(Subtitle) Celebrating those who have been fooled by Nature
Welcome to this special blog for April Fool’s Day, 2015. Let’s get to some traditional humor first, then we can get back to the new items, and the serious science-stuff afterward.
It gives me great pleasure to announce the promotion of the C-R theory’s faithful mascot, the Jester. He is being promoted from (lowly) couch potato, to [Corporate] Suite potato paygrade. Hearty Congratulations are in order.
A brief quote from the Jester is: My favorite days of the workweek are – the ones that are already over!!
And speaking of the Jester, for those who did not get to read his report from the April Fool’s Day blog back in 2012, click-on his FISH STORY to read all about it.
A new 2015 answer to an age-old, unanswered question, taken from Alice In Wonderland:
Q: Why is a raven like a writing desk?
A C-R theory revised presentation, created to be added-in to my April Fool’s Day blog: I have pondered enough to create a new, humorous answer to Lewis Carroll’s, age-old, unanswered question: Why is a raven like a writing desk? {NOTE: In today’s popular media, the current-collective wisdom suggests (and now accepts) this as the best conventional answer: Because, Poe wrote on both of them!!!}
In keeping-up with the story of Alice In Wonderland, I slightly revised my answer from a few years back, in a previous blog, to suggest an answer to that question that is more in keeping with the paradoxes in situations, with the sense – nonsense tradition, that gives the fable’s dialog it’s endearing charm.
New Answer: A raven has an ink black quill, whereas a writing desk has an “ink-black” well.
Explanation, in an audio-visual sense: 1. In audio, they’re almost identical [answers], sound-wise, but, 2. In a visual sense, simultaneously, the answers are nothing alike (or nonsense).
NOTE: If you say, out loud [and very rapidly, repeating to yourself each answer at least 3 times]: ink black quill, “ink-black” well, ink black quill, … you might start to sense the similarity of the answers, to your ear, audio-wise.
To appreciate this new {and better?} answer, imagine two of your favorite argumentative characters from the story above, debating the answers, one (listening) claiming: Hear hear, they’re almost identical, and the other adamantly arguing (visually): See, they’re nothing alike.
The C-R theory’s favorite “ove rSTu ffed” Top Ten list of Puns (and Jokes?)
[ refer to the month’s & year’s blog listed within the brackets , to find the original pun ]
1. A Black-Hole C-R is a mass-sieve body. [Many possible link locations]
2. “Who are you gonna believe, Me [ as in: the Theory of Relativity ], or your own two eyes?” {a quote from Chico Marx, who almost never got the funny or witty lines} – (Author’s Italics Added to denote the applicability to relativity) — [April, 2012 Blog] and
[Jan. 2011 blog]
3. de Sky’s the Limit, – or – “Disguise the Limit”; We Cannot Tell the Difference
[Sept. 2011 blog]
4. What *LIES at the center of a Black-Hole C-R ? : –
[the singularity being the chief *LIE] [Oct. 2012 blog]
5. The Cat’s in the bag (of tricks), – or – What Fur? —
Rubbing Science the Wrong Way [June, 2013 blog]
6. Alight at the end of the Funnel [Oct. 2012 blog]
7. Ohm, Ohm on the Range, – or – Cooking with Electricity —
A Short(ing) Story [June, 2013 blog] & [Sept. 2011 blog]
8. It’s now twice as good!! Our Double-Standard Answer:
Why gravity is felt outside of a Black-Hole C-R , but not heat, light, electrical charge, and spin. [Mar. 2011 blog]
9. A Cosmic Raise? [Nov. 2012 blog]
10. A Simple Funnel Diagram, – or – (pour performance?) [Nov. 2012 blog]
11. Look Ma!! No Branes (or A No Brainer) [May 2014 blog]
12. Even though we live in the Digital age, Mainstream Science is showing “The Wrong Digit ” to the C-R theory [June, 2013 blog]
13. EXPAND Your KNOWLEDGE, yes, but not the SIZE -of YOUR UNIVERSE [Sept. 2011 blog]
14. Gravity is kind-of like Seniority, i.e., no time, no pull [Oct. 2012 blog]
15. (re)-WRITING a WRONG [Sept. 2011 blog]
16. Should we just let the rules slide? [Oct. 2012 blog]
17. Entropy or not Entropy, THAT is the Question? : [Oct. 2012 blog]
18. Choosing the right “FOOL” [i.e., me] for the right job [Oct. 2012 blog]
19. {According to} Relativity: If “c” ain’t FIXED, it’s broken. [Dec. 2012 – Jan. 2013 blog]
20. If a stopped clock is right twice a day, how does it know?
21. If a clock could talk: What would it tell time? ( Chose one )
a: You said the same thing yesterday.
