Tin-Hats at the ready.

Icky ’n’ Sticky Tin-Hat Time

MW Rhodes © 20221213

I really don’t like doing these Tin-Hat articles because they’re icky ’n’ sticky.

I was never any good at playing dot-to-dot games as I could barely keep the lines straight but here are a few dots for you, maybe your lines will connect up straighter than mine. 

I’m sure many would agree that 2020 saw a tin-hat tsunami of all sorts of weird and wonderful works of glittery tin-foil head-wearing apparel art from the pseudoscience of mind control and imaginings of some elitists with financial motives, others with passionate motives for crying WOLF and those who see an obvious flaw or danger and just want to scream out amidst the hoard of audiences in this sleepy pantomime of life.  “ The monster is right behind you..” no matter how loud the children scream and point, the actors feign obviously oblivious to any warnings of danger.   We are such incredible critters in this way.  Predictable to a T. 

Ahh, My apologies where are my manners? If you would like a little background music as you read here’s a FREE music player with some original tunes I whipped up for you earlier. :) Click the button, press play and then return to the article.

Nice huh? :)

So as we all watched Tin Hats resurrecting old conspiracy theories and creating some new colourful ones based on whatever it was they we didn’t know much about but had our suspicions that something might be awry. I was quite surprised to see that almost none of them included something like the Tin-Hat theory I’m about to deliver here. Yup, with nothin’ better to do I dusted off my old Tin-Hat, gave it a polish and thought up some crazy stuff about stuff with my own Tin-Hat theory so get your shiniest aluminium foil ready or a clean cooking pot we’re about to venture down the rabbit hole and take both the blue and the red pills, just in case. Just kidding.. It started as a jovial theory until some dots started to align.

Nothing quite as outrageous as mind control or population growth controls or any of those extremely dark satanic conspiracies that doom us to lives of slavery and servitude or appeasing some extremist elitist’s version of climate control by eradicating half of humanity.   Profits?  Sure spread a virus and profiteers of miracle cures spring out of all sorts of woodwork, even the corporatised authorised authoritarianism of Big Pharma for the whimsy.  Nothing quite so sordid, nothing quite so dark indeed my Tin Hat theory is kind of the opposite of that but it’s no less strange for the well-postured head scratch.  It’s …

It’s a strange form of humanitarianism and decisions based on our behaviour as an organism in fear and how we respond to things in ways that only make sense when primordial instincts drive us toward our own insanity of inhumanity.  I mean C’mon, Toilet paper?  What I mean to say is that evidence is looking more like the Covid-19 Coronavirus came from a lab and somehow got out. But how? or maybe even Why?

Was it an accident or on purpose? If it was on purpose then what possible purpose could there be to release such a virus with such a low morbidity rate but high spread rate with only the spread rate causing the effectiveness of the low morbidity rate to be sufficiently significant to officially deem the virus as a deadly pandemic and scare or force almost the entire globe indoors for months and even years in some political regions of the world.   Why has China taken so long to lift restrictions? Dunno what if.. um..anyway. There are lots of inconsistencies with the timing of various decisions and even the mathematical modelling of such events. Inconsistencies that deserve investigation. Anyway, one will not hold one’s breath for the waiting of it.

In March 2020, the world bank opens its vaults like never before as if there was no tomorrow and so even many of the homeless were given shelter indoors.  For the thriftiness of it and the lack of normal administrative resistance to giving out Trillions in a single meeting, it really was almost like the World Bank didn’t have much of a care for the economic future of the world.  Almost as if they imagined the world was ending and none of all of the money in the world could save them so they might as well, just give it out like GDP fairy bread at a grade one end-of-year primary school party.   

Anyway, it was weird times with many weird behaviours and decisions like that that I’d never read about in History.  I’ve read about many falls of civilisations and many responses to great sicknesses, pandemics and plagues and the responses to this Covid-19 didn’t match history much at all.  Indeed unprecedented responses to a precedented state of a pandemic.  It’s not like the world hadn’t seen pandemics before.   So anyway let’s move on to the normal stuff about how humanity as a mob responds to such precedented things. 

Violence over toilet paper for the sake of a pandemic.  WOW, what a signal that humanity in reality is not nearly as rosy as some of our rose-coloured glasses might have us believe we are, or desire us to be.  

Can you imagine how we would respond if the news was not of a pandemic but of say something like an armageddon type asteroid heading our way and with no recourse to action but the simple finality of life on Earth?   Imagine if we had a year’s notice and this was the news.   Think of all the ….

Imagine. …………………………….

With my rose-coloured glasses on there would be tears of fear and hugs for the love of all life.  Meditations of prayer that the inevitability of all life’s end was coming.  Perhaps a few peddlers of prophecy and pretend promises portending righteous religious ceremonies of repentance and no doubt a costly miracle cure for folks waiting to buy a ticket to whichever heaven would accept them.  Or indoctrination they would succumb to.  Peace of mind is a nice thing in dire situations.  Permanent, deliberate and more peacefully humane exits from life may be arranged or acted on too. Escaping the potential mayhem and trauma of what might be coming. Ouch, that is dark stuff for a rose-coloured world but historically these are things that we have done to avoid mass trauma for our people. What it is to be humane is not always clear nor easy.

Remove the rose-coloured glasses and we might see something less rosy.  I’m sure you can imagine the mayhem and vengeance and violence over toilet paper and perhaps air freshener too because most people will be shitting themselves including me.  That’s just domestically but what about globally? well, perhaps something similar might happen only much worse on international scales. Vengeance and righteousness.  

My own romantic notion of such a grand exit involves a bottle of whiskey and a hill to sit on as the end comes.  Alone with nature would be nice but with friends would be nice too.

Imagine if the news of armageddon came out and every authority of science and maths around the globe agreed that the impact would happen and the end of life on this planet was inevitable. The news being something like “All life on Earth has only a year or two left to live and we could be squished or Kentucky fried immediately or slowly poisoned by the planet’s chemistry or climate changing.” Imagine if we had two years notice. Imagine how all the unresolved political and religious conflicts might resolve.  

Imagine that by the luck of the gods or angels or some of our wonderful scientists that something happened at the very last minute and diverted the asteroid in the nick of time.  Imagine how the Earth would be after all our mayhem.  Heck someone might have even thought it more humane or religiously correct to press the little red buttons and destroy ourselves with nukes or needles.

Imagine that for a moment. Take a few moments././.   Ahh Hollywood.

Read on.

There’s a thing about science that you may or may not be aware of but it has to do with how we respond to new or more accurate technology.  Technology that may give us readings that we simply weren’t expecting or predicting.  When we built our first gamma ray detector to detect any earth-proximity nuclear testing activities by our enemies we got a serious shock.  A shock that caused a lot of confusion and almost lead to World War III or something like that.  Deep Space Gamma-ray bursts were first detected by this device and we had no idea whatsoever that they existed out in space.  The only gamma-ray events we knew of were the ones of fission and nuclear bombs that we made happen.    

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gamma-ray_burst_research

Ok, that’s just an example of when we get things wrong and might respond pre-emptively to our fears of what we don’t know.  There’s been plenty of close calls to WW3 and other silly decisions, google it, it will open your eyes to how crazy we critters really are with such destructive toys in our arsenal.  Who needs conspiracy theories when our world is already so divided and divisive?

I want to show you our present understanding of things like supernovas.  It would take me a few chapters to write this so to slim things down a little, I’ve found a pretty accurate description of supernovas and their dangers in the video below.  A recent Nov 2022 YouTube Video by Veritasium.  

The takeaway from this video is how dangerous we think supernovas are and the nature of how dangerous radiations are to all life on this planet and dangerous from many light years away.   At a great distance, the radiations may not be strong enough to cook an egg but they may just trip an oxygen atom away from a Nitrogen atom in our atmosphere and then other stuff changes like O3 dissolving.  Which ain’t great for sunbathers as changes to the chemistry of UV filters and so we eventually cook from our own sun. 

The truth is though, that most supernovas we observe are very far away and our observations and calculations are only as good as what we interpret and try to understand in correlation to what we know and theorise about nuclear physics.  The end of the video mentions the tools used to create the theory behind the process described and officially these are the best tools we have.  The process as we know it will change as we come to learn more but until then and for the purpose of this article the point of this video is to show how dangerous we think supernovas might be to life on this planet even at great distances.  

After the video, we’ll explore a completely unexpected, unpredicted something that happened in Jan 2019.  A natural event that for all we really knew but didn’t actually know was determined with a probability against what we don’t really know about these things to be a nearby star about to go supernova.  First, let’s just see the global consensus on just how dangerous we think supernovas are to our planet.

  Enjoy the video.  

Pretty Dangerous huh?  Our planet would be radiated for months, Day and night.  If the radiation didn’t fry us like an egg then it could easily convert atoms of safe elements in our biosphere into isotopes of dangerous elements and destroy all life without barely a whisper or any Hollywood-style drama.  Just radiation doing what radiation does and creates an atmosphere that we didn’t evolve with.   So keep in mind that this is how we currently think supernovas will or can affect the Earth if our science is right.  Don’t worry I’m not disputing it here.  I just want you to be aware of our uncertainties about such things. 

I don’t dispute what we know or how we know what we know but I do explore supernova beyond what we think we know in other articles in my website blog so if you’d like to see something a bit different than the current accepted/authorised descriptions of this distribution method then check out my Successful Space Species blogs.  My background includes physics, geology and archaeology with history and music for the creative streak so although my versions aren’t authorised they do use observation and evidence but just with slightly different interpretations.  I write them for anyone who may be interested or looking for alternate perspectives when trying to resolve their own vectors of cosmological stuff.  Galaxy, star and planet formation and back to the beginning of stuff and how matter comes to be but from a slightly different yet still plausible sequence of events and outcomes.  Kind of like doing a switcheroo and turning E=mc^2 into M=e/c^2 and playing with that.

So I have a Tin-Hat theory but so far all I’ve mentioned here is that our science community have in the past overreacted to new observations and with the video you might consider how our science community might respond if we suspected a supernova were to happen near our planet.  This isn’t rocket science.

