tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48947108190800747132024-03-12T16:41:25.214-07:00My Thoughts on the Changing WorldEvery day I seem to run into new issues where I need to reexamine what I know about the world. It's a very complex world, and getting more and more complex every day. So, I'm going to comment on it here.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-69313211020594682152022-04-23T08:37:00.012-07:002022-04-24T09:56:58.980-07:00Stationary Points in SpaceSometime around the end of March, 2022, I began to realize an implication of Einstein’s Second Postulate that hadn’t occurred to me before. Below, highlighted in blue, is Einstein’s Second Postulate from page 1 of his 1905 paper “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”:
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJ27kzapTgE0DtzceXGG0Qj582RvYGOKNFVdT9p_SPCf3XL5Z4TS7w_Abo1MR_lVCbXjCk3gpEbYs4KGOVLPZn2SL7kl0_OYEeR3LPdv1RQtsQNsys9Sf4RQlo_HgRhi2F1ewF5O0Fyy_0eLBPOrm4EY52rx0QGa3VRq6UGyGlTEbnXQDIhbjHG84STA/s968/2nd-Postulate.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="320" data-original-height="792" data-original-width="968" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJ27kzapTgE0DtzceXGG0Qj582RvYGOKNFVdT9p_SPCf3XL5Z4TS7w_Abo1MR_lVCbXjCk3gpEbYs4KGOVLPZn2SL7kl0_OYEeR3LPdv1RQtsQNsys9Sf4RQlo_HgRhi2F1ewF5O0Fyy_0eLBPOrm4EY52rx0QGa3VRq6UGyGlTEbnXQDIhbjHG84STA/s320/2nd-Postulate.jpg"/></a></div>
I’d always viewed that postulate as primarily saying that “Emission Theory” was wrong. “Emission Theory,” which was commonly believed in 1905, stated that the speed of the emitter adds to the speed of the light that is emitted. But, I began to realize Einstein’s Second Postulate says a lot more than that. Here it is again:
<br><br>
<b> light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity <i>c</i> which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.</b>
<br><br>
It doesn’t just say that the speed of the emitter does not ADD to the speed of the light that is emitted, it says that light is emitted at 299,792,458 meters per second regardless of <b>any</b> movement of the emitter <b><i>in any direction</i></b>. That suddenly caused me to view it this way:
<br><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUF7Cp_3i4rPy3l0ziMNtjxQBtugG5dL5hmltxbuFLtpCJ2CzJ8eZUSqn9U4lBbkXliAayXMWogBPnnKf-BIVeelE3tLN5nnHwFYw4PYHMzjYYKlYLaCNCd6yODYzi5X8gn8pwF_1iDnWrWnffO7EuXK9QbXxlEyw8vRrvCOBfvO5U-OCpurPofN5tqQ/s645/Circular-light-wave.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="320" data-original-height="416" data-original-width="645" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUF7Cp_3i4rPy3l0ziMNtjxQBtugG5dL5hmltxbuFLtpCJ2CzJ8eZUSqn9U4lBbkXliAayXMWogBPnnKf-BIVeelE3tLN5nnHwFYw4PYHMzjYYKlYLaCNCd6yODYzi5X8gn8pwF_1iDnWrWnffO7EuXK9QbXxlEyw8vRrvCOBfvO5U-OCpurPofN5tqQ/s320/Circular-light-wave.jpg"/></a></div>
In the illustration above, a light emitter is moving from the lower left to the upper right. At the midway point, it emits an instantaneous burst of photons in all directions. Photons traveling back toward the lower left travel at the same speed as photons traveling toward the upper right. In fact, Einstein says that the photons spread out in a “spherical wave.” It is shown as a circle in the 2-Dimensional illustration, but in 3-Dimensional reality there would be photons traveling at 299,792,458 meters per second in all directions.
<br><br>
We also know that light photons travel in a straight line away from the point of emission. When we look at the nearby star Alpha-Centauri, we see it where it was located 4.367 years ago. When we look at the stars in the Andromeda galaxy, we see them where they were located about 2,537,000 years ago.
<br><br>
What this implies is that, while the emitter (the stars) move, the point of emission in space does not.
<br><br>
Einstein seemed to understand that when he wrote that his theory made the “luminiferous ether” superfluous. If all light is emitted from stationary points in empty space, what need is there for some imaginary “ether” to measure movement against?
<br><br>
When all the pieces and all the implications fell together in my mind, I wrote a scientific paper about it and put it on vixra.org. Two weeks later, I wrote a longer version with a lot more details and put it on vixra.org at this link: <a href="https://vixra.org/pdf/2204.0016v2.pdf">https://vixra.org/pdf/2204.0016v2.pdf</a>
<br><br>
It wasn’t long before someone named “Mikko” posted some comments about what I had written. His comments showed he didn’t understand what I was saying, and I wrote a response trying to explain things to him. But, for some reason, the administrator of that site deleted my response. So, I’m going to write my responses here.
<br><br>
Mikko inexplicably claimed I didn’t believe in Relativity.
<br><br>
<b>I fully accept Relativity!<i></i></b> Relativity is about how two different observers can see different things due to Time Dilation or the speed of light. My article has NOTHING to do with relativity. It is <b>ONLY</b> about Einstein’s Second Postulate and how light is created and travels.
<br><br>
Mikko then stated that there were no “facts” to support my claim that there are “stationary points in space.”
<br><br>
My response: If light travels in a straight line in all directions away from where the light is emitted, doesn’t that indicate that the light comes from a stationary point in space? The emitter moves on, but the point of origin for the light remains at a specific location. We can determine where that point is by tracing the light back in a straight line until it hits an OBJECT that was on that line at some time in the past. That object MUST be the emitter, otherwise light would have to pass through it.
<br><br>
Mikko then argued that, although I state that the point where an atom emits a photon will not be where the atom will be NOW, but does not say where it will be instead.
<br><br>
My response: Where the atom is NOW is irrelevant. It all depends upon the speed at which the atom is moving. The only fact of importance is where the atom WAS when it emitted the photons that traveled in a straight line to our telescope.
<br><br>
In his second comment, Mikko wrote a rambling diatribe about how I failed to explain that more light will be emitted in the direction the emitter is traveling and less in the opposite direction.
<br><br>
My response was that his comment has nothing to do with the subject “Stationary Points in Space.” And it is WRONG! In the illustration I posted above, the same amount of light is emitted in all directions. For any star, it should be the same. But if photons are emitted constantly, the photons will be CLOSER TOGETHER in front of the emitter. THAT will make the light seem brighter if the emitter is coming toward you. The illustration below shows how light is brighter in front of a moving light source because the photons are closer together there.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbPX0r75-0ZH1KQU0Hga9GItSgoODMMZti_5KaZTjScIW-3Z8OM47C6qM0R_l4_wIGo3X_3B8cQQMmizTGJKVD5vZQxkAOhjQP0Big88HMpKqsxKFuNb6xMa_-7WRtqujE_BCjm9FEzTVXRwvVk7Dt1HIf-rgmxgjYpDTWfpDzup9SahX6Rg11_RNEsA/s800/light-bulbs-rev.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="320" data-original-height="272" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbPX0r75-0ZH1KQU0Hga9GItSgoODMMZti_5KaZTjScIW-3Z8OM47C6qM0R_l4_wIGo3X_3B8cQQMmizTGJKVD5vZQxkAOhjQP0Big88HMpKqsxKFuNb6xMa_-7WRtqujE_BCjm9FEzTVXRwvVk7Dt1HIf-rgmxgjYpDTWfpDzup9SahX6Rg11_RNEsA/s320/light-bulbs-rev.jpg"/></a></div>
Mikko next wrote that I also didn’t mention that the frequency of the light is different in different directions: bluer in front of the source, redder behind.”
<br><br>
My response: That is because it is NOT. I explained why in the paper.
<br><br>
Mikko then rambled on and on, but one additional comment is worth mentioning here. He wrote; “It is an observable fact that light emitted by a moving source is observe to be blue-shifted if the source is coming nearer and red-shifted if the source is going farther.”
<br><br>
My response was: That is NOT an observable fact. My paper explains that the Universe is expanding, so we are moving away from other stars while they are also moving away from us. We are both moving away from some point in space somewhere between us. If we see the light as red-shifted, it is because WE are moving away from that point, not because the star is moving away from us.
<br><br>
Additionally, the “annual Doppler shift” demonstrates that when the earth in its orbit around the sun is moving toward a star at 67,000 miles per hour, the light from that star appears blue-shifted, and six months later when the earth is moving away from that same star at 67,000 miles per hour, the light from that star appears red-shifted.
<br><br>
I created this discussion thread because discussions were not allowed on other forums I had tried.
<br><br>
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-88426372066075747102021-10-31T10:00:00.039-07:002021-11-05T08:26:31.309-07:00Russia's Kola Peninsula Pyramids MysteryAround October 28, 2021, I visited <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/9990182714/">the Science Fiction Facebook group</a> to see if anything interesting had been recently posted. I found a discussion thread had been started about the mysterious pyramids on Russia’s Kola Peninsula. The thread began with an image that also contained this information::<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3_qQ8JgJ68cfphvKnd6bnGuiP2_e535iyT_khkcQSdJsH0U5zGVsTwY5tBa2u8t2MARhCKkuyFu83sRAIajIvmR7jVwciN1Iph4k-L-Xn9Pb_vBJn9XYBw0WJhSMrNI44QVsonrxA41Dt/s526/Starter-thread.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="526" data-original-width="526" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3_qQ8JgJ68cfphvKnd6bnGuiP2_e535iyT_khkcQSdJsH0U5zGVsTwY5tBa2u8t2MARhCKkuyFu83sRAIajIvmR7jVwciN1Iph4k-L-Xn9Pb_vBJn9XYBw0WJhSMrNI44QVsonrxA41Dt/s400/Starter-thread.jpg"/></a></div>
The discussion contained a lot of arguments about whether the "pyramids" were man-made or just natural formations. And there were arguments that the ice ages would have destroyed any man-made pyramids. Over four thousand people had indicated that they “like” the topic, and over a thousand had “shared” the thread elsewhere.<br><br>
I had never heard of the Kola Peninsula, much less any Russian pyramids. It seemed interesting, so I began researching the subject.<br><br>
The Kola Peninsula is almost entirely above the Arctic Circle and looks like it should be part of Finland, but it’s Russian. Here’s a map of the area:
<br><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGUAxtwjitZNmbo9fY2rhjbuU4PG3_XvjoMMj1fqIhvsiT0akVKz1MRdALnTGHqsqNuS4LoYrrrb0EBCaWTwXw-gSf85xeojWIjvUxAtlvDS-d9_ODkwXlDCCcFBHl8Vc7xNk9ogQ5FFeO/s1112/Kola-Peninsula-map2.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="690" data-original-width="1112" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGUAxtwjitZNmbo9fY2rhjbuU4PG3_XvjoMMj1fqIhvsiT0akVKz1MRdALnTGHqsqNuS4LoYrrrb0EBCaWTwXw-gSf85xeojWIjvUxAtlvDS-d9_ODkwXlDCCcFBHl8Vc7xNk9ogQ5FFeO/s600/Kola-Peninsula-map2.jpg"/></a></div>
At first, I just tried Googling “Kola Peninsula pyramids,” but that immediately resulted in getting links to Russian sites that have brief articles about the pyramids but are also filled with ads for Russian wives, Russian girlfriends and Russian porn, plus more often than not they <b><i>also contained triggers to attempt hacks into your computer</i></b>. So, if the link contains .ru at the end, avoid it -- or make sure you have good Internet security software running in your computer.<br><br>
According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1mi_people">Wikipedia</a>, the Sámi people originally occupied northern Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Kola Peninsula, surviving by herding reindeer and sheep, plus fishing and trapping. The article, however, says nothing about any pyramids.<br><br>
The first reasonably good article I found that mentioned the pyramids is <a href="https://who-knows.imtqy.com/articles/G35165/index.html">HERE</a>. It looks almost as shady as the .ru sites, but the information seems good, even though there are no references. It says the Kola Peninsula is legendary in that it was supposedly once the home of the Hyperboreans mentioned by ancient historians. The word ‘hyperborean’ means: one who lives in the north, or one who lives beyond Borea (beyond the North wind). According to legend, the Hyperboreans were much smarter than the ancient Greeks.<br><br>
The article also says, “The pyramids of the Kola Peninsula were first discovered in 1922, and the first expedition began in 1920 under the guidance of the famous [Russian] science fiction writer and explorer Alexander Vasilyevich Barchenko.” It also says the pyramids were found near Seydozero (Holy Lake), and they are “connected by a jumper and oriented to the cardinal points, have a height of about 50 meters. Sámi shamans apparently used ancient structures to conduct their magical rituals.”<br><br>
Barchenko was killed in 1938 during a purge by Stalin, and it wasn’t until the 1990s that another expedition was made to the pyramids. The article says: <br><br>
“Artifacts that confirm the existence of an ancient civilization in the Russian North are the main attraction of the peninsula. Scientists who made the last scientific expedition to the pyramids of the Russian North, claim that these man-made structures are at least 9000 years old. This indicates that the pyramids are 2 times older than the Egyptian ones.”<br><br>
The last Ice Age ended about 11,700 years ago, which means the pyramids were built at least 2 thousand years after the last ice age, contrary to some of the arguments on the Facebook thread.<br><br>
“Geologists concluded that the elevations are anthropogenic in nature. These hills (pyramids) are not natural, but the creation of human hands. In addition, they were rebuilt three times - increasing their height. Their cavities have the correct shape (research results by modern geophysical instruments), and what is located there is still unknown. It is assumed that the functional purpose of the pyramids of the Kola Peninsula is an observatory that allows you to follow the stellar system. The results of the analysis showed that the age of the mysterious observatory is nine thousand years.”<br><br>
It was all very interesting to me, but the uncaptioned picture the article shows of the Russian pyramids doesn’t match the picture in the Facebook thread that got me started on researching them. Here’s that <b><i>second</i></b> picture I found that is supposedly of Russian Pyramids:
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhogUIjnbLePEhDSVS4l7V1hCmBJHErxhWHcccbIQ_1QyF8WQlWvYdebLx9I0nl0eMx4U-juOvZ52Q7_0r9DeqljU_rIhaMpqQBhrvBBCCtqidCCObkeze-W4iJkQ-B8UPILg7FMW98r598/s800/Russian-Pyramids-03.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhogUIjnbLePEhDSVS4l7V1hCmBJHErxhWHcccbIQ_1QyF8WQlWvYdebLx9I0nl0eMx4U-juOvZ52Q7_0r9DeqljU_rIhaMpqQBhrvBBCCtqidCCObkeze-W4iJkQ-B8UPILg7FMW98r598/s600/Russian-Pyramids-03.jpg"/></a></div>
Which picture shows the actual Russian Pyramids? The Facebook picture or that second picture? And what are those objects on the “jumper” between the “pyramids”? If they are people, then the “pyramids” certainly can’t be 50 meters tall. Those questions caused me to immediately start a hunt for more pictures of the Russian Pyramids. At a web site <a href="https://www.privet-russia.com/ancient-pyramids-in-kola-peninsula-russia-older-than-egypt/">HERE</a> I found this <b><i>third</i></b> picture:<br><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlfu3O1PkqYhmRzEq8AsH_jo7b_WG0bAdzvDH1zshnd1EtC41Sn_m3yJcy0BaPZYpP7uaGUxi-kTCDgmj41HjF1sEwQ_tbj4DqXtDr2y8hSOGuQfPG2yCvR3IeSxylVQolrtXrx1G5-sfn/s1200/Russian-Pyramids-01b.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlfu3O1PkqYhmRzEq8AsH_jo7b_WG0bAdzvDH1zshnd1EtC41Sn_m3yJcy0BaPZYpP7uaGUxi-kTCDgmj41HjF1sEwQ_tbj4DqXtDr2y8hSOGuQfPG2yCvR3IeSxylVQolrtXrx1G5-sfn/s600/Russian-Pyramids-01b.jpg"/></a></div>
It seems to match the Facebook picture, except that it is taken from a slightly lower location. Complicating matters, the article at that link also contains a <b><i>fourth</i></b> picture of the Russian Pyramids which doesn’t seem to match any of the other three pictures, and these “pyramids” seem to be vastly taller than 50 meters. Here’s that <b><i>fourth</i></b> picture:
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBYjvLTIW0utmMPd5S_XMiszNNmM9p0DWHBATicTkpnv9KRAziDgsf0XekAHtBgaHQElVAXNFMhGIxrOcDBdUSM3LZL-sYXTBPDrcgkl0th-BHsSrjkhpBnUBlT1DO17OcjQgN4UgtvlLx/s1280/Russian-Pyramids-02b.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBYjvLTIW0utmMPd5S_XMiszNNmM9p0DWHBATicTkpnv9KRAziDgsf0XekAHtBgaHQElVAXNFMhGIxrOcDBdUSM3LZL-sYXTBPDrcgkl0th-BHsSrjkhpBnUBlT1DO17OcjQgN4UgtvlLx/s400/Russian-Pyramids-02b.jpg"/></a></div>
But then, after doing further research <a href="https://www.ancientpages.com/2020/08/03/mysterious-kola-pyramids-built-by-an-unknown-lost-ancient-civilization-can-rewrite-ancient-history/">HERE</a>, I found this <b><i>fifth</i></b> picture which is also supposedly of the Russian pyramids:
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuMFLPAuG7swlDbuSEUM8oSHjl0kzPRF0uEh9qOBn4CAlRLpSIVdpZM5f-UAWGCgKzQ-0Jt1kdn96Ve4OZ6bnpagAdtc5iAfw1ieNyhEenXPSIdKQQeXkFOoB95E28VlAH4lRFYBx-HV6v/s1000/Russian-Pyramids-04c.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="455" data-original-width="1000" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuMFLPAuG7swlDbuSEUM8oSHjl0kzPRF0uEh9qOBn4CAlRLpSIVdpZM5f-UAWGCgKzQ-0Jt1kdn96Ve4OZ6bnpagAdtc5iAfw1ieNyhEenXPSIdKQQeXkFOoB95E28VlAH4lRFYBx-HV6v/s400/Russian-Pyramids-04c.jpg"/></a></div>
These “pyramids,” if they can be called that, in no way match the pyramids in the Facebook thread. But they are a good match for the pyramids shown in that second picture I found. Plus, they could be about 50 meters tall, although they seem smaller than that. And the objects on the “jumper” in this view definitely do not seem to be humans.
I decided I needed to find the exact location of the pyramids and look at them via Google's Satellite view. <br><br>
The articles I’d found indicated the pyramids were located near Lake Seydezero (a.k.a. "Holy Lake') and also near Mount Ninchurt. Lake Seydezero was easy to find, but all I could find about Mount Ninchurt was that it is evidently part of the "Lovozero Massif," which is evidently a U-shaped mountain range which nearly surrounds Lake Seydozero. Here's a satellite view of Russia's Kola Peninsula with a red pointer indicating the Lovozero Massif:<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-dQTAJ3oyQQxoNQaB0HQ0iiVEh3tIYJKkLkzyCKRLLV61nsuTNmQylvcJt16u9xuTvf415PgpAYkTDmQLC9R6xrtZyy_mFO31VwM3WLAi0pNPRxjQb9sPEGN_XimtmRVrrDELB83QK-A5/s1486/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-01.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="831" data-original-width="1486" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-dQTAJ3oyQQxoNQaB0HQ0iiVEh3tIYJKkLkzyCKRLLV61nsuTNmQylvcJt16u9xuTvf415PgpAYkTDmQLC9R6xrtZyy_mFO31VwM3WLAi0pNPRxjQb9sPEGN_XimtmRVrrDELB83QK-A5/s600/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-01.jpg"/></a></div> <br>
And here is a closer view of the Lovozero Massif surrounding Lake Seydezero:<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqrRHfqyXTVR4vfueowFWrypDG_eff_8k7N48zhmLM0vUbJWVluJ8tQWx12XYubAdT4fMVFDGxZ_ZZuXxMq7hlJX3vIPj9_jL8-1Msg9T9C5bs-QmnRYaaWQYjFbzpDZKhmzBs2dyL1gOz/s1474/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-03.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="838" data-original-width="1474" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqrRHfqyXTVR4vfueowFWrypDG_eff_8k7N48zhmLM0vUbJWVluJ8tQWx12XYubAdT4fMVFDGxZ_ZZuXxMq7hlJX3vIPj9_jL8-1Msg9T9C5bs-QmnRYaaWQYjFbzpDZKhmzBs2dyL1gOz/s600/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-03.jpg"/></a></div>
The pyramids definitely do not stand out on a satellite image that is 10 miles to the inch. Zooming in to about 2 miles to an inch, the Lovozero Massif mountain range surrounding Lake Seydezero looks like this:<br><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaK-2hrzQbI0KP1Hdo2kqVa_KCPDZWjTNkNNISJyvzStnoyW-vCIqRRNRYIhUHoViEHjWEV08oPPwLpktnByaaSiM3NE_dHBwEOvPiuriLrypeGc4mFWHwQnVQCE7E-BTnu8ly_bpYG7Rc/s1450/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-07.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="871" data-original-width="1450" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaK-2hrzQbI0KP1Hdo2kqVa_KCPDZWjTNkNNISJyvzStnoyW-vCIqRRNRYIhUHoViEHjWEV08oPPwLpktnByaaSiM3NE_dHBwEOvPiuriLrypeGc4mFWHwQnVQCE7E-BTnu8ly_bpYG7Rc/s600/Satellite-Russian-Pyramids-07.jpg"/></a></div> <br>
Zooming in further, to 500 or 200 feet to an inch, I can’t find anything in the area that looks like it might be the pyramids. So, I need to do further research in an attempt to find their exact location. <br><br>
On November 3 I found an article <a href="https://totalfish.ru/en/lodki/ekspedicii-na-kolskii-poluostrov-giperboreya-seidozero-taina-prirody-ili/">HERE</a> that contains dozens of pictures and lots of information about the Russian Pyramids. Unfortunately, it appears to be a bad translation from Russian, so some of what is in the article is almost undeciperable. It also contains this video:<br><br>
<iframe class="BLOG_video_class" allowfullscreen="" youtube-src-id="KDgjd60Uj8k" width="400" height="322" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KDgjd60Uj8k"></iframe>
<br>
After hunting for a week or so, I decided further hunting wasn't worth the effort. I couldn't find the exact location of the "Russian Pyramids," nor could I verify that the picture in the Facebook thread is anywhere on the Kola Peninsula. Image #2 appears to be the "Russian Pyramids."<br><br>
During my search, I found another mystery about the Kola Peninsula. Here are some examples of large stones placed attop smaller stones for some unknown reason:<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUgkYtsVa5BUfWlalaw6Cc_14l77HSjovpHGPdh5ifWGdSxT7464PUeIvFBx5qSglC0enU0MQIu2IkQAkEfnk3dr2JubdgtohDub7RDYrL8fiLgma7ZBG1aWzfbh68HqwjNRV19_iL4G3P/s800/image-27.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUgkYtsVa5BUfWlalaw6Cc_14l77HSjovpHGPdh5ifWGdSxT7464PUeIvFBx5qSglC0enU0MQIu2IkQAkEfnk3dr2JubdgtohDub7RDYrL8fiLgma7ZBG1aWzfbh68HqwjNRV19_iL4G3P/s600/image-27.jpg"/></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0UEd_nxVUSB3R5IfOZ3OQDf7VxNpK-pPq4atHkOeSJUNEJMNudhE6erAkkImgSUIaQEaGST1KSCQSj0VOJnG0mNR8rsmldYNyQN84sTrM73y02Z9MMH7uQQEiWmPWRWzchU6oLr8P6mYD/s797/image-28.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="797" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0UEd_nxVUSB3R5IfOZ3OQDf7VxNpK-pPq4atHkOeSJUNEJMNudhE6erAkkImgSUIaQEaGST1KSCQSj0VOJnG0mNR8rsmldYNyQN84sTrM73y02Z9MMH7uQQEiWmPWRWzchU6oLr8P6mYD/s600/image-28.jpg"/></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtKkOQb5i0G3dzzL9uyjdwsRmBMhsFl-hCcAp-elA7c7bgCkSk15TZWuszKIz_D3crS04XSQYDlId_UzrtpnO33xfxgD5psZkNRre_K-_Hhq_l2-XRBBs5ZwY9K5U7xq-U-VVygp1cRJAM/s600/image-29.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="390" data-original-width="600" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtKkOQb5i0G3dzzL9uyjdwsRmBMhsFl-hCcAp-elA7c7bgCkSk15TZWuszKIz_D3crS04XSQYDlId_UzrtpnO33xfxgD5psZkNRre_K-_Hhq_l2-XRBBs5ZwY9K5U7xq-U-VVygp1cRJAM/s600/image-29.jpg"/></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHb9Yur0clpMMjP8Q8T6hr1QWGJe-r9CI_GEbm09w6fP1oeHeKAEo3l3Syrkt7YsigUjnu09u4yYcbiUS4qJPNWTc76x-usFY8vLLga07FI7wHA5u6end970iK37wAxOgfVcDHl9_WU4M5/s600/image-30.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="600" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="600" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHb9Yur0clpMMjP8Q8T6hr1QWGJe-r9CI_GEbm09w6fP1oeHeKAEo3l3Syrkt7YsigUjnu09u4yYcbiUS4qJPNWTc76x-usFY8vLLga07FI7wHA5u6end970iK37wAxOgfVcDHl9_WU4M5/s600/image-30.jpg"/></a></div>
That's the final status of this investigation....... for now.
