hoola

I saw AJB say that the mass of a free electron + free proton is larger than that of a hydrogen atom....why is that?

it seems logical that the universe may have once consisted of a true void, not even space. Space, and all that goes along with it may be the current state of a mathematical structure held in place with a durable sub-logic that evolved from prior states. IOW, time must have preceded space as space needed "time" to evolve...although it is interesting to think that from the first tick of time, the observed structures were rather inevitable in their form....how many universes can a void spit out? It seems it could spit out trillions, but how many have a "durable substructure"; what we call logic? Following that thinking, there could be a short shelf life on all but a few, maybe just one...I see once again it's amusing to think that some of the gamma ray bursters that have no detectable source are nascent universes in deep space that disintegrate due to in part, to these unstable (short-lived) sub-logics, but can "deliver the goods" long enough to have a measurable effect in our universe, as the thing fizzles out. I would imagine a larger component of the odd GRBs are from identical logic structures to ours, but our existing universe interferes with them in gestation from physical proximity, allowing for a selective pressure in the void environment for only one universe at "time" to be extant...pretty lucky for us if true. So it seems that the odd GRBs could have two main types..

good point, john....and if a photon is a photon is a photon, what difference could there be between the "same" photon entering both slits, and two photons of nearly identical energies and going through the slits at nearly the same time, causually interfering and being mistakenly seen as one photon interfering with itself...?

as far as cancellation of sound goes, there is some decrease, most noticable in the bass frequencies if you point two speakers at each other. Another way to cause this decrease is to reverse the phase of one channel, by reversing leads on one speaker, in a normal front-facing arrangement...there is never perfect cancellation of any frequency, but it's easier to detect interfering reductions in the lower ones...

I thought I had read that firing photons one at a time didn't deliver anything but randomness.....and the wave pattern accumulates when multiples are fired off...

yes the universe can be alone but only for a finite time period. I see this with the presumption that at one point a void existed, and that there is now something in that previous void. That would infer a series of steps going from nothing to something as a form of inevitable mutation, given nothing to prevent it. I use the "1 nothing" as my favorite candidate for that initial step. Each of these steps should have required some amount of accumulated change, which we identify as time. This is also to infer that these steps are ongoing, as time still flows...

If one were to have two identical photons leaving two emitters, and heading on parallel paths of equal distances, aimed at the two slits, hitting a screen, and both photons were measured by identical instruments, would the interference pattern continue to show the wave pattern due to both photons being affected identically? In other words, if measuring one photon destroys the wave pattern, could identical distortions (measurements) on both restore it in the theoretical sense?

I think we have free will, but within limits. That upper limit is established by the available substructure of the universe which the "operator" exists within. In our universe (given of a mathematical construct), the logical (durable) component of the "Mathematic bulk" codes for physical matter/energy, and the illogical ( transient) components can be accessed by the operator's brain (the observer), and the higher the awareness, more degrees of freedom in the approximate mimicry of the real world (perception) is possible as the limit reach is explored by compounding these transients into an internal roadmap.....given this, it seems awareness allows the illogical component to transitionally manifest (abstract thought) within logic (brain), then perturb the local environment via physical activity, and may determine the fermi paradox. . That is to say there is a primary downside (besides the obvious ones) to all this fancy thinking stuff as sentience approaches the free will limit. This would form a sort of "awareness entropy" as the sentient beings increasingly mistake the illogical data stream as a logical one (as the mimicry becomes closer to the perceived model, and therefore more powerful, with small errors amplified into big ones) and past a certain level, those errors will extinguish that sentient being, or community from the universe, or perhaps merely limit their perception at a point determined by biology rather than the limit established by the M-bulk. Since we are still in transition to that "bulk limit", we are of limited interest to any sentience that has made that leap past these amplified sentient perception errors, and are perhaps being carefully observed, if indeed it is possible for sentience anywhere having made that leap and avoid the awareness entropy curve within the arrangements given of this particular universe...

in considering the analogy to the electric field, which is ordinarily thought of as needing some associated material substrate in the macro world, but on the microscopic level the electron whirling around a nucleus doesn't have any carrier entity, and appears as a free agent....in considering black hole interiors, don't virtual particles appear everywhere, including that region? Why wouldn't they and if they did, how would that environment affect them? I suppose it would matter where within the interior they appeared. Doesn't the center of a BH have gravitational neutrality analogous to you standing in a hollowed out region at the center of the earth and being weightless? If so, they would separate at the horizon and there only, and be less affected if appearing either towards the center, or away into surrounding space?..Of course, what about dark matter? Wouldn't that get stuck in the field and contribute to overall field strength? If so, wouldn't the overall parameters of a BH need to include the dark matter contribution? Twin holes with identical geometric size might have identical overall masses, but the dark matter contribution could vary between them, so they wouldn't be truly identical. From what I have read about dark matter and it's lack of self interaction, it can never manifest into a BH by itself, and become a "dark black hole"...

his remarks seemed to indicate there was no interior, and if so, no singularity. It seems as though once a large gravitation field gets established, matter is not needed to sustain the field.

I heard Kip Thorne say that the matter falling into a black hole gets completely destroyed. If gravity can exist essentially on it's own, and no longer requires the matter which created the field, presumably having converted all matter energy into gravitational energy, is there any thinking on how to build a black hole directly, with some process needing no mass to "get it started", but by directly manipulating space ? If the black hole horizon is the place that virtual particles separate, could some induced "splitting" of a single virtual particle pair mimic some properties of a microscopic BH?

If you are using Iran as a specific example of the thrust of your idea, you may want to read "All the Shah's Men", about the CIA overthrow of the democracy that Iran had up to 1953. According to the book, the only place an uprising against the dictator, Shah Palevi could be planned was the secrecy allowed by the church.

Externet....as per wasting of bulb heating in the flue cavity, the top is capped except for a small hole in the glass at the top for the AC line to go in, so nowhere for the heat to go except into the water...I am losing some small efficiency as I leave the bottom partly open, to prevent moisture condensation inside the flue. I am saving up money for another 500 watts of solar and have all the batteries, wiring and conduit I need. When I switch to DC the thermostat will work as usual instead of the variac. I had tried the half-wave rectification briefly, but then went to a "2 bulb" idea, as I am using standard bulbs, and if one goes out, the second bulb with at least keep the tank from going cold, as it takes a full day to warm up a cold tank with this process. These are just standard incandescent bulbs, but with the lowered voltage to them they last for years. A standard electric water could be used of course, but the amperage would be more than my proposed small solar outfit could handle, so I am using the "slow and gentle" method along with keeping my hot water use to a minimum....thanks for your interest...

J. Cuthber, sorry, I meant "high resistance to water"....hoola

a light bulb down the flue is a "cheap resistance to water", and how does one store heat energy in direct conversion, when backup batteries do the job with the photovotaics? What about all the plumbing that direct heating would require with attendant pumps, and worry about freezing in winter when piping hot water directly from collector to tap? The point is to get off fossil fuels, not to switch to another one. And what about the expenses of adding a propane tank seems problematic, certainly more complex and expensive than the light bulb (cost $1) being dropped down a flue. The variac to control the ac voltage is the most expensive thing, and could be substituted with a standard light dimmer, or by juggling the wattage of the bulbs slightly lower and dispense with the controller altogether.

yes, and to further elaborate, virtual particles at minimum energy, or symmetrically simple orbits could provide the basic accelerative force of expansion, and when orbits distort and held past normal time signatures when proximate to matter, increase output of their local harmonic oscillator property and provide increased repulsive force, or gravity. If that is true, then gravity should be re-callibrated, based in units of the minimum energy level of space, or lamda. I have read about the shawyer EMG engine and have seen little about it lately, and am becoming afraid it may end up being another "cold fusion" type deal. But, for a while the microwaves "doing something" to space seemed pretty cool. I was thinking at the time that if microwaves actually distort virtual particle decay paths, that might constitute creating an artificial gravity within the EMG engine, which approximated thrust. So, if we could distort local gravity, perhaps with a modulation of signal amplitude, might that not allow a possible mode of communication to a partner universe, like early AM radio via the shared gravitational effect?

what if the idea of the other dimensions ( presumably within our universe) possibly interacting with our 3Ds were instead not interactions between dimensions, but between universes? Since our universe has virtual particles, and this proposed "partner" universe possibly has similar structures, and if the warpage of space, hence gravity, is tied to the changed orbital distortions in their emergence and recombination paths, then perhaps there is some interaction between another universe's VPs and ours, causing the dark matter effect. Perhaps a series of some sort of modified casimir effect tests could separate an anomaly that could be attributed to the partner's particles distorting ours, thus making the results uneven as the test drifts through various densities of partner particles? I would think the test would have to be conducted in space to avoid interference from the earth's gravitational noise. Perhaps the "closed loop" gravity inducing string is analogous the closed loop of a VP's creation / destruction process?..

I changed my gas water heater over to electric in a simple and cheap method when my local gas supplier hiked the base rate and minimum usage from $12 monthly up to $30. Since I don't use gas for any other function in the house, and use very little hot water, I tried a modification to the existing setup that has worked great for the last 2 years. I disconnected the gas, took off the flue, and placed a 100 watt light bulb down into the flue, extending about 2/3 of the way down, on a ceramic socket and high temp wire. I plug in the light bulb in series with a variac that regulates the voltage. I keep the variac set at about 50 volts in the summer and around 60 volts in the winter. I placed a glass cap over the flue with a small port to allow the wire to come out. The glass allows me to see if the light is on, as once the bulb fused and had to be replaced so I check on it on occasion. I use a conventional cheap incandescent, although heavy duty bubs are available and more reliable. I have plenty of hot water for bi-weekly showers, doing dishes and other small uses. I have a bimetal themostat mounted on the tank that shows a very steady 125 deg f. reading. Other than twice a year adjusting the variac, I never touch it, except when leaving town for a week or so, I turn down the variac to 40v. I have another house that has a feedback circuit that leaves a 40 watt bulb on constantly and turns on a 100 watt bulb when the temp goes below 115 deg. and off at 120 deg. I will eventually secure parts for the more complex arrangement here, but for now things work quite well. I never tried to figure out what my electrical cost for the single bulb running at half power all the time, but now I have one less bill to pay and figure my added electricity cost is considerably less than $30 monthly the gas company wanted to charge me. My next move is to connect my solar array to the hot water heater as the bulb can work fine with DC and I can dispense with any need for an inverter. It will have six 12 volt, 45 watt panels in series for approx 240 watts available at 72VDC at peak sunshine to heat the tank and will connect a set of six 12V, 7.2ah batteries hooked in series, across the DC input for storage. I will change to the more complex 2 bulb circuit with feedback regulation when converting over to solar later this month. As I plan on getting both houses "off the grid" as much as possible with photovoltaics, I figure the water heater is the place to get started.

thank you danijel, that is the answer I was seeking...

any serious responses to my energy equivalence question would be appreciated...otherwise don't respond....

I suppose the practical method of simply hooking up a 100watt light bulb to 120 vac, then subbing in 120 vdc and comparing the resultant luminosity could offer a way of determining the power relation between AC and DC...this relationship should transfer over to a heat element...thanks for all the good help guys !

I volunteer at a recycle center and am in charge of the electrical / electronics that comes in. I check over the stuff that comes in and can have almost anything I want, including flat screen tvs, stereos and computer stuff...we also get in tons (literally) of lead acid batteries and I have checked out and have accumulated 40 good ones, so my storage expenses are almost nothing...hence the plan to have the heaters ready for next winter....

well, acme, I never actually measured the current of a neon mini lamp....a rather insignificant value, I am sure.....

anyone in here collect vintage/early Apple stuff? I have been sitting some back rather that see it go to the crusher...

oh yeah, I forgot the 20ma pilot light !

I have no problem with disconnecting the heat element for dc, and run the fan, thermostat and pilot light on regular AC. A added relay will isolate the two systems, as the thermostat kicks on the fan, it will activate the relay which engages the DC to the heat element. My question is an energy equivalency question for the heat element, so as not to over-current the element, which I think I would do if I used 120vdc to it...

By having the thermostat not having to carry the heavy load of the heat element, and only a small fan and low current relay, this will save wear and tear on that component (often arc damaged) and shift the burden of heat off the grid and onto the solar/battery array...

the real question is....will 120 vac give the same energy to a fixed resistor that 84.84 vdc will give it?

I am going to series 24 volt solar cells to get the needed voltage, charging series wired 12v batteries to match. So the intended voltage will be higher that the standard 12v system...this will eliminate the inverter...

I am wanting to install a battery assisted solar array that provides a dc line to small (500 watts or so) passive resistance space heaters throughout the house. Since 120 vac converts to 84.84v RMS, wouldn't that be the voltage in DC to deliver an equivalent heating effect?