Indeed even our science community know that the above video presents facts and figures that are a hundred per cent correct enough but that comes with not only margins of error but also probability functions based on theoretical frameworks that use unresolved theories within their own evidence matrices and so most of the facts and figures are only to be trusted during story time but when it comes to the real thing, then absolute caution needs to be taken as our calculations and theories may be underestimating or overestimating things to all sorts of extremes.  The smarter science community folks know this to be true. We advise and respond to what we think we know at any given time. Look at climate change and technology.

Science of cosmology relies heavily on theory because unlike science for engineering, biological, geological or many other Earth-bound systems where materials or objects are accessible for the testing of hypothesis, cosmology labs can’t simply build a star-to-scale to test fusion or collations or other things in those extreme environments so we just do the best we can in a piecemeal kind of way. Smashing protons, fission and partial or complex fusions but nothing nearly as substantial as what is out in the universe. So there must be some flexibility when it comes to demanding cosmologists be 1 00% spot on with predictions.

This is where my Tin Hat comes in and instead of some satanic, demonic, evil human nature trying to rule the world, we get something more innocent and human but perhaps even more difficult to navigate than a conspiracy of lies. It’s our global response to the truth.  How do you navigate that stuff. Darned if you do and darned if you don’t. Telling the truth and sharing the whole science of what some of us do and don’t know may be more disastrous for our global mob mentality response so it really boggles the mind.

What a storm it would be to navigate especially if the predicted event turned out to be a powder puff of fear.    

We have a scenario where scientists make an observation in January 2019.  They resolve what they can and can guess through what we think we know but we truly know that we absolutely have no idea what is happening and what the result will be.  It could have been the beginning of a nearby supernova and so the actuaries calculate the risks based on what we think we know, determine the response and come up with something like a better than 50/50 chance that this event will mean the end of all life on Earth.   

How long does it take to make a decision to tell the world that according to our best science that the world has less than 50% chance of surviving the rays of a supernova that might be coming?  Would you tell the world this news? How would the world respond? WOW.. Should you tell them?

So a best-case scenario or the least extreme scenario might be that perhaps some extra cosmic rays and light from the event tinkers with our electronics, chemistry or even biology but nothing devastating.  But then on the other extreme, there could be rays that might fry us to dust in an instant or destroy the chemistry of our atmosphere and become a ticking time bomb to an end-of-all-life-on-Earth scenario.   Somewhere between the minimum and the maximum was inevitable, it was certain.  Something was coming and with a whole bunch of unknowns including the timing of things. The main danger could have arrived in days or in months or it could be a few years. As a political leader, you take on board what your scientists say and prepare for the worst but hope for the best.  

Is the best way to protect the people of the world in this instance to simply tell everyone to stay inside for a year or so until the danger period was over?   Ha, yeah good luck with that.

Let’s imagine for a moment if that’s exactly what was done. 

The absolute truth was told and people were told to stay inside because the Earth was about to be bombarded by radiation that even our atmosphere might not be able to protect us from.  Bombarded day and night for months and possibly a couple of years.  An event that might end all life, but we really don’t yet know enough about the subject to be absolutely certain if we are as correct as we thought we were before this happened.  This is unprecedented so we have no idea. We have made an observation and for all our science and theories we interpret the observation as “We don’t know for certain but chances are good based on what we think we know that it could mean the end of the world”.  So..

So please stay indoors day and night for as long as it takes until we say it is safe. It could be months, it could be years.  

Can you imagine our response as a globe?… You have one case study to compare with already but with a virus rather than a cosmological conundrum.

Would it be more humane to come up with an alternate way of keeping as many people indoors as possible?  Say perhaps release a virus that is not overly deadly but spreads very fast and can support a narrative to keep as many people as possible locked away safely in their homes. It’s an extreme measure but would an actuary’s calculations determine a better outcome for the world given the risks based on what we think we know?   We know more about human behaviour than we do about the life cycle of stars. BUt we do know they can be dangerous on both accounts.

I know it’s a Tin Hat theory. It’s one that I came up with in March 2020 when the world bank opened its coffers almost freely to world leaders and without a care and Australia had its first total lockdown order even though Australia had nearly no cases of covid-19.  I mentioned it to a friend of mine who is a space nut like me and amidst the saturation of conspiracy theories circulating the internet, it was a very mild theory that I thought was more amusing than possible but that was until I saw a video on space science a few weeks ago and noted the dates and considered the timing of things and our scientific community and behaviour of responses throughout modern history as our technology gets more accurate.  

It was a similar type of scenario that my Astronomy 101 lecturer brought up once or twice at Uni along with how to deal with population growth and climate change and end-of-life-on-Earth events.  The Earth was never destined to last forever and ever amen and from my other blogs, you’ll know that I support any initiatives working toward deep space success for the preservation or even propagation of Earth’s life beyond Earth, beyond our solar system and especially beyond our galaxy.  Space is a pretty violent place and unity is what we need if we’re to succeed.  Perhaps if a Tin Hat theory like this one above was true then this may be a step toward unity that we could advance from.   

If you ask me if I truly believed that the whole Carona-virus pandemic was really about some super secret space danger,  then I guess my answer is that I believe nothing of the sort indeed I believe nothing.  These are just some interesting dots that may draw an interesting picture if connected with good lines. 

In Jan 2019 the nearby star of only 650 Ly away, Betelgeuse showed a dimming patch.  By June 2019 it was clearly an event of the like that no modern observation had ever been made of nor official Astro theory ever theorised of. It was a very uncertain observation for cosmologists and with incredible potential consequences.   You’ll note that the process started being observed Jan 2019 and it took a whole year for it to progress through to a complete separation of mass from the star. Around Jan-Mar 2020.

The timing of which gives rise to an extreme coincidence that much of the planet’s people were indoors during the most probable dangerous period determined by scientists who have never seen anything like this before nor considered such an event in their specialised careers.

Here’s the official release from Nasa. Now is a good time to start noticing the dates of how it progressed. Below the link is an image I found with clear dates present. If it took one year to decide how to respond and plan for it then the timing of things is remarkable. Jan 2019 the first observation, continued observation through that year saw it develop into something completely new to our cosmologists and by Jan 2020 it had completely separated and by March 2020 the planet was gearing up for everyone to be indoors to avoid something.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2022/hubble-sees-red-supergiant-star-betelgeuse-slowly-recovering-after-blowing-its-top

If the image represents the event correctly then it took one year from the beginning to complete the separation. The light took 650 years to get to us and what comes after light?. We don’t know. Our tiny sun mass coronal ejections send light that reaches us first within five minutes then charged particles not long after and then more disruptive stuff days, weeks or months after if we are unlucky. This was no tiny little ejection from our sun, this was an unprecedented observation of something more uncertain and from a much bigger event. Distant yes but uncertain nonetheless as the first light of it had just reached us Jan in 2019.

Before the observation came to be, science presenters were saying that this star was dying and might go supernova in a 100 million years or so, so there was absolutely nothing to worry about.  The Jan 2019 ejecta event happened and by the time they realised what was going on ( which means that had no idea what was going on because it was unprecedented ) their stories changed a little.  Now they absolutely know all there is to know about everything in the same way that they did before this unexpected event happened and with the same public confidence for telling that story.  It’s storytelling more than science and below are a couple of videos that highlight my point.  

The following videos are presented by Anton Petrov, an excellent video presenter of the most current authorised science we know and the theories that are officially the best-authorised theories we have.  I often wonder that if they had my notes on planet formation from stellar mass coronal ejections of this type if the conclusions, confusion and fears reaching the politicians and actuaries would have led to a different type of outcome or response.   It’s hard to say but this event is on my list of the universe's mechanisms of mineral distribution which predicts this type of event is quite common for planet formation. I started theorising on this model way back in the mid-1990s’. I did write to several observatories regarding the theory back then but Tin-Hat theories of Pseudoscience don’t fare well during project funding applications so the responses from the observatories were limited, to say the least. One did respond noting they didn’t have the funding to carry out such investigative science so I guessed they were after some funding dollars. Such is the systemic way of our modern scientific progress.

Anyway, the takeaway from these videos is to note the dates they were made as they show exactly what we knew or didn’t know and then what we really don’t know about the cosmological stuff going on but that everything we know is 100% correct.  It’s like a pantomime really..  Our institutes of science telling us they know everything they need to know to be correct.  And yet we see corrections occur with further observations that don’t always align with our best science.

If you’re familiar with my writings you’ll get the gist that I feel being seen to be right or wrong is not nearly as important as being right or wrong especially when investment in or loss of life is at stake.  Being wrong about how our universe distributes matter and minerals will result in us overreacting to uncertainties and perhaps even worse, spending too much energy travelling to the wrong places in the future if we do progress to being a deep space species before the planet’s life expiry date comes.    Enjoy the videos.   

So you see I’m not a very good Tin-Hat conspiracy theorist because if the above dots connect in the way as suggested then it suggests that our world leaders, that our elite scientists, that our economic elites and perhaps even our religious leaders heard news of the End of the world and succumb to knowing how we might respond as a globe if that news was told in its true form.  That perhaps the best way to keep most of us indoors was to spread a very real, well studied lab virus for it’s low morbidity but high transmissibility and let the narrative of responding to a pandemic do the job of keeping as many folks indoors as possible and saving as many folks as possible.

So a Tin-Hat theory that says our leaders are NOT trying to enslave us into some wacky indoctrination but simply save us from our own mob fear-driven behaviours.   Of course, the profitable fallout of the miracle cures and the political shifts seem to debunk my rose-coloured Tin Hat views.  Mind you, the Toilet Paper violence was quite an astounding reality of our meditations. 

Albeit, here’s a video of Tim Robbins sharing an observation of our humanity during the pandemic and the unusual redefinitions of things like vaccines and most unusual politics evolving as time progressed. Tim may not be a scientist or medico or world behavioural therapist but just an average business owner trying to run a business through the pandemic response and observing the world as it was. Something was certainly unusual or unprecedented about the whole affair.

As always, travel well, stay safe and keep your Tin Hats handy for them cosmic rays and a dunny paper roll in the glove box just in case.  

There are more blogs on this pseudoscience fictional writing style at my website. Also some normal unadulterate science and fiction. :)

www.murryrhodes.com

Cheers     

Murry  :) 

If you have any comments.

