some initial interest in a new idea? Even if it were only regarding how and why a Christian Church Pastor was trying to save large numbers of Muslims from dying in a civil war? I have been extremely surprised that in over eleven months, I have received a grand total of TWO responses from those 410 contacts! One was from a Poli Sci Prof who berated me for wasting my and her time. The other was in December 2006 from a reporter in Baghdad who responded that he was VERY interested in hearing any new idea. (But he never again responded to the added information!) I rarely mind being told that my ideas are without value, so even if he (or any of the 400 others) thought that the idea was stupid and a waste of time, I would have thought that I should have received a polite rejection???

Each person is free to make their own decisions in life. But I have to wonder about the Poli Sci Profs. They ARE knowledgeable in world conflicts, since that is what they Teach about! One would assume that they CARE about their subject, but that appears to have been an incorrect assumption! But further, I would have thought that those 32 Professors would have had a SELFISH reason for wanting to possibly promote this concept. There are almost one hundred thousand Political Science instructors in the US. Few of them ever become noted for anything! But I had thought that at least ONE of those 32 Professors would have seen an OPPORTUNITY for him/her, in that how many Poli Sci Profs ever even TRY to end a major war? Even if the concept turned out not to work, I had thought that a Professor who chose to alert others in Poli Sci about "a possible way to end the war in Iraq." would likely have gained massive respect and reputation among colleagues! Like, regarding future EMPLOYMENT possibilities??? And I had NOT expected any of them to commit years of their life to developing a concept, but merely maybe an hour or two to see if there might be any positive feedback. Sure, if all the feedback was negative, he/she would have wasted an hour of valuable time!

Do our leaders actually CARE about solving these things? I am not insisting that I have any brilliant ideas, but only that leaders should be willing to at least CONSIDER ideas other than their own! Says something about trying to do Christian Good Deeds, doesn't it?

In any case, it looks like the leaders and politicians insist on forging ahead with their own assumptions that massive amounts of money is the ONLY solution to all problems! That is even sadder, that they have such narrow perspectives! Either brute force (Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, etc) or massive amounts of American taxpayer money is always the only solution to all problems! Spock would say "Interesting!"


In Oct. 2006, I started trying to get authorities to consider a very unique concept toward ending the war in Iraq, specifically ending the sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni Muslims. I first tried to let Colin Powell be able to get credit for it, but there was no response from several letters and dozens of e-mails. I then tried to let around 40 other American leaders know about it, starting with the people who were part of the Iraq Study Council, James Baker and Lee Hamilton and others. No responses from anyone. I then sent preliminary descriptions to 32 Professors of Political Science at major Universities, including DePaul, Purdue (main campus), Purdue North Central Campus, Purdue Calumet Campus, University of Chicago, Governors State College, Prairie State College, South Suburban College and others. In one phone call to SSC, the (woman) Professor was incredibly disrespectful, even telling me that she was really busy and that she should have ended the call five minutes earlier, as she hung up on me. I have always wondered what immensely important duties she has that are more important than avoiding the deaths of 1,500 additional American troops since then, along with around 100,000 Iraqi people! It must be great to be so important that you can blow off a Minister who is trying to save thousands of human lives!

Only one even sent an e-mail back, and that was to tell me to stop wasting my time! I tried assorted newspapers and TV networks and TV programs such as Meet The Press, the Charlie Rose Show, Think Tank, McLaughlin Group, the PBS News Hour, Nightline and others, with no responses at all except for a couple automated responses. I tried to contact Tom Friedman in several ways. I then tried to contact all the news reporters I could in Iraq, such as John Burns, Sabrina Tavernise, Bobby Ghosh, Richard Engel, Dexter Filkins, George Packer, and many others. No responses. I even tried contacting an assortment of Arabic newspapers and television media such as al Jazeera. No responses.

I am tempted to wonder if no one really cares! Or if no one really wants to stop that war. Or that there is some immense confidence that the leaders suddenly know what they are doing! In any case, after six months of really serious effort to get ANYONE to simply listen to the concept, with zero interest after hundreds of e-mails and dozens of letters, I really do not know what else to try. The only remaining thought I had was to hire someone to translate it into Arabic and then submit it again to Arabic newspapers and television.

I had really figured that at least a few people would have responded, if only to tell me that it is a dumb idea! But no one ever even had enough interest to learn what the actual concept was, to form such an opinion! These days, people are all so BUSY that they are only willing to waste 10 seconds in reading the first sentence of any communication they get, upon which they then believe they TOTALLY UNDERSTAND every nuance of any subject, and to also find the correspondence to have wasted their time! Very strange! I will always believe that it was Iraq's one true chance at avoiding an incredibly bloody massive civil war, which will certainly involve Muslims around the world.


End of footnote 4






.

Global Warming Issues

There actually seems a credible possibility that the devices that ANYONE can build [to heat their homes and make their hot water] can have a huge effect at correcting the Global Warming problem. Yet, of around 185 attempts made so far to let news organizations, the British government, and many others know about this (nearly all by e-mail, so far), ZERO responses!

Do our leaders actually CARE about solving these things? I am not insisting that I have any brilliant ideas, but only that leaders should be willing to at least CONSIDER ideas other than their own! Some friends have told me that the fact that I am giving away the construction plans to the two devices causes people to assume that they have no value! I suppose that might be true, which is really sad. Says something about trying to do Christian Good Deeds, doesn't it?

In any case, it looks like the leaders and politicians insist on forging ahead with their own assumptions that massive amounts of money is the ONLY solution to all problems! That is even sadder, that they have such narrow perspectives! Either brute force (Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, etc) or massive amounts of American taxpayer money is always the only solution to all problems!


End of footnote 3






.

Each American Family has ALREADY Committed around $10,000 of future income to paying for the adventure in Iraq

(2007) I have been amazed that NO reporter ever seems to have mentioned that there are roughly 75 million families in the US and that we have so far spent at least $750 billion of (our) taxpayer money simply because President Bush insisted on getting one person (Saddam) killed in 2003. What has never been mentioned is that that represents $10,000 from every single American family (so far)! Maybe some American families enjoy giving $10,000 for such a purpose, but most of us could have had far better purposes for the $10,000 which will eventually have to be paid by our own families!


End of footnote 5






.

Capture, Killing of Zarqawi

The US Government had insisted on capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and Zarqawi almost immediately after 9/11/01, and they soon offered a $25,000,000 reward for anyone who enabled them to find either one of them. For four years, they had ZERO success, and rarely seemed to even have much of an idea of what REGION either of them were in!

I have no doubt that I deserve to receive the $25MM for Zarqawi!

On Apr. 25, 2006, I sent the following e-mail to half a dozen National News media organizations, including Charlie Rose, ABC Nightline, Think Tank, Foreign Exchange, Meet the Press:

Hi,

The video of Zarqawi today may have extremely important evidence in it!
For the past two years, I have been trying to get word to the CIA regarding
this regarding the many outdoor videos of bin Laden.  I know that you have
contact with people high in the CIA, so I ask that you inform them of the
following.

Around two years ago, our Intelligence demonstrated a "face recognition
system" at the Super Bowl game.  Each face scanned was quickly compared to
images of many terrorists and criminals.  I don't think the success of that
demonstration was ever presented, but the basic concept is what I see of
value.

I have recommended that UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) be flown at low
altitude up and down every valley of Afghanistan, with (two) side directed
cameras taking an image every second.  The result would be "a database of
background images from every location" (with around 150 feet spacing between
images, if the images are taken once per second and the aircraft flown at
100 mph).  Now that Zarqawi made a similar video (probably in Iraq), I
recommend the same be done there.

The existing "face recognition program software" could then be
used WITHOUT MODIFICATION.  Instead of hundreds of thousands of photos
of faces, the database would be filled with hundreds of thousands of
these UAV photos of backgrounds.  Then a frame of a bin Laden or Zarqawi
video could be entered as the "suspect face", to be compared with
all the hundreds of thousands of background images in the database.
The existing system should then be able to identify a "few"
reasonably possible locations which could have been the background of
Zarqawi.  Within seconds, our Intelligence could know EXACTLY where Zarqawi
was on last Friday when he allegedly made that video!  In any case, such
"evidence" seems extremely valuable to me!  I have never gotten any response
in any previous attempts to apprise our Intelligence regarding this concept.
I truly believe they might then capture or kill Zarqawi and/or bin Laden
within days!

I was educated as a Nuclear Physicist at the University of Chicago, so I
like to think that I have some idea regarding this working as described!

So I hope you will try to pass word along for me, and for our country's
security.

Carl Johnson

Forty-two days later, they found Zarqawi and killed him. The news reports in the first few hours (as on BBC) described that they had analyzed the videotape and figured out where he was, and they announced that that was how they got him. However, just hours later, they were announcing a very different story, where some local people had turned him in.

I can understand why they would have done that. They would clearly want to be able to use the same method in finding Usama bin Laden from the videotapes that he would regularly make outdoors. Obviously, they would not want UBL to know that it was a bad idea to do any more outdoor videotapes. So I understand that that would have wanted the news media to present a different story.

Still, they had chased Zarqawi for more than four years without finding him. Then I provide my method and 42 days later, Zarqawi is dead, and the initial news reports described essentially my exact concept! It seems to me that I deserve the $25 million reward that the US government offered for information toward the capture or killing of Zarqawi! Some how, I don't think I will ever be given MY MONEY!


Actually, I think I could have qualified for the similar reward regarding bid Laden several years earlier. In late 2002, the US Military believed that bid Laden and many other al Qaeda leaders were living in a very deep cave inside some mountains in a very rugged area which separates Afghanistan and Pakistan. My friend Peter Jennings (of ABC News) had aired news reports where it was believed that they were living around 1500 feet deep underground. The US plans were to use many of their ferociously powerful bunker-buster bombs to demolish the entire mountain!

I (and probably many others) found that to be a truly foolish approach. It was pure Military thinking, and would certainly have resulted in the killing of thousands of nearby civilians by giant flying rocks, parts of the mountain that were blown away!

So I described a far more logical approach to Peter Jennings. I pointed out that people living inside a cave NEEDED AIR TO BREATHE. I mentioned that caves generally tended to only have a very few internal passageways where air could get into the cave system. I pointed out that the US Military certainly has extremely sensitive infrared imaging equipment which could have monitored the vicinity of the mountain.

Finding where DISCARDED air left the cave system would have been very easy, as that air would have become slightly WARMED from the 98.6°F exhaled breaths of all the people living inside. Such outlets would likely be high on the mountain, as such warmed air tends to rise, even inside caves. (It is a scientific process called thermosiphoning.) However, I felt that the value of finding where air was LEAVING the mountain was of limited value. Yes, small bombs could cause such outlets to become sealed shut, but a large mountain could contain a lot of air, and even without circulation, people might be able to live a year on the remaining air supply inside a large mountain.

But the valuable part of what I described to Mr. Jennings was that there had to be INTAKES of air into the cave system! They would certainly be LOW on the mountain or even slightly away from the mountain. Again, infrared imaging, as well as precision radar, could detect MOTION patterns of airflows in the area. Good Technicians should be able to use computers to discover statistical patterns in those airflows, to (quickly) discover WHERE they were.

I noted to Peter that such INTAKES represented critical air supplies for any residents INSIDE the mountain. I then mentioned to him two different approaches. The less desirable one was to use small bombs to seal off those air intakes, but again, that could leave large amounts of air already inside the mountain, for months of survival. I then suggested to Peter that if deadly airborne poisons were simply airdropped near the entrances of such airpaths, within HOURS, the entire cave system inside the mountain would be filled with such poisonous gases. If the poison chosen was not obvious by smell or appearance, it seemed certain to me that within a day or two, anything living INSIDE the caves would have died!

