This is our August, 2005 editorial Go directly to 2005 August News

Have you noticed a huge turn in how folks are looking at energy? A recent issue of Science, 'Is It Time to Shoot for the Sun?,' 22Jul2005, p.548, is talking about how many square miles of solar cells Earth would need to displace current energy supplies. They say if we used nuclear power we would need 10,000 new power plants! That amazes us... Oil has just about had it. Probably not a bad thing in itself. Diesels are deadly, even with rigid emissions requirements. Trouble is, what do you do to replace that enormous torque? Electric motors can do it, but we don't have efficient power cells to run them. We could wire our superhighways and go to class 8 trollies... We took a similar approach to Science's solar cells on global warning in our main text below. Not such a great idea, but it's fun to read and think about. Our view of energy, is that availability is n¤t a problem, rather, learning how to extract energy from nature is our real problem. Energy is free. (Would reality 'exist' if energy were n¤t 'free?' Could reality sustain itself if energy were n¤t 'free?') Trouble is it costs money and n¤vel thinking to learn how to extract it. Reality IS energy, folks: quantum flux. It is ubiquitous and our one truly abundant and unlimited resource. So be enthusiastic about our energy prospects. We only need one pioneer with a ground-breaking spirit to open some quantum doors. "Hmmm...., now let me see, how is it that we can 'rectify' quantum isoflux..., hmmm...?" and "If I had a hammer, I'd hammer...all over this" omniverse. Edison probably would have figured it out by now... J We've been consumed in our David Bohm holomovement research, so we don't have much to offer here this month. Looks like Rove is gonna get a pass (similar Bernard Kerik) on offer of his resignation. Have you considered disproportionality of his (their) crimes, say, for example, to Martha Stewart's? Rove, in our opinion, should get a minimum of 10 years for outing that CIA 'agent.' 'Course, if you work for a presidential administration you are implicitly immune from the 'law.' "Institutions are above individuals." GW Bush. Little wonder more and more individuals find USA government undeserving of respect. Not sure about you, but we're ready to permute that culturally-corrupting society-disordering inversion of Values. We're tickled about Frist's vote in favor of stem cell research. Fundamentalist Christians fight it as hard as they support Intelligent Design. Most of those folk are biologically and medically inept due their rejection of emergent~adaptive~evolution as nature's intelligent approach to her unending emergence of reality. Can you imagine us allowing our country to be run by anyone with a troglodytic, neandertalibanic mind like that? Christians, like Muslims, have terrorism built into their historical bloodstreams. GW Bush is a fine exemplar and makes our point for us. 100,000 plus dead Iraqis. Nearly 2000 dead USA kids (but government folks' kids don't go???; are Bush's daughters exempt?). Nearly 50,000 US wounded. Now who is terrorizing whom? I cannot say strongly enough how much contempt, insolence and disrespect I feel toward GW Bush and his cronies. White, Christian dialectical fundamentalism is what G'Bush is all about. Ugh! Doug - 31Jul2005.

"...an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to [] phenomena nor to the agencies of observation." Niels Bohr Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature page 54, 1934, CUP. See Jammer, p. 91. "As the preceding quotations clearly show, Bohr's 1927 conception of complementarity referred, above all, to the impossibility of carrying out a causal description of atomic phenomena which, at the same time, is also a space-time description." Max Jammer The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics page 92, 1974, Wiley. "Societies may not validly and verifiably protect individual rights using 'laws' borne of dialectic." Doug - 1Aug2005 .

2005 TQS News December, 2004 through November, 2005

Month:

JAN

FEB

MAR

APR

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

NOV

DEC

You are here:

Topics:

tsunamis, Goldsworthy, ESS, Scorsese, Stronach, Marthas, quantum WJS, Forrester, etc.

global warming rant, what is democracy?, Imus, TV, fav flicks list & why?   & vPod, our fav TV ad, Apple's Itunes & IPod, Quantonics'   gravidation videos, Banesh on de Broglie, Who likes Quantonics?, etc.

why we cannot  fix global warming,

a GW last jab, social security, cell chips, etc.

