I’ve been banned from Physics Forums for being a “crackpot”.  Oh how well I live?

     If wanting theories to agree with the actual facts is a crackpot so be it.  The old saying that science advances one death at a time is too true.

     I will remain opposed to the Big Bang and the half dozen fudge factors that need to be randomly added to make it work.  Same for the latest impending big collapse.

     What laws of physics drive inflation?  Can we demonstrate them in the lab?  Where is the Dark Matter we need to explain why galaxies don’t behave the way our understanding of gravity says they should?

     How can we measure or observe dark energy in the lab?

     None of these things are observable because they’re all made up to prop up a broken theory.

     If you believe in something without any evidence, it’s religion not science, and that’s what we have at Physics Forums.

     Articles are running in various science magazines telling us that the universe may be on the brink of a collapse.  In those same magazines there are articles telling use CERN is starting up this weekend at unprecedented energy levels that may reveal mini black holes.

     Perhaps these two are not coincidental.  If Steven Hawkins is wrong, and these mini black holes do not evaporate as predicted, but instead stick around sucking up more and more material around them, until the entire Earth is swallowed, for us, our visible universe will have collapsed.

     Honestly though I’m not too worried, CERN is capable of producing slightly over a trillion electron volt energy levels, that’s 1×10¹², where as naturally occurring cosmic rays top out at over 1×10¹⁶ electron volts.  If CERN was going to create these mini black holes, and if they didn’t evaporate rapidly as Steven Hawkins has predicted, then cosmic rays slamming into atmospheric particles would have already done this for us and I would be writing this with a very small font.

     If, on the other hand, you hear a giant sucking sound followed closely by being crushed to death, well, you’ll know I was wrong.

A “severe” geomagnetic storm may bring the Aurora’s south.  Weather permitting, look north tonight!

Geomagnetic storm may bring the Northern Lights south.

It’s my belief that uranium, concentrated in the Earth’s crust, gradually sinks towards the core-mantle boundary where it occasionally concentrates to the point where a fission chain reaction occurs.  At that point, increased heat and convection disperses it.

If this were not the case, volcanic plumes would not originate at the core-mantle boundary because there is no ongoing source of heat at the core.  The core itself is mostly iron in which uranium and it’s oxides don’t readily dissolve.  So the core does not have heat from ongoing radio-active decay or fission.

We know fission must be taking place because He³ is present in mid-ocean rift gases.  If the only source of heat were normal radio active decay and not a fission chain reaction, we would find only He⁴ since He³ is not produced in normal radioactive decay.

I’ve been a proponent of the Many Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics for years because it best agrees with experimental evidence, and it makes intuitive sense.

I am better able to wrap my mind around the idea that an infinite number of parallel universe exist than I am the idea that our observation is required to bring something out of quantum superimposition into determined reality.

In my view, the Copenhagen interpretation is actually kind of an epiphenomena of the many worlds interpretation.  If the observer in the act of observing an event that can go two ways and does, the observer bifurcates at that point along with the rest of the universe, and so each observer that results saw what happened when the even went a particular direction.

In the traditional view of the Many Worlds interpretation, once that bifurcation takes place, each child universe is totally unaware of the other.

In the new Many Interactive Worlds interpretation there is an interesting rub, the two universes do continue to interact on a quantum level.

This makes perfect sense to me as I would expect that every particle in a given child universe would be quantum entangled with it’s brother in the other child universe, and so quantum interaction between these many worlds would be expected.

There are a couple of interesting ramifications.  The first is that this theory might be testable by designing a test that exploits expected interactions.

The second interesting ramification is that this universe may not be as deterministic as many would like to believe because it is not a closed system given this interaction with parallel worlds.  I think there is much observational evidence of this.

It also suggests a quantum immortality, and I wonder if it’s not responsible for some of the Deja Vu phenomena.  If we come to a point of our death, the event leading to our death is another decision point, it could go one way or the other, in this universe we die, in the parallel universe that bifurcated off at that point we live, and so this tree of life/death universal bifurcation could go on infinitely and in that sense, somehow in some parallel world we’d always exist.

Anyone who is familiar with resonance has to wonder how resonances might cross the world boundaries and by that affect things in different worlds, especially in the realms of thoughts and emotions since quantum level effects seem to be involved in the operation of our synapses.

I’ve read that the rod receptors have a temporal resolution on the order of 50-100ms while the cone receptors have a resolution of around 10-15ms, therefore rods should only be able to detect an intermittent light source flicker of 10-20 HZ while cones should be able to detect intermittent light source flicker of 66-100 Hz.

Since the fovea, that part of the retina that is more densely packed near the center of your vision, contains more cones and few rods, one would think it would be able to detect flicker at higher frequencies than the periphery but this is contrary to my experience.

In the center of my vision I can perceive flicker at 60Hz marginally at 70Hz, not at all at 75Hz, under fairly bright lighting conditions, but at the periphery I can sometimes see the 120Hz flicker of fluorescent lighting and easily see the flicker of tube monitors even at 75Hz.

This seems pretty much backwards from what I would expect given the normal temporal response of rods and cone cells and their populations in the fovea and periphery.

I’ve heard it postulated that parallel universes could potentially interact with our own via gravitational forces only.

It occurred to me however that if they could interact gravitationally, then there is a way they could interact electromagnetically indirectly.

Here is my thought in a nutshell; in universe A, a strong radio source exists.  It causes an oscillation of electrons in a conductor of finite length such that the concentration of electrons in any one part of the conductor varies with time according to the electromagnetic field.

The electrons have mass, therefore their movement sets up a slight gravitational oscillation.

That gravitational oscillation effects matter in universe B, some of which consists of charged particles.  Those oscillating charged particles setup an electromagnetic field in universe B.

The net effect is some portion of an oscillating magnetic field makes it from universe A to B indirectly.  Whether it’s enough to be detectable remains a question.

There were four significant meteor events last night.  One meteor was seen from half a dozen states which indicates that it grazed the atmosphere rather than descending vertically.  A significant meteor event is defined as an event reported by 25 or more people.

There have been 13 events this month, where the average is 4-5.  This may be due in part to people anticipating the arrival of comet Ison and the big event over Russia recently that injured more than 1000 people and thus more people looking up.

I can’t help but wonder though if that is all it is, or if when something dislodges an object from the Kuiper belt and it becomes a comet, does it not also dislodge some smaller stuff into a similar trajectory?

Whatever be the case, there have been some spectacular events for people to see if they are in the right place at the right time.

Those of you who know me know I’m not a big fan of the big bang theory.  There are way too many fudge factors to make it even come close to working and still there is data that doesn’t fit into the theory.  Here is yet another example: