[Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive Order 13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically require his approval before release of any information, obstensively because of Executive Privelege. Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What exactly have you debunked? you blatant liar. I'm not surprised as the continued presidency of a muslim would serve islam and muhammed, so it is OK to lie, to deceive, by outright lying or guile. I'm not surprised. Goodness my friend, you have been exposed as a liar on 3 occasions now. (A'isha age during consumation with muhammed. The obligatory requirement of FGM in Sharia,. and now this.) Don't you have some shame? Are you going to continue your lies, because you lies would serve islam and muhammed? Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies you'll come up next. THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 21, 2009 EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - - PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) Archivist refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee. (b) NARA refers to the National Archives and Records Administration. (c) Presidential Records Act refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207. (d) NARA regulations refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270. (e) Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. (f) Former President refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created. (g) A substantial question of executive privilege exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch. (h) A final court order is a court order from which no appeal may be taken. Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative. (b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice. Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified. (b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Your opinion has certainly been noted by Bill. Quite obviously, I'm still here cause Bill saw nothing that I have done to deserve banning. But if I am banned, it's no great lost for me; so recommend away. LOL BTW Jouni, I consider this a personal attack, and this is the 2nd of such attack. Your first attack was an insult by calling me a girl although my gender has clearly been established here in Vortex-L. Now you are calling me a troll. I am letting this 2nd attack as well as your first attack slide. Please do not continue this behavior unless you want a retaliation. Jojo PS. This is Jouni's 2nd attack against me. Note that thus far, I have NOT attacked Jouni or insulted her in any way. I never start attacks or insults, but I will eventually respond to it. Please refrain from such attacks PS. I consider labels such as troll a grave insult. Let that be clear to everyone lest Lomax will claim that it is a mild insult. Being a liar justified by his religion, he would begin building a fallacious history of this event again. - Original Message - From: Jouni Valkonen To: William Beaty Cc: Jed Rothwell ; Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ; Jojo Jaro Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 4:31 PM Subject: Fwd: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Hello, There has been some recent discussion about continuous trolling by Jojo. I would highly recommend banning him/her. This message has not much else content expect insulting the original author indirectly and political trolling. As Jojo proudly admits his/her off-topic/political trolling and he/she is not going to end it, I would recommend banning him/her. Thanks in advance, —Jouni -- Forwarded message -- From: Jojo Jaro Date: Thursday, 27 December 2012 Subject: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Yes, digital information is indeed present in DNA. One has to wonder how it got there. Natural Selection can not explain how random process can originate information; let alone exabytes of information present in DNA in its natural state. But, of course, Darwinian Evolutionist are right because there's 2000 of them and nobody has heard on one of them being threatened or bribed. Jojo - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:32 AM Subject: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. Quote: DNA storage is very dense. At theoretical maximum, DNA can encode two bits per nucleotide (nt) or 455 exabytes per gram of ssDNA . . . I'd like to confirm I have the units right here -- Present world data storage is variously estimated between 295 exabytes in 2011 to 2,700 exabytes today (2.7 zettabytes). See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672 (295 exabytes) http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Q (2.7 ZB) I don't know what source to believe. This takes a colossal number of hard disks and a great deal of electricity. On NHK they estimated the number of bytes of data now exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. Assume it is 2.7 ZB. That seems like a large number until you realize that you could record all of this data in 6 grams of DNA. That demonstrates how much our technology may improve in the future. We have a lot of leeway. There is still plenty of room at the bottom as Feynman put it. DNA preserves data far better than any human technology. It can also copy it faster and more accurately by far. I mean by many orders of magnitude. It might be difficult to make a rapid, on-line electronic interface to DNA recorded data, similar to today's hard disk. But as a back up medium, or long-term storage, it seems promising. As Prof. Church demonstrates, this technology may come about as a spin off from genome-reading technology. Perhaps there are other 3-dimensional molecular methods of data storage. Maybe, but I would say why bother looking for them when nature has already found such a robust system? - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
The views expressed by Lomax below are typical of those who have not read Darwin's book or understand what Darwinian Evolution really says. Natural Selection is not the process of DNA building, it is the macro result of mutations. Mutations are the mechanism Darwin claims to be behind changes. The changes result in a survival advantage, hence Natural Selection occurs. Hence the process is in fact a random process. It is important for us to understand that Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. In other words, there is no Natural Selection mechanism to determine at the cellular/DNA level what random mutation is to be retained. That mutation has to cause a change in the macro organism that would confer a survival advantage before Natural Selection can be invoked. You can have many many many mutations or changes at the cellular level but only when changes confer a survival advantage does that mutation get retained. Retention of changes occur at the individual to offspring level - a macro level, not at the cellular/DNA level. If there is no reproduction, there is no Natural Selection. If there is no survival advantage, there is no Natural Selection. If you understand this, you will understand how utterly impropable Darwinian Evolution is. If we have had infinite time, then yes Darwinian Evolution is possible, but we only have had 4 billion years since the creation of the Earth and 15 billion years since the creation of the Universe. Not enough time. (Note, that I do not personally subscribe the the 4 billion Earth age nor to the 15 billion age of the Universe. I just mention it to highlight the utter fallacy of Darwinian Evolution.) Jojo PS. BTW, I did not start this thread lest Lomax and Jouni will claim that I am starting a trolling thread again. - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 1:20 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Natural Selection can not explain how random process can originate information; let alone exabytes of information present in DNA in its natural state. Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. But, of course, Darwinian Evolutionist are right because there's 2000 of them and nobody has heard on one of them being threatened or bribed. Gee, bringing in two separate contentious issues at once, like AGW and Evolution. Darwinian Evolution uses the name of a person. Why? Do we care about persons, or do we care about principles? Jojo - Original Message - From: mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comJed Rothwell To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:32 AM Subject: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdfhttp://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. Quote: DNA storage is very dense. At theoretical maximum, DNA can encode two bits per nucleotide (nt) or 455 exabytes per gram of ssDNA . . . I'd like to confirm I have the units right here -- Present world data storage is variously estimated between 295 exabytes in 2011 to 2,700 exabytes today (2.7 zettabytes). See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672 (295 exabytes) http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Qhttp://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Q (2.7 ZB) I don't know what source to believe. This takes a colossal number of hard disks and a great deal of electricity. On NHK they estimated the number of bytes of data now exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. Assume it is 2.7 ZB. That seems like a large number until you realize that you could record all of this data in 6 grams of DNA. That demonstrates how much our technology may improve in the future. We have a lot of leeway. There is still plenty of room at the bottom as Feynman put it. DNA preserves data far better than any human technology. It can also copy it faster and more accurately by far. I mean by many orders of magnitude. It might be difficult to make a rapid, on-line electronic interface to DNA recorded data, similar to today's hard disk. But as a back up medium, or long-term storage, it seems promising. As Prof. Church demonstrates, this technology may come
Re: [Vo]: OT:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
Oops sorry, I forget the OT tag. LOL - Original Message - From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 4:50 PM Subject: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive Order 13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically require his approval before release of any information, obstensively because of Executive Privelege. Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What exactly have you debunked? you blatant liar. I'm not surprised as the continued presidency of a muslim would serve islam and muhammed, so it is OK to lie, to deceive, by outright lying or guile. I'm not surprised. Goodness my friend, you have been exposed as a liar on 3 occasions now. (A'isha age during consumation with muhammed. The obligatory requirement of FGM in Sharia,. and now this.) Don't you have some shame? Are you going to continue your lies, because you lies would serve islam and muhammed? Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies you'll come up next. THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 21, 2009 EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - - PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) Archivist refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee. (b) NARA refers to the National Archives and Records Administration. (c) Presidential Records Act refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207. (d) NARA regulations refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270. (e) Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. (f) Former President refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created. (g) A substantial question of executive privilege exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch. (h) A final court order is a court order from which no appeal may be taken. Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative. (b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice. Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive
RE: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
An intriguing side issue of this ... that is, the general concept of DNA-as-information-carrier - maybe it has been done already, and maybe we should be looking for an encoded message which has been here for millions of years. Actually there are themes in SciFi which have explored a similar possibility- that there are messages awaiting us in DNA. This does not mean require an alien visit per se. Wiki has an article on extremophiles which is the kind of lifeform that could tolerate the cold and vacuum of space - and possibly be carried to Earth from elsewhere - PURPOSELY and with encoded messages in unused DNA. Most known extremophiles are microbes - like the domain Archaea - which name says it all. How would you decode such DNA? Would it mathematical, verbal or more likely: some kind of self-teaching format. Here is the start of a possibly way to transfer with few losses - and with a lot of references to other articles: http://www.panspermia.org/nongenseq.htm Jones From: Jed Rothwell Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Jones sez: An intriguing side issue of this ... that is, the general concept of DNA-as-information-carrier - maybe it has been done already, and maybe we should be looking for an encoded message which has been here for millions of years. Actually there are themes in SciFi which have explored a similar possibility- that there are messages awaiting us in DNA. After considerable deliberation (plus the aid of several overheated DARPA supercomputers) an obscure piece junk DNA code, found exclusively in the X chromosome of the homo sapiens genome, was decoded and subsequently translated into English as meaning the following: Model 23A - CLEVER MONKEY with 5 digits / base 10 configuration, (no tail): Universal Copyright patent held by the Zeta Reticuli Consortium. All rights reserved. Revision 34.559576-42. Expiration date: 2305 AD +/- 200 years. The next planned upgrade is currently in progress. Expected completion of download and installation: approximately 2150 AD +/- 50 years. Latest download includes bug fixes as documented by the Official Standards of Zeta Catch-and-Release Consortium, as lawfully monitored under the Regulus / Tau Ceti treaty. There remains considerable debate over the meaning of the term: download and installation. * * * * * * * Talk later... The mother ship is on the other line. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Dave,
I believe the mass of the ship is converted to energy (thru radiation) as
it approaches which is then converted to entropy and increases the surface
of the hole. The information becomes completely scattered by the time it
reaches the surface. Until you reach the surface, the black hole is doing
work on you we call gravity, which is an entropic force.
Stewart
Darkmattersalot.com
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications
of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of
the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no
energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase
significantly as it reaches the boundary. This must be true since the
velocity of the ship becomes zero at that point and all of the
gravitational energy due to the initial location of the ship at the
beginning point of its journey must be converted into mass. This could be
calculated, and it definitely is not infinity but is substantially greater
than when at rest in our vicinity.
Again, you need to think about each observer and what they perceive. We
need to have our laws of physics to be in effect during our observations
and the other guys need the same. So far, the only way that this seems
likely is for time dilation to work overtime. I suspect that the red shift
is a stand in for time dilation on board the ship, but I do not recall
seeing that proven. If it is true, then we have an easy technique to
employ.
I now tend to think that the space guy can impact with the black hole,
but that it will take forever for this to happen from our perspective. If
he had a jar full of muons, they would never decay as far as we could tell
while he is near that boundary. Too bad for him, but the muons would not
be able to save him from extinction in a very short time period. Then
again, he might live for essentially ever from our point of view which is
an extension to his normal life span in our environment. My father used to
tell us kids that time passes faster and faster as you get older. Now I
understand what he meant.
The curvature of space might somehow enter into this discussion but I am
not sure how to think of its effect. I am confident that time dilation is
a factor, but perhaps the distances are modified as well. That is an area
to consider.
You know what I think of sources that say that things are meaningless
don't you? That translates into I do not know and please do not ask me
again.
It is late and my mind is becoming mush.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'a...@lomaxdesign.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'vortex-l@eskimo.com');; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.comjavascript:_e({},
'cvml', 'vortex-l@eskimo.com');
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 12:09 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 10:23 PM 12/26/2012, David Roberson wrote:
We both agree that nothing will happen to the ship itself unless
tidal forces tear it apart. That has not been an issue and I am not
sure of why you start with the assumption that I think it will. You
must have misunderstood my statement. I suppose I could have made
it in a clearer manner.
I never objected to the thought experiment, nor thought that this
would be an issue. We can imagine a teeny-tiny spaceship that is
super strong. and we can imagine a really big black hole, so that the
curvature doesn't bite us.
The ship itself will never think it reaches the ultimate boundary
but we will see radiation emitted by it become red shifted until no
more detectable energy comes our way from it.
I'm no longer confident of any of the explanations. The holonauts
never see the singularity, but if they are travelling toward it, in
their own time, they see an event horizon ahead of them, becoming
smaller more and more intense, I'd think. However, lots of sources
say that events beyond the event horizon are meaningless.
Part of what is frying my brain here is the gravitational field at
the event horizon. The event horizon is defined as the boundary where
gravity is so intense that light cannot take a path that increases
its distance from the center of gravity. That's geometrical. If the
holonauts pass the originally observed event horizon, and see a
receded event horizon in front of them, how would the light paths
have shifted? It doesn't seem that time dilation would do this.
The sense I keep coming up with is that the event horizon is the
place beyond which light cannot escape to the *external universe*,
which means infinite distance, I found one article that refers to
this. Not that it cannot escape to some greater distance.
But that contradicts the gravity so intense statements, and the
light path statements.
I need to examine
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. Quote: DNA storage is very dense. At theoretical maximum, DNA can encode two bits per nucleotide (nt) or 455 exabytes per gram of ssDNA . . . I'd like to confirm I have the units right here -- Present world data storage is variously estimated between 295 exabytes in 2011 to 2,700 exabytes today (2.7 zettabytes). See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672 (295 exabytes) http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Q (2.7 ZB) I don't know what source to believe. This takes a colossal number of hard disks and a great deal of electricity. On NHK they estimated the number of bytes of data now exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. Assume it is 2.7 ZB. That seems like a large number until you realize that you could record all of this data in 6 grams of DNA. That demonstrates how much our technology may improve in the future. We have a lot of leeway. There is still plenty of room at the bottom as Feynman put it. DNA preserves data far better than any human technology. It can also copy it faster and more accurately by far. I mean by many orders of magnitude. It might be difficult to make a rapid, on-line electronic interface to DNA recorded data, similar to today's hard disk. But as a back up medium, or long-term storage, it seems promising. As Prof. Church demonstrates, this technology may come about as a spin off from genome-reading technology. Perhaps there are other 3-dimensional molecular methods of data storage. Maybe, but I would say why bother looking for them when nature has already found such a robust system? - Jed That would be an awesome way to transmit messages as well. Pop a message into a bacterial ring DNA, insert it into a pathogen free Ecoli, and infect your agent with it. They travel to whereever, take a blood sample, culture the bug, and extract. A few days processing time, but still, undetectable. Hmm Actually... That gives me a novel idea (by which i mean, an idea for a novel.