Michael Lynch on Where Is Liberal Passion? etc.

Relook at EU, Cuneiform, & Questions from Mitch...

Tea, A sound track, Whitepaper stuff, Quantonics OS X, Inflation, etc.

A silly GW fix, computer pathologies,

Doug rants on Intelligent Design, Status on Quantum Holography, Doug offers his best quantum~affective expectation of global warmings' current cyclings

Russert, Katrina, & Dialectical Christ

Libby indictment

Murtha gets it, Libby's foot?, Why WJS hated religion, Still a Republican? "Rewrite History?," A Sting WinWinWin, Admin calls US 'the people,' Talk/Walk vis-à-vis Walk/Talk, Confidentiality of News: Society vis-à-vis Individual?, Technologies vis-à-vis Quantologies, Can meaning be unambiguous?, and Our Earthshaker!,

August, 2005 News:

For fun we have been trying to imagine some contraptions Kyoto Accord envirnomentalists might come up with to fix 'global warming.'

Let's assume that their rationale leads them to a conclusion that if they held our oceans' sea levels constant that would somehow mitigate Earth's 'human-caused' 'global warming' problem.

Their solution involves pumping ocean water into large storage tanks.

• First problem is how large would those storage tanks have to be. (There are unbounded other problems like where do we get pumps (how many, how big, etc.) and energy (how much, from where, how to distribute, etc.) to do pumping, etc. We are limiting our solution to a few simple classical notions. Doug.)
• Second problem is where can we put these storage tanks?
• Third problem is what are envirnomental issues involved with such an operation: how big an impact on environment would that be?
• Fourth problem is how much will it cost?
• Fifth problem is how many Earth folk will agree to do it, given costs and envirnomental impacts?
• Sixth problem... you can use your imagination here...

Gedankenment - If we lowered oceans' levels one foot how much storage capacity would we need?

We need a volume assessment. Classical volume of a sphere (Earth is an animate oblate spheroid) is 4/3••r³. So volume varies, classically, as radius cubed.

So what do we need to do? We want to calculate Earth's volume using Earth's radius plus one foot, then calculate Earth's volume using Earth's radius, and subtract latter from former. We need to multiply our result by 0.7 since water covers about 70% of Earth's surface.

What part of a mile is one foot? Answer: 0.000189394 (using our trusty HP 12c) which is 1/5280.

What is Earth's radius? Recall says Earth's diameter is about 7850 miles, so Earth's (non oblate, ideal spherical) radius is 3925 miles, right?

We need to cube 3925, and cube 3925.000189394.

3925³ = 6.046707...•10¹⁰

3925.000189394...³ = 6.046708...•10¹⁰

multiply by 4/3•• and take our difference:

2.532839...•10¹⁰ - 2.532838...•10¹⁰ = 36,500 cubic miles of water.

Earth's surface is only covered by water about 70%, so multiply our result by 0.7 and we get 25,550 cubic miles.

Now where can we store over 25,550 cubic miles of water? Texas? Hmmm... Washington D.C.? Interesting... Africa? Warming... err, ummm, cooling... J

Antarctica is 5,500,000 square miles of ice averaging one mile thickness. We do not know, so we are assuming all of that ice is above sea level. If any of it is below sea level, we need to subtract that from 5,500,000 prior to doing following calculations. So what if all that ice melted? How many feet of ocean rise might we anticipate? Using our 25,550 cubic miles per foot number we can divide that into 5,500,000 square miles and get feet of rise of oceans: 5,500,000/25,550 = 215+ feet! And that's not counting Arctic! Notice an error in our arithmetic. Our number is too high! Why? Each foot of radius we add to Earth's radius is a larger volume than previous one, so we need to take a 'di' fferent approach. We need to calculate radius given cubic miles of ice. Another problem is whether a cubic mile of ice is a cubic mile of water. It is not, but that error is not as significant as our previous one. Also, we need to worry about a hotter atmosphere containing more water vapor vis-à-vis a cooler atmosphere. This stuff, even when one is attempting to do something 'simple,' isn't. And envirnomental scientists want to blame Earth borne processes for Earth's global warming! Seems a tad naïve to us...