As generally was true, Mr. Jennings was extremely attentive to my suggestions. His position as a world-famous Journalist gave him easy access to the ears of virtually everyone in power! And he later informed me that he had called a couple Generals in the Pentagon (without identifying them to me) to describe my approach.

Peter later seemed surprised that they did not seem to ever try my concept. It certainly was far simpler than what they had decided to try to do (bomb the entire mountain to oblivion!), a lot quicker, and a lot cheaper to do!

I realize that my concept was fairly complex in some of its details, and maybe Peter was not able to get the Generals to fully grasp the concept or its premise. But I still see that as a far more likely successful way of eliminating bin Laden back in 2002! But, like with Zarqawi four years later, I have a feeling that I would never have been given the $25 million reward! Of course, the fact that Peter Jennings was fully aware of my sourcing that concept, and that HE was the method where the Military first learned about it, I want to believe that my friend Peter would have stood up for my case, and somehow gotten the Pentagon to "quietly" gotten the reward to me! But there seemed no indication that any Military effort along these lines was ever tried, or if they were, no news of them ever leaked out. In any case, bin Laden was apparently not killed in that mountain, and so I guess I didn't deserve any reward then anyway! But, still, it sure seemed to me (and to Peter) that my approach made a lot of logical sense!


End of footnote 6






.

To FIX the Stock Market!

The US Congress would simply pass a Law where NO Trader or Mutual Fund would be permitted to BUY OR SELL more than 1% of their holdings of any specific company on any one day! Period! That would instantly and completely eliminate the wild speculation on stock price changes and would re-install the original intent of the Stock Markets as being a source of financing of businesses.

OK. As a Physicist, this would seem out of my bailiwick. But Physicists are VERY logical people, and I believe I see TWO things that should IMMEDIATELY (Oct 2008) be done! Of course, no one of actual importance will ever read this, so my thoughts on this really do not matter, do they? And you are free to agree or disagree with the following, but I do NOT intend to be "debating" this matter with thousands of people who each feel they have even better ideas!

First, we must note that the ORIGINAL intent of the Stock Market was to provide a constant supply of money that is needed to support the many businesses which need it to operate. Fine. It provided the money for companies to use to start and build their businesses.

And as long as stock market transactions were SLOW, it seemed to work pretty well. Millions of INDIVIDUAL stockholders may or may not decide to buy or sell stock on a particular day, and CHANGES in the overall RATING (value) of any one company would or could rarely change by more than 1% in a week or a month. Fine.

But the PURPOSE of the Stock Market greatly changed, primarily about 30 years ago. It became a GAMBLING GAME for a very small number of people. Unfortunately, it was and is not an entirely FAIR gambling game, as those same people have the capability of MANIPULATING the market to their own PERSONAL ends.

The well-being of a company is no longer of any importance at all! And the value that a stock trades at has often changed at fantastic speeds, where the (alleged) total value of a company sometimes DOUBLES in a single day, or HALVES! This has NOTHING to do with the actual company, and rarely has much to do with the company's sales or success. A simple RUMOR which is good or bad can cause EVERYONE to suddenly want to either buy or sell the stock of that company, and there is NO importance any more of whether the rumor was even true!

An example seems appropriate, which has been repeated EVERY DAY for many years! A stock is described as having a particular value, say $10 per share, at the start of a trading day. One of those few powerful people (who have access to massive money or credit) decides that he thinks he can make some money on the stock of that company. So he BUYS UP maybe 100,000,000 shares of that company, maybe in a quick series of purchases. ALL THE OTHER TRADERS AND INVESTORS SEE the enormous traffic in the stock of that company AND that the stock price is rapidly going up. So THEY want to buy in (with the intent of also getting very rich very fast). And everyone then sees that the traffic in that stock is growing even faster and the prices are shooting up even faster. So, maybe by the end of the SAME DAY, the price of a share of that company's stock has risen spectacularly to maybe $20.

And at THIS point, the person who STARTED this whole thing decides to SELL those 100 million shares he bought that same morning. But now he can SELL them at $20 per share when he had bought them that same morning for $10 per share. In this single company's stock, in a single day, he first SPENT one billion to buy the stock, but then RECEIVED TWO billion later that same day! In a single day, with a single stock, he has just made a personal profit of one billion dollars!

And he is proud of himself for having accomplished something!

But what did he actually accomplish? After he sells all his stocks, everyone else will see the massive selling (which is NEVER identified as being from ONE seller or a million sellers, which is incredibly useful in this situation for them!) and they will also sell. And the amount they could sell for will drop rapidly, possibly back to the original $10 per share.

Did the COMPANY benefit at all from this? No, because their total value of all their stock did not change after the whole day was done.

The Trader made his billion dollars. Where did that money come from? Was it printed up just to give to him? No. It actually came from the LOSSES of exactly one billion dollars by OTHER INVESTORS and TRADERS! Those are the large numbers of people who got in late, and had to buy that stock for $18 or $20 per share, but then quickly discovered that the price soon plummeted and they had to TRY to sell it for $14 or $12 or $10 per share, thereby losing money on EVERY share of it. EACH of them might have only owned a few hundred or few thousand shares, so their INDIVIDUAL losses might have been moderate. But COLLECTIVELY, they necessarily lost that billion dollars that day!

IF there was any sort of MEDIA REPORT which indicated that that particular company was ABOUT TO ANNOUNCE a cure for cancer or some super-efficient vehicle, it even gives the people who dream up such schemes a sort of CREDIBILITY upon which the herd of later investors would enthusiastically jump! And they KNOW that! In some cases, the Traders KNEW some such fact BEFORE it was otherwise known, but that sort of Insider Trading was made illegal when a lot of them were cheating other investors in such ways. But it still happens every day, but the Traders are just far more cautious now to make sure not to leave any evidence that they had previously known of what was about to happen or be said. The entire process has evolved a lot, to a point where actual Inside Information (for which they could be sent to prison) is generally no longer even necessary, and simply a RUMOR is all that is needed to enable doing this. And they know that they could NEVER be sent to prison for acting on a rumor!

They DON'T call that cheating each other, and essentially they ALL need to do such things just to be competitive with all the others who do it. And so there has developed an astounding tunnel-vision regarding ONLY looking for HUGE PROFITS TODAY, where no other considerations matter. Such as the effects on the company whose stocks are used for such trickery.

Actually, this sort of manipulation of the value of a stock was openly done and very common in the 1920s, and it was a direct cause of the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the following Great Depression. So Laws were passed to make such behaviors illegal. The problem is that top Executives in Wall Street are very smart, and they have found several ways to EFFECTIVELY do the same today but without any evidence that they have done anything wrong. They see nothing wrong in using such methods, which are known to have been the direct cause of the Great Depression, as long as they believe they cannot get caught!

There is a slightly more legal variant of this, which is definitely used by every Trader, every day! Say that we see a Stock that is currently $10.00. And a Trader FEELS LIKE GAMBLING! He THINKS that stock will rise by 1%, up to $10.10 that day. So he buys the 100 million shares. It turns out that IF HE WAS RIGHT IN HIS GAMBLE, and he would sell all those shares at the end of the day, he would "earn" ten cents on each of those shares, or $10 million on that single stock in that single day. AND, of course, he knows that the EFFECT of his buying all that stock will be seen by all other traders and investors, which NEARLY GUARANTEES that his "gamble" will turn out to be true, and not actually much of a gamble at all!

This IS what the modern Stock Market is! It has virtually NOTHING to do with the initial reasons for stock markets! It is simply a giant game of Monopoly, where if you are big enough and have access to enough money, you can CAUSE self-perpetuating profits for yourself (but at the cost of the exact same amount of losses by other investors!)

The Stock Market is obviously a lot more complex than this simplified description, but the core of its operation is essentially as described here. MOST stocks are now bought and sold by DAY TRADERS, people who ONLY intend to own any particular stock for a very brief time. MUTUAL FUNDS have made this even worse, as the few individuals who operate such funds can buy and sell billions of dollars of stocks every day, and they do.

A significant point to be made here is that REALITY has very little place in this whole operation! The ACTUAL value of all the assets of General Motors is irrelevant! It is ONLY what the few handfuls of individuals who can buy and sell billions of dollars of stocks believe that matters! And, because of the rather incestuous arrangement, those people tend to follow each other's movements with similar movements of their own, because they do NOT want to be found to be the person who moved too slow and therefore caused his Fund to be left out of great profits.

Another amazing factor is an absolute lack of transparency. Absolutely no one seems to know WHO is buying or selling or HOW MUCH or even whether they actually have the funds to back such purchases! In fact, there have been MANY times when Traders officially BOUGHT massive amounts of stock when they did not have the available money to do so, ASSUMING that they would again sell it all within a few hours, at the expected profit, in order to provide the money that SHOULD HAVE EXISTED in order to even start the whole thing! There is a LOT of this sort of trickery which occurs every day related to the Stock Market, but since NO ONE EVER IS ABLE TO KNOW (due to the lack of transparency), they are all able to get away with such things! It is truly unbelievable that it can work at all! It is virtually ONLY a gambling game between a very small numbers of heavy hitters!

For at least five years, I have speculated about an even darker possibility that I see possible. I usually describe it about like this: Imagine that you have a roomful of people who all agree that the HEALTH of the stock market is critically important to their individual successes and wealth. Under NO conditions, could they ALLOW any really bad things to ever occur. These people would be those couple dozen people who each have the capability of buying or selling billions of dollars of stock at any personal whim.

So they see that some important stock seems to be dropping in price. One or more of them immediately offers to buy a billion dollars of that stock. Since all investors and Traders would immediately see that huge purchase, any public sense of panic would vanish, and PROBABLY millions of private investors might each then decide to buy a little bit, where the person would then be able to sell off the billion dollars of stocks, smoothly and INVISIBLY.

I often felt that such an incestuous relationship was the ONLY explanation for days when there was horrendous business news, but then the Stock Market shot UP by 400 points! Such things should NOT be possible! I remember one day a year or two ago when Ford announced a tremendous loss of billions of dollars, the unemployment figure had greatly risen, and two other pieces of major negative business news occurred, and yet the Stock Market shot up that day! I tend to think that COULD NOT have happened without some sort of collusion like what I had speculated. Of course, since there is no transparency, there could never have been any way to prove that my suspicions might have been true!

The Solution

With the preamble above, we can now consider the suggestion. Is it to give $110 billion to AIG, which they immediately put to use in sending themselves on a luxury holiday? No. Does it involve ANY US Taxpayer money? No. It is even quite simple to do! The US Congress would simply pass a Law where NO Trader or Mutual Fund would be permitted to BUY OR SELL more than 1% of their holdings on any one day! Period!

That would ELIMINATE much of the INCENTIVE of the Brokers to be Day Trading to swipe some quick millions of dollars, because they would NOT be allowed to be buying or selling that large a fraction of their holdings ON ANY SINGLE DAY. It would inspire and require LONGER-TERM PLANNING on the part of Traders and Investors, getting back to the INITIAL REASON for the Stock Market to exist.