: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Dave, I think you have it pretty much correct but like you don't know if it has ever been proven other than as an extension to the small proven dilations accumulated by satellites. I would also agree that distance is modified but this again is due to dilation and would only be from our perspective due to Lorentzian contraction of the spaceship as it approaches the horizon. It should be a straightforward Pythagorean relationship between space and time where one can not deviate without the other V^2/C^2. I posit the hydrogen in a Casimir cavity reflects the same relationship between itself and our macro world here on earth as we perceive between ourselves and the spaceship nearing the horizon. This is what Jan Naudts was saying in his 2005 paper suggesting the Mills hydrino was relativistic hydrogen.. not in the sense Mills used regarding hydrogen being ejected by the suns corona which is still the typical Lorentzian contraction of an object approaching C or the gravitational equivalent of an event horizon but rather the differential of an object experiencing a gravitational hill/deficit relative to the macro world where from it's perspective as normal we in the macro world appear to be the dilated objects slowing down to a near stop. I propose that changes in the height of a gravity hill are the basis for catalytic action like we see in skeletal cats and nano powders such that it is the geometry of the conductive metal that establishes the environment in opposition to stiction... the hydrogen, like the spaceship approaching the environment is merely reacting to the already established environment This may be the power source behind all the anomalous claims on Ni-H in contradiction to COE because COE falsely assumes that a HUP trap [maxwellian demon is impossible] - it may be impossible to fabricate but if nature can be induced to naturally assemble I believe you can create heat by putting forces like Casimir stiction into opposition with random gas motion It just takes a very craftily set stage to avoid self destruction o the props. Regards Fran From: ChemE Stewart [mailto:cheme...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Dave, I believe the mass of the ship is converted to energy (thru radiation) as it approaches which is then converted to entropy and increases the surface of the hole. The information becomes completely scattered by the time it reaches the surface. Until you reach the surface, the black hole is doing work on you we call gravity, which is an entropic force. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase significantly as it reaches the boundary. This must be true since the velocity of the ship becomes zero at that point and all of the gravitational energy due to the initial location of the ship at the beginning point of its journey must be converted into mass. This could be calculated, and it definitely is not infinity but is substantially greater than when at rest in our vicinity. Again, you need to think about each observer and what they perceive. We need to have our laws of physics to be in effect during our observations and the other guys need the same. So far, the only way that this seems likely is for time dilation to work overtime. I suspect that the red shift is a stand in for time dilation on board the ship, but I do not recall seeing that proven. If it is true, then we have an easy technique to employ. I now tend to think that the space guy can impact with the black hole, but that it will take forever for this to happen from our perspective. If he had a jar full of muons, they would never decay as far as we could tell while he is near that boundary. Too bad for him, but the muons would not be able to save him from extinction in a very short time period. Then again, he might live for essentially ever from our point of view which is an extension to his normal life span in our environment. My father used to tell us kids that time passes faster and faster as you get older. Now I understand what he meant. The curvature of space might somehow enter into this discussion but I am not sure how to think of its effect. I am confident that time dilation is a factor, but perhaps the distances are modified as well. That is an area to consider. You know what I think of sources that say that things are meaningless don't you? That translates into I do not know and please do not ask me again. It is late and my mind is becoming mush. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Jojo, how does the theory that you believe in result in the different races of peoples? It seems likely that the darker complexion of those that typically live in areas of ample sunlight would give them an advantage due to protection from ultraviolet sunlight. I have also noticed that the inhabitants of the more northern regions tend to have lighter skin. The people of isolated regions develop characteristics that are different from the nominal such as the red haired Irish or the peoples of Iceland. Is it you belief that the various genes were already present within these groups but for some reason did not become widespread within the overall human population? I guess that this idea would be somewhat like the fact that dogs come in many breeds but most came from one stock which is the wolf. Is this the way you understand the situation? If you carry this to the extreme, a separate group of people that do not come into contact with the population at large might well become very different over eons. I can imagine that as time passes they would be subject to genetic mutations due to radiation, etc. that is not fatal but perhaps others in the group find attractive. Maybe the selection of future mates becomes influenced by this new mutation and they generate more children as a result to pass the trait along. Another possibility is that this new accidental change allows women to survive child birth better such as enlargement of the region where babies pass to be born. Immunity to certain diseases would be a real life saver to anyone that inherits that trait. The relatively recent introduction of the mutation that results in hemophilia was a reverse example of this process at work. The genetic mutation that causes that unfortunate disease is identified and I assume random. It seems that much depends upon the magnitude of the effect that the mutation causes to determine how successful it becomes within people at large. I would find it very difficult to believe that an entirely new animal would arise instantaneously in isolation since it would most likely take at least two of these new critters to continue with the species. This makes it unlikely for a quick change of great genetic variation to become successful. Slow incremental changes that occur randomly in isolated groups might be the trick if allowed to operate over millions of years. I believe that the fossil record tends to support this. There are many species of birds instead of one. That same is true for most animals it seems as I am often amazed at the number of kinds of snakes, lizards, cats, and etc. that inhabit the earth. How does you understanding apply to the many species of birds for instance? Some are remarkably similar but can not interbreed. Just by appearance alone it seems likely that each of these bird species are related in the distant past. Plants offer an enormous example of genetic variation and people have domesticated a large number of them. Take one look at the varieties of maple trees for example. I have a good friend that cultivates dozens of different types for sale. Currently all his maples can be fertilized by any maple, but if they were isolated for a few million years this might not be possible. Oak tree species exhibit a similar variation but can not cross pollinate. Back to the basic topic concept. Data encoded within DNA sounds like a great starting point for long term storage technology. We need to unravel the mechanisms that allow it to be accurately read and I suspect repaired when damaged. I assume it will be possible to use different materials for a similar structure which could allow the new engineered system to withstand high temperature for instance. I suspect that the rate of data storage must be improved by orders of magnitude before a practical solution is generated. My gut feeling is that there will be better methods developed involving optics. I have always felt that a technique such as perhaps 3 dimensional holograms will be capable of immense long term storage capability. Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 4:21 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA The views expressed by Lomax below are typical of those who have not read Darwin's book or understand what Darwinian Evolution really says. Natural Selection is not the process of DNA building, it is the macro result of mutations. Mutations are the mechanism Darwin claims to be behind changes. The changes result in a survival advantage, hence Natural Selection occurs. Hence the process is in fact a random process. It is important for us to understand that Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. In other words, there is no Natural Selection mechanism to determine at the cellular/DNA level what random mutation is to be
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
You might be correct since it is difficult to perform an experiment of this type. I would not expect radiation to be emitted by the ship since it has zero net charge. This would not be the case if a plasma enters the black hole. I suspect that the intense radiation that we detect currently is due to the charged things being accelerated on the way in. Direct heat radiation (with a red shift) would be expected due to collisions within the extremely hot plasma. I have been trying to understand what a far away observer detects instead of what the poor guy inside the doomed ship sees. What would you expect us to view as the spaceship heads inward? We know that gravitation causes time dilation so does the spaceman come to a complete stop in motion as I suspect at the boundary? I can imagine him looking extremely flat and motionless at the boundary until the remnants of his existence red shifts into oblivion. The main problem is that it takes time for the photons to finally reach 0 Hertz, actually an infinite amount of it. I look at this as similar to an exponential decay. The signal never actually reaches zero, but becomes close in a hurry. The mass of the ship could be determined by the gravitational energy difference between the two points that we observe. In my concept the ship is motionless at the boundary so all of the gravitational energy is converted to effective mass. This is from our long way off perspective and others will see different things. These are interesting questions that we are considering and I am confident that many have seeked the answers before us. It is a good exercise in reasoning. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Dave, I believe the mass of the ship is converted to energy (thru radiation) as it approaches which is then converted to entropy and increases the surface of the hole. The information becomes completely scattered by the time it reaches the surface. Until you reach the surface, the black hole is doing work on you we call gravity, which is an entropic force. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase significantly as it reaches the boundary. This must be true since the velocity of the ship becomes zero at that point and all of the gravitational energy due to the initial location of the ship at the beginning point of its journey must be converted into mass. This could be calculated, and it definitely is not infinity but is substantially greater than when at rest in our vicinity. Again, you need to think about each observer and what they perceive. We need to have our laws of physics to be in effect during our observations and the other guys need the same. So far, the only way that this seems likely is for time dilation to work overtime. I suspect that the red shift is a stand in for time dilation on board the ship, but I do not recall seeing that proven. If it is true, then we have an easy technique to employ. I now tend to think that the space guy can impact with the black hole, but that it will take forever for this to happen from our perspective. If he had a jar full of muons, they would never decay as far as we could tell while he is near that boundary. Too bad for him, but the muons would not be able to save him from extinction in a very short time period. Then again, he might live for essentially ever from our point of view which is an extension to his normal life span in our environment. My father used to tell us kids that time passes faster and faster as you get older. Now I understand what he meant. The curvature of space might somehow enter into this discussion but I am not sure how to think of its effect. I am confident that time dilation is a factor, but perhaps the distances are modified as well. That is an area to consider. You know what I think of sources that say that things are meaningless don't you? That translates into I do not know and please do not ask me again. It is late and my mind is becoming mush. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 12:09 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon At 10:23 PM 12/26/2012, David Roberson wrote: We both agree that nothing will happen to the ship itself unless tidal forces tear it apart. That has not been an issue and I am not sure of why you start with the assumption that I think it will.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
I like that idea as long as it is not me that is being infected! Now, the hard part. Why would this new bacteria not be wiped out by the competition within the guys system? And of course you then must find your exact ones within a large group of others. Also, how many different times can a guy be infected in this manner? A very tiny silicon chip insert at an exact location only known to the carrier would work very well and be difficult to locate or even suspect by others. Dave -Original Message- From: leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 1:19 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. Quote: DNA storage is very dense. At theoretical maximum, DNA can encode two bits per nucleotide (nt) or 455 exabytes per gram of ssDNA . . . I'd like to confirm I have the units right here -- Present world data storage is variously estimated between 295 exabytes in 2011 to 2,700 exabytes today (2.7 zettabytes). See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672 (295 exabytes) http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Q (2.7 ZB) I don't know what source to believe. This takes a colossal number of hard disks and a great deal of electricity. On NHK they estimated the number of bytes of data now exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. Assume it is 2.7 ZB. That seems like a large number until you realize that you could record all of this data in 6 grams of DNA. That demonstrates how much our technology may improve in the future. We have a lot of leeway. There is still plenty of room at the bottom as Feynman put it. DNA preserves data far better than any human technology. It can also copy it faster and more accurately by far. I mean by many orders of magnitude. It might be difficult to make a rapid, on-line electronic interface to DNA recorded data, similar to today's hard disk. But as a back up medium, or long-term storage, it seems promising. As Prof. Church demonstrates, this technology may come about as a spin off from genome-reading technology. Perhaps there are other 3-dimensional molecular methods of data storage. Maybe, but I would say why bother looking for them when nature has already found such a robust system? - Jed That would be an awesome way to transmit messages as well. Pop a message into a bacterial ring DNA, insert it into a pathogen free Ecoli, and infect your agent with it. They travel to whereever, take a blood sample, culture the bug, and extract. A few days processing time, but still, undetectable. Hmm Actually... That gives me a novel idea (by which i mean, an idea for a novel.
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
I think beta decay/evaporation at the surface of the hole will emit
ionizing radiation which will punch atomic holes in the ship as it
approaches, sinking it to davey jones' cosmic locker...
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
You might be correct since it is difficult to perform an experiment of
this type. I would not expect radiation to be emitted by the ship since it
has zero net charge. This would not be the case if a plasma enters the
black hole. I suspect that the intense radiation that we detect currently
is due to the charged things being accelerated on the way in. Direct heat
radiation (with a red shift) would be expected due to collisions within the
extremely hot plasma.
I have been trying to understand what a far away observer detects
instead of what the poor guy inside the doomed ship sees. What would you
expect us to view as the spaceship heads inward? We know that gravitation
causes time dilation so does the spaceman come to a complete stop in motion
as I suspect at the boundary? I can imagine him looking extremely flat and
motionless at the boundary until the remnants of his existence red shifts
into oblivion. The main problem is that it takes time for the photons to
finally reach 0 Hertz, actually an infinite amount of it. I look at this
as similar to an exponential decay. The signal never actually reaches zero,
but becomes close in a hurry.
The mass of the ship could be determined by the gravitational energy
difference between the two points that we observe. In my concept the ship
is motionless at the boundary so all of the gravitational energy is
converted to effective mass. This is from our long way off perspective and
others will see different things.
These are interesting questions that we are considering and I am
confident that many have seeked the answers before us. It is a good
exercise in reasoning.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'cheme...@gmail.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 12:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Dave,
I believe the mass of the ship is converted to energy (thru radiation)
as it approaches which is then converted to entropy and increases the
surface of the hole. The information becomes completely scattered by
the time it reaches the surface. Until you reach the surface, the black
hole is doing work on you we call gravity, which is an entropic force.
Stewart
Darkmattersalot.com
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications
of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of
the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no
energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase
significantly as it reaches the boundary. This must be true since the
velocity of the ship becomes zero at that point and all of the
gravitational energy due to the initial location of the ship at the
beginning point of its journey must be converted into mass. This could be
calculated, and it definitely is not infinity but is substantially greater
than when at rest in our vicinity.
Again, you need to think about each observer and what they perceive. We
need to have our laws of physics to be in effect during our observations
and the other guys need the same. So far, the only way that this seems
likely is for time dilation to work overtime. I suspect that the red shift
is a stand in for time dilation on board the ship, but I do not recall
seeing that proven. If it is true, then we have an easy technique to
employ.
I now tend to think that the space guy can impact with the black hole,
but that it will take forever for this to happen from our perspective. If
he had a jar full of muons, they would never decay as far as we could tell
while he is near that boundary. Too bad for him, but the muons would not
be able to save him from extinction in a very short time period. Then
again, he might live for essentially ever from our point of view which is
an extension to his normal life span in our environment. My father used to
tell us kids that time passes faster and faster as you get older. Now I
understand what he meant.
The curvature of space might somehow enter into this discussion but I am
not sure how to think of its effect. I am confident that time dilation is
a factor, but perhaps the distances are modified as well. That is an area
to consider.
You know what I think of sources that say that things are meaningless
don't you? That translates into I do not know and please do not ask me
again.
It is late and my mind is becoming mush.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent:
Re: : Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
It is difficult to grasp what you are saying in regard to the hydrogen, but it might sink in with time as my subconscious grinds away on your ideas. I have problems with that little demon guy and suspect that there is a way to sort the hot atoms from the cold ones. I actually consider nature having already built such a device for us in the form of radiation. Why would the emission of IR from a energized molecule not be an example? The effective energy of the gas system is reduced by this emission since it only originates from the energized molecules and not the colder less energetic ones. If the object is to take heat out of a system as the end result then it has been achieved. We can capture the IR at a distant point and convert it into electricity while the source gas has become less energized. The demon has been pushed aside by this process since we found a way around the beast. I do not consider this process a violation of the COE. It might seem problematic from a thermodynamic point of view since it involves taking energy from just one source and not using the difference in energy between two sources to get work. In a way, the other source is empty space which is lower in energy. I have tried to get around the demon in another manner. Why not substitute very large simulated atoms (like pool balls) for the real thing? If the pool balls exhibit inelastic collisions and can be trapped within a cavity of some nature, they should be a stand in for atoms. I am sure we could find some way to separate out the fast moving pool balls by using less energy than required to operate the separation mechanism. This seems like a scaling issue. Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 1:47 pm Subject: : Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Dave, I think you have it pretty much correct but like you don’t know if it has ever been proven other than as an extension to the small proven dilations accumulated by satellites. I would also agree that distance is modified but this again is due to dilation and would only be from our perspective due to Lorentzian contraction of the spaceship as it approaches the horizon. It should be a straightforward Pythagorean relationship between space and time where one can not deviate without the other V^2/C^2. I posit the hydrogen in a Casimir cavity reflects the same relationship between itself and our macro world here on earth as we perceive between ourselves and the spaceship nearing the horizon. This is what Jan Naudts was saying in his 2005 paper suggesting the Mills hydrino was relativistic hydrogen.. not in the sense Mills used regarding hydrogen being ejected by the suns corona which is still the typical Lorentzian contraction of an object approaching C or the gravitational equivalent of an event horizon but rather the differential of an object experiencing a gravitational hill/deficit relative to the macro world where from it’s perspective as “normal” we in the macro world appear to be the dilated objects slowing down to a near stop. I propose that changes in the “height” of a gravity hill are the basis for catalytic action like we see in skeletal cats and nano powders such that it is the geometry of the conductive metal that establishes the environment in opposition to stiction… the hydrogen, like the spaceship approaching the environment is merely reacting to the already established environment…. This may be the power source behind all the anomalous claims on Ni-H in contradiction to COE because COE falsely assumes that a HUP trap [maxwellian demon is impossible] – it may be impossible to fabricate but if nature can be induced to naturally assemble I believe you can create heat by putting forces like Casimir stiction into opposition with random gas motion…. It just takes a very craftily set stage to avoid self destruction o the props. Regards Fran From: ChemE Stewart [mailto:cheme...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Dave, I believe the mass of the ship is converted to energy (thru radiation) as it approaches which is then converted to entropy and increases the surface of the hole. The information becomes completely scattered by the time it reaches the surface. Until you reach the surface, the black hole is doing work on you we call gravity, which is an entropic force. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase significantly as it reaches the
[Vo]:Papp and Water
Gentlemen, De-oxygenated water is the super molecule. Really should be a gas. See Chan recent posts on RWGResearch and summery copied from Form page 55-59: SNIP What if.. What if we are all looking at this noble gas thing all wrong. Every one, who has ever attempted to make this thing work over the past 30 plus years, and everyone currently working on the thing - including BR and JR - all looking at it wrong... We are all looking at making some sort of gas mixture expand, ie. from normal to expanded. Suppose that's not how it works. There is another possibility. Suppose we should be looking to make some sort of gas mixture contract, a normal mixture, that after processing collapses to a smaller volume. The atoms cluster together - not a molecular bond, that would take too much energy to disassociate - but some sort of bond like Axil described when he was talking about super-atoms. Imagine, for a moment, that when the gas mixture is properly processed, it shrinks to a much smaller volume - for what ever reason - the atoms cluster together... Then in the engine, the event at TDC (voltage discharge of some sort) breaks the weak bonds, with a massive and almost instantaneous expansion in volume. As the gas expands (as allowed in the engine - not allowed in the pipe bomb) under the influence of a magnetic field (Papp had 3 coils - rather large with many turns) then it contracts back to its condensed state to start the cycle over again. Suppose the plug that Dr Feynman pulled from the wall operated the cylinder coils (the engine still ran, so not all of the support electronics were plugged in). Papp got very nervous - he knew that it could explode soon, and violently - and it did. Put the condensed gas in an enclosed cylinder without the means to expand (no piston) and without the magnetic coils to cause the contraction - well that spells BOMB, see US3680431. We can't believe anything JR says - he is faking it, doesn't have a clue how to make a nge engine run - he is doing research hoping to find the answer before his next public show or stockholders meeting. But then there is this: http://dimensionalbliss.com/2011/08/06/p...planation/ In this video, if JR wasn't so caught up in his delusion of having an actual running engine, he would have realized that he had actually (re)discovered the critical missing link to the Papp process... Just some food for thought - I got to get back to my day job... kcd Oh, just one more thing. So why didn't Papp disclose this little tidbit? Because the process is really freaking dangerous - loose control of the engine process and it explodes - violently!! Papp wanted to get his process accepted first, then inform folks of the negative attributes later.. Of course, I could be completely wrong... Quote: What if we are all looking at this noble gas thing all wrong. Everyone, who has ever attempted to make this thing work over the past 30 plus years, and everyone currently working on the thing - including BR and JR - all looking at it wrong... It is true that the Papp process is a cycle in which expansion and contraction of the noble gas mix is occurring. To understand the Papp process, we must understand both the contraction phase of the Papp cycle as well as the expansion phase. If the contraction phase of the current cycle is not successfully engineered, then the expansion phase of the next cycle will not be successful. The noble gas mix must get back to the same quiescent state after each cycle is completed. I believe that this quiescent state is characterized as an “uncharged dialectic initial condition”. Quote: Suppose that's not how it works. There is another possibility. Suppose we should be looking to make some sort of gas mixture contract, a normal mixture that after processing collapses to a smaller volume. The atoms cluster together - not a molecular bond that would take too much energy to disassociate - but some sort of bond like Axil described when he was talking about super-atoms. Imagine, for a moment, that when the gas mixture is properly processed, it shrinks to a much smaller volume - for whatever reason - the atoms cluster together... I believe that power is produced in both the contraction phase as well as the expansion phase of the Papp cycle. So far, what Russ has showed us is just the power produced by the expansion phase of the cycle. He has not yet engineered the controls for the contraction phase of the Papp cycle. When Russ adds that control logic for the contraction phase of the Papp cycle, the power produced will double, the cycle will be repeatable and in a rapidly cyclic fashion. To reiterate at this juncture, Russ has shown us a “one off” expansion of the first half of the first cycle. The question you might now ask is what controls the contraction of the noble gas mix. And how do we maximize the power
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
Why de-oxygenated? Why is water not mentioned in the excerpt of Chan's recent posts on RWGResearch? On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM, neu tron neu.t...@gmx.de wrote: Gentlemen, De-oxygenated water is the super molecule. Really should be a gas. See Chan recent posts on RWGResearch and summery copied from Form page 55-59: SNIP What if.. What if we are all looking at this noble gas thing all wrong. Every one, who has ever attempted to make this thing work over the past 30 plus years, and everyone currently working on the thing - including BR and JR - all looking at it wrong... We are all looking at making some sort of gas mixture expand, ie. from normal to expanded. Suppose that's not how it works. There is another possibility. Suppose we should be looking to make some sort of gas mixture contract, a normal mixture, that after processing collapses to a smaller volume. The atoms cluster together - not a molecular bond, that would take too much energy to disassociate - but some sort of bond like Axil described when he was talking about super-atoms. Imagine, for a moment, that when the gas mixture is properly processed, it shrinks to a much smaller volume - for what ever reason - the atoms cluster together... Then in the engine, the event at TDC (voltage discharge of some sort) breaks the weak bonds, with a massive and almost instantaneous expansion in volume. As the gas expands (as allowed in the engine - not allowed in the pipe bomb) under the influence of a magnetic field (Papp had 3 coils - rather large with many turns) then it contracts back to its condensed state to start the cycle over again. Suppose the plug that Dr Feynman pulled from the wall operated the cylinder coils (the engine still ran, so not all of the support electronics were plugged in). Papp got very nervous - he knew that it could explode soon, and violently - and it did. Put the condensed gas in an enclosed cylinder without the means to expand (no piston) and without the magnetic coils to cause the contraction - well that spells BOMB, see US3680431. We can't believe anything JR says - he is faking it, doesn't have a clue how to make a nge engine run - he is doing research hoping to find the answer before his next public show or stockholders meeting. But then there is this: http://dimensionalbliss.com/2011/08/06/p...planation/ In this video, if JR wasn't so caught up in his delusion of having an actual running engine, he would have realized that he had actually (re)discovered the critical missing link to the Papp process... Just some food for thought - I got to get back to my day job... kcd Oh, just one more thing. So why didn't Papp disclose this little tidbit? Because the process is really freaking dangerous - loose control of the engine process and it explodes - violently!! Papp wanted to get his process accepted first, then inform folks of the negative attributes later.. Of course, I could be completely wrong... Quote: What if we are all looking at this noble gas thing all wrong. Everyone, who has ever attempted to make this thing work over the past 30 plus years, and everyone currently working on the thing - including BR and JR - all looking at it wrong... It is true that the Papp process is a cycle in which expansion and contraction of the noble gas mix is occurring. To understand the Papp process, we must understand both the contraction phase of the Papp cycle as well as the expansion phase. If the contraction phase of the current cycle is not successfully engineered, then the expansion phase of the next cycle will not be successful. The noble gas mix must get back to the same quiescent state after each cycle is completed. I believe that this quiescent state is characterized as an “uncharged dialectic initial condition”. Quote: Suppose that's not how it works. There is another possibility. Suppose we should be looking to make some sort of gas mixture contract, a normal mixture that after processing collapses to a smaller volume. The atoms cluster together - not a molecular bond that would take too much energy to disassociate - but some sort of bond like Axil described when he was talking about super-atoms. Imagine, for a moment, that when the gas mixture is properly processed, it shrinks to a much smaller volume - for whatever reason - the atoms cluster together... I believe that power is produced in both the contraction phase as well as the expansion phase of the Papp cycle. So far, what Russ has showed us is just the power produced by the expansion phase of the cycle. He has not yet engineered the controls for the contraction phase of the Papp cycle. When Russ adds that control logic for the contraction phase of the Papp cycle, the power produced will double, the cycle will be repeatable and in a rapidly cyclic fashion. To reiterate at this juncture,
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
Bowery p. 56
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
did.. anyone say that there are exabytes in our dna? I seem to have missed that assertion. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 09:41 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What has he rebuted? Has he rebuted that A'isha was 9 years old when muhammed had intercourse with her? I've shown that the age is uncertain. What Muslim and Bukarhai show that there was a rumor that she was nine. Other sources indicate that the age may have been different, nine is the *youngest* of the possible ages. We don't actually know, from Muslim and Bukhari, that they had intercourse at this time but that's the usual assumtion. What it actually says is that she went to live with him. What is universally accepted, however, in all sources, is that she was sexually mature when the marriage was completed. I presented source like Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari saying that this was true. No, they quote two stories, that slightly contradict each other, that say that she was nine. They actually don't say that it is true that she was nine. They don't even address the issue. Hadith are not assertions of truth, generally, they are reports of testimony, usually at least third-hand. Jojo assigns an authority to hadith that he imagines Muslims must assign, because he thinks that way about the Bible. Some Muslims do think that way, in fact, but the position I'm stating is that of Muslim scholars, not the multitides, who sometimes know less about the Qur'an and the sources for Islam than the ordinary Christian knows about the Bible. Lomax presented wikipedia and blogs and he rebuted what I said? Yes. I presented far more than that. But Jojo has acknowedged that he doesn't read what I've written. I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell you for cheap. Very close to the beach? LOL And we expect that it would be like everything else Jojo offers. A lie. Trust, not me or him, but the balance of the evidence, and know that our judgement is easily flawed. What has he rebuted? Like nearly everything expect certain obvious facts that were never in question. That Muslim and Bukhari report 9 at marriage is fact. That was never in question. How old Ayesha actually was is controversial, we do not actually know. So what was refuted was the idea that the actual age is known, as if this were a certainty merely because it's found in certain hadith. Muslims disagree about the age, but it's also true that many Muslims, from far back, have accepted nine as the age. And that's not impossible, nor, personally, do I consider it outside of the bounds of possiblity. But this does *not* establish nine as some clearly permitted age, because, in fact, the law was not about age, though later sources do mention ages.(I have another 13th century treatise on marriage that shows the modern tendency to use age rather than specific condition). The traditions cited were not *interpreted*. They are just reports of what people said that people said had happened. He said that pre-islam tribes practiced child marriage and therefore muhammed's practice of it was acceptable? No, I said that all tribal cultures use the actual condition of the girl to judge marriageability rather than chronological age. Nor did I say that Muhammad's practice was acceptable. That's a moral and religious judgment, and acceptable must have a context. Tribal practices may be acceptable under tribal conditions and unacceptable under other conditions. This is absolutely clear, and Jojo refuses to see it: Muhammad's practice, whatever it was, was *clearly acceptable* at the time, and for a long time after. There was no shame about it. And, by the way, a single incident doesn't necessarily establish a practice. He married a controversial number of women, but it seems to have been a dozen, accumulated. (Not all at the same time.) One of them was betrothed (engaged) when she was young and probably sexually immature. That marriage wasn't consumamated for, probably, about three years. It's clear that she was sexually mature at consummation and probaly not at betrothal. She was the only young wife. The others were generally widows, some quite old. So what was his practice? Jojo has argued that the practice was abhorrent, but he's really judging the entire human tribal tradition as such, based on? All that I can see is that he's applying a certain modern American cultural bias to conditions fourteen hundred years ago. Nobody is arguing for allowing the marriage of young girls here, where American cultural norms apply. Jojo is purely casting a stone of blame, purely to attempt to impeach the honor of the Prophet and, by the way, of his wife, who told the intimate stories that have come to us. She was unashamed, and a very strong woman, who lived long and well. Even if she didn't make a successful general. OK, whatever. Progressive religions need to correct abhorent retrograde practices, not embrace it with gusto. LOL... What's retrograde? There is a gusto, here, though, it's a gusto for life, for self-expression and freedom from
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I think the intended reference may have been to Zeta Reticuli. At 09:55 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: My goodness, you have no idea how close to the truth you are with this joke. Yes, residents of Eta Reticuli. Except that they are not aliens from another world as in ET - biological aliens. They are in fact residents of another dimension beyond our 4 dimenstions - as in Fallen angels, jinns, demons and all sorts of malevolent spirits. This my friend is who has you mesmerized. Jojo - Original Message - From: mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comDaniel Rocha To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comJohn Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age I think It's more likely that the inhabitants of Eta Reticuli mesmerized me! 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro mailto:jth...@hotmail.comjth...@hotmail.com Get a cranial enema my friend. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comdanieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 08:05 PM 12/26/2012, you wrote: Liar liar liar . I'm not surprised after all I know who you are and your religion. There is an executive order. Obama issued it on the day he took power. It covers his BC in Hawaii, his Occidental College records and his other thesis records from Harvard. Cool. I cited that Executive Order. It has zero effect on his birth certificate or other pre-Presidential papers. It's an order covering Presidential papers. That order has *nothing* to do with the documents Jojo mentions. He's lying, and he keeps lying. For some time, it was possible to claim that he was merely mistaken. No, he's lying, he's responsible, because he has turned away from the most obvious opporunties to notice error. Like right now, let's see if he takes advantage of it this time. Here is a copy of the order. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-01-26/pdf/E9-1712.pdf By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows [...] (e) ''Presidential records'' refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. Because it's obvious that some people have looked at it and jumped to conclusions, here is a page that goes into great detail: http://www.thefogbow.com/birther-claims-debunked1/other-stuff/#EO Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. I say what I say openly, in plain sight. There is nothing to hide. I am a known person, I have a reputation to maintain, my future depends on it. Jojo PS. Expert spin with Naudin. I am not, never have, and never will be associated with Naudin. This is guilt by association. A well known debating technique to spin the issue. I did not claim or imply that Naudin and Jojo are associated. Jojo is not responsible for Naudin, nor Naudin for Jojo. Rather, I related these discussions to matters which are of list import. That is, I said similar things about Naudin. I'm making a general argument, that when one is in egregious disregard of the truth, is informed and has a clear and extended opportunity to correct false statements of weight, one becomes a liar even if it was not originally intended that way. Ignorance *is* an excuse when it comes to the sin of lying. But when ignorance becomes wilful, out of pride or arrogance or hatred, or any of the other niceties, the excuse vanishes. Liars lose credibility, as Naudin has lost credibility, and as Jojo has lost whatever credibility he might have had. I was suprised, but I received mail today from one of the top cold fusion scientists in the world, thanking me about my comments about Islam here. Apparently they were found interesting. I received another mail today from a prominent activist in the field, pretty much the same. I wasn't seeking this. But I don't mind it. Don't worry, I have no intention of turning this list into a Muslim tract. I've only been responding to gross misinformation, of a kind that has some credence in some segments of society in the U.S. I would not bring this stuff here, without that reason, and I would not use this list to generally try to correct society on these topics. This whole birther thing was brought here by Jojo, entirely. He thinks that some of us like Obama, so he's trying to get us riled up. Now he's off onto the Illuminati, [Z]eta Reticuli, and what else? - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. I've said similar things about Naudin, because he made blatant errors in his MAHG investigation, stonewalled friendly inquiries, and eft the page with those major errors (that totally reverse his conclusions) without corrections, thus continuing to mislead the public. That's culpable. Until he fixes this, he's a *liar*. If Naudin were a serious investigator, he'd do it in a flash. He made a mistake. Embarrassing. So what? All it takes is Oops! and it is almost entirely over. And if Jojo were interested
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Jojo: However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. I am curious. Please elaborate. On Dec 26, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: The Illuminati satanic occultic pagan group of powerful men and bankers behind everything in our society, including the President, Congress, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve, the Smithsonian and other institutions. The Illuminati is the shadow government that FDR was alluding to and the reason JFK was assasinated. He spoke too much when he called for the dissolution of secret societies. This above is not speculation. However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press conference. Not a white house press conference which is questionable to begin with. This is very simple and the Birther movement will die an untimely death and I will apologize and tuck my tail between my legs in shame and go away. Lomax lies when he says we have seen the official BC. We have not; no one has. What we've seen which Lomax claims is the official BC is a scanned photoshop file. No one except Obama and alledgedly snopes have seen it. Why? Is anybody buying Lomax's argument? It's very simple my friends, if there is an officially issued BC, complete with seal, and signature of the official representative of the State of Hawaii, just show it. No amount of spin or eloquence or tiresome lengthy essay will overcome this very strong argument. Just show it. Period. Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. This is the first time it has ever happened to a sitting president. What the heck is wrong with seeing the original vault copy BC? If he has alledgedly issued an official copy, what's wrong with verifying it with the vault copy? Why does Obama feel the need to go out of his way to issue an executive order to block access? You know, only corrupt and lying leaders find the need to hide their history. Obama is a corrupt lying usurper. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes, intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members, apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly favoring the Muslim faith, rather,
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Hey! I'm the one living in the snowy mountains, and looking out the windows of my office at a fine winter storm, large dry flakes tumbling out of the sky, dancing with the breeze, playing hide-and-go-seek among the aspens smile On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
At 03:50 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive Order 13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically require his approval before release of any information, obstensively because of Executive Privelege. Obstentively? Took me a moment. Ostensibly. Release of any information. Sure. Any information of what type, where located, and by whom? Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What exactly have you debunked? you blatant liar. No, no apology, unless you show that the Executive Order does what you claimed. I not only never claimed that this *particular* Exectuive Order did not exist, I linked to it and discussed it specifically. [...] Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies you'll come up next. You've acknowledged all along that what you are doing is spinning. You have acknowledged that you say things that aren't true to create a dramatic image. That's spin. But I'll give you a fair chance here. You claimed that this document is an Executive Order which blocks access to Obama's vault BC. Below, I quote a bit of what I wrote, to which you are responding. I wrote, in more than one way, If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. Okay, how does this Order do that? What would cause this document to apply to birth records held by Hawaiian state officials? It's all here right in front of us, no more research should be necessary. But, also for the record, I'll say it again: There is no Executive Order that blocks public access to the vault birth certificate. That access is blocked by Hawaiian law on the privacy of records (as is true, I think, in all states). Some access to records is blocked by HIPAA, a federal law relating to the privacy of medical records, and there are other laws protecting the privacy of certain records, but no relevant Executive Order that does what Jojo claims. He lied, and he is continuing to lie. But ... his turn. THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 21, 2009 EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - - PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) Archivist refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee. (b) NARA refers to the National Archives and Records Administration. (c) Presidential Records Act refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207. (d) NARA regulations refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270. (e) Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. (f) Former President refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created. (g) A substantial question of executive privilege exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch. (h) A final court order is a court order from which no appeal may be taken. Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative. (b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 12:58 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: TIf a photon left the surface of the black hole and headed outward in a vector along the radius what would happen to it? Could the energy rapidly be drained as it headed outward until there is nothing left? What would happen to the energy once things settled down? I assume that it would still be in existence within some region. What are your thoughts? I just want to make the issue clear here. From what is being said in various places, the event horizon is a place where gravity is so intense that no light path can increase the distance to the singularity center of mass. The photon does not head out at all. Period. Some of the sources note that the escape velocity description is inaccurate, and it's clear that if we were dealing with escape velocity, that's a concept that allows a mass to increase in height, it merely falls back eventually after the initial velocity, kinetic energy, is converted to potential energy. Most sources note that the escape velocity explanation is inferior, and they point to the light path explanation. I'm finding it very obvious that I don't understand relativistic gravity, and I'm not finding it easy to discover a clear explanation.