Universal Observational Correction Question.

Could this be possible?

I have a question about cosmology observations that I have searched for an answer to or discussions of but cannot find any references directly on what my question raises.  Perhaps you can help me. 

My question is about the ratios of elemental distribution of star composition and elemental composition throughout the universe and how we came to determine the ratio.  It may be significant in how we determine the composition of stars and our universe as we move forward into deep space exploration.

The method I understand of how we determine this ratio is through light emission and absorption spectral analysis of stars and light-emitting bodies. 

My question raises concern for a possible observational error 1/5 or 0.20 to the value of 1- (cube route of 2) or approximately 0.26 so a multiple of 1.26.  Where observing the light from a sphere comprised of two elements of equal or 50%-50% composition but the physical trend toward forming a shell-type structure may be observed only as approximately 74%-26% composition.  74%-26% with some variation given that most of the bodies ( Stars ) we can observe have rotational eccentricities away from being a perfect sphere and may present margins of difference given these are dynamic systems with only shell-like tendencies or averages.  

Our telescopes collect and focus a 2-dimensional plane of light onto sensors that we then carry out spectral analysis on that point of light.  A point of light that often comes from a spheroidal body comprised of elements emitting light like stars.  So a star is some kind of the core of stuff and then an outer shell of stuff as per our understanding of the life cycle of Stella nucleosynthesis of stars and galaxy cores. Dynamic systems in motion so not perfect spheres and shells but spheroid systems with collated shelling-type tendencies.  

Let’s pretend we have a body comprised only of Hydrogen and Helium but in equal amounts. So it’s 50%-50%.  I’m not sure if this has ever been observed and I think that through our current understanding of Stella life cycles that other processes occur before a body might ever reach this composition ratio.  So let’s pretend simply for demonstrating where this possible observational error may occur in scenarios where 50%-50% may exist but never be observed as 50%-50% but will almost always be observed as 74%-26%.  Or indeed at 80%-20% as the minimum margin as you will see in Fig 1. Because of a simple observational perspective correction.

Let’s consider the volume of a unit sphere = r(1)^3 x 4Pi/3.       

Let’s now consider the same volume but now distributed as a shell around the original unit sphere.  So Volume of r(2) Sphere - Volume r(1) Sphere..  Let’s find the volume of r2 the outer shell and ultimately the value of r(2). We can use surface area considerations and equations too for similar results but with some slight variations. For simplicity of demonstration, volumetrics will suffice as density, mass and gravitational collation and particle valence charge of two elements plays a role in earlier and later articles on similar topics. I like Volumes, Let’s do volumes and just keep it simple for now.

Vol of core sphere r(1) = Vol of Shell with r(2)

Our Unit Sphere has r(1) = 1 unit              

->  r(1)^3 x 4Pi/3 = r(2)^3 x 4Pi/3 - r(1)^3 x 4Pi/3

->   4Pi/3 = r(2)^3 x 4Pi/3 - 4Pi/3

->   1 = r(2)^3 - 1

->  1+1 = r(2)^3

->  2^(1/3) = r(2)

->  1.26 = r(2)   Approximately. 

-> 1-1.26 = 0.26  leaving 0.74.. Almost +1/4 r(1)

In our complete star, we now have five-fifths, four for the sphere and one for the shell. This gives us a new unit sphere of r=r(2) which now incorporates the entirety of the light source in this application.  

So, of the light being emitted from within the inner unit sphere transferring out through the outer shell of the body will on average of the system appear to any observer to see a ratio of around 76% of the inner-24% or more so 4/5 inner shell with 1/5 outer shell as being the apparent composition.   In perfect conditions. 

This may be applied to large spheroidal bodies such as stars, galaxy cores and composite nebula where, density and volume occur and we may also apply this to electromagnetic emissions from a simple or complex atomic nucleus. Where symmetry of fields may need also to be considered for field potential variance in more complex Nuclide arrangements. 

So I wonder if the determinations of our universe’s composition in ratios may be out by 20% - 26% with the inverse accounting for 80%-74% error where our compositions of Hydrogen to Helium may be closer to 50%-50% or 1:1 than the existing figures.   

Our sun is said to comprise of 75% Hydrogen, 24% Helium and 1% (Other heavier elements)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

Our current universe has been determined to be much the same ratio of composition as our sun which is quite fortuitous of our star to be fusing Hydrogen for the past few Billion Years and be the same ratio as the universe by the time we come along to make the observation. The probability of it occurring certainly exists although I wonder how small it is and if perhaps 1-( that probability) might be the chance that our observation considerations at present might possibly have a larger margin of a difference than the authorities of knowledge might like to think.

Our ancient universe just after the Big Bang is said to be something like 75% Hydrogen, 24% Helium and 1% Lithium +(other trace elements). If you’re familiar with my articles then you may be familiar with some of my applications of Lithium in the origins sequences of massive particles and if you’re not then you may enjoy reading and exploring some of my earlier articles. Lithium is unstable and gets reabsorbed in normal hot Stella-type environments where nucleosynthesis happens and so it has been considered that the only place and time where an environment might exist for the production and preservation and distribution of Lithium as a mineral was back at the Hot Big bang with some other fortuitous events.

Perhaps a consideration for if Dark energy and Dark matter theories fail to find particles to account for the error margins they are trying to fix in modelling the universe.     

This is an observational question that arose while modelling the universe from something more akin to M=e/c^2 and a Cold Big Bang that has a thermal signature provision for the cosmic microwave background (CMBR).  Please feel free to read my other articles and observations.  There may be more to come too so stay tuned.  I am happy to take criticisms constructive or otherwise and will leave a contact form below.  

And don’t forget to check out my Music, photos and designs they incorporate space, biology and the spirit of life and of all life.

Any generous Tips for the musings of my stories, music or designs are more than welcome and certainly help me survive and continue to do what I do. Thank you in advance.

Kind regards

Murry W Rhodes

Would you like to comment?.. That’s great, here’s a form for you to do so. :)

Successful Space Stuff Early animations.

It’s almost Successful Spooky Science.. :) Talk about the coolest of cool, well kind of hot coincidences for the timing of things. :) Synchronicity? Duplicity? G5? Anyway, it’s cool.

Directly below is “a little music button” click it and it will open a new page with a music player. Press the play button and leave that page open then return here and read on. :)

Hi all, I’ve been playing around trying to learn how to animate so I can reduce all the wordiness of some of my descriptions. Here are a couple of my animation attempts I hope you like them.

The first one is about how spiral galaxies are formed and how they send out matter from the core, rather than the official collapse from a gas and dust nebula from the current Hot Big Bang theory. It’s 25 seconds long and was fun to scribble around, clicking buttons and trying to make it look something close to how I’ve imagined it since I was a young child.

The second is a follow-on from the first but longer and more detailed / progressed version of a similar type of process but a bit different in the scale and composition and physical aspects as it’s about a Star ejecting a high quantity of hot mass in a plasma state. Like our coronal mass ejections but with more mass than we have ever seen our sun eject. A plasma that shoots out into the cold vacuum of space expands and cools to recombine ionic state elements that collate and gravitate into one molten hot inner planet and with the lighter gassing elements being swept out to become an outer gas giant. So Earth might be one of the dense hot inner planets and Saturn may be little more than a debris field formed into a ball along with a few scraps of ice and dust making rings or belts.

For the wonderful luck or coincidence of all things, I was in the process of finishing this animation when the science presenter Anton Petrov published a video on the Red Giant Star Betelgeuse that had been seen to eject a significant amount of stuff from its surface and so now it’s a waiting game to see if this ejection event resolves into something like my decades-old theory predicts. :) I put Anton’s video link below too.. He’s got some far cooler presentation tools than me and presents science stuff really well.

To be honest I never thought I’d see such an event in my lifetime but I always felt that it was the right theory to describe how planets and galaxies and other stuff happen in space. :) While I Studied Astrophysics at UWA I read and understood the texts of the collapsing nebula theory and could parrot it off in tests but It seemed more like a parody or farce or only one tiny part of a much broader field that didn’t seem to include the way I thought was the most obvious and intuitive process and whenever I started asking questions about the verity of things. Well, TIn-Hat theories only distracted lecturers from their own projects and funding priorities so creative discussions about it never really happened at Uni.

I felt at the time that the university system was less about exploring new ideas and more about funding for polishing old safe ones or following the popular international science crowd which at the time was all about the wonderful string theory champions on campus or proving Einstein was right about stuff. Champions who didn’t much like my questions about their probability functions. I felt sorry for them ten years later when CERN’s results didn’t quench their thirst for brilliance.

I’ll visit the 2015 gravity wave discovery a bit later too as my main Astro lecturer was involved in his own gravity wave detector project out at Gin Gin in Western Australia. It was an awesome set-up with Telescopes and lasers. As a student, I enjoyed an interesting backstage visit to the installation and had overheard some discussions about the sensitivity of equipment and funding problems and so I was stoked to hear that he was awarded a huge bonus when a gravity wave was finally detected in the U.S.

CERN posted a nice congratulatory write-up about the gravity wave Nobel Science Award for proving Einstein was right about gravity waves existing. At that very same time, CERN was busy smashing protons apart to find the sub-atomic particles responsible for making gravity so this was very Cool timing huh? One looking for gravity in space and one smashing subatomic particles apart looking for the stuff that makes gravity. Coincidences like this are so cool and the funding applications certainly looked better with a Nobel prize on the table. Anyway, keep your eye out for my reviews and questions about those discoveries one question leads to some interesting maths for the scale of things.

Anyway, if you read back through my blogs you’ll find references to many videos and wonderful animations on how the current theory treats galaxy and planet formations and now with my little animations here is a different kind of theory for you to digest and see if you prefer it to the more official version :)

So after watching this video… I discovered a timeline of images from a CNN site.. Took a screen shot and how cool is the likeness of their time line images and my animation… I love this coincidence stuff… I wonder if we’ll start to see resolved physics on Fusion theory, perhaps the begining of the universe not being such a big mysterious deal after all but just a cold transformation of E=mc^2 to M=e/c^2… With M materialising into Free Neutrons at Zero Degrees Kelvin and then with the help of gravity and beta decay transforming all the M of E into the Proton, Electron symmetries of our universe. A squence that got a little thermal with a 450K Lithium N-N chain reaction in situ with Deuterium. Maybe.. Anyway, I can’t wait to see those videos.. They should be coming soon.. Dark matter and Dark energy are on my list of things to do too.. :) So stay tuned..