We set up a spreadsheet to do this more quickly. Allocate c4 as Earth's radius in miles. Allocate c5 as delta-radius in feet. Allocate f7 to do cubic miles of water calculations like this:

We assume our HP 12c and Excel results are notably omniffering due precision of npu and algorithms used in calculations. For example, where 4/3 cuts off significant digits in decimal mantissa would have an affect and whether pi is a built-in or was entered by Doug. Quantum reality IS uncertain!!! Regardless what classical envirnomental 'scientists' say.

We're self-acclaimed and technically proficient envirnomental scientists now, so let's come up with something 'mathematically elegant' and 'mechanically symmetrical' to implement our proposed solution. What does our approximately 25,500 cubic mile result remind us of? Earth's circumference! Wow!!

Let's put one cubic mile storage containers along Earth's circumference! Do we use equator? A meridian? Meridians go through poles, so freezing would be a hell of a problem! We can decide that later... We can leave gaps for shipping lanes! Wow!! Mitigation of Atlantic hurricanes! Cooling of Earth's poles! Weather ('not' whether?) control! We can have "ocean prix" races on top of them and go like hell with no obstacles for thousands of miles! We'll have emergency airports and docking marinas all around Earth! We can integrate an enormous particle accelerator into our structure! We can integrate a rail gun thousands of miles long for launching satellites without rocket fuel burning! We can integrate global distribution desalination capabilities! We can put Super BLT telescopes every mile of Earth's entire circumference! We can build cities and grow crops all around Earth's circumference. We could build in contrarotating rings and turn Earth into a massive fermionic boson. "Spaceship Earth!!!" And just thingk, if an asteroid strikes earth we have an asteroid shield against the other side... Or with our bosonic capabilities we can just 'dodge' inbound asteroids!!! "Set me free..., 1, 2, 3,..., " Just thingk of all that we can do with our solution to global warming... Spaceship Earth borne of envirnomental 'science.' J

Now let's engineer a single one cubic mile container and see how much material it will take and how much it will cost. Oh-oh, we have to worry about floating and anchoring these things in mid ocean too. Let's see, what else? Japan's gonna love this!!

We're trying to be funny. We're trying to show you what scale of effort is required to terraform Earth's responses to global warming. Whatever envirnomental scientists and politicians decide, we can assure you it will be at least as ridiculous as our funny? proposal above.

This rank of classical thingking by envirnomentalists and SOMwitted politicos keeps moving Doug closer and closer to transition and n¤vel iterationings...

...

On computer viruses and phages, etc...

Today we, for some reason, were recalling old days of computing. By "old days" we mean HP 1116s with core memory. Any of you who worked with HP software back then recall that core memory offered no hardware capability to enforce ROMesque behaviors. HP's OS folk used that to advantage whenever we did a JSR (jump to subroutine), instead of pushing a stack, hardware put our return to address at entry point of code we are entering. Of course today, such antics are viewed as pathological and certainly non objective.

However, from any AI perspective, and from any viral defense perspective there is enormous advantage in understanding advantages Jekyll~Hyde lurking in notions of self modifying code. Most viruses depend upon self-reference and self-modification to work.

It seems, on our quantum stages, that some answers to our PC virus problems (not yet on MACs, we're referring Win$Tel) are hiding in those 'ancient' practices.

Long ago, there was an article in one of then popular computing journals on an operating system based upon "good viruses."

Also, compare how our memes and memeos ilk our thoughts here apply to terrorists and terrorism.

Doug - 3Aug2005.

...

See you here again in early September, 2005!

Doug.

Index

J