Space News from Around the Internet Updated Every Weekday

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 5 Space News from Around the Internet Updated Every Weekday NEWS ARCHIVE TOPICS FORUM PHOTOS LINKS Web Search Tasco Telescopes Uk 1000's of Telescopes in-stock for the holidays. Up to 60% off. Telescopes for kids Large Selections of brand name Telescopes for kids Free 2 Day UPS Shipping 25% Off All In Stock Items Serengeti, Bolle, H2Optix, Zeal. Telescopes Great Prices Telescopes Binoculars & Eyepiece $25 Plossl eyepiece w/free Shipping Ads by Goooooog Universe Today Forums -> New theory on Energy Universe Today Help Search Members Calendar Logged in as: JohnnyW ( Log Out ) My Controls 0 new messages View New Posts My Assistant Universe Today Forums -> Space and Astronomy -> Alternative Theories SUBSCRIBE FREE! Join More newsletters (text, weekly edition, etc) 26,000 subscribers and growing. XML Version New theory on Energy, David Duane Supercluster Posts: 1338 Member No.: 113 Joined: 16-July 03 Posted: Dec , 10:50 PM QUOTE Track this topic this topic Print this topic Hello again, Antoniseb, I went to the 'Alternative Theories' forum and registered (as ngeo) but was unable to start a new topic or reply to a topic where I found your name. I don't know what the drill is there but I will keep trying. In answer to your comment, I agree that energy is eminently quantifiable, but what we are quantifying is the manifestation of an ability. The problem arises when we try to identify or define energy by its measurement, rather than by its essential characteristic. In the case of energy I believe the essential ability of energy is the ability to move. If we look at Einstein's equation we find an acceleration, a change in motion. By the dictionary we find that energy is the capacity to do work, which presumes that the 'capacity' resides in, or is a property of, a material body, and the work is done by one body on another body, etc. The result is an acceleration. By identifying the ability with its manifestation in material bodies we tend to identify the ability with the material bodies. However, the bodies themselves are manifestations of the ability which we assign to them, namely the ability to move. This is a kind of mis-assignment which, for example, leads us to believe that there is a finite amount of mass-energy in the universe. I have read on a NASA website to the effect that 'all the energy of the universe was released within one year after the Big Bang'. This presumes that there is a finite, SUPPORT UNIVERSE TODAY Help me maintain and improve Universe Today. SPONSOR

2 Page 2 of 5 quantifiable amount of energy - ability to move - in the universe, which was released over a specific period of time. But if we think more closely about the ability itself, we find that the ability to move does not necessarily include the ability to stop moving. If we measure motion by time-space co-ordinates, we find that before there was any motion - before the Big Bang, for example - there are no time-space co-ordinates to measure by. After the Big Bang, we have time-space co-ordinates. The ability to move is expressed in the change from a time-space with no co-ordinates - i.e., no time-space - to a time-space with co-ordinates. It seems to me this change alone illustrates the ability to move is the ability to create time-space. How then could this ability be limited, or 'run out', or turn against itself and take timespace away? That to me is a kind of 'mathematical' or 'logical' distinction between an ability and its quantifiable, or measurable, manifestation. Energy is then like a oneway switch: it turns itself on, but has no way to turn itself off. Another way of looking at it is to imagine the universe as an imagery system rather than as an energy system. If we then say that imagination is the ability to create an image, we can measure the capacity of this ability that resides in any material body - for example, a human brain - in energy terms, but those terms do not describe the essential characteristic of imagination, namely the ability to create an image. I will continue this if I can get into an 'Alternative Theories' forum. I am removing this paragraph from the Story Comments forum. A topic opened just for you David All civilizations become either spacefaring or extinct. ~ Carl Sagan ~ Humanity must rise above the Earth, to the top of the atmosphere and beyond, for only then will we fully understand the world in which we live. ~ Socrates, 500 B.C. ~ JohnnyW Planet Group: Members Posts: 25 Member No.: 2913 Joined: 5-October 04 Posted: Jan , 06:36 PM I got a little confused... who is the questioner in this posting? (Duane, David, or Antoniseb?). In any event, I agree that we measure energy based on the measurement of "displacement." As in the Einstein/Lorenz formulations, we must distinguish between what we measure and the actually happens. For example, place a spoon in a glass of water -- it bends! You can measure the bend... just how much energy did that bending require? No, I'm not that crazy... the spoon isn't bent but the LIGHT that we use in our measurements gives that appearance. SPACE SITES Astronomy Links Bad Astronomy Cosmic Log HobbySpace Kids Astronomy The Space Show Nine Planets SPONSORED LINKS Finance Carte di Credito Top Ricerche Finanziamenti Graduates labor law posters UK Wholesalers cheap web hosting website hosting web design templates html tutorial