NASA on Betelgeuse Ejection.

This next video shows just how much we are prepared to not touch the old theories of planet formation. The description moves toward the Red Giant being a dying star and this ejecta is part of that dying process and yet it is unprecedented and not predicted anywhere in the life cycle of stars as per any texts.. I really feel that the recent spate of reports on the bottle neck of science theories could use a little simplifying rather than complicating things with multiverses and crystallised concepts. Anyway, it’s nice to be able to watch it as it happens, or happened.. :)

As always. Take care, Travel well and hopefully, we get to see some cool new space images emerging and vectors being resolved either way.

Cheers Muz :)

Successful Space Simplicity

Successful Space Simplified 20221110

MW Rhodes © 20221110

Before we get started. How cool was the Blood moon two nights ago? Here’s a little compilation of the crimson moon and another cool crimson pic of the feathery variety :) Nice huh?

Hello and welcome.  I’m Murry, let’s simplify stuff and get back to the basics of what we know.  As much fun as it is to write many imaginings of things and histories of our progress in coming to understand the things of space and our place in it, we really do need to simplify our systems if we are to become a successful space species. 

We are already a successful space species because we exist, albeit by chance or intervention or even a bio-legacy of some kind but we can only remain a successful space species if we rise above our differences, indiscretions or trespasses as the fickle species we are and stop fluffing around. 

Fluffing around with mind-challenging complexities is nice but…   

The more complex any system is then the more stuff there is that can go wrong and all we have to do to succeed in deep space is to somehow preserve the biodiversity of Earth’s biome on a journey toward the next destination and then the next with enough energy and information to propagate the legacy or seed.    Are we up for it?  Are we going to be a successful species?..  Perhaps only time can answer that but we can do a few things in the meantime to at least try not to fail. 

Deep space is a long, long journey that may take longer than any of our technology might last without needing resources and methods and energy to replace and maintain in deep space.  So the more complex any of those systems are then the increased likeliness they are to fail.   Our own biological complexity may attest to that.  Keeping things simple has often proven to be just as or even more successful than complicating things.  So to start this simplification process I offer some simpler descriptions of things that have become over-complicated for whatever reasons.  

Physics is the philosophical side of observing and interpreting our observations into words that help describe or communicate what we are observing and how we might exploit certain things to our benefit.  No one of us can accomplish the task of succeeding as a deep space species and so we need language to communicate and collaborate with others to help.   

Maths is the language we use as a tool to help communicate, quantify and qualify our observations.  Maths is also useful when trying to predict certain events or outcomes and yet the almost infinite dynamics of our universe in its wonderful combinations and permutations of transforming one form of energy to another or one particle’s location to another, tests our predictability models when the laws of averages are often broken by outliers in the data.  The more complex our models then the more likely they are to fail even in maths and so all predictions are subject to unforeseen circumstances or outliers in the data.    

So first we will do some simple physics to observe and interpret stuff into words and pictures if needed and then we can apply some maths to help qualify and then quantify stuff.  Let’s start looking for some pieces that best fit the puzzle using our physics then at the end we can come back and identify which parts we want to qualify and then perhaps quantify with time.  Time was the giver of life but it is also the immortal enemy of life so knowing our enemy in quantity may do us well.  Knowing how much time we have to prepare for deep space success is the prediction we hope to achieve and we can only pray or hope that we have enough resources of energy and time to succeed.   

Beginning the Beginnings.  A simplification of everything.

As we strip back our atoms to smaller and smaller things we have come to learn that all particles and bonds are little more than tightly wound and bound bundles of a simple field flux.  Field flux such as what we observe in magnetic field-type stuff.  We are currently making this study more complex by trying to understand the intricate interferences of resistances and polarities of these fields and predict or determine outcomes with precision to better exploit these fields.   

We start at the beginning with little more than a simple field of flux that then has somehow been wound and bound by other fields of flux with slightly different polarities or properties and those fields have also somehow been wound and bound in various ways that for all its combinations and permutations give us our complexity of fields that interact with harmonics of attraction and repelling that has manifest and materialised into the physical universe we can observe, experience and interact in with resistances and states that become our natural laws.  We have particles with properties of mass and we have transmissions of radiation from the bonds binding the matter.  Transmissions can also be seen to communicate properties of mass in some ways and finally, we have fields and polarities doing all these things and more.  

In one of the animations of gaining something from nothing at absolute zero degrees Kelvin, it starts with a single field without coordinates of scale but that forms a primarily symmetrical spheroid with coordinates of ratios by position within the field.  Primarily symmetrical on its own but where other primary symmetries play roles internally and indeed externally if multiple fields are manifestly present in what might be considered a closed system.  Then it introduces multiples of the fields as a single field and with natural symmetries that can by natural means cause pathways of least resistance that may wind and bind the flux easily and without resistance at Zero Degrees Kelvin but by doing so introduce a gravitational communication by way of geometrical reduction of space in the field space extracted from the windings. Sorry for the wordiness, It’s the type of imagery that may be best represented or communicated with visual aids.

Before we watch the animation I would first like to show how dark energy as mysterious as it sounds, can be considered intuitively plausible.  It is not considered in the animation but let’s see how we go on the physics of this in words. 

Like when it rains. In the air exists many water molecules each molecule with an atomic mass.  Their energy state relative to the energy state of the environment (air) determines their density and behaviour. Change the energy state of the air and the tendency of the molecules to repel or attract changes. Change it enough and we get what is called a phase change in the function of state so we get rain, hail or snow.  Other charged particles in the air also play their role such as dust etc. But the key here is that once those conditions are met then the mass of the water vapour gets extracted from the air and accumulates on the ground so the air literally becomes lighter in mass than any surrounding air that did not take part in the precipitation of rain hail or snow.  

That is a generalisation that doesn’t take into account the pre-existing saturation of water molecules in the surrounding air but for the sake of the intended purpose to show that mass is removed from a solution and is literally removed from that system leaving a depleted region.  How this translates into dark energy is such that regardless of which mechanism or sequence we apply on how the universe was made that the properties of mass were necessarily removed from the (air) fabric fields of space in one region.  

This means that the surrounding regions still retain that which did not precipitate out of the fabric.  In simpler words, if we consider our physical universe on the scale of the infinite space of the non-physical universe then our physical universe is simply a region where it rained.  Hence dark energy or the properties that were used to materialise particles/bonds with mass properties still exists in the fabric outside of our physical universe. A physical universe that extends to infinity.  

Collectively or cumulatively this dark energy extends out to infinity so this stuff may be that which is accelerating the entropy of our physical universe.  Is dark energy a particle like a graviton?  It doesn’t need to be a particle by definition but only to have the property of gravity which is also a property of mass given mass is made from the windings of field flux. If we considered the centre of the primary unit sphere as a point particle then you might call it a particle but the centre of a field is not the definition of a particle. Especially if it has no coordinates of any calibrated measure.

So it’s not a particle unless it has undergone processes required to partition the fields of space fabric into particles with polarities or resistances such that we might try to detect which is by virtue of the difference between our physical universe being defined by the resistive interactions of wound and bound binding fields or not. I don’t think a graviton can or needs to exist. 

Also collectively and cumulatively, to say that our physical universe is the only corruption in the Infinitum of space is presumptuous and since extreme distances may exist between regions of materialisation into bound bundles of field flux or between physical universes, then one might consider the sum of the gravitational fields in association with such multiple universes might be as a point that can be added to the collective and cumulative effects of dark energy on the scale of Infinitum.    

So hopefully that philosophical wordage makes sense to everyone or someone.  Dark energy is very likely to exist and yet does not need to exist as a particle.  

Dark matter on the other hand seems to need a particle to exist but one that has no other interactive resistances other than gravity.  Quite simply by the sounds of it, a Free neutron that is not able to decay may be that particle if we could detect such a particle.  A tightly wound and bound field of flux containing sufficient flux to account for mass properties of gravity but without any ability to communicate in or out any field flux polarities and inherent resistances thereof for other field resistive properties or perhaps inertia.  

So without polarities or harmonies, one of these special types of free neutrons can’t cause resistance to attract or repel any form of field communication which means it can’t crystallise with any other configuration of field charge nor transmit or receive any harmonics of secondary bonding radiations of the strong, weak or electromagnetic types.  Fundamentally it raises the question of what then is gravity if not a geometric constriction on space itself.  Despite calculable math on oblique euclidian geometry, I’m not a fan of the Einstein geometric constriction interpretation because that constriction still needs to be communicated between mass properties in order for gravity to take effect both instantaneously as t2-t1 -> 0 or in a sequence of instantaneous non calibrated non zero moments.  Sorry but simplicity is sometimes tricky especially when describing non-detectable things like dark energy, dark matter or Einstein’s theories.  Do they exist or do our natural laws and classical theories really need reassessing? 

If the galaxy rotation was the only phenomenon for the allusion to dark matter then I would love to see the assumptions and calculations that were done as I can intuitively see at least one adaptation or configuration of classical physics that would certainly predict such rotation and orbital speeds that have been used to demonstrate dark matter as the cause to effect orbit speeds.  To which the classical well established laws need not be altered or redefined nor does Dark matter need to be introduced to explain the phenomena. I’ll check out the other suggested evidence and see if the other causes may be oversights or need a slightly altered perspective. After all, our authorities of knowledge have been known to hold on to old theories for millennia and altered or new perspectives are what Copernicus and Einstein and perhaps others were promoting.

If indeed dark matter exists but without any other property of mass for resistance other than gravity then one might assume intuitively that it has already accumulated at a single point without any other vectors of inertia, resistance or interaction other than gravity.  But then gravity by definition needs two points to cause attraction and so Is this attractive force of natural law where every action has an equal opposite reaction unless it is dark matter. Then it is only Dark matter acting without reaction to be attracted to the second gravity node. This has some pretty special consequences that might be evident in such things as binary star systems in motion or indeed mineral distribution events in supernovas.   

Do you see how tricky the philosophy of this stuff can be?  It does my head in..

It’s not as easy as the chicken or the egg of what came first, like Did matter come first with its bonds that we can observe transmitting and receiving radiation? or Was there a spontaneously contained universal supply of radiation from a completely unknown non discovered mechanism or method or field that then somehow stops containing the radiation and releases it to expand and to make the bonds that make the radiation that makes the bonds that recombine particles and bonds into matter determined by the charge of the particle’s fields in some kind of function-of-state. 

A quantity of thermal radiation that we cannot make in a lab nor have we ever observed in nature such as thermal radiation on a scale that the Big Bang requires to expand and cool down before any recombination of particles, ions and elements can happen. Such a quantity of energy where E=mc^2 might already be contained in the universe of mass but where M=e/c^2 and where we can observe mass entropy reduce via radiation as a natural path of least resistance but the radiation of any concentration never resulting into a hadron of mass. A Hadron being a permanent particle such as a quark, neutron, proton or electron. Hence the Hadron collider collides protons to see what other particles might survive the collision well enough to be detected. Like the Higgs Boson.

Precipitation of pre-existing particles is not the creation of new particles so we may reduce thermals in a system and see state-of-function type effects but never the creation of mass as a Hadron. We can see an energy transformation from mass via radioactive decay into a wave of radiation that may have some properties of mass such as gravity or inertia but never see radiation energy transform into say a hadron.

Subatomic bonds have been observed to make fission simpler by adding more thermal radiation and responding by a type of weakening of the bonds but what seems to have been overlooked or omitted from this thermal process is that atomic bonds also break down and get weaker as we get closer to Absolute Zero degrees Kelvin. A weakening of flux that is less ordered and freer to do what exactly?    

This is why I wrote the Successful Space Stuff series because winding and binding field flux at zero degrees kelvin is a path of least resistance and is much simpler and requires much less complexity when flux can exist closer together in such proximity.  Adding thermal energy simply tends to increase a repelling force between same-phase flux vector components in the field, and weakens bonding properties/resistances by the ratio of the flux density over a spheroidal inverse square law in that system.  

Besides, the very definition of Absolute Zero Degrees kelvin requires that no thermal energy exists which must necessarily have been a condition of the environment of the fabric of the universe at one time before the mechanisms that we can observe to cause it actually exist to make it.  Hence tightly wound and bound bundles of field flux with polar properties of some description commenced moving in a reciprocal behaviour against a sufficient polar resistivity to cause the peak and trough of radiation waves. 

The maths of this does not require a function of probability distribution but can be classically determined by resolving vectors of field resistive interactions of phase angles and motion coordinates along the vertical, horizontal and depth axis of X,Y & Z in this single universe of three-dimensional space.  The maths will be explored further in the following Successful Space Sums series.  

From the video, the big takeaway is the thermal signature of the Hot Big Bang a thermal signature that may also be derived from a matter-to-energy model whereby Lithium Deuteride ( The fuel of the Biggest U.S nuclear test ) can be produced in context and in a sequence commenced by Beta Decay of Free Neutrons. Another little takeaway mentioned is that the Big Bang can’t identify Why the universe has more matter than Anti-matter, so this might be due to M=e/c^2 with M being the original storage container and mechanism producing all the thermal energy of the Universe. Perhaps the release of the thermal energy wasn’t quite as fast as our current Hot Big Bang theory suggests. Yes, for all my flaws in life and for my interpretations of the data I am a Cold Big Banger but just not quite the same one that was presented a hundred years ago by Georgias Lemaitre.

Phew, was that a minefield of complex simplicity or what? I’m glad you got this far, I almost didn’t but there is an animation to show you and then you may try reading the above again to see if it makes sense to you. It’s one thing to know a thing but then it’s a whole other thing to be able to communicate it and so I know it’s tricky. :) My apologies it may take me a little while to get the animation up on here so come back in a week or so if this Cold Big Bang interests you. :) Oh I just now finished a different animation that is intended for after the first. I’m still working on the first one but here’s the second one. :)

A 12-minute animated sequence of Free Neutrons precipitating in empty space and evolving into a BIg Bang of sorts.

A short 25-second animation of how Galaxies breach to make spirals and stars. :)

There is a comment box below for you to send me a comment. Good or bad, religious or scientific it’s all good I’ve studied enough stuff to not take anything personally as nothing I write here should not be believed but certainly questioned.

In the meantime Feel free to read a few more blogs on the Successful Space Series.

Successful Space Species-i

Successful Space Species-ii

Successful Space Species-iii

Successful Space Stuff I

Successful Space Stuff II

Successful Space Stuff III

Successful Space Simplicity

Anyway as always, safe travels and take care.

Cheers Murry

Successful Space Stuff? III

Successful Space Stuff? III

MW Rhodes © 20221020

Hot Models Goldilocks and Stellar explore the universe of swirly swirl swirls, Check out the Video at the bottom too and one of the cooler coincidences of sharing these scribbles.

Hi and Welcome to my scribbles, I’m Murry.

Swirly swirl swirls.  Hurricanes, Cyclones, and Galaxies. They all look cool and kind of similar huh? 

In our labs, we can replicate some of these swirly swirl swirls or we can simply look at the swirly swirl swirls when flushing our loos.  There are a few different ways to make swirly swirl swirls indeed I think you can stir a bucket of mud to see a swirl or there are even firecracker wheels that make swirly swirl swirls with crackling sparkles of light.  They’re all swirly and curly cool.

In our modelling of the universe from the Big Bang stuff, we use the Nebula Hypothesis to gravitationally collapse a huge cloud of gasses and dust and we do our best to show how it can form some swirly swirls of spiral galaxies.  You may have seen animations of these models where supercomputers calculate all the variables that we can think of that would replicate the formation and evolution of spiral galaxies.  It’s quite wonderful to watch really, and rather mesmerising but is it right?     

No, it’s not right nor is it wrong though, it’s just incomplete.  We can’t expect it to be complete because the variables in our real world are almost infinite as they rely on transitions and gradients and energy exchanges and fields of fields in some state of chaos.  They all play their part to give us our universe and the best we can do when modelling is commit to a model, invest our time and resources in it to see if it works as a best guess kind of averaging tool and maybe ask how we might make it better.   

If you’re new to my scribbles, perhaps you may like to catch up on the story so far.  It starts with a little Cold Big Bang, explores planet formation and now we’re looking at galaxy formation.   I’ll pop some links to earlier posts below so if you enjoy this one then you may like to gain a little more background.  Most of this space stuff is about looking at the tools we have and the tools we may need if we are to become a Successful Space Species so if your future matters or the future of Earth’s life in this universe matters to you then you may really enjoy my scribbles. 

How did you like the SWTB model from my last Successful Space Stuff II scribbles?  It was fun to write and regardless of its own verity or lack thereof, it allowed us to examine some of the flaws in our bandaid hypothesis. The old but ever-popular and most current Nebula hypothesis.  If we are to succeed in space for the long term then knowing the systems and determining where and when assets will form is going to be a necessary tool.  

That the current nebula hypothesis has its 80-90% Dark Matters to deal with loosens the reigns of conclusive popular theories a little and allows us to analyse other flaws that seemed to have evolved into acceptable assumptions of insignificance.  Assumptions that took on a quasi-god-like status of their own verity as a natural law in the conventional wisdom of things. 

“If you believe anything else then you are sadly misinformed” was a saying I heard on more than one occasion by one or two prominent and public scientists. A saying used in situ with their conclusion to a body of science they were presenting. the saying grated on me as it seemed more like something my Christian friends would say at school when telling their story of god. So I started questioning the verity of our cosmological science theories and started a path of study and research.

Trust me. ;)  In science, there are many long-held popular theories with flaws but don’t take my word for it as a big chunk of the broader science community knows this to be true and is busy trying to figure out the where, when, what, why and how these flaws matter in the bigger scheme of things.  Hmm. Flaws can get pretty slippery when wet so let’s put our skates back on and get slippery.  And but seriously, don’t trust me, but the stuff I show you will be interesting. 

So to start exploring our galaxies I’m going to start off by using an intuitive method to present something that can be observed by everyone.  Then I’ll show you some really cool stuff.

Let’s start off with something similar to the SWTB, the Spinning Wet Tennis Ball from my previous scribbles only it’s not a tennis ball or a hot wet star but a spinning galaxy core.  Some galaxy cores aren’t wet at all but super dark, cold and almost solid.  If we keep in mind that our classical universe replicates systems regardless of scales other than quantum particles and field theories then applying parts of the SWTB to this is simple enough but I can’t start this without first looking at Black Holes.  Hmmm.  Do they really exist?

Well, the images of gravity lensed around a large gravitational mass that we can’t see or detect directly in the electromagnetic spectrum may be proof of the existence of a gravitational body that we can’t detect directly so by that definition then yes they exist.  Are they the mystical objects that demand so much conjecture on what happens to light or time or extra dimensions of space?  Maybe but maybe not.  I’ve touched on the humanities in science before and our need to stop fluffing around if we are to be a Successful Space Species and what has been happening over the past hundred or so years is a bit worrying.  

The Bible has Jesus Christ and you can only guess the level of investment that has gone into proving the existence of the man to reinforce the biblical narratives behind the entity of J.C to then ratify the viability of the institution of the Church.  A.E or Albert Einstein was a wonderful philosopher of science and his brand profited the institutes of knowledge to seemingly no end.  Even today his E=mc^2 moniker sells bums on seats and his story inspires many to mortgage their homes so little Billy or Betty can go to university and become famous knowledgeable scientists like A.E.

The past couple of decades has seen some serious investment going in to prove the theories of A.E were true and correct.  There are some circles of science out there busily trying to prove A.E to be incorrect.  Hmm. So which one is right or wrong and why think that the proof presented in support of the A.E theories might be flawed?   I hate exploring this stuff because science should be clean and simple and without this biased stuff.  