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-43955337955103552542018-02-26T09:47:00.000-08:002018-07-20T07:56:04.477-07:00The 10 DUMBEST Ideas in Physics<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKUUTTOnSjSwbT8fsO-cLEfPGajZPbNN469BVn3PXboI2ztz2bKC_huUo1erLzcP5QVaZzlZ3mCXtaAMI9LCznCOyFUGqd75DOsD5w644uHnJBR_dQamnwbEEpQ04MskbyMDpwey-cGSBB/s1600/QMJobCrop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1073" data-original-width="1600" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKUUTTOnSjSwbT8fsO-cLEfPGajZPbNN469BVn3PXboI2ztz2bKC_huUo1erLzcP5QVaZzlZ3mCXtaAMI9LCznCOyFUGqd75DOsD5w644uHnJBR_dQamnwbEEpQ04MskbyMDpwey-cGSBB/s320/QMJobCrop.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
This thread should probably be titled <span style="color: red;"><b>THE TOP TEN DUMBEST <i><u>BELIEFS</u></i> IN PHYSICS</b></span>. The word "ideas" seems to give more value to the items on the list than they deserve. But, I can't change the title without causing all the places that link to this page to have bad links. Anyway, ...<br />
<br />
I've been arguing with physicists for several years now, primarily about Time and Time Dilation, and this is a list of the <b>THE TOP TEN <i>DUMBEST</i> BELIEFS</b> I've encountered being expressed by physicists. There seem to be a lot more than ten, but this blog is modifiable, so as time goes on I'll add more and adjust the list as required. Here are the top 10:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>#10. Singularities are real. </b></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Physicists
will argue that singularities are real, even though that is totally
illogical. They argue it because they can construct a mathematical
model where everything is moving away from everything else (such as in
the Big Bang universe), therefore everything is x distance from a single
point. They do not know what is at that point, and they don't seem to
care. They call it a "singularity." In reality, calling it a
"singularity" just means they have no clue as to what <u><b>is there</b></u> or what <b><u>was there</u></b>. It is just a meaningless "singularity" in a mathematical model of limited value. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Black
Holes are also considered by mathematicians to have "singularities" at
their center. No one knows what is at the center of a Black Hole, but
there is no LOGIC which says it is a "singularity" consisting of
nothing. What "singularities" do is allow physicist mathematicians to
argue beliefs instead of trying to figure out what is actually at the
center of a Black Hole.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>#9. The Big Bang didn't occur at any spot, it happened everywhere.</b></span> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The Big
Bang was "discovered" when it was realized that most galaxies in the
visible universe seem to be traveling away from each other, which
implies that at some point in the past they were all clumped together in
one point. When that point is mentioned in discussions of it being the
<i><u><b>stationary</b></u></i> point where gravity is zero (because
everything is spread out evenly in all directions from there) and there
is no velocity time dilation (because everything moved away from that
point), the immediate argument from mathematicians is that the Big Bang
didn't occur at any "point," it occurred "everywhere." There is no
logic to that argument (see dumb idea #5). Logic says that the <u><b>VISIBLE</b></u> universe is much smaller than the <u><b>BIG BANG</b></u>
universe. During the first moments after the Big Bang, there was no
light, and there probably weren't any particles to measure and create
Time. So, we can only see 13.8 billion years into the past to the point
where light turned on. We cannot see back to the Big Bang. The
situation can be viewed this way:</span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr8UAEZXwo67VsY2AzQYwpA3BFOyMs3DyDEsPJlquDzvueCkgRRqfxW3KdOJcywbYIN_h9IHA_yztIofpfIU7Z-lKihb1IIkNXf5TzKSY_jhOC8jLFSEXS-RgXundXCaO22KlghuWrld7Z/s1600/Universes.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="537" data-original-width="580" height="296" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr8UAEZXwo67VsY2AzQYwpA3BFOyMs3DyDEsPJlquDzvueCkgRRqfxW3KdOJcywbYIN_h9IHA_yztIofpfIU7Z-lKihb1IIkNXf5TzKSY_jhOC8jLFSEXS-RgXundXCaO22KlghuWrld7Z/s320/Universes.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">Virtually
every point within the Big Bang universe is the center of a Visible
universe that is 13.8 billion light years in diameter. Within our
Visible universe, almost every galaxy seems to be moving away from every
other galaxy (with Andromeda and the Milky Way being notable
exceptions) , but we cannot see the point when everything originated.
That point is outside of our Visible universe.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: large;">#8. Light travels as waves.</span></span></b></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The idea
that light travels as waves had been shown to be false in many ways, but
it is still what is taught in colleges and universities around the
world. Light consists of <u><i><b>photons</b></i></u>, not waves.
Photons can be emitted almost individually by turning down the power to a
light source. Each emitted photon remains the same strength as other
photons, but there are fewer of them. When they hit a detector, each
hits with full force. This also means there is no relationship between
"wave length" and "wave frequency." An individual photon oscillates in a wave-like
pattern, but the intensity of the light is totally dependent upon the power of the
source and the distance over which the photons will be spread. Anyone
who compares waves of light to waves of water (or sound) is talking
total nonsense. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">#7. It is perfectly acceptable for physics to be illogical.</span></b> </span><br />
<br />
Many many college text books state that physics may sometimes appear
contrary to "common sense," but what is "common sense" in the everyday
world may not apply to the world of physics. It also appears to be a
way for teachers to stop students from arguing that what is being taught
makes no sense. As far as I know, only one physicist believes that it
is perfectly acceptable for physics to be <b>illogical</b>. That physicist posts as "tjrob137" on <a href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21forum/sci.physics.relativity">Google's Science, Physics & Relativity" discussion forum</a>.
If I find there are more, this dumb idea may be moved to a spot higher
on the list. Here are parts of one argument where "tjrob137" made his
beliefs clear:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">At one point "tjrob137" wrote: </span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">Logic is a subset of
math. But what I said has NOTHING WHATSOEVER
to do with that, because the world is NOT math
or logic, it just IS. Physics is also neither math nor logic, and is the
systematic effort to MODEL how the world
works. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Moreover, your "logic" is FLAWED
-- you do not consider all of the aspects of the experiments you think you
understand (but don't). </span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">Sometime later, after arguing that
think that I understand Einstein's theories and
how "tjrob's" beliefs conflict with those
theories, I wrote:</span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">So, I'm on the side of
Einstein who felt that the universe IS
logical. </span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;"> And "tjrob137" responded:</span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">He was wrong, too. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><b>Note <span style="color: red;">the
non-logical aspects of the world are not
related to relativity, they </span></b><b><span style="color: red;">are related
to quantum mechanics</span>, which
Einstein never accepted</b> -- <span style="color: red;"><b>we know he </b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>was wrong
in that</b></span>. YOU are even more
wrong than him, because he at least understood the math and physics
underlying relativity, while you CLEARLY do
not.</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">So, "tjrob137" was clearly saying that
there are aspects of quantum mechanics which are
<b><i>not logi</i></b><b><i>cal</i></b>.
And that doesn't bother him at all. Of
course, I think Einstein was right in never
accepting Quantum Mechanics. Quantum
Mechanics is all about <b>mathematical models</b>,
not about what is happening in reality.
Yes, the mathematical models often work very
well, but that just means they work until they
no longer work because they do not represent
reality. The mathematical model of the
earth-centered universe is a good example.
It worked for a thousand years, until someone
noticed something was wrong. </span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">#6. Math is logic.</span></b><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">The argument that "math is logic" is one I get into very often in arguments on <a href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21forum/sci.physics.relativity">Google's Science, Physics & Relativity" discussion forum</a>
(which is also a UseNet forum). The physicists posting there
constantly argue that "math is logic" while I argue that math may be
logical, but it is NOT logic. The Scientific Method uses LOGIC, not
math to find the correct answers to scientific questions. When an
answer is found that appears to be correct, the answer may be reduced to
a mathematical formula to see if predictions can be generated. For
example, if it is imagined that planets orbit in elliptical orbits and
not in circular orbits, you can use math to predict when a planet will
appear on the other side of the sun using a mathematical model for
circular orbits and another mathematical model for an elliptical orbit.
Observations and logic will tell you which mathematical model is
correct. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>#5. Time ticks at the same rate everywhere.</b></span> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The idea that Time ticks at the same rate everywhere is evidently a key
belief in Quantum Mechanics. It appears to be one of the irreconcilable
differences between Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Theories of
Relativity. In Relativity, Time ticks at a slower rate for a clock that
is moving very fast, versus a clock that is standing relatively still.
And Time ticks at a slower rate when you are closer to a gravitational
mass than when far away. To QM mathematicians, this is not true. And
they have mathematical models which they use to show it is not true, but
they cannot relate their mathematical models to the reality of
Relativity. To me, Time is particle spin. I have a paper on "What is
Time?" Here's the link: <a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1602.0281v2.pdf">http://vixra.org/pdf/1602.0281v2.pdf</a> </span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: large;">#4. The speed of light
is always measured to be the same by the
emitter and by all outside observers,
regardless of their own velocity.</span><br /> </span></b><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The notion that all observers will see the speed of light to be
traveling at c is due to mathematicians misinterpreting Einstein's
Second Postulate. It has been proved wrong in countless experiments and
countless ways. I have a paper on that subject here: <a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v4.pdf">http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v4.pdf</a> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>#3. "Cause and effect" has no meaning in science.</b></span><br />
<br />
I
was rather surprised to see this absurd belief stated so emphatically
by mathematician physicists. They equate understanding "cause and
effect" to asking <b><i>why</i></b> 2 plus 2 equals 4. They claim it is philosophy, not physics. Cause and effect is all about <b><i>why</i></b> things happen. The mathematician physicists evidently do not care <b><i>why</i></b>
things happen. In one argument I was told that once the mathematical
model is found, "cause & effect becomes obsolete. We
understood this 2000 yrs ago!"<br />
<br />
<b><i>Why</i></b>
things happen is what a scientist wants to know. It's what the
"wonders" of science are all about. A mathematical model is only good
until someone notices that it isn't always correct. Then someone asks
"What is the cause of that error effect in the mathematical model"? And
the model awaits an overhaul as scientists investigate cause and
effect.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>#2. Scientists routinely LIE to the public.</b></span><br />
<br />
I spent a lot of time discussing this belief with mathematician physicists. They go to great pains to avoid using the word "lie." Instead, they say that scientists "dumb down" or "vulgarize" explanations of their work for the public, because the public is "too dumb" to understand what is really happening in science and particularly in physics.<br />
<br />
The debate is usually over time dilation, and whether or not clocks moving fast through space "tick slower" than stationary clocks, and whether or not a clock at the bottom of a mountain "ticks slower" than a clock at the top of the mountain. Scientists and physicists routinely make such claims in news stories and even in scientific papers when they report the results of new experiments. Quantum Mechanics, however, says that <b>clocks tick at the same rate everywhere. Time is the same everywhere.</b> So, clocks <b>cannot</b> tick slower in one situation versus another. And when a scientists writes something that says "clocks tick slower" for a moving object (even if it is Albert Einstein), the mathematician physicists who accept Quantum Mechanics will claim that is just a "vulgarization" or a "dumbing down" of what really happens, and what "really happens" is some mysterious problem with "signals" that are sent between observers and their clocks that just make it <b><i>appear</i></b> that the "clocks tick slower." So, instead of acknowledging that experiments<i><b> disprove</b></i> their Quantum Mechanical belief that time ticks at the same rate everywhere, they rationalize what was said and argue that it was just a "vulgarization" or "dumbing down" of the topic. In other words, "It is a lie."<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: large;">#1. All
motion is reciprocal.</span></span></b><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="font-size: small;"></span></b></blockquote>
</div>
The idea that all motion or movement is reciprocal is in many physics books.
Basically, it means that if I am in a spaceship that seems to be
motionless in empty space, and suddenly you pass by in another spaceship, there's no way to tell who is moving and who is standing still.
It will seem to me that you are moving. But to you it will seem that I
am moving. And thus a physicist will argue that all motion is
reciprocal. And, piling absurdity upon absurdity, if all motion is reciprocal, then time dilation is also reciprocal.<br />
<br />
The problem, of course, is that the
situation with the two spaceships is totally <i><b>fictional</b></i>. In real life,
it costs millions (maybe billions) to send off a spaceship into space, and
it burns lots of fuel which causes the spaceship to move toward countless objects in space that
can be used to measure distances and movement. So, there is no doubt
that the spaceship was made to move. It cannot be logically argued
that the fuel expended caused planet Earth and the rest of the universe
to move away from the stationary spaceship. It is the same as arguing that if I use a gun to fire a bullet at a target, it is equally likely that the bullet stood still and I caused the target and the rest of the universe to move toward the stationary bullet.<br />
<br />
The bizarre belief that all motion is reciprocal is the #1 dumbest idea in physics also because it is the basis for so many <i><b>other</b></i> errors and misunderstandings - particularly regarding time dilation. It has no reality except in the minds of mathematicians.<span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><u><b>Additional thoughts</b></u>:</span><br />
<br />
I'm considering adding "Spacetime" somewhere on the list. The problem is that the idea of "spacetime" is not exactly "dumb," it's just wrong. It assumes a relationship between time and distance. As I see it, there is no such relationship. Time is particle spin, and space is just the emptiness between objects. The "spacetime" idea came from Einstein who believed that time and distance (and length) were related. In 1905 they knew nothing about "particle spin." Eight years earlier, in 1897, J.J Thompson had discovered that atoms were composed of smaller particles. But Einstein was working with light, not with atoms. I need to think about how to phrase things if I argue that "Spacetime" belongs in the #9 spot on the list. As I think of others for the list, I'll update this page. If there turn out to be more than 10, I may list the remainder as "waiting in the wings" for one of the Top Ten to fade from favor.<br />
<br />
I'm also considering adding "String Theory" to the list. The problem is that "String Theory" isn't science, because there is no way to prove or disprove the theory. Plus, it really isn't physics, either. It's just mathematics. <br />
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-79779811235206442922017-12-29T14:05:00.002-08:002017-12-30T12:51:38.840-08:00Examining Claims by Flat Earth Theorists <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijJgmkKFCzmmwrBq1R57tkgDAxH0KXq2TbGCI0Zd9t72XzWMZuHxGW1WGX9Mi-01E_zQLkWQS8l3xOfIh28w-JscDrv0Ua4hHAJpOSGlstpZyjulXz1Iibih9Hc0Kz2qBg80fm_a3PSV3n/s1600/Azimuthal+Equidistant+Projection.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1600" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijJgmkKFCzmmwrBq1R57tkgDAxH0KXq2TbGCI0Zd9t72XzWMZuHxGW1WGX9Mi-01E_zQLkWQS8l3xOfIh28w-JscDrv0Ua4hHAJpOSGlstpZyjulXz1Iibih9Hc0Kz2qBg80fm_a3PSV3n/s320/Azimuthal+Equidistant+Projection.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">I was surprised to see on the news a couple months ago that a conference of people who believe the earth is flat was held in</span> <big><span style="font-size: small;">Raleigh, North Carolina, on Nov. 9-10, 2017.</span> <span style="font-size: small;"> It was a sold-out event, with about 400 people attending. </span> <span style="font-size: small;">The image above is the shape of the earth as most of them see it. The white band around the edge is the "ice wall" (known to everyone else as "Antarctica") that keeps people and the oceans from falling over the edge.</span></big><br />
<br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">A little more research turned up <b>news
stories</b> about the Flat Earth
Conference. Examples: "<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5091991/Conspiracy-theorists-flock-Flat-Earth-conference.html">Inside
the first ever 'Flat Earth conference'
where conspiracy theorists promise to
'reveal Nasa space lies' and prove our
planet isn't spherical</a>," "<a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/880615/flat-earth-USA-conspiracy-NASA-9-11-Kyrie-Irving-Aristotle-news-weird-BBC-North-Carolina">Fanatics
descend on sell out 'Flat Earth'
conference promising to 'reveal NASA space
lies'</a>," "<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4931880/these-oddballs-are-convinced-the-earth-is-flatand-theyre-out-to-prove-their-theories-are-true/">GLOBE
NOTTERS: These oddballs are convinced the
Earth is FLAT … and they’re out to ‘prove’
their theories are true</a>," "<a href="http://www.ibtimes.sg/sellout-flat-earth-conference-discusses-nasa-lies-fictional-9-11-government-mind-control-20190">Sellout
flat-earth conference discusses NASA lies,
fictional 9/11 and government mind control</a>." </span></big><br />
<br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">I also found that there are many web sites run by Flat Earthers, and they also have many YouTube videos where they explain their beliefs. One Flat Earther, Eric Dubay, has a 35 page "book" in which he presents </span></big><big><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: small;">"<a href="http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html"><i>200
Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball</i></a>."</span> <span style="font-size: small;">Four of his</span></span></span></span></span> more interesting "proofs" are #44, #46, #47 and #48. Here they are: </span></big><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: small;"> 44) If Earth was a ball, and Antarctica was too cold to fly over, the only logical way to fly from Sydney to Santiago would be a straight shot over the Pacific staying in the Southern hemisphere the entire way. Re-fueling could be done in New Zealand or other Southern hemisphere destinations along the way if absolutely necessary. In actual fact, however, Santiago-Sydney flights go into the Northern hemisphere making stop-overs at LAX and other North American airports before continuing back down to the Southern hemisphere. Such ridiculously wayward detours make no sense on the globe but make perfect sense and form nearly straight lines when shown on a flat Earth map.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">46) On a ball-Earth Cape
Town, South Africa to Buenos Aries,
Argentina should be a straight shot over the
Atlantic following the same line of latitude
across, but instead every flight goes to
connecting locations in the Northern
hemisphere first, stopping over anywhere
from London to Turkey to Dubai. Once again
these make absolutely no sense on the globe
but are completely understandable options
when mapped on a flat Earth.</span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">
</span></span>
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">47) On a ball-Earth
Johannesburg, South Africa to Sao Paolo,
Brazil should be a quick straight shot along
the 25th Southern latitude, but instead
nearly every flight makes a re-fueling stop
at the 50th degree North latitude in London
first! The only reason such a ridiculous
stop-over works in reality is because the
Earth is flat.</span></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
48) On a ball-Earth Santiago, Chile to Johannesburg, South Africa should be an easy flight all taking place below the Tropic of Capricorn in the Southern hemisphere, yet every listed flight makes a curious re-fueling stop in Senegal near the Tropic of Cancer in the North hemisphere first! When mapped on a flat Earth the reason why is clear to see, however, Senegal is actually directly in a straight-line path half-way between the two.</blockquote>
<big><span style="font-size: small;">They are all basically both the same argument. They just use different locations. I found a graphic that some Flat Earthers use to illustrate this argument. Here it is:</span></big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<big><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLmtbcd-6BFTxsGOb63mfiu8WWmP1XJ8iHlMQuCfCkue5NV4IUukvZKLS4_6JQsHqxk7FWc7ADjldwnTFGl8yXUU-JLt-qmeJjqM5p6F71w11Eq2s-5Xd4jxSo7VHZo5EaQ-dgGGz0CrsK/s1600/antarctic-map.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="802" data-original-width="804" height="319" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLmtbcd-6BFTxsGOb63mfiu8WWmP1XJ8iHlMQuCfCkue5NV4IUukvZKLS4_6JQsHqxk7FWc7ADjldwnTFGl8yXUU-JLt-qmeJjqM5p6F71w11Eq2s-5Xd4jxSo7VHZo5EaQ-dgGGz0CrsK/s320/antarctic-map.png" width="320" /></a></span></big></div>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">Note
that the routes were clearly chosen so that they would
cross Antarctica, and they ignore shorter, <b><i>actual</i></b>
airline routes that go to and from the places
depicted and do <b>not</b> require flying
over Antarctica. Moreover, the route they show from San Paolo, Brazil, to Perth, Australia, which goes closest to the South Pole, would be a 9,240 mile trip, and <a href="https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/classic/boeing-7471.htm">the range of a Boeing 747-400</a> is just 8,380 miles. </span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">I did a little research and found that, contrary to the claims in the illustration and in the "proofs," anyone who has the money can fly around the earth (and around Antarctica) on commercial flights. And it can be done on just 4 hops:</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">1. Sydney, Australia, to Santiago, Chile, via Qantas Airlines. </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Distance: 7,055 miles.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Time: 12 hours, 20
minutes. </span></span></span></span><span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">5 non-stop flights per week</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Cost: $1,920, one way.<br /> 2. Santiago, Chile, to San Paulo, Brazil, via LATAM. </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Distance: 1,604 miles</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Time: 4
hours, 10 minutes. Many daily non-stop flights.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Cost: $741, one way.<br />
3. San Paulo, Brazil, to Johannesburg, South
Africa, via South African Airways</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Distance: 4,620 miles.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Time: 10 hours 25 minutes. 1 - 2 non-stop flights per day.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Cost:
$1,982, one way.<br /> 4. Johannesburg, South Africa, to Sydney, Australia, via Qantas. </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Distance: 6,934 miles. </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Time:11 hours, 40 minutes. 1 non-stop flight per day.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"> Cost: $1,270, one way.</span></span> </span></span><br />
<br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">Total distance: 20,213 miles.</span></big><br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">Total cost: $5,913</span></big><br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></big>
<big><span style="font-size: small;">On a projected map with the South Pole in the center, the 4 hops look like this:</span></big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE5yQhQyMeVNR4d3beK0A_oogZNNdJE-6YJB60YqNc_Vdqyq0K0t8LTto-XsTmfnRWp5f6GDj2Ef2CBVML9bA2PWYbhQSiFIeHB2YDPEBYB6MLj8AMMj2tUowtNacvhCsDDE0efJB9YTex/s1600/Round-Earth-trip.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="627" data-original-width="590" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE5yQhQyMeVNR4d3beK0A_oogZNNdJE-6YJB60YqNc_Vdqyq0K0t8LTto-XsTmfnRWp5f6GDj2Ef2CBVML9bA2PWYbhQSiFIeHB2YDPEBYB6MLj8AMMj2tUowtNacvhCsDDE0efJB9YTex/s320/Round-Earth-trip.jpg" width="301" /></a></div>
<big><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></big>
<big><span style="font-size: small;">On the Flat Earth map, however, the 4 hops look like this:</span></big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhvL0UzuJgF-O5_vzaN9GMOXoAzLm2L2a5TthNpV8j-U4lYNKyP3ZEkHjeNzshXvfP45eLOTvityQ1H51lsb9retvRQjBZOkQhAPCg1JNl57qMh3exAQEKqBPfdYXXIVNt5UbRNsBKRACI/s1600/Flat-Earth-trip.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="590" data-original-width="590" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhvL0UzuJgF-O5_vzaN9GMOXoAzLm2L2a5TthNpV8j-U4lYNKyP3ZEkHjeNzshXvfP45eLOTvityQ1H51lsb9retvRQjBZOkQhAPCg1JNl57qMh3exAQEKqBPfdYXXIVNt5UbRNsBKRACI/s320/Flat-Earth-trip.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></big>
<big><span style="font-size: small;">And that is where the absurdity of the Flat Earth theory can be clearly seen. To get from Sydney to Santiago, you have to fly across the flat earth world, passing over Los Angeles, California! There doesn't seem to be any way to measure distances on the Flat Earth map, but on a globe, a flight from Sydney to Santiago that passes over Los Angeles would be 13,084 miles, much farther than directly from Sydney to Santiago on a globe, and far beyond the range of a Boeing 747-400.</span></big><br />
<br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">And, of course, when flying on the flat earth from Johannesburg to Sydney, you would fly over Saudi Arabia and China. On a globe, the flight is mostly over the Indian Ocean. </span></big><br />
<br />
<big><span style="font-size: small;">The question then becomes: When people take these flat earth flights, how is it they do not notice that they are flying over land when they should be flying over the ocean? And how do they make it in one hop if the distance is greater than the distance the plane can fly without refueling? Do the Flat Earthers believe all the passengers are hypnotized or drugged as soon as they get aboard?</span></big><br />
<br />
Or maybe the Flat Earthers are just incapable of understanding simple logic.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-89724844730860620112017-11-21T09:34:00.002-08:002017-11-21T13:23:07.433-08:00airplane on a conveyor belt<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmDQf7NBereGAx4qwQ07GZ_rVCE35LlnT9aZ4uc9PJAylTXscwIIczRY9qTlgKSkwSWVxsu77ZtzbW6EYUuTO0LW3KZJPTHetfqBkcabw_i3_5pDBgf5EHYQe5Z3B3Br5E0yqcCkB7qc6s/s1600/747-on-conveyor-belt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="545" data-original-width="586" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmDQf7NBereGAx4qwQ07GZ_rVCE35LlnT9aZ4uc9PJAylTXscwIIczRY9qTlgKSkwSWVxsu77ZtzbW6EYUuTO0LW3KZJPTHetfqBkcabw_i3_5pDBgf5EHYQe5Z3B3Br5E0yqcCkB7qc6s/s320/747-on-conveyor-belt.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
As I see it, the answer to the question is clearly "NO." Some people agree. But, it seems that many other people on the Internet strongly <b>disagree</b>. And the TV show "Mythbusters" agreed with the naysayers.<br />
