Tizzy fit...
man cannot measure...never could...but
with absolute zero...that may change...
If you haven't already, a subscription to “DISCOVER” magazine is a must for
anyone living in the 21st century. Unfortunately, many articles are shrouded in
so much bull shit, hidden amidst words and phrases no person outside a
functioning scientific community directly involved with the subject can
comprehend; the articles lend themselves more to fiction than reality simply by
their obscure wording and the assumptions of who their audience is. I believe
many ‘new discovery’ articles are purposefully worded that way. Granted, a ‘new
discovery’ certainly deserves descriptions using words and phrases which are
apropos to the discovery; yet this reader believes a simple, readily digestible
common example will suffice in many instances, thus providing a novice like
myself the opportunity to dissect the ‘new’ word or phrase so we may savor the
same excitement the discoverer with the doctorate and/or masters degrees had
when they created the ‘new’ vocabulary in an attempt to protect their ‘new baby’
in a protective blanket of bull shit. We cannot intermingle words from one ‘new’
discovery with words and phrases from another; each respectively, deserves it’s
own dictionary of descriptive words and phrases at least equal to the ‘new’
discovery itself. Again, unfortunately many times these ‘new discoveries’ lack a
most important ingredient; that being, a generous sprinkling of common sense.
Especially when presenting the ‘new discovery’ to the general public; many of
who are the tacit sponsors of their science, visa vie buying the magazine,
contributing to colleges, etc. In a time when corporate grants, donations, and
federal funding are drying up unless college and private laboratories follow
their ‘wishes’ and adhere to the ‘paths’ of discovery dictated by those
benefactors. It may do scientists and article writers good to
remember, the publics' curiosity and awe are major players in this game, for
without our curiosity and interest in these discoveries, however banal and
obscure is what sells. It is a rare occurrence when the discovering scientist is
footing the bill for his thought process; therefore, I respectively ask that he
or she please include my thought process when speaking to middle men and women
sucking your brains with a digital recorder.
The article in question is “Blinded By Science”, By Bruno Maddox, Discover
magazine, October 2007 issue, page 82.
The article starts out with forced assumption: “Why it really matters that the
world is five millimeters smaller that we thought it was. By Bruno Maddox. Then
Bruno proceeds to explain, with the help of scientists why this is so; to prove
a point….to prove the ‘discoveries’ point and assign a degree of importance to
his subject. To provide legitimacy to something by way of absurdity and a hefty
sprinkling of those ‘special’, dedicated words we were just talking about. The
part of the article I found assumptive is the part describing ‘how’ the
scientist measured the earth’s circumference to such a fine degree as to
ascertain our previous measurement was false.
Using a term like (VLBI) Service, Very Long Baseline Interferometry;
….yahoo...we’re in it now! Apparently using Quasars (active galaxies) “the most
distant detectable objects. In fact, in all of existence.”
The article goes on to say: “if one of them were shooting laterally across the
sky at the speed of light, it would, to us, appear motionless. That’s if you
could see it, of course, which you wouldn’t be able to because it’s so far
away.”
Following that: “hearing it is another matter entirely, however, Quasars turn
out to be prodigious broadcasters of radio emissions, issuing faint whispers of
smooth jazz and shadow traffic from across the inky vastness of Space.”
Not to bore you, the article goes on to describe how (using
these galaxies) as precision objects in space, they are able to use them with
great precision to measure objects; one such object is the earth. I personally
think this attempt is outstanding; yet I fall back to an article I read many
years ago describing how scientists are able to measure and predict the
molecular consistency of far away object; ie., galaxies, planets, vast
concentrations of matter existing outside the boundaries of man’s touch. I will
try to describe the process as I remember it: All objects emit a certain light
in our known spectrum. That is to say, using a prism, reflections of light
emitted/reflected from an object are passed through the prism (much like a
filter), and using the colors/degrees which come out the other side, we are able
to compared those colors against the colors emitted from known matter. I'll try,
as an example: if carbon emitted the color red here on earth, and I was
looking out in space on a particular azimuth (so many degrees longitude, so many
degrees latitude, etc.) and I held a prism to the lens, and the color red was
projected on a white piece of paper, I would have a pretty good case for
announcing “there is an object in deep space that contains carbon”. This process
is used all the time to find out the consistencies of matter without actually
touching the matter; even if we cannot see the matter, because of distance
and/or size limitations. Pretty neat, huh?