b. That wasn’t what you told me a minute ago!!!
c. You may be right, but it still ticks me off.
d. I’d like a second’s opinion.
22. Honor and Off(er?) – or – (An) Off(er) You Can’t Refuse —- and
It cannot go offer than OFF [Mar. 2011 blog]
23. Suggesting where the errors LIE , to the LAY persons [Mar. 2011 blog]
___________________________________________________________
Open forum question: Is it more likely that something is wrong with our universe, or that the earth-science that has been used to understand our universe is wrong? – Build upon that.
Punnops:
[Our new special word-term for Pun opportunities: Our opportunity to create new and relevant puns for the C-R theory, recognizing special situations, such as:
Kicking-Out any one Supermassive Black-Hole C-R from some duo-trio groupings = the new pun: high velocity “sails”-force — [may kick-out the one with the most mass to lose].
Insert them into headlines EVERYWHERE, if they are relevant.
Punnops are also our best opportunities to create or derive new puns to include somewhere within the C-R theory’s headlines.
Punnop: For all practical purposes, every Neutral Zone C-R is only a temporary storage container, or holding-state of affairs. They are NEVER designed as a permanent condition!!!!! (need a good pun here)
Punnop: Are ALL stars powered by Black-Holes C-R ?
Even white dwarf and brown dwarf stars? An All Star line-up
Punnop: Add-up all the lightning-bolt amperage totals from one average day’s thunderstorms = total current? Yearly and daily total #’s.
Pun: Lightning: the load – or – Strike-up the band, … bolting, … re:volting
NEW PUN: You will reap what you sow (from a Black-Hole’s C-R inside), after you rip what you sew(-up) inside. {By ripping-open the Neutral Zone C-R } [July 2010]
The Big Bang’s Reigning Beauty Queen: Miss Understanding
A Special Invitation:
A C-R theory goal for 2015: We would like to invite mainstream science to hold *a Permanent “Name Retirement Party” for the term: Event Horizon , then, may it R.I.P. forever more, never to mislead anyone again. [or, ironically fitting: *an Event Horizon for the use of the scientific term, Event Horizon , as a final event, if you will]
New Items for April, 2015
On the cover of the April, 2015 issue of Scientific American, there is an explanation of a new concept, trying to explain the dilemma to science, of whether or not information is lost inside a conventional black hole, and whether quantum mechanics, or general relativity is wrong.
This is a problem that the C-R theory has already solved, 30 years ago, although mainstream science has not accepted that solution. I will comment upon the article, then give the C-R theory response.
A Firewall is Missing –
Part of conventional wisdom’s thinking about conventional black holes originally thought that a singularity resided at the center of each one. With some newly revised thinking, the cover article, Burning Rings of Fire , by Joseph Polchinski, starting on page 36, describes some new possibilities, where immediately inside the event horizon* [* a term the C-R theory claims will misguide reader’s thinking, and mislead them], this article’s author now speculates lies a very hot firewall.
Let me quote part of one sentence from the beginning of this article, (from page 38), “… if enough mass comes together, gravity’s pull will cause it to start collapsing. Nothing can stop this process until all the mass is compressed into a single point…”
A C-R theory response:
These sentences are where the mistakes above were made. It is only when enough mass comes together, that the new region [now the inside part] closes-off. This creates at least one initial Schwarzschild radius, which establishes the Black-Hole’s C-R outer perimeter. The text should read, gravity’s “pull” ceases immediately after any mass crosses this Schwarzschild radius. [“Gravity” loses it’s handles, to influence matter, once mass traverses across this barrier. Having surrendered 100%, or ALL gravitational energy-potential already, mass cannot lose any more energy.]
