Norman Albers

I read something (zpenergy) that supercapacitors are being strongly developed to usable battery capability. Who's got the scoops here? We need such things in many application scales. I remember the Princeton tokomak with its own two-story flywheel and walls of capacitors, to average the grid drawdown with pulsed operation.

I heard recently that saliva is a disinfectant. Think on the fact that every opening in our body is dependent upon a continually refreshed wash of mucous coat. If our lungs did not have a mucous escalator continously running up and out, how long do you think it would take to fill up like a vacuum bag? (Calcs, please.) Surely it would be good design to have here a barrier to bacteria of the outer world. Starting with tubeworms, life is that which declares an inside from an outside, no? Back to the topic, smush up plantain and saliva and spit on the wounds of those you love!

This is why snowfall is so beautiful. Also, sailing in wind. Here, I watch hang-gliders.

When you need to do something crazy from being tired of going nuts, make up book or movie titles that NEVER MADE IT. Give us your best three. Mine: "EXODUST" (Leon Uris); "THE CHARMED, THE STRANGE, AND THE UP-DOWN" (Gell-Mann); "THE BIBLE" (CRC Tables).

Relevant quantum numbers: <n,l,m> . For n=1, l must be zero. For n=2, l may be zero or one; m may vary between +/- l. Photons carry spin one; this must be exchanged. States of l=n-1 are circular; the s,p,d,f...are l=0,1,2,3. What the heck were those selection rules? Energy depends on n and l.

Given normal and thorough mastication of your turkey you will remain in the realm of a few electron volts, because that's about the energy of chemical bonds, I think. I'm not sure about carbon, but as noted, 13.6 volts is high in these realms. This actually gives me pause for thought: why is it that so many things are just so: visible sunlight energies, common chemistry energies, batteries, and us........................................earth, air, fire, water....................................If you posses thermonuclear teeth, on the other hand, or if you place the turkey in the THERMONUCLEAR BOX, you can really do some cooking!!! Quite a few magnitudes more.

By "this" I mean the depiction of mass/energy densities affecting the geometry of spacetime by a smoothly describable change under differential transplantation. Do I recall correctly the sense of affine connections? Adler, BAzin, Schiffer, p44: speaking of "a general law for transplantation of a vector psi^i at the point 'x' into the quantities ..............psi^i + d(psi^i) at the point x + dx. It is a law of affine character; that is, it has invariant structure under a linear transformation of the coordinates."

Are you speaking of the first, or outermost ionization? (Howz my trmnlogy?) Nwaogu, yo! Individual absorption events are more discreet than I think you are saying, but on the average with steady illumination, what you say makes sense.

As far as technologies I cannot be specific but many people are messing with ideas involving the quantum "zero-point" radiation field. I figure it would be cool if we can get our understanding together, and I think it is not. I see myself as a PURE THEORIST, one who deals in PURE B******T. When I finally reach a stage of calculating a number, it puts me in a panic for a few days.

I see us as mathematicians and storytellers. We can, up to a point, move the audience with the idea that "masses produce forces at a distance". We experience this and so any story which expresses what we experience draws our applause. Then the next storyteller speaks of "rubber membranes" which draw things along their characteristic curves. We know damned well there is not rubber here, but this is a very good story that tells us something of how space and its contents are connected. Affine connections deal with the smooth connection of vector fields in differentially small neighboring locales. This gives us a better handle on just how that force gets out to that distance. We applaud, and realize how subtle it is to know anything at all! I use some beautiful old textbooks, one written in 1928. I say that becuase the writers are entirely lucid in presenting their structures and their limitations. By being clear on all assumptions they give me the opportunity to take off with new ones! How nice to read, "If the reader is confused by the assumptions behind Planck's black-body spectrum, this confusion is no greater than that which existed in the minds of the participants in 1911."

I lost patience with a person in another forum who is very difficult to communicate with, and I typed, "Go learn some realativity". You cannot do this stuff if you are trying!!!

The uncharitable could say I should be embarrassed to even speak here because I am not well trained at the level on which you speak. I have spent time at the semi-classical level because I found it producing useful results, as stated in my two papers. At one point where I was tempted to give up because quantum mechanics can be so intimidating, I finally realized I am doing something parallel and possibly different. Either the physics I depict mathematically is answered to in QM or not, but no one is saying!

I ran two ideas together. There is the concept of colony and organism arising from a large collection of simple elements. Then there is cultural growth with its own dynamics. I love your misspelling of 'incumbents' to encumbents. That's partway to encumbered, and I like that. Thanks for your support, mate.

This sign is on my neighbor's front porch. I think an important principle has been touched on here and there, here, namely that of thresholds. Given a very large multiplicity of simple elements (doy) new forms of organization manifest. Look at cultural changes which I see happening with a sort of 100-year component. Maybe it takes three generations to absorb and create the desire to move beyond what was given to us. This principle is surely relevant at every level.

Was this not the original question? Also, yes, energy over c-squared is equally a source of gravitation. I see mass as just "canned light". Eat supper and enjoy molecularly "canned light". What else is there?

Light we can understand as E and M fields pushing each other along. THE NEWS IS THAT GRAVITY AFFECTS THIS FIELD PHENOMENON AS IT DOES WHAT WE CALL MASS. Where our vision is short is in using the word mass in the first place!

We understand that bound states (particles) exchange quantized photons, and thus we created a quantum mechanics of them. It seemed appropriate to speak of "ficticious oscillators" as though somehow the field knew this as its only possibility. This is a wrong-headed assumption, and looking at wave packet localzation I conclude that the "photon field" has a phenomenology which bunches, or localizes, disturbances at whatever magnitude. Locally, energy density and angular momentum density have a ratio of omega, but the global total of angular momentum in the packet may be fractional compared to the usual units of Planck's constant. Absorbing atoms with their selection rules of unit change in angular momentum are what declares the quantized currency of exchange. Thus it is not appropriate to assign a ground state default of 1/2h-bar necessarily for every available mode. Now if we allow fractional states in the range <0,1>, this would be phenomemologically different at some level of physics, and I don't yet know where to point. At low energies, there would be present the same energy total if all modes automatically have 1/2 unit energy or if they average that! I produce a diverging situation as energy rises, though, with a Boltzmann-like term, and it seems to me this is rightly applied at both calculation points in my Dark Energy paper. This changes the population and shifts it toward zero where we have treated it as 1/2 going up to some cooked-up cutoff.

With any 1/r potential such as electric or gravitational fields, the force inside of any spherical shell is zero, period! Now if you came from outside to be there, work was done and energy exchanged. Once you are through the spherical shells, though, work is finished. This is assuming there is no further mass at lesser radius.

Rather than repeat it all here, check out our discussion in the thread, Implications ...Unified... and the thread, Quan...+Relat.... I see reason to say that our quantum theorization of vacuum energies is not complete.

I don't mean that at all as a blowoff, either. This is what I came for. What if our quantum vacuum theory is not complete because the field is not necessarily quantized?

I went to Princeton on Grumman Aircraft Co. scholarship tuition. I was also a National Merit Scholar. What I did was present my desire cogently.

Your most important feelings are those that rankle, saying something is not right, or not finished. Trust them utterly. Norman Albers

In 1968 I worked 20 hrs/wk as a research assistant for NASA, and my prof showed me how to do fourth-order Runge-Kutta numeric integration to optimize a low-thrust rocket simply going from Earth orbit to a "far" orbit such as Saturn. To my continued amazement the Lagrangian quantity told you when to shut off your thruster! Optimal is to fire at first to change momentum, then you see the "L" goes through zero and you coast for the middle journey, then "L" comes back through zero and you turn back on to insert in the far orbit. THIS IS MATHEMATICAL MAGIC and I still wonder at it. Norm Albers

When I understand all that you offer me, the cows will come home and it will be a nice evening. Norm

Please understand that I come sort of from nowhere and am poorly trained at where you speak but am quite ready to apprehend I hope. You know, over the years I have said quite a few times, "This is my nth approach to quantum mechanics. Surely this time I will see further." Well, n=about 7, now, and things are coming together. I am honored to talk with you. What do you mean by trans-Planckian? I see smoothness until ultimately small wtf.