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 01:29 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: You are asking very good questions. I have given this a little thought over the years and there are certain things that seem likely to happen. It has been proven that a gravity field causes time to dilate. A very large field will cause it to dilate a lot. A black hole has an extremely large gravitational field around it due to the enormous mass. We need to get, I suggest, unless someone comes along and rescues us, much more specific. I'm afraid that we might actually have to ... horrors! I hoped it would not come to this! ... do some math. It's not enough to say that a gravity well causes time to dilate. *How much*? This might explain why time for one on board a spaceship approaching the event horizon slows down from an observer outside of the field and eventually comes to a complete stop. I'm not accepting the description without knowing where it came from. And without knowing what, exactly, it means. You are getting clearer; here you do specify the observer, but not how the observer makes the observation, and that might be critical. Your sentence is a bit contradictory, you speak first of time for one on board, but then refer to from an observer. I think I know what you mean, but becoming obsessively careful about each detail of statements is how students approach topics like this, if they are to hope to actually understand them. We have trouble with understanding black holes because they are outside our experience, and we have accepted ideas about them, and our ideas about ideas, as being true. We really need to back up and cleave, as closely as possible, to what we know. That would, first, take us back to classical mechanics, but we can be explicit about that. This is strange indeed. Time actually coming to a standstill is difficult to put ones arms around. Time doesn't actually come to a standstill, except for light itself. I.e, from our point of view, photons don't age. Einstein is said to have derived much of his theory from thinking about what the universe (of matter) looks like to a photon... As I read this, *it all happens at once.* But is that right? The implication is that the guy on board that ship does not age at all as far as we are concerned. A million years could go by for us and he would not seem to change. This is a way to travel into our future provided you are not annihilated by the black hole. If you escape the hole, then you get a look at working ECATS! LOL! I sure hope that they are available for sell before a million years goes by. I have no problem understanding, it seems, time dilation from velocity. There is a simple derivation of it from considering an photon oscillator clock. It falls out from the constancy of the speed of light (and all interactions are governed by photons or electromagnetic phenomena that travel at the speed of light). But gravity is general relativity, and I just don't get it. As I was speculating before, I think that the amount of red shift that occurs is directly in proportion to the amount of time dilation for the fellow. Maybe. Math. I'm not sure how to define the amount of red shift. The wavelength goes to infinity Remember his heart beats at a rate that is a fraction of the cycles of the time measuring laser and it seems logical that we observe both changing by the same percentage. Don't even think about biology. All physical phenomena are mediated by light speed. Now, that apparently appplies to gravity as well The implication is that every method of time keeping is similarly effected by the gravity field present near the black hole boundary. We need to explore this concept and determine whether or not it makes sense. There is no problem with every method of time keeping. We can assume a clock. We actually don't need to specify some particular clock, but it can make the understanding simple if we do, and that's how the equations are developed. I understand that we should expect that the space guy is accelerating toward the black hole and from his perspective it must be true since he is within a gravitational field. He does not experience the gravitational field, per se, setting aside tidal forces. If his spaceship is closed, he can't tell the difference between approaching a black hole, and floating in space. *We*, outside the ship, see him accelerating, or do we? That is one of the questions here, becuase it's being said that, instead, we see him slow down, and the information coming to use from him, i.e, photons, increasingly red shift and disappear. It's said that the disappearance takes a very long time. Does it? I'm not trusting any of the popular explanations. That does not mean that they are wrong. What it means to me is that I don't understand them. The only way out of this dilemma is if he indeed does continue forward until he becomes dissociated into atoms or whatever near
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 01:47 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: I am thinking along the line of the second concept that you list at the end. The photon would cease to exist at any energy if allowed to continue by itself from the spaceship that is infinitesimally close to the boundary. So, instead, the second ship intercepts it ... This is a concept that has the photon rising from the event horizon, but being slowed until ceases to exist. But that would violate conservation of energy, for starters. Rather, the way the event horizon is described is that no path for light from inside the horizon crosses it. This *appears* to conflict with views of the event horizon as being located differently with different observers. I really think we need to back up, practically all the way. Why do we think there would be black holes?
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 02:09 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: Abd, it is all in the perception of the various observers. Each one does not detect anything special about their own situation. We, as the far off guys, see the fellow on the ship being affected by the gravitational field he is within. That field is so intense that we see it slow his time measurements down to zero eventually. Maybe. You say so. Why? At the event horizon, the field is not infinitely strong. He does not see this happening from his point of view. He sees that big black zero ahead of him and kisses his butt goodbye. It takes very little time as far as he is concerned until he becomes bacon. For us, an eternity passes before he dies. I don't know what he sees. Now, I find it interesting what we should observe during this process. I agree with you that initially the ship leaving our vicinity must appear to accelerate toward the black hole. I am confident that we could bounce radar pulses off of the ship and measure its velocity and distance from us and that these measurements would show what is expected for a while. Okay. What would they show? The acceleration of the ship would increase as the ship got further away from us until time dilation caught up with the device. Time dilation is inferred, it is not observed by us unless we can observe a clock. But I don't know, here, how to distinguish doppler shift in the signal coming to us from the gravitational shift, from time dilation. There must exist a distance from us at which the ship begins to slow down from our perspective. That is not a consequence of time dilation. And the speed of light remains the same. If we send radar pulses to the ship, the time of flight would correctly show the distance. However, there would be a point where the radar pulses don't return. The concept that the ship slows down would imply that this point is never reached. However, it appears, matter *is* falling into the black hole. It is disappearing. A writer here imagined that incoming matter was smeared all over the face of the black hole, which is a different perspective, i.e, that it never falls in, to an outside observer. I think this whole thing is a mess I'm fully aware that the mess is in my thinking, but I rather doubt it's just me. I have not read any definitive discussion of black holes from anyone who actually understands the concept, in all its detail. I haven't read Hawking. Maybe I should, but not now. This must be where the time dilation due to the gravity field exceeds the apparent acceleration due to the pull of the field. As the time dilation wins the battle, the ship appears to decelerate until it eventually comes to a stop. We don't see time dilation, so this is incorrect, I think. That is, we can see that time *on* the ship is slowed, if we can observe a ship clock, but we want to measure the ship's velocity in *our* frame, not the ship frame. I suspect that you can obtain an idea of how a signal behaves when transmitted from us to the spaceman by thinking of behavior that is reversed from the other direction. All of the frequencies we transmit will be blue shifted by the same proportion. Have you practiced your Donald Duck speak lately? Perhaps a bottle of helium might help! Yes, I've looked at this from the other direction, that is a useful analytical approach. If we are using radar, our radar pulses will hit the ship having been blue-shifted by gravity. But the ship is gaining velocity as it approaches the black hole, so that's an effect in the other direction. When the come back to us they are again red-shifted. Were the ship stationary in our frame (as is being proposed, roughly), and outside the horizon, the blue shift and red shift would cancel out. What would time-of-flight show? I think we really need to understand what the gravity is at the event horizon. If it's true that no path of light can escape, *from what perspective is this true.* Is there some absolute locaion for the event horizon in our frame (center of mass frame for the black hole, but with external anchors or reference points). The black hole is stationary in our frame.
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 02:38 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: OK, I guess that I am modifying my beliefs as we consider the implications of this system. I think you are correct in the assumption that the mass of the ship does not reach infinity at the horizon. If we assume that no energy is created out of thin air then the mass of the ship must increase significantly as it reaches the boundary. This must be true since the velocity of the ship becomes zero at that point See, you are assuming that's true. Why? Because someone said so? I am *not* saying that it's false. I don't know that. But I know that we cannot reason from what we do not grasp. and all of the gravitational energy due to the initial location of the ship at the beginning point of its journey must be converted into mass. This could be calculated, and it definitely is not infinity but is substantially greater than when at rest in our vicinity. Again, you need to think about each observer and what they perceive. We need to have our laws of physics to be in effect during our observations and the other guys need the same. So far, the only way that this seems likely is for time dilation to work overtime. I suspect that the red shift is a stand in for time dilation on board the ship, but I do not recall seeing that proven. If it is true, then we have an easy technique to employ. I doubt it. But time dilation on the ship and red shift can be related. I now tend to think that the space guy can impact with the black hole, but that it will take forever for this to happen from our perspective. If he had a jar full of muons, they would never decay as far as we could tell while he is near that boundary. Too bad for him, but the muons would not be able to save him from extinction in a very short time period. Then again, he might live for essentially ever from our point of view which is an extension to his normal life span in our environment. My father used to tell us kids that time passes faster and faster as you get older. Now I understand what he meant. The curvature of space might somehow enter into this discussion but I am not sure how to think of its effect. I am confident that time dilation is a factor, but perhaps the distances are modified as well. That is an area to consider. You know what I think of sources that say that things are meaningless don't you? That translates into I do not know and please do not ask me again. Things are meaningless. We create meaning. I don't know bleep, but you may ask me again. It is late and my mind is becoming mush. That happens, I know all too well. However, I had a standing joke with a friend, it would come up when he said something like this. My friend, your mind is not becoming mush, it's already mush and has always been mush. Things actually get much easier with the realization that we are self-important mush.
RE: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 11:31 AM 12/27/2012, Jones Beene wrote: Actually there are themes in SciFi which have explored a similar possibility- that there are messages awaiting us in DNA. Aw, that's a primitive idea compared to the idea in Contact, that there are messages encoded in the digits of pi. However, yes, there are messages encoded in DNA, and we are busy decoding them. Every moment.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 04:05 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:  Your opinion has certainly been noted by Bill. Quite obviously, I'm still here cause Bill saw nothing that I have done to deserve banning. Well, we don't know that. Bill sometimes pays little or no attention to this list for a time. I would expect Bill to comment either way, if he makes a decision. [...] PS. I consider labels such as troll a grave insult. Let that be clear to everyone lest Lomax will claim that it is a mild insult. Being a liar justified by his religion, he would begin building a fallacious history of this event again. At one time I posted some history, with links. I'm not likely to do that again unless requested. It's actually a lot of work. One of the reasons it's a lot of work is that it involves interfacing with the archive so that every statement is verifiable. Otherwise it is just more he-said she-said. I actually did this on Wikipedia, for a central claim that was at Arbitration, and it was rigorously -- and completely -- supported by proof. The cabal still cried lies, but ... an Arbitrator decided to make the same compilation, and wrote a program to do it. And posted it. It showed, of course, *exactly the same as my evidence had previously shown.* I had *neutrally* compiled it. It wasn't cherry-picked. *At all*. Until then there was a possibility I'd simply be banned for being disruptive, and those compilations of evidence were proof against me, i.e, walls of text. In fact, a lot had been done to make everything concise and precise, but, bottom line, to refute lies can take a *lot* of words, and most people won't read them. Once the Arbitrator had confirmed my position, and claims, the Committee was stuck. It later came out that a majority really wanted to ban me, but it would have been way too obvious. That Arbitrator was a rebel, a trouble-maker. They eventually got rid of him, as I recall. The reality behind the face of Wikipedia can be quite ugly. I haven't said the half of it. It's still a highly useful project, but handle with caution. Original Message - From: mailto:jounivalko...@gmail.comJouni Valkonen To: mailto:bi...@eskimo.comWilliam Beaty Cc: mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comJed Rothwell ; mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.comAbd ul-Rahman Lomax ; mailto:jth...@hotmail.comJojo Jaro Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 4:31 PM Subject: Fwd: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Hello, There has been some recent discussion about continuous trolling by Jojo. I would highly recommend banning him/her. This message has not much else content expect insulting the original author indirectly and political trolling. As Jojo proudly admits his/her off-topic/political trolling and he/she is not going to end it, I would recommend banning him/her. Thanks in advance, Jouni -- Forwarded message -- From: Jojo Jaro Date: Thursday, 27 December 2012 Subject: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com Yes, digital information is indeed present in DNA. One has to wonder how it got there. Natural Selection can not explain how random process can originate information; let alone exabytes of information present in DNA in its natural state. But, of course, Darwinian Evolutionist are right because there's 2000 of them and nobody has heard on one of them being threatened or bribed. Jojo - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:32 AM Subject: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdfhttp://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense. Quote: DNA storage is very dense. At theoretical maximum, DNA can encode two bits per nucleotide (nt) or 455 exabytes per gram of ssDNA . . . I'd like to confirm I have the units right here -- Present world data storage is variously estimated between 295 exabytes in 2011 to 2,700 exabytes today (2.7 zettabytes). See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12419672 (295 exabytes) http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Qhttp://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23177411#.UNt2eSZGJ5Q (2.7 ZB) I don't know what source to believe. This takes a colossal number of hard disks and a great deal of electricity. On NHK they estimated the number of bytes of data now exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. Assume it is 2.7 ZB. That seems like a large
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue. So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated with general relativity. It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary. You would not want to visit this area for a vacation. Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far. I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is the key. Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent. That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate? Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic very soon. I have enjoyed our thought processes and it is relaxing after I finally competed a good model for the MFMP cell behavior. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon At 01:47 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: I am thinking along the line of the second concept that you list at the end. The photon would cease to exist at any energy if allowed to continue by itself from the spaceship that is infinitesimally close to the boundary. So, instead, the second ship intercepts it ... This is a concept that has the photon rising from the event horizon, but being slowed until ceases to exist. But that would violate conservation of energy, for starters. Rather, the way the event horizon is described is that no path for light from inside the horizon crosses it. This *appears* to conflict with views of the event horizon as being located differently with different observers. I really think we need to back up, practically all the way. Why do we think there would be black holes?
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. Jojo - Original Message - From: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA did.. anyone say that there are exabytes in our dna? I seem to have missed that assertion. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
The discussion of Papp and his engine leads me to one question. Is it possible that the extra force that Russ, the video experimenter, obtained using hydrogen as the active gas was due to the dissociation of the hydrogen molecules into individual atoms? I suspect that the pressure must increase in such an environment due to the fact that there are more particles colliding. This may have been discussed previously, but the thought just came into my mind and I wanted to pass it on. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Guys,
Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot. Unless
you only believe in large ones...
A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of
1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a
few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a
hurricane...
http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that
is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with
this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said
what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue.
So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon
toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy
ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in
some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from
the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE
is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is
assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated
with general relativity.
It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of
both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that
supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that
any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the
outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary.
You would not want to visit this area for a vacation.
Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There
have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on
nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of
energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their
axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far.
I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it
reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it
freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter
should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all
the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is
the key.
Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite
massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are
familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star
appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that
required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge
of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the
associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal
radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it
becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent.
That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space
surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space
itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the
observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they
appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious
solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate?
Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is
productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the
vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow
most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic
very soon. I have enjoyed our thought processes and it is relaxing after I
finally competed a good model for the MFMP cell behavior.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'a...@lomaxdesign.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'vortex-l@eskimo.com');; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.comjavascript:_e({},
'cvml', 'vortex-l@eskimo.com');
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 6:45 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 01:47 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote:
I am thinking along the line of the second concept that you list at
the end. The photon would cease to exist at any energy if allowed
to continue by itself from the spaceship that is infinitesimally
close to the boundary. So, instead, the second ship intercepts it ...
This is a concept that has the photon rising from the event horizon,
but being slowed until ceases to exist. But that would violate
conservation of energy, for starters. Rather, the way the event
horizon is described is that no path for light from inside the
horizon crosses it.
This *appears* to conflict
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
It is funny when I hear of junk DNA as described by the genetics experts. Why choose to call something unknown as junk instead of just admitting that it is not understood? Reminds me of the old theory about the amount of one's brain that is being used. I just wish people would lay out the facts that they know and not judge the unknowns. I guess some would call LENR junk physics! Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:26 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. Jojo - Original Message - From: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA did.. anyone say that there are exabytes in our dna? I seem to have missed that assertion. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
For this particular thread we were concentrating upon very large black holes. You can have the tiny ones. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Guys, Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot. Unless you only believe in large ones... A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of 1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a hurricane... http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue. So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated with general relativity. It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary. You would not want to visit this area for a vacation. Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far. I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is the key. Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent. That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate? Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic very soon. I have enjoyed our thought processes and it is relaxing after I finally competed a good model for the MFMP cell behavior. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon At 01:47 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: I am thinking along the line of the second concept that you list at the end. The photon would cease to exist at any energy if allowed to continue by itself from the spaceship that is infinitesimally close to the boundary. So, instead, the second ship intercepts it ... This is a concept that has the photon rising from the event horizon, but being slowed until ceases to exist. But that would violate conservation of energy, for starters.