Once matter enters this region, gravitationally, this mass is then already at it’s lowest-possible gravitational potential, and cannot go any lower. Further inward, crossing a Schwarzschild radius, proceeding back into real-time, again, matter there is always worth more energy, gaining more energy, with values increasing all the way “down*” into the uncurved center, where the energy-value is at a maximum. Matter at “lowest-energy” cannot be allowed inside, without picking-up more energy. It cannot be permitted to do so, until the escape velocity decreases to “below ‘c’ level”.
Unlike a conventional black hole, curvature is MAXIMUM at the Schwarzschild radius, and decreases to zero [or minimum] at the center. This solution “Fixes” the problem of a probable collapse, and stabilizes the Black-Hole’s C-R inside portions.
Technically, the Black-Hole C-R portion only exists at the Schwarzschild radius, for a new Black-Hole C-R , or between an inner and outer Schwarzschild radius, once the Black-Hole C-R starts filling-up, by eating mass. Between the Schwarzschild radii, the escape velocity is above the speed-of-light. Both inside and outside of the Black-Hole C-R , in normal space, the escape velocity is always below “c”.
Back to the Scientific American article: The unsolved problem with this new approach is that what lies further inside, past the Schwarzschild radius, is still just as unknown, and un-approachable, as the previous singularity. At least this new approach is one small step in the right direction, but still a giant leap short of the C-R theory’s total, more-comprehensive, system-wide insights.
While the C-R theory does not believe this view is correct, it is progress away from the obsessive thinking, both about the singularity, and the “cult” of the event horizon. That is a welcome change, hoping that with this break from convention, the door is opened a bit, to consider the “more reasonable”, full-treatment scenario involving the C-R theory’s ideas.
I do strongly recommend discarding any use of the idea of the event horizon , and instead fully concentrate on ALL OF the roles performed or fulfilled by the Schwarzschild radius. It is this barrier’s special properties that block communication from inside leaking out, to the outside. To truly unlock the key to understanding this chief part of the Black-Hole C-R , the Schwarzschild radius needs to be the prime focus of one’s thinking. Without this key, nothing conventional theory realizes is sufficient to overcome the world’s false assumptions.
I would still recommend reading the article, then compare the net aftermath of the actions of this new firewall concept covered, to those expected-results, written-about in the C-R theory, and in my blogs. Note: Other than solving the dilemma of the singularity, little else is gained in a practical testability of the firewell concept.
NEW for 2015:
Definition: A Black-Hole C-R is a temporary “storage container” for mass, designed to self destruct.
In the C-R theory approach, the ongoing reports of high currents, stray electrical charges, energetic electrons, multiple-ionized protons, energetic cosmic rays, polarized radiation, recur in almost every new report, in ways conventional theory has never wanted or expected. The C-R theory is unique in demanding high levels of just this type-of phenomena going on, everywhere we look, in every direction, in almost every system we observe!! When will science learn to recognize these persistent patterns, and connect the dots, interlinking all of these phenomena to ongoing, everyday processes?
A key difference in the C-R theory is that our Black-Holes C-R never face an information paradox. From before a Black-Hole C-R comes into existence, until the final catastrophic energy and matter release, everything that enters the Black-Hole C-R is cared-for, planned to help in it’s own, eventual recovery, and freshly restored.
I will not cover the full recovery scenario here, but it is available from past blogs, or from the theory itself.
In contrast to the conventional thinking, the C-R theory concept is supported by at least 100 types of known phenomenon, with a recognizable set of distinct, specific, and unique patterns, producing major effects superimposed over most of the items on the full list. Most of those items are NOT wanted or expected by conventional science, and there is no common thread linking them to a specific type of plan.
Mainstream science has overlooked hundreds of electrically-based phenomena, looking with their blinders-on, and NOT SEEING the obvious, or what should have been obvious, to even the most-casual observer. Ignoring the simplest answer, that contributions from electromagnetic forces do explain ALL of the discrepancies in these observations, they look for dark matter and dark energy, never finding any evidence for either of them.
[If the phenomena & evidence-list is ready, post it here and link to it.]
