Home 2January 14 2025
Click here to read The Intersection Of An Atomic And Planetary Science With A Habitable Star System
The rudiments for a theory of planetary and atomic systems bridging macro-scales (planetary systems) with micro-scales (the atom’s proton) is achieved through a wave equation solution of our Solar System that is used to describe atoms in quantum mechanics. We find the base unit of time, the characteristic time, in the solution for our Solar System and the atom comes out to be the base unit of time developed since ancient times by the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians of one second. Applying this theory to multiple star systems reveals that the optimal conditions for life may be intersecting at Earth-like star systems. It is suggested that stars that host planets that are good hosts for intelligent life to develop begins at around spectral class F stars to spectral class K stars on the main sequence with the optimal conditions intersecting between these two around spectral class G stars in the area of our star, the Sun. Moons of planets are shown to play a key role in the wave solution for the star systems and turn out to define their ground state if they are habitable. Our moon plays a primary role in allowing for life on the Earth, stabilizing its orbit allowing for the seasons. It may be the conditions for complex life maximize during the epoch where a moon perfectly eclipses the star it orbits as seen from the habitable planet which determines some forms of the equations that give the characteristic time of the star system at or around 1 second. The characteristic time of 1 second common to the Solar System and atomic systems appears to be characteristic, as well, of hydrocarbons the skeletons of life chemistry in a context of sixfold symmetry. An in depth look at the moon eclipsing the Sun as seen from the Earth over geologic times is given. In section 12.0 and 13.0 we present the ideal method for modeling habitable star systems with our theory. While this set of equations diverges with another set and we have to introduce correction factors, we find after perfecting the method in the next section (14.0) that it works across all of the equations very well. There is not one kind of planet for any particular orbit that is the only one possible; you can have many kinds of planets form for a given type of star. We conclude that the intersection of an atomic and planetary science happens with habitable systems like the one that belongs to our Sun, a so-called G2V star system and within a range from F to K stars, the G stars being of the type that includes our Sun, which is in-between the two. This seems to happen in a star system where there are perfect eclipses of the star by the moon, as occurs in our Solar System.
**************************************************************************************
December 29 2024 (Updated Dec 31 2024)The rudiments for a theory of planetary and atomic systems bridging macro-scales (planetary systems) with micro-scales (the atom’s proton) is achieved through a wave equation solution of our Solar System that is used to describe atoms in quantum mechanics. We find the base unit of time, the characteristic time, in the solution for our Solar System and the atom comes out to be the base unit of time developed since ancient times by the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians of one second. Applying this theory to multiple star systems reveals that the optimal conditions for life may be intersecting at Earth-like star systems. It is suggested that stars that host planets that are good hosts for intelligent life to develop begins at around spectral class F stars to spectral class K stars on the main sequence with the optimal conditions intersecting between these two around spectral class G stars in the area of our star, the Sun. Moons of planets are shown to play a key role in the wave solution for the star systems and turn out to define their ground state. Our moon plays a primary role in allowing for life on the Earth, stabilizing its orbit allowing for the seasons. It may be the conditions for complex life maximize during the epoch where a moon perfectly eclipses the star it orbits as seen from the habitable planet which determines some forms of the equations that give the characteristic time of the star system at or around 1 second. The characteristic time of 1 second common to the Solar System and atomic systems appears to be characteristic, as well, of hydrocarbons the skeletons of life chemistry in a context of sixfold symmetry. In the last section 16.0 on lunar eclipses we find everything intersects at stars like the Sun (G2V) in quite a remarkable way that indicates life in the Universe is a deep proposition centered around such stars being at an inflection point in the HR diagram.