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Thanks, we've got em
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
For this particular thread we were concentrating upon very large black
holes. You can have the tiny ones.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'cheme...@gmail.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:34 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Guys,
Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot.
Unless you only believe in large ones...
A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of
1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a
few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a
hurricane...
http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that
is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with
this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said
what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue.
So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon
toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy
ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in
some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from
the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE
is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is
assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated
with general relativity.
It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of
both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that
supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that
any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the
outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary.
You would not want to visit this area for a vacation.
Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There
have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on
nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of
energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their
axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far.
I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it
reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it
freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter
should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all
the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is
the key.
Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite
massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are
familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star
appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that
required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge
of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the
associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal
radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it
becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent.
That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space
surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space
itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the
observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they
appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious
solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate?
Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is
productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the
vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow
most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic
very soon. I have enjoyed our thought processes and it is relaxing after I
finally competed a good model for the MFMP cell behavior.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@esk
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
The recombination of atomic hydrogen to diatomic hydrogen is notoriously exothermic. Why, then, is it reported that the gas temperature rises little if at all? On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 7:33 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The discussion of Papp and his engine leads me to one question. Is it possible that the extra force that Russ, the video experimenter, obtained using hydrogen as the active gas was due to the dissociation of the hydrogen molecules into individual atoms? I suspect that the pressure must increase in such an environment due to the fact that there are more particles colliding. This may have been discussed previously, but the thought just came into my mind and I wanted to pass it on. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Also, if we consider a black hole the mass of Jupiter, 1.9x10e27 kg which will be a fraction of a degree k, as you approach I believe you will be shredded into protons and electrons as you approach the surface just like the gas ball of hydrogen( protons and electrons) around...Jupiter On Thursday, December 27, 2012, ChemE Stewart wrote: Thanks, we've got em On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: For this particular thread we were concentrating upon very large black holes. You can have the tiny ones. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Guys, Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot. Unless you only believe in large ones... A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of 1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a hurricane... http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue. So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated with general relativity. It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary. You would not want to visit this area for a vacation. Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far. I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is the key. Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent. That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate? Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic very soon. I have
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
Is it possible that the spark required to break apart the molecules needed to inject the exact same amount of energy as that which is returned when they recombine? This might just be a technique that performs a high efficiency transfer of electrical energy into mechanical energy. That might have some uses since it would be similar to an electric motor, but operates with pressure instead of typical motor action. Do you know of any applications for the direct conversion of electric energy into mechanical energy that would benefit with pressure as the active coupling force? Hum...maybe a new way to build something like a rail gun replacement. Just another wild idea to ponder. Most likely there would not be enough energy transferred to be of great use although direct heating of the gas by the electric current might enhance the power. Dave -Original Message- From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water The recombination of atomic hydrogen to diatomic hydrogen is notoriously exothermic. Why, then, is it reported that the gas temperature rises little if at all? On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 7:33 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The discussion of Papp and his engine leads me to one question. Is it possible that the extra force that Russ, the video experimenter, obtained using hydrogen as the active gas was due to the dissociation of the hydrogen molecules into individual atoms? I suspect that the pressure must increase in such an environment due to the fact that there are more particles colliding. This may have been discussed previously, but the thought just came into my mind and I wanted to pass it on. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Do you need to compress that mass into something a whole lot smaller before it would become a black hole? Seems like that would eliminate Jupiter as a candidate. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Also, if we consider a black hole the mass of Jupiter, 1.9x10e27 kg which will be a fraction of a degree k, as you approach I believe you will be shredded into protons and electrons as you approach the surface just like the gas ball of hydrogen( protons and electrons) around...Jupiter On Thursday, December 27, 2012, ChemE Stewart wrote: Thanks, we've got em On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: For this particular thread we were concentrating upon very large black holes. You can have the tiny ones. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon Guys, Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot. Unless you only believe in large ones... A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of 1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a hurricane... http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote: Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue. So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated with general relativity. It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary. You would not want to visit this area for a vacation. Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far. I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is the key. Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent. That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? Does anyone on vortex know of the observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate? Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic very soon. I have
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 04:20 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: The views expressed by Lomax below are typical of those who have not read Darwin's book or understand what Darwinian Evolution really says. I have not read Darwin's book, nor do I give a fig about Darwinian Evolution. I care a bit more about the mechanisms through which life was created on this planet, and especially how life is maintained and develops. It is typicial, again, of so-called Creationists, that they posit this bugaboo, Darwinian Evolution, and then attempt to poke it full of holes. Darwin wrote a lot time ago. And science is not about individuals, and the progress of science is about *informed consensus.* We are not interested in Fleischmannite Fusion. What Fleischmann thought about his work is *irrelevant.* He was dead wrong about certain things, but he was also a scientist. He admitted his errors, when he had the chance. That's what distinguishes scientists from ideologues. Natural Selection is not the process of DNA building, it is the macro result of mutations. Well, that's not accurate. Natural Selection is a product of the interaction between genetic trait and survival. Mutation creates diversity in genetic traits, and natural selection creates preferential survival for certain traits, varying with conditions. DNA building is not relevant, actually, except as DNA is built through cells that replicate it, and that make copying errors. That selection is natural is a bit of a tautology. The implication, though, is a distinction between selection that is somehow programmed toward a result, and selection that simply occurs. Mutations are the mechanism Darwin claims to be behind changes. No, mutations *are* changes. And, again, I don't care what Darwin claimed. I'm not a Darwinian. As to the development of life, it is no longer controversial that species differ in genetic code, and, indeed, that we all differ from each other, each inheriting a specific and unique code. All humans are almost identical, but not quite. By change, here, Jojo must mean speciation. And it's obvious that species have different genetic code. What Jojo is claiming I suspect, is that one species never changes into another through mutation. However, he's not actually proposing a different mechanism for speciation. Perhaps he will claim that there is no speciation. The mother of a squirrel was always a squirrel, the mother of a hummingbird was always a hummingbird. The changes result in a survival advantage, hence Natural Selection occurs. Hence the process is in fact a random process. Mutation is not necessarily a random process. (The level of mutation is *controlled*, generally. Different organisms have varying degrees of protectin of copying accuracy.) However, let's grant that. However, what was said was not that mutation was not a random process, but that natural selection is not a random process, and the context was a claim that natural selection cannot originate information. That's obviously bogus. Natural selection isn't mere mutation, which might be a kind of random input, but rather is the product of mutation and survival. The result, the genetic code as it shifts through time in a population, is information about something very obvious: what survived to reproduce, not just once, but many times. It is important for us to understand that Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. Oh, it does. There are many copying errors that will kill the cell, promptly. But perhaps Jojo means something else here. In other words, there is no Natural Selection mechanism to determine at the cellular/DNA level what random mutation is to be retained. That is generally correct, given the exception that I noted. That mutation has to cause a change in the macro organism that would confer a survival advantage before Natural Selection can be invoked. There is no trait confers survival advantage. Natural selection is a term for an overall process, a very gross summary of what happens, it is not an actual mechanism. Yes, an unexpressed change, one that has no effect on the macro organism, will have very little effect on survival. Survival is the actual mechanism that filters mutations, but the filtering may be quite slow. The exception I know of: there is a lot of junk DNA, DNA that apparently does not code for any expressed protein or messenger. If there was too much of that, the inefficiency would start to bog down the process of copying, and copying is essential to growth and repair and operation of the cells. You can have many many many mutations or changes at the cellular level but only when changes confer a survival advantage does that mutation get retained. Retention of changes occur at the individual to offspring level - a macro level, not at the cellular/DNA level. This is completely false. All mutations that don't kill the organism are retained, the human copying
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Dave,
A black hole of the total mass of Jupiter would be about 3000 meters in
radius.
I believe if you sail thru that gas cloud of Jupiter you will find a primordial
black hole nucleus which be a significant % of the total mass.
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
Do you need to compress that mass into something a whole lot smaller
before it would become a black hole? Seems like that would eliminate
Jupiter as a candidate.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'cheme...@gmail.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'vortex-l@eskimo.com');
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Also, if we consider a black hole the mass of Jupiter, 1.9x10e27 kg which
will be a fraction of a degree k, as you approach I believe you will be
shredded into protons and electrons as you approach the surface just like
the gas ball of hydrogen( protons and electrons) around...Jupiter
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, ChemE Stewart wrote:
Thanks, we've got em
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
For this particular thread we were concentrating upon very large black
holes. You can have the tiny ones.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:34 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Guys,
Not all black holes are cold, the small ones are extremely hot.
Unless you only believe in large ones...
A black hole weighing 1.2x10e12 kg is about a million K with a radius of
1.8x10e-10 meters. If the sun spit that at earth it might orbit around a
few months and collapse atmospheric gasses around it and create a
hurricane...
http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/
On Thursday, December 27, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that
is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. There is no problem with
this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said
what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue.
So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon
toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy
ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in
some manner. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from
the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE
is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is
assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated
with general relativity.
It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of
both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that
supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that
any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the
outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary.
You would not want to visit this area for a vacation.
Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There
have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on
nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of
energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their
axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far.
I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it
reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it
freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter
should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all
the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is
the key.
Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite
massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are
familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star
appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that
required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge
of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the
associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal
radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it
becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent.
That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space
surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible u
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 08:26 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Yes, but only if we don't mind that it's exabytes of copies of about 1.5 gigabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. That's an exaggeration of new research. Some functions are being found for some noncoding DNA. I've understood noncoding DNA to refer to sequences that are not used to create proteins. There can be a few other functions, for example, telomeres are noncoding, but serve to protect chromosomes from copying errors at the ends. There is an interesting piece of evidence. Noncoding DNA much more rapidly mutates because of lack of selection pressure. Noncoding DNA gives a measure of time since organisms diverged. If this DNA were serving a critical biological function, it would be under selection pressure. (Most mutations of critical genes kill the cell or the organism, babies spontaneously abort, etc.)
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
David, The different physical characteristics of individuals within a species is the result of microevolution. Microevolution is different from Darwinian Evolution. As I've posted before, Darwinian Evolution says that random mutations cause changes that result in some feature that confer a survival advantage resulting in Natural Selection. Darwinian Evolution postulates that if you accumulate enough of these random changes, the individual becomes a new species. What a species is; we don't know other than the rough physical classifications we use. If something looks different from another, it's a different species. Such is the problem with Darwinian Evolution. Before we can say whether Darwinian Evolution is correct; we have to ask ourselves whether it is clear enough to be correct. Heck, we don't even know what a species is. The process of species classification is more an art and an exercise in consensus building. Before we can even say that Darwinian Evolution is correct and cram it down people's throats, ala AGW, we need to establish without a shadow of a doubt, what we mean by species. We need to build a new Genetic Classification of species instead of our current physical features classification system. My friends, establish the science first before you cram it down people's throats. Microevolution on the other hand is in the simplest term called adaptation. The changes occur because of genetic expression of what is ALREADY encoded in the DNA. When we turn black under the sun, that is not a random mutation of our DNA to give us black skin, that is an expression of what we already have. An organism can only change its features within the coding already in its DNA. Microevolution does not cause DNA changes, it causes expression of the changes that is dormant in the DNA. Microevolution is evolution within a species. It is extremely versatile as our DNA contains a lot of information for carrying out these changes. Hopefully, in the very near future, we should finish encoding the DNA of all animals and we can properly classify everything according to their DNA. I have told this true story before and I'll tell it again to really try to bring home this distinction. A few decades back, a group of scientists subjected a colony of E.Coli to stresses. One of the stresses was Streptomycin antibiotic. As expected, a bunch of E.Coli died, while a few seems to have resistance. These resistant cells then multiplied and they ended up with a colony that is now totally resistant to Streptomycin. Aha, definite proof of Darwinian Evolution. We have a new species of E.Coli. Champagne bottles began popping all over. At last, we can shut up all those crazy creationists. Darwinian Evolution has triumphed. On closer inspection, Streptomycin resistance was conferred by a single gene expression. The gene caused the creation of a single protein on the surface of the E.Coli cell that prevented Streptomycin from latching onto the cell wall to denature it and split it open. A single gene conferred the survival advantage. That single gene lied dormant in all E.Coli DNA and was expressed when the Streptomycin stress was applied. After Streptomycin was removed, the colony devolved back to its original streptomycin susceptible version. The gene became dormant again. There was no permanent change of E.Coli's DNA. Just expression of various genes. This is microevolution in action. This my friend is how we apparently have different species, when in fact, they are all the same species. For instance, I have a strong suspicion that a wolf and a domestic dog is probably one species. This would also explain how Noah seems to have been able to cram all these various species into his ark. He did not have to bring a pair of poodles, a pair of collies, a pair of German Shepherds, etc. He just brought in a pair of dogs, whatever it was, and that pair microevolved into the hundreds of canine varieties we have today. Jojo - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 2:48 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Jojo, how does the theory that you believe in result in the different races of peoples? It seems likely that the darker complexion of those that typically live in areas of ample sunlight would give them an advantage due to protection from ultraviolet sunlight. I have also noticed that the inhabitants of the more northern regions tend to have lighter skin. The people of isolated regions develop characteristics that are different from the nominal such as the red haired Irish or the peoples of Iceland. Is it you belief that the various genes were already present within these groups but for some reason did not become widespread within the overall human population? I guess that this idea would be somewhat like the fact that dogs come in many
