Re: Kook warning, Oriel36

From: Sergey Karavashkin (selftrans_at_yandex.ru)
Date: 12/01/04 

Date: 1 Dec 2004 14:56:53 -0800

Dear Don, I will reply to all your posts in this frame and in previous
of 2004-11-11.

Your father was absolutely right, this all appears simple as the
result, when you get over the difficulties. Olga reads geological
literature with the same puzzle as you and Carey: what for do they
explain simple things in so complicated way?

The same with subduction: if we use the terms you suggested, we will
have no controversy. If that what we thought under the standard term
"subduction" we now call "overriding" (something like French
charriage?) and call "subduction" the factory re-working the crust
(call it even a pot, only don't put in a fire, so?), we come to a full
understanding in this issue. Now we see, we have to account this
aspect in order to be understood correct by our English-language
readers. The same with convection. It undoubtedly exists, but this is
the process which has other physical revelations, it is a silly thing
to attribute to it an ability to move so directly large spatial
structures. But we can prove it only after we present a more obvious
and more proven mechanism of causation for formation of just such
structure of crust blocks. And again, we should not deny the
convection as such only because the plate tectonics supporters use
this concept in their sense.

In order to define this "overriding", we have to show the conditions
under which it reveals around the Pacific. But we have before to pass
step-by-step along the thread of our study. So we still are not
striving to define finally the essence of these processes, we can
meanwhile use this "overriding", though this is also not so much
exact; but this does not mean any controversy, only more clear words.

Then, please explain in your words, what Carey means under "mafic
lavas"? Is it the same as alkaline lavas or not?

Thank you again for linking us to important pages. Something we read
now, something will read later; you understand, it is impossible to
analyse this all immediately.

Here I would like to answer your question, what concern has our method
to calculate elastic systems. You are aware of course of engineering
geology and know, during its long history all the crust became broken
into separated blocks and we hardly can find a large territory of
solid, monolithic crust. If we disregard this, how can we calculate
correctly the propagation of seismic waves and predict destruction
either safe zones? Of course, calculations will be much discrepant
from reality. If we do not account this, we will encounter the fact
that today science cannot cope well with such systems. While with the
help of our method these processes "come to life" before your eyes in
formulas and plots, you can calculate them, they become understandable
and palpable. And we have many such aspects, very many partial
solutions which contribute to the general pattern. When you see this,
you will understand how many fragments were unknown, and many were
known but scientists still did not connect them by definite
approaches.

With it we seemingly have completed the discussion of one block of
issues, so I would like to pass to the next and to comment Carey's
book (still only chapter 1, to avoid a mess).

You are saying, Carey had not a background in physics; however it did
not prevent him to see the discrepancies of today physics. Though he
explains them on fingers, not in rigorous formulas, he absolutely
correctly criticises this eccentric twin paradox, the universe of
billiard balls, 20 (32, 64 ...)-dimensional world and many, many other
absurd things which he mentioned; in their sum, these theories of
relativity and quanta are the madness of modern physics, and the
physicists yet have to come to their sense from these theories. This
is just the reason, why physics feels so weak when geology needs its
help to sort out geological problems  they have entangled in
their own problems. In particular, physicists have helped geologists
to create the plate tectonics so as they used to create their theories
in 20th century - first giving the stipulations which the result has
to satisfy. Naturally, the result satisfies the given stipulations,
not real processes. When there are too many such theories and they
become indisputable, the scientists lose last reference points. And
they became indisputable since, for example, in Russia many scientists
were discharged from positions and politically suppressed because they
disagreed with these modern theories. And now in sci.physics we have
run into the fact that our colleagues round the world do not dare to
agree with obvious arguments of logic and experiments which I showed
them much, because my arguments encroach upon the Holy Grail of
Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Seemingly, who agrees with my
arguments will be ostracised (alas, politics again...).

Now, when reading Carey's book, we have some questions to you and
would like to make some comments. In the Chapter 1, item "Venus",
Carey writes:

<< … the surface altitudes of Venus were unimodal, not bimodal as on
the present Earth. For example, a histogram of the heights of all
males in the world is unimodal, with a high peak at the most common
height, falling away to the very tall males on one side and the very
short males on the other. Likewise for all females. But a histogram of
all people in the world is bimodal with a male and a female peak. In
fact Earth had been unimodal for the first 80% of geologic time before
the Jurassic beginning of the great oceans >>

How do you think, what he means? Absence of sea-type mountains with
"cut" tops (in Russian we call them "giotes")? Or he means something
other?