<br />
This is an analysis of the dispute. The question and illustration above are what Albert Einstein would have called a "gedanken," or a "thought experiment." It is probably impractical or far too expensive to perform in real life, but there is nothing to stop the experiment from being performed in our imaginations. You just need to <i>have</i> an imagination.<br />
<br />
This is how the "thought experiment" works:<br />
<br />
We have a 747 setting on a conveyor belt. There is a wind sock or flag next to the conveyor belt which hangs limp, indicating there is no wind blowing. Since "<b>the conveyor belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels, moving in the opposite direction</b>," the flag pole can be used as a guide to assure this happens. When the plane starts to move, the flag pole will get farther away unless the conveyor belt also moves to keep the plane in the same place. So, we need some kind of device that makes sure the airplane always remains in the same spot. That way, the conveyor belt will "exactly match the speed of the wheels, moving in the opposite direction."<br />
<br />
The pilot of the plane can push his throttles full forward, and the conveyor belt will compensate to keep the plane in the same place, the speed of the wheels exactly matching the speed of the conveyor belt. <br />
<br />
Can the plane take off? Of course not. It is basically just standing still. It cannot get any lift. There is no air rushing across the wings to create low pressure atop the wings to lift the plane. That is what the "thought experiment" was designed to illustrate.<br />
<br />
So, how can anyone possibly disagree with this?<br />
<br />
Mostly they disagree because they <b><i>misunderstand</i></b> it. Many disagree because they consider the "thought experiment" to be <b><i>impossible</i></b>, and they create a <b>different</b> experiment that they agree with.<br />
<br />
The "thought experiment" might have been easier to understand if the pilot was in control of the experiment instead of the conveyor belt. That way, the conveyor belt can be set to just run faster and faster until it reaches about 200 mph or beyond normal takeoff speed.<br />
<br />
When the conveyor belt starts moving, the pilot will see the flag pole moving away from him, indicating that his plane is being hauled backwards. He can then add power to his engines to compensate, keeping the flag at the same angle to the aircraft. As the conveyor belt moves faster and faster, the pilot applies more and more power to the engines which generate more and more thrust. But the weight of the plane on the conveyor belt remains the same. No air moves across the wings, so the plane does not lift and cannot take off. If the conveyor belt reaches 200 or 300 or 500 miles per hour, the plane will still be in the same spot. All the engines are doing is preventing the the airplane from moving backwards. The wheels will be flattened on the bottom just as if the plane was parked.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXS_xa35pH60dJ3yGzF6-z8zNlNVpRPEY2C37-SEB90PFNzFQsV-6zSLXol3kjO3OkzBzmvqnHUfmpOlUz-uQMyS08gUMGZLL5DeB_df-D7fWIpbEEILf_vlpq-wnmeP3PXOUY5H6pZHMT/s1600/747-wheels.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="913" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXS_xa35pH60dJ3yGzF6-z8zNlNVpRPEY2C37-SEB90PFNzFQsV-6zSLXol3kjO3OkzBzmvqnHUfmpOlUz-uQMyS08gUMGZLL5DeB_df-D7fWIpbEEILf_vlpq-wnmeP3PXOUY5H6pZHMT/s320/747-wheels.jpg" width="280" /></a></div>
<br />
In reality, of course, the constant flexing of the rubber in the tires as they rotate under the full weight of the plane at high speeds would cause the tires to overheat and burst, and the engines would also overheat and either shut down or explode because they are designed to fly best in the cold air of higher altitudes. But the plane would not take off.<br />
<br />
What are the arguments from the naysayers? The first argument (on a web site <a href="http://c-aviation.net/plane-conveyor-belt-explained-debunked/">HERE</a>) is "<b>The wording of this quiz is wrong and makes it physically impossible,</b>" and "<b>we can not design the conveyor belt to move at the same speed as wheels</b>." In effect, he admits that the plane cannot take off unless you reword the "thought experiment" to allow it. He argues that the way the thought experiment is phrased does not allow for an imbalance of forces to move the plane forward.<br />
<br />
So, he wants the experiment done the way it was done on Mythbusters. And he includes a link to the Mythbusters episode about the thought experiment: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/0ul_5DtMLhc/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0ul_5DtMLhc?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
But the Mythbusters experiment did not have a conveyor belt. They had a long canvas cloth laying on pavement. And a truck pulling the cloth under the plane is supposed to simulate a conveyor belt. But, it doesn't, because<i><b> the weight of the plane is being held up by solid earth</b></i>, not by the cloth and not by any conveyor belt.<br />
<br />
When power is applied to the engine in the video, the plane can be seen to move almost normally relative to the traffic cones marking the side of the runway. And the plane took off. Why? Because it wasn't the experiment in the original question. The plane was moving across the stationary earth, not sitting on a moving conveyor belt. The cloth was being pulled out from under the plane, but the cloth was very long and therefore flexible enough to have little effect on the movement of the plane. That flexibility allowed the wheels to turn at the speed the plane moved<b> relative to the earth</b>. And the plane is allowed to move forward, almost as if the cloth wasn't there. They should have had high-speed cameras and marks on the tires to record the speed of the wheels versus the speed of the cloth and the speed of the ground. That would have shown that the plane moved almost as if the cloth wasn't there, totally ignoring the experiment. <br />
<br />
Another web page <a href="http://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/jw/plane-conveyor.htm">HERE</a> also argues that the original question is not realistic, and it also argues that if the conveyor belt is moving fast enough it will <i>drag air with it </i>and give the airplane the lift it needs to take off. That is highly doubtful, since the air being dragged will be very close to the earth and certainly won't be going OVER the wings, creating low pressure, which is what is needed to give the plane LIFT and allow it to take off. <br />
<br />
Another web page <a href="https://blog.xkcd.com/2008/09/09/the-goddamn-airplane-on-the-goddamn-treadmill/">HERE</a> also argues that the question is unrealistic. <br />
<br />
A web page <a href="https://kottke.org/06/02/plane-conveyor-belt">HERE</a> says the plane <i><b>cannot </b></i>take off, and then he opens the question for debate, getting responses for and against. There's another such page <a href="http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=348452">HERE</a>. <br />
<br />
There are more arguments <a href="http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=747177">HERE</a>, <a href="http://www.airplaneonatreadmill.com/2008/01/airplane-on-treadmill.html">HERE</a>, <a href="http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=428718">HERE</a>, <a href="http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=361386">HERE</a> and <a href="http://nslog.com/2008/01/31/stupid_people_refuting_mythbusters_over_planeconveyor_belt">HERE</a>. And there is a New York Times article from 2006 <a href="https://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/the-airplane-treadmill-conundrum/">HERE</a>. <br />
<b><br /></b><br />
As I see it, the question is HYPOTHETICAL. It is a "gedanken" thought experiment. As it is stated in the original question, the plane cannot take off. If you change the question and add other conditions, then you aren't answering the question. You are just arguing.<br />
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-35062970200488840212017-03-23T13:05:00.000-07:002017-03-23T13:08:04.202-07:00Trump thinks emotionally, NOT logically<big>I've been trying to restrain myself, but I keep
thinking I need to write a comment about
President Donald Trump's screwball claim that he
was wiretapped by President Obama. It's
just one straw too many. So, here's my
comment. <br />
<br />
According to an article in Friday's <i><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-drags-key-foreign-allies-into-controversy-over-unproven-wiretap-claims/2017/03/17/bd405278-0b2a-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.723c4615c25e">Washington
Post</a></i>:<br />
</big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big>In the days since Trump’s tweets
alleging the wiretapping were posted, the
White House has called for a congressional
investigation, declined to comment, dodged
questions, pointed to media reports that don’t
contain the information aides say they do and
analyzed the president’s use of quotation
marks — all while doubling down on his claim
without providing any evidence.</big></blockquote>
<big>While doing research, I found this cartoon: </big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnhl1S9A9s4YvMWM7Qg5-mwktApooQG5Uo2_Ofbm0VbqAg3LlXd-HmMbP14Zuaj-rOhVVThrwMJ7Pj1WZqAeYeQlrpDnGLffRVPSYVseIqh8u_mCW-hUU4ACPw4tVOxjaroor-o14ex9GS/s1600/Trump-cartoon-001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnhl1S9A9s4YvMWM7Qg5-mwktApooQG5Uo2_Ofbm0VbqAg3LlXd-HmMbP14Zuaj-rOhVVThrwMJ7Pj1WZqAeYeQlrpDnGLffRVPSYVseIqh8u_mCW-hUU4ACPw4tVOxjaroor-o14ex9GS/s320/Trump-cartoon-001.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big> </big><big>
I keep thinking that President Trump simply
cannot think logically, he only thinks
emotionally. Evidence obviously has no
meaning to him. Only his beliefs have
meaning. If there's no evidence of wire
tapping, that just means the FBI hasn't looked
hard enough to find the evidence that Trump
believes<b><i> must</i></b> exist.<br />
<br />
How can President Trump believe the evidence <b><i>must</i></b>
exist? Because some staffer comment or
news article or email or idea convinced him to
believe it. And once he believed it, it
becomes an emotional conclusion. What he
believes cannot be wrong, since that would mean
he is not as smart as he thinks he is. </big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikz2kKcx5cRW88BYOqPxCIFswsuUyM3kW3QJT2Fhd3hIGdqxt4GGseJhxki562XQqGSSuRKo5jieeDbicihlQqdeYbIOnk-6btgOkWg_ausdr6IDekCrjBUETzm-DV1kR25IzYJ4VJQ8TF/s1600/Trump-Cartoon-002.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="230" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikz2kKcx5cRW88BYOqPxCIFswsuUyM3kW3QJT2Fhd3hIGdqxt4GGseJhxki562XQqGSSuRKo5jieeDbicihlQqdeYbIOnk-6btgOkWg_ausdr6IDekCrjBUETzm-DV1kR25IzYJ4VJQ8TF/s320/Trump-Cartoon-002.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
<br />
</big>
<br />
<big>
</big> <big>
There is no middle ground for those who think
emotionally. Those who think emotionally <b><i>must</i></b>
be right, and the only acceptable alternative is
that the world <b><i>must</i></b> be conspiring
against them to maliciously argue something is
wrong that <b><i>must</i></b> with absolute
certainty be right. If something they
argued for turns out to be a failure, it is
always the fault of those ignorant and malicious
people who disagreed with them.</big><br />
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNYT4YCoFXnNwL9QHuZnNoP3fhCQFMQIHhI7HXXxu9wBS-b8UToo1j2K61asnAGZCDIxuJc-a5xJzahbC1WEgt-CGN7is7KyAhLXc9u8WH0dkulduDIMRLLdupxibNXB1LRBPunVZupwpX/s1600/Trump-Cartoon-003.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNYT4YCoFXnNwL9QHuZnNoP3fhCQFMQIHhI7HXXxu9wBS-b8UToo1j2K61asnAGZCDIxuJc-a5xJzahbC1WEgt-CGN7is7KyAhLXc9u8WH0dkulduDIMRLLdupxibNXB1LRBPunVZupwpX/s320/Trump-Cartoon-003.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big>This topic has special meaning to me because
I spent over a decade arguing with people who
believed that Muslims sent the anthrax letters,
even though <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Crime-Unlike-Any-Other-Edwards/dp/0976616343/">all
the evidence clearly said the letters were
sent by an American scientist</a>.
And <a href="https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/">those
True Believers are still out there</a> arguing
the same things they argued ten years ago.
No facts or evidence will ever change their
minds. And, of course, they have no facts
or evidence to support their beliefs. As
with Trump, they want the FBI to find the facts
and evidence for them. They are just
absolutely <b><i>certain</i></b> that there is
evidence out there somewhere that will confirm
their unshakable beliefs. <br />
<br />
It also seems that if these True Believers have
one totally unsupported belief, they also have
others. And they are totally certain about
all of them. The absurd claims were
probably never more absurd than when Trump
argued that millions of people voted illegally
in the election <u><i><b>he won</b></i></u>. </big><br />
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6pjIAEPcYje_51383UQ48fcJX9CKhapmdaeRTEX_4hyphenhypheng-JZiqJWXNlVffeloB99AlONbkJc67KqFAnhN3_KDAV4Wk5_sbJraAqYd2LL479aXTVPkd22EeNqPTUnO8iB24Dt1XkWsPlX1K/s1600/Trump-cartoon-004.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6pjIAEPcYje_51383UQ48fcJX9CKhapmdaeRTEX_4hyphenhypheng-JZiqJWXNlVffeloB99AlONbkJc67KqFAnhN3_KDAV4Wk5_sbJraAqYd2LL479aXTVPkd22EeNqPTUnO8iB24Dt1XkWsPlX1K/s320/Trump-cartoon-004.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big>From my observations, it
appears that Trump was elected by people who
think the way he does, people who think
emotionally, not logically. Were they
driven by a hatred of foreigners, a fear of
foreigners or a hatred of the government in
general? Maybe a bit of all three.
All that appears certain is that were
"fed up" and wanted to elect a fast-talking
game show host to straighten out the
situation. Trump told them what they
wanted to hear, and they believed him. </big><br />
<br />
<big></big><br />
<big></big><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfI9IMVt9S6M3npJCBz5EV4YkaY6vWLhp-9Tz5zyjco3-1lzaD6pjlrca6MZQdIZztps-eUJGNuvGEJyltCqJWGjGAJVRvTuD3MsOD3atD3MTX9CLnGgJbuA9jrQf-uatt_0SX-mplPsSE/s1600/Trump-cartoon-005.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfI9IMVt9S6M3npJCBz5EV4YkaY6vWLhp-9Tz5zyjco3-1lzaD6pjlrca6MZQdIZztps-eUJGNuvGEJyltCqJWGjGAJVRvTuD3MsOD3atD3MTX9CLnGgJbuA9jrQf-uatt_0SX-mplPsSE/s320/Trump-cartoon-005.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big> <big> </big> <big> Another thing that
Donald Trump has made very clear is that he had
absolutely no idea how complicated politics can
be. He was probably the only person in
America who thought that replacing "Obamacare"
would be a simple task.</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMYDUi9cS-GzpURsX4kwYpbrh7jMb3y_pIsFoYdOFHkv9AQIyWtmme8GZDpWNSjpdt_u0IU-MqMY6AFdfPvQKRLDn1OS9Kbj9bspCMZXAr9q_UEfyv7xccXJmX2051OaJsyeAuGJP50FXj/s1600/Trump-cartoon-008.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="283" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMYDUi9cS-GzpURsX4kwYpbrh7jMb3y_pIsFoYdOFHkv9AQIyWtmme8GZDpWNSjpdt_u0IU-MqMY6AFdfPvQKRLDn1OS9Kbj9bspCMZXAr9q_UEfyv7xccXJmX2051OaJsyeAuGJP50FXj/s320/Trump-cartoon-008.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big>
I'm reminded of a comment in Eric Hoffer's book
"<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer">The True Believer</a>" which said</big><br />
<big>the only way to change a True
Believer's mind is to convert him to a
different belief. "He cannot be
convinced, but only converted."<br />
<br />
I have a paperback copy of Hoffer's book
somewhere in my library, but I couldn't find
it when I looked for it yesterday. (It's
probably behind some other book.) But I
quickly found <a href="http://libgen.me/">a
free pdf copy on the Internet</a>.
Searching through it for the word "convert," I
found this full quote:<br />
</big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big>The fanatic
cannot be weaned away from his cause by an
appeal to his reason or moral sense. <b>He
fears compromise and cannot be persuaded
to qualify the certitude and righteousness
of his holy cause.</b> But he finds no
difficulty in swinging suddenly and wildly
from one holy cause to another. <span style="color: red;"><b>He cannot be convinced
but only converted.</b></span> His
passionate attachment is more vital than the
quality of the cause to which he is
attached.</big></blockquote>
<big>I also found this quote which
seems very much to apply to President Trump:<br />
</big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big>Both by
converting and antagonizing, he shapes the
world in his own image.</big></blockquote>
<big>And this quote also seems to
apply to President Trump:<br />
</big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big>The proselytizing
fanatic strengthens his own faith by
converting others. The creed whose
legitimacy is most easily challenged is
likely to develop the strongest
proselytizing impulse.</big></blockquote>
<big>So, we can assume that as
more and more of Trump's absurd beliefs get
shot down and debunked by people citing facts
and evidence, the more Trump will become
convinced that he is right and the world is
conspiring against him.</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheo5SfRr2DwPfsRRiWnLWaHM50oB1pIGPQZEZYgLzQxwe_oktcaGDP30aqvbjm7A4WoMHun0_iQqIrzMRLOrqX0PSspTVxosckQPqncP0jsT3j1UrA745n3CyMeMUrjlMv9rgEAzTcOvYe/s1600/Trump-cartoon-007.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheo5SfRr2DwPfsRRiWnLWaHM50oB1pIGPQZEZYgLzQxwe_oktcaGDP30aqvbjm7A4WoMHun0_iQqIrzMRLOrqX0PSspTVxosckQPqncP0jsT3j1UrA745n3CyMeMUrjlMv9rgEAzTcOvYe/s320/Trump-cartoon-007.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big>
Doing <a href="https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=impeach+trump&*">a
Google search for the words "Trump" and
"impeach"</a> I was provided with 16,900,000
results. Among those results, I found a
web site called "impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org"
which is looking for people to sign their
petition to impeach President Trump (and to
donate to their cause). There are also a
lot of other sites out there with petitions to
impeach Trump. I also found a Time
Magazine article titled "<a href="http://time.com/4692507/congress-remove-donald-trump-impeachment/">Congress
Can Remove Donald Trump From Office Without
Impeaching Him</a>." And a
Bloomberg.com article titled "<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment">Trump's
Wiretap Tweets Raise Risk of Impeachment</a>."
According to <a href="http://www.okayplayer.com/news/preliminary-impeachment-papers-filed-against-donald-trump.html">one
source</a>, <a href="https://nadler.house.gov/press-release/congressman-nadler-introduces-resolution-inquiry-force-gop-vote-trump%E2%80%99s-conflicts">Congressman
Jerrold Nadler</a> has already set in motion
a plan to impeach Trump.<br />
<br />
Of course, if Trump were to be impeached, that
would mean that Vice President Mike Spence
would become President. Some consider
that to be a worse situation: It's better to
have an incompetent President than an evil
President. <br />
<br />
Personally, I think it is more likely that
Donald Trump will resign before the end of his
four-year term than that he will be
impeached. If he doesn't find being
President the "fun" and the boost to his ego
that he thought it would be, and if he
constantly suffers setbacks in his plans, he
could just "throw in the towel" and say "The
hell with it." He'd blame others for his
failures, of course.<br />
</big><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<big><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpaHFrjc3GFJsdzwTfRTqzzPMAgmCFHS7ML2ygrLuM9ny73ZA3vR2SxdYDQQbmC11xZHO8EBNJRDFb0Re-VY-2Lb5lxFMWwB6N_cbuyNIrBclxn4zGmacA3qZwMR_7nQSh-h9MGOhjOPk6/s1600/Trump-Cartoon-06.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpaHFrjc3GFJsdzwTfRTqzzPMAgmCFHS7ML2ygrLuM9ny73ZA3vR2SxdYDQQbmC11xZHO8EBNJRDFb0Re-VY-2Lb5lxFMWwB6N_cbuyNIrBclxn4zGmacA3qZwMR_7nQSh-h9MGOhjOPk6/s320/Trump-Cartoon-06.png" width="320" /></a></big></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<div align="center">
<big></big></div>
<big>
On the other hand, if President Trump manages to
start a war somewhere, that would mean all bets
are off. </big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2NgLAjKCUdp7HtPXDCAeHFi_OFk89UrymXjs6phwPif3GILaeMnhC2qD2WNdp_r1pFdp7du92sJr3hHCVqh8dSVBZJle5HnPBJWU9N0i8wfkTQH_MZKBOCH0XivJuBrogX2hw8m0BnyuB/s1600/Trump-cartoon-012.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2NgLAjKCUdp7HtPXDCAeHFi_OFk89UrymXjs6phwPif3GILaeMnhC2qD2WNdp_r1pFdp7du92sJr3hHCVqh8dSVBZJle5HnPBJWU9N0i8wfkTQH_MZKBOCH0XivJuBrogX2hw8m0BnyuB/s320/Trump-cartoon-012.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br /></big>
<big>I've been wanting to write a
comment about Donald Trump for weeks, even
though I try very hard to avoid thinking about
him. The problem is: He's on the TVs they
have at the gym where I work out four times a
week. I seem to work out at the exact same
time that Trump's spokesman Sean Spicer gives
his daily news briefing.</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_doGF3QFm5berr4jurpmMojq8vt10UbwuGP0KbWku8931qtuVrcJMFed9zuBzr_XLSvWIKTBcwagrRis2o9KAuJVxeSYXPPWJi3diqa7HlUTyqfYvQfaYdJToJ8lCME-d3Dwnd9lL5yZa/s1600/Trump-cartoon-010.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_doGF3QFm5berr4jurpmMojq8vt10UbwuGP0KbWku8931qtuVrcJMFed9zuBzr_XLSvWIKTBcwagrRis2o9KAuJVxeSYXPPWJi3diqa7HlUTyqfYvQfaYdJToJ8lCME-d3Dwnd9lL5yZa/s320/Trump-cartoon-010.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big><br />
</big>
<br />
<big>
</big><big>When I get home, the evening news every
night seems to have some story about Trump's
latest screwball tweet. And <i>The Late
Show with Stephen Colbert </i>always has some
hilarious comments about the Trump absurdities.<br />
<br />
It's all very hilarious.. But, at the same time
it isn't very funny at all.<br />
</big>Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-3796658223188287392016-08-28T13:02:00.003-07:002016-09-05T09:37:41.011-07:00Physics teachers are teaching mathematical nonsense, not science<big>A couple years ago, I took a course titled <a href="http://www.worldscienceu.com/courses/short/space-time-and-einstein">Space, Time & Einstein</a> at the <a href="http://www.worldscienceu.com/">WorldScienceU.com</a> web site. </big><big><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="color: black; line-height: 107%;"> </span></b></span></span>It's taught by Professor Brian Greene of Columbia University in New York City. There were things about the course that bothered me, and I started thinking about Time Dilation and how it really works. There was something in Professor Greene's lecture on
"The Reality of Past, Present and Future"
(Module #8) that bothered me a lot. But then I forgot all about it as I organized my thoughts and worked on my scientific papers on "<a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v1.pdf">Time Dilation Re-visualized</a>" and "<a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1602.0281v2.pdf">What is Time?</a>" </big><br />
<br />
<big>Then, while waiting to see if my newest paper on Time Dilated Light will be accepted by a peer reviewed journal, I decided to watch parts of Professor Greene's course over again.</big><br />
<br />
<big>I want to make it clear before continuing that <b><u>Professor Greene is not teaching anything that other physics professors aren't also teaching</u>.</b> The only difference is the Professor Greene's course and lectures are on-line where I can easily access them. </big><br />
<big>
<br />
I soon realized what bothered me about "Module #8"
back then. Prof. Greene was
breaking Time down into "quanta," i.e., into
moments, like the individual frames of a movie. And he was
viewing time as a <i>mathematician</i> would view
time. Plus, the lecture concludes with
Professor Greene saying that, "<span style="color: red;"><b>What this collectively
tells us is that the traditional way we
think about reality - the present is real,
the past is gone, the future is yet to be -
that <u>is without any real basis in physics</u>.</b></span>
<b>What we are really learning from these ideas is
that the past, the present and the future are
all equally real.</b>"<br />
<br />
If you believe that, then you can also argue
that everything we see may be equally <u><b>unreal</b></u> -
from a mathematician's point of view.<br />
<br />
Looking over the course schedule, I
noticed that Module #3 was titled "The Speed of
Light." That's the subject of my latest scientific paper. So, I watched Module #3 again.
Wow! <b><i>It's total nonsense!</i></b>
</big><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQJWI7TcL9JcbxkcAsKlrOK8L0B_S_WgBoBQO9ziUSixOlYWOTJn-qY1PXMkJCbtzNBoGgYLm9netngnMQkBGMqjHx8dfYOS6PtD6124yTw-Xv559YHyjtfPGd3oBV8dpj3WwcGoZvF8gv/s1600/Greene-03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="190" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQJWI7TcL9JcbxkcAsKlrOK8L0B_S_WgBoBQO9ziUSixOlYWOTJn-qY1PXMkJCbtzNBoGgYLm9netngnMQkBGMqjHx8dfYOS6PtD6124yTw-Xv559YHyjtfPGd3oBV8dpj3WwcGoZvF8gv/s320/Greene-03.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<big> </big><big> </big><br />
<big>Professor Greene explains that the fact that the
velocity of the light-emitting-object (when it
is coming toward you or going away from you)
cannot be added to or subtracted from the speed
of light you perceive is <b>proof that the
speed of light is a "universal constant."</b>
<span style="color: red;"><u><b><i>It proves no such thing!</i></b></u></span>
It is simply proof that the <u><b>direction</b></u> an object is moving does not affect the speed of
light coming from the object. I couldn't
remember any of that from when I took the course
in early 2014. Evidently, it had no
significance to me then. Now I see it is <b><i>just plain WRONG</i></b>.</big><br />
<big><br />
But there was even more nonsense to come. I
then watched the lecture on "Time In Motion"
(Module #5), which is about Time Dilation.
In the screen capture below, he is explaining
how the stationary clock by his hand runs faster
than the moving clock off to his right because
light bounces off mirrors more slowly when the
mirrors are moving while light is being used to
measure time. <b><i><u>That is total nonsense</u>,
and it is also a demonstration that has very
little to do with Time Dilation <u>or</u>
reality! <br />
</i></b></big>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWqxW8LYVHMVUoRZeMG2mWOV54_8p0aumQri62E98ZZKjPRtScKoFHWkC3nAnd35C7ukUy2EgDNZo70-FsTGSprfMgogI_Hxwsskt4PIdu767D8KFQigV0f_Eewr8Lf3TVwynUj9nG06MK/s1600/Greene-05.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWqxW8LYVHMVUoRZeMG2mWOV54_8p0aumQri62E98ZZKjPRtScKoFHWkC3nAnd35C7ukUy2EgDNZo70-FsTGSprfMgogI_Hxwsskt4PIdu767D8KFQigV0f_Eewr8Lf3TVwynUj9nG06MK/s320/Greene-05.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div align="center">
<big><b><i></i></b></big><br /></div>
<big> </big><big>
<u><i><b>He was teaching his students that Time
Dilation is just "an optical illusion."</b></i></u>
He didn't use that term, of course. He was
carefully explaining how a <b>stationary</b>
person will view an object as moving while a
moving person will view the stationary person as
moving. </big><big>Furthermore, <b><i>it
is a </i></b><b><i>totally wrong and silly</i></b><b><i>
demonstration. </i></b> It's twisting
the facts to rationalize a belief! <b>In
reality, light would </b><i><b><u>not</u></b></i><b>
bounce at angles between moving mirrors, light
would move in a straight line and the mirrors
would simply move out of the path of the
bouncing light! Plus, <i>if the speed of light is fixed and universal, a stationary light clock would give the same result on Earth as on Jupiter and in empty space, and it would<span style="color: red;"> <u>disprove</u></span> Einstein's theory of gravitational time dilation!</i> </b><br />
<br />
It would have been better if Prof. Greene had
used the explanation of how a ball is <b><i>perceived</i></b>
to move if a child on a jet plane tosses it up
and down as the plane moves at 500 miles per
hour. The child will see the ball going
straight up and straight down, while some
imaginary viewer on the ground will see the ball
travel in an arc that covers over a thousand
feet laterally between the time the ball leaves
the boy's hand and the time he catches it
again. It really has <b><u>nothing</u></b>
to do with Time Dilation, <i><b>it only has to
do with Relativity</b></i>, and therefore it
is the same as saying Time Dilation is just an
optical illusion. <br />
<br />
<b>That is where <u><i>everyone</i></u> goes wrong!</b>
They do not think of Time Dilation as a real
phenomenon all by itself, <b><i>they <u>only</u>
think of it in terms of relativity!</i></b><b><i><br />
</i></b><br />
And, it was really bizarre when I watched Module
#7, "Time Dilation - Experimental Evidence," in
which Prof. Greene explains how Time Dilation
has been <b>confirmed</b> by people carrying
atomic clocks aboard airplanes, and he explained
how muons exist longer when they are traveling
faster. Professor Greene makes absolutely
no mention of <b><i>gravitational</i></b> time dilation.
Nor does he explain who was the "observer" when
the atomic clocks were flown around the
world. He doesn't put 2 and 2 together.<br /> </big><br />
<big>Module #12 was the most absurd of all.
It's titled "The Twin Paradox," and it shows how
preposterous the explanations can get when mathematicians
try to rationalize and distort Time Dilation to
make it fit their equations. Prof.
Greene uses "fraternal twins," George and
Gracie. While George remains on Earth,
Gracie goes off on a space ship to some nearby
star and then returns. That's simple
enough, but Prof. Greene then explains how<b><i>
neither twin knows who is really moving</i></b>.