From NASA’s New MAVEN [Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN]:
You can add these two new observations from NASA’s MAVEN, to the list of phenomena supporting a C-R theory like universe. There is a bright new Mars Aurora, seen in ultraviolet, spanning the Northern hemisphere just noticed for the first time. An article about the ultraviolet Aurora quoted Arnauld Stiepen, a team member from the University of Colorado saying: “The electrons producing it must be really energetic.” The same article also stated that the source of those energetic electrons appears to be our sun.* [*Thank you for these gifts to the C-R theory. From our C-R Management]
(the above excerpted from a NASA press release, dated 03-18-2015)
http://mars.nasa.gov/news/whatsnew/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowNews&NewsID=1789
The C-R theory claims that Aurora-like activity is evidence for ample quantities of stray (excess) electrical charges seen on most planets, and even on several moons, causing thunderstorms, lightning, and conventional auroras.
There is also a dust belt, some 150-300 km. (93-190 miles) above Mars surface, with dust particles suspended in Mars very light atmosphere, about 1% of earth’s available air pressure. NOTE: The C-R theory suspects that the dust levitation is likely due to excess static-electrical charges, or negative ions, providing most of the support for levitating the dust particles, rather than due to the kinetic energy of motion from tenuous air particles.
Welcome to the new Magnetospheric MultiScale mission [MMS]
We welcome the launch of 4 identical satellites, dedicated to tracking magnetic reconnection, and investigating powerful bursts of charged particles ejected from the sun, on their way towards earth. These satellites should make discoveries connected to earth’s auroras, both Northern and Southern lights. The C-R theory expects great “gifts” from these observations, when they are released.
This new set of 4 satellites is dedicated to studying this phenomena, orbiting through earth’s magnetosphere, rather than attempting to study it in a lab on earth. The C-R theory expects many great gifts from the observations and findings from this mission.
To The Serious Side of Science, but with Some Jokes and Puns Included
I am dedicating the serious part of this blog to all those scientists who have been April fooled by “Nature” about the true nature of our universe. The C-R theory claims that science has gotten the properties of our universe horribly wrong, since at least 1929.
When Edwin Hubble detected the increasing red-shifts at a distance for far-away galaxies, science called upon popular theories that speculated that our universe was expanding, to explain-away the increasing red-shifts, instead of first reaching a much simpler conclusion, that the redshifts are created by the properties, because we live in a Closed Universe.
HINT: The Closed-Universe explanation also naturally covers the simultaneous blueshifts observed in the direction towards “The Great Attractor”, too. Unless our universe is BOTH expanding and collapsing at the same time, both observations need the simplest explanation.
Atomic Clocks Stay “Ticked-off” Whenever They Are Stuck-in Greater Gravity –
(kind-of like) Tap-Dancing on Wet Molasses – [a sticky subject]
Recently, scientists raised an atomic clock by 33 cm. and noticed that it ran slightly faster than another clock which remained at the original level. In that particular case, it was the decreasing level of gravity that increased the clocking rate of the raised clock.
Although in that particular case, raising the atomic clock above earth’s surface, into a slightly weaker gravitational field allowed the raised clock to run slightly faster, it was consistent with the C-R theory’s expectation that a clock will continue to run slower in a stronger gravitational field, but gain time when lifted into slightly lesser curvature. [Unless that particular 33 cm stretch of this universe was the only place in the universe where that would be the case.]
What the C-R theory expects is that, inside any closed universe, at the center will be the least curvature, and the least slowed-down {unimpeded, fastest-clocking} region. As one proceeds further out, the clocking rate will slow down in proportion to the overall collective gravitational curvature. At the outermost locations of that universe, time would stop, as the escape velocity reached the speed of light.
If the above scenario were the case, we would expect that, from earth’s location, one would see increasing redshifts in all galaxies residing further out, increasing with distance. [We do see that.] We would also see increasing blue shifts in one direction [towards The Great Attractor], as objects there clocked faster than here, on earth. [We also do see something like that.]
Notice, in the above description, one sees in the real world the exact appearance that the Closed-Universe type scenario would display. In such a closed universe, the center region would always be exactly filled-up, at a sufficient density to close-off the universe. Mass at every location would have a balanced energy-availability to maintain it’s internal position, and nothing could collapse inward, towards the more-active center, without gaining additional energy. Everything further out, residing in greater curvature, would lack the required energy to be allowed-in, to a faster-clocking environment.