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Amen to that, my friend. This is the malady of conformism that is plagueing modern scienctific study. Jojo - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA It is funny when I hear of junk DNA as described by the genetics experts. Why choose to call something unknown as junk instead of just admitting that it is not understood? Reminds me of the old theory about the amount of one's brain that is being used. I just wish people would lay out the facts that they know and not judge the unknowns. I guess some would call LENR junk physics! Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 8:26 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. Jojo - Original Message - From: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA did.. anyone say that there are exabytes in our dna? I seem to have missed that assertion. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 08:11 PM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: Notice that I carefully specified that the photon left from a point that is extremely close to but outside of the horizon. Then the photon will continue to infinity. I thought that your idea was supposed to be a way to communicate information from within the event horizon to outside, by positing a ship that is outside of our horizon, but sees an event horizon closer, and the second ship is within our horizon -- we can't communicate with it -- but outside of the first ship's horizon. There is no problem with this location as far as the radial outward path of a photon. If I had said what you suggest the it started within the horizon, then there is an issue. So, the photon as before continues outward from this side of the horizon toward the far away observers. I asked the question about where the energy ends up because I suspect that it becomes distributed throughout space in some manner. It's like any photon. It travels until it reaches the end of time. I.e., forever, and a day. Its energy remains intact, but because of the red-shift, the energy is spread out more. One might draw a conclusion that space is stretched out from the horizon due to some form of linear dimension dilation so that the COE is preserved. This is not completely evident and I do not know if it is assumed in any theory except possibly for the curvature of space associated with general relativity. It becomes increasingly complicated if we must deal with dilation of both space and time. My photon thought experiment tends to support that supposition. If one follows the logic in reverse the spaceman sees that any thermal noise or other radiation incident upon the hole from the outside would become very intense within this region near the boundary. You would not want to visit this area for a vacation. Your question about the existence of black holes is a good one. There have been measurements of the effect of one at the center of our galaxy on nearby stars which is quite convincing. Some of the enormous beams of energy being emitted by other galaxies in opposite directions from their axis seem to have not other conceivable mechanisms so far. I have wondered about how matter is added to a black hole once it reaches a point where time dilation becomes so great that we observe it freezing on the way in. Like our test probe ship, this incoming matter should be frozen in some manner until the radiation from it red shifts all the way to zero. Of course that is what we observe at a distance which is the key. What do we have in terms of observation of black holes? Lets start with something simple. A large star that is not quite massive enough to become an assumed black hole behaves in ways that we are familiar. My statement begs an interesting question. How does a star appear to a far away observer if it has a mass that is just below that required for it to become a black hole? I would guess that the outer edge of such a beast would exhibit enormous gravitational flux and the associated time dilation. It really makes me wonder what happens to normal radiation that is emitted from the surface. Should we assume that it becomes red shifted as it travels our direction to a very large extent. It has to be. However, I don't know that any such object has been observed. All the spectral lines would be shifted. We might conclude that the object is a a great distance, and the only way we'd know that it wasn't would be if we could detect graviational effects other than red shift. Blah, blah, blah. That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? No, the energy is not trapped. Light continues to travel at the speed of light. Does anyone on vortex know of the observations of any stars that fall into this category? Perhaps they appear like red giants at our location-interesting question. The obvious solution is that they explode before this occurs. Is that their fate? The spectrum would be very different from a red giant. Speculation can be fun to engage in, but I am not sure that it is productive to keep alive a thread for this long unless other members of the vortex become interested. It does not seem fair to them for us to borrow most of the bandwidth for so long so I plan to return to the main topic very soon. I have enjoyed our thought processes and it is relaxing after I finally competed a good model for the MFMP cell behavior. It is an exercise in thinking, and in recognizing our limits. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon At 01:47 AM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: I
Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
Lomax does not understand that this Executive Order covers anything related to previous and current presidents. Anything about this current president is covered by this order. IF anyone wants to release information about Obama's BC, they have to go thru Eric Holder (the corrupt right henchman) or thru the Presidential counsel; for approval. This is the veil of corruption surrounding this usurper-in-thief and people like lomax are gving him a pass. I'm not surprised as lies are OK for Lomax as long as it helps prop up his illegitimate usurper muslim president. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 6:59 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies At 03:50 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive Order 13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically require his approval before release of any information, obstensively because of Executive Privelege. Obstentively? Took me a moment. Ostensibly. Release of any information. Sure. Any information of what type, where located, and by whom? Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What exactly have you debunked? you blatant liar. No, no apology, unless you show that the Executive Order does what you claimed. I not only never claimed that this *particular* Exectuive Order did not exist, I linked to it and discussed it specifically. [...] Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies you'll come up next. You've acknowledged all along that what you are doing is spinning. You have acknowledged that you say things that aren't true to create a dramatic image. That's spin. But I'll give you a fair chance here. You claimed that this document is an Executive Order which blocks access to Obama's vault BC. Below, I quote a bit of what I wrote, to which you are responding. I wrote, in more than one way, If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. Okay, how does this Order do that? What would cause this document to apply to birth records held by Hawaiian state officials? It's all here right in front of us, no more research should be necessary. But, also for the record, I'll say it again: There is no Executive Order that blocks public access to the vault birth certificate. That access is blocked by Hawaiian law on the privacy of records (as is true, I think, in all states). Some access to records is blocked by HIPAA, a federal law relating to the privacy of medical records, and there are other laws protecting the privacy of certain records, but no relevant Executive Order that does what Jojo claims. He lied, and he is continuing to lie. But ... his turn. THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 21, 2009 EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - - PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) Archivist refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee. (b) NARA refers to the National Archives and Records Administration. (c) Presidential Records Act refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207. (d) NARA regulations refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270. (e) Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. (f) Former President refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created. (g) A substantial question of executive privilege exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch. (h) A final court order is a court order from which no appeal may be taken. Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Brrr.. I don't know how one could live in such cold climates. But to each his own. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Hey! I'm the one living in the snowy mountains, and looking out the windows of my office at a fine winter storm, large dry flakes tumbling out of the sky, dancing with the breeze, playing hide-and-go-seek among the aspens smile On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
I agree in general with what you are saying Jojo. It is quite apparent that Microevolution is occurring all the time as with your example of the ecoli bacteria. This is merely the normal expression of genes that are already available within the population. I assume you agree that on occasions a random mutation occurs due to some outside influence which leads to changes in the genetic material that is passed on to future generations. One I have read about is the one I mentioned earlier. If I recall correctly, the gene problem that leads to hemophilia came about during the middle ages, but was not present until that time. I think the story is that it became prevalent with the royals in Europe and has spread from that point forth. Do you suspect that it was a recessive gene that was there all along but not seen until close kinship marriages allowed it to show up? That could be what happened in that case, but it had not been expressed before that time as far as I know. It seems reasonable to consider animals to belong to a species if they can mate to produce young that are fertile. As you know, the numbers of chromosomes varies among the different animals and that pretty much eliminates the fertile young case. I always think of mules when this type of situation comes up. Of course there are exceptions as when a mule actually produced a colt or whatever it would be called on the one documented case I am aware of. Horses and donkeys are very similar to begin with so it is not too surprising. Dogs are just wolves that have been domesticated. It is a good thing that our dogs behave differently than typical wolves! Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 9:19 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA David, The different physical characteristics of individuals within a species is the result of microevolution. Microevolution is different from Darwinian Evolution. As I've posted before, Darwinian Evolution says that random mutations cause changes that result in some feature that confer a survival advantage resulting in Natural Selection. Darwinian Evolution postulates that if you accumulate enough of these random changes, the individual becomes a new species. What a species is; we don't know other than the rough physical classifications we use. If something looks different from another, it's a different species. Such is the problem with Darwinian Evolution. Before we can say whether Darwinian Evolution is correct; we have to ask ourselves whether it is clear enough to be correct. Heck, we don't even know what a species is. The process of species classification is more an art and an exercise in consensus building. Before we can even say that Darwinian Evolution is correct and cram it down people's throats, ala AGW, we need to establish without a shadow of a doubt, what we mean by species. We need to build a new Genetic Classification of species instead of our current physical features classification system. My friends, establish the science first before you cram it down people's throats. Microevolution on the other hand is in the simplest term called adaptation. The changes occur because of genetic expression of what is ALREADY encoded in the DNA. When we turn black under the sun, that is not a random mutation of our DNA to give us black skin, that is an expression of what we already have. An organism can only change its features within the coding already in its DNA. Microevolution does not cause DNA changes, it causes expression of the changes that is dormant in the DNA. Microevolution is evolution within a species. It is extremely versatile as our DNA contains a lot of information for carrying out these changes. Hopefully, in the very near future, we should finish encoding the DNA of all animals and we can properly classify everything according to their DNA. I have told this true story before and I'll tell it again to really try to bring home this distinction. A few decades back, a group of scientists subjected a colony of E.Coli to stresses. One of the stresses was Streptomycin antibiotic. As expected, a bunch of E.Coli died, while a few seems to have resistance. These resistant cells then multiplied and they ended up with a colony that is now totally resistant to Streptomycin. Aha, definite proof of Darwinian Evolution. We have a new species of E.Coli. Champagne bottles began popping all over. At last, we can shut up all those crazy creationists. Darwinian Evolution has triumphed. On closer inspection, Streptomycin resistance was conferred by a single gene expression. The gene caused the creation of a single protein on the surface of the E.Coli cell that prevented Streptomycin from latching onto the cell wall to denature it and split it open. A single gene conferred the survival advantage.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an abhorrent act. Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our practice of it OK? Lomax and a few others seems to think that because all the tribes surrounding muhammed practice child molestation of 9 year old little girls, that muhammed's practice of it was OK. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. 'Nuff said. I can never convince a retrograde moon god worshipper about his abhorrent acts. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:44 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 09:41 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What has he rebuted? Has he rebuted that A'isha was 9 years old when muhammed had intercourse with her? I've shown that the age is uncertain. What Muslim and Bukarhai show that there was a rumor that she was nine. Other sources indicate that the age may have been different, nine is the *youngest* of the possible ages. We don't actually know, from Muslim and Bukhari, that they had intercourse at this time but that's the usual assumtion. What it actually says is that she went to live with him. What is universally accepted, however, in all sources, is that she was sexually mature when the marriage was completed. I presented source like Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari saying that this was true. No, they quote two stories, that slightly contradict each other, that say that she was nine. They actually don't say that it is true that she was nine. They don't even address the issue. Hadith are not assertions of truth, generally, they are reports of testimony, usually at least third-hand. Jojo assigns an authority to hadith that he imagines Muslims must assign, because he thinks that way about the Bible. Some Muslims do think that way, in fact, but the position I'm stating is that of Muslim scholars, not the multitides, who sometimes know less about the Qur'an and the sources for Islam than the ordinary Christian knows about the Bible. Lomax presented wikipedia and blogs and he rebuted what I said? Yes. I presented far more than that. But Jojo has acknowedged that he doesn't read what I've written. I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell you for cheap. Very close to the beach? LOL And we expect that it would be like everything else Jojo offers. A lie. Trust, not me or him, but the balance of the evidence, and know that our judgement is easily flawed. What has he rebuted? Like nearly everything expect certain obvious facts that were never in question. That Muslim and Bukhari report 9 at marriage is fact. That was never in question. How old Ayesha actually was is controversial, we do not actually know. So what was refuted was the idea that the actual age is known, as if this were a certainty merely because it's found in certain hadith. Muslims disagree about the age, but it's also true that many Muslims, from far back, have accepted nine as the age. And that's not impossible, nor, personally, do I consider it outside of the bounds of possiblity. But this does *not* establish nine as some clearly permitted age, because, in fact, the law was not about age, though later sources do mention ages.(I have another 13th century treatise on marriage that shows the modern tendency to use age rather than specific condition). The traditions cited were not *interpreted*. They are just reports of what people said that people said had happened. He said that pre-islam tribes practiced child marriage
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 08:38 PM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: It is funny when I hear of junk DNA as described by the genetics experts. Why choose to call something unknown as junk instead of just admitting that it is not understood? Reminds me of the old theory about the amount of one's brain that is being used. I just wish people would lay out the facts that they know and not judge the unknowns. I guess some would call LENR junk physics! Junk DNA refers to noncoding DNA. Noncoding means that the DNA is not expressed as a protein. Noncoding DNA presumably sends no messages, it's inactive. It may not be entirely so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA deals with the complexity of it. When I used the term junk DNA, I was referring to what the article calls pseudogenes. When it's said that much or most human DNA is noncoding, the article says 98%. Some organisms have very little noncoding DNA, as 2% for some bacteria. Noncoding is not a synonym for unknown function, it's very specific. The sequences are not transcribed to proteins. Some noncoding DNA is known to have functions, I mentioned telomeres in another post. There are sequences that aid in transcription of neighboring sequences. The article has: The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENCODEENCODE) projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA#cite_note-Nature489p57-1[1] reported in September 2012 that over 80% of DNA in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genomehuman genome serves some purpose, biochemically speaking.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA#cite_note-pennisi-2[2] And here is where having some idea of how Wikipedia works can be helfpul. This is very recent. The ENCODE project made that announcement about three months ago and there hasn't been time for much response. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Noncoding_DNAdiff=518424872oldid=514740309 is an edit by an anonymous editor that removed a comment that the claim has been criticized. The claim was unsourced and was properly removed, but ... what *has* been the response? There is some decent discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Noncoding_DNAoldid=517850643#Misinterpretation_of_ENCODE.3F The issue appears to be that much of the 98% noncoding DNA is, in fact, transcribed, into RNA, which then serves certain functions. The project still seems to leave about 20% of the genome as nonfunctional. As pointed out in the discussion, noncoding DNA can sometimes be reactivated under selection pressure. That requires a mutation, but only one, perhaps. So the noncoding DNA might be a junkyard, and a junkyard can be very useful! One of the key issues about pseudogenes is that, being nonfunctional, being, sometimes, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirusEndogenous retroviruses that were deactivated after being inserted into human cells, having no human biological function, they are not under selection pressure, which causes the retained mutation rate to be much higher for these sequences, it's a raw measure of raw mutation rates, not being selected, since mutations in those regions are almost always neither of harm nor of benefit. And so these can be used to study evolutionary time.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 10:05 PM 12/27/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENCODEENCODE) projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA#cite_note-Nature489p57-1[1] reported in September 2012 that over 80% of DNA in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genomehuman genome serves some purpose, biochemically speaking.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA#cite_note-pennisi-2[2] I found an excellent discussion of what the ENCODE project found, on Scientific American: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=hidden-treasures-in-junk-dna I found it expeciallly fascinating in the recognition of our ignorance. I recommend it.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
You are in error my friend. You come to this conclusion only because you make the first erroneous assumption that there is natural selection occuring. Nothing can me more unsupported than this speculation. As I've mentioned, Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. There is no arbiter within the cell that tells which changes are to be retained and which are to be discarded. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA At 08:26 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Yes, but only if we don't mind that it's exabytes of copies of about 1.5 gigabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. That's an exaggeration of new research. Some functions are being found for some noncoding DNA. I've understood noncoding DNA to refer to sequences that are not used to create proteins. There can be a few other functions, for example, telomeres are noncoding, but serve to protect chromosomes from copying errors at the ends. There is an interesting piece of evidence. Noncoding DNA much more rapidly mutates because of lack of selection pressure. Noncoding DNA gives a measure of time since organisms diverged. If this DNA were serving a critical biological function, it would be under selection pressure. (Most mutations of critical genes kill the cell or the organism, babies spontaneously abort, etc.)
