Re: 6th August 1945 when Japan suffered firts atomic explosion

pehaps it has been said,
history is made by the victors. I just read
about a new documentary by a japanese-american,
finally using the immense footage
from the scty of war Stimson's arbtitrary policy
of heralding the nuclear age with an act of unneeded terror,
which Truman embraced, as a matter of bowing
to his British betters, supposedly
to "give the SU a lesson."

this is fully documented in the LaRocuhe stuff, but
maybe you can't tolerate reading that.

they did it over MacArthur's head, and ever since then,
they've tried to say that he'd have done it in Korea!

thus:
provisionally, wind does not blow "radially" from high
to low pressure (or bigh to low from high?), but
it goes along the "bars," the lines
on the map of ground pressure;
isn't that stated in Bucky's _S_, known
from his sailing discipline?

which direction depends upon which side of equator!

say the wind sucks than to say it pushes. When the land cools at night,
the air pressure over the land increases. The air blows outward from
the high and inward toward the low. Actually "blow" suggests movement
and direction to me which seems more accurate than "sucks" which
suggests the, to me, fallacious idea that the low is somehow more
essential to the movement. If some anti-Buckyite said the wind

thus:
this quote rather contradicts Bucky's statement
that wind is "really" sucking, since it also curves
away from the greatcircle path, according
to the Coriolis force/effect (this nomenclature seems
to depend on whether one uses a rotating coordinates .-)

perhaps it is just a matter of whether
one is thinging of ballistic atoms or atmospherical waves;
although traditionally a north wind is blowing
(to the south) from the north, anyway,
it is strictly a spatial phenomenon, involving vertical gradients
of pressure (highs & lows going in & out);
they've probably never worked this precessional stuff out
in Flattest Land climatology for Abbot Abbot Secondpoweredites
(Ian Stewart, A.K.Dewdny et al ad vom.);
there are no 2D tensegrities!

the current issue of "Infinite Energy" has an exquisite article
about "plate dynamics," that is a valid improvement
of Hamaker's model, vis-a-vu tectonics, although he doesn't seem
to be mentioned in the bibliography. as for Zero Point Energy,
never mind, unless you can find some thing
in those articles that makes any sense!

the current issue of "American Scientist" has an article
about the integer value of Avagadro's number, although
it doesn't actually quite give one, I thing. homework,
using your cheese tetrahedron!

"Neither winds nor columns nor spars of any great length can be linearly extended or pushed anywhere. Pushed lines curve; pulled lines tend to straighten out."

thus:
note that you've said that Moon is "physically dark,"
apparently referring to its albedo compared to Earth,
but all of this is rather elementary for anyone
who has taken photographs at night, and further, if
they have developed the film & prints by hand,
whereby one can actually develop those stars --
with which few in Apollo were concerned. of course,
the astrosuits were by far the brightest objects,
other than Sun, itself.

just so happens, there's an article about this
in the current "Skeptical Enquirer,"
noting that soem stars are visible becase
the UV was not filtered -- as you say?... unfortunately,
it's also "part two" of their "global" warming bake-
sale, and they also get into lagubrious cosmology.

thus:
as pointed-out by the Tits On Mars guy,
who was a commentator for one of the TV networks
at the time, these simulations were labeled
as such for the broadcasts ... *** Hoagland,
whose own face may be on Mars, two!

in Gore's "global" warming propoganda,
he actually refers to the "dark side of the moon,"
when the astronauts lost radio contact, or
some thing, followed by the paradigmatic "rise
of Earth" during orbit; another victim of pinkfloydism,
"the wall" of the Harry Potter PS
that he attended in DC?... anyway,
there are many other inaccuracies in his movie, but
I didn't take notes when I saw it at the pier.

--n~nerfman~n!

.

Quantcast