This is in total contrast to the current approaches of Washington, of PROVIDING hundreds of billions of (taxpayer) dollars to allegedly stabilize Wall Street. Washington can't seem to realize that by ENSURING plenty of money, with the current rules, it ENCOURAGES every Trader to make his best guess as to WHEN he should "buy absolutely everything!" Given the depressed level that they all believe the Market is now in, they each see an OBVIOUS way that they can make THEMSELVES many billions of dollars, by buying enormous amounts of stock when it is low and then selling it ALL a few days later. Why doesn't Washington see that they will be FEEDING such greedy people? That some of our taxpayer billions will DIRECTLY go into billions of personal profits, leaving the Market no better than before? And it is ALL because the Traders are ALLOWED to make fantastically huge purchases and sales of stocks every few minutes!

The ONE PERCENT PER DAY rule would also eliminate the tremendous surges and then personal incentives of Traders to be buying and selling obscene amounts of stock, just to be running with the herd! The Stock Market would NECESSARILY be based more on sanity, as it should be! The ACTUAL VALUE of the total assets (minus liabilities) of any company would be carefully examined before making any major stock commitment in that company.

As long as Traders can expect to be able to make billions of dollars in what they call daily "profit taking", nothing will really change! It would not matter much what the government might try to invoke, human nature would find a way to bypass it, because they can taste those enormous profits!

This simple concept would FORCE all investors and Traders to essentially adopt Warren Buffet's LONG view of the Stock Market. Of ONLY buying when there was ACTUAL perceived value existing, and no longer running thither and yon in buying and selling stocks as if they were simply scoring markers in a game of Monopoly!

I actually have a SECOND recommendation as well! I believe that if my friend Peter Jennings was still with us, he would have instituted the following, so if it should ever be adopted, my hope would be that it be called the Jennings approach!

I believe that Peter would have invited: Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Melissa Gates, President Sarcozy of France, Tony Blair, Robert Redford, Charlie Rose, Michael Jordan, Will Smith, Richard Petty, Bono, President da Silva of Brazil, at least one prominent Japanese and two prominent Chinese and two prominent Indian, and a few others; to a regular meeting in a remote location such as Mr. Redford's Ranch. There, with NO ONE ELSE than them present, they would have free-wheeling discussions about ALL matters that are critical to the world's people. NO politicians are in that mix (but Jimmy Carter seems a possible exception to that), and no bureaucrats.

The point would be that they would bring up all kinds of ideas and probably immediately shoot them down. And occasionally, if they felt they needed "expert advice" regarding the Economy or Nuclear Power or Global Warming or anything else, THEY could decide to invite SEVERAL experts in the appropriate fields (for only one day) where they would then be able to ask their questions. Several so that they could hear differing views on any specific issue.

The theory would be that they would FIND A CONSENSUS regarding what should be said or done. And THEN, EACH of them would return to their normal life and start to have Press Conferences, where they EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC WHY they feel confident that the solution they have adopted seems to make sense. A member of the public would therefore see Bono on TV describing the EXACT same plan that Tony Blair similarly presented, which is identical to the plan that Michael Jordan and Bill Gates would be saying.

The POINT of this is that THE PUBLIC would very quickly see that MANY of the famous people THAT THEY RESPECT all seem to be in complete agreement about what is needed to be done.

This is actually a modern version of what Franklin Roosevelt had done to INSPIRE CONFIDENCE in the American people in 1933. The people's lives had actually not materially improved, but they all FELT confident that FDR "knew how to lead them back to prosperity and happiness". (As it turned out, FDR made many bad decisions regarding things to try, but as long as the people BELIEVED in his leadership, they were all confident that the US would recover.)

So the final aspect of this suggestion is that the group of 20 people probably would KNOW when they needed to get together. If Peter Jennings was still with us, he certainly would have known, and he would certainly have simply called each of them and asked them if their schedules could include a Meeting for a few days at XX/XX/XX to XX/XX/XX. But it seems good that if the PUBLIC saw need for them to meet, THEY could somehow initiate the process for them as well!

PEOPLE would feel INVOLVED. They would feel CONFIDENT. And they would TRUST those people who they had earlier learned to have great respect for.


End of footnote 8






.

To FIX the American Economy!

America faces enormous problems ahead. It is NOT just that millions of houses are worth less than people owe on them, in other words, they have no equity in the house they live in, or that they also rarely have any savings, or that their 401-k and other retirement plans have lost trillions of dollars due to problems in the stock market.

A CENTRAL problem in coming years will be there will be few JOBS for the many millions of people who are out of work. A similar situation occurred during the 1930s, but it was actually BETTER then because there were millions of MANUFACTURING jobs in the US then. Now, there are not, because the NAFTA and GATT agreements had enabled and encouraged nearly all manufacturers to move their factories to countries where workers are ENTHUSIASTIC at working for 50 cents per hour, instead of American workers who were generally unhappy at being paid $30/hour for the same work.

A complicating factor is that, because BOTH men and women now work, there are essentially twice as many American people who will be searching for the few jobs which will be available. An interesting aspect of this is that it figures that there will be soon millions of workers who WILL BE WILLING to work for BELOW minimum wage, out of desperation to earn enough for food for their family! How will employers deal with that, as they will get into deep trouble if they ever pay any employee less than Minimum Wage!

In any case, I believe there is a really obvious AND WONDERFUL solution for much of this!

In the 1930s, FDR set up many work programs, where millions of people earned money (from the government) for manual labor, in building the road system of the country and other infrastructure systems.

Leaders seem to start becoming aware of how terrible the infrastructure of the US has become, because very little funding has been allocated for repairs for many years. So there is definitely a NEED for massive work on the infrastructure in the US.

It will be interesting to see IF the government chooses to approach this as they traditionally have, of HIRING giant contractors to do the repairs, ASSUMING those contractors would hire huge numbers of workers to do the work. This happens to be an extremely inefficient approach, I believe. An obvious example was when President Bush gave $100 billion (of our taxpayer money) to a handful of very large contractors (who also happened to be good friends of his!) and where it was found by Reporters later that only about $1 billion of actual work had gotten done. The other $99 billion sort of disappeared inside those giant corporations! Is THAT what they are going to do on a much larger scale this time?

It seems that the approach that FDR used in the 1930s was far wiser. The government DIRECTLY offered to hire millions of manual laborers, at modest pay rates, and those jobs were all rapidly filled. Those millions of workers did not have much Prosperity right then, but at least they had consistent income so that their families were able to eat.

I am mentioning this here for a reason! Around 1990, I had invented and (nearly) fully Designed an impressive NEW transportation system for the US. The transportation would NOT require any fossil fuels to be burned, a wonderful side benefit! Automobiles and (most) trucks would be replaced by a system where people and products traveled at 200 mph instead of the 55 mph on highways, with NO traffic jams or any other delays. Better yet, the system is so efficient that the fees for traveling from Chicago to New York should be around $5 (one way), less than 1/20 of the cost of an airplane trip (which would actually involve about the same total amount of travel time!)

When you have been at drive-through banks, you have seen the pneumatic tubes and canisters which transfer papers and money very rapidly into and out of the bank. In the late 1980s, I discovered a way where a large version of that concept could transport people and products in very large canisters (which I called pods), AND that it was possible to use a well-known Bernoulli Effect of Physics to enable the pods to essentially FLY inside of a system of fixed tubes. This results in very little friction, and extremely efficient operation. FAR better than the average 21% overall efficiency of modern cars!

HERE is where the SOLUTION arrives!

First, such a National system would require many MILLIONS of pods to be manufactured, either to transport products or to transport people. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler happen to already have many very large factories, which could easily be converted to making such pods rather than conventional vehicles. MILLIONS OF JOBS would be involved and VERY RELIABLE for many years!

Second, the system of the tubes themselves are designed as being EXISTING concrete culverts (of 5 foot diameter). My plan involved installing THREE of these concrete tubes down the Median of each Interstate highway (one each direction and the third to take the traffic when either needed any repairs). Many other locations of such tubes could be installed in other locations, as desired. MILLIONS OF CONSTRUCTION JOBS for several years would provide reliable income for other Americans.

Third, the infrastructure of the US would not just be REPAIRED, but REPLACED with an entire system that was GREEN (no fossil fuels), VERY FAST, and incredibly useful.

Fourth, hundreds of thousands of computer and electronics workers would assemble the computer control system for this system. Each pod would have a bar-coding pattern on its side, and as it passed scanners along the system, its exact position would always be known to the computer. When that pod needed to be diverted into a different tube path to get to the desired destination, the system would use all that information to divert just that one pod, leaving all the other pods ahead of it and behind it on their original path.

I trust you see that quite a few million people would be earning at least moderate amounts of income, for a number of years while the American economic system gradually recovered from its problems. And at the end, we would wind up with a wonderful NEW transportation system that was far BETTER than anything existing today.

Finally, NO NEW TECHNOLOGIES are necessary or involved! This could be started IMMEDIATELY!

WITHOUT something like this, the US is certain to have severe economic and financial problems for quite a few years. It seems extremely obvious to me that this concept SHOULD be at least carefully examined, and then probably IMMEDIATELY implemented!

A web-site which provides a more extensive overview of this TRANS system is at High Speed Rail, but better, TRANS Super-Efficient Transportation System.

We also have a presentation at Tower Windmills and Electricity Practical Large-Scale Wind-Generated Electricity (1 MegaWatt for 1000 houses)


End of footnote 9






.

Bodyfat Disposal

It does not seem appropriate here to discuss all the biochemistry involved in when bodyfat is used by the body, but suffice it to say that the complex lipid carbohydrate molecules are broken down into smaller molecules (often acetyl coenzyme A) to be transported by the blood to (muscle) cells that need the energy they contain. There are a LOT of chemical reactions which occur, many of which are in what is called the Kreb's Cycle.

The results of that Cycle are ATP molecules that are compact energy carriers, and also liquid water and dissolved carbon dioxide gas. These are now waste products of the body, and they are primarily transported by the blood to the lungs, where the water can evaporate to make the outgoing breath get up to near 100% relative humidity (to be able to get rid of the greatest amount of water per breath) and also up to about 4.4% total concentration of carbon dioxide (limited by Dalton's Law of Partial pressures).

By the way, you might see the connection here between when you do serious exercise and then have to breathe heavily for a while? The body has to have that heavy breathing to actually get RID of the carbon dioxide it produced! In doing strenuous exercise, you DO use up some bodyfat molecules (but a disappointingly small amount of them. We will shortly see in the Technical paragraph below that even when we exercise hard enough where our breath is TWICE normal, that only removes the carbon from around 1/1100 pound of bodyfat per minute. A full hour of such strenuous exercise and we can remove only around 1/20 pound of bodyfat!). Due to the requirements of the exercise, the body naturally accesses some of your energy supplies, first, the sugars, which are most easily accessed fast, but then eventually the bodyfat stores. As those sugar or lipid molecules are oxidized, carbon dioxide molecules are formed, which get carried in the blood to the lungs and then exhaled with the next outgoing breath. If you do TWICE as much exertion, then twice as much of the lipid (bodyfat) molecules get oxidized, and twice as much exhaled breath is needed to carry all that carbon away from the body! Now you know! (You also breathe more heavily to get more oxygen INTO the body, to be able to do all that oxidization of all that carbon into carbon dioxide. The body has an immense number of unique chemical reactions, and we have greatly simplified the matter here!)