So is there a motive to prove his stuff is right?.. Yes. and Is there a motive to prove his stuff wrong?.. Um.. Maybe.  Perhaps one of those nay-sayers has an alternate theory or claim to fame or profitable margins of some sort so I’m not sure but we can probably assume there may be room for some motives.  Perhaps just pride?.. Who knows?  Not I. 

Anyway or either way it doesn’t matter too much.  I’ve looked at the evidence presented as proof positive of A.E theories and well, something is only conclusive when no other possible explanation can exist and where the bias in the presentation of the evidence is clearly present and readable between the lines.  Like if a text might be geared in support of reinforcing the A.E brand and institutions that support and profit from that brand.  

In the A.E theories dealing with gravity, the evidence gets described as a phenomenon occurring because of a theorised structure of gravity being the bending of space-time.  

For all of the evidence presented I still see immediate conditions that may arise where the phenomena can occur in the presence of gravity and some other stuff rather than just from gravity alone.  This raises the question of What about the other stuff?  Why isn’t it mentioned at all? Especially when it’s an obvious and intuitive other stuff that if proven to be cancelled out then no questions get raised and the theory can advance.  

Now, right now, you’re probably thinking I’m not a fan of A.E.  What if I told you that he cracked the Grand Unified Theory but had no idea that he did.  Indeed he likely didn’t because others before him may have already done the maths but being the iconic commercial brand influencer that he was, one of his jobs while promoting a thing involving a thing about a thing and some stuff about when some stuff happened something was revealed in a way that was more commercial than science driven so the significance of it may have been overlooked.  Either that or an even simpler oversight occurred or even may something more complicit.  I’ll show more about this later when I start presenting some maths on this Successful Space Stuff. 

So I think the solution to the grand unified theory exists but because of the way things happened and the motives of why things were happening it just got overlooked or bypassed. It’s happened before with fire, like How silly would our ancestors have felt when they discovered the secret to making fire was as simple as rubbing two sticks together?  The materials were always at hand but just the method was hidden for hundreds of thousands of years until someone connected a few dots and revealed just how close to our noses the solution was all the time.  

Something for a later post. :)  

Anyway, sorry I got a little sidetracked.  I may explore more detail of that stuff and other stuff in future scribbles but for now, I’d like to get on with our galaxy formations. 

Looking out into the universe we observe many different morphologies of galaxies and the two main shapes or categories are spheroidal and spiral where spiral forms have subcategories depending on how twisted or malformed they are.  The spheroidal ones may be formed from a distribution event, not unlike the one we explored during the Cold Big Bang in the “Successful Space Stuff I”  scribbles.  

Alternately what we see as a spheroidal explosion may only really be just a Star type of body having radiated its mass out into its stellar-sphere passively as our Sun does for our Solar-sphere - stellar-sphere.  How our solar system may look to a distant observer may be similar to what we observe of other star systems with radiations of rings and big spheres. 

The Spiral Galaxies are a slightly different kettle of fish or mass and almost quite literally like a kettle on the boil.  When the kettle boils then pressure builds up and the whistle blows and we distribute the tea and biscuits or coffee and pancakes.  A galaxy distributes other stuff. 

Of course, a galaxy core is not a kettle but perhaps more like sealed ball stuff that was once hot but had crusted over and kept on cooling. Angular momentum of a shrinking spinning ball, coupled with an outer cooler crust made of brittle minerals and yet still actively hot in the middle.  Here is where some thresholds in science might be determined for such a system. 

If the body’s rotation or angular momentum starts off low then the rate of black body radiation may cool the body and shrink it and still increase the spin rate or reduce the period of the rotation while conserving angular momentum.  The spin rate is quite important because the faster a thing spins then the more centripetal forces get exerted outward from the equator of the spinning ball. The pancake effect or gravitational polar collapse in this instance.  You might see a tennis ball or even a golf ball flatten out to an eccentric shape.  Our spinning planets have this and sure enough, the dynamics of gravity, mass, density and rotation period help determine the shape and outcome. 

So in essence, if the angular momentum of the system starts low then this pancake effect is also low which means the body will continue to lose black body radiation and shrink until the atomic forces of the body crystallise and effectively even under great gravitational forces in the core the theorised fusion process stops.  I may explore more on fusion in a later paper but for now, we can see a simple recipe here for making a completely dead inactive node with lots of mass and gravity.   A node that eventually will reach sufficient entropy with its environment and one that we simply won’t be able to see with any of our current sensors.     

Would we see this type of object?.. With a cold dark surface and little to no black body radiation to see then we might not have a way of sensing it other than by aberrations of light bending around a body that contains a lot of mass properties.  This might be a black hole.  Quite simply a system that didn’t have much angular momentum after being distributed out from perhaps some other primordial node.  

Alternately it’s just a ball of primordially accumulated dark matter as like the deactivated free neutrons mentioned and explored in Successful Space Stuff I.    

By the way, the redshift of light over long distances stretches the wavelengths of frequencies.  This is why the James Web Space Telescope looks at the Infra-Red wavelengths.  We may not have a sensor that can resonate with even longer stretched wavelengths and so we do the best we can with what we have.  Looking at the lower frequencies allows us to focus on the stuff in space only at a distance that corresponds to the transmitted wavelength but over such a distance that it gets stretched to or beyond the infrared.   

So the requirement to see stuff further away is not about if they exist or not but by the simple fact that their wavelengths may have stretched beyond that of our sensors.  Perhaps our Black Holes aren’t really completely black but simply emitting low energy that gets redshifted beyond our sensory capabilities.  Either that or some alternate universe is sucking the light and information out of the universe at some event horizon and sending it into a portal of some other dimension of infinite universes.   Which one seems more practical?   :) 

So that’s a system without sufficient angular momentum to spin the core fast enough as it shrinks to keep up with the rate of cooling.  

What about a system that might have enough angular momentum to really speed up the spin of that shrinking galaxy core and cause a little pancake action while it’s still actively hot in the core?  Hmm.  Hollywood could have a field day animating this model but I’m sure a supercomputer could predict it quite well too.  If I had one I’d show you some of the awesome fluid scenarios that it might result in. There are plenty of variables and variations but on average they kinda all do the same kinda thing.   

Perhaps your mind’s eye can picture this one.  A Hot shrinking body that spins faster and flattens out.  A brittle outer core and the gravitational polar collapse of a body.  Much like the collapse of a nebula but a bit less passive and a nebula doesn’t have brittle boundaries. 

This brings us to a derivation of the SWTB model but instead of a spinning wet tennis ball we have something more like a fire cracker spinning wheel with lots of potential energy at its core.

Where the N->H->He->Li sequence used fission of the Lithium shell to commence its primordial distribution event, here is a far less explosive one but still delivers a wonderful exchange of energy and very natural and artistically beautiful creation of nature. 

Consider this pancake squeeze on a brittle ball with something super hot going on inside. Did you notice the Equatorial fractures I draw in on the sides of the ball?..

So I’m sure your mind’s eye can imagine some kind of massive mass with a plasma-hot inner core and magma-hot liquid mantle surrounded by a cold brittle crust that is spinning so fast that it squashes down and a breach happens.   There are lots of variations on how that might all result in a mineral distribution event.

The Wagon Wheel galaxy in all the Hollywood High definition pictures may give us some idea of what might happen when a spinning wheel breaches at the equator.  It’s one possible outcome of such a system but there are many and I’d love to show you the evidence we’ve had of this for quite some time only we still seem to hang on to the old nebula hypothesis where the pancake of the nebula then becomes these spirals.   Honesty when you see this you may wonder the same thing. 

Ok I don’t want to breach any copyright laws for using other people’s photos in a way that they may not like so I’ll draw a few pictures and then you can simply search for the old photos of spiral galaxies and confirm for yourself that they exist and that this sequence might have been a reasonable clue or bit of evidence to consider this SWTB type process alongside the nebular hypothesis. I hope this image makes sense.  

Now for the Hollywood description.  The Baby spiral starts with a single breach of the crust somewhere along the plane of the ecliptic or near the equator.   Consider it like a super volcano with shock waves that traverse around the globe and try to meet up at the equal opposite side.  It may fully collapse the already weakened region of the crust OR it might just cause a second breach along the way OR it may be successful at reaching the other side OR it may not breach elsewhere and we get a rocket ship thrusting around. There are many variations of this breach. Barred spiral galaxies may be examples of two main breaches   This means we get a secondary breach sometime after the first which is why you often find one arm of the spiral shorter than the other.  Like in the diagram above where B is shorter than A. 

The initial thrust outward is mainly due to internal gasses and entropy of element expansions going in the exchange. As the ejection of matter continues the thrusting eventually reduces as one would expect and the distance of the orbit of the stuff being pushed out into orbit reduces accordingly. As the process continues, slightly different collated regions of the internal core correspond to the mineral distribution we can observe in the variation present along spiral arms. The symmetry of the system in its mineral distribution out along the spiral arms gives us a progressive sequence related to the internal collated structure of the original node, the galaxy core.  

There is a secondary thrust that involves the polar collapse.  Less pressure but more momentum behind the force for a bigger payload out to space plus at this later stage the breach point will have grown.  A significant amount of mass will have vacated and the whole outer crust may crumble and fall in toward the dense core.  The rest has to be left up to your imagination but it’s a big crunch with a big secondary or tertiary final push of stuff outward and by this time the entire equatorial region will be in breach releasing stuff in all directions.   

 Post publish edit 30 October 2022 - I juts found an animators app. So I’m not much of an artist but this is my scribble animated version of the words above.. Plus a little extra. :) Enjoy.. The animation was fun, I hope to refine the method for future scribbles. :)

Galaxy forming spiral and baby stars

When I look up at our our own Milky Way I sometimes wonder if that big cloud of stuff is still coming toward after the core crust crunch or if it has stopped moving outward started to assume an orbit.   I hope that cloud is not encroaching on us mind you if it is, then it will still take a few billion years to get here which by then the planet and our solar system will have cycled to what ever state it will be in and hopefully we’ll be up there somewhere tinkering around in some kind of Noah’s Ark just surviving until our descendants find a new party planet.  So this cloudy stuff might just make our own deep space travels a bit bumpy.  

