IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

'gravity' [was Re: 'gravioty']

KP_PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sun Oct 5 00:22:16 EST 2003


First, yes, I'm deliberately leaving this discussion
'disjointed' because I want those who can get its
stuff in-Fullness to get-it [they will, 'dis-jointed' or
not], while allowing others to not 'worry' about its
stuff.

To continue - consider the balancing of 'angular
momentum' and 'gravity' that's Observable in the
little "bucket experiment" that I discussed in the
~~"NL-P" thread a couple of weeks back.

Note how everything within it is obviously Connected.

That is, note how what's been referred to as
"gravity" is periodically-'dominant'.

Go deep in-there, and you'll see that this is a macro-
scopic instance of the Same-Stuff that I discussed
with respect to accelerator collisions - the "bucket
sub-system" exhibits =Exactly= the same UES-'enrich-
ment' that I discussed in my previous post with re-
spect to accelerator "decay-product volumes".

So one doesn't need an accelerator. All one needs
is a bucket of water and a bit of 'topsoil' :-]

Voila - one Sees the UES-flow, and everything that
really matters within physical reality can be calculated
[albeit, roughly] from the periodicity of the 'comma's
disolution and reformation.

Can you See it?

The 'angular momentum' periodically 'disappears'
into the UES local to the bucket, only to 'reappear'
as a physical-Consequence of the UES's 'spring-
ing'-back from it's locally-over-'pressurized' 'state'.

And, as the energydynamics unfold, WDB2T can
be calculated in the weakening of the 'comma's
reformation.

It's the Same-Stuff that I discussed with respect to
accelerator energydynamics, but in-a-bucket :-]

Statistical Mechanics will, of course, see the buck-
et sub-system differently. They'll see the individual
'atoms' ['molecules'] as 'interacting locally' in a way
that reflects their periodic 'statistical' 'random mo-
tions' [which, in light of water's 'incompressibility',
leaves a lot to the imagination :-]

Gees 'louise', why not just See the UES-flow?

Why not just See the energy going back-and-forth
in the UES, and the overall Nature of this physically-
real energy-flow that is WDB2T?

It matters-greatly because the little 'comma' dynamics
are extraordinarily-powerful when their 'big-brothers'
are discussed from the perspective of nervous-system
function [see the "DNA-tuning [...]" thread].

It's all wave<->wave thresholding energydynamics that
extends, continuously, right into the SSW<->UES
harmonics that are what have been referred to as "atoms".

Get-it?

Getting-it 'opens the door' to vast New Possibilities
with respect to the useful tuning of energydynamics.

A whole New Future.

It's a New 'Day' for all of Humanity - all that's necessary
is a 'bucket-full' of understanding :-]

ken [k. p. collins]