This brief discussion is intended to show you that virtually ALL the carbon that can leave your body must leave by your exhaled breath, and that all the impressive claims of flashy advertising which claim otherwise are simply not credible. IF some program causes you to BREATHE MORE HEAVILY, either deeper breathing or faster breathing or both, THAT WILL directly increase your body's ability to get rid of undesired bodyfat. Such a program also needs to cause your Metabolism to speed up to actually process/oxidize some bodyfat and make the carbon dioxide available to the lungs. So the next time you see any of those ads on TV or elsewhere, THINK about whether they are describing any credible way where your breathing is increased. If not, there is no realistic reason to spend money to buy what they are promoting!

On a more technical level, each INCOMING breath draws in air which is at the natural 0.038% of carbon dioxide, and each outgoing breath contains around a maximum of 4.4% of carbon dioxide. When sitting, we breathe around 12 times per minute and each normal breath is around 0.5 liter of air. This all means that in each minute of normal breathing, we CAN exhale around 0.26 liter of carbon dioxide. The actual exhaled air is not always saturated with carbon dioxide but it is usually close.

This means that each minute, we each (normally) exhale around 0.50 gram of carbon dioxide, or around 1/1000 of a pound. (In an entire year of normal breathing, we each exhale around 500 pounds of carbon dioxide!) In each minute, this includes around 1/3500 pound (or 0.11 gram) of actual carbon atoms. They could have come from normal foods or from stored bodyfat. If they had come from normal food molecules, that represents around 1/1400 pound (0.3 gram) of food which would "disappear" during that minute (of normal breathing). At 2200 Calories per pound of normal food, that is around 1.6 Calories of food per minute gets used up. If they had instead come from lipid bodyfat molecules, (a far more compact source of energy) that would represent around 1/2200 pound (0.2 gram) of bodyfat which would disappear during that minute (of normal breathing). This ONLY occurs when the person has not recently eaten enough food to provide the energy needed for all bodily activities, where stored energy needs to be used up. At 3500 Calories per pound of bodyfat, that again means that around 1.6 Calories worth of energy would be provided, this time from bodyfat, every minute. Since a day includes 1440 minutes, either case here accounts for the 2,200 Calories of energy that our metabolism needs to use up every day to keep us alive. Also, 1.6 Calories per minute times 60 minutes is around 100 Calories per hour of sedentary activity, which also agrees with the ASHRAE figures for heat given off by a human body.

This then confirms that each minute of regular breathing necessarily requires the exhaling of the carbon atoms from whatever food or bodyfat materials were consumed during that minute. That process of exhaling is essentially the ONLY process the body has of removing carbon from itself!

In a bizarre Physicist's-view of this matter, I tend to wonder if someone could somehow "slightly extra-ventilate" for an extended time, and whether that might result in some bodyfat loss WITHOUT even having to work out? Strange, huh? I wonder if the brain would DECIDE to increase its Basal Metabolism, just because it now could. And whether anyone could be trained to learn to keep up the (10%) faster or deeper breathing on a regular basis is not known. Sounds like something a Research Lab should do a Study on! Since we know that we breathe around 12 times each minute, and thereby exhale the carbon atoms from all the day's pound of eaten food, the idea of training a brain-body to increase that breathing rate to 13 times per minute seems reasonable. No one would even notice this slight change, and we know that the human body can be trained in thousands of ways. The point would be that instead of exhaling the carbon from 16 ounces of eaten food (as calculated here and in the Bodyfat, Weight Loss, the Physics of Body Weight Control presentation, that minor change would enable the body to get rid of the carbon from an additional 1.3 ounces of food materials, each day. If done for an entire year, that would possibly represent an additional consumption of over 30 pounds of bodyfat! Interesting!

Physicists always try to see reasons for failure in such hypotheses. In this case, if the body was actually not doing any extra work, maybe the brain would see no reason to initiate additional Metabolic activity. Human and animal patterns suggest that no wasteful decisions like that are made, in order to maintain maximum survival capability for some future emergency. So even if the breathing was slightly increased, it might be that the CONCENTRATION of carbon dioxide in the exhaled breath might simply become reduced!

Another Physicist's aspect of this, which seems far more interesting, is the question of whether overweight people might breathe more shallowly than other people. I have not located any research that has ever been done on this subject. Wouldn't it be sort of funny of the entire obesity problem might be eased or even solved by simply teaching overweight people to breathe slightly more deeply? I have no idea whether that would actually be of value or not, but it certainly seems to be worthy of serious scientific investigation!

We have a presentation at Bodyfat, Weight Loss, the Physics of Body Weight Control


End of footnote 10






.

Energy in a PERFECT Battery-Powered Car

Several of the automotive-related presentations in this Domain include the complete analysis of calculating the Aerodynamic Drag of any vehicle and also the Tire Drag. It is not that difficult but we are going to leave out the details here. The details and calculations are in the specific pages about those subjects. Suffice it to say that an extremely aerodynamic sports car might have an Aerodynamic Drag of 100 pounds at 60 mph speed (which is essentially used up in pushing the air out of the way of the vehicle, and then in turbulence as that air again filled the space where the vehicle had just passed through) which has the effect of transferring that energy to the air and thereby very slightly heating it up! Similarly, it is easy to see that around 30 pounds of Tire Drag would exist. This energy mostly gets used up in flexing the sidewalls of the tires every time they rotate, which causes the tires to get too hot to touch after an extended highway drive. Add the two to get the total vehicle Drag, in this case 130 pounds.

For comparison, a C-4 Corvette, a rather aerodynamic car, has an aerodynamic drag of about 117 pounds and a tire drag of about 48 pounds at 60 mph, for a total vehicle Drag of 165 pounds. So the numbers we are using are very optimistic!

By multiplying that 130 pounds total Drag by the vehicle velocity (88 feet/second, which is what 60 mph is), we get 11,440 lb-ft/sec. This can be converted into other forms, such as 20.8 horsepower or 15.5 kilowatts.

IF WE ASSUME THE VEHICLE AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS ABSOLUTELY PERFECTLY EFFICIENT we would then see that a one-hour, 40 mph, drive would use up 15.5 kWh of power. So say that it was a battery-powered, electric motor vehicle. Once the batteries had used up the necessary 15.5 kWh of electricity, it would have to be replaced by re-charging the batteries.

It is clear that we would need just over 9 hours of charging at the maximum 15 amperes that a standard home 110 volt electrical outlet could provide (9h * 15a * 110v = 14.9 kWh) or that a standard heavy-duty extension cord could carry. NINE HOURS!

To drive ONE hour, NINE hours of charging would be required, simply by the basic Laws of science regarding Conservation of Energy!

But MOST promotional literature for electric vehicles talks about two-hour or three-hour recharge times, and they nearly always make sure to mention that a standard outlet and a standard heavy-duty extension cord could be used! Do you see where their statements are attempting to violate very basic laws of science?

What they are usually doing is applying the common aspects of trickery used in most modern advertising. A woodstove might be advertised as "able to heat your entire home" and also "able to hold a fire for 20 hours.". Each statement is potentially true, and they probably have tested evidence that each is NOT a lie so they do not get sued! But their advertising LEADS READERS TO THINK THAT BOTH ARE TRUE AT THE SAME TIME, which turns out to simply be impossible! It COULD be fired hard to produce enough heat for a small house, but then the wood gets used up fast and is gone in an hour. But if it is used to only heat one small room on a mild day, yes, it might hold a fire for 20 hours.

In the case of electric vehicles, a common statement is that it can be re-charged in just two hours. Yes, that might be true if you had only gone to the grocery store! And they make SEPARATE claims regarding high speed or long driving range. If I was forced to have to make such a statement, I would probably arrange for a vehicle to travel at ONE mph! At that speed, the aerodynamic Drag is extremely low, and even the Tire Drag is lower, especially if I filled them with 90 pounds of air pressure! Extremely little electricity would get used up in going that mile in that hour! Say a (private) Test Track was set up to allow this vehicle to constantly circle a track. In a MONTH that vehicle would have traveled around 720 miles, and the batteries STILL probably would not actually yet need to be re-charged. Such a test, with some Stamp of Approval from some Independent Observer, would be able to actually claim that the vehicle had gone 720 miles and more before needing to be re-charged. The manufacturer would then feel free to brag about a 720-mile range.

It would technically not be a lie, but no one would ever ride in a vehicle that only traveled at 1/3 walking speed! But it certainly could be done as just described, and that manufacturer would certainly promote the daylights out of such a statement, knowing that it would sell massive numbers of their vehicles. Of course, once people actually BOUGHT the vehicles and they all found that it could not even go an hour, 60 miles, at highway speed, people would know they had been deceived. But exactly what could they do about it? The manufacturer would have an Attested confirmation that their vehicle had traveled 720 miles without needing a re-charge. Would any Judge find them guilty of any crime? I don't see how. And THEY know that!

The point here is that modern promotional and advertising executives feel that there are NO rules regarding ethics or principles or morals regarding getting their advertising commissions! They are willing to say absolutely anything. If a manufacturer had also been deceitful to have done silly Test Runs as I just described, there is virtually no limit to what they might feel free to claim.

Regarding many claims, remembering that this is a technology that is still being born, it certainly seems that claims are made that actually only apply to ONE PART of the complete system. I have seen statements where a manufacturer announces 98% efficiency of the electric motor. That might technically be a true statement, but any real SYSTEM requires wires and controls and batteries and chargers and much more, all of which degrade any possible claims regarding (overall) efficiency. I remember seeing, in the 1970s, advertising of a very poorly efficient fireplace which claimed "98% combustion efficiency". That statement was actually true, but irrelevant! Their heat transfer efficiency was horrendous, around 20%, so the best any owner could ever actually see was just under 20% (the product of the two efficiencies.) No one stopped that company from claiming that because it was actually true. But they quickly angered so many buyers that word got out about their ethics and they soon disappeared!.

We have a presentation at Electric Cars, Hybrid Cars.


End of footnote 11






.

Photovoltaic (solar to electric) Devices

There are occasional news reports about some new PV technology that allegedly has 30% efficiency. A Reporter listens to a Company Spokesperson say that over 100 watts of sunlight power arrives in every square foot (true, at noon, on a perfectly sunny day, if the collecting panel is aimed exactly at the Sun). The Spokesperson then ASSUMES that the customer will buy the state-of-the-air technology which IS 30% efficient, and PREDICTS that 32 square feet of such PV panels (the size of a sheet of plywood or wall paneling) COULD therefore capture a spectacular amount of electricity (110w/sf * 32sf * 30% = 1050 Watts of electricity! And the villagers rejoice at this amazing news!

But that Spokesperson left out a LOT of important facts! Such as that the technology mentioned is still astoundingly expensive and hard to produce, currently costing maybe $100,000 per square foot! Such as that most climates have clouds, and that the Sun is NOT always in the ideal location, and that the PV panels are NOT always aimed exactly at the Sun!

The Spokesperson did not actually lie, but was DECEPTIVE in many ways!

The REALITY is that PV panels that most people can afford to buy are of a technology called Cadmium Sulfide, which happens to have atomic properties where they are around 7% efficient. That a climate like Chicago has a lot of clouds, and that an annual cloudiness factor is often described as around 65% (or sky clearness of around 35%, or sometimes described as 34%). That a FIXED POSITION PV panel (facing south, at some angle upward) has geometric disadvantages when the Sun is in the eastern or western sky.

So a REALISTIC EXPECTATION of that 32 square feet of PV panels is more likely to be (110 w/sf * 32 sf * 7% * (100% - 65%) * 0.4 = a truly consistent and reliable supply of only about 35 Watts of electricity!