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? No, the energy is not trapped. Light continues to travel at the speed of light. Actually Abd, a photon has a finite amount of energy that is directly proportional to its frequency. If it becomes red shifted by definition it has less energy. Since the photon looses energy as it travels through the region from the edge of the black hole toward our observation point, that energy must be stored within this space. We could collect each photon with a detector after it leaved the vicinity of the black hole and we would find that it is less energetic. So no, it does not continue forever at the same energy. Then the photon will continue to infinity. I thought that your idea was supposed to be a way to communicate information from within the event horizon to outside, by positing a ship that is outside of our horizon, but sees an event horizon closer, and the second ship is within our horizon -- we can't communicate with it -- but outside of the first ship's horizon. One thing at a time Abd. The main plan is to communicate if possible, but this explains part of the problem and why it happens. Every once in a while it makes sense to look at the overall system. It's like any photon. It travels until it reaches the end of time. I.e., forever, and a day. Its energy remains intact, but because of the red-shift, the energy is spread out more. No. If the photon becomes red shifted, energy is lost from that photon. If the red shift is total down to zero, no energy remains. What do we have in terms of observation of black holes? Sorry if it sounded like I had observations of them. I was just asking if others might as I do not. It has to be. However, I don't know that any such object has been observed. All the spectral lines would be shifted. We might conclude that the object is a a great distance, and the only way we'd know that it wasn't would be if we could detect graviational effects other than red shift. This is a good question for the astronomers. Perhaps they are seeing these things and are not aware of it. It is hard to imagine that there are not a large number of these out there unless they tend to explode before reaching this size range. It might not be a bad idea for the astronomers to take a second look at what is referred to as failed stars or other unusual thermal objects. Dave -Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 9:26 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Yes, the question of random mutation occuring is not in dispute. The dispute occurs when Darwinian Evolutionist extrapolate from this low probability event and claim that this is the mechanism for the origin of different varied forms of life on Earth. Like I said, given enough time, Darwinian Evolution is probable. Yet, based on our best current understanding of the Universe, there just ain't enough time for this to occur. That is why Darwinian Evolutio is so improbable as to be laughable. Microevolution is a different matter. Changes due to microevolution are rapid since the changes instructions are already coded in the DNA. Hence, we see rapid adaptation of animals to different stresses. We see changes within an individual in response to stresses. Natural Selection as envisioned by Darwin CAN NOT occur this rapidly. Mutations are slow, must confer a survival advantage first. Darwinian Natural Selection is an intergenerational mechanism, there must be reproduction for it to happen. I am not sure about hemophilia in royal families. I will not state an opinion over something I have not investigated. That would be the height of ignorance. Mating and reproduction is not a necessary condition for classification into a species. A modern European human will not successfully mate and reproduce with an African pygmy human, yet they are the same species. Certain species of dog will not reproduce with other species, yet they are the same species. There are dozens of examples of this. Reproduction involves a whole host of issues, much more than just DNA, so I hope people do not take what I just said and twist it. Yes, as I said, wolves are probably the same species as domestic dogs. The behavior is different and they won't mate successfully, but that has nothing to do with genetics. Jojo - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:38 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA I agree in general with what you are saying Jojo. It is quite apparent that Microevolution is occurring all the time as with your example of the ecoli bacteria. This is merely the normal expression of genes that are already available within the population. I assume you agree that on occasions a random mutation occurs due to some outside influence which leads to changes in the genetic material that is passed on to future generations. One I have read about is the one I mentioned earlier. If I recall correctly, the gene problem that leads to hemophilia came about during the middle ages, but was not present until that time. I think the story is that it became prevalent with the royals in Europe and has spread from that point forth. Do you suspect that it was a recessive gene that was there all along but not seen until close kinship marriages allowed it to show up? That could be what happened in that case, but it had not been expressed before that time as far as I know. It seems reasonable to consider animals to belong to a species if they can mate to produce young that are fertile. As you know, the numbers of chromosomes varies among the different animals and that pretty much eliminates the fertile young case. I always think of mules when this type of situation comes up. Of course there are exceptions as when a mule actually produced a colt or whatever it would be called on the one documented case I am aware of. Horses and donkeys are very similar to begin with so it is not too surprising. Dogs are just wolves that have been domesticated. It is a good thing that our dogs behave differently than typical wolves! Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 9:19 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA David, The different physical characteristics of individuals within a species is the result of microevolution. Microevolution is different from Darwinian Evolution. As I've posted before, Darwinian Evolution says that random mutations cause changes that result in some feature that confer a survival advantage resulting in Natural Selection. Darwinian Evolution postulates that if you accumulate enough of these random changes, the individual becomes a new species. What a species is; we don't know other than the rough physical classifications we use. If something looks different from another, it's a different species. Such is the problem with Darwinian Evolution. Before we can say whether Darwinian Evolution is correct; we have to ask ourselves whether it is clear enough to be correct. Heck, we don't even know what a species is. The process of species classification is more an art and an exercise in consensus building. Before we can even say that Darwinian Evolution is correct and cram it down people's throats, ala AGW, we need
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
I'm pretty sure you wrote a lot worth responding to, to correct it, but I did not read your tiresome lengthy essays. Please learn to split you arguement into smaller readable segments. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:03 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA At 04:20 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: The views expressed by Lomax below are typical of those who have not read Darwin's book or understand what Darwinian Evolution really says. I have not read Darwin's book, nor do I give a fig about Darwinian Evolution. I care a bit more about the mechanisms through which life was created on this planet, and especially how life is maintained and develops. It is typicial, again, of so-called Creationists, that they posit this bugaboo, Darwinian Evolution, and then attempt to poke it full of holes. Darwin wrote a lot time ago. And science is not about individuals, and the progress of science is about *informed consensus.* We are not interested in Fleischmannite Fusion. What Fleischmann thought about his work is *irrelevant.* He was dead wrong about certain things, but he was also a scientist. He admitted his errors, when he had the chance. That's what distinguishes scientists from ideologues. Natural Selection is not the process of DNA building, it is the macro result of mutations. Well, that's not accurate. Natural Selection is a product of the interaction between genetic trait and survival. Mutation creates diversity in genetic traits, and natural selection creates preferential survival for certain traits, varying with conditions. DNA building is not relevant, actually, except as DNA is built through cells that replicate it, and that make copying errors. That selection is natural is a bit of a tautology. The implication, though, is a distinction between selection that is somehow programmed toward a result, and selection that simply occurs. Mutations are the mechanism Darwin claims to be behind changes. No, mutations *are* changes. And, again, I don't care what Darwin claimed. I'm not a Darwinian. As to the development of life, it is no longer controversial that species differ in genetic code, and, indeed, that we all differ from each other, each inheriting a specific and unique code. All humans are almost identical, but not quite. By change, here, Jojo must mean speciation. And it's obvious that species have different genetic code. What Jojo is claiming I suspect, is that one species never changes into another through mutation. However, he's not actually proposing a different mechanism for speciation. Perhaps he will claim that there is no speciation. The mother of a squirrel was always a squirrel, the mother of a hummingbird was always a hummingbird. The changes result in a survival advantage, hence Natural Selection occurs. Hence the process is in fact a random process. Mutation is not necessarily a random process. (The level of mutation is *controlled*, generally. Different organisms have varying degrees of protectin of copying accuracy.) However, let's grant that. However, what was said was not that mutation was not a random process, but that natural selection is not a random process, and the context was a claim that natural selection cannot originate information. That's obviously bogus. Natural selection isn't mere mutation, which might be a kind of random input, but rather is the product of mutation and survival. The result, the genetic code as it shifts through time in a population, is information about something very obvious: what survived to reproduce, not just once, but many times. It is important for us to understand that Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. Oh, it does. There are many copying errors that will kill the cell, promptly. But perhaps Jojo means something else here. In other words, there is no Natural Selection mechanism to determine at the cellular/DNA level what random mutation is to be retained. That is generally correct, given the exception that I noted. That mutation has to cause a change in the macro organism that would confer a survival advantage before Natural Selection can be invoked. There is no trait confers survival advantage. Natural selection is a term for an overall process, a very gross summary of what happens, it is not an actual mechanism. Yes, an unexpressed change, one that has no effect on the macro organism, will have very little effect on survival. Survival is the actual mechanism that filters mutations, but the filtering may be quite slow. The exception I know of: there is a lot of junk DNA, DNA that apparently does not code for any expressed protein or messenger. If there was too much of that, the inefficiency would start to bog down the process of copying, and copying is essential to growth
Re: [Vo]:[OT]Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
At 09:27 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax does not understand that this Executive Order covers anything related to previous and current presidents. No. Not only do I not undertand it that way, nobody who has any clue about law and authority and juridiction doesn't understand that. It does not cover his listing in phone books. It does not cover *anything relating to his life before becoming President. It only covers exactly what it says it covers: Presidential Records in the custody of the National Archivist. Anything about this current president is covered by this order. Like these posts? Like his driver's license? *Those are not *Presidential Records.* That terms has a very specific meaning, defined in the Order. IF anyone wants to release information about Obama's BC, they have to go thru Eric Holder (the corrupt right henchman) or thru the Presidential counsel; for approval. No, that's not true. I was about to say it was, but I re-read it. I mean, what an idiot! Information about Obama's BC is routinely released. We've done it here. No, what is true is that to gain access to private records, which include birth certificates, hospital records, school records, and the like, the permission of the individual involved must be obtained, which could include someone with a power of attorney. This has *nothing to do with the Executive Order, it is explicitly and specificaly not about those non-Presidential Records. Presidential Records are not just anything about the President, they are documents created within the Presidency by the President, in his capacity as President. It's defined in the Order: Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. The documents Jojo refers to are not maintained by NARA. Period. This is *really* stupid, obtuse beyond belief. This is the veil of corruption surrounding this usurper-in-thief and people like lomax are gving him a pass. I'm not surprised as lies are OK for Lomax as long as it helps prop up his illegitimate usurper muslim president. We see right here that Jojo's arguments are totally corrupt, divorced from basic reality, clearly, as we can see with no research other than what's included in this mail, the Executive Order itself. Jojo has simply repeated his claim, ignoring the Order that he himself provided as evidence. There is nothing that connects the order to his *birth certificate*, and even if he were so stupid as to issue an Executive Order to attempt to control documents held and controlled under Hawaiian law, Hawaiian officials would ignore him. No, you cannot just walk in and access records that are protected under the law, but that protection has nothing to do with the Executive Order. Sheriff Arpaio's investigators -- operating privately, but apparently misrepresenting themselves as the police, -- tried to do that. They were tossed out. That has zilch to do with this Order, and Jojo keeps tossing smoke bombs to conceal the fact that he *lied.* The issue here is not the alleged corruption of Obama. The issue is not whether Obama should bend even further backwards to satisfy the birthers, when Jojo is showing that he, anyway, won't be satisfied No Matter What. The issue is in the subject title, which Jojo created. He left out the [OT] tag when he created the thread, I just added it. Birther Myth? or Lomax lies Jojo said that there was an Executive Order that prevents the release of the birth certificate. He didn't make that up, it is a common claim among birthers. It's a Birther Myth. I didn't know for sure that Jojo was referring to this partcular Executive Order, but eventually I concluded that there wasn't any other. Jojo keeps claiming that I'm lying. I return the favor, but ... he's lying, and it can be seen here. When one lies in the presence of conclusive evidence, the possible excuse of I just didn't realize disappears. Jojo is lying. He's lying because he is attempting to deceive and repeating deceptions long after any possible reasonable excuse. It appears that he won't even read the evidence he himself presented. It's an Executivee Order, and it talks about Presidential Records. Obama is President, and a Birth Certificate is a Record, and, Q.E.D., the BC is a Presidentital Record, right? No. Wrong. The Order defines Presidential Records, and they have absolutely nothing to do with anyone's Birth Certificate, not his, not Bush's, not Clintons, etc. no more original content below. The Executive Order is there, though. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 6:59 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies At 03:50 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
That you can contain x exobytes in y grams. Not anything about how much code is actually in the human body. Seems someone assumed on that. Junk Dna contains a lot of triggers to turn on and off the protein coding DNA. That's actually been known for, well, I learned that about 20 years ago. But it wasn't big news until recently. It also contains leftover viral strands from infective virus up the line, and copies and backups of coding dna, including in some instances previous versions that are deprecated. Interestingly enough, theres a common marker that seperates out those backups, much like comment tags in computer coding. With the protein coding dna sequences, classes as it were, and the information in the junk to tell the body when and where to use them, the genetic code is actually VERY similar to object oriented programming such as c ++. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. Jojo - Original Message - *From:* leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, December 28, 2012 5:34 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA did.. anyone say that there are exabytes in our dna? I seem to have missed that assertion. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Natural Selection is not Random Process. Nor are there exabytes of information encoded in our DNA, at least not in a single copy of our set. It's far, far less than that. The human genome is around 1.5 GB according to this source: http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html It couldn't be exabytes because it was sequenced by 2002, when exabyte-scale storage did not exist. I doubt they stored the raw data the sequence was derived from. The entire genome is copied in every cell, so the total amount of information per body is ~1.5 GB * 100 trillion cells per body. That would be 140,000 exabytes (136 zettabytes). Abd is correct that natural selection is not a random process. This is a widespread misunderstanding. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 09:18 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: David, The different physical characteristics of individuals within a species is the result of microevolution. Microevolution is different from Darwinian Evolution. Sure. However, the difference is not a sharp dividing line. Populations diverge when isolated, and can become mutually infertile, the classic definition of a species. As I've posted before, Darwinian Evolution says that random mutations cause changes that result in some feature that confer a survival advantage resulting in Natural Selection. That's a straw man presentation. Random mutations change DNA. That happens. Some DNA changes are expressed as a feature, most are not. However, changes accumulate over time. Darwinian Evolution postulates that if you accumulate enough of these random changes, the individual becomes a new species. No. This is not worth pursuing. Essentially, the tactic is a common one, present what you want to attack or debumk as X. And X is preposterous. But X is not what advocates of the target idea or philosophy or practice actually propose or believe. There is no accumulation of random changes that suddenly becomes a new species. What is accumulated is a combination of random changes and functional changes (those few mutations that affect survival, and obviously, to accumulate, they must affect survival positively.) If a population is cofertile, the genes will keep mixing, and an individual becoming non-cofertile is not likely to survive. But there is another factor influencing the gene mixing that keeps populations together: isolation. Relatively isolated populations will share traits that will be *different* for other originally similar populations. Eventually these shifts accumulate until the cause a failure of co-fertility. And that is normally considered a species boundary. That's not any organized philosophy, it's just my own understanding. What a species is; we don't know other than the rough physical classifications we use. If something looks different from another, it's a different species No, the definition is usually that normal members can mate with any other member of the same species. At least that applies to species that mate. Such is the problem with Darwinian Evolution. Before we can say whether Darwinian Evolution is correct; we have to ask ourselves whether it is clear enough to be correct. Heck, we don't even know what a species is. The process of species classification is more an art and an exercise in consensus building. Before we can even say that Darwinian Evolution is correct and cram it down people's throats, ala AGW, we need to establish without a shadow of a doubt, what we mean by species. We need to build a new Genetic Classification of species instead of our current physical features classification system. My friends, establish the science first before you cram it down people's throats. Microevolution on the other hand is in the simplest term called adaptation. The changes occur because of genetic expression of what is ALREADY encoded in the DNA. When we turn black under the sun, that is not a random mutation of our DNA to give us black skin, that is an expression of what we already have. That is not evolution at all. It's just a respose to the enviroment. These responses are not inherited, the idea that they were was Lysenkoism, promoted by Stalin. An organism can only change its features within the coding already in its DNA. Organisms don't really change their features, they simply express what is already in their DNA. Is this agreement? Microevolution does not cause DNA changes, it causes expression of the changes that is dormant in the DNA. That's made-up. There is no such distinction, and that can easily be shown. But it's not a job for me. Mutations happen, and mutations are not *what is already in the DNA.* But some mutations do activate sequences already in the DNA. That, in fact, is how compex genes can form out of a sequence of mutations, even if the protogene has no function and is not expressed. Those would be an example, one might imagine, of what Jojo is saying, but the changes were not dormant in the DNA, they happen from random mutation that hits the jackpot once in a while. If you believe in some sort of conscious purpose to evolution, you could say that everything that happened was part of this plan, and what appears to be a random process is not. But random process *is* how it appears.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Yes, an intriguing idea. But isn't this what Intelligent Designers have been saying all along. That our DNA contains information from an Intelligent Designer, whoever that Designer might be. Remember that Intelligent Design as a philosophy never claims that the Intelligent Designer is God. Why all the hoopla about teaching this basic concept of scientific curiousity? Jojo - Original Message - From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 12:31 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA An intriguing side issue of this ... that is, the general concept of DNA-as-information-carrier - maybe it has been done already, and maybe we should be looking for an encoded message which has been here for millions of years. Actually there are themes in SciFi which have explored a similar possibility- that there are messages awaiting us in DNA. This does not mean require an alien visit per se. Wiki has an article on extremophiles which is the kind of lifeform that could tolerate the cold and vacuum of space - and possibly be carried to Earth from elsewhere - PURPOSELY and with encoded messages in unused DNA. Most known extremophiles are microbes - like the domain Archaea - which name says it all. How would you decode such DNA? Would it mathematical, verbal or more likely: some kind of self-teaching format. Here is the start of a possibly way to transfer with few losses - and with a lot of references to other articles: http://www.panspermia.org/nongenseq.htm Jones From: Jed Rothwell Not quite as off topic as you might think. I am looking into this as part of an essay about the history of cold fusion I am writing. Anyway, see: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church_Science_12.pdf This prof. at Harvard, George Church, has been experimenting with recording data in DNA. He recorded his own book and then read it back, with only a few errors. He reproduced it 30 million times, making it the biggest best seller in history in a sense.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
You are in error my friend, is condescending and rude. There is no need to speak that way. On the contrary, there are most certainly codings within cells that kill cells that change badly, be it from damage during mitosis or bad transcription of dna. When these processes fail, we get cancer. In addition isn't ALL natural selection an issue of the cellular or dna level? The changes that express themselves are caused at the cellular or dna level. For example, there is a major difference between the hemoglobin of humans and other species that has a MASSIVE influence on efficiency. Its an about 25 percent difference in efficiency. Caused by 3, count them THREE different amino acids in one protein. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: You are in error my friend. You come to this conclusion only because you make the first erroneous assumption that there is natural selection occuring. Nothing can me more unsupported than this speculation. As I've mentioned, Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. There is no arbiter within the cell that tells which changes are to be retained and which are to be discarded. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA At 08:26 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Yes, but only if we don't mind that it's exabytes of copies of about 1.5 gigabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. That's an exaggeration of new research. Some functions are being found for some noncoding DNA. I've understood noncoding DNA to refer to sequences that are not used to create proteins. There can be a few other functions, for example, telomeres are noncoding, but serve to protect chromosomes from copying errors at the ends. There is an interesting piece of evidence. Noncoding DNA much more rapidly mutates because of lack of selection pressure. Noncoding DNA gives a measure of time since organisms diverged. If this DNA were serving a critical biological function, it would be under selection pressure. (Most mutations of critical genes kill the cell or the organism, babies spontaneously abort, etc.)
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Ah, another one of Chan's alter egos pimping Chan ideas trying to beef himself up. Not worth responding to. Jojo - Original Message - From: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA You are in error my friend, is condescending and rude. There is no need to speak that way. On the contrary, there are most certainly codings within cells that kill cells that change badly, be it from damage during mitosis or bad transcription of dna. When these processes fail, we get cancer. In addition isn't ALL natural selection an issue of the cellular or dna level? The changes that express themselves are caused at the cellular or dna level. For example, there is a major difference between the hemoglobin of humans and other species that has a MASSIVE influence on efficiency. Its an about 25 percent difference in efficiency. Caused by 3, count them THREE different amino acids in one protein. On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: You are in error my friend. You come to this conclusion only because you make the first erroneous assumption that there is natural selection occuring. Nothing can me more unsupported than this speculation. As I've mentioned, Natural Selection does not occur at the cellular or DNA level. There is no arbiter within the cell that tells which changes are to be retained and which are to be discarded. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA At 08:26 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Well, Jed's story says that we can store exabytes of data. Yes, but only if we don't mind that it's exabytes of copies of about 1.5 gigabytes of data. Nowadays, we only use the coding part of DNA to figure out the amount of information. Scientists erroneously assume the non-coding parts are junk DNA that have no information. That is not true. The non-coding parts are not Junk. Newer research are indicating that all of our DNA have functions we still do not know or understand. If they have function, they contain information we don't know about yet. That's an exaggeration of new research. Some functions are being found for some noncoding DNA. I've understood noncoding DNA to refer to sequences that are not used to create proteins. There can be a few other functions, for example, telomeres are noncoding, but serve to protect chromosomes from copying errors at the ends. There is an interesting piece of evidence. Noncoding DNA much more rapidly mutates because of lack of selection pressure. Noncoding DNA gives a measure of time since organisms diverged. If this DNA were serving a critical biological function, it would be under selection pressure. (Most mutations of critical genes kill the cell or the organism, babies spontaneously abort, etc.)