Anyway, this article goes on to say a particular galaxies static location was used as a beginning or ending point to determine earth’s size. I find this extremely interesting because we all know, every item is in constant motion. The earth, galaxies, Quasars, etc. It is my belief it is this motion which creates electricity, magnetism, etc., and that without this motion all would cease because there would be no renewable electricity, thought would cease. Veered a little bit there...sorry. Anyway, knowing the atmosphere, the earth, and every object on it is in a constant state of motion, gives me pause. I know every object (whether visible or not) in a Quasar is in a constant state of motion and flux; to me, begs the question, “how did anyone measure the distance between two moving objects in flux? Especially when the earth is comprised of molecular structures in constant motion and bombardment from each other. I want to know exactly which two he used, the surface of that particular atoms surface (on our end), that particular atoms surface (on the other end), what time, and most of all, how he got them to stand still, how he measured each one comprising the earth to find the ones farthest out (five millimeters out) to make his statement. I find it impossible; therefore, I have put this assumptive article in the ‘bull shit’ pile. I can see measuring with two objects, if measurements of this precision are being made using radio emotions traveling through billions of miles of distortion, after distortion, may even be measurable, but not when the radio emissions are by nature motion themselves. Even to track and use a known geographical, expansion location on the earth’s crust as a focal point, at a precise time, to that preciseness is absurd when one interjects the fact the molecule or atom being that focal point is in motion (an atom located within that measurable molecule on the precise spot on the surface of the earth, would have to be in a measurably, precise location, for a measurement to start or end on the surface of any known atom within the experiment). Remember, a radio wave is a electromagnetic wave. To assume radio waves from Quasars are static with regards to the electromagnetic influences of other radio wave emitters which are distributed throughout the known and unknown universe is absurd. To assume a measurement will be the same twice at any given moment is absurd. The passage of time it would take you to tell me about the measurement, or the time it took you to enter it in a computer, scribble it down on a piece of paper; it will never exist again….ever. Motion forbids it, prevents it, and all is motion, there is no ‘static’ anywhere….anywhere! The identical motion of atoms will never occur twice. Influence is too astronomical, the motion is constant, yet immeasurable, incalculable in our life time. This measurement also falsely infers the assumption all measurements of interference and distance originate between the earth and something else. We are not the center of the universe. What about interference effecting those radio waves used in the ‘measurement’ coming from enumerable, incalculable degrees of attack ‘off line of sight/intensity’ (hitting, passing through) and electrically interfering with radio waves coming at us? The fluctuations of speed cannot continue at a measurable, constant rate at any moment, much less, stay constant long enough to measure. This does not even take into consideration, ‘man cannot measure anything’. An exaggerated example is the simple drawing of a line on a piece of paper. Everything used to make this possible, wood, paper, dye, ink, pencil, computer, anything and everything is in motion. In my opinion, man must have two objects which are static, in order to have measurement. Man has no two objects which are static! The known universe has not two objects which are static. The simple configurations and symbiotic relationships between atoms in molecular configuration forbids it; even if they are located in Quasars. For these configurations must exist in order to transmit/reflect radio waves. We cannot even measure the distance between the coffee cup on my desk and the soft ball sitting on a roll of paper towels sitting on my desk, the molecular/atomic motion will not allow a measurement to be taken from any atoms surface while that atom is in motion; while two atoms involved in the measurement are in constant motion...which they are. For anyone to claim measurement, is absurd and the time it takes to simply speak such notion condemns that notion to the past. If man could, all measurements would have to be history measurements; they could never remain while atomic structures remain in motion. That is of course if the passage of time is simply change in atomic configuration, which it is. Man can calculate, man can never measure.