This is EXTREMELY different from what the Spokesperson tried to lead potential buyers to believe! It would be GREAT if we could expect that area of PV panels to produce 3400 Watts or 1050 Watts, but the reality is that it would likely produce an AVERAGE of only 35 Watts instead. Granted that there WILL be days which are cloud free and at noon on such a day, briefly, as much as 220 Watts of electricity might be produced. But for an installation in that region of normal cloudiness, a 12 hour period of sunlight might therefore be expected to produce a total average of about 420 Watt-hours per day. Noting that you now pay maybe 15 cents per kiloWatt-hour (including Delivery costs and taxes), this is a benefit of around 7 cents of electricity produced for you! A solid $26 of FREE electricity for you! This is due to you having spent between $3200 and $4800 to install the PV panels and the associated electronics and batteries. What a deal! In maybe 150 years, you will have gotten enough electricity to equal what you paid for the equipment (assuming that nothing needs any repairs during that 150 years).

The manufacturers and salespeople and spokespeople for PV devices know that they could never actually admit that, or no one would ever buy the products they are trying to sell!

So the public is permitted and encouraged to have a totally wrong, sugar-plum-type view of what magic that PVs can do for them! Someone is allowed to come to assume that a few square feet of PV panels will provide them with a consistent and reliable 1050 Watts all day every day, and so they believe that they will be able to fully operate their entire household on such a wonderful supply of electricity. But then once they spend all the many thousand dollars to buy the equipment and then to have it all installed, THEN they discover that they ACTUALLY can only RELIABLY count on an average of around 35 Watts instead. That is NOT even enough to light a single 100 Watt light bulb!

Yes, after an entire day of collecting sunlight, such a setup CAN collect a total of around 400 Watt-hours of electricity, but then after that electricity is put INTO batteries and then later taken back OUT of the batteries, you can count on actually having around 300 Wh of USABLE electricity from that entire day. You could light that one light bulb for about three hours. Is THAT worth spending many thousands of dollars for? IF people know the actual facts, it seems unlikely that many people would think so.

I realize that it does not seem like it from these comments, but I VERY STRONGLY ENCOURAGE EXPERIMENTING in Photovoltaics and other alternative energy methods. As long as a customer approaches the matter as an EXPERIMENT and an ADVENTURE, fine. What I rebel to is the fact that few customers are remotely told the truth, in order to encourage them to have those sugar-plum-dreams of all the amazing benefits they will receive. If based on HONEST facts and HONEST information, I'm in! But if everything is based on deception and distortion and misleading customers, NO, NO, NO!

This whole realm is another example where ADVERTISERS promote PEAK RATINGS for their products, the absolute maximum that they had ever been able to get their products to produce in a test laboratory, under absolutely perfect conditions, while USERS later discover that such numbers are nearly always useless and irrelevant, as they use such products in REAL environments! Many of the energy-related presentations in this Domain are intended to help the public learn what the actual facts are and the reality is! Where they might then listen to the spectacular claims of advertising, and be in a position to then be able to ASK INFORMED QUESTIONS! "Yes, yes, I realize that the numbers you just cited are possible with this product, but that was in a laboratory under perfect conditions. I do not have such ideal conditions, so I want to know what I will be likely to see in MY application. I want to know an AVERAGE PERFORMANCE that I can expect for a day or a week or a month or a year. Can I get that in writing???"

Salespeople have never had to deal with such tough questions, because the public has never been informed enough to be able to ask them! You know the horror stories of Used Car Dealers! An unsuspecting customer wanders in and expects to hear TRUTH about a vehicle, but the Dealer knows that the Customer will have to sign a Disclaimer that prominently states AS IS, so the Dealer knows he is free to say essentially anything he thinks this customer might swallow! Similarly, Reporters have never known enough background information to ask such tough questions either, so news reports have ALWAYS only shown people being allowed to talk about the IDEAL operation of the product which has gotten them on TV or in the newspaper! Such Reporter interviews are ALWAYS with either a Representative of the Company trying to sell the products or with Customers that have glee and enthusiasm of Christmas morning regarding the presents Santa brought. We feel that an interview with that kid in April or May might be a more realistic assessment of that toy or bike!

We have a presentation at Solar Cells. Photovoltaic Cells, PV, Electricity from Sunlight.


End of footnote 12






.

What? Modifying a Cow?

A REALLY interesting but strange idea has occurred to me! And this figures to either be totally worthless or worth many billions of dollars!

This is VAGUELY related to the HeatGreen concept!

There are TWO ways that organic material can decompose. One is if there is minimal oxygen around, which turns out to be the usual case inside the stomachs of cows and humans and other mammals, which is called ANAEROBIC DIGESTION. It uses a type of bacteria which are called ANAEROBIC BACTERIA. Anaerobic digestion is NOT very efficient! Among other things, the chemical composition does not completely occur and there is considerable METHANE GAS which is generated. All the jokes about cows and flatulence in people are due to this. (Did you know that virtually ALL people are flatulent around TWENTY TIMES every day?) Anaerobic bacteria also cannot digest some organic materials, which we call FIBER, which then necessarily pass right through us (and cows). The other method is FAR more efficient, and it is called AEROBIC DIGESTION. It uses a different type of bacteria, which are FAR FASTER and more effective in digesting virtually all organic materials. More importantly, those aerobic bacteria can nearly completely digest ALL foods! NO methane gas is generated, just carbon dioxide (which has no smell!) And nearly all the food eaten gets digested, which provides more energy for the cow or person and leaves less waste material to dispose of!

I designed the HG concept to use AEROBIC bacteria, because they are so much (1) more efficient; (2) faster; and (3) able to decompose far more organic materials; than ANAEROBIC bacteria can do. The anaerobic are worse in all those ways, The bacteria in your intestine or that of a cow are bacteria that can survive and operate in an anaerobic environment. Anaerobic bacteria also tend to form METHANE gas (CH4) (which you call flatulence) and that anaerobic digestion leaves a lot of unprocessed material (which you call manure). In tremendous contrast, aerobic digestion generally results entirely in producing CO2 and H2O. This is FAR more efficient digestion, of being able to get SEVERAL TIMES AS MUCH ENERGY BENEFIT for the body, if and when aerobic digestion might be regularly done.

In 2008, I had extended that aerobic/anaerobic thought about potential experiments to create "super-human athletes" by either sliding two "air hoses" down the esophagus to the stomach, or doing an operation to insert such hoses through the abdomen.

Here was my thinking at the time: If one of those hoses had an air pump and filter, and the other hose was there to release "used gases", then the stomach and intestine would have a constant supply of FAR MORE oxygen in them than is normally the case. And then, like in the HG, it should then only take a few hours before AEROBIC bacteria start digesting the food contents.

At the time, I was only thinking in terms of "pro athletes" but I never liked the idea as being somewhat like the illegal drugs that many star athletes use to get an unfair advantage.

So what is the NEW insight? Say that an Animal Husbandry Researcher would install the pair of air tubes and a small air compressor INTO A COW?

The result SHOULD be that the cow's metabolism should greatly increase, maybe double or triple normal.

A MILK COW might then PRODUCE double or triple the milk per day! And beef cattle might grow two to three times faster, WITHOUT having to add all the nasty chemicals in their feed!

This then MIGHT enormously increase the US milk and beef supplies, possibly without the cows consuming any additional feed! It would be ENTIRELY due to their having become far more EFFICIENT at digesting food, by aerobic rather than the current normal anaerobic processes!

There are many unknown variables! For one thing, cows happen to have a multiple chamber stomach, which enables them to already digest grass and roughage and fiber. Would there be any effect, good or bad, to be pumping in extra air into those stomachs?

I admit that I have doubts! It might not work at all, or it might have detrimental side effects. Specifically, the stomach might start to operate at far higher temperatures than has always naturally been the case. The bacteria that now digest our food for us and for cows operate at around 99°F temperature. I am speculating about a far higher performance bacteria taking over. Many are known to thrive best when the temperature is over 125°F. Would that kill the cow? I do not know and only an experiment could find that out. But for a Research Program to invest a few hundred dollars in ONE COW, and then letting it re-join its cow-friends out in a meadow to watch IF it ate more or less or different stuff, and to constantly monitor body temperature and respiration rates, it seems like a worthwhile expense.

You might be amused at WHY this dawned on me now! I have always been amazed since I first discovered the research on humans, about ten years ago, that we all "pass gas" around 20 times every single day. And there are all the jokes about cows and methane gas. It dawned on me that IF I "converted" cows from anaerobic to aerobic, then they should no longer be producing methane gas. Or nearly as many cow patties! I was thinking about whether THAT might be a worthwhile goal, when I realized the "increased milk production" and "increased beef production" consequences which should also occur!


End of footnote 14






.

Is the Universe mostly Dark Matter?

There has never been any actual evidence of this idea. When the BASIS of this concept is examined, it was ENTIRELY due to scientists not having any valid explanation for the way our Milky Way Galaxy rotates. Hundreds of years ago, a scientist named Kepler had discovered some formulas that describe the gravitational behavior of the planets in our Solar System. Later, Isaac Newton proved that Kepler's formulas were actually only approximate, and that they were pretty accurate in the Solar System BECAUSE nearly all the mass in the Solar System is inside the Sun at its very center.

And yet, the Physics community chose to try to apply Kepler's Laws to the Galaxy, where the mass is known to be broadly distributed over its entire size! And then when the Galaxy did not rotate as they insisted it should (per Kepler), they started dreaming up dozens and dozens of really silly ideas that each claimed would fully explain everything!

Some have claimed that spiral galaxies are NOT spiral at all, but only APPEAR to be spiral due to effects of (speculated, unseen and unproven) gravity waves passing through the galaxy to cause gravitational shock waves, which allegedly cause localized star burst patterns where new stars get formed. They seem to overlook the fact that NO shock wave from ANY direction could cause SPIRAL PATTERNS of star bursts! IF there were such a phenomenon, it would certainly be seen as PLANAR sheets of bright new stars, which would gradually pass through that region!

But most other Physicists seem to insist that the Galaxy rotation that they cannot explain is due to massive clumps of invisible material in the Galaxy. IF such an explanation were valid, the DISTRIBUTION of where that invisible mass would have to be would be truly bizarre! AND VERY UNSTABLE! But more than that, IF there were such invisible masses in the Galaxy, they would also attract OTHER parts of the Galaxy which the proponents ignore! Such concepts are so amazingly silly that it is hard to believe that ANY actual Physicist would even consider it worth thought! But THIS is what NEARLY ALL modern Astrophysicists now believe! At different times, they have called the invisible material Missing Mass, Neutrinos, Exotic Matter, Dark Matter, and other things. But NONE of them can be arranged in any actual pattern where they would have the gravitational effects that are claimed for them, and NONE of them would be remotely stable even if they could momentarily exist.

I feel that a far more simple and traditional explanation explains these matters far better. NO weird and speculative assumptions are necessary at all! Just SIMPLE gravitation that Newton calculated for us hundreds of years ago, BUT examined for a DISTRIBUTED MASS. Duh!

Galaxy Spiral Arms Stability and Dynamics


End of footnote 15






.

Are There Black Holes?

This is a concept that is so deeply ingrained in modern society that even little kids refer to them all the time! It is hard to see how and why they became such a cornerstone of modern Astrophysics!