Ahh well.. I hope you enjoyed that. the cool thing about having done the galaxy like this is that if our Solar System is said to have come from an old hot place then if we don’t find our parent Super Nova star (which I thought we would have by now as we would highly likely be in orbit around it) then perhaps our galaxy core was the origin of our nebula our parent of sorts.  And so the wet tennis ball we used or planets may not be needed to resolve those thermal vectors after all.  Plus it leads us to the query of Where did the galaxy cores come from? This takes us back to the Big Bang Theory and the Nebula collapse..  But then the time that all of this takes is a little longer than 14 or so Billion years.  Perhaps 14 Billion years was when our Galaxy was a baby Goldilocks. Indeed for the age of the Universe, personally I’d just keep adding zeros to that figure for a few minutes and see how many we can come up with. We’d be a little closer.  

As always

Take Care and travel well.

Cheers Murry :) 

Ahh, nice Do you like co-incidences? Just now in the middle of checking my spelling in these scribbles, I took a little coffee break and on my YouTube page was a nice little video that was published about an hour ago by Anton who is an excellent up-to-date science presenter. Haha, I love cool coincidences like this. It’s almost as if someone is monitoring what I’m writing about and helping out by making cool videos with tech and information that I simply don’t have access to. I love that stuff and those coincidences. Anyway, This video shows what has been officially described as a very strange Jet coming out of a Galaxy. Jets aren’t new but this type of jet apparently is. They’ll find more, and they’ll find doubles and triples and other multiples because it’s a common enough process as are a few other things we haven’t captured in sensors yet. If we don’t Nuke ourselves or procrastinate too long while our planet starts to expire then this future of preparing for deep space is gonna be a lot of fun for a lot of puzzle-solving scientists and a lot of work for everyone on the planet and a pretty cool motive too.

I really do hope in the spirit of why I’ve been sharing my scribbles on this stuff, that we start to see a shift toward a more predictive model for predicting future assets. If we’re to be a successful space species then we need to get this done sooner so our brains trust geniuses can solve the mountain of other challenges ahead. Seriously, deep space success for our species ain’t gonna be easy. Enjoy the video.

To see more of my scribbles on space stuff and tool of deep space survival here are some links.

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/7/successful-space-species-nbsp

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/12/successful-space-species-ii

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/15/successful-space-species-iii

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/19/successful-space-stuff-ii

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/16/successful-space-stuff-i

ADDITIONAL INFO SINCE POSTING THIS BLOG

This Gamma Ray ray Burst has some interesting similarities to the system described above. Applying these phenomena to the model above is simple enough as the rotational and mineral properties combined with crust fractures and then the period of the peak itself makes for an instant of instability. As we learn more bout the gamma-ray bursters then the closer the model above makes more physical sense. Nice. :) Enjoy this video.. It was just posted 9 hrs ago today’s date is 20221025.

Successful Space Stuff? II

Planet formation model. A continuation of the Successful Space Species Series.

MW Rhodes © 20221016

Hi I’m Murry.  I hope you have some fun with this. It seems there are a few space theories that are still up for discussion and resolution with 80-90% dark matter and energy throwing a sizable spanner in the works.

If we are to be a successful space species then we’ll need some successful space stuff.  One of the tools of success will be to be able to predict what mineral assets will form in the future to give us time to get there and exploit it. Assets for supplies or even a new home planet.  Assets that we discover now may take too long for us to get there before they have decayed or been absorbed back into their own system.  At present our most widely accepted theory of how galaxies, stars and planets form and evolve is not adequate for the task.  

If we don’t advance from that theory’s application then the time our engineers get a vessel into deep space and the energy we waste travelling to targets ( targets that may not be assets by the time we arrive) then as a space species we won’t be very successful, indeed we may become extinct.    If Earth’s biome is to perpetuate beyond this planet then we’ll need several key tools and knowing how to predict where and when assets will come into existence is one of those tools. 

I hope what I write in these blogs helps us gain that tool. 

Do you know the nebula hypothesis?  It’s today’s most widely accepted theory on how galaxies, stars and planets form.  I hate to say it but in its current application, it’s more wrong than right.  It has its place as one of the main physical processes in space but when applied in the way that it is, it is mostly wrong and requires perhaps too many low-probability events to occur plus the addition of 80-90% dark matter for it to satisfy observations of this system.  

Here’s a link for a little extra revision of what that theory is. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis

Let me now show you an alternative that may take some of the guesswork out of it.

A process I like to call the “Spinning Wet Tennis Ball” or SWBT plays an important role in the events leading up to the formation of smaller bodies ejecting from larger bodies.  Perhaps the title alone is enough for your mind’s eye to see what this process is about.  It is not nearly as simple as just a spinning wet tennis ball because the stuff that gets ejected from node is a solution of ions that is native to that node at the time of ejection. The stuff is in a hot plasma state entering the colder vacuum of space so it undergoes what you might call a micro nebula formation or simply a thermal expansion and cooling process that precipitates stuff. From the hot cooling plasma, the recombination of ions and crystallisation of minerals depends on the gradients of thermal energy at any one time in that ejecta system. 

With an initial composition of around 75% hydrogen, 24% Helium and 1% other heavy elements including Iron, Carbon, Oxygen, Nitrogen and more, we may look at the equations of state to determine the sequence of ion recombination as this system expands and cools.  We may also consider that we have a hotter sun radiating out more light and other solar winds than we observe today and all of which contribute to this process.  The lighter elements of Hydrogen and Helium that do not get absorbed into the nodes chemically continue to expand and escape the gravitation of the much denser forming mineral body. The inner planet.  

This lighter elementary cloud is more susceptible to solar winds and so separates/titrates from heavier nodes and gets whisked out to a more distant destination.  One of these ejection events may result in at least two nodes.  One is the inner more dense node and the other is a node of the less dense much lighter materials.  This means a chemical relationship exists between an inner planet and an outer gas planet.  A chemical analysis, with this in mind may determine which outer planet is Earth’s debris ball.  Additional nodes may form other debris like natural satellites and asteroids.

The net result of adding inner and out planet chemistry gives us the original ionic composition of the sun’s surface at the moment such a coronal mass ejection occurs.  Some variables of difference for loss of energy and mass may be included. These margins are minimal in comparison to the probabilistic status of the current nebula theory on mineral distribution.

Using this wet tennis ball physics is just the first step in predicting what a star may produce and when.  A similar application of this to our galaxy formation may help us identify which galaxies are ripe for producing young new stars that are most suitable for life. All hot wet stars can send off planets but not all can produce fertile life-sustainable planets and maintain them for biodiversity with their own specific composition.

Light frequencies associated to processes such as photosynthesis need to be made in the star by the star’s specific composition and state of energy. If for example a star doesn’t contain frequencies of carbon then the harmonics of carbon atoms on the planet don’t respond to complex molecules like CO2 in photosynthesis. There are variations of this process with different harmonics of light but ultimately if the star hasn’t got those ingredients or hasn’t got the energy needed to make them shine for life then life doesn’t happen. I think one of the cooler assets to try to predict in any deep space scenario is when a planet might start forming and so by the time we get to it, it’s perhaps cool and good for life. It may take a billion years just to travel to where ever a ripe sun might be about to give birth to the right kind of planet.

For now though and before we explore galaxy formation let’s just explore the smaller scale of Stars forming planets. The composition of the star makes all the difference to life and helps us identify other stuff too.

It may sound far-fetched but let’s explore it a little further anyway.  

There may be an official term for that spinning wet tennis ball process but I like calling it the Spinning Wet Tennis Ball because as a child the best way to dry a wet tennis ball is to throw it into the air with as much backspin as possible and let it bounce on the ground.  When it bounces and splooshes the water out, you can see the pattern that the water makes on the ground.  It looks very much like the distribution pattern of our Milky Way across the night sky. It’s a pattern and observation that gave me some ideas as time went on. 

Some decades on I researched our origins theories, studied some physics, astronomy, chemistry and geology and other things at university and have applied some of my own creative and critical thoughts to our understanding of the universe and how it works.  Perhaps I can show you a more efficient way of understanding the formation and evolution of stuff in our galaxies, stars and planets.  It would be nice to think we might succeed and perpetuate Earth’s biome beyond this planet’s expiry of her biosphere. 

Where to begin? 

Starting at the beginning takes us back to a primordial distribution of stuff. From my end, a Cold Big Bang with a Lithium Deuteride thermal signature sits better with me than a Hot one with a chicken or egg dilemma about the origins of thermal radiation coming before the very material particles that we know create it. After all mass is the potential energy of radiation and not the other way around and we see it all the time in natural decay because it is the path of least resistance. Making mass from thermal radiation, however, is one path we don’t see in nature as it comes with more resistance than even we can overcome in a lab or testing field.

But, regardless of the theory of the origins of such big events or big bangs of any kind, after any distribution event, we are left with clouds and clumps of stuff that have charge, gravity some active and some inert thermal energy and so they undergo physical transformations of that energy to become the physical universe we can observe today.  Collapsing a nebula is certainly an important part of this but so too are the supernova events and other physical systems and distributions going on.  A spinning wet tennis ball is precisely what I would call our younger hotter Sun and the mechanism that formed our planets rather than a big single collapsing nebula.

The surface activity of the sun is a function of the state of energy at any one time and its composition.  Evidence shows that our sun has been much hotter in the past and is constantly losing mass and energy so in its younger days it had more mass and energy and so higher surface activity but in slightly different solar-sphere conditions than today.  We might consider it being something as simple as higher energetic coronal mass ejection events with sufficient mass to form planets.

That all our planet’s orbits align near the ecliptic plane would be the expected normalised average of projectile paths from a wet spinning sun with some variation.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

The kinetic and thermal vectors in this SWTB process resolve many issues that the Nebula theory can only do by introducing seemingly intuitive but very uncertain probabilistic requirements in addition to uncertain theories in order to satisfy outcomes in the narrative of the Nebula hypothesis. It uses handwaving solutions. It’s OK, we all do it at times this the fluffing around part of theories which is fun.  

Kinetics- where the ejecta process leaves a trail of outward and sideways or arc/circular motions this translates into the observations of rings or the discs being formed from the ejecta rather than a disc formed by a collapsing nebula. The spirals of galaxies may form in more ways than one. All angular momentum remains conserved and the complexity of motion, acceleration on mass and electrical field charge vectors are significantly reduced when compared to the Nebula hypothesis.