What is most interesting about that scenario is, no anomalies are needed to explain the existing observations. Our universe would be stable, and not expanding, but still fit all observations.
From what I know, no other theory explains our universe in this particularly simple manner. I will admit, it is not taught like that, and not covered in textbooks, either. What is nice is that no anomalies are needed for it to agree with what we already see.
Compared to the many major anomalies needed by the Big Bang, for the universe to start to make sense, the C-R theory universe is far simpler to explain. Getting people to accept it has proved troublesome, as it is not-yet taken seriously enough by most home-readers.
Each new blog is part of showing-off the overall simplifications that the C-R theory represents.
Another part of the C-R theory simplification is: There is no need for dark matter or dark energy to explain why galaxies arms hold together. Instead, consider the following scenario:
Inverse-Square Dancing, — or,
Back in My Gal{axy}’s Arms again – or
A New Roll-Model – [pun intended]
No Red-Tape Here (to interfere)
Give us some Static; Cling to the Past
I will mention that the C-R theory claims that enormous electrical imbalances, seen everywhere, are created by natural processes. [I have covered those in other blogs.] This leaves tremendous quantities of electrical currents available to drive, shape, twist, and hold-together, or torque the galaxy’s arm structure. Remember that, atom for atom, the electrical force is 10 40th times stronger* than the atom to atom gravitational force. This is why simply pulling a few cm. of Scotch® tape from a roll can create enough static-electrical charge to attract loose items, like dust, ashes, or loose paper scraps towards it, overcoming in a few seconds the “total gravitational pull” from the “entire mass of the earth”, over short distances.
If one realizes the level of electrical charge imbalances available, those forces should be entirely sufficient to shape, drive, torque, and hold together the galaxy arms, without the arms shredding-apart, and to allow the arms to hold their shape even at the outermost portions of galaxies, without their angular velocities dropping off with distance.
A major simplification can be had by clearing up one misunderstanding astronomers have. Astronomers assumed that only the force of gravity can have any influence on a galaxy-wide scale. That missed-assumption has sent mainstream science on a hopeless quest, searching in vain for non-existent dark matter.
*(That means that the hydrogen atom’s electric charge’s attraction is: 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10× 10 times stronger than an individual hydrogen’s atom’s feeble gravitational pull toward another hydrogen atom, all other things being equal. I thought, maybe written out, it would make more of an impression on those jaded readers who skimmed-over that exponential statistic above, without fully realizing the overwhelming magnitude of the superiority, force-wise.)
Even so, mainstream science ignores this fact, when looking for OBVIOUS candidates when normal gravity falls short of their expectations, in galaxy arms. Perhaps, one of you home-readers can inform astronomers why their search for dark matter, and dark energy, should be ended. Maybe this hint above will be helpful to them, to suggest where else to look, force-wise!!!)
[Saving those] Explosive Handling Charges
Alfred Nobel made his fortune by safely “stabilizing” nitroglycerine when he invented dynamite. It was much safer to handle, and saved many miner’s lives in the process. The Neutral Zone C-R is to “safe-handling and storage” of this group of explosively-dangerous electrical charges, similar to what dynamite is to nitroglycerine.
The Merger-Murder Model (for attempted Black-Hole C-R mergers) – or
Pooling our logic: a suggested big new “splash” of humor, or –
a retro-pun [said with an accent] – Are You Just “ Pooling ” our Leg?
Imagine two small, plastic, “kiddie-type” swimming pools, each one exactly filled to capacity, bulging to the last drop, with scalding hot water. Now imagine that one or both of them get the idea to merge with the other, or that they try to combine their contents, and make one even larger-sized swimming pool, as a result. In their misguided attempt to merge, the inconvenient fact here is that each pool is already at it’s full capacity, and neither one can expand enough to take-in even one-more-drop of the other pool’s contents. [Because of the uniqueness of the circumstances, as we have set-it-up, only a colossal failure could emerge from the attempt.]
{Note: This anecdote is not an exact analogy for the proposed Black-Hole C-R merger, but it is intended to illustrate some newly-thought-of possibilities for what one of the dilemmas of a Black-Hole’s C-R merger plans may be. Do not take the above example too literally.}
New joke-op headline suggestion: The Biggest Loser?