He has Gracie arguing that her space ship is
standing still while George and the planet Earth
moved away from her, while George argues just
the opposite. Prof. Greene then explains
that George is right because Gracie felt
acceleration, which wouldn't happen if she had
been standing still. It's an absolutely <u><i><b>silly</b></i></u>
explanation of Time Dilation. In what
universe would a space traveler think that she
was standing still while the planet she just
rocketed away from must be moving away from her
and then somehow it reversed course to come back
to her once again? It's idiotic! <br />
</big>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdWoC_GgRadjKjd8U3XZl3LUweprj5ok9p379u2pmC7wQM7NuAASuFfCBeMPSXRJUvlpTObX_48x19E4BrfjJbBQhPEpTuVndBNRwKcz6xQLolC4JawLAjqmJHdsd0adJW8XFk15g2C_34/s1600/Greene-12.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="191" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdWoC_GgRadjKjd8U3XZl3LUweprj5ok9p379u2pmC7wQM7NuAASuFfCBeMPSXRJUvlpTObX_48x19E4BrfjJbBQhPEpTuVndBNRwKcz6xQLolC4JawLAjqmJHdsd0adJW8XFk15g2C_34/s320/Greene-12.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div align="center">
<big> </big></div>
<big> </big><big>It also shows how mathematicians do not care about logic or reasoning. They only care about how the math works. The math says that an astronaut can stand still while the Earth moves away from his rocket, therefore it <b><i>must</i></b> be possible. </big><br />
<big><br /></big>
<big>At several points in the course, Professor Greene pauses to explain to his students that if what he is saying doesn't seem to make any sense, then they should take the version of his course that focuses on mathematics. </big><br />
<br />
<big>Yes, why not? After all, in the world of mathematics "garbage in, garbage out" is totally acceptable if the equation looks clever. Nothing needs to be logical or make sense if the mathematics work. Science today is about <u><i><b>mathematics</b></i></u>, not about logic -- or science.</big><br />
<br />
<big>I not picking on Prof. Greene. He's just teaching the same nonsense that most physics professors seem to be teaching. As stated above, Prof. Greene
merely put his course on the Internet
where I could take it and view the lectures over
again. I should be grateful. It
taught me a great deal, but definitely not what
Prof. Greene intended to teach. </big><br />
<br />
<big>I don't see any way to contact Prof. Greene directly, so I posted a "zinger" question to the discussions for Module #5. Click <a href="http://www.worldscienceu.com/courses/1/elements/VzvMYL#comment-2868882222">HERE</a> to see if you can view it. It works for me. </big><br />
<br />
<big>As evidence that other teachers are teaching the same nonsense, here's a video that also uses a "light clock" to explain relativity:</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/TgH9KXEQ0YU/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TgH9KXEQ0YU?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<br />
<big>There are probably many similar videos out there. </big>Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-17969014691336057602016-07-18T13:24:00.000-07:002016-08-03T06:43:00.086-07:00Light does NOT travel at a "universal speed of light."<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvncHTiqD-gTgy0CBaSyRqhnxdo24MdIRz-KL_PC7JZrO5pPZzZvxEmsGduxKW0HH-87DOe5l72HwCZAaR_eOtqL60OBcbwsE8cl54nHdB6BSV4Vmh74UmB-zo73-WApYRWSExEjUeVerr/s1600/pink-elephant-in-room.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvncHTiqD-gTgy0CBaSyRqhnxdo24MdIRz-KL_PC7JZrO5pPZzZvxEmsGduxKW0HH-87DOe5l72HwCZAaR_eOtqL60OBcbwsE8cl54nHdB6BSV4Vmh74UmB-zo73-WApYRWSExEjUeVerr/s320/pink-elephant-in-room.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
There's "an elephant in the room" that no one seems to want to talk about because it just generates arguments: Light does NOT travel at a "universal speed of light." The "speed of light is different in water, in air, in glass, and in a vacuum. So, there can be no "universal speed of light." It is not even constant in a vacuum.<br />
<br />
Einstein's relativity theory was presented as a PRINCIPLED, rather than
a CONSTRUCTIVE, theory. A principled theory is one that begins with
scientific principles and then uses those principles to explain the
phenomena; a constructive theory starts with actual observations and
culminates in theories that explain and reconcile those observations.<br />
<br />
Einstein's "principled theory" is interpreted to say that the speed of
light is "constant" throughout the universe and therefore light must cause <b>Time</b> to slow down or DILATE when the object emitting light is in
motion or near a gravitational mass.<br />
<br />
A CONSTRUCTIVE theory based
upon observations, however, shows the reverse. The speed of light
changes depending upon the "time" occurring at the source of the light.<br />
<br />
Thus, due to gravitational time dilation, light coming from the Sun is
traveling slower than the speed of light as we measure it here on Earth
in a laboratory. And light coming from distant stars is coming at
various speeds due to gravitational and velocity time dilation at the
sources.<br />
<br />
Any calculations which assume that the speed of light is
fixed throughout the universe, such as the calculations involved in
Dark Energy, will be incorrect.<br />
<br />
A new scientific paper "Time
Dilated Light (A Constructive Relativity Theory)" has been published to
explain everything. It is available at this link: <a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v3.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v3.pdf</a>Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-24590983494889456882016-07-02T10:03:00.002-07:002016-07-02T12:36:48.223-07:00Dormant Black Holes and Dark Matter<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Black_Holes_-_Monsters_in_Space.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Black_Holes_-_Monsters_in_Space.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Are dormant black holes the same thing as dark matter? If not, why not?</b></span><br />
<br />
It's been bugging me for a long time that dark matter and <b><i>dormant</i></b> black holes seem to be the same thing. I'm not a scientist, I'm just a science buff, and I'd never really studied either subject in school. But, I keep asking myself: why would there be two different mysterious substances (dark matter and whatever is at the centers of dormant black holes) that so closely resemble one another?<br />
<br />
So, a few days ago, I started doing some focused research. Over the years I've found that whenever I have a science question, it usually has already been asked and answered somewhere on the Internet.<br />
<br />
I soon found a web site called "Ask Ethan," which has the exact question I was asking: "<a href="https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ask-ethan-56-are-black-holes-made-of-dark-matter-b2cc579a232c#.rqbjtelkw">Are black holes made of dark matter?</a>"
The page does a very good job of explaining how black holes are thought
to be created. However, it also contains arguable statements like this:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;"><b>So
initially, when they’re first formed, black holes are pretty much 100%
normal (baryonic) matter, and just about 0% dark matter. </b></span><span style="color: purple;"><b><span style="color: red;">Remember
that dark matter interacts only gravitationally, unlike normal matter,
which interacts via the gravitational, weak, electromagnetic and strong
forces</span>.</b> </span>All of this is a fancy way to say that when
normal matter comes into contact with other normal matter, it goes
“splat,” meaning that it can stick together, clump, exchange momentum
and accrue even more normal matter when this occurs. Dark matter, on the
other hand, doesn’t “splat” either with normal matter or with other
dark matter. This is why, when we look at galaxies and clusters of
galaxies, we picture spiral or elliptical galaxies where the normal
matter is confined to a relatively small region of space, but they are
embedded within dark matter halos that extend for maybe thousands of
times the volume of the normal matter.</blockquote>
To me, the first
sentence in the quoted paragraph above is highly questionable. I would assume just the opposite. I would assume that when a black hole is created, it is
100% dark matter, i.e., the normal matter that was ultra-compressed by the
imploding supernova. <i>The supernova turns normal matter into the dark matter that is at the center of a black hole. </i><br />
<br />
The second sentence in the quoted paragraph does a good job of explaining what happens when a supernova creates a black hole consisting
of dark matter. It turns normal matter into a form of matter that is somehow stripped of all the
properties which give it the weak, electromagnetic and strong forces. That
would explain how the matter that is at the center of a black hole can
be so highly compressed without causing nuclear fusion. <br />
<br />
The last paragraph in the article contains this conclusion:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
And there you have it: a <i class="markup--em markup--p-em">quantitative</i> answer to the question of whether black holes are made of dark matter or not. <b class="markup--strong markup--p-strong">At most</b>
they can only be made of about 0.004% dark matter, and that’s the most
optimistic number that applies only to the most massive ones!</blockquote>
That might be so, but it's definitely not how I see things. So, I looked for more information.<br />
<br />
This article attracted my eye: "<a href="http://www.astronomy.com/news/2015/06/nasa-simulation-suggests-black-holes-may-make-ideal-dark-matter-labs">NASA simulation suggests black holes may make ideal dark matter labs</a>." It seemed to say what I've been thinking, that <b>black holes are "factories" that create more dark matter.</b> They take in normal matter, strip normal matter of its weak, electromagnetic and strong forces, perhaps spewing out those forces in the form of X-rays, and leaving only dark matter behind at the center of the black hole.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the article begins this way:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
While we don’t yet know what dark matter is, we do know it interacts with the rest of the universe through gravity, which means it must accumulate around supermassive black holes.</blockquote>
Huh? Reading the article, I found that it suggests that supermassive black holes concentrate dark matter that was created elsewhere and cause the dark matter particles to collide. That has nothing to do with what I'd been thinking. And there's nothing conclusive in the article, except for another description of some properties of dark matter that I consider to be <b><i>very</i></b> important:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;"><b>dark matter [is] an elusive substance accounting for most of the mass of the universe that neither reflects, absorbs, nor emits light.</b></span></blockquote>
That description of dark matter should be compared to this description of dormant black holes I found elsewhere:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Roughly 90 percent of the biggest black holes in the known universe are
dormant, meaning that they are not actively devouring matter and,
consequently, not giving off any light or other radiation.</b></span> </blockquote>
The source is this article: "<a href="https://cmns.umd.edu/news-events/features/3585">Dormant Black Hole Eats Star, Becomes X-ray Flashlight</a>."<br />
<br />
Think about it. A dormant black hole doesn't reflect light, nor does it emit light, and it doesn't absorb light, it bends the path of light - a process called "gravitational lensing." What <i><b>need</b></i> is there to have two different things - dark matter <i>and</i> black holes - if they have the same physical properties?<br />
<br />
Searching further, I soon found a web page where someone asked the question I've been asking, but just phrased in a different way: "<a href="http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/88-the-universe/black-holes-and-quasars/observation-of-black-holes/421-could-the-universe-s-dark-matter-be-made-up-of-black-holes-advanced">Could the Universe's dark matter be made up of black holes?</a>"<br />
<br />
However, the answer was (in part):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What's
important to realize about this is that our studies of dark matter
don't just tell us that "it's out there somewhere"; when we study a
galaxy, we learn something about the total distribution of matter within
it. This means that we know the <b>dark matter surrounds galaxies and is not a central object, like a black hole, within galaxies.</b><br />
<b>The
problem with your idea is that black holes are nothing that special,
gravitationally: they're just accretions of matter. They are centralized
in the middle of the galaxy,</b> and according to the laws of gravity, they can't pull very hard on stuff far out at the edge of a galaxy.</blockquote>
Who says black holes are "centralized in the middle of the galaxy"? I'd seen an article which said there could be <b>millions</b> of black holes <i><u><b>within</b></u></i>
our galaxy. And who says "black holes are nothing that special,
gravitationally"? Just the opposite would seem to be true if a black
hole can be dormant and yet be a massive gravitational source with no
real explanation for what is <b><i>inside</i></b> the black hole.<br />
<br />
A June 27, 2016, article on Astowatch.net web site titled "<a href="http://www.astrowatch.net/2016/06/clandestine-black-hole-may-represent.html">Clandestine Black Hole May Represent New Population</a>" states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Astronomers
have combined data from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, the Hubble
Space Telescope and the National Science Foundation's Karl G. Jansky
Very Large Array (VLA) to conclude that a peculiar source of radio waves
thought to be a distant galaxy is actually a nearby binary star system
containing a low-mass star and a black hole. This identification
suggests <b><span style="color: red;">there may be a vast number of black holes in our Galaxy that have gone unnoticed until now</span></b>.</blockquote>
The article also says,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Because
this study only covered a very small patch of sky, the implication is
that there should be many of these quiet black holes around the Milky
Way. <span style="color: red;"><b>The estimates are that tens of thousands to millions of these black holes could exist within our Galaxy</b></span>, about three to thousands of times as many as previous studies have suggested.</blockquote>
But
<b>nowhere in the article does it mention "dark matter."</b> It's just about "millions" of black holes which could be in the same places where dark matter is believed to be.<br />
<br />
It should seem
"obvious" that dormant black holes and dark matter could be the same
thing. It seems so "obvious" that the question seems to be, <b>What facts about dark matter show that it cannot possibly be dormant black holes?</b><br />
<br />
I then found an article titled "<a href="http://www.space.com/23583-dark-matter-tiny-black-holes.html">Is Dark Matter Made of Tiny Black Holes?</a>" It's from November 14, 2013 and says,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A
planet-hunting NASA spacecraft has detected no sign of moon-size black
holes yet in the Milky Way galaxy, limiting the chances that such
objects could make up most of the "dark matter" that has mystified
scientists for decades.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Dark
matter is one of the greatest scientific mysteries known — an invisible
substance thought to constitute up five-sixths of all matter in the
universe. It remains so mysterious that scientists are still uncertain
as to whether dark matter is made of microscopic particles or far larger
objects.</b></span> </blockquote>
and<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Over four years, Kepler monitored the brightness of more than 150,000 stars in the <a href="http://www.space.com/14249-milkyway-galaxy-photos.html">Milky Way</a>
to detect regular dimming caused by planets crossing in front of them.
If a primordial black hole passed in front of one of these stars, the
star would become temporarily brighter instead. That's because black
holes warp light around them with their gravitational fields, a
phenomenon known as gravitational lensing.</blockquote>
and<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Until now, researchers had eliminated the chances that <a href="http://www.space.com/15421-black-holes-facts-formation-discovery-sdcmp.html">black holes</a> that
are approximately the mass of the moon could make up dark matter. <span style="color: red;"><b>
Kepler's data show no evidence of black holes between 5 and 80 percent
of the moon's mass, suggesting these black holes could not constitute
most dark matter. </b></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;"><b>
</b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>
However, even smaller primordial black holes, ones less than 0.0001
percent the mass of Earth's moon, could still make up the entirety of
dark matter</b></span>, Griest said. Future missions — such as the European Space
Agency's Euclid spacecraft or NASA's proposed WFIRST satellite — could
look for smaller black holes than those identified by the Kepler data.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We've ruled out a range of primordial black holes as dark matter, but
have not ruled them out completely," Griest told SPACE.com. "They're
still a viable candidate for dark matter."</blockquote>
Hmm. That definitely fits with the way I envision things. Most dark matter is supposed to be like a cloud surrounding the Milky Way galaxy. Small black holes wouldn't produce any substantial gravitational lensing effect on distant stars and galaxies. <br />
<br />
It's quite possible that I'm totally misunderstanding everything. But, if I'm understanding things correctly, there's also a key to "The Theory of Everything" in this. The key is figuring out how you can strip a particle of normal matter of all of its electromagnetic, weak and strong forces, and produce a particle of dark matter that only possesses gravitational force, and thus can be packed like grains of wet sand into a spherical ball of dark matter that is so small that mathematicians can misinterpret it to be a single, dimensionless point of infinite density.<br />
<br />
This "Theory of Everything" might also explain "The Big Bang." A gigantic mass of dark matter encountered something that restored electromagnetism, weak and strong forces to the dormant dark matter - like a bowl of nitroglycerin being hit by a bullet. And there could be lots of left-over "unexploded" dark matter floating around.<br />
<br />
Of course, I could be wrong about all this. <br />
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-8324959658085326752016-05-29T09:01:00.000-07:002016-05-30T12:25:15.734-07:00What is Time Travel when Everyone is Time Traveling?<span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody">Last
night I watched Part 1 of "Genius by Stephen Hawking," a PBS series.
Part 1 is titled "Can We Time Travel?" I'd recorded it on my DVR a
couple weeks ago. The entire episode is available for viewing on line
at this link: <a class="" dir="ltr" href="http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fvideo%2F2365757267%2F&h=XAQFGyuUp" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.pbs.org/video/2365757267/</a><br /><br />It
does a fairly good job of explaining how Time Dilation works, and how
we can travel into the future but not into the past. Traveling into the
past would require the creation of another you out of nothing, which is
totally against all we know about science. (No, the universe wasn't
created out of nothing. We just don't KNOW what was there just before
the start of the Big Bang.)<br /><br />Traveling
into the future doesn't require creating another you. You travel 1
second into the future every second of your life. <br /><br />In
the PBS show, two of the experimenters take an atomic clock to the top
of a mountain. After spending the night there, they compare their
atomic clock to one at the bottom of the mountain. The clock on top of
the mountain is 20 nanoseconds (billionths of a second) ahead of the
clock at the bottom. So the two people who went up the mountain aged 20
microseconds more than the experimenter who stayed at the bottom of the
mountain. OR, you might say that those who went up the mountain traveled 20 nanoseconds into the future.</span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfVips7-1GWGWSSa1MyEfunBAkb7YQVmH7Cn-lSmerY5yO87iP4UZS68-me6sXnq1t17tIvUQpEiEPeMvgjLHLBkKhyphenhyphenY8hYPuCpWM8MFQkOgZbmz2pNLMbGr7_QDuqcaic4XvEVj4Pxw7d/s1600/Time-Dilation-PBS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfVips7-1GWGWSSa1MyEfunBAkb7YQVmH7Cn-lSmerY5yO87iP4UZS68-me6sXnq1t17tIvUQpEiEPeMvgjLHLBkKhyphenhyphenY8hYPuCpWM8MFQkOgZbmz2pNLMbGr7_QDuqcaic4XvEVj4Pxw7d/s320/Time-Dilation-PBS.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody"><br />Things get
complicated and confusing when one of the people who went up the
mountain talks about using binoculars to look at people at the base of
the mountain and how, "technically, they are in the past." Are they?
If they are in the past, then the experimenter who spent the night at the bottom of
the mountain is also in the past as he meets the two who spent the night
on the mountain. And the people who live at the bottom of the mountain
will be in the past when the people who went up the mountain come down
again and walk among them. <br /><br /><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Who is in the
past and who is in the future when everyone of us moves through time
at a slightly different rate than everyone else?</b></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
If you think about it a bit (as I did overnight), you realize that if you stand on the street and yell back and forth with someone leaning out a window on the third floor of a building, that person is moving through time at a faster rate than you are. <b><i>Yet, you can communicate with each other.</i></b><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-imhvX70XidWmcwIKvuhMKvU4U754gx6kao5MOdzvmeZTyiz_BoUHQdaYUjfpsQlKzh1SxuuAoiHaCtFR3BP9K3AKTSIXVA6_Dm01nQLbiL8IcwTVEjEH0pkqLSpbctnZY1-kMt0OC81R/s1600/building-yelling-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-imhvX70XidWmcwIKvuhMKvU4U754gx6kao5MOdzvmeZTyiz_BoUHQdaYUjfpsQlKzh1SxuuAoiHaCtFR3BP9K3AKTSIXVA6_Dm01nQLbiL8IcwTVEjEH0pkqLSpbctnZY1-kMt0OC81R/s320/building-yelling-2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
So, while Time is passing at different rates for both parties, "<b>now</b>" is evidently somehow the same for both of them. The situation illustrates something I wrote in my "scientific paper" about "<a href="http://vixra.org/abs/1505.0234">Time Dilation Re-visualized</a>." I wrote this about the "twin paradox": <b>Neither twin was ever behind or ahead of the other in time</b>." And the same holds true with two people yelling at each other from different heights. Neither is behind or ahead of the other in time, even though time is going faster for the person who is farther from the center of the earth.<br />
<br />
How can this be? It can be because of something I wrote about in my 2nd "scientific paper," which was titled "<a href="http://vixra.org/abs/1602.0281">What is Time?</a>" I wrote: "<b>time is particle spin</b>." If you are on the third floor, the particles that make up your body are spinning faster than the particles that make up my body down at street level. We are both in the "now," which means we can talk with each other even though time is going faster for you than it is for me. <br />
<br />
The main problem is putting this into words that can be easily understood. Is it something that others have pointed out thousands of times before, or is this a new way to view Time?<br />
<br />
Obviously, the person on "Genius" was wrong. You are <u><i><b>not</b></i></u> viewing people in the past when you stand atop a mountain and look through a telescope at people at the bottom of a mountain. You are both in the "here and now," even though time is moving at different rates for everyone.<br />
<br />
I'm going to have to think about it some more. There's got to be a better way to describe this.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-44072186722975895672016-05-16T07:21:00.000-07:002016-05-16T07:21:05.012-07:00Does Dark Energy Exist?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkTQuIw567fYliz0f4m1lexXcUXhkm22AkcUYfOq8uibRUEhdcAQ6teos4KgKMFYvUfSmgDl9pWRANUfEgAP_buGxXUdYplpKL5MT2sOHdTjuB4OFBB3v4bOkYUtZKXRVY4OEDzQcNPrm7/s1600/Dark_Energy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkTQuIw567fYliz0f4m1lexXcUXhkm22AkcUYfOq8uibRUEhdcAQ6teos4KgKMFYvUfSmgDl9pWRANUfEgAP_buGxXUdYplpKL5MT2sOHdTjuB4OFBB3v4bOkYUtZKXRVY4OEDzQcNPrm7/s320/Dark_Energy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<big>I recently watched a TV
program about dark energy on <a href="http://www.sciencechannel.com/">the
Science Channel</a>. It was an episode
of "<a href="https://www.discoverygo.com/spaces-deepest-secrets/hunt-for-dark-energy/">Space's
Deepest Secrets</a>." Dark energy was
something I'd never paid much attention to
before. Suddenly, I found the subject to
be fascinating. Looking around the
Internet, I found some key information <a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dark-energy-the-biggest-mystery-in-the-universe-9482130/?all">HERE</a>
about dark energy:</big><br />
<br />
<div class="copy-paste-block">
<blockquote>
Assuming the existence of dark matter and
that the law of gravitation is universal,
two teams of astrophysicists—one led by Saul
Perlmutter, at the Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, the other by Brian
Schmidt, at Australian National
University—set out to determine the future
of the universe. Throughout the 1990s the
rival teams closely analyzed a number of
exploding stars, or supernovas, using those
unusually bright, short-lived distant
objects to gauge the universe’s growth. <span style="color: red;">They knew how bright the
supernovas <em>should</em> appear at
different points across the universe if
the rate of expansion were uniform. By
comparing how much brighter the supernovas
actually <em>did</em> appear, astronomers
figured they could determine how much the
expansion of the universe was slowing
down.</span> But to the astronomers’
surprise, when they looked as far as halfway
across the universe, six or seven billion
light-years away, they found that the
supernovas weren’t brighter—and therefore
nearer—than expected. They were dimmer—that
is, more distant. <b>The two teams both
concluded that the expansion of the
universe isn’t slowing down. It’s speeding
up.</b><br />
The implication of that discovery was
momentous: it meant that the dominant force
in the evolution of the universe isn’t
gravity. It is...something else. Both teams
announced their findings in 1998. Turner
gave the “something” a nickname: dark
energy. It stuck. Since then, astronomers
have pursued the mystery of dark energy to
the ends of the Earth—literally.<br />
</blockquote>
<big><span>The program made it very clear that
no one really knows if "dark energy" really
exists. They call it "dark" energy
because they don't now what it is, not
because it is somehow dark in color.
Everyone seems to realize it could very
easily be that they are just looking at
things from the wrong angle. <br />
<br />
On the Internet I'd previously argued with
people who believe that "<a href="https://www.google.com/#q=aether+definition">the
aether</a>" is slowing down light coming
from distant galaxies, or gravity from dust
particles is slowing down light. They were usually arguing against the Big Bang theory, not against Dark Energy. To
me, it seemed
"obvious" that some misunderstood factor
about Time and/or the speed of light was
causing the distant supernovae to appear to be moving so fast. There are lots
of things we do not know about Time and Light, so
why assume that there is something totally new
that is behind what is being observed? <br />
<br />
Of course, my ignorance of these subjects is
very great, but what I <u><i><b>do</b></i></u>
know says that it makes no sense to assume
that anything like "dark energy" actually
exists. Unlike Science
Truthers, however, I'm not prepared to argue
that the idea is wrong simply because it
makes no sense to me. What I <b><i>am</i></b>
prepared to do is some "slow thinking" to
try to figure out <b><i>why</i></b> it
makes no sense to me. Maybe there is
something the Nobel Prize winners know that
I do not know. That certainly seems
possible.<br />
<br />
First of all, I <b>know</b> the official
"speed of light" is the speed of light <b><i>in
a vacuum</i></b>. And I <b>know</b>
that the speed of light is slower through air and
water. <a href="http://www.universetoday.com/38040/speed-of-light-in-mph/">In
a vacuum</a> the speed of light is
299,792,458 meters per second, while <a href="https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100228103543AAcIVDo">in
water</a> it is 225,056,264 meters per
second. And that means that, if the
light from a supernova is somehow going<b><i>
slower</i></b> when it arrives, it would
merely <b><i>appear</i></b> that the
supernova is farther away than it really is,
because scientists used an incorrect
measurement for the speed of <b><i>that</i></b>
specific light. <br />
</span></big></div>
<big><br />
If it is not possible for light to go slower
simply because it is coming from an object that
is moving away at a very high speed, then the
question becomes: If an object is moving through
<i><b>Time</b></i> at a much slower rate than we are,
wouldn't the light the object emits be slowed down as well? Is it possible for us to detect a difference
between light that travels at a slow speed and
light that moves at its maximum speed through a
slow tunnel of time? Does that question
even make sense?<br /> </big><br />
<big>I did <a href="https://www.google.com/#q=how+is+the+speed+of+light+measured">a
Google search for "how is the speed of light
measured"</a> and <a href="http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html">found</a>
this question and answer:<br />
</big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<b><big>Is The Speed of Light Everywhere
the Same?</big><br />
<br />
<big>The short answer is that it depends on who
is doing the measuring: the speed of light is
only guaranteed to have a value of 299,792,458
m/s in a vacuum when measured by someone
situated right next to it.</big></b><br />
</blockquote>
<big>Hmm. <b><i>Groan!</i></b> When I
get some free time, I'm going to have to try to
find out how the people who dreamed up "dark
energy" eliminated all the other (seemingly)
possible explanations for why light from a
supernova shows that the universe is expanding
faster and faster. When you have an
explosion, doesn't the material that ends
farthest from the point of the explosion get
there because it traveled faster than the other
material involved in the explosion? And
who says that the universe has had sufficient
time for gravity to start slowing things down?</big>Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-91174765210783000812016-05-11T07:08:00.002-07:002016-05-11T07:13:59.910-07:00Donald Trump's Upcoming Trial for Fraud<span style="font-size: small;">It seems like it should be in the news more often that <u><span style="color: red;"><b>Donald Trump will be going on trial on November 28 for Fraud.</b></span></u></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">It's all about his phony "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University">Trump University</a>," which advertised itself this way:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/BvaaeHP9xtQ/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BvaaeHP9xtQ?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
According to <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-university-trial-after-election">one source</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Donald Trump will go to trial in a class-action lawsuit against him and his now-defunct Trump University after the presidential election but before the inauguration, setting the stage for a president-elect to take the witness stand if he wins the White House. <br />
<br />
U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel on Friday scheduled trial for Nov. 28 in the suit that alleges people who paid up to $35,000 for real estate seminars got defrauded. The likely Republican nominee planned to attend most, if not all, of the trial and would testify,Trump attorney Daniel Petrocelli said.</blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">I looked for
other articles and found one from the <i>National
Review</i> titled "<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432010/trump-university-scam">Yes,
Trump University was a Massive Scam</a>."