Thermal- (Nebular Hypothesis) It is widely accepted that an accumulation of heat from collisions of cold gas and dust in space is clearly not sufficient to bring bodies such as the Earth or moon to the complete molten hot magmatic state as confirmed by geology.  We then introduce a theory of partial fusion via gravity pressure acting on core minerals to provide the heat required to bring these bodies to their full magmatic state.  There are some incredible assumptions being made here and potential deal breakers. One might be that the mass was sufficient to commence the partial fusion process to bring these bodies to a complete magmatic state but then not enough mass to maintain the state against the rate of thermal product to the rate of black body radiation losses to space.  Quite simply how did it start a process due to mass and then stop the process without losing mass? It’s rhetorical.

If the mass of the moon or even smaller bodies was sufficient to commence the process to bring its whole body into a magmatic state then we might consider that the Earth has sufficient mass even today to maintain the process of producing more heat than it loses and so would remain as a hot molten planet without a crust.  So either partial fusion never took place or some uncertain change occurred to stop the process that brought the planet to a molten hot state. Many of our asteroids look to have been completely molten too and their mass is surely not sufficient to do this from either friction or partial fusion. Their origins certainly seem more like a spurt of some kind.  

There are many other assumptions that could be presented for the uncertainty they contribute to the current theory but for the sake of brevity, I won’t unless requested. The SWTB provides the thermal energy directly from an already highly thermal source the Sun.  It is interesting to note that the core of the Earth’s temperature scale is similar to that of the Sun’s surface temperature. Not all planets share this characteristic but then our inner planet is bigger than most, it still has some insulating atmosphere meaning the rate of cooling is reduced. It does share a similar thermal core temp with Venus which is a similar size and similar mass but slightly different conditions. SI and Fe ionic recombination occurs around 340-380 Kj/mol depending on environmental pressure. This leads us to thermal and gravitational dependencies for gradients and rates of recombination and thermal insulations of this very dynamic hot micro nebula system.

The probability of this thermal relationship being the case in a nebula hypothesis is extremely low. Thermal temperature is a mutually exclusive outcome to have the inner planet thermals coincide with the scale of the thermals at the surface of the sun based on the vectors associated with its mass and gravity through the process described in the nebula hypothesis. The partial fusion hypothesis lends some weight to this but that theory is uncertain for the mass discrepancy of other less massive bodies coming to the full molten state.

In the SWTB the young sun was hotter, the planet’s formation simply accumulated the thermal energy as the ions precipitated and gravitationally collated, accumulated the thermals and insulated the system. A system that cools and forms a crust and continues to cool without further thermal processes heating things up. Our planets are not our sun. Jupiter’s mass in this nebula hypothesis of partial fusion should be evident but its not, not even close.  

Our planets or planet and moon having only one main input of thermal energy would then cool proportionally to their size and surface area with some consideration for temporary insulations provided by heavier atmospheric particles/gasses present during the initial process.

For the Earth to form with a moon and be chemically related suggests more than one node can form in such an ejecta event.  The presence of elements such as Helium ice on the surface of the moon may be from trailing the Earth’s node before reaching the initial orbit cycle and with the Earth releasing Helium while the moon cooled faster than the Earth and formed a crust before the Earth cooled enough to form its own crust sealing the helium in the process.  

The mineral composition of the Earth and our moon has a strong relationship due to being part of the same ejection event.  The densities etc of the moon also correspond to the expected densities of a smaller node from the one plasma solution and so they share the same mineral collations but with Earth being the first and dominant node gained most of the heavier Si and Fe elements out of that solution leaving the moon with less heavy core mass, gravity and density.  

In the Nebula Hypothesis, the Disc formed two nodes from two planetoids and with much uncertainty as to the origins of the formations of the planetoids.  Theia is the name of the moon node before this nebula hypothesis uses a collision of the moon into the Earth while both are still molten hot bodies.  Considering the plasticity, elasticity or indeed even mineral liquidity and surface tensions of liquids the probability of such a collision resulting in a moon bouncing off is very small perhaps much closer to zero than to one.

In the nebula hypothesis is describes that many cold collisions of gas and dusts happened and the friction welded the matter together. This process is said to accumulate thermal energy and kick started a partial fusion process that melts the whole body into a molten phase. Theia managed to break those laws of averages and bounce off even though the gravitational component between then is the strongest of all possible local bodies in this system. It’s fluffing around.

The SWTB theory proposes that the moon’s node formed while following the Earth’s early node out from the sun.  They were formed from the Sun’s plasma ion’s and so they formed at the equation of state where elements phase shift from ion to element and then from their to minerals. For Silicon and Iron these phases are at high temperatures meaning they are hotter than molten hot but the cooling is that which brings them down to being molten hot.

They both have an almost identical initial trajectory but form in slightly different coordinate positions in the initial ejected plasma cloud and since the first node that forms (Earth) has had more time to accumulate more mass properties and by collation has the greater density of the two nodes this translates into slightly different densities as mentioned before but also motion vectors in responses to acceleration and deceleration forces internal and external of the cloud.  The lower density of the moon node makes it slightly more influenced by the solar winds and radiations of the sun. meaning a higher outward force to inward via gravity of the sun. Let’s not forget that the Earth’s own gravity is also influencing and attracting this second node (moon). The dynamics are just lovely.  

So the sun’s gravity is slowing their outward motion but is still providing a slight outward force with radiation and solar winds. By the time the planet and moon system reaches the point where the sideways velocity (adopted from the surface of the sun’s spin) matches and then overtakes its outward velocity then we start to see a closing curve of the system with more sideways momentum than outward velocity thus beginning to enter its initial orbital path whereby the less dense moon with a little more outward push by the solar winds will not slow down to the Sun’s gravity as fast as the denser main node ( Earth ). There are internal tidal and charge influences too but for now, let’s just work with the external influences.

This means that the moon and other dense particles/bodies in the heavy trail will try to overshoot the Earth.  This motion and trail collapse does several things including providing angular moments for the Earth’s rotation.  It does so in the average direction of this system’s motion which is directly related to the rotation of the initial projectile vectors of the plasma leaving the sun which with some margins of difference is why most planets that truly spin as a closed system on an axis, spin in this same direction.  

The conservation of angular momentum by a falling trail is something we might consider when comparing this to the current nebula hypothesis that uses a fully formed moon to crash into and bounce off the planet the probability of the two may come down to the observation of the like of either in nature. A lava lamp might suffice for the first and a boundary splash of magma might suffice for the second.  

The tidal lock of the moon and its final shape and surface mineral distribution suggests the moon had very little rotational momentum transferred into it and by the tidal force transference through its own passing of the Earth ( without any contact collision required ). It entered its orbit according to the vector resolutions of just such a system.  If you watch a lava lamp long enough you may get an idea of the variations of nodes and the tail and trail fall and how they might introduce some variation on the end result of angular moments occurring in this type of system.

I don’t have access to a supercomputer for visualisation. Perhaps this drawing with a little song works. Please excuse the typos..  Press Play . :)

I hope the drawing works.  If you study cosmology or know a few things you may like to test this against the gravitational collapse of a nebula. I once believed in the currently popular theory but when I tried to resolve it with vectors, I found it near impossible to account for the friction given the discrepancies between the masses of large and small bodies, the plastic and elastic collisions in space and the gravitation acceleration of each node to be able to produce such friction. I even added the 80-90% dark matter to see if it would resolve but it just doesn’t. When I added the theory of partial fusion I ran into a similar problem with the discrepancy of masses.

So even combined with the assumed possible accumulation of thermal energy it didn’t work so I started thinking about the possibility of the Spinning Wet Tenni Ball. Some of the vectors resolved immediately like the thermal ones. Then the angular momentum and many others. So

Anyway, this is just a summary of the idea. I’m sure you can imagine that when applied to existing unknowns that it raises quite a few questions. I did look at the transitional thermal gradients of expanding plasma ejecta of such planetary mass to try to figure out the entropy effects of proton charge etc Figuring that out might account for some mass losses such as asteroid debris out onto their own orbits. Perhaps some chemical analysis of the belts might help connect the inner and outer planets to single ejecta events and add to the story of formation too.

I did find an excellent recent video of a supercomputer animation of folks trying to show how the moon collided with the Earth and it is very cool and considers lots of variables in physics. Watching it I think it misses all the precipitations and chemical fluctuations and thermal regions of recombination and cooling sections to thicker liquidities, or even heavy core interactions etc so as I watch it, it seems physically incomplete but still, it’s very cool to watch and may give you some ideas on how liquid these things may be and the variables involved.   

Anyway, that’s it for now. I hope it wasn’t too heady for you. Writing this stuff, does my head in. Trying to find the right words to mean the right thing is tricky given the topic of space.

The big collapsing nebula is the same sort of thing but on a bigger scale than the smaller micro-nebula described above. Yes, our Sun came from a nebula from either a supernova or other nodal distribution thing and yes some satellites or planet-type bodies will likely have formed from that process too and so the whole system of the diagram above will look much the same on all scales for moons to planets to stars and to galaxies. Which we’ll explore in Successful Space Stuff III.

The keys here as to why I think the planets came directly from the Sun’s surface is that the activity on Jupiter and the activity on Venus are fresh. The activity on Saturn and on Earth is older. The activity on Uranus and Neptune makes them look very old and well, and Mars is as intriguing as Mercury is. There are various scenarios that can bring them into this SWTB process but not without employing probability scenarios or alternate theories like the partial fusion stuff. Anyway these things should be solvable with some chemistry recombinations that lead back to a combination of the Sun’s contents. It’ll be just like a jigsaw puzzle. :)

Take care and travel well. :) You may like to catch up on my other posts about the beginning of the universe and making something materialise from the Zero degree Kelvin cold flux in the fabric of space. :) Quite a fun one that one but not nearly as important as simply getting this predictive stuff right for our future space kiddies. :)

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/7/successful-space-species-nbsp

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/12/successful-space-species-ii

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/15/successful-space-species-iii

https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/16/0ypfsf00f60x8gjcvclpqaqfqhsl7d

Cheers

Muz