P. S. Please Forgive me if, as the Country Song says,
I'm having "Too Much Fun" :-] kpc

"KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4Gnfb.168292$3o3.12220494 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| further comments below.
|
| "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
|
news:Uknfb.168274$3o3.12218516 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | Whoops! Got the 1-bit-'error'-short-shrifting
| | 'blues' :-]
| |
| | Depending on SSW<->UES-harmonics-
| | phase conditions, there =can be= an Ob-
| | servable =decrease= in 'stability' - decay
| | 'event' volume will =increase=.
|
| This's, essentially, what happens in so-called
| 'nuclear' explosions.
|
| | So I've got to qualify my "'always'" as I used
| | it in what's quoted below.
| |
| | Overall, the plot will reflect the NL-P as I've
| | discussed it.
|
| Which, come to think of it, [the NL-P] should also
| be directly-readable in 'nuclear'-reactor control-rod-
| setting data.
|
| Get it?
|
| It's not 'random'.
|
| It all behaves in rigorous accord with the NL-P be-
| cause it all reduces to the one-way flow of energy
| from 'order' to dis-'order' that is what's =described=
| by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T].
|
| [Those who are 'alarmed' that I've discussed in terms
| of 'nuclear' stuff should actually be Alarmed that 'nuclear'
| arsenels exist but a general understanding of the NL-P
| has not existed - 'nuclear' weapons are =not= what they've
| been presumed to be - =that= is what's Humanity-wide-
| Worthy of =Alarm=.]
|
| Anyway, what I'm doing in this discussion is working to
| provide the 'big-picture' in a way that Physicists can
| understand - if they want to Test TH.
|
| It matters Greatly with respect to the Survival of
| Humanity, which is actually why I'm discussing it. kpc
|
| | The SSW<->UES energy-'containment' UES
| | 'pressure' is also calculable via this approach
| | [one of a g'zillion ways that it is].
| |
| | ken [k. p. collins]
| |
| | "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| |
|
news:K4nfb.168264$3o3.12216863 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | | BTW, this stuff has been in TH for at least 25 years.
| | | I've discussed it repeatedly here in b.n and in other
| | | online 'places'.
| | |
| | | It's the way TH handles what's been referred to
| | | as "radioactive decay" - Deterministically.
| | |
| | | I've added an important thing to the discussion
| | | below.
| | |
| | | "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| | |
| |
|
news:RNmfb.168255$3o3.12214120 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | | |
| | | | "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| | | |
| | |
| |
|
news:XKrcb.152072$0v4.11317282 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | | | | [...]
| | | | | "KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| | | | |
| | | |
| | |
| |
|
news:3xrcb.152062$0v4.11315265 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | | | | | [...]
| | | |
| | | | "`Other Dimensions? She's in Pursuit'
| | | | By DENNIS OVERBYE
| | | |
| | | | Published: September 30, 2003"
| | | |
| | | | http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/30/science/30MARI.html
| | | |
| | | | It's not necessary to invoke dimensions greater
| | | | than three.
| | | |
| | | | It's in Tapered Harmony that, if it looks like a
| | | | quantity of energy is 'going away', it's be-cause
| | | | that energy is just 'winking-out' of =observability=
| | | | as its ephemerance [freedom to move] increases
| | | | beyond a threshold, and the energy 'just' returns to
| | | | the UES.
| | | |
| | | | This's all Testable.
| | | |
| | | | Iff physical reality is as above, an Observable increase
| | | | in the quantity of applied energy that's required to
| | | | produce the 'usual' 'particle'-collision dynamics will
| | | | occur.
| | | |
| | | | This's be-cause, when energy returns to the UES,
| | | | the UES 'pressure' local to that 'event' augments,
| | | | which 'bolsters' all local SSW<->UES harmonics'
| | | | energy-'containment' dynamics.
| | | |
| | | | I'll be surprised if all the data necessary to Verify
| | | | this position has not already been collected at
| | | | Fermilab and.or CERN.
| | | |
| | | | The only 'difficulty' is that a continuous stream of data
| | | | is Necessary. You can't 'pick-and-choose' as the folks
| | | | at Fermilab are doing - or you'll miss the thing that
| | | | you want to observe - the 'instantaneous'-but-exceed-
| | | | ingly-fleeting augmentation of collision stability [which
| | | | will be Observable as an 'instantaneous' event-decrease.
| | | |
| | | | Get it?
| | | |
| | | | The dynamics are roughly-analogous to what happens
| | | | when one gets into one's car on a cold morning, drives
| | | | off without allowing the engine to warm-up, and stomps
| | | | the accelerator - the fuel-air mixture often becomes too-
| | | | rich, and the engine loses power briefly.
| | | |
| | | | The diminution of detector events is analogous to this
| | | | be-cause the local UES is 'too-rich' :-]
| | | |
| | | | Should be 'easy' to see in already-recorded data [unless
| | | | the continuous stream has been tossed-out - no problem -
| | | | record a continuous stream]. All that's required is to crunch
| | | | the data looking for fluctuations in the decay-product
| | | | 'volume'.
| | |
| | | "fluctuations" isn't the right term.
| | |
| | | The Observables will be 'instantaneously'-augmented
| | | stability that's 'time'-correlated to energy going back to
| | | the UES.
| | |
| | | Given such 'missing energy', plot it the way you please,
| | | the 'fluctuations' in decay-product volume will 'always' plot
| | | on your 3-D coordinates in the 'direction' of fleetingly-
| | | increased-'stability'. kpc
| | |
| | | | ken [K. P. Collins]
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
|
|





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net