*****************************************************************************************
The Problem of an Uncaused Cause (Dec 26 2024)
Things can only fall apart in Newtonian physics if you can show instances where mathematics doesn't hold under ideal conditions. This is because mathematics has sometimes nonsensical solutions because it is a formal system and makes assumptions that in the end lead to logical inconsistencies. It is a question in mathematics if mathematics is an invention or a discovery, thus artificial or Natural. It ultimately cannot tell us what reality is, it can only give us a model to manipulate in our mind. It is an abstraction and an approximation. A good example of this is a point has location but no dimension (size). But to draw a point to specify a location we have to give it size, thus mathematics and Nature are not aligned. And even if we change mathematics, the same problem will always arise, it is a matter of the difference between formal constructs and reality.
We have to ask, insofar as the Universe is a paradox, what seems to be an uncaused cause, what we mean by ideal conditions and can they be created, or if they could have existed to begin with. The idea of ideal condition may themselves be a formal construct and may make no sense in terms of reality. This would be important to explore because I think it is the path to explaining uncaused causes.
A paper in mathematics was published where it was shown Newtonian physics can be broken in a classical sense, that indeterminism in quantum mechanics is inherent in Newtonian physics. It works like this. Say we have a dome, and place a ball at its apex, if the dome is radially symmetric, it is the same in every direction and the balanced ball will not roll down it unless acted on by a force. But if you balance such a ball at the apex, you will find, even thought the dome is the same in every direction it will appear to choose a direction eventually and roll down the dome. The reason it does this is that it does not really choose a direction to roll down the dome, it is just so precariously balanced that the force required to displace it and cause it to roll down the dome is so small that it cannot be perceived. It could be minute vibrations from a car passing by, or in the atoms of the dome like small irregularities in the dome that defy human perception, or the atoms in the ball are vibrating quantum mechanically, and this is imperceptible as well. The way the mathematician did it was he found a shape for the dome surface that when used had two solutions for the differential equations of its motion, one where the ball eventually rolls down the surface after a time he called the excitation time and the other where it doesn't.
But this lead me to ask, if we cannot construct such a dome perfectly radially symmetric, perfectly smooth, how can we test his theory. The ball could have eventually rolled down the dome because of imperceptible irregularities. Or because of imperceptible vibrations of the surface and the ball. That is I think the problem is we have to ask what is meant by ideal conditions and can they exist.
This would become important I would think because today they are using perturbation theory in cosmology where we have a ball at rest on the apex of a curve in equilibrium state (balanced, not moving) and eventually with a small perturbation, the ball chooses a direction and rolls either left or right breaking symmetry and choosing to fall into a well perhaps on the left instead of the right. However, I don't think this solves an uncaused cause because a perturbation makes the decision, and that is a small force. That is why the recent paper that shows two solutions to a particular surface, one where the ball eventually moves, one where it doesn't in terms of Newtonian mechanics might be important. But it makes me ask, what are ideal conditions, can they be produced, or even measured if they are approximated by things so small we can't measure them.
In other words, if ideal conditions are too imperceptible to measure how can we say they can exist? And indeed there is a limit to how small something can be and still be measured which is a law in quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, it is given by h, Planck's constant. I think it arises because we are measuring atoms with tools that are made of atoms. Thus the lines on the ruler can only be made as thin as the atoms in the painted line on the ruler. You can't measure atoms with atoms, you have to use things smaller than atoms, and these atoms are vibrating indeterministically by quantum mechanics.
The surface this mathematician found where though radially symmetric, had two solutions; one that makes sense, one that doesn't may be because mathematics is an invention, not a discovery, artificial, not natural, because mathematics is abstract and has nothing to do with reality, it is a formal system and by Godel's Incompleteness Theorem all formal systems have at least one unprovable statement.