Around 1912, Albert Einstein derived some very complicated equations as part of his General Relativity Theory. Around 1916, another Physicist named Schwarzschild derived a solution to part of them. In his result, he had his equations act strangely where in some very specific locations, the denominator dropped to zero! This meant that the number itself would become infinity. This became known as a singularity. Neither Einstein nor Schwarzschild had any idea of what such a mathematical singularity might actually mean in the real universe. But around 1960, some Physicists chose to entirely ignore the real nature of actual material (atoms) and instead consider everything to be describable by mathematics. This assumption permitted them to make a rather strange assumption! The first part of it was reasonably credible, where a white dwarf star developed such extreme high density that the atoms of the star (separate protons in the nuclei and electrons revolving around them) being gravitationally jammed together into everything become neutrons (because neutrons are known to be simply the coupling of positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons, and some extra Binding Energy. THIS then was a hypothesis that there must be NEUTRON STARS, of even smaller diameters, objects which have the mass of an entire star but all of which is packed into a space that may only be a few miles in diameter.

Since Neutron stars are not charged electrically, they would not affect any objects passing near them, except by gravitation. And they are (probably) not hot enough to give off any radiation, so detecting Neutron Stars has been an extremely hard task. The only real possibilities found have been in binary star systems, where the larger star that IS giving off light is seen to be apparently orbiting with an unseen companion object of great mass.

Well, the part that seems outrageous to me is that someone ASSUMED that if gravitation can be so strong as to force an electron INSIDE the nucleus of an atom to create a neutron, then even greater gravitation (due to even higher density) would cause TWO neutrons to get embedded within each other. This would then create a new object that was the size of a neutron, but with TWICE the mass of a normal neutron.

Well, IF that assumption is accepted as credible, then it is easy to see that the new double-neutron would have TWICE the gravitational attraction to a neighbor neutron, and therefore it would certainly suck that one into the object. We would then have an object which still had the size of a normal neutron, but now with THREE TIMES the mass! And this would obviously mean that it would even more quickly suck in a fourth neutron, then a fifth, and so on.

This rather weak line of reasoning continues on ad infinitatum. There would allegedly never be any limit, and this object would forever keep absorbing more neutrons (and other objects) into that still tiny space of the size of one neutron. For a few years in the 1960s, Physicists would say that this object would be the size of a neutron but with the mass of our Sun or a thousand or a million Suns. Eventually, that sort of statement stopped being said. I think it was due to the speakers realizing how ridiculous it sounds!

In any case, THAT is still the case, the entire reasoning of what a Black Hole would be. But it really could only have gotten to be that popular a concept by two conditions: (1) that no Physicist seems to have ever carefully examined the physical reality of what is described above; and (2) that no Physicist seems to have examined that the ENTIRE basis for this very speculative concept was the SINGLE solution by Schwarzschild of Einstein's General Relativity equations around 90 years ago! And yet it is ABSOLUTELY ACCEPTED WITHOUT ANY QUESTION OR DOUBT AT ALL!


End of footnote 16






.

Is the Twins Paradox True? Not a Chance!

This is another bit of lore which somehow arose from the Physics community. Many modern Physicists passionately defend that story, and they actually must, as several entire fields of modern AstroPhysics are based entirely on the assumption that the Twins Paradox is valid. It is not!

The very popular Twins Paradox is absolutely untrue and impossible, and that is actually for really obvious reasons!

Einstein had died a few years before the Twins Paradox was first presented. If he had still been alive, he would certainly have immediately pointed out a major error in it! His Relativity was entirely based on the concept that the Universe has to seem logical for every viewer in every situation. The Twins Paradox definitely does not comply with that! It ONLY considers the appearance FROM THE EARTH, which makes it immediately invalid regarding Relativity! The premise is based on a TRUE situation that for a NON-ACCELERATING situation, a moving target must always appear to be aging more slowly than the observer senses. This is a special case of Relativity called Special Relativity, which only applies for non-accelerating situations.

The error in the Twins Paradox is really obvious if one considers ONLY the perspective of the person in the spacecraft! HE senses no speed at all. But he sees the Earth seem to be shooting away at very high velocity! Logically, he must then see life on Earth passing MORE SLOWLY than he personally experiences. This is an unavoidable statement. However, the Earth observers feel that THEY are motionless and that he is rapidly moving away from them. So THEY TOO see this Time Dilation effect, where they see HIM appear to be aging more slowly than they are aging! Both viewers see the other as aging more slowly than he ages! I realize this sounds impossible, but the very basis of Relativity insists on that fact. There IS an explanation, and it is totally logical, and even mathematically supported. It is a little complicated, but it is certainly the truth, and the Twins Paradox is not true and even impossible!

We have a presentation at The Twins Paradox of Relativity Is Absolutely Wrong.


End of footnote 17






.

Was there a good basis for developing Quantum Dynamics?

(Several web-pages have been composed on this subject in the Advanced Physics listings)


End of footnote 18






.

Quantum Defect

Beginning in the 1930s, it was ASSUMED that a peculiar factor in the experimental data of atomic nuclei could not be logically explained! And so it was referred to as a Defect to the allegedly pure logic of Quantum Dynamics. But that "Defect" can be very precisely presented by a rather simple mathematical formula. It DOES include a very peculiar characteristic that a scientist named Moseley discovered around 1913 (and which is now called Moseley's Law), but THAT is one of the most interesting aspects of it all. There seems like a valid possibility that an entirely new law of science may exist!

A full presentation is provided at A New Basic Law of Science, the Square of Electrical Charge A Totally New Basic Law, the Square of Electrical Charge, of Science? Moseley's Law Explanation


End of footnote 19






.

Neutrons inside Atomic Nuclei?

A very careful and thorough analysis of the highly respected NIST data regarding atomic isotopes has resulted in some surprising conclusions! Examination of same-atomic-weight families of atomic isotopes provides impressive evidence that the neutrons that we all learned about as school children probably can NOT actually exist inside any atomic nuclei! (They exist as SEPARATE protons and electrons instead.)

A full presentation is provided at Statistical Analysis of Same-Atomic-Weight Isotopes. Nuclear Structure. (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)


End of footnote 20






.

Atomic sizes???

Several web-pages discuss electron orbits in atoms, including: NIST Atomic Ionization Data Patterns, Logical Inconsistencies in Nuclear Physics, and others (linked below in the Advanced Physics links).

As it happens, the 'binding energy' for an electron that is in a large orbit, or a planet that is in a large orbit, is LESS (when compared to a situation of infinite distance where the binding energy is zero) than for one in a smaller orbit. In fact, in both the case of an electrostatic orbit of an electron and a gravitational orbit of a planet, the inverse square law applies, meaning that FOUR TIMES as much binding energy (has to) exists for an electron or planet in an orbit of half the radius.

The result of this is that electrons which have been strongly ionized, to have MORE energy, are necessarily in SMALLER orbits, where the electrostatic attraction for is stronger. This is exactly OPPOSITE of what is the popular ASSUMPTION by Physicists and the Public!


End of footnote 21






.

End of footnote 22






.

Regarding Carbon Dioxide in an Old Auditorium

Consider an auditorium which is 200 feet by 100 feet, and therefore seats about 3,000 people (at the US legal 7 square feet per person). Give it a fairly high ceiling at 20 feet. We therefore have 400,000 cubic feet of air inside the room. Normal air is now around 400 ppmv of carbon dioxide, so there is about 158 cubic feet of actual carbon dioxide in the room to start with.

We have 3,000 people in the room listening to the lecture. They each breathe about 12 times every minute, and each breath is about 0.5 liters of exhaled air. So, every minute, they exhale about 3,000 * 0.5 * 12 or 18,000 liters of breathes, which is about 510 cubic feet of breaths. Because of something called Dalton's Law of Partial Pressures, that exhaled breath air can only be about 4.4% carbon dioxide, so each minute adds about 22 cubic feet more of exhaled carbon dioxide into the auditorium. Over a boring three-hour lecture, 180 minutes, that is about 4,100 cubic feet of additional carbon dioxide in the room, just because of all those people breathing!

If the building had been absolutely airtight, our quantity of carbon dioxide in the room would have risen from 156 cubic feet up to more than 4,200 cubic feet, an increase by a factor of about 27 times! This would increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the auditorium from the original 400 ppmv up to over 10,600 ppmv (parts per million by volume). A concentration of 10,000 ppmv which I mentioned in the text is more common than you might think!

End of footnote 31






.

Stonehenge as an Astronomical Observatory of 3000 BC

Very likely to be true, EXCEPT not with the extreme precision that some modern people attribute to them. The Earth has many slow-acting mechanical effects occurring to it, such as Plate Tectonics which constantly but very slowly has the North Pole move as compared to the visible surface of the planet. This causes a very slow change regarding the observed rotational axis, and so precise orientations of stone monuments regarding an exact location of where sunrise and sunset occur changes. Only by a fraction of a degree, but that is not in compliance with some modern comments that ancient stone monuments were built with a level of precision of modern technology. Other similar comments claim that stone surfaces were (somehow) ground so perfectly that giant slabs of rock fit together with a precision that modern technology can achieve, no. The Earth is subject to many hundreds of other slow-acting mechanical effects, such as Mutual Planetary Perturbations and various wobbling effects due to mechanical facts such as the region of the Pacific Ocean being less massive than the (somewhat opposite) continents of Europe and Africa. There are many other such effects which can slightly change orientations over a 5,000 year interval!

End of footnote 51






.

The Egyptian Pyramids as Astronomical Observatories of 2500 BC

Very likely to be true, EXCEPT not with the extreme precision that some modern people attribute to them. The Earth has many slow-acting mechanical effects occurring to it, such as Plate Tectonics which constantly but very slowly has the North Pole move as compared to the visible surface of the planet. This causes a very slow change regarding the observed rotational axis, and so precise orientations of stone monuments regarding an exact location of where sunrise and sunset occur changes. Only by a fraction of a degree, but that is not in compliance with some modern comments that ancient stone monuments were built with a level of precision of modern technology. Other similar comments claim that stone surfaces were (somehow) ground so perfectly that giant slabs of rock fit together with a precision that modern technology can achieve, no. The Earth is subject to many hundreds of other slow-acting mechanical effects, such as Mutual Planetary Perturbations and various wobbling effects due to mechanical facts such as the region of the Pacific Ocean being less massive than the (somewhat opposite) continents of Europe and Africa. There are many other such effects which can slightly change orientations over a 5,000 year interval!

End of footnote 52






.

Dark Energy

A totally stupid idea. The very term seems to contradict itself! The existence of ANY sort of Energy implicitly implies that any changes or any perception of changes, will create Radiation of some sort to maintain Conservation of Energy. Accepted that such created Radiation might be unfamiliar to us, but it still has to exist AT SOME FREQUENCY and WAVELENGTH. Meaning that it CANNOT be "dark'. In order to accept this idea, it is necessary to entirely abandon all trust in many long trusted Laws of science, such as the Conservation of Energy, Conservation of Momentum, Conservation of Mass, Relativity, and many others.

Among the rampant application of unsupportable assumptions, a recent addition is a claim that gravity is no longer really important and that some ASSUMED new idea is the overwhelming presence in the Universe. Recent claims are that the vast majority of the entire Universe is made of things that we have never been away of and can never be aware of! There are Physicists who are now announcing that 75% of the entire Universe is made of Dark Energy and another 20% is made of Dark Matter, claiming that the entire Universe we have any way of knowing about is only 5% of all existence! This bizarre idea arose based on some observations of some objects in the Universe which appear to be immensely far away from us.

It is not possible for us to see anything more than a 'snapshot' of extremely distant objects in space, a single momentary view. We are unable to see any variations in brightness level or any other characteristics that might be useful in determining the size or brightness of really distant objects. Even the DISTANCE of such objects is a quantity which requires several ASSUMPTIONS.

But apparently in the competition in modern Physics to make the most outrageous statements, the tiniest bit of POTENTIAL evidence has had many layers of assumptions loaded onto it, to result in a claim that all known laws of science are to be discarded! The claim is that those extremely distant objects are moving away from us at speeds which are greater for objects which are farther away from us. Now, if that was a VALID statement, it would be amazing. But that statement was only dreamed up after about a half dozen ASSUMPTIONS were applied to observed data. Since modern Physics seems to no longer require any PROOF of any statements made, everyone seems to feel free to dream up any assumptions they wish, to then announce statements as though they are actual science! No they aren't! They are results of speculative imaginations of people who want to find new assumptions to apply!

The claim referred to here is totally dependent on us knowing the accurate distance from us to each extremely distant object. But such distances cannot be measured! They have to be ESTIMATED due to the application of several assumptions. We have NO good way of determining reliably accurate distance information for such objects which appear to be at extreme distances from us. Much of that is based on spectral lines being shifted to the red (called the Red Shift) which we ASSUME only occurs due to the speed the object is moving away from us. There is actually no good reason that has to be true! There might be TWENTY different physical processes which exist which cause Red Shifts, but which we are still totally oblivious about!

Interestingly, the main basis for the distance we think distant objects are from us is ALSO based on the spectral Red Shift. When both the numerator and denominator of a fraction are based on the same number, the value of the fraction becomes irrelevant, and that is essentially the situation here. Another huge assumption which has been universally made is the idea that ALL objects in the Universe which LOOK to be of the same type, are actually absolutely IDENTICAL! Schoolchildren are never allowed to make such poor assumptions, but modern Physicists feel free to do so! Based on these assumptions and on several more, it has now been decided that if two ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL OBJECTS are seen, but they appear to be of different brightness, then one is farther away from us as calculated by that difference of brightness. Unbelievable!

In any case, these assorted assumptions have resulted in the recent outrageous announcement that the Universe is in runaway expansion, essentially dismissing all the known laws of science. As a result, the Physicists then decided they could 'explain' this new (alleged) finding, by speculating an even more outrageous idea, that there is an unseen and undetected thing they call Dark Energy. Allegedly, this latest speculation is supposed to be the opposite of energy and gravitation, where it allegedly then would explain a runaway expansion of the Universe! It is sad that no one paused to try to confirm or deny whether the alleged 'evidence' of a runaway expansion is even credible or valid, before they jumped to make even more outrageous announcements!

I tend to wonder if modern Physicists think their future Grants of money for research will be based on how outrageous their statements are! Science and Physics seems to have gotten lost along the way.

End of footnote 53






.

Big Bang Origin of the Universe

This idea was first thought up around the 1950s, in order to try to provide an explanation for a long-standing mystery of mankind. Unfortunately, the people who thought this up had to abandon acceptance of MOST of the accepted logic, ideas and Laws of science! They now simply claim that conditions at the time of the Big Bang were so extreme that our known Laws of science simply did not apply. That then freed them up to SPECULATE WILDLY, since they were free to claim that scientific knowledge simply is irrelevant! That essentially discards ALL of three thousand years of scientific study!

I suppose there is no way to prove that such irrational ideas might have been true, as their claim that scientific logic and rules do not and cannot apply! So I suppose they are safe from ever being proven wrong! But around 1960, I came up with a slightly different concept which DOES comply with known Laws of science and also all reasonable logic! Origin of the Universe A different amd LOGICAL explanation for the beginning of the Universe which is then apparently STILL ongoing!

End of footnote 54






.

The Existence of Black Holes

The same people who had dreamed up the Big Bang as the origin of the Universe soon also thought up the idea of Black Holes. The basis for this claim is amazingly 'thin'! One of the equations that Albert Einstein derived in trying to understand General Relativity was especially hard to solve. It remained unsolved until a mathematician/Physicist named Schwarzschild found a solution for that equation in 1916. His solution was troublesome in that there were certain (rare) situations where the denominator became exactly zero, which meant that the value of his solution would have to become infinite. Since both Einstein and Schwarzschild are universally considered to be absolutely infallible, no one doubted Schwarzschild's solution or his consequence of having a result which could apparently violate ALL of known science! But it took into the 1960s before one of those scientists who seem to have loved to speculate came up with the idea of that 'mathematical singularity' of Schwarzschild being actual reality, and the term Black Hole was dreamed up. (Neither Einstein nor Schwarzschild ever claimed existence of any physical singularities.)

There WERE certainly very compact stars known by the 1960s, including White Dwarfs and Brown Dwarfs. In a nearly hilarious speculation, one of that group of speculative thinkers decided that Schwarzchild's mathematical singularity permitted them to claim that it was possible for a proton to (somehow) jam itself into the space used by a different proton! Their claim was that gravitation inside a really compact white dwarf caused this to happen.

They neglected a really obvious FACT! BOTH the attractive force of a gravitational field AND the repulsive force of electrostatic repulsion between positively-charged protons act according to the inverse square dependence. In other words, if two protons got twice as close, yes, the gravitational attraction would increase by a factor of four, but what they overlooked was that the electrostatic repulsion ALSO increased by a factor of four. Becoming very close would NOT cause super-strong attraction, which might (allegedly) become so strong that two protons might exist in the space of one!

However, IF they had been correct, then their following logic would have worked! The new super-proton would gravitationally attract other protons TWICE as strongly as the gravitation that would have3 jammed the first two protons together! (Of course, they also overlooked that the doubled electrical charge of the super-proton would also have REPELLED the third proton twice as strongly!) So they merrily extended this (wrong) idea into essentially becoming a gravitational vacuum cleaner which would suck up every proton it encountered. And they seem to have overlooked some other logical problems in eventually having a 'Black Hole' which had the entire mass of a star, all tightly packed inside the tiny space of a single atom! But they always slid by such 'details' as I asked at least a hundred Physicists about this during my Physics Education and Physics career, and was never even given ANY response at all! It is apparently an irrelevant question to them, people who seem to believe that all the known Laws of science can be ignored whenever they become inconvenient!

Like many of the other wild speculations of modern Physics, the idea of Black Holes is probably immune from serious attack. Since they feel that they can ignore any and all Laws of Physics if they become 'inconvenient', no logical argument could ever be posited against that idea! And the fact that the Public has found excitement and sexiness in a concept such as Black Holes, we are destined to have that concept forever! Even though it is nearly certain NOT to be valid!

End of footnote 55






.

Dark Matter

This is another idea in Physics which was speculated to be true, even though it totally violated many well-established scientific Laws! The way the idea arose is humorously curious! It has been known for about 80 years that our Milky Way Galaxy is somewhat like a flattened pinwheel and it rotates about every 200 million years. But Physicists insisted on ASSUMING that it must behave according to Kepler's Laws, which were proven to be pretty accurate regarding the rotation of the Solar System. They overlooked a huge detail! Newton explained that Kepler's Laws are 'nearly' accurate due to the fact that virtually all the mass of the Solar System is in the Sun, at the very center. The Galaxy is not remotely like that! Its mass is DISTRIBUTED throughout its entire dimensions. Newton clearly showed that Kepler's Laws simply cannot apply for such a situation! Yet, Physicists overlook that little detail and they insist that Kepler's Laws must apply in the Galaxy. THIS creates an entirely new problem, where the Spiral Arms of our Galaxy would then NOT be able to 'keep up' with the rotation of the Core. So, based on this WRONG assumption regarding Kepler's Laws, all sorts of very silly ideas have been thought up, and then immediately accepted without question, in order to try to explain 'extra mass' that they know would have to be necessary if Kepler's Laws were to apply.

These 'silly ideas' include there being extra mass as DARK MATTER or MISSING MATTER to try to provide the alleged explanation; the claim that our Galaxy is nearly entirely invisible as 90% Neutrinos; the claim that GRAVITY WAVES pass through our Galaxy and create 'shock waves' which cause 'starburst formations in the shape of Spiral Arms'; and even more silly claims. No one ever tries to apply any actual LOGIC to such claims, so they each get immediately accepted by many Physicists. It is sad!

I believe there is a FAR more logical explanation, which does not NEED silly ideas like Missing Mass or Dark Matter or Neutrinos or Gravity Waves. SIMPLE Newtonian Gravitation explains why our Galaxy can and does rotate as it does, and it explains how and why our Galaxy can be stable in maintaining its form. See Galaxy Spiral Arms

End of footnote 56






.

Gravity Waves

This is another idea in Physics which was speculated to be true, even though it totally violated many well-established scientific Laws! The way the idea arose is humorously curious! It has been known for about 80 years that our Milky Way Galaxy is somewhat like a flattened pinwheel and it rotates about every 200 million years. But Physicists insisted on ASSUMING that it must behave according to Kepler's Laws, which were proven to be pretty accurate regarding the rotation of the Solar System. They overlooked a huge detail! Newton explained that Kepler's Laws are 'nearly' accurate due to the fact that virtually all the mass of the Solar System is in the Sun, at the very center. The Galaxy is not remotely like that! Its mass is DISTRIBUTED throughout its entire dimensions. Newton clearly showed that Kepler's Laws simply cannot apply for such a situation! Yet, Physicists overlook that little detail and they insist that Kepler's Laws must apply in the Galaxy. THIS creates an entirely new problem, where the Spiral Arms of our Galaxy would then NOT be able to 'keep up' with the rotation of the Core. So, based on this WRONG assumption regarding Kepler's Laws, all sorts of very silly ideas have been thought up, and then immediately accepted without question, in order to try to explain 'extra mass' that they know would have to be necessary if Kepler's Laws were to apply.

These 'silly ideas' include there being extra mass as DARK MATTER or MISSING MATTER to try to provide the alleged explanation; the claim that our Galaxy is nearly entirely invisible as 90% Neutrinos; the claim that GRAVITY WAVES pass through our Galaxy and create 'shock waves' which cause 'starburst formations in the shape of Spiral Arms'; and even more silly claims. No one ever tries to apply any actual LOGIC to such claims, so they each get immediately accepted by many Physicists. It is sad!

I believe there is a FAR more logical explanation, which does not NEED silly ideas like Missing Mass or Dark Matter or Neutrinos or Gravity Waves. SIMPLE Newtonian Gravitation explains why our Galaxy can and does rotate as it does, and it explains how and why our Galaxy can be stable in maintaining its form. See Galaxy Spiral Arms

End of footnote 57






.

Universe Rapidly Expanding Forever

Among the rampant application of unsupportable assumptions, a recent addition is a claim that gravity is no longer really important and that some ASSUMED new idea is the overwhelming presence in the Universe. This arose based on some observations of some objects in the Universe which appear to be immensely far away from us.

It is not possible for us to see anything more than a 'snapshot' of extremely distant objects in space, a single momentary view. We are unable to see any variations in brightness level or any other characteristics that might be useful in determining the size or brightness of really distant objects. Even the DISTANCE of such objects is a quantity which requires several ASSUMPTIONS.

But apparently in the competition in modern Physics to make the most outrageous statements, the tiniest bit of POTENTIAL evidence has had many layers of assumptions loaded onto it, to result in a claim that all known laws of science are to be discarded! The claim is that those extremely distant objects are moving away from us at speeds which are greater for objects which are farther away from us. Now, if that was a VALID statement, it would be amazing. But that statement was only dreamed up after about a half dozen ASSUMPTIONS were applied to observed data. Since modern Physics seems to no longer require any PROOF of any statements made, everyone seems to feel free to dream up any assumptions they wish, to then announce statements as though they are actual science! No they aren't! They are results of speculative imaginations of people who want to find new assumptions to apply!