3 Page 3 of 5 Another conundrum -- when will the Earth's battery run out and the "work" performed by gravity stops working (or when is the last time you replaced the batteries that hold your refridgerator magnets in place?) The appearance of "work" ascribes the energy to one source or another. Convention about the "source" may be incorrect. html web hosting SYNDICATED CONTENT Put free space news on your website. Click here to find out how. I don't subscribe to Big Bang (another measurement misinterpretation) so I don't have the explain other measurement anomalies like the bent spoon above. I do believe in an infinite universe with all energy explained (not by fields or waves but) by smaller and smaller particles acting like "bb"s plumling beach balls (but from all directions -- the spin-off from infinite stars and planets). I see a energy-matter balance in an infinite (basically, steady-state universe.) Why do I believe Big Bang is a measurement mis-interpretation? It is based on the interpretation of the OBSERVED ubiquitious redshift on stellar spectra with the interpretation that this IMPLIES a receding vector. Rather than red-shift supporting Big-Bang, I believe red-shift is better explained as the result of small particles ejected by stars accumulating "mass" (i.e. coalescing a couple more "bb"s enroute) and therefore appearing heavier/slower by the time it gets here. As this "energy bullet" continues to grow in size, soon it appears to us as matter (like He)-- like the flow we see every December from the zodiac sign of Ophiuchus. NASA Report 17 Dec 2004 There are other reasons why red-shift can occur (as in near-by Quasars) so it isn't EXCLUSIVELY due to distance, but distance WILL cause it. Do you remember Occam's Razor? ("Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" or "plurality should not be posited without necessity." - commonly quoted as the "simplest solution is usually ***THE*** right answer.) Welcome, in the 21st Century, to JOHNNY'S SHAVER (to supplement Occam's Razor). JOHNNY'S SHAVER says "Several Heterogeneous Antecedents, (may have) Virtually Equivalent Results". In answer's to Occam's question, "Why posit two when one will do?", Johnny replies, "There are times when TWO (or more answers) ARE true -- that's why!" That's enough for now -- probably enough to get me banned from the site, but it is an alternate theory. (And I didn't mention my web site, only NASA!) -- Johnny antoniseb Posted: Jan , 07:47 PM

4 Page 4 of 5 QUOTE Jan , 06:36 PM) I got a little confused... who is the questioner in this posting? (Duane, David, or Antoniseb?). Universe Posts: 2934 Member No.: 1628 Joined: 26-February 04 David posted this, addressed to me, in another thread. Duane clipped it, and started a new thread, which is good, because I don't recall previously seeing it. - Forming opinions as we speak antoniseb Posted: Jan , 09:17 PM QUOTE Dec , 10:50 PM) registered... but was unable to start a new topic or reply to a topic Universe Posts: 2934 Member No.: 1628 Joined: 26-February 04 It is possible that you are using an IP address that has been IPbanned because of persistant mis-behavior by someone at that location. Sometimes groups of IP addresses get banned, such as from a particular library or other place where someone might try and get around one computer being banned. If you still cannot put messages on the forum, send a private message or to Fraser and request getting un-banned. - Forming opinions as we speak 0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users) 0 Members: «Next Oldest Alternative Theories Next Newest» - Alternative Theories Go [ Script Execution time: ] [ 13 queries used ] [ GZIP Enabled ] Powered by Invision Power Board(U) v1.2 RC IPS, Inc. Mobile Editions - About This Site - About Fraser Cain - FAQ - Newsletter - - Privacy Info - Writer Guidelines - Advertise Copyright Universe Today, All rights reserved. - Powered by Article Manager from interactivetools.com.

5 Page 5 of 5