Next, Carey writes:

<< Quantum theory did not recognize the universal tension of the
cosmos and that Planck's constant is its measure [chapter 10]. For any
wave be it an electromagnetic wave of light or a soliton wave of
"matter", the fundamental must resonate with the background tension,
followed by second and third harmonics, and onward. To Einstein's
photoelectric effect, this seemed to indicate quantum steps, and from
that the quantum theory grew - to his astonishment, and disbelief! >>

Concerning photoelectric effect, this is absolutely right and based
probably on private talks with thinking physicists who understand,
there also is a discrepancy and we have to solve it (though, they
never, nowhere will tell this except in the very confidential talk).
Some time ago there was in sci.physics a large discussion in which I
have proven that discreteness appears not in nature but in our
detectors because of lack of sensitivity, so quantum theories are
excessive and true only in that part which repeats the classical
theory in their own manner, while classical wave theory answers the
questions in which that quantum is powerless. The colleagues opposed
me their usual argument - photoelectric effect which, as they say, the
wave theory cannot explain. I proved them that quantum theory only
claims that it can explain it but really does not. But to explain this
effect within the wave theory really is the task for tomorrow, as we
have first to solve many underpinning problems which will make it
possible. The plan of this work is clear for us, but it would take too
much time to fulfil it; we still are involved in other problems which
we think more important. The more that after all other my arguments,
the colleagues go on chattering and glorifying their photon theory, as
if nothing was proven. I understand them: if these air castles fall,
misters passengers will have to work hard to take a place in the new
paradigm. As I see, today the agenda is even not about the century of
physicists' efforts and not about billions spent to prove this
unsubstantially made work true but only about misters passengers
fearing any change.

And what concerns "great theory of everything" mentioned by Carey,
this is a separate story. When we got tired of cacophony of physical
discussions and that all serious arguments are disregarded, we opened
a thread "Great theory of everything" and put there the following
opus:

****************

Dear Colleagues,

I am very sorry having foisted you some obsolete dogmata and ideas
before. This is out of date.

Space-time is some rolled up spiral nothing along which with the speed
of light there are rushing the egg-shaped photons in the shell of
thickened conglomerate of the 32D energy condensed onto a compressed
EM wave of space-time continuum. In its cerebrally compressed state
the EM wave is interchanging its half-charge with the particles and,
emitting the background radiation not changing the zero level of the
energy of emptiness, informatively contacts with the absorbing
electron, clearing up the conditions of the forthcoming parking and
wish of the following behaviour planned by the electron at the Great
Council of Atom. The decision taken on the Quark Commission and
confirmed by Bosons allows Photon to be parking by either front or
back bulge, and dependently on this to direct the Electron's motion in
the given direction, by way of EM wave straightening and ejection the
energy partially consisting of dual electron-positron couples, a part
of which in a strongly quantized form is sticking to an electron
forming a black hole that pierces the electron like a toroid and eats
time with the sub-sub-atomic particles transiting with it into the
pi-dimension of Coulomb's constant divided into the Lorenz reduction
of EM mass.

This is the beginning of conception that will explain all the
interactions and origin all possible and impossible particles and
sub-particles, including the sub- and nano- hyperons of the inverse
inertia having the flavour by choice of the experimenter and
incredible charm at the bulging parts formed by the androns with the
elastically connected gravitons that in pairs are moving
reciprocating, and due to the sticky force of the super-molecular spin
self-acceleration attracting all the dust from the space-time with the
attenuating memorisation of the past homeo-singular metamorphisation
in the form of holographic gene substructure of the attractors
compressed into a foam-shaped corpuscular defragmentator.

I am looking forward for colleagues joining me in developing this
theory (-;

Sergey

****************

We hoped, a burst of laughing will help us to sober colleagues and to
draw their attention to real problems, but instead laughing we raised
a sudden hullabaloo. It appeared, many scientists write "theories of
everything" IN THE MOST SERIOUS WAY, AS A WORK OF ALL THEIR LIVES. And
when we pasted our joke, they estimated it as a claim that we have
solved many problems of this "theory" to which they so much addressed!
Racing one another, they published in that thread their theories,
maybe unfinished, maybe "yet" contradictive, but they needed to have
witness that they were first, to save at least a part of their
authorship! Oriel attacks Newton that theologian Newton in 17th
century repeated the dogma of church about the stars fixed in the sky,
but I tell you a story of 21st century. "Great Council of Atom"
sending its agents - photons with information, decisions, permissions
and bans all the universe round appeared a real participant of their
"theories"!

That's all for Chapter 1. And I would like to ask you of one more
thing. Could you prompt us good sites on geology of Australia and
Antarctica? It would help us in our work on further chapters. Very
pity that you cannot participate in our work. There are important
points which we have to clear.

Kind regards,

Sergey

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quantum Physics for mere humans
    ... How do I get a good grounding in Quantum Physics? ... background asks how to learn quantum mechanics. ... Quantum mechanics is just another wave mechanics, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • English eBooks Physics & Astronomy
    ... Advanced Visual Quantum Mechanics Thaller, ... Advances in Solid State Physics Kramer, ... Applied Electromagnetism and Materials Moliton, ... Chaotic Dynamics and Transport in Classical and Quantum Systems ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: why cant fields be quantized too?
    ... > you were born) researching about Quantum Field Theory, QCD, ... > will publish the 'corrected' enhanced version in Physics ... actually means in physics before claiming that QFT is wrong! ... > failure by physicists to find a mathematics based directly on ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Dayton Millers Data have no Real Signal
    ... known quantities and making sure the math follows the established ... I just got lucky to find a huge gaping hole in quantum physics theory ... >>The strong force and gravity are both mainstream physics. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Dayton Millers Data have no Real Signal
    ... >> studied in physics and chemistry. ... and the math is what the math is. ... >clearly shows that the Aether is a quantum unit of rotating magnetic ... >> what is in mainstream physics with gravity omitted. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)