The claim referred to here is totally dependent on us knowing the accurate distance from us to each extremely distant object. But such distances cannot be measured! They have to be ESTIMATED due to the application of several assumptions. We have NO good way of determining reliably accurate distance information for such objects which appear to be at extreme distances from us. Much of that is based on spectral lines being shifted to the red (called the Red Shift) which we ASSUME only occurs due to the speed the object is moving away from us. There is actually no good reason that has to be true! There might be TWENTY different physical processes which exist which cause Red Shifts, but which we are still totally oblivious about!

Interestingly, the main basis for the distance we think distant objects are from us is ALSO based on the spectral Red Shift. When both the numerator and denominator of a fraction are based on the same number, the value of the fraction becomes irrelevant, and that is essentially the situation here. Another huge assumption which has been universally made is the idea that ALL objects in the Universe which LOOK to be of the same type, are actually absolutely IDENTICAL! Schoolchildren are never allowed to make such poor assumptions, but modern Physicists feel free to do so! Based on these assumptions and on several more, it has now been decided that if two ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL OBJECTS are seen, but they appear to be of different brightness, then one is farther away from us as calculated by that difference of brightness. Unbelievable!

In any case, these assorted assumptions have resulted in the recent outrageous announcement that the Universe is in runaway expansion, essentially dismissing all the known laws of science. As a result, the Physicists then decided they could 'explain' this new (alleged) finding, by speculating an even more outrageous idea, that there is an unseen and undetected thing they call Dark Energy. Allegedly, this latest speculation is supposed to be the opposite of energy and gravitation, where it allegedly then would explain a runaway expansion of the Universe! It is sad that no one paused to try to confirm or deny whether the alleged 'evidence' of a runaway expansion is even credible or valid, before they jumped to make even more outrageous announcements!

I tend to wonder if modern Physicists think their future Grants of money for research will be based on how outrageous their statements are! Science and Physics seems to have gotten lost along the way.

End of footnote 58






.

Universe is Chock Full of Neutrinos

This is another idea in Physics which was speculated to be true, even though it totally violated many well-established scientific Laws! The way the idea arose is humorously curious! It has been known for about 80 years that our Milky Way Galaxy is somewhat like a flattened pinwheel and it rotates about every 200 million years. But Physicists insisted on ASSUMING that it must behave according to Kepler's Laws, which were proven to be pretty accurate regarding the rotation of the Solar System. They overlooked a huge detail! Newton explained that Kepler's Laws are 'nearly' accurate due to the fact that virtually all the mass of the Solar System is in the Sun, at the very center. The Galaxy is not remotely like that! Its mass is DISTRIBUTED throughout its entire dimensions. Newton clearly showed that Kepler's Laws simply cannot apply for such a situation! Yet, Physicists overlook that little detail and they insist that Kepler's Laws must apply in the Galaxy. THIS creates an entirely new problem, where the Spiral Arms of our Galaxy would then NOT be able to 'keep up' with the rotation of the Core. So, based on this WRONG assumption regarding Kepler's Laws, all sorts of very silly ideas have been thought up, and then immediately accepted without question, in order to try to explain 'extra mass' that they know would have to be necessary if Kepler's Laws were to apply.

These 'silly ideas' include there being extra mass as DARK MATTER or MISSING MATTER to try to provide the alleged explanation; the claim that our Galaxy is nearly entirely invisible as 90% Neutrinos; the claim that GRAVITY WAVES pass through our Galaxy and create 'shock waves' which cause 'starburst formations in the shape of Spiral Arms'; and even more silly claims. No one ever tries to apply any actual LOGIC to such claims, so they each get immediately accepted by many Physicists. It is sad!

I believe there is a FAR more logical explanation, which does not NEED silly ideas like Missing Mass or Dark Matter or Neutrinos or Gravity Waves. SIMPLE Newtonian Gravitation explains why our Galaxy can and does rotate as it does, and it explains how and why our Galaxy can be stable in maintaining its form. See Galaxy Spiral Arms

End of footnote 59






.

Neutrons within Atomic Nuclei

The existence of FREE neutrons was established in the late 1920s. As 'Atomic Weights', that is, the mass of atomic nuclei were determined in coming years, it was found that most atomic nuclei had substantially more mass than that of the specific number of (electrically charged) protons and electrons that were necessary for the characteristics of each nucleus and element. It was ASSUMED that the nuclei also contained specific numbers of neutrons, in order to account for the needed extra mass. Physics has accepted that assumption ever since then. Careful examination of modern precise values of atomic masses seems to have now proven that assumption to have been incorrect. Instead of neutrons existing inside atomic nuclei, there appear instead to be SEPARATE protons and electrons inside the nuclei. This difference seems to have extremely little change in the characteristics of atomic nuclei, but it eliminates many small errors in exact values of atomic mass.

It also eliminates the need for massive numbers of neutrinos to need to be created and absorbed by nuclear processes, and it seems to also eliminate the need for a peculiar idea. During the 1930s, it was realized that mutual electrostatic repulsion of the closely-packed protons inside each nucleus by Coulomb's Law of electrostatics, would seem to immediately cause nearly all atomic nuclei to fly apart and cease to exist. Since it was known that most atomic nuclei are extremely stable, the Physicists of the 1930s ASSUMED that there was an 'extra force which existed', which became called the Strong Nuclear Force. The Strong was ASSUMED to be tremendously powerful at small distances, in order to overcome the mutual repulsive forces between the protons, to keep atomic nuclei from flying apart. The Strong was ASSUMED to have a distance dependence of either an inverse-third-power or inverse-fifth-power effect, in order for it to have the needed tremendous strength at tiny distances while not having any detectable effects at greater (atomic) distances. But NO experiment has ever detected any actual evidence of any Strong Nuclear Force. There are only IMPLIED bits of evidence, all of which require various assumptions of their own.

In the late 1990s, I began to statistically examine the highly respected NIST data regarding precise experimentally measured masses of atomic nuclei, with the single intention of trying to determine whether the Strong was actually an inverse-third-power or inverse-fifth-power effect. I had been troubled by noting that NO ONE ever seemed to try to actually specify which was true, regarding such a basic characteristic of such an important nuclear force!

Like in many other scientific investigations, my statistical analysis of the data surprised me in apparently showing that NEITHER was true, and that, IF protons and electrons were moving around separately within each atomic nucleus, the presence of the negatively charged electrons provides ATTRACTIVE electrostatic effects on the protons to keep them from flying out of the nucleus. So the ASSUMED Strong Nuclear Force appears to not even be necessary, or desirable, in maintaining the stability of most atomic nuclei. In fact, simple geometric arrangements of the protons and electrons within atomic nuclei seem to provide wonderfully obvious explanations for many nuclear behaviors, without having to assume any Strong Nuclear Force, or the existence of Pions within nuclei, or neutrinos.

My statistical analysis of the NIST data has now convinced me that there probably is NOT any Strong Nuclear Force, and likely no pions or neutrinos INSIDE atomic nuclei. Yes, pions and neutrinos exist OUTSIDE of atomic nuclei, but much of the basic reasoning of Nuclear Physics seems now to be entirely different than previously ASSUMED.

See Statistical Analysis of Same-Atomic-Weight Isotopes. Statistical Analysis of NIST data on Nuclear masses.

End of footnote 60






.

Branes

In recent decades, Physics seems to have abandoned any association with actual reality, and instead come to be based entirely on trying to solve immensely complex mathematical equations. Unfortunately, the mathematicians/physicists who try to solve such equations tend to make their own ASSUMPTIONS in order to get solutions. This situation has resulted in Physicists feeling free to make totally outrageous assumptions, and then solving some equations, and no one questions the validity of their claims! This has resulted in modern Physics having come to be centered on an assortment of silly ideas. The ideas are safe from ever being disproven because they claim to describe objects and processes which are so incredibly tiny that no (future) experiment could ever detect any of them! So String Theory, Super-Strings, Branes, and an endless assortment of speculations have been dreamed up by various Physicists in recent decades. Since no possible experiment could ever detect such tiny objects or processes, they are each free to give as many lectures as they wish, with no possible challenge to their claims.

But all those speculative ideas were created as consequences of assumptions that were speculative on their own, and much of these areas of modern Physics are totally based on other earlier assumptions which ARE definitely wrong! No actual reality is even considered any more, and Physicists simply argue over different sets of mathematical equations! And they get away with it because there is no one other than Physicists who can have any clue what they are trying to talk about! So when some Physicist announces that there are 10 spatial dimensions rather than the three we know about, no one questions such a statement! When another announces that there are 26 spatial dimensions, again, there is no challenge! This silliness is due to so many layers of wild and speculative assumptions being stacked on other unsupported assumptions that reality has lost the field! It seems that rather than Physicists needing to PROVE EVERY STATEMENT with brutal logic, now Physics has devolved into admiring the one who makes the most outrageous claims! VERY disappointing to an 'actual' Physicist!

End of footnote 61






.

Wormholes

Once the Twins Paradox was totally accepted, then the Public started extending that idea to 'Time Travel'. Countless Science-Fiction stories have been published which are based on this idea. But since the Twins Paradox is absolutely wrong, having been based on really terrible logic, and the two Twins would meet and see that they were both EXACTLY the same age, the balloon of the idea of Time Travel pops!

There ARE some very peculiar effects of Special Relativity and General Relativity regarding some PERCEPTIONS of time, but the REALITY never involves actual gain or loss of time, so NO Time Travel is possible!

Some noted Physicists, including Kip Thorne, then dreamed up the idea of Wormholes, which would allegedly be time conduits between two distant locations in the Universe. It is merely a variant on the Time Travel idea, which is absolutely and totally untrue and impossible.

This is beyond debate, once the error in the Twins Paradox is seen and understood.

End of footnote 62






.

Time Travel

Once the Twins Paradox was totally accepted, then the Public started extending that idea to 'Time Travel'. Countless Science-Fiction stories have been published which are based on this idea. But since the Twins Paradox is absolutely wrong, having been based on really terrible logic, and the two Twins would meet and see that they were both EXACTLY the same age, the balloon of the idea of Time Travel pops!

There ARE some very peculiar effects of Special Relativity and General Relativity regarding some PERCEPTIONS of time, but the REALITY never involves actual gain or loss of time, so NO Time Travel is possible!

This is beyond debate, once the error in the Twins Paradox is seen and understood.

End of footnote 63






.

Twins Paradox

In the early 1960s, some Physicists did some really sloppy thinking and they came up with a rather silly idea which later caught the Public's interest, and it is now totally accepted, both within Physics and by the public, even though the concept is totally wrong. And it is wrong for trivially simple logical errors they made in dreaming it up! The Twins Paradox is a story about identical twin brothers, one of whom stays on Earth while the other gets into a spacecraft and zooms off into space at incredible speed, and then when he later zooms back, the claim is that the elderly brother who remained on Earth would meet a very young 'identical' twin when he returned. This error arose due to the Physicists totally ignoring one viewpoint and exclusively describing everything as it would (allegedly) appear from Earth! My web-page on this matter at The Twins Paradox of Relativity Is Absolutely Wrong. The errors and the explanation should be simple enough that even schoolkids should be able to see what the correct explanation is, and it does NOT involve gaining or losing years of age!

End of footnote 64






.

End of footnote 65






.

End of footnote 66







E-mail to: Public4@mb-soft.com