It says,</span><br />
<div>
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">First thing first, Trump
University was never a university. When the
“school” was established in 2005, the New
York State Education Department warned that
it was in violation of state law for
operating without a NYSED license. Trump
ignored the warnings. ...</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">The free seminars were the first step in
a bait and switch to induce prospective
students to enroll in increasingly expensive
seminars starting with the three-day $1495
seminar and ultimately one of respondents’
advanced seminars such as the “Gold Elite”
program costing $35,000. </span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
At the “free” 90-minute introductory
seminars to which Trump University
advertisements and solicitations invited
prospective students, Trump University
instructors engaged in a methodical,
systematic series of misrepresentations
designed to convince students to sign up for
the Trump University three-day seminar at a
cost of $1495.</span></blockquote>
</div>
<span style="font-size: small;">The article also says,</span>
<br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">The New York lawsuit alone
represents some 5,000 victims. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">Meanwhile, Trump — who maintains that Trump
University was “a terrific school that did a
fantastic job” — has tried to bully his
opponents out of the suit. Lawyers for [one of
the victims] Tarla Makaeff have requested a
protective order from the court “to protect
her from further retaliation.” According to
court documents, Trump has threatened to sue
Makaeff personally, as well as her attorneys.
He’s already brought a $100 million
counterclaim against the New York attorney
general’s office.</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">The article also provides a link to an
article in <i><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/03/the-art-of-the-upsell-how-donald-trump-profits-from-free-seminars/284450/">The
Atlantic</a></i> which says,</span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">Every university has admission
standards and Trump University was no
exception. The playbook spells out the one
essential qualification in caps: “ALL PAYMENTS
MUST BE RECEIVED IN FULL.” Basically, anyone
with a valid credit card was “admitted” to
Trump University.</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: small;">I'm totally amazed that some Americans would elect
someone like Donald Trump to run for
President. Who <b><i>are</i></b> these
Americans? I don't see any possibility
that they represent any kind of majority, but
they certainly seem fired up and
dedicated. And I certainly could be wrong
about how many there are. On TV they seem
to be angry bullies, reminding me once more of
the followers of fascist leaders in the mid 20th
century. Mussolini had his admirers and
followers, too. When I talk with my
Republican relatives, all they will talk about
is how much they dislike Hillary Clinton.
It's as if they are embarrassed to be supporting
the Republican candidate, but they seem to feel
it's their duty to make sure Hillary Clinton
isn't elected. Why won't they vote for Hillary Clinton? Because they just don't <b><i>like</i></b> her. They'd rather vote for a fascist nutcase instead.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://media.giphy.com/media/c1zUxcC1feI1O/giphy.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://media.giphy.com/media/c1zUxcC1feI1O/giphy.gif" /></a></div>
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-61308328417988340302016-04-13T10:12:00.001-07:002016-04-18T06:56:24.726-07:00Google street view time travelI've used <a href="https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/">Google Maps' Street View</a> to look around my home town, around Washington DC, and around Chicago its suburbs, and for awhile I assumed that Google just ran it's camera car up and down streets of the USA. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.androidheadlines.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/url3.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.androidheadlines.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/url3.jpeg" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Then, about 6 months ago, I wondered if I could use it to locate where a Rational Science Methodist conference was held in a small town in Scotland. Since I knew the address, I quickly discovered the "conference" was held in this pub:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhC1QvUhQCK0IbEiW-n7wzCPWJZHLUHBy_jec6DFE7BrFt0wuem4MJguZ6ajFWVcU-CUr_xSYzmnaAb3mrpQZ53d806bljPVPmIosf1cv2SYusmyeokhm7Ft3R1lSGzO5NOBCm3JGe2WRHl/s1600/the-loch-doon.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhC1QvUhQCK0IbEiW-n7wzCPWJZHLUHBy_jec6DFE7BrFt0wuem4MJguZ6ajFWVcU-CUr_xSYzmnaAb3mrpQZ53d806bljPVPmIosf1cv2SYusmyeokhm7Ft3R1lSGzO5NOBCm3JGe2WRHl/s320/the-loch-doon.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I spent hours touring Dalmellington, Scotland, via Street View. Then, when I was done, I never thought about touring any other location -- until yesterday. <br />
<br />
Yesterday, I wondered what Misawa, Japan, looks like today. When I was there from mid-1963 to mid-1965 I took hundreds of photographs. I also wondered if Google Street View had ever been to such a remote place.<br />
<br />
So, I used Google Maps to locate Misawa and then picked what looked like the main street to see (via Street View) what it looked like today. It didn't look anything like what I remembered. <b><i>Nothing</i></b> in the town looked <b><i>anything</i></b> like what I remembered. Then I realized I needed to find some reference point to make sure I knew where I was. The only reference point that I was certain was in the same place today as it was 53 years ago was the main gate to Misawa Air Force Base. Here is what it looked like in the winter of 1963 or 1964 (you can click on the images to view larger versions):<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjmItmmmNzME3QqzvfgQhmLBaZDxQG4B6NKIN0bR07by5kkcWkDrncd72sSIffrGJD19wjkjqWPcQNWWV-DBlJxL1lEIth3m29GWkb0Y1c0DpYVsbtEDQLj6RoHcOjz4sfOhEe-lbrLg0f/s1600/Misawa-main-gate.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjmItmmmNzME3QqzvfgQhmLBaZDxQG4B6NKIN0bR07by5kkcWkDrncd72sSIffrGJD19wjkjqWPcQNWWV-DBlJxL1lEIth3m29GWkb0Y1c0DpYVsbtEDQLj6RoHcOjz4sfOhEe-lbrLg0f/s320/Misawa-main-gate.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Here's what is looked like in September 2015, when Google's street view camera car passed by:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOwOaDgFITh6A1Si4iISgizbuK0aZMPAax6oYD6YB4dWTjdIrgeMQ4toI3M8hI-dcLqcbbZe8n4G2EXmR4e8q-Z9i-WdaQijtt9MT6_xlIM3xl7N7hzusuu489yKwymmnSKhDmQ9hPEo9u/s1600/Misawa-2015-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="161" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOwOaDgFITh6A1Si4iISgizbuK0aZMPAax6oYD6YB4dWTjdIrgeMQ4toI3M8hI-dcLqcbbZe8n4G2EXmR4e8q-Z9i-WdaQijtt9MT6_xlIM3xl7N7hzusuu489yKwymmnSKhDmQ9hPEo9u/s320/Misawa-2015-01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
At some point in time, probably in 1964, they added a sign over the main gate:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsylXLgN8y0eAK8kHtI6CKcPeqR5u1FOK8eUVL_qNkH0v7Dbi-vgnqiaJUyPltKhhnXh6KOAmCZsKQklEiDb3xJaGhquebkqHSFWZI5cxPtt6EBbgga812cgK0PuVA9LPZ8bMLOBuT3Uv8/s1600/20121213093120_01a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsylXLgN8y0eAK8kHtI6CKcPeqR5u1FOK8eUVL_qNkH0v7Dbi-vgnqiaJUyPltKhhnXh6KOAmCZsKQklEiDb3xJaGhquebkqHSFWZI5cxPtt6EBbgga812cgK0PuVA9LPZ8bMLOBuT3Uv8/s320/20121213093120_01a.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
These days, the sign seems to be stone or concrete, and it's located on a grassy area outside the gate: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3-46g9_Hq1hJ3JA2PddEGglFSRkL6YmYKOMnZDU4D_A2DQKH0lCnijwXCNw9HR_2nQGNf1m3WA3oOLJQmycBaWncGUTLO_Ts6CEs5b3cBjiVMA6mdXpGVTVLZVrxhgI1tljQkIK23ftk2/s1600/Misawa-2015-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="162" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3-46g9_Hq1hJ3JA2PddEGglFSRkL6YmYKOMnZDU4D_A2DQKH0lCnijwXCNw9HR_2nQGNf1m3WA3oOLJQmycBaWncGUTLO_Ts6CEs5b3cBjiVMA6mdXpGVTVLZVrxhgI1tljQkIK23ftk2/s320/Misawa-2015-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Using the main gate as a starting point, I was able to locate the main street which looked like this in 1964 when the Emperor drove through on his way to his plane at the air base:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VuYPX1nI4X_dM474Co1nvrSyENLTv0nkb9P9yGEVN498sJWHyf-N6J_P8g19Q1J06D0oaueS43dU1pU0G-6WT-NmSqLAnGzioo7aVLletrJncm-p4yqzNK10c4Pfr8LMulB08dPlyt1l/s1600/Emperor-May-63-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VuYPX1nI4X_dM474Co1nvrSyENLTv0nkb9P9yGEVN498sJWHyf-N6J_P8g19Q1J06D0oaueS43dU1pU0G-6WT-NmSqLAnGzioo7aVLletrJncm-p4yqzNK10c4Pfr8LMulB08dPlyt1l/s320/Emperor-May-63-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
And here is what that approximate same point looks like today:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNRouDr3aKwaNCC5kMpbj5PAxd9xKuGrvLVJcpDyrImk8qiiD_xFXA3clqhuqFQ5q8SHPgLTyor-479HxfLmDlf8IwOzeg7bVSsej8qQUSV6L1fZKc2rAb33D2hSkuO-r0W6FZAeGBlVas/s1600/Emperor-Sept-2015-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNRouDr3aKwaNCC5kMpbj5PAxd9xKuGrvLVJcpDyrImk8qiiD_xFXA3clqhuqFQ5q8SHPgLTyor-479HxfLmDlf8IwOzeg7bVSsej8qQUSV6L1fZKc2rAb33D2hSkuO-r0W6FZAeGBlVas/s320/Emperor-Sept-2015-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
A big part of the change was undoubtedly the need to replace flammable wood structures with concrete block buildings. I remember one major fire while I was there that burned down several side-by-side businesses. But, they must have razed virtually <b><i>every</i></b> building on both sides of the main drag to widen the street and transform in into what it looks like today. And they must have done the same thing to most of the rest of the town.<br />
<br />
(Several days after writing the paragraph above, I found the explanation for how they were able to widen the main street. The whole center of Misawa burned down in January 1966. Click <a href="http://www.usafssmisawa.com/misawa-images/displayimage.php?album=9&pos=44">HERE</a> to visit a web site with 75 photos related to the fire.) <br />
<br />
Back in the 1960s, there was an alley less than a hundred feet from the Air Base main gate. That alley (now a side street) was lined with a string of at least a dozen bars, restaurants and pawn shops side by side. Back in the 1960s, it was called Nakashio Koji, which translated to "the small street next to the Nakashio department store." It was the only street I knew by name.<br />
<br />
I never took a picture of the entrance to Nakashio Koji while I was there, but today it is a narrow side street. Here's a current picture showing how close it was and is to the main gate:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrSOvaChnrzPCnsV2LRV1J-7RRfcjCzars2O84cqSubij4ufuV6GG5p3ZqpkIqg91ESvZysNhrBDUvtIGzhxEXPtnRS-QSrEyUrMZSz4fuXhNesOzVp4hvltyHvBtxERtQ9-EyGn6I1kED/s1600/Nakashio-koji-now-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="140" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrSOvaChnrzPCnsV2LRV1J-7RRfcjCzars2O84cqSubij4ufuV6GG5p3ZqpkIqg91ESvZysNhrBDUvtIGzhxEXPtnRS-QSrEyUrMZSz4fuXhNesOzVp4hvltyHvBtxERtQ9-EyGn6I1kED/s320/Nakashio-koji-now-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The side street makes a bend to the left behind the first building on the left. Here's a picture I took of the area just beyond the bend when I was there:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjri1RbTeYnflOxkePzcow7a89OIodCUjy_lnjQqxvh5_w7AcykD9MvZ-_UUdLodSpIQ3s0SosL6Jf5d4qLAf8Jlznv_c3Mtk11RHr4EVcqbCYbG2EX3UjxDnRaTfyROdFXX-2IrvCER8ZB/s1600/Nakashio-koji-then.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjri1RbTeYnflOxkePzcow7a89OIodCUjy_lnjQqxvh5_w7AcykD9MvZ-_UUdLodSpIQ3s0SosL6Jf5d4qLAf8Jlznv_c3Mtk11RHr4EVcqbCYbG2EX3UjxDnRaTfyROdFXX-2IrvCER8ZB/s320/Nakashio-koji-then.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Here's what it looked like to Google's camera car in 2015:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivC1xx0NXVyZd6ILJX4GFiGfHyRtBhjZTSjFBVTgbQepsAU-OiQITeAeKrOiy0yJg5cRJK2fSLpsmqv1Yn53-fD8IFMesUZ8op5fXi_SycGKpKnmDzj8_Sn0N0i6E6AU-pMYTi8K4GQ8dX/s1600/Nakashio-koji-now.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivC1xx0NXVyZd6ILJX4GFiGfHyRtBhjZTSjFBVTgbQepsAU-OiQITeAeKrOiy0yJg5cRJK2fSLpsmqv1Yn53-fD8IFMesUZ8op5fXi_SycGKpKnmDzj8_Sn0N0i6E6AU-pMYTi8K4GQ8dX/s320/Nakashio-koji-now.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The street still seems to have several bars and restaurants, but there's now one or two businesses occupying the same amount of space where there used to be a jumble of four or five bars.<br />
<br />
After using Google street view to tour Misawa for a few hours, I tried finding some places in England to see what they look like today compared to the 1990's when was last there. They don't look all that much different. For example, here's a shot I took at an intersection in London at least 20 years ago:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwCGKSDM7oyXKNoMP1HTc_1kddtfrF02NbrSPRYoFR87toXSS_JYzfQF5QB_Mrb3Kyo1UuNhFCfwW9UvJeI7el6F3Po_m91MDJ0zG3-Wo0L3MDBU1tqN-pqWcz2-V6rjqOj83fQlwJWBkG/s1600/London-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwCGKSDM7oyXKNoMP1HTc_1kddtfrF02NbrSPRYoFR87toXSS_JYzfQF5QB_Mrb3Kyo1UuNhFCfwW9UvJeI7el6F3Po_m91MDJ0zG3-Wo0L3MDBU1tqN-pqWcz2-V6rjqOj83fQlwJWBkG/s320/London-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The name of the street is clearly visible on the sign at the lower right corner of the picture, so I was able to easily locate it as it looks today:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKkqtCixr2vO3-rfxA-UCNFH8CXav1BJhXhp_u5py2uT-nmXEqy24T_eauUpb1TtqQo58j23nMHkYOfO95CSjb3q9r9cX7GdFVW9UQjn_IJOsSQ02Ta0TGKWu1IKbnxm4YwtyllIt5xLac/s1600/London-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="236" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKkqtCixr2vO3-rfxA-UCNFH8CXav1BJhXhp_u5py2uT-nmXEqy24T_eauUpb1TtqQo58j23nMHkYOfO95CSjb3q9r9cX7GdFVW9UQjn_IJOsSQ02Ta0TGKWu1IKbnxm4YwtyllIt5xLac/s320/London-01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The street sign is no longer on the fence, it's now on the corner of the building. The ground floor windows of that building seem to now be bricked over. And there seem to be fewer signs on the buildings down the street, but the Halepi Greek Restaurant is still there, just with a new paint job. And the hospital a few doors down now seems to occupy additional space that was previously occupied by two other businesses, but generally things look about the same.<br />
<br />
Then I tried Las Vegas, which I know is very different today compared to what it looked like when I last visited it. <br />
<br />
Here's a photo I took of the Stratosphere Tower when it was under construction:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggqEsov_r9kDjW2SdfbhH_Cka0Lq0EqTh1wOvORKx2d7-TxUrTjCSUaVe1_3ksApvtrtZT-3D_LEquQQ2WN-OePiGqm4FJs7Y7AYVltZkTp1AmrPto852YVG3Kai8TZa7xYgm62ezzfh-N/s1600/Tower-01-Then.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggqEsov_r9kDjW2SdfbhH_Cka0Lq0EqTh1wOvORKx2d7-TxUrTjCSUaVe1_3ksApvtrtZT-3D_LEquQQ2WN-OePiGqm4FJs7Y7AYVltZkTp1AmrPto852YVG3Kai8TZa7xYgm62ezzfh-N/s320/Tower-01-Then.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<br />
And here is what it looks like today:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuahEtBJoZDlyf1NXgRZvATnlW3ih8IouVQaceoXhC-w0olwR4T9UrDaWwjizczk_rLNvN_u0Ghmc-Ojzt-eXmIFVFQHOyAjM2FyJhMhtOqGlOzc3gHqLG6qKN8IzB_gQjEjp_bGXXnHUC/s1600/Tower-01-Now.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuahEtBJoZDlyf1NXgRZvATnlW3ih8IouVQaceoXhC-w0olwR4T9UrDaWwjizczk_rLNvN_u0Ghmc-Ojzt-eXmIFVFQHOyAjM2FyJhMhtOqGlOzc3gHqLG6qKN8IzB_gQjEjp_bGXXnHUC/s320/Tower-01-Now.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Except for completing the construction, this particular view isn't all the different today. The "General Store" is still there and looks virtually unchanged. The biggest difference is that I used a standard camera lens and Google uses a wide-angle lens, which makes the "General Store" look a lot farther away from the tower than it really is.<br />
<br />
Construction on the tower began in February 1992, so the photos show only 24 years of change.<br />
<br />
I'm constantly amazed by the things that can be done on the Internet, and viewing previously visited locations is one of the more amazing things.<br />
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-90243646066051528682016-02-23T09:58:00.005-08:002021-05-07T09:20:28.637-07:00What is Time?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div><p>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "book antiqua" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"> </span></i></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "book antiqua" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgShhyQesjB-YEzBRo_WF3bsfdfAfn0e9_OypmH0bUIVBE3h7jihdvRN2N-5TDQSZNUKFzAY9Sxy3bohLxP3dHTZRz-Rclif02pnQ_Oktnvre4k2ovW4ax6g48Npq6rVityWltmG-RFciO9/s480/Einstein-quote-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgShhyQesjB-YEzBRo_WF3bsfdfAfn0e9_OypmH0bUIVBE3h7jihdvRN2N-5TDQSZNUKFzAY9Sxy3bohLxP3dHTZRz-Rclif02pnQ_Oktnvre4k2ovW4ax6g48Npq6rVityWltmG-RFciO9/s320/Einstein-quote-02.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></i></div><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "book antiqua" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i><p></p><p><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "book antiqua" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Albert Einstein’s explanation of Time Dilation,
along with “The Twin Paradox” explained by Paul<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Langevin, pose
two scientific questions:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(1) ”What IS
Time if it can be dilated?” and (2) “HOW is Time dilated by velocity and
gravity?” The answers below may be only a re-visualization of what has
been known for over a century, but it appears the topic has never before been
explained by a layman in layman’s terms.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> (For the complete explanation, click <a href="http://vixra.org/pdf/1602.0281v2.pdf">HERE</a>.)