Simply said, to measure distance between or the precise size of anything, the measurement must consist of one or more static surfaces. There must exist at least one static mass to measure, there are none. To assume the removal of heat from mass of any size denotes an object void of movement is absurd. Simply to view such an object is to move it. Simply to enclose such an object is to wrap it in motion. A vacuum is simply a cocoon within motion. For a vacuum to exist, itself must fluctuate within the plasma of motion surrounding it. It must be contained by motion; hence, a part of. To measure from point 'A' to point 'B' I would have to start on the surface of an atom or smaller particle, and measure to the surface of another atom or smaller particle; unfortunately, these surfaces/atoms/particles are moving. If that is not enough, so are the atoms which comprise the measuring instruments themselves. Another way to look at it....a line on a ruler is not a line at all, but a cluster of moving molecular clusters comprised of moving atoms, so where and when do you start? There is nothing we can use to measure distance which is not by its nature, in motion. If that is not enough, the simply fact that we are in the room voided the experiment because on a much larger scale, our presence negated the experiment simply by our bodies magnetic cluster of atoms and molecular configurations interacting with what is. When we came into the room, our atoms moved all atoms ! ! ! While you are reading this, you are altering it....forever. Be it ever so slightly; nevertheless, nothing will ever be like it was in the past (the past pushing on you like billions of tons of atoms) the past is simply that, all that was. Remember, while you are reading this, you and it are the past.
It is said "we can use the known speed of objects to measure other structure". Unfortunately, there isn't any 'known' speed of anything. We don't even come close. Is it true that sound does not end; it only disperses over distance? I have heard this before. I told someone the other day, man will never hear a true sound. All sound is intermingled with other sound. Man has added significantly to the 'sound barrier'. Kind of like using radio waves traveling through space (there is nothing in there way, if they reached us). That is one way to look at it, but to say you know the exact moment a fluctuating wave of radioactive particles left their origin is impossible in my mind unless you know which atom cluster the initiation came from, and then, which atom in that cluster you put the other end of the ruler on, which in my mind is impossible because radioactivity is many electrically charged particles traveling through other charged particles; granted the charged particles they are traveling through are differing in size (as a planet like Earth, Mars, Saturn, Pluto, etc., the concentrations of their respective magnetic fields must alter magnetic fields of + and - as those minute fields pass by. Remember, nothing works without electricity, and electricity is motion; we can guess at motion, surmise motion, but we have noting to measure motion. If we use our conciseness and thought waves to measure, we have moved the measurement, we have moved the articles to measure by our physical curiosity. The atomic/molecular thought process within our brains molecular structure has altered the experiment simply by its participation in the experiment. One atom will move the another atom. One kiss deserves another.....right?
Can you say “Absolute Zero”?
Can you have absolute zero without mass? Can a temperature of
absolute zero exist in a vacuum, a void of all matter, or must tangible
(atoms/molecules) objects with mass exist, minus heat? If we have two
surfaces/objects at absolute zero, then we can measure if they indeed are stopped. Can
we calculate a measurement from a distortion of motion of non-absolute zero?
a.
If they find absolute zero, can it be long afterwards the minds that found it
leave the rest of us behind?
b. Has consciousness to that degree of discovery left us behind before?
c. Are these
the only thought processes within man that do ‘go on’? Those who can ‘measure’?
d. After all, some are or were so close to absolute zero, (I think scientists were
somewhere at or near -.0000000001, or minus one billionth of one degree, or one
billionth of one degree away from absolute zero, I think absolute zero is
somewhere near or at minus 268 degrees (not sure). At this temperature or lack
of temperature the assumption is atoms may stop. To stop a gas. Motion makes energy, motion generates heat. Lack
of heat (absolute zero) may stop motion. If this is so, man can start to measure
from the surfaces of these static objects to other static objects. No you
say? How will they know, you say?
e. Is a measurable absence of heat proof
matter exists within that environment void of motion? Or is it the
assumption that IF there is matter within that environment it has not
motion?
f. Can motion exist without heat?
g. Can mass exist without heat? I
don't know but compared to absolute zero, I lifted a scorching cube of ice
to my lips one time and the H2O molecules running over my lips were dragging
heat from those same lips on their way to obvious dissection within my body.
The cube felt cold and I could not have picked it up unless it also
possessed mass; albeit, forever changing mass.
h.
It is also said, to remove smaller and smaller, most infinitival degrees of
heat, is the hardest; whereas to remove great amounts of heat is relatively
easy.
Ask yourself, how would you go about removing one billionth of one degree of
heat from an still in atom in motion; albeit, much reduced motion? You
would think it easier to remove heat from a dieing (in terms of motion)
object. Why must man kill (in the terms of motion) that which is?
i.