A REALLY STARTLING NEW IDEA: During an encounter, the larger of the two or three supermassive Black-Holes C-R may actually have the MOST UNSTABLE storage-conditions just inside, and it may have accumulated inside, the most MASS TO LOSE. Thus, it may be more likely to become “The Biggest Loser” during the encounter, and not become “The Champion-Eater”, as Newton would certainly expect. The Biggest and Baddest Mass could be the net loser, and not the BIGGEST bully, – like taking-away candy from babies.
Situation HINT: Think of the encounter of the world’s fattest man, Augustus P. Creosote, dining piggishly in the restaurant, in Monty Python’s movie: The Meaning of Life , after receiving the thin, after-dinner mint. A very similar condition, indeed, deciding which Black-Hole C-R in the group will explode first. HINT: The one that gorged the most.
Immediately Inside a Neutral Zone C-R
HINT: Think like the parachutist, i.e. (punfully): and jump out-of-the-plane [or, the plain].
An additional pun is 0 = i “c” { pronounced, “Oh, I see!!”} — :
We describe this “nothing” state as light travelling or resonating in an “imaginary dimension” (pointing to the mathematical direction specified by i , [the square root of -1], at “c”, while also spinning at the speed-of-light), a dimension one cannot visit when we are living in real-time. Then think of light somehow “spinning or resonating” at right angles, perpendicular to all 3 of our standard 3 dimensions, in an imaginary direction “ i “, out of the plain, rather than simply standing still, or frozen in place. [July 2010]
Bring a Conclusion to this April Fool’s Day Blog for 2015:
I always strive to invite newcomers to this web site to visit more than once, because there is so much new information here, that is not available elsewhere. I try to find new ways to present the case for the C-R theory, and show off it’s advantages vs. the standard theories, like the Big Bang.
Unfortunately, unless one is willing to at least temporarily suspend their current beliefs, it is unlikely that one could accept these new ideas. This slows-up the likely acceptance of these new ideas, and makes it difficult to overcome years of indoctrination with the very limited resources available here.
There is a continual stream of new phenomena uncovered or announced, that seems to highlight the type of things that only the C-R theory expects. Please consult earlier blogs for numerous highlights of these items. I have tried to make it simple for the home reader to detect this pattern, and evaluate whether or not the C-R theory is valid in aiding recognition of special conditions.
Dedicated to the “Fooled” Fools
Ultimately, this April Fool’s Day blog has been an attempt to celebrate the fooling of science since at least 1929, and to provide a yearly helping of humor, in keeping with the Comedy-Recycling theory’s name. Thank you for the opportunity to state the case for the C-R theory, and mention that there are no real negatives known to me, phenomena where the C-R theory would be knocked-out, invalidated, or eliminated.
If I can, I would request that you keep an open mind, and give the C-R theory an honest evaluation, to see if it can work for you, personally. If you are too indoctrinated, it is unlikely that you will seriously try to understand anything presented on this web site, you will just discard any ideas here and you will go to other, more conventional web-sites. [You probably departed long before reaching this section.]
I would welcome honest questions, and if there are points of confusion, I will try to clear-up those, too. I still come-up with new ideas on a regular basis, and I still find new items I had not anticipated. I want to see informed home-readers attempt to find items missed by me, and give them the opportunity to add to the thinking.
While I have had some good natured fun with this blog, I am not intentionally trying to fool anyone [on the science part, at least]. I do admit that my thinking is quite different from conventional thinking, and I expect to be regarded as a fool for some of my thoughts. That is a price I am so far, willing to pay, for the advances I believe I now understand.
I accept my role of being: The right “Fool” for the right job, acting as a “tool” for nature. I have a contribution to make, if that is what is needed to break-up the logjam regarding conventional black holes, vs. my new thinking on Black-Holes C-R . I still respect those individuals who cannot make the leap to accept these new ideas. Although I might laugh at their wrong ideas, and the dilemmas they face, I do not intend to blame or ridicule their sincere attempts to understand science. I am trying to point out the irony in their logic, and show where their errors LIE.
Thank you again for visiting. Your suggestions are appreciated. If you would like me to cover certain topics, please use the response form to communicate with me.
Last edited, March 31, 2015