</span></span></i><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false"
DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="371">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footer"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of figures"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope return"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="line number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="page number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of authorities"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="macro"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="toa heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Closing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Message Header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Salutation"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Date"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Note Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Block Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Hyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="FollowedHyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Document Map"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Plain Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="E-mail Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Top of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal (Web)"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Acronym"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Cite"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Code"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Definition"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Keyboard"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Preformatted"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Sample"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Typewriter"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Variable"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Table"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation subject"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="No List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Contemporary"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Elegant"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Professional"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Balloon Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Theme"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true"
Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:107%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]--><br />
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false"
DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="371">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footer"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of figures"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope return"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="line number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="page number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of authorities"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="macro"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="toa heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Closing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Message Header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Salutation"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Date"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Note Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Block Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Hyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="FollowedHyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Document Map"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Plain Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="E-mail Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Top of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal (Web)"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Acronym"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Cite"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Code"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Definition"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Keyboard"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Preformatted"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Sample"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Typewriter"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Variable"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Table"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation subject"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="No List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Contemporary"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Elegant"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Professional"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Balloon Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Theme"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true"
Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:107%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
</p><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Time is particle spin. What we <i><b>perceive</b></i> as time are the <i><b>effects</b></i> of particle spin.<br /><br />We <i><b>perceive</b></i> time as <b><u>non</u></b>-cyclical processes, such as growth, aging and decay. We <b><i>measure</i></b> time by cyclical processes, such as the rotation of the earth, the seasons, the phases of the moon, etc. But Time itself is particle spin. <b><u>Local</u></b> particle spin determines how fast things grow, age and decay <b>locally</b>, and <b>local</b> particle spin determines the rate of <b>local</b> cyclical processes, such as our heart beat, our sleep cycles, and the ticking of local clocks. Thus we will perceive different effects of Time and particle spin in different locations depending upon our velocity through space and the gravitational strength at each location. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">What we
commonly measure and call “Time” is just an agreed-upon standard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Two centuries ago, “noon” occurred at a
different time in nearly every town and city.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Clocks were set to 12:00 “noon” when the sun was at its highest point
during the day.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then the need for
railroad schedules gradually created a requirement that everyone must use an
agreed-upon standard for when “noon” occurred in a specific “time zone.”</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">In his 1905
paper, Albert Einstein viewed time in a very different way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He explained that Time will run slower for an
object whenever the object <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>moves</u></i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For convenience, he used clocks to describe
how movement (velocity) dilates (slows down) Time: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-left: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span face=""arial narrow" , sans-serif">If
at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the
stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the
velocity <i>v</i> along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two
clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the
other which has remained at B by ½<i>tv</i><sup>2</sup>/<i>c</i><sup>2</sup> (up to magnitudes of
fourth and higher order), <i>t</i> being the time occupied in the journey from
A to B.</span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">
</span><br />
<div style="margin-left: 0.5in;">
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span face=""arial narrow" , sans-serif">It
is at once apparent that this result still holds good if the clock moves from A
to B in any polygonal line, and also when the points A and B coincide.</span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">
</span><br />
<div style="margin-left: 0.5in;">
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span face=""arial narrow" , sans-serif">If
we assume that the result proved for a polygonal line is also valid for a continuously
curved line, we arrive at this result: If one of two synchronous clocks at A is
moved in a closed curve with constant velocity until it returns to A, the
journey lasting <i>t</i> seconds, then by the clock which has remained at rest
the traveled clock on its arrival at A will be ½<i>tv</i><sup>2</sup>/<i>c</i><sup>2</sup>
second slow. Thence we conclude that a balance-clock at the equator must go
more slowly, by a very small amount, than a precisely similar clock situated at
one of the poles under otherwise identical conditions. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">The last
sentence above explains that a clock at the equator will run slower than a
clock at the North Pole simply because the clock at the equator is moving at about
1,000 miles per hour around the Earth’s axis while a clock at the North Pole
just rotates in place once per 24 hours.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Everything</i> at the equator that
measures Time will run more slowly than an identical object at the North Pole. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A human
being standing on the equator will <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">age</i>
more slowly (by a very small amount) than a human being standing at the North
Pole.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUOh-uNxm8v0c2RXaqle0jcJs1bnezim3X8t4Gvy2hfOjiJWUBYkmtrKT2T1ffjHRTgqYymPHA_VzFvDhwWIYfk7Fo2rE5NDR5QVhOC4JnNVTPPL1X9UvgVLpjuHGV8HmLu3kwZpsZfpcm/s1600/earth-spin-time.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="244" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUOh-uNxm8v0c2RXaqle0jcJs1bnezim3X8t4Gvy2hfOjiJWUBYkmtrKT2T1ffjHRTgqYymPHA_VzFvDhwWIYfk7Fo2rE5NDR5QVhOC4JnNVTPPL1X9UvgVLpjuHGV8HmLu3kwZpsZfpcm/s320/earth-spin-time.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; mso-no-proof: yes;"></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">This means
that Time can (and does) “move” at a different rate for each of us.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The rate with which Time “moves” depends upon
your velocity and your distance from a large gravitational mass.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The closer you are to the center of a large
gravitational mass – such as the Earth – the slower time will move.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Plus, because the Earth is not a
perfect sphere but is slightly flattened at the poles, a clock at the North
Pole is also 13 miles closer to the center of the Earth than a clock at the equator.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The clock at the North Pole will thus run slower
by a very slight amount, an amount which must be added to any amount of slowing
caused by velocity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">The question
then becomes: Exactly what are we measuring if Time will move at a different
rate for someone on the equator versus someone at the North Pole?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">It isn’t <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">just</i> velocity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A stationary person sitting motionless in
“absolute space” will age normally, and his wristwatch will tick off the
seconds normally. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">But, as soon
as he starts to move, Time for him and his clocks will start to slow down in
comparison to what was occurring when he was sitting motionless.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Since we are
all moving, being “stationary” in “absolute space” is basically just a hypothetical
concept.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the speed of light is NOT
hypothetical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That is one reason why <span class="uficommentbody">Time Dilation is typically computed by measuring an
object’s velocity relative to the speed of light instead of relative to a purely
hypothetical stationary object.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><span class="uficommentbody"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">The speed of light is not only fixed, it cannot be exceeded
by anything yet known to man.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And since nothing
can move faster than the speed of light, that means that Time Dilation <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>must</u></i> be caused by a some kind of “conflict”
with the speed of light – a circumstance where Time is somehow forced to slow down because the movement of Time cannot exceed the speed of
light.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">It appears there is only one “thing” that can cause Time to
slow down when it conflicts with the speed of light – particle spin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And that observation seems to indicate that
particle spin <u>IS</u> Time, and Time <u>IS</u> particle spin.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">O</span></span><span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">ne “fundamental unit of time” is one
complete "spin" of a <b><i>stationary</i></b> particle. When a particle moves, the completion of one full "spin" must slow in some way because the distance covered during the spin must be added to the lateral distance the particle itself has moved. And that immediately conflicts with the fixed speed of light. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span></span></span><br />
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span>
<br />
(Muons are unstable subatomic particles with a mean lifetime of 2.2 microseconds. They are created locally when cosmic rays collide with particles in Earth’s upper atmosphere. Their short mean lifetime does not provide enough time for the particle to reach the surface of the Earth, yet they do reach the surface in great numbers. That happens because their high speed (about 99 percent of the speed of light) slows down the Time they experience (i.e., they experience Time Dilation), allowing them to travel further before decaying.)<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">So, “a fundamental unit of time" is one complete spin of
a hypothetical <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>stationary</u></i>
particle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, the Time we all
experience is <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">NOT</b> fixed because particles
do not remain stationary, and thus the time it takes for a particle to complete
one spin is not fixed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One complete spin
of a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>moving</u></i> particle is one <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>dilated</u></i> unit of time. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Unfortunately, we do not know with any precision what a
particle looks like or how it spins.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Some theoretical models show an electron spinning just as the Earth
spins on its axis. A different model has the particle rotating like a spinning donut. Another theory has particles <b><i>vibrating</i></b> instead of spinning. Whatever is happening, the movement cannot exceed the speed of light and therefore the spinning must slow down. A massive gravitational force will also slow the spin. </span></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<span class="uficommentbody"></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">This way of viewing time also indicates that Time can <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">stop</i></b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When an object (such as an electron or a
human) reaches the speed of light, the object ceases to exist as a coherent
object and will become waves of energy moving across the universe forever.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Time will stop for that object.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Likewise, when an object enters a black hole,
the electron will cease to spin and Time will stop.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">This means that <i><b>dilated</b></i> Time is the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">normal</i> form of Time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Everything
in the universe is moving <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>and</u></i> is
being affected by gravity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the amount
of Time Dilation is normally so small that we have all agreed to use a man-made
"STANDARD" (such as the time measurement provided by the atomic clock
at the National Institute for Standards and Technology) instead of trying to
compute our own personal rate of time using the tiny clocks known as "particle
spin.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="uficommentbody"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">What is Time?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Time is
the spin of sub-atomic particles at a specific location.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Time
began shortly after the Big Bang, when particles such as electrons were formed,
and Time will continue until electrons and other particles stop spinning.</span></span></div>
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-16793243636491442662016-02-06T14:15:00.000-08:002016-02-06T14:56:20.501-08:00Questions for the 4th Rational Physics Conference<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9ns0HtcAndBIWOInTJ_W5GuS2sRA-Sx4dJOpOUT2JEkx0Gw2fyLooQCqtQEqoWPXXmhKN0YEspd5_e4bPSAg4IGZU-e4IQiCoScmmZ6cAbVKyY4Z3egHb0nJzguVGHZnb6-p_dLmIIl41/s1600/light-hypothesis.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9ns0HtcAndBIWOInTJ_W5GuS2sRA-Sx4dJOpOUT2JEkx0Gw2fyLooQCqtQEqoWPXXmhKN0YEspd5_e4bPSAg4IGZU-e4IQiCoScmmZ6cAbVKyY4Z3egHb0nJzguVGHZnb6-p_dLmIIl41/s320/light-hypothesis.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The Fourth Rational Physics Conference will be held in Acapulco on
February 22. According to <a href="http://www.rationalphysics.info/default.asp?dir=Home/Speakers+%26+Abstracts">the schedule</a>, Bill Gaede will be presenting
his theory about "The Rope Model of Light." We know from <a href="http://www.scientific.net/AMR.433-440.5809">his 2010 paper</a>
on the subject that he will "begin by ASSUMING that a physical medium
underlies the phenomenon known as 'light" and that this entity takes on
the configuration of a rope."<br />
<br />
So, it seems time to suggest some questions that hi<span class="text_exposed_show">s audience can ask which will make it clear that his assumptions are not necessarily true. Here are some suggested questions:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="text_exposed_show">
1. What are the "ropes" in your hypothesis made of?<br />
<br />
2. What experiments can scientists perform to confirm the existence of these "ropes"? <br />
<br />
3. If there are at least ten quadrillion vigintillion "ropes"
connected to every atom in the universe, as would be true if every atom in the universe is connected by a "rope" to every other atom, why don't any of those "ropes" show up in scanning, tunneling electron microscope images
of individual atoms?<br />
<br />
4. How do you explain the fact that
numerous experiments show that light waves move up and down, not in the
spiral pattern your theory requires?<br />
<br />
5. Light waves and radio
waves are the same thing, just with different distances between waves
(different frequencies). A radio wave can be as small as 1 millimeter
from crest to crest and as large as 100 kilometers (68 miles) from crest
to crest. How does the "rope" between two atoms get longer or shorter
to accommodate the different number of twists?<br />
<br />
6. If light and
gravity "ropes" connect every atom in the universe to every other atom,
why does light pass through glass but not through steel?<br />
<br />
7. If
light and gravity are carried by the same intertwined "rope," why does a
dark object like a brown dwarf produce very intense gravity but no
light?<br />
<br />
8. Are you saying that if I build a flashlight, turn it
on and shine it on the wall, the light from the atoms in the flashlight
were already connected to the atoms in the wall and have been since the
beginning of time?<br />
<br />
9. If I walk through a beam of light, how
does the gravity threads in the "rope" remain connected to the rest of
the atoms in the universe while the light thread switches from atoms on
the wall to atoms in my shirt?<br />
<br />
10. Scientists have the ability to fire one photon at a time from a photon gun to a detector. How is this possible if the photon is a "rope" that is already connected to the detector? <br />
<br />
I'll think about adding some more or exchanging the questions above with better questions as I think of them. Meanwhile, I'm open to suggestions.</div>
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-67258211594640799292016-01-31T07:36:00.000-08:002016-02-01T07:16:05.003-08:00Inactive Black Holes and Dark Matter<big>I recently watched the PBS NOVA presentation of the science documentary
called "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_Fever">Particle
Fever</a>." The documentary is 99 minutes long, and PBS had a two hour time slot to fill, so they filled it with pieces of some "science cartoons." They weren't jokey
cartoons created to humorously illustrate
scientific concepts, they were serious
explanations scientists had given to media people on some occasion, and cartoonists had then illustrated
those explanations via
animation. I was particularly fascinated by a
"cartoon" from 2012 about "dark matter." I
ended up watching it twice, and the next day I
did a search on YouTube to see if I could find it there. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diGqS2yhPIM">I
did</a>. It came from parts of the
cartoon below. (Other parts came from <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqAWqwh3Etw">HERE</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMvT2sriq34">HERE</a>):
</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8kCtiOS_F_M/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8kCtiOS_F_M?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
<big>I'd never before heard of "Dark Matter"
described as "blobs of stuff." Dark Matter
has never been something I've been particularly
fascinated with, so I probably just hadn't been
paying serious attention. I only
recalled Dark Matter being described as
something <b><i>unknown</i></b>, an <b><i>unknown</i></b>
mass that was only detectable by the
gravitational <b>force</b> it exerted on
galaxies and elsewhere. In the above
cartoon, at about the 2 minute mark they talk
about "strong lensing" and how "<b>blobs</b>" of
dark matter will distort what we see if there is
a "<b>blob</b>" of dark matter between us and
some distant galaxy.</big><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8n7bqM2ATB796uzLWbCuMW34BVaVTa84xF5d1HKpmLKvI5AWH06C3PxswqNV2eBzwzFeN0reOFtIxIoJTR09mbzEiwuE7BozBviV0T1mZFKUCxi23jGaawVDxQYbrWq2oVBgnj_ZwzH8B/s1600/DarkMatter1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="267" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8n7bqM2ATB796uzLWbCuMW34BVaVTa84xF5d1HKpmLKvI5AWH06C3PxswqNV2eBzwzFeN0reOFtIxIoJTR09mbzEiwuE7BozBviV0T1mZFKUCxi23jGaawVDxQYbrWq2oVBgnj_ZwzH8B/s320/DarkMatter1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<big>My jaw dropped open. Somehow I'd
never heard Dark Matter described that way
before! I realized it's the same thing
that would happen if a <b><i>black hole</i></b>
was located at that spot! I could only
conclude that, <u><b>obviously there is some
connection between black holes and dark
matter!</b></u> <span style="color: red;"><u><i><b>They
might even be the same thing!</b></i></u></span>
<br />
<br />
But, I also realized that it wasn't very likely
that I would be the first to see that
connection. So, I did a Google search for <a href="https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=dark+matter+and+black+holes+difference">the
difference between black holes and dark matter</a>.
I quickly found an article titled "<a href="http://www.astronomy.com/news/2011/01/no-direct-link-between-black-holes-and-dark-matter">No
direct link between black holes and dark
matter.</a>" But it merely argues that
scientists don't see any connection between the
massive black hole at the center of a galaxy and
the dark matter that seems to be embedded among
the stars that form the galaxy itself.
That's an answer to a very different question!<br />
<br />
</big><big>Searching further via Google, I found
an article titled "<a href="http://www.zmescience.com/space/observations/dark-matter-black-hole-20022015/">Surprising
Link Found Between Dark Matter and Black Holes</a>."
It says that there seems to be a relationship
between the amount of dark matter scattered
around in a galaxy and the <b><u>size</u></b> of the black
hole at the center of the galaxy. Another
article titled "<a href="https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/news/2015-07">Dark
Matter Guides Growth of Supermassive Black
Holes</a>" says the same thing. That
also wasn't what I was looking for. It
discussed questions I wasn't ready to ask.<br />
<br />
On a less prestigious source, I found another
article titled "<a href="https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ask-ethan-56-are-black-holes-made-of-dark-matter-b2cc579a232c#.jvs7w2f7h">Are
Black Holes Made of Dark Matter?</a>" It
concludes by arguing that the answer is
"No." But, the question for which I wanted
to find the answer was just the reverse: "<b>Is
Dark Matter Made from Black Holes?" </b></big><br />
<br />
<big><big><small>Then I found an article titled "<a href="http://www.space.com/23583-dark-matter-tiny-black-holes.html">Is
Dark Matter Made of <i><b>Tiny</b></i>
Black Holes?</a>" Except for the
word "tiny," it was very close to the
question I wanted to ask. The article
contains this information:</small><br />
</big> </big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big><b>The consensus right now is
that dark matter consists of a new type of
particle, one that interacts very weakly at
best with all the known forces of the
universe except gravity. As such, <span style="color: red;">dark matter is invisible
and mostly intangible, with its presence
only detectable via the gravitational pull
it exerts</span>.<br />
<br />
However, despite research from thousands of
scientists relying on the most powerful
particle accelerators on Earth and
laboratories buried deep underground, <span style="color: red;">no one has yet detected or
created any particles that might be dark
matter.</span> This led Kim Griest, an
astrophysicist at the University of
California, San Diego, and his colleagues to
investigate black holes as potential dark
matter candidates. <br />
</b></big>
<br />
<div id="stcpDiv" style="left: -1988px; position: absolute; top: -1999px;">
<b><big>The
consensus right now is that dark matter
consists of a new type of particle, one
that interacts very weakly at best with
all the known forces of the universe
except gravity. - See more at:
http://www.space.com/23583-dark-matter-tiny-black-holes.html#sthash.hsEI3xA1.dpuf</big></b></div>
</blockquote>
<big>Ah! That fitted very well with the
description I gave <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/396188730576334/permalink/434351150093425/?comment_id=436836203178253">on
my Facebook group</a> for what is at the
center of a black hole. I wrote that
"singularities" were just a way of saying there
was some unknown factor somewhere, it didn't
mean there was actually a "singularity" at the
center of a black hole. And, to me,
"portals" into another dimension were just
"fictions" that some scientists use to describe
what else <i><b>might</b></i> be at the center
of Black Holes. It's a mathematical model
that cannot be proved or even confirmed.
The way I visualized Black Holes was that they
had some kind of "super-dense" matter at their
centers. I wrote:</big><br />
<blockquote>
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><b>I
imagine that the "super-dense"
matter would have to be purified
quarks and leptons or whatever
smaller particles quarks and
leptons might be made of.
It couldn't be atoms.
Compressing atoms is what caused
the chain reaction that created
the black hole in the first
place.</b> </span></span></big><br />
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"></span></span></big></blockquote>
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g">I began
visualizing Dark Matter as being <i><b>inactive</b></i>
Black Holes which have gobbled up
everything in their vicinity and no
longer have anything nearby to grab
onto. Since they aren't
pulling in or pulling apart
anything, they do not generate the
tell-tale X-ray signatures of "active"
Black Holes. And they are too
far away from any individual stars
to show any noticeable affect on the
orbits of individual stars.
Furthermore, they don't have to be
"tiny." They just have to be
far enough away from any "food
source" that would allow them to
become "active." <b>They're
like fish traps in a lake where
all the fish have been caught and
removed. The traps still exist, but they're not doing anything.</b><br />
<br />
I wondered if the term "inactive
black hole" was something else that
others had thought about
before. Sure enough, <a href="https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=inactive+black+hole">a
Google search found</a> that they
had, although "<a href="https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=dormant+black+hole"><b><i>dormant</i></b>
black hole</a>" might be a more
common term. I didn't like the
word "dormant," since it implied an
habitual routine.
And the articles were far from what I
was looking for. They seem to
talk mostly about black holes at the
center of galaxies which no longer
seem to be spraying out X-rays -- or
which no longer spray X-Rays in our
direction. <br />
<br />
The way I was seeing things, if one
looks at this information logically, the whole
idea of dormant or inactive black
holes should put an end to all talk
of "singularities" and "portals" to
other dimensions. If a black
hole were a "singularity" or a
"portal," it should <b><i>disappear</i></b> when
it runs out of fuel and becomes
inactive. Why would the
"singularity" exist, and what would
keep the "portal" open, if nothing
was falling into it or going through
it? Besides, how can there be
tiny <i><b>and</b></i>
super-massive "singularities"?
Anything that is "infinitely small"
is just one size: "infinitely
small." There can't be a BIG
infinitely small.<br />
<br />
And an inactive portal to other
dimensions makes no sense,
either. Apparently, the only reason they
come up with the idea of a "portal"
to another dimension was to explain how all those
stars and other material can plunge into
a black hole like it was a
bottomless pit. Their answer:
it has to come out somewhere else --
in another universe. But, if
it comes out somewhere else, how can
the black hole get larger and
larger?<br />
<br />
It seems to me that the only logical
way you can have black holes that
come in various sizes, while also
having the capability to get larger
AND to merge with other black holes,
is if everything that falls into a
black hole is stripped of all of its
electromagnetic properties (i.e.,
positive and negative charges) so
that the remaining particles are
electromagnetically <b><i>neutral</i></b>
and can be stacked together like a
pile of bricks - or compressed into
a solid ball of inert particles (or
maybe Higgs bosons). It would just be a
(temporarily?) stable gravitational
mass. <br />
<br />
Mathematicians would probably <i><b>hate</b></i>
that idea. "Singularities" and
"portals" can be converted into
mathematics, but they evidently
can't mathematically create a stable
gravitational mass of the size
needed to form a black hole.
And it seems that mathematicians are
leading the search to explain what
is at the center of a black
hole. Which reminds me of
something <a href="http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Quotations/Einstein.html">Albert
Einstein</a> once said: <br />
</span></span></big>
<br />
<blockquote>
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g">Since
the mathematicians have invaded
the theory of relativity, I do not
understand it myself anymore.</span></span></big><br />
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"></span></span></big></blockquote>
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g">I
see two unanswered, interconnected
questions: (1) What is at the center
of a Black Hole? <b><i>and</i></b>
(2) What is dark matter?
Those question may need to be
answered <b><i>logically</i></b>
before the answers can be confirmed
mathematically. <br />
<br />
Logically, it seems to me that Dark
Matter is very likely just <b>inactive
Black Holes</b>. And the centers
of <i><b>all</b></i> black holes consist of neutral
particles (with mass) that can be
stacked together (and/or compressed)
without any nuclear fusion taking
place. (The cartoon says that at one
time people thought Dark Matter
might just be a collection of
neutrinos. But they decided
neutrinos don't have enough mass to
account for what was known about
Dark Matter. So, the centers of black holes
must also consist of something with more
mass.) <br />
<br />
Once you form an image of inactive
black holes, you can then start
visualizing them being slowly drawn
together by their massive
gravitational force to form larger
and larger black holes. </span></span></big><big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g">It seems that, instead
of using the Large Hadron Collider
to break things apart, the focus
should be on how neutral particles
can be created and compressed
together without causing nuclear
fusion.</span></span></big><br />
<br />
<big><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g">But, I'm not a scientist. I'm just a guy who is fascinated by science. <br />
</span></span></big><br />
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-67188485328105565322016-01-15T13:46:00.000-08:002016-01-16T08:26:18.067-08:00Analyzing the "Rational Scientific Method" <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc9gJQWgNXxTctMzzjzZ4iT6LCvM8BkR9yT9FPWZMW1BwKPNCiextk0KAKhqVD6FIqyLG8jMLSx30REJMW13rit1vBW80MLJ4rRPHlH4WVtgZwgwwXOMB0wNXDKlsIVorJaKkqVRouiOml/s1600/closed-mind1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="304" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc9gJQWgNXxTctMzzjzZ4iT6LCvM8BkR9yT9FPWZMW1BwKPNCiextk0KAKhqVD6FIqyLG8jMLSx30REJMW13rit1vBW80MLJ4rRPHlH4WVtgZwgwwXOMB0wNXDKlsIVorJaKkqVRouiOml/s320/closed-mind1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Having argued with Rational Scientific Methodists ("RSMists") <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/396188730576334/">on Facebook</a> for about six months, and having been thrown out of several of their <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/1696648560565391/permalink/1716389471924633/">Facebook groups</a> for asking questions they don't like, it seems to be time to write an analysis of what I learned about RSMism.<br />
<br />
First of all, RSMism is not "rational," it is not "scientific," and it's not even a "method." What they seem to believe to be "rational" is actually something they RATIONALIZED, i.e., it is something they twisted and distorted to make it fit their beliefs. <br />
<br />
Secondly, there is absolutely <u><i><b>nothing</b></i></u> "scientific" about their actions or their beliefs. They seem to be thoroughly ANTI-SCIENCE. They believe the great scientists like Einstein, Bohr, Oppenheimer and Feynman are "idiots." RSMist beliefs have almost <b><i>nothing</i></b> to do with science. It is really all about SEMANTICS. They have created some bizarre word definitions which are at the core of their belief system. They seem to believe that their WORD DEFINITIONS control the universe. Anything that conflicts with their word definitions is deemed "impossible." Any attempt to discuss science with them turns immediately into an argument over word definitions, and only their definitions are considered valid. Until you accept their definitions as the only valid definitions, you are not even worth talking with.<br />
<br />
Lastly, here's what one of the originators of RSMism, Monk E. Mind, provides as <a href="http://rationalsciencemethod.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-rational-scientific-method.html">his description</a> of their "method":<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>The Rational Scientific Method is how intelligent beings can objectively
and rationally explain phenomena and arrive at rational conclusions
about reality. Using this method is how we can achieve an understanding
of the world around us.</b></blockquote>
But, first you have to accept their word definitions as unambiguous gospel. If you don't, the method turns into nothing but endless arguments over word definitions. <span style="font-size: small;">Here are the <a href="http://rationalsciencemethod.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-rational-scientific-method.html">definitions
of some key RSMist words</a>:</span><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<b>Universe: matter (atoms) and space (nothing)<br /> Concept: the relationship between two or more objects<br /> Object: that which has shape<br /> Space: that which does not have shape<br /> Exist: matter + location<br /> Location: the set of static distances from one to all other objects <br /> Motion: Object + 2 or more locations</b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Their philosophy says that everything <b><i>must</i></b>
be either an object or a concept. RSMists
also have a pathological aversion to ambiguity,
so those definitions <b><i>must</i></b> apply
universally. There can be no </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">alternative
or secondary definitions.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjalUo7VeHD7_X93Fp9JKn81rK2him34gqnL73oSNsUSOo-wXI8LQKeXwO09edakoeMJH97IUS0UIpp1qbF11KnvFZQSE_tlHg5OX6ZE_rWlqUcC1l5ddsXf9WbJCQqi3d0rnK50GN_WQv/s1600/Argument.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjalUo7VeHD7_X93Fp9JKn81rK2him34gqnL73oSNsUSOo-wXI8LQKeXwO09edakoeMJH97IUS0UIpp1qbF11KnvFZQSE_tlHg5OX6ZE_rWlqUcC1l5ddsXf9WbJCQqi3d0rnK50GN_WQv/s320/Argument.jpg" width="271" /></a></div>
<br />
It wasn't long after I began arguing with them that I concluded that their name should really be "Rationalized <b>Semantic</b> Methodists," since they just argue about word definitions while acting like members of a high school clique who not only claim to be superior to all others, but who also verbally attack anyone who does not believe what they believe.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJBZ-Kd2FJIxUEOjAiVHO9Sxyqj1zBKPFtBYZiMHPopTM4_qbLX_sTcK8WndyODmIUs40VdrRccLxuMPcIKbeHephrPAT8nKmIE6FHF7BDzepgxpa3XSNXkfZtUWUCpjQw1YtRWivAlYxQ/s1600/signpost-A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJBZ-Kd2FJIxUEOjAiVHO9Sxyqj1zBKPFtBYZiMHPopTM4_qbLX_sTcK8WndyODmIUs40VdrRccLxuMPcIKbeHephrPAT8nKmIE6FHF7BDzepgxpa3XSNXkfZtUWUCpjQw1YtRWivAlYxQ/s320/signpost-A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Since it seems clear that they are also anti-authority, I asked one of them if he also believed in a number of conspiracy theories. He believed in some (9/11, JFK, MLK, Sandy Hook) but not in others (the moon landing "hoax" and the theory that the International Space Station doesn't exist). I was going to ask others if they also believed in various conspiracy theories, but they don't like any definition of the term "conspiracy theorist," so I was never able to get a discussion going on that topic. <br />
<br />
They do <i><u><b>not</b></u></i> believe in evidence. They declare so emphatically. Evidence can be ambiguous, and anything that can be ambiguous is something they don't want to have anything to do with. That is why they created their supposedly "<u><b>un</b></u>ambiguous" word definitions.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeZtWpDt-tACUlAa747uwNPZXfUzFnPuU3oJ-3icViMuFU5Hh5zxYorlO6X7g-4hTEo5dgq_f9qE-RXc1wDLeTZ8Fn6nwwiYThpHh44VwaQB7XMabSlrTZdgHtKhNaBRnOOzmxbNtrBUbO/s1600/Unambiguous.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeZtWpDt-tACUlAa747uwNPZXfUzFnPuU3oJ-3icViMuFU5Hh5zxYorlO6X7g-4hTEo5dgq_f9qE-RXc1wDLeTZ8Fn6nwwiYThpHh44VwaQB7XMabSlrTZdgHtKhNaBRnOOzmxbNtrBUbO/s320/Unambiguous.jpg" width="301" /></a></div>
<br />
But, it's very clear that it is all just a cover for the fact that <u><i><b>they do not understand science</b></i></u>, and they cannot accept that others understand science, since <b><i>the experts themselves state that they do not understand it!</i></b> RSMists seem to believe that anyone who admits to not understanding something is a total idiot. Albert Einstein admitted there were many things about the universe that he did not understand, so, in the eyes of RSMists, that makes Einstein an idiot. If everyone would just use their word definitions, there would never be anything that you do not understand. Here are some of their arguments: <br />
<br />
A hole does not "exist," i.e., it does not consist of matter at a location, therefore Black Holes are impossible. They cannot exist. So, there's nothing about them to <b><u>not</u></b> understand.<br />
<br />
The Big Bang never happened, since the universe consists of atoms and space, and you cannot create something out of nothing. So, there's nothing about Black Holes to <u><b>not</b></u> understand.<br />
<br />
Gravitation and quantum mechanics are theories that cannot be reconciled, so they are just temporary theories that might be invalidated tomorrow. So, there's nothing about them worth knowing. <br />
<br />
Aging and decay are not physical objects, therefore they <b><i>must</i></b> be only concepts, i.e., they are just in the mind of the observer. So, there's nothing about them worth knowing. <br />
<br />
What all this means is that there is no way to have an intelligent conversation with an RSMist. RSMists believe that their word definitions supply all that anyone needs to know about the universe. They believe that discussing their word definitions IS real science, and what scientists do is nonsense.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7wUwYzQlm91pOUSExnFMdMX_Nqv7UYblP385QXFNnFE-osE3Ss78zXA4xQmJhq7n8f3ynyx-YxhNQhYkgV7sS9Ay74RA8HScGHTmX4ooF2659k_-RkT17yP51fz8XuD9rBX7jPC4BSP-9/s1600/semantics-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="291" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7wUwYzQlm91pOUSExnFMdMX_Nqv7UYblP385QXFNnFE-osE3Ss78zXA4xQmJhq7n8f3ynyx-YxhNQhYkgV7sS9Ay74RA8HScGHTmX4ooF2659k_-RkT17yP51fz8XuD9rBX7jPC4BSP-9/s320/semantics-01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
What they are really doing, of course, is mental masturbation. Here are some <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mental+Masturbation">definitions of "mental masturbation"</a>: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>1. In academics it is the practice of using faulty premises to draw a conclusion.<br /><br />2. The pretense of superior knowledge or intelligence by claiming conjecture, theory, feeling or opinion as fact.</i><i><br /></i><br />
<br />
<i>3. Intellectual activity that serves no practical purpose. </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>4. The act of engaging in intelligent and interesting conversation purely
for the enjoyment of your own greatness and individuality.</i><br />
<br />
<i>5. The act of engaging in useless yet intellectually stimulating
conversation, usually as an excuse to avoid taking constructive action
in your life.</i><br />
<br />
<i>6. Overly intensive self gratifying procrastination, thought and
contemplation for a subject not necessarily warranting such effort. </i><br />
<i><br /></i></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuV5uIdovBuUOK7EphsVEBYHKNx6uQgo45o70Ro4ZXHG0EmfhwaFTrdVm1X3hpVQaRPHQeOv9h13djFb-cLTVhFg8XdUvijbZU4A-BK3Tc3aT3dV6IdSKOyMXrF8r9KbWipr94WRQdGgD9/s1600/RSM-MM-04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="181" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuV5uIdovBuUOK7EphsVEBYHKNx6uQgo45o70Ro4ZXHG0EmfhwaFTrdVm1X3hpVQaRPHQeOv9h13djFb-cLTVhFg8XdUvijbZU4A-BK3Tc3aT3dV6IdSKOyMXrF8r9KbWipr94WRQdGgD9/s320/RSM-MM-04.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
It's a shame that RSMists will just change the subject or run away when confronted with questions they do not like. For example, if the universe consists of only atoms + space, what is light? Is light an object or a concept? What is heat? Why can we see through glass but not through steel? What is sound? Do electrons exist? I'd still really like to have them answer those questions. <br />
<br />
<br />
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-2931447381986581722015-12-03T13:38:00.000-08:002015-12-05T09:19:50.440-08:00Singularities, Black Holes and the Big Bang<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfnyB1cNMhU2O0QUnZDYN7a5fhde2LNAzZKJRRI14UYoGLG672P_uVcHu4wNNe9Djq85EUN49ycmZaHB84NFygtcXfrXi4D66_dm6PREpLiy4XAFI09OCSaBOdYXDQjoCr3_2nrDA8Hcsc/s1600/singularity1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfnyB1cNMhU2O0QUnZDYN7a5fhde2LNAzZKJRRI14UYoGLG672P_uVcHu4wNNe9Djq85EUN49ycmZaHB84NFygtcXfrXi4D66_dm6PREpLiy4XAFI09OCSaBOdYXDQjoCr3_2nrDA8Hcsc/s320/singularity1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Stephen J. Crothers of
the Alpha Institute of Advanced Study,
Brisbane, Australia, who is also a well-known <a href="https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=rational%20scientific%20methodists%20%26%20their%20beliefs">Rational Scientific Methodist</a>, has written a new "scientific paper"
about "singularities" and black holes. It seems he paid $470 to have it published in a "scientific journal" of
dubious worth called "<a href="http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/index?journalid=122">The American Journal of Modern Physics</a>." In the
paper he argues that black holes are impossible because
singularities are illogical. According to Mr. Crothers:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="color: red; font-size: small;">"the whole theory of black holes is fallacious" </span></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="color: red; font-size: small;">"Just
as people who believe in ghosts assign the
action of ghosts to that which they do not
understand, cosmologists assign the action
of black holes to that which they do not
understand."</span></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="font-size: small;"> <span style="color: red;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}"><span class="UFICommentBody">"The intellectual decrepitude of modern physics and astronomy is clear indication that they are diseased and dying sciences."</span></span></span></span></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
The paper can be found at the link <a href="http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/html/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050101.15.html">HERE</a>. Some information about the so-called "scientific journal" in which the paper can be found is available at the links <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/10/15/mysterious-publisher-launches-with-44-journals/">HERE</a> and <a href="http://www.math.columbia.edu/%7Ewoit/wordpress/?p=5607">HERE</a>. Note that it is also not listed on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_physics_journals">Wikipedia</a> nor in the list of <a href="https://kofegeek.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/list-of-physics-journals-impact-factors-2013/">ranked physics journals</a>. The name of the "journal" is very similar to the <b><i>real</i></b> scientific journal, "<a href="http://scitation.aip.org/content/aapt/journal/ajp">The American Journal of Physics</a>," so don't be confused.<br />
<br />
What Mr. Crothers apparently fails to realize is that the existence of
black holes is generally considered to be a proven fact, while the existence of singularities is
generally considered to be purely theoretical. One concept does not depend upon
the other.<br />
<br />
It's always been my understanding that "singularities" are just what you get when you do not have all the information needed to make a calculation. Personally, I think there are probably spheres of super-dense matter at the center of black holes, since we know there are "regular" sized black holes that are formed when a star goes supernova, and there are <b><i>super massive</i></b> black holes at the center of galaxies. How can a "singularity" with no dimensions come in sizes big and small? The problem is, at this moment there is no way to prove what is at the center of either size black hole.<br />
<br />
But, we can do research to get more information about "singularities." I spent a couple hours on such research, and here is what I found: <br />
<br />
<a href="https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100123202354AAHwrX1">Yahoo</a> has this question: "<b>How does a gravitational singularity work?</b>"<br />
With this answer:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A gravitational singularity, that is, a place where the known laws of
the universe break down, is a "solution" to Einstein's theory of
gravitation. <b>But it is known that Einstein's equations are only a
partial description of reality. What is lacking is a theory that
integrates gravity with quantum mechanics. </b>If and when a "theory of
everything" is developed, we may have some idea what really lies at the
center of a black hole, but until then all we have is Einstein to go on.