Anyway, if scientists actually totally stop motion, man will finally have
something to measure from, and perhaps measure to. But keep in mind, without using atoms
which are still in motion, he has nothing to measure with! Unless of course, he
has concentrated enough non-moving, static, absolute zero atoms with which to
devise a very special instrument to measure with. Otherwise he must
continue to hypothesize what may be.
j. Perhaps there is a way to measure distance between non-motion objects
(absolute zero atoms) with a moving instrument in a symbiotic relationship with
the moving items, I just don’t know yet...
2. Another item of interest is....if in fact man removes the heat from an atom, and indeed that atom or electron stops moving, what then? Will others stop moving? Is the universe a plasma of sorts which requires all matter to participate in the fluid in order for the fluid to remain fluid...a symbiotic motion universal plasma? Can it be that.....like a million horse power turbine engine, once the parts/mass are moving and up to speed (like our universe) is it prudent to suddenly freeze or stop the motion of one atom of that turbine engine, an atom which is an active, integral participant in the whole? This seems folly and very, very dangerous..... won't it shatter when the proximity atoms collide with the dead one? Won't at least a portion of the atoms/motion involved in the atomic fluid motion of that 'turbine universe' systematically collide with the stopped atom? Can you envision the explosion? Can you envision the proximity atoms/electrons being forced by their collective orbits, to suddenly veer to avoid the stopped atom/electron? Kind of like standing....waiting.....in a long line to buy a Rolling Stones ticket......the line is stopped for hours.....suddenly it surges forward for two minutes.....everyone is moving forward, up to the window.....yahoo!......then some Jesus freak tries to pay with beads.....the line stops suddenly......and all the people standing in that line collide with the person in front of them....until.....the motion is transferred so far down the line it becomes minimal..... never-the-less, the ones up front take a repeated beating!
a. Do you get what I'm saying? Even if only one atom/electron/ gaseous molecule/atom was singled out and pulled from the 'celestial motion plasma' and put in a vacuum for the final heat transfer doesn't the fact that it was pulled from the 'motion plasma' in the first place have irreversible consequences to all at least in the original proximity/relationship with that particle? And shit, where did they put that heat? I want to see the needle move on that dial.....ha......haa......haaaaa.
b. What happens when they are through with the experiment? Is heat given back to the atom....is it 'restarted'? Or is the experiment 'chamber' just opened up and vacated? Is the dead/motionless/heatless atom allowed to rejoin the 'motion plasma' and just exist in 'un-motion', un-heat'? Remain a stopped, un participating particle? Although I'm sure very improbable, but isn't it possible that from the theoretical 're-entry' time forward other particles/atoms/etc. which are in motion ( that means all) may collide with that particle? Perhaps over the millennia creating a traffic accident of sorts....only there are no tow trucks coming or cops to re-direct the traffic around the obstacle sitting in the middle of the road. So what you say? Speed is time, time is mans....time is motion....and ours alone. Remember the speed of light, the speed of sound; just how long do you think trillions, trillions, trillions, trillions of atoms/electrons moving that fast will take to find the dead atom we just threw in their path in some obscure lab in the middle of Annapolis? Then again, perhaps the dead atom will garner heat from those same atoms moving past it at astronomical speeds.....all the while sharing their magnetic fields and pushing the little, dead, fellow around until it starts moving again...just don't know at this time; however, keep an eye on the horizon over Maryland. If anybody in white coats disappear, drop a dime.
I just hope they don't throw it back out
there, in the middle of Interstate-5 during the morning commute without
resuscitating it, and bringing it up to speed or we're going to have allot of
universal 'fender benders'...they need to be sure sure what will happen to the
only 'stopped' mass in existence before throwing it into universal motion.
Be our luck....someone in the back of the room will say " there's only one way
to find out what will happen"........heh...heh....while holding the plug.....you
know, the same guy that didn't get his name on the 'proof'. Ever stub your
toe on a brick......think of that atom like a brick.....and your toe, trillions
and trillions of atoms.....which it is.....your brain tells you to reverse that
which caused the pain, that which stopped your foot......does the atomic plasma
of our universe posses the same or similar acting mechanical consciousness and
symbiotic relationship we enjoy with our bodies atomic configuration to reverse
the flow of atoms hitting the zero temperature atomic brick? Can /does the
atomic structure of our universe think? On earth when adjustments are
observed in the environment, we call that "nature". Does the
universe possess "Nature" consciousness other than the one we observe on
hear on earth?
yea, I’m working on that one too….to be continued….all the best...RJ