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has to come as a man (pure human) can not come. They would have effectively thwarted God's plan for redemption. The recent spate of UFO activity and the more blatant abduction of women seems to support this speculation. In almost all UFO abduction experience, what is the most common theme that these abductees are experiencing? It almost always has to do with the human reproductive system. Women's eggs are removed, men's sperms are collected, women are impregnated, etc. If these were truly biological beings - as in ET, why the preoccupation with the reproductive system . When we study lower lifeforms, are we preoccupied with how they reproduce? Yes, we study their reproduction but we also study their other systems. This is the normal behavior of a curious higher being studying a lower lifeform. But these UFO's are almost always studying human reproductive systems. Curious. There is reason to believe that these malevolent spiritual entities are trying to breed a super race of humans. Abduction have been going on for thousands of years and it is reasonable to speculate that they have successfully breed hybrids almost indistinguishable from normal humans. These hybrids have now risen to power worldwide and have infiltrated all of our institutions. These hybrids are the powers behind the Illuminati. So powerful and so entrenched are these hybrids that even presidents fear crossing them. They sent a clear lesson to all future presidents when they assasinated JFK. These illuminata satan worshippers and their hybrid handlers are the shadow government parasites bleeding our society dry. No one can oppose these hybrids. They can drive you mad with a thought - telepaths or they can squeeze your heart - Telekenetic. You can not oppose TEPs and TEKs. Only God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit is holding them at bay. When the Holy Spirit is removed from this Earth at the Rapture of Christians, the floodgates of hell will literally open and these demonic hybrids will consume all life. This my friends is what you are looking forward to if you are not a saved believer. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Jojo: However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. I am curious. Please elaborate. On Dec 26, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: The Illuminati satanic occultic pagan group of powerful men and bankers behind everything in our society, including the President, Congress, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve, the Smithsonian and other institutions. The Illuminati is the shadow government that FDR was alluding to and the reason JFK was assasinated. He spoke too much when he called for the dissolution of secret societies. This above is not speculation. However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
Read Darwin's The origin of Species first before you mouth off with these ignorant rantings. This is typical of you, you claim expertise and cloud the debate with irrelevancy and write long boring, tiresome irrelevant essays hoping that people don't read it. It's working for me sometimes, I tire of your lengthy hot air. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA At 09:18 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: David, The different physical characteristics of individuals within a species is the result of microevolution. Microevolution is different from Darwinian Evolution. Sure. However, the difference is not a sharp dividing line. Populations diverge when isolated, and can become mutually infertile, the classic definition of a species. As I've posted before, Darwinian Evolution says that random mutations cause changes that result in some feature that confer a survival advantage resulting in Natural Selection. That's a straw man presentation. Random mutations change DNA. That happens. Some DNA changes are expressed as a feature, most are not. However, changes accumulate over time. Darwinian Evolution postulates that if you accumulate enough of these random changes, the individual becomes a new species. No. This is not worth pursuing. Essentially, the tactic is a common one, present what you want to attack or debumk as X. And X is preposterous. But X is not what advocates of the target idea or philosophy or practice actually propose or believe. There is no accumulation of random changes that suddenly becomes a new species. What is accumulated is a combination of random changes and functional changes (those few mutations that affect survival, and obviously, to accumulate, they must affect survival positively.) If a population is cofertile, the genes will keep mixing, and an individual becoming non-cofertile is not likely to survive. But there is another factor influencing the gene mixing that keeps populations together: isolation. Relatively isolated populations will share traits that will be *different* for other originally similar populations. Eventually these shifts accumulate until the cause a failure of co-fertility. And that is normally considered a species boundary. That's not any organized philosophy, it's just my own understanding. What a species is; we don't know other than the rough physical classifications we use. If something looks different from another, it's a different species No, the definition is usually that normal members can mate with any other member of the same species. At least that applies to species that mate. Such is the problem with Darwinian Evolution. Before we can say whether Darwinian Evolution is correct; we have to ask ourselves whether it is clear enough to be correct. Heck, we don't even know what a species is. The process of species classification is more an art and an exercise in consensus building. Before we can even say that Darwinian Evolution is correct and cram it down people's throats, ala AGW, we need to establish without a shadow of a doubt, what we mean by species. We need to build a new Genetic Classification of species instead of our current physical features classification system. My friends, establish the science first before you cram it down people's throats. Microevolution on the other hand is in the simplest term called adaptation. The changes occur because of genetic expression of what is ALREADY encoded in the DNA. When we turn black under the sun, that is not a random mutation of our DNA to give us black skin, that is an expression of what we already have. That is not evolution at all. It's just a respose to the enviroment. These responses are not inherited, the idea that they were was Lysenkoism, promoted by Stalin. An organism can only change its features within the coding already in its DNA. Organisms don't really change their features, they simply express what is already in their DNA. Is this agreement? Microevolution does not cause DNA changes, it causes expression of the changes that is dormant in the DNA. That's made-up. There is no such distinction, and that can easily be shown. But it's not a job for me. Mutations happen, and mutations are not *what is already in the DNA.* But some mutations do activate sequences already in the DNA. That, in fact, is how compex genes can form out of a sequence of mutations, even if the protogene has no function and is not expressed. Those would be an example, one might imagine, of what Jojo is saying, but the changes were not dormant in the DNA, they happen from random mutation that hits the jackpot once in a while. If you believe in some sort of conscious purpose to evolution, you could say that everything that happened
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse. However, that can reasonably be inferred. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim). Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed. He did not hear this from Ayesha! Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a blog. Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. What Jojo is effectively lying about would be that I claimed Ayesha was *not* nine. I pointed to evidence that she was, and evidence that she wasn't. I wrote that I don't know how old she was, but that she was sexually mature, regardless. Jojo wants to quibble on that, but a sexually mature woman is not barely out of diapers, which he's said over and over, unless there is some problem! I write lengthy essays because I actually do research and report it, and I discuss the issues. Jojo hates that. He just wants to toss his mud and be done with it. Someone who actually checks his claims? Horrors! OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an abhorrent act. *What abhorrent act?* Jojo has never been specific. And nobody here is proposing that girls be married at nine. What I've been saying, though, is that this *was not an abhorrent act* in the culture, the time and place where it occurred. Nobody cared about her age, they care about her *maturity*. And Islamic law, in some places, is still the same. Maturity, by the way, one of the sources I cited noted, includes her reasoning and sound judgment. But that's dicta, in a way, because only one aspect of marriageability is being considered here. Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our practice of it OK? Straw man argument. And nobody has claimed that a practice is OK. Rather, if a practice is universally accepted in a time, we cannot condemn those who practiced it, it was their culture. The practice itself could be awful, but obviously was not from theirs. If we are going to judge
Re: [Vo]:[OT]Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
Weapons grade balonium. You repeat your lies that people have seen Obama's BC, but nobody actually has. Give me the name of one single individual who have claimed to have seen Obama's original BC. Not just say it's been seen by Hawaii officials, or clerks etc. Give me a name. One credible individual who have seen it is sufficient for me. No one have seen it. It's covered as executive privelege information in this executive order. That is the veil of corruption with this president. Abercrombie could have seen it if he wasn't blocked. He is an official government officer seeking access to official documents relating to the public good. He by himself would have authority under Hawaii law to access those vault records. He could have accessed it as governor. Yet he was blocked and obviously threatened to give up the investigation. This is the veil of corruption of this usurper-in-chief. But Lomax will continue to prop up this muslim president and lie for the greater good of islam. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]Birther Myth? or Lomax lies At 09:27 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax does not understand that this Executive Order covers anything related to previous and current presidents. No. Not only do I not undertand it that way, nobody who has any clue about law and authority and juridiction doesn't understand that. It does not cover his listing in phone books. It does not cover *anything relating to his life before becoming President. It only covers exactly what it says it covers: Presidential Records in the custody of the National Archivist. Anything about this current president is covered by this order. Like these posts? Like his driver's license? *Those are not *Presidential Records.* That terms has a very specific meaning, defined in the Order. IF anyone wants to release information about Obama's BC, they have to go thru Eric Holder (the corrupt right henchman) or thru the Presidential counsel; for approval. No, that's not true. I was about to say it was, but I re-read it. I mean, what an idiot! Information about Obama's BC is routinely released. We've done it here. No, what is true is that to gain access to private records, which include birth certificates, hospital records, school records, and the like, the permission of the individual involved must be obtained, which could include someone with a power of attorney. This has *nothing to do with the Executive Order, it is explicitly and specificaly not about those non-Presidential Records. Presidential Records are not just anything about the President, they are documents created within the Presidency by the President, in his capacity as President. It's defined in the Order: Presidential records refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. The documents Jojo refers to are not maintained by NARA. Period. This is *really* stupid, obtuse beyond belief. This is the veil of corruption surrounding this usurper-in-thief and people like lomax are gving him a pass. I'm not surprised as lies are OK for Lomax as long as it helps prop up his illegitimate usurper muslim president. We see right here that Jojo's arguments are totally corrupt, divorced from basic reality, clearly, as we can see with no research other than what's included in this mail, the Executive Order itself. Jojo has simply repeated his claim, ignoring the Order that he himself provided as evidence. There is nothing that connects the order to his *birth certificate*, and even if he were so stupid as to issue an Executive Order to attempt to control documents held and controlled under Hawaiian law, Hawaiian officials would ignore him. No, you cannot just walk in and access records that are protected under the law, but that protection has nothing to do with the Executive Order. Sheriff Arpaio's investigators -- operating privately, but apparently misrepresenting themselves as the police, -- tried to do that. They were tossed out. That has zilch to do with this Order, and Jojo keeps tossing smoke bombs to conceal the fact that he *lied.* The issue here is not the alleged corruption of Obama. The issue is not whether Obama should bend even further backwards to satisfy the birthers, when Jojo is showing that he, anyway, won't be satisfied No Matter What. The issue is in the subject title, which Jojo created. He left out the [OT] tag when he created the thread, I just added it. Birther Myth? or Lomax lies Jojo said that there was an Executive Order that prevents the release of the birth certificate. He didn't make that up, it is a common claim among birthers. It's a Birther Myth. I didn't know for sure that Jojo was referring to this partcular
Re: [Vo]:[OT]:Question About Event Horizon
At 10:16 PM 12/27/2012, David Roberson wrote: That energy leaving the massive star becomes trapped within the space surrounding it to a significant degree; how is this possible unless space itself has expanded to accommodate it? No, the energy is not trapped. Light continues to travel at the speed of light. Actually Abd, a photon has a finite amount of energy that is directly proportional to its frequency. Yes. If it becomes red shifted by definition it has less energy. Since the photon looses energy as it travels through the region from the edge of the black hole toward our observation point, that energy must be stored within this space. The energy is stored in the gravitational system. It is potential energy. When a body falls toward the earth, its potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. When the body is shot from the earth, and it is deaccelerated by gravity, its kinetic energy is converted to potential energy. We don't normally think of light this way. However that seems to me to be what happens. If the light were reflected back to the black hole, returning along the same path, it would regain the energy it lost. Potential energy is converted back to kinetic energy. We could collect each photon with a detector after it leaved the vicinity of the black hole and we would find that it is less energetic. So no, it does not continue forever at the same energy. That's correct. But it continues forever, unless it is obstructed. And it continues at the same velocity. It does not slow down (in a vacuum, anyway). Then the photon will continue to infinity. I thought that your idea was supposed to be a way to communicate information from within the event horizon to outside, by positing a ship that is outside of our horizon, but sees an event horizon closer, and the second ship is within our horizon -- we can't communicate with it -- but outside of the first ship's horizon. One thing at a time Abd. The main plan is to communicate if possible, but this explains part of the problem and why it happens. Every once in a while it makes sense to look at the overall system. It's like any photon. It travels until it reaches the end of time. I.e., forever, and a day. Its energy remains intact, but because of the red-shift, the energy is spread out more. No. If the photon becomes red shifted, energy is lost from that photon. If the red shift is total down to zero, no energy remains. If the photon is beyond the event horizon, heading outward, it is never red shifted to zero. (I was incorrect about energy, though. Energy is lost in climbing the gravitational well, stored as potential energy from gravity.) What do we have in terms of observation of black holes? Sorry if it sounded like I had observations of them. I was just asking if others might as I do not. I didn't think that. It has to be. However, I don't know that any such object has been observed. All the spectral lines would be shifted. We might conclude that the object is a a great distance, and the only way we'd know that it wasn't would be if we could detect graviational effects other than red shift. This is a good question for the astronomers. Perhaps they are seeing these things and are not aware of it. It is hard to imagine that there are not a large number of these out there unless they tend to explode before reaching this size range. It might not be a bad idea for the astronomers to take a second look at what is referred to as failed stars or other unusual thermal objects. I doubt they would miss this. But maybe.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 10:22 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I'm pretty sure you wrote a lot worth responding to, to correct it, but I did not read your tiresome lengthy essays. Please learn to split you arguement into smaller readable segments. It is a major discourtesy to quote, in its entirety, a long post, to a mailing list, while only responding with tl;dr. It's discourteous to the entire list, and to the listserver. I'm not interested in going to extra work to solicit Jojo's corrections. I'm not writing for him. I write to explore topics, among other benefits. Others are free to read, not read, respond, not respond, etc.
Re: [Vo]:Digital information storage in DNA
At 11:18 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Read Darwin's The origin of Species first before you mouth off with these ignorant rantings. Why should I read it? This is typical of you, you claim expertise I have not claimed expertise on this or any other topic. Sometimes I have unusual knowledge, but that's not expertise. Ah, I've claimed expertise on Wikipedia process. and cloud the debate with irrelevancy and write long boring, tiresome irrelevant essays hoping that people don't read it. It's working for me sometimes, I tire of your lengthy hot air. Can we hope that you will tire all the way?
Re: [Vo]:Papp and Water
*“The recombination of atomic hydrogen to diatomic hydrogen is notoriously exothermic. Why, then, is it reported that the gas temperature rises little if at all”* The fact that Russ has seen no heat produced by the spark discharge in hydrogen speaks to the fact that no atomic hydrogen is produced by the spark discharge. This is a clue to what is going on inside the gas medium. This insightful experimental observation supports the theory that accelerating plasmoid movement toward the head of the cylinder is the primary source of the power generated by the Papp reaction. If the plasmoid is the active power producing structure in the Papp engine, then it can concentrate a large number of electrons is high amperage circulating current flow concentrations at and around the outer surface of the plasmoid. As the plasmoid move through the uncharged dialectic gaseous medium(UDGM), The plasmoid must generate large numbers of negative charged clusters of gas atoms in the thin boundary zone between the plasmoids negative charged current layer and the UDGM. It is this contrail of residual negatively charged gas clusters that must be neutralized before the start of the next cycle can begin. This process of charge neutralization is how the feedback current is generated. The magnitude of this feedback current might be greater than the current that produced the spark discharge under certain noble gas mixtures. This increase in current can be one of the contributors to over unity power generation in the Papp reaction. This may also be the reason why the Papp engine exploded during the R. Feynman demo when an unchecked positive feedback current loop was formed between the various cylinders when the circuit that controlled the current feed to these cylinders was disabled. Increasing spark discharge current having been directly supported by the feedback current from other various cylinders produced a series of plasmoids of increasing strength. It was this uncontrolled current loop that eventually culminated in an explosive disintegration of the Papp engine after a few moments of unregulated operation when the control circuit was disabled after R. Feynman pulled the plug to the control unit. Cheers: Axil On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 8:42 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: The recombination of atomic hydrogen to diatomic hydrogen is notoriously exothermic. Why, then, is it reported that the gas temperature rises little if at all? On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 7:33 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: The discussion of Papp and his engine leads me to one question. Is it possible that the extra force that Russ, the video experimenter, obtained using hydrogen as the active gas was due to the dissociation of the hydrogen molecules into individual atoms? I suspect that the pressure must increase in such an environment due to the fact that there are more particles colliding. This may have been discussed previously, but the thought just came into my mind and I wanted to pass it on. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK Lomax, let's agree to disagree. I say intercourse between a 50 year old man and a 9 year old little girl is abhorrent and retrograde. You say it is justified because people around him were not offended. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say marrying multiple wives is abhorrent and retrograde, you say it is OK because other tribes do it. Let's allow the reader to decide if this is abhorrent. I say worshipping a 2nd rate moon god of muhammed's tribe is retarded, you say it is not, Let's allow the readers to decide if the mood god is their cup of tea over a the Universal God of Judaism and Christianity. I say a 9 year old little girl is not sexually mature to be a mother, you say she is because she has had her first menstrual cycle. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the practice of FGM is abhorrent, since it does not have any redeeming or medical value, you say it is OK. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the truth and cite quality evidence, you tell lies and cite wikipedia and Internet blogs as your evidence. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I tell the truth about islam and highlight the corruption of a retrograde and violent religion, you lie and lie for the good of muhammed and islam. Let's allow the readers to decide. Frankly, I grow tired of reading you boring lengthy tiresome lies of an essay. I guess you've found a way to shut me up. Just bore me with tiresome spin and lies. So, I bow out and let you have the last word on this topic. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse. However, that can reasonably be inferred. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim). Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed. He did not hear this from Ayesha! Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a blog. Which of us is more credible with