<span style="color: red;"><b>The notion of a singularity, infinite density in an infinitely small
volume, is anathema to physicists; physicists detest infinities.</b></span>
Infinities in an equation are always a sign that something is wrong. One
way to avoid infinities is to adopt a different theory of space and
time. One such theory is loop quantum gravity which says that there is a
minimum unit of space and a minimum unit of time. Once a minimum unit
of space is filled, nothing more can be crammed into it. If anything
more is to be added, it has to fit into the next minimum unit of space.
Hence, no infinities and no singularities. But so far loop quantum
gravity is only the outline of a concept, a concept that eventually will
have to reconcile gravity with quantum mechanics if it is to have any
validity." </blockquote>
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_singularity">Wikipedia</a> has this comment:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Many theories in physics have mathematical singularities of one kind
or another. Equations for these physical theories predict that the ball
of mass of some quantity becomes infinite or increases without limit.
<b>This is generally a sign for a missing piece in the theory</b>, as in the
ultraviolet catastrophe, renormalization, and instability of a hydrogen
atom predicted by the Larmor formula."</blockquote>
<a href="http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_blackholes_singularities.html">Another scientific web site</a> has this comment:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"<b>The existence of a singularity is often taken as proof that the theory
of general relativity has broken down, which is perhaps not unexpected
as it occurs in conditions where quantum effects should become
important.</b> It is conceivable that some future combined theory of quantum
gravity (such as current research into superstrings) may be able to
describe black holes without the need for singularities, but such a
theory is still many years away."</blockquote>
Yet <a href="http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae251.cfm">another scientific web site</a> has this comment: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Most people worry about singularities involving general relativity:
two examples being a black hole and the singularity that classical
general relativity predicts was our universe at the moment it began. If
you try to apply the laws of general relativity in these situations you
will inevitably find the same 1/x singularities I've been talking about.
<b>How are we going to resolve these singularities? We expect quantum
mechanics to do the job, since it is the theory that correctly describes
physics at small distance scales. </b>Unfortunately, while we have good
theories of atomic physics, we don't real have a good theory of quantum
gravity. Many of us think string theory will ultimately provide the
resolution to these problems.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
"In short then, <b>a singularity
represents an infinity and we generally don't think nature is infinite.</b>
The problem arises from not having some kind of 'floor' built into a
theory that keeps you from taking the limit of 1/x as x goes to zero.
The way out is to apply a new theory that has such a floor, such as
quantum mechanics or string theory (quantum gravity)."</blockquote>
In Stephen Hawking's book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Design-Stephen-Hawking/dp/055338466X/">The Grand Design</a>," Hawking wrote this about the Big Bang, where there are also calculations resulting in "singularities": <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Measurements of helium abundance and the CMBR [Cosmic Microwave
Background Radiation] provided convincing evidence in favor of the big
bang picture of the very early universe, but although one can think of
the big bang picture as a valid description of early times, <span style="color: red;"><b>it is wrong
to take the big bang literally, that is, to think of Einstein’s theory
as providing a true picture of the origin of the universe</b></span>. That is
because <b>general relativity predicts there to be a point in time at which
the temperature, density, and curvature of the universe are all
infinite, a situation mathematicians call a singularity. To a physicist
this means that Einstein’s theory breaks down at that point and
therefore cannot be used to predict how the universe began, only how it
evolved afterward.</b> So although we can employ the equations of general
relativity and our observations of the heavens to learn about the
universe at a very young age, it is not correct to carry the big bang
picture all the way back to the beginning."</blockquote>
In other words, the
fact that singularities are illogical cannot be used to claim that black holes (or the Big Bang) are illogical. Black holes (and the Big Bang) are confirmed by massive amounts of data which does <b><i>not</i></b> include singularities. Singularities are simply
mathematical results that show that something is missing or unknown in
the mathematical equations.<br />
<br />
Rational Scientific Methodists, however, appear to believe that to NOT
have an answer to a scientific question is to admit to being ignorant or
stupid. They seemingly feel it is better to BELIEVE that black holes
are impossible than to accept that there is something unknown about what
exists in the center of a black hole.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-88981069514021640402015-11-05T08:29:00.002-08:002015-11-05T09:23:51.664-08:00Antares October 28, 2014 explosion picturesSkimming through <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/">The Huffington Post</a> this morning, I came across a story titled "<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/antares-explosion-photos_563afa72e4b0307f2cac1c89">NASA Releases Stunning New Images Of 2014 Antares Rocket Disaster</a>." The article shows this image:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_YmNKUhQgCOMIBOZrP_mH499i04C3UuTaRFMfCri-1zX4w1OYztwIGkeK5nItNlfeSKZo4eCTuuCPRXhlz92LWaQKdwvHhWwh5NCDYkTfpuDRb2zHiQvqytcDU7Pml0_bRiFn1GcSNqWu/s1600/22421835200_452bda3852_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_YmNKUhQgCOMIBOZrP_mH499i04C3UuTaRFMfCri-1zX4w1OYztwIGkeK5nItNlfeSKZo4eCTuuCPRXhlz92LWaQKdwvHhWwh5NCDYkTfpuDRb2zHiQvqytcDU7Pml0_bRiFn1GcSNqWu/s320/22421835200_452bda3852_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
It is indeed a "stunning" image. So, naturally I hunted for the link to the NASA flickr site where the full size image would be available. There was no link in the article. There was a link to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/28/rocket-explosion-antares_n_6064572.html">a Huffington Post article from October 31, 2014</a> which shows this animated gif of the explosion.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/nasa570.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/nasa570.gif" height="176" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
So, I did a Google search for <a href="https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=nasa+flickr">NASA-flickr</a> and that led me to <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/">Flickr's NASA HQ Photo pag</a>e. There, I clicked on "<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/albums">Albums</a>" and started hunting for the "stunning" pictures of the Antares explosion. I did a search for "Antares" and found all the images from the Huffington Post article and more. Here are some of them (you can click on them to see larger versions, but you need to go to the NASA Flickr "<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/sets/72157648942817271">Orb 3 Mission album</a>" site to see the biggest collection of full size versions I could find):<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZUedYeK6dRjN-wa6sJph2M-1bQEe6d7-drpSUTrFqGqPUsqcxCWlcw2E5pdH7pEEixJ6KCfdkCrh_l6mfYsDVdep21sLJh4GL9vp0mygz9QymUxsb6Eji_um2rA6Qd91PzKmGSL1IQb9d/s1600/21986970864_115540b070_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZUedYeK6dRjN-wa6sJph2M-1bQEe6d7-drpSUTrFqGqPUsqcxCWlcw2E5pdH7pEEixJ6KCfdkCrh_l6mfYsDVdep21sLJh4GL9vp0mygz9QymUxsb6Eji_um2rA6Qd91PzKmGSL1IQb9d/s320/21986970864_115540b070_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJF3QunuN6XkIYo92ImH1DvuzjZUxIaWS2eOlnbn0Vpv4smXTDO3P7tRVMeh6wCqFG7ntAWzz_7WAgvFH1yKRjwaEiyWzYDQS3w024PfwQPTnCaIht8LK5dwcMMeW8j5Aq6w1msQviJ-Om/s1600/22421789360_bd31b00bf5_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJF3QunuN6XkIYo92ImH1DvuzjZUxIaWS2eOlnbn0Vpv4smXTDO3P7tRVMeh6wCqFG7ntAWzz_7WAgvFH1yKRjwaEiyWzYDQS3w024PfwQPTnCaIht8LK5dwcMMeW8j5Aq6w1msQviJ-Om/s320/22421789360_bd31b00bf5_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxxpEZ8xgSSaR4SqfUya_icE6aegmaSEUKJvOEgylKd_QW1MWYczU4AifBUZDE6h-cPHXBmPR6WOaRp64sBsPukLMnNtgynLVV2pFlrMB9DM15gYu0qUdX3uil2pBnFV8TvkOPXEjC53oO/s1600/21987012084_ff094f3632_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxxpEZ8xgSSaR4SqfUya_icE6aegmaSEUKJvOEgylKd_QW1MWYczU4AifBUZDE6h-cPHXBmPR6WOaRp64sBsPukLMnNtgynLVV2pFlrMB9DM15gYu0qUdX3uil2pBnFV8TvkOPXEjC53oO/s320/21987012084_ff094f3632_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYFeMScGlmm2IIf_3KVObEmQXgYD1LujfS38UJUgX42r2S52Ou30Y3Oe-rdV-d2mw_ko77-dBJfZcNyFI8kBwT7mZVg0aF0zmaaGfGajKZbliXrDYlqEpnF1cTc9RMzvwMZpY26DOo3f4T/s1600/22596228072_7ae6fa8bd9_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYFeMScGlmm2IIf_3KVObEmQXgYD1LujfS38UJUgX42r2S52Ou30Y3Oe-rdV-d2mw_ko77-dBJfZcNyFI8kBwT7mZVg0aF0zmaaGfGajKZbliXrDYlqEpnF1cTc9RMzvwMZpY26DOo3f4T/s320/22596228072_7ae6fa8bd9_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUTu-bsj1LT2VWXToVDBTEHC0pFgBto16e_gzONbuC0KI5WHUtdZOVj0rvHwQ6bjySfWg35k5RXs9uFzisVmTCNwp7FGKWompiu0yrwoufvfrUDg-zt4CaxTxvsim6U431gkjFR79oYwds/s1600/22609791005_0e04d9c24b_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUTu-bsj1LT2VWXToVDBTEHC0pFgBto16e_gzONbuC0KI5WHUtdZOVj0rvHwQ6bjySfWg35k5RXs9uFzisVmTCNwp7FGKWompiu0yrwoufvfrUDg-zt4CaxTxvsim6U431gkjFR79oYwds/s320/22609791005_0e04d9c24b_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I never cease to be amazed by what is available via the Internet. I save these pictures as if they are as valuable as gold, but they are free and instantly available to anyone and everyone on the Internet. The only advantage to saving them is that if I want to view them again, I don't have to hunt for them again.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-91509686686162565532015-11-04T09:24:00.000-08:002015-11-07T12:52:20.096-08:00Me and my new MP3 PlayerYesterday (Tuesday), I decided I needed to get further into the 21st Century and buy an MP3 player. I wanted to try listening to audio books while at the gym -- and possibly at home. I'd spent nearly a whole day on Monday going through audio books available on-line from my local library, and there were a lot of them I wanted to try. I <b>read</b> science books every day while eating breakfast and lunch. I can usually read them in 10 minute segments while eating (It takes about a month and a half to get through a book that way), but I can't read and enjoy novels in 10 minute segments. I had tried <b>reading</b> science books and novels while on the treadmill and the Exercycle at the gym, but I need to wear my glasses to do that. That meant that, at the start of the exercise session, I would take the book (or Kindle) with me and would wear my glasses while I did my "warm up" 30 minutes on the treadmill. Then I'd have to take the glasses and the book back to the locker. Then after about 20 minutes of various arm and stretch exercises, I'd have to go back to the locker for the book and my glasses before getting on the Exercycle the final 20 "cool down" minutes of the session. It was just too much trouble - not to mention the fact that I couldn't easily hold and read the book while walking at 3.2 miles per hour on the treadmill, so I quickly gave up on that and only read while on the Exercycle. <br />
<br />
Yesterday, I looked on-line for the best local store to buy an MP3 player and went out and bought one.<br />
<br />
The first startling discovery was that the MP3 player I wanted was a LOT smaller than I expected. I was accustomed to seeing people at the gym with iPods and iPhones strapped to various parts of their bodies or falling off equipment and crashing to the floor as the owner exercised. In the package, the MP3 player that best suited my needs looked to be about the size of a postage stamp. When I got it home, it turned out to be about the size of a cigarette lighter.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl6OpiqImpjXcBiuhir386OBes1m9GbOvH5dTSE6ckfYjuAVPKaAk4VzAfpxgtkx3aPNeSe6Qwt7eqViBr_ylHh-FBYonGzZuQ9zq4sti7KDofr3-GL1mfYVdtEk5DIeNGEgcPI0gU-V2o/s1600/MP3-Player-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl6OpiqImpjXcBiuhir386OBes1m9GbOvH5dTSE6ckfYjuAVPKaAk4VzAfpxgtkx3aPNeSe6Qwt7eqViBr_ylHh-FBYonGzZuQ9zq4sti7KDofr3-GL1mfYVdtEk5DIeNGEgcPI0gU-V2o/s320/MP3-Player-01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Yet it has the capacity to store "up to 3,000 songs" and presumably dozens of books. It comes with a clip that allows me to clip it to my belt or to the neck of my gym shirt. (<b>It weighs only <u><i>1 ounce!</i></u></b>) It seemed perfect for my needs, so why did it seem that everyone else was using an iPod or some other much larger and heavier gizmo? Furthermore, my MP3 player cost less than $50, and iPods cost 3 to 4 times that much - or more.<br />
<br />
I didn't have any answers. And I needed to figure out how the thing works. The first task was to charge the battery. The instruction manual says that I do that my connecting it to my computer -- just the way I usually charge my Kindle. (Or I also charge it by using my Kindle electrical plug adapter.) <br />
<br />
While the battery was charging, I downloaded a Jack Reacher short story called "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Deep-Down-Jack-Reacher-Story-ebook/dp/B008ED5G9A/">Deep Down</a>" into the player. On the first try, I put it in the wrong folder. The instructions are all about using the "Drag and Drop" method, which I couldn't make any sense of. I think it's for people with iPads and tablets. On my laptop computer, I used Windows Explorer to create a new folder in the MP3 player called "Books," and put the short story there in a folder called "Deep Down." Then in the process of trying to figure out how to play it, I found that it should have gone into an existing folder called "Audiobooks." The instructions say nothing about such a folder. They say I should Drag and Drop it into a folder called "Audible." But, no harm done. I just cut and pasted the files into the Audiobooks folder and deleted the "Books" folder along with the sub-folder I'd created for "Deep Down."<br />
<br />
This morning, I downloaded two science books I got on loan from the library into the Audiobooks folder and a free copy of "The Peter Gunn Theme" into the Music folder. Everything seems to work fine. <br />
<br />
So, I'm all set to go. In theory, I can start listening while making lunch. Then I can continue while eating lunch, while changing clothes, while driving to the gym, and while doing all the various exercises at the gym. I just need to take it off while taking a shower. But, it's time to stop learning and planning and to start doing. <br />
<h2 style="text-align: center;">
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED</h2>
I quickly realized that making lunch (or breakfast) is NOT an automatic (subconscious) chore I do without really thinking. Plus, eating while I have plugs in my ears is awkward and uncomfortable. So, I continued reading from my Kindle while eating breakfast and lunch. Right now I'm reading a psychology/sociology book titled "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Tipping-Point-Little-Things-Difference-ebook/dp/B000OT8GD0/">Tipping Point: How Little Things can make a Big Difference</a>."<br />
<br />
I also realized that it's not a good idea to drive while you have ear plugs plugged into your ears. So, while driving, I'm listening to CDs I burned for "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mental-Floss-History-World-ebook/dp/B001FA0TQY/">The Mental Floss History of the World</a>," a light-hearted history book that required 17 CDs. I'm really enjoying listening to it. Previously, I just listened to a "oldies" music station because there is no station in my area that plays jazz. It's much more enjoyable listening to amusing and interesting history tidbits than to music I don't really enjoy. The only "problem" I had was that I didn't realize that I could pause the CD when I needed to get out of the car to open or close my garage door. So, I missed about 20 or 30 seconds of the first part of the book before I discovered the pause button.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, I found that I can listen to my MP3 player from the time I've changed into my workout clothes at the gym until I take them off again to take a shower. There's no problem counting repetitions while listening to someone reading the popular science book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/What-Einstein-Told-His-Barber-ebook/dp/B002ZW7ECI/">What Einstein Told His Barber</a>." Counting reps is evidently a nearly automatic (subconscious) activity. So, I'm getting over an hour's worth of listening done per day, which means I should be done with the book in about 8 or 9 workout days. <br />
<br />
What I need to do is check to see if I can find a device that would allow me to play the MP3 player via speakers in addition to using earplugs. That way, I can switch back and forth between ear plugs at the gym and the speakers at home without losing my place in the book, since the MP3 player controls where I am in the book. <br />
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-87859537104754056772015-10-23T09:44:00.000-07:002015-10-25T08:50:08.942-07:00A FAKE picture of the REAL Earth and REAL stars<span style="font-size: small;">Today, I discovered <a href="http://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/">a new NASA web site</a> that provides daily images of the Earth taken by the Deep
Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite, which is in an orbit <i><b>around the Sun</b></i>, 924,777 miles away from the earth. The satellite is in orbit around <a href="http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Operations/What_are_Lagrange_points">a Lagrange point</a> where the Earth's gravity is exactly the same as the Sun's gravity. So, the satellite is, in effect, orbiting the Sun just inside the Earth's orbit, moving in sync with the Earth, and it can continually take pictures of the side of the Earth that faces the Sun as the Earth spins on its axis.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Because the exposure time to take a picture of the Earth from that satellite is much faster than an exposure time that would be needed to take pictures of the stars, the pictures do not show stars. They show the Earth and a black background. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">I wondered what the Earth would look like with a starry background, and I created this FAKE image of the REAL Earth (from <a href="http://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/epic-archive/png/epic_1b_20151021165333_00.png">HERE</a>) and REAL stars (from <a href="http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0812/coathanger_parker_big.jpg">HERE</a>):</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGMYLJBnHOaZfRrumwnjCDRGFj_Oa1yC5AOYq84EUpaCNNTQ8tZhvfnHhYyQ0IwBtPKzftNEoTdAa_1yB_u9AzqDMgvLj2HGTxaGyd3njoHtPSSWcyhA1bkhYR2ImolG9ImvBcM-JuvjBR/s1600/Stars-AND-Earth-FAKE.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGMYLJBnHOaZfRrumwnjCDRGFj_Oa1yC5AOYq84EUpaCNNTQ8tZhvfnHhYyQ0IwBtPKzftNEoTdAa_1yB_u9AzqDMgvLj2HGTxaGyd3njoHtPSSWcyhA1bkhYR2ImolG9ImvBcM-JuvjBR/s320/Stars-AND-Earth-FAKE.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">You can click on the image to view a much larger (and more spectacular) version.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The images were combined using <a href="http://www.getpaint.net/index.html">paint.net</a>.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Someone advised me of <a href="http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/gallery/sciencePhotos/pics/CW0181616382B_RA_3_stretch.png">a REAL picture</a> that does show the Earth and stars. Here it is:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhB6By70Qd0NOreodk0ik8P0jANTa2AiurrmOeJhDVXoeTavJ88GDvBworQUV7TZfS7OZTpVctXQOWvtGBgexKroPrTdfq1lzv74upuRfPKJU8Jo1zV6fBwuBIWMODqn4qq2-U9rSvS9l35/s1600/CW0181616382B_RA_3_stretch.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhB6By70Qd0NOreodk0ik8P0jANTa2AiurrmOeJhDVXoeTavJ88GDvBworQUV7TZfS7OZTpVctXQOWvtGBgexKroPrTdfq1lzv74upuRfPKJU8Jo1zV6fBwuBIWMODqn4qq2-U9rSvS9l35/s320/CW0181616382B_RA_3_stretch.png" width="318" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Of course, the only reason you can see both the Earth <i><b>and</b></i> background stars in the picture is because the Earth is so small and isn't significantly brighter than a star in the picture. As a result, the same exposure time will capture the Earth, the moon <i><b>and</b></i> some of the brighter background stars. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Looking around <a href="http://blogs.discovery.com/inscider/2014/08/stars-in-photos-from-space.html">the Internet</a>, I found a picture <a href="https://twitter.com/astro_reid/status/501326597216296960">HERE</a> taken by US astronaut Reid Wiseman on the International Space Station (ISS) that shows part of the earth and plenty of stars:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVaULr-ufoXEAuySfaJEAJl8t-uLJ1tou7_SK2lHUIbIYOAykkKCJItZ-N2w0c4mBAw5v-TqgbBaK0SQBRAerZGmKRWr93ZSfS5xUNYLXvmkbyH0iIzQ06lKR4Q1UzZMbsVQEQisrvpDGC/s1600/VtyMgx3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVaULr-ufoXEAuySfaJEAJl8t-uLJ1tou7_SK2lHUIbIYOAykkKCJItZ-N2w0c4mBAw5v-TqgbBaK0SQBRAerZGmKRWr93ZSfS5xUNYLXvmkbyH0iIzQ06lKR4Q1UzZMbsVQEQisrvpDGC/s320/VtyMgx3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The problem with it, is that he had to use a 3-second time exposure from the moving ISS, so the stars are blurred and so is anything else that moved relative to the ISS. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">And the fact that the above picture was a time exposure reminded me of the time (about 60 years ago) when I went down to the shore of Lake Michigan to take a time exposure photo of the moon over the lake. Here it is:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0VmdsODKHIfRIMLjTUxOBGBGBkXfmCaIxx-qh8vKbG7ldhlXeKfp6I4MFVa7cTA0IyjPzE29poF3qx6DPizdRzvE43UHirnt8hroxALZ9fu-DvKd5K2GdgbIuGjf5HT6vxOqhKMO1sU2Q/s1600/20121219111633_03b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0VmdsODKHIfRIMLjTUxOBGBGBkXfmCaIxx-qh8vKbG7ldhlXeKfp6I4MFVa7cTA0IyjPzE29poF3qx6DPizdRzvE43UHirnt8hroxALZ9fu-DvKd5K2GdgbIuGjf5HT6vxOqhKMO1sU2Q/s320/20121219111633_03b.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">There are no stars visible in the photograph, yet it was a beautiful night and the sky was full of stars. (That white dot just above the horizon on the right could be Venus, or it could be a blemish on the color slide.) The time exposure just wasn't long enough to make the stars visible. If I would have left the shutter open longer to capture the stars, the moon would have moved and turned into an oblong shape. </span>Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-21215447894551946302015-10-17T10:16:00.001-07:002015-10-18T08:55:56.868-07:00Some of my favorite Apollo missions archive photosI've been going through the newly released <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/with/72157658629322108">Apollo Moon Mission photo albums</a>, and I've downloaded and saved about 315 pictures so far. Initially, I made a mistake of just saving the photos using the NASA file numbers. For example, this is photo #21062657803_1b5573f7dc_o.jpg:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXe2WHXUVkCat4K0sDetSyPz8dea-8JoecLGiE7dMGk1SPSJSLVeHqIbaQQ562JsCBUP3XePnPhAcVtXkAYktBCu9x0Juit0moCvH26YZfvJdhVd7ozi6435yJxdfOXsZk73YGPqNT1abQ/s1600/UNK-21062657803_1b5573f7dc_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXe2WHXUVkCat4K0sDetSyPz8dea-8JoecLGiE7dMGk1SPSJSLVeHqIbaQQ562JsCBUP3XePnPhAcVtXkAYktBCu9x0Juit0moCvH26YZfvJdhVd7ozi6435yJxdfOXsZk73YGPqNT1abQ/s320/UNK-21062657803_1b5573f7dc_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I'd downloaded about 50 pictures when I suddenly realized that if I wanted to mention them in a comment, I had forgotten in which album the photo was located. And there is no way to tell from their photo number what mission or album the picture is from. I couldn't tell anyone where I got it or where they could find a full size copy. Duh!<br />
<br />
So, I started methodically going through albums to try to identify where I'd found those 50 pictures, so that I could rename them. The photo above is one that took a long time to locate. I knew it wasn't from the Apollo 11, 12, or 14 missions, since they didn't take a "moon buggy" along until Apollo 15. Finally, by using <a href="http://www.tineye.com/search/f994e77b56a7374d276f09ac42f1d37fc8484b82/">TinEye</a>, I found it was from album <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658635051560">Apollo 15 Magazine 82/SS</a>. <br />
<br />
The photo below is a favorite from the first mission to land on the moon: Apollo 11. There are 8 albums of photos from Apollo 11. The picture below is from the <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658601662068">Apollo 11 Magazine 40/S</a> album. It's the 8th picture I saved from that album, so my photo number is: A11-M40S-08.jpg.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi56nUOyFpHQn_IdMC2N0T-ijycH_OddxaBf0jPhd7lF6Cy_HINmJeLrkl2xk_4vq6l-uhIxR1JMLhC0NVjln1UjT9vMXvh_Tga4AOJ_GEyx1O-oCInogZ6hnniGW_VJvFPGOm6hZUpmjun/s1600/A11-M40S-08.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi56nUOyFpHQn_IdMC2N0T-ijycH_OddxaBf0jPhd7lF6Cy_HINmJeLrkl2xk_4vq6l-uhIxR1JMLhC0NVjln1UjT9vMXvh_Tga4AOJ_GEyx1O-oCInogZ6hnniGW_VJvFPGOm6hZUpmjun/s320/A11-M40S-08.jpg" width="306" /></a></div>
<br />
I cropped the above picture to create the picture below as photo #A11-M40S-08A.jpg:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtowimdysYhiq0nxKr8wX7uzoCKRATOSxw2J6DyoX0WzUb0jATs96_w4yi9sjjwlwgBZW3xdykXi3n7jiE5fXPzLtxaX1cEVomGy4R5K8a-sN2l8wFlYEHdSZ3N_pVjBiNrD0rF-1xnjoV/s1600/A11-M40S-08A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtowimdysYhiq0nxKr8wX7uzoCKRATOSxw2J6DyoX0WzUb0jATs96_w4yi9sjjwlwgBZW3xdykXi3n7jiE5fXPzLtxaX1cEVomGy4R5K8a-sN2l8wFlYEHdSZ3N_pVjBiNrD0rF-1xnjoV/s320/A11-M40S-08A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Here's a cropped version of a picture the astronauts took during the Apollo 16 mission. Interestingly, they got dirt on the lens and nearly all of the photos in <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658639005288">magazine 114/B</a> show the smudge:.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnDzVpenN_urP0e5eGy1L0NzljofThFjbBgadgnC18HnhcPmypyAdnlMrsuZdbjRVEbipDjtgag-EHceTAXuypjcw621fSAibvA_jOej7bSLmoYrhyphenhypheni5zoB1brIox3MziPJgR9p4fZIu6-/s1600/A16-M114B-05A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnDzVpenN_urP0e5eGy1L0NzljofThFjbBgadgnC18HnhcPmypyAdnlMrsuZdbjRVEbipDjtgag-EHceTAXuypjcw621fSAibvA_jOej7bSLmoYrhyphenhypheni5zoB1brIox3MziPJgR9p4fZIu6-/s320/A16-M114B-05A.jpg" width="318" /></a></div>
<br />
Here's a cropped shot from the Apollo 16 mission after they put in <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658975308056">magazine 117/F</a> and cleaned the lens (or maybe it was shot by the 2nd astronaut who didn't have smudge on his camera lens):<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOiE7QRk99xr-y9hlNQz4bGGJEoricBX9LAzD1iEDx4s6dmQCZhd0DLry6VmSDLpHSYa0hSMtZSX49aGB7l5k09ugJb2LIf7VTl1Do_zegnmx9j6iP3l1g_4wcSIgtX78aX7wuhv5s1DXL/s1600/A16-M117F-02A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="228" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOiE7QRk99xr-y9hlNQz4bGGJEoricBX9LAzD1iEDx4s6dmQCZhd0DLry6VmSDLpHSYa0hSMtZSX49aGB7l5k09ugJb2LIf7VTl1Do_zegnmx9j6iP3l1g_4wcSIgtX78aX7wuhv5s1DXL/s320/A16-M117F-02A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Here's a cropped favorite from the Apollo 17 mission, film <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658976934006">magazine #134/B</a>:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUHOEF69iGphOgvvoQUDvG0dunGS92OEcEQxyBgYhJ_wTGd_NqPj1Gbhyphenhyphen1ht-XSNNySmNAV_3v_fsvVGbhaDzU2w4keHeV3vAVBGI4PxQ7ja3yTfLGfmadoxX8aWkVb3_s_veCjSG22fer/s1600/A17-M134B-04A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUHOEF69iGphOgvvoQUDvG0dunGS92OEcEQxyBgYhJ_wTGd_NqPj1Gbhyphenhyphen1ht-XSNNySmNAV_3v_fsvVGbhaDzU2w4keHeV3vAVBGI4PxQ7ja3yTfLGfmadoxX8aWkVb3_s_veCjSG22fer/s320/A17-M134B-04A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Below is another shot from the same film magazine, but this shot shows the astronaut holding the corner of the flag to straighten it out. The lower gravity on the moon apparently was enough to cause the flag to straighten out all by itself.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixQ2SVN1d5EIX8a5oYA63x-oVRFBQmiFyt2xshckXC8P3XytetL1aI9XVwH3LZGKqMz5OZkO6dUHOWNu1f3v2YSY4UtjtZAAqIdIyK-WcQHcicedAl5mwbXTwR9Ih5Ialgfj3BqdcuAzSj/s1600/A17-M134B-13A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixQ2SVN1d5EIX8a5oYA63x-oVRFBQmiFyt2xshckXC8P3XytetL1aI9XVwH3LZGKqMz5OZkO6dUHOWNu1f3v2YSY4UtjtZAAqIdIyK-WcQHcicedAl5mwbXTwR9Ih5Ialgfj3BqdcuAzSj/s320/A17-M134B-13A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
When I mentioned this collection of photo albums on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/ScienceTechnologyAndSocietyDiscussionCorner/permalink/10156151466420008/">a Facebook page</a>, it didn't take long before someone wrote: "<span data-reactid=".8.1:5:1:$comment10156151466420008_10156154945945008/=10.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".8.1:5:1:$comment10156151466420008_10156154945945008/=10.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1.$comment-body"><span class="UFICommentBody" data-reactid=".8.1:5:1:$comment10156151466420008_10156154945945008/=10.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1.$comment-body.0"><span data-reactid=".8.1:5:1:$comment10156151466420008_10156154945945008/=10.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1.$comment-body.0.$end/=1$text0/=010"><b>Sure. Kubrick was such a genius.</b>" I think he was joking, but I had been wondering how long it would take before a "Moon Landing Truther" would argue that all the pictures are faked. And I was also wondering if there was anything in the pictures that might convince a "Moon Landing Truther" that we actually did go to the moon. Probably not. But, would Stanley Kubrick's special effects experts have created dozens and dozens of pictures that look nearly the same? Would he have created smudged pictures and partial pictures from the end of a film roll? Looking through the albums, I could not help but think how the astronauts weren't taking time to compose artistic photographs. They were photographing <u><i><b>everything,</b></i></u> and the result was often a dozen pictures of the same rock from slightly different angles. A "Truther" might argue that a picture was faked, but it gets pretty hard to say a picture is a fake when it is one in a series of thirty shots taken from the moon buggy as they drive across the moonscape. Where on earth would anyone find such a landscape and such a sky? </span></span></span></span> <br />
Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-59892402590167884832015-10-14T08:21:00.000-07:002015-10-14T08:53:37.737-07:00Newly Released Photos from Apollo Moon Landings<div class="entry-component__headline" itemprop="name">
While browsing the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/">Huffington Post</a> web site, I came across an article titled "<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/apollo-missions-stop-motion-film_561d3cc3e4b028dd7ea548b8">Now You Can Watch Amazing Stop Motion Video of Apollo Space Missions</a>." That video led me to the <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/">Project Apollo Archive on Flicker</a>. And that in turn led me to the page that shows <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums">the available albums of photos</a> from the Apollo missions. I don't know how many images there are, but they number in the many hundreds, they are full size and they are in the public domain. Most may never have been released to the public before. </div>
<div class="entry-component__headline" itemprop="name">
<br /></div>
<div class="entry-component__headline" itemprop="name">
As an example, here is <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21648739442/in/album-72157658601662068/">a 1600 x 1569 pixel photo</a> from <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658601662068">Apollo 11 Magazine 40/S</a>:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiym3E3D1GWN16r35pLCbnrRRMKj8P0G9asjxvNQHssObf8dF3T47HiGaRuz8CfMQMmhBLacMZ_wTkwllA6xI5hkbvBZF2IscXpkoHqc5Ay55fVpoBEcK0gojyHB1MUr6j4ceaVKb7n-iCH/s1600/21648739442_7dec5721a8_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="313" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiym3E3D1GWN16r35pLCbnrRRMKj8P0G9asjxvNQHssObf8dF3T47HiGaRuz8CfMQMmhBLacMZ_wTkwllA6xI5hkbvBZF2IscXpkoHqc5Ay55fVpoBEcK0gojyHB1MUr6j4ceaVKb7n-iCH/s320/21648739442_7dec5721a8_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
You can click on the link above to see how large it really is. It's 4048 x 3968 pixels, but Google won't allow me to provide a picture that large on this blog. Of course, you can download the pictures and crop them or resize them to fit your needs. Here's a cropped shot I created from an original in <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658629322108">the Apollo 16 Magazine 107/C album</a>:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6T82FBl60F3U-HnnroretClANRY39P45QvZ6OUnSbEOM1eVgthI9jZGjFBx-44wPIyTyG5E3ytJnS8q0CqJO4unO__rlHva0iLtnYbqn2T0thApuBMJmGVJlkKCRlNbj6wYFsgFXTPN-K/s1600/21651777526_56469f2c4e_oA.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6T82FBl60F3U-HnnroretClANRY39P45QvZ6OUnSbEOM1eVgthI9jZGjFBx-44wPIyTyG5E3ytJnS8q0CqJO4unO__rlHva0iLtnYbqn2T0thApuBMJmGVJlkKCRlNbj6wYFsgFXTPN-K/s320/21651777526_56469f2c4e_oA.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
The photos include dozens of shots of the earth taken during the trip to the moon and from orbit around the moon. An example:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFf_D0FV25XBBK8tfTVhCqQEs7BttHxMjWVWZj6qOf2WBrDIYDndkmQ3Ip5UwYB3F8VTVKHdg5_aoL1U91pxHvViTD8e6OAibYebLOu3OKZ93bC2_WjhRgey7RS261hxpL3gIFA-u2S245/s1600/21513743779_a497469844_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="314" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFf_D0FV25XBBK8tfTVhCqQEs7BttHxMjWVWZj6qOf2WBrDIYDndkmQ3Ip5UwYB3F8VTVKHdg5_aoL1U91pxHvViTD8e6OAibYebLOu3OKZ93bC2_WjhRgey7RS261hxpL3gIFA-u2S245/s320/21513743779_a497469844_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
I could go on and on. But, I recommend that you view the images yourself at your leisure. If you are a science nut like me, you'll want to save copies. If you are not familiar with the way flickr.com works, it may take a few minutes to figure out how to best go through the albums and how do download pictures, but it's definitely worth the effort.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-86179583099641194582015-10-09T10:00:00.000-07:002015-10-09T14:01:46.894-07:00weight & balance issues on an airplaneI took a round-trip flight recently from Milwaukee, WI, to Lynchburg, VA, with a stopover to change planes in Charlotte, NC. On the flight from Milwaukee to Charlotte, and again on the flight from Charlotte to Milwaukee there were "weight and balance issues." It was 14 years since the last time I was in an airplane, but I'd only encountered "weight and balance issues" on a plane once before in my life. That was on a small plane hopping between islands in the Caribbean. <br />
<br />
Anyway, on the flight out of Milwaukee, shortly after everyone was aboard, the flight attendant got on the speaker and said that they had a "weight and balance issue" and they needed someone to volunteer to move from one of the first four rows back to the rear of the plane. I was in seat 3A, from where I'd just taken this picture:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1Nrcbsl0vi0mUV7G22nIuyipNhX0919SkEoVYyNgoDWkCAF1j3GfYabFuUP4E7PYKuv5M6CsdRtC-jHZDc786EinceJQJ-PH__0znPx-ypX4qdbtB0T7y5rf_apCcGethU76WQT-29hBr/s1600/IMG_0867.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1Nrcbsl0vi0mUV7G22nIuyipNhX0919SkEoVYyNgoDWkCAF1j3GfYabFuUP4E7PYKuv5M6CsdRtC-jHZDc786EinceJQJ-PH__0znPx-ypX4qdbtB0T7y5rf_apCcGethU76WQT-29hBr/s320/IMG_0867.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
It looked like everyone else in the first rows were couples, so I raised my hand and volunteered. I moved back to seat 10C where I took this picture:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdLLMzpK9iku-W12G_x3e_G0u6e0BZeOi4ZlB8Ic8VMef8knvit2GDj4WA0n_2IZOoGGicJg1Bw8Q-Ec5gu0Ig85106ksRd5ZcFBCfNmWcWEmcEdQ-CCsfGmB_gdJX9ICg3rTuIucgPi8w/s1600/IMG_0868.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdLLMzpK9iku-W12G_x3e_G0u6e0BZeOi4ZlB8Ic8VMef8knvit2GDj4WA0n_2IZOoGGicJg1Bw8Q-Ec5gu0Ig85106ksRd5ZcFBCfNmWcWEmcEdQ-CCsfGmB_gdJX9ICg3rTuIucgPi8w/s320/IMG_0868.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
On the return flight from Charlotte to Milwaukee it happened again. Only this time the flight attendant asked that <u>TWO</u> people volunteer to move from the first four rows to the back. I was in seat 4F, but someone in row-1 immediately volunteered, and while he was getting up to move to the rear, someone in row-2 also volunteered. So, I remained in seat 4F.<br />
<br />
But the experience made me wonder about "weight and balance issues." On the schedule I'd printed out for my flight, it said that there were occasional delays on the flight from Charlotte to Milwaukee. Was it because no one volunteered to change seats? What would they do if no one volunteered?<br />
<br />
So, when I got home I did some research. It turns out that "weight and balance issues" are fairly common on smaller airplanes. And they are particularly common on the CRJ-200. Here's a picture I took of the Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ) aircraft shortly after I'd gotten off in Charlotte:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdW2xmYt3lAxEZv3JFRdviw0kFsGShQ_ywXnD1pLt4HYR07i-J0WfUwBJ1gwZOW1swttpwiu2VtzUMzvtiNXtcbHjtBVSoWq0gn9SR8azVso4YA8VRL3QWfyRbJg0cqPx4Xu7ewPdEE7kZ/s1600/IMG_0870.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdW2xmYt3lAxEZv3JFRdviw0kFsGShQ_ywXnD1pLt4HYR07i-J0WfUwBJ1gwZOW1swttpwiu2VtzUMzvtiNXtcbHjtBVSoWq0gn9SR8azVso4YA8VRL3QWfyRbJg0cqPx4Xu7ewPdEE7kZ/s320/IMG_0870.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
And here's a stock shot of a CRJ-200 I found on the Internet:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://airchive.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/KPHX-5_22_14-17.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://airchive.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/KPHX-5_22_14-17.jpg" height="213" width="320" /></a></div>
Looking around the Internet I found a web site <a href="http://airwaysnews.com/blog/2014/05/30/flying-the-barbie-jet-a-crj-200-adventure/">HERE</a> which calls it a "Barbie Jet" and says that there are also other names for it: Satan’s Chariot, Climb Restricted Jet, Mini Lawn Dart, the Flying Bus, and Future Beer Can. The person writing that article tells of being asked to move from seat 2D to 12D for "weight and balance purposes."<br />
<br />
Personally, I had absolutely no problem with the aircraft or the flight. I just thought the "weight and balance issue" was interesting. And I wondered what would happen if no one volunteered. But, further research indicates that it might be more common for the flight attendant to TELL someone they need to move to the rear for "weight and balance purposes." The instruction carries the weight of law, since the flight attendant is an acting agent of the captain.<br />
<br />
I found a blog <a href="https://flightaware.com/squawks/view/1/1_year/new/7474/EasyJet%20passengers%20told%20'get%20off%20the%20plane%20or%20you%20will%20be%20arrested'%20after%20fuelling%20blunder%20makes%20flight%20too%20heavy">HERE</a> where 37 passengers were asked to get off the plane in England because someone had accidentally put too much fuel in the tanks. I found a BBC News article <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/8115216.stm">HERE</a> where 71 passengers on another flight from England refused to stay on board because of "weight and balance" issues and demanded to get off the plane. Apparently it was because a cargo door was jammed and they couldn't use that space for luggage, so it created a "weight and balance issue." It doesn't say how many were asked to move, only that 71 got off.<br />
<br />
A blog <a href="http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/338803">HERE</a> says:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva; font-size: x-small;">The
CRJ-200 can be a pain when it comes to weight and balance. It is usually
no big deal where the people are seated when it is under about 40
passengers. It's only when it is nearly full that you often have to make
sure the empty seats are toward the front.</span></blockquote>
and<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva; font-size: x-small;">RJs can
be VERY sensitive to W&B issues. Part of the issue is that each
person in this example is 2% of the theoretical total pax weight load,
instead of say .5% on a 200-pax plane. So yes that's definitely an issue
for small planes. </span></blockquote>
I could only find one place on the Internet where someone refused to change seats. Click <a href="http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-424151.html">HERE</a>:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: small;">Aircraft less than half full. Me sitting over wing in an aisle seat, vacant middle seat and a person at the window.<br />
<br />
Just before take off, a female cabin crew approaches me and states <br />
<br />
"I am sorry sir, but due to weight and balance reasons, you will need to move three rows back"<br />
<br />
What the is this about... seriously. If an 80kg person moving 3 metres
is so critical to the W&B of a 400+ton aircraft, then we are all in
trouble. Hopefully no-one leaves their seat during the flight.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, <span style="color: red;">the request was so stupid, that I politely refused, told
her I was comfortable where I was and asked her to explain her why.</span><br />
<br />
Just a thought.... if you treat passengers like idiots... they might just take offence and become uncooperative.<br />
<br />
Could someone shed some light on this ridiculous request. Is it used
often for some reason? Why would the request be made... keeping in mind
the aircraft was less than half full... and CC are not Load Controllers.</span></blockquote>
I haven't found anything in that blog which explains exactly what happened when the guy refused. I assume that someone else simply volunteered. The passenger says that the Flight Attendant just went about his/her business as if nothing had happened. But, it's interesting that the guy felt it was some kind of demeaning request and that it was beneath him to submit to such a request.<br />
<br />
For what it's worth, there were no "weight and balance issues" on the much smaller planes I took from Charlotte to Lynchburg and back again. Here's a photo of one of those planes (a Dash 8-300) at the airport in Lynchburg, VA:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_8Q2dezntAv0JG7W2Ek3DqJPJnzi961khrLRsm38XvSaw-nay2CtipyIpjQsEuFbpSgntqPIefdVxtU9lyQPhzJvBDBQiuRtOQIyBlpfHjaxQVPipTO0100nBz4ZivK2p8vjEbriflIpr/s1600/IMG_0887.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_8Q2dezntAv0JG7W2Ek3DqJPJnzi961khrLRsm38XvSaw-nay2CtipyIpjQsEuFbpSgntqPIefdVxtU9lyQPhzJvBDBQiuRtOQIyBlpfHjaxQVPipTO0100nBz4ZivK2p8vjEbriflIpr/s320/IMG_0887.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
(I thought it was also unusual that of the 8 times I had to get on or off an airplane, only once did the passengers use a loading ramp (when boarding in Milwaukee). All the other times we used stairs to the pavement and a ground-level door in the terminal.) <br />
<br />
And now I think I know all that I need to know about "weight and balance issues." It's "normal," particularly on the CRJ-200, and most of the time people just volunteer. But it was relatively new to me. The time I encountered the issue when I was in the Caribbean, I thought it was because of the heat and the air being too thin or something. But, it was probably just a "weight and balance issue" there, too.Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894710819080074713.post-39765148184896987012015-09-22T09:13:00.001-07:002016-09-23T07:06:48.030-07:00Cleaning up photos using paint.net<h2>
<span style="color: red;"><b>On July 13, 2016, paint.net issued an update. The update caused paint.net to <u><i>sometimes</i></u> start up in a virtually worthless mode that doesn't include the cloning tool and the "Auto-Level" feature described below. I'm not sure what causes it, but it usually goes away when you start it a second time.</b></span></h2>
When I digitized all my photographs that were in slide format, I also converted about 2,400 regular photographs to digital format. About a third of the photos were in black and white. The rest, of course, were in color. Color negatives look like faded color photographs, and the gizmo I used to do the digital converting also converted the negative images to positive color shots. But, it appears that some of those photos were also slightly faded and also have blemishes. Since I'm working with negatives, the dirt spots and blemishes tend to be white, not black as they were with slides.<br />
<br />
Here's a photograph I took in Venice as it looked before I used the "Auto-Level" adjustment feature in <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/248297/paint_net.html">paint.net</a> (you can click on the image to view a larger version):<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFcHitktGDX1ne-S-FdN7jxKxPGpC3OmtnZgOPgK-GTnqlhU63mqUlYjXDjXs11PuzLjIrji_-N24_Tpa6PI6unjVtq6_QHhjja2j84_XNeknW6YfEx6Nrxc9eh_TLatmri2qknEqeI3Y5/s1600/20121224094112_11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFcHitktGDX1ne-S-FdN7jxKxPGpC3OmtnZgOPgK-GTnqlhU63mqUlYjXDjXs11PuzLjIrji_-N24_Tpa6PI6unjVtq6_QHhjja2j84_XNeknW6YfEx6Nrxc9eh_TLatmri2qknEqeI3Y5/s320/20121224094112_11.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
There may not be any way to tell if the color needs adjusting or not, until you do it. It could have just been a purplish day in Venice. But, it's clear that the dark line down the right side shouldn't be there. Evidently, the negative just wasn't properly positioned in the gizmo device I used to convert the color film negative to digital format.<br />
<br />
There were no blemishes to eliminate, so here's the same photo after I used the "Auto-Level" adjust feature to adjust the colors <i><b>and</b></i> after I used the cropping feature to eliminate the black edge:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5flyyDgSJjbhMaUHE8bqQ5TT-tmV63goQIR-_Nc4K7I4dGAZBgFdPUUuTFp2R6LZGVThEQkORWuuTvK-0lrWoR96POzqA_MkJqmMhMDg3coviQJjk05JnMRclNH6GVubTyANl8P2IZHBO/s1600/20121224094112_11-fixed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5flyyDgSJjbhMaUHE8bqQ5TT-tmV63goQIR-_Nc4K7I4dGAZBgFdPUUuTFp2R6LZGVThEQkORWuuTvK-0lrWoR96POzqA_MkJqmMhMDg3coviQJjk05JnMRclNH6GVubTyANl8P2IZHBO/s320/20121224094112_11-fixed.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Obviously, the colors <b><i>did</i></b> need adjusting.<br />
<br />
I also found a photograph I took in Monaco that had a bad scratch that definitely needed fixing. The colors looked in need of adjustment, too. Here's what it looked like:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvlqD4dlJQt7YBqtibLtDj4k3tFcXTjBISSe5_4LE1aYUocyWmIYSpHhw0MijO4MukV0Ze2gdPoTAeEBN2iYdy2AJj7GpRpvJ5L62K4q-TnT4Nda6fle6l_4Ace3__krSwrI73yyyvBypv/s1600/20121226091023_03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvlqD4dlJQt7YBqtibLtDj4k3tFcXTjBISSe5_4LE1aYUocyWmIYSpHhw0MijO4MukV0Ze2gdPoTAeEBN2iYdy2AJj7GpRpvJ5L62K4q-TnT4Nda6fle6l_4Ace3__krSwrI73yyyvBypv/s320/20121226091023_03.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
There is not only the white scratch in the lower right corner, but there are also lots of white dust spots in the sky and elsewhere. Using <a href="http://www.getpaint.net/doc/latest/CloneStamp.html">paint.net's "Clone-Stamp" tool</a>, I fixed the blemishes. And here is what the final image looks like:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0uhPdHor13ErotRx6oOIWXlD36ZU9wQfE39oB9oci1xPHhwfnQ2khjuG4B1QZMgaUcQ4u8elNyuCy1fPtAqUhQSpBuMMIzL7kyXv6IodSsjUHJ3MowiOyDSLSabMo2OorV7s1km7P81U7/s1600/20121226091023_03a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0uhPdHor13ErotRx6oOIWXlD36ZU9wQfE39oB9oci1xPHhwfnQ2khjuG4B1QZMgaUcQ4u8elNyuCy1fPtAqUhQSpBuMMIzL7kyXv6IodSsjUHJ3MowiOyDSLSabMo2OorV7s1km7P81U7/s320/20121226091023_03a.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The next step for me was to figure out what the building was in picture. I always thought it was the Grand Casino in Monaco, but when I looked for current images of it on the Internet, I found that it could also be the Monaco Opera House, which is <i><b>part of</b></i> the Casino Royale in Monaco (or vice versa). I finally figured out that it's the view of the side of the building that faces the Mediterranean. That's the Opera House side. The main entrance to the casino is on the opposite side of the building. <br />
<br />
Live and learn.<br />
<br />
Another thing I learned is that I should have spent more time during the digital conversion phase figuring out <i><b>when</b></i> the pictures were taken (or developed) and using that date as part of the names of the picture files I was creating instead of letting the conversion program assign file names. I think the pictures above where taken sometime in the 1980s, but I'd have to find the packet with the negatives to be certain. The develop date is usually on the packet, and it could also be on the end or side of the strip of negative film. Most of my photographs are also in albums where photographed dates and other information is included with the photos.<br />
<br />
For my experiences color adjusting and repairing digitized slides, click <a href="http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/2015/09/cleaning-up-slides-using-paintnet.html">HERE</a>. <br />
<br />Ed Lakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00517078636884309733noreply@blogger.com0