One of the things that comes up in light of Godel's Theorem is Evolution is true, it has no assumptions. That it is an formal system without unprovable statements. Well it actually isn't, it is just that the unprovable statements are so self-evident that you have to go way out there to say they are not true statements. For example, it is hard to say the geologic record is not real. But you can, it just goes way out there. An example would be many scientists are beginning to believe in Simulation Theory, the theory that reality is a computer generated hologram generated by people of the future or more advanced than us to play out scenarios so they can make decisions for their civilizations. Everything we see is generated by a computer: the Universe, the Galaxies, The Earth, the fossil record. This explains a lot, but it is not very practical to choose as a world view, though it may be that it explains more than traditional cosmology sometimes. However, in mathematics and physics, things can't be left out of our theoretical construct even if they seem self-evident. A good example of this is in Newton's time it was held that if two triangles were the same as a third, they were the same as one another. But under extreme conditions his theory of gravity failed in modern times. Einstein had to question this assertion. He suggested space can be curved and thus curves the triangle drawn in it in one place but not the other depending on the nature of the curvature, as well as the ruler with which you measure it curves locally for one triangle and not the other. As a result he was able to construct a new theory of gravity that accounted for things like black holes. So in mathematics you have to be very precise, you have to question the self-evident, because if you don't it can come to haunt you. I don't think this is so true for evolution, even though the theory uses the scientific method.
********************************************************************************************
November 17 2024 (Updated Dec 14 2024 version 15)
Click here to read A Partial Theory of Everything And The Hierarchy Of Life In The Universe
I have a theory that could be considered a partial, crude theory of everything. It presents a solution to quantum mechanic’s Schrödinger wave equation used for atomic systems, but for planetary systems, in particular for our star system, the Solar System. Also, the theory solves the atom’s proton and shows a common characteristic time of about 1 second for both these systems one on the macroscopic scale, star systems, and the other on the microscopic scale, atomic systems, through the atom’s proton. Also, in common, it describes hydrocarbons, the chemical skeleton’s of life, suggesting that life could be part of a universal process in the Universe. As such, we have a partial theory of everything, but I say partial because it does not, so far, go into particle physics in depth, for instance in treating the quarks that make up protons, or other particles such as photons and electrons.
We want to apply the equations in the theory for our Solar System to other star systems, to see what they don’t explain that they do explain in ours, and from that difference find relationships between our star system and others which is where I think we will find not just our purpose but the interconnected purposes between all life in the Universe. I would assume the equations I have found for our star system where the Sun is a yellow, main sequence, spectral class G star would apply for most such stars. But here is an example of how the civilization of one kind of star system could have a relationship with our civilization in terms our star system, the Solar system…
*****************************************************************************************
My theory has something to do with why we would be going into space, which indicates it might be in part to find out if other star systems have dynamic relationships with protons that make up atoms and both those with time as measured in their calendars by dynamic mathematical relationships that may exist in the motions of their planets and their moons as is the case with our star system, The Solar System. My theory shows we have this with our star system, and would suggest we need to find other star systems with habitable planets to see if they have them and relate them to ours if they do so as to reveal a higher truth as to how and why we are here, and what our purpose might be.
The theory solves the atom (primarily the proton) and the Solar System, with the Schrödinger wave equation of quantum physics, demonstrating a connection between macroscopic and microscopic scales.
Because the basis unit of time for the solution is about 1 second, and the second comes from ancient Sumerian mathematics, not contemporary physics, the paper concludes with archaeological and paleoanthropological connections to a possible flow of the development of human life since ancient and prehistoric times with the dynamics of the physics of atoms and planetary formation.
A section is added after this conclusion showing the physical theory meets with biology reaffirming the proposition from the physical theory that life might be part of a Universal Natural Process.
If the theory is correct we should be able to predict the characteristics of different habitable star systems. This should soon be verifiable because NASA has as one of its primary objectives with its recent deployment of the James Webb Space Telescope to find Earth-like planets around Sun-like stars. Something that has been difficult to do up to now because prior technologies were only refined enough to work primarily with red dwarf stars for finding planets.
******************************************************************************************
November 01 2024
The Purpose of Becoming an Interstellar Civilization
Click here to read Spacetime Operators, The Proton, And The Protoplanetary Disc
My theory has something to do with why we would be going into space, which indicates it might be in part to find out if other star systems have dynamic relationships with protons that make up atoms and both those with time as measured in their calendars by dynamic mathematical relationships that may exist in the motions of their planets and their moons as is the case with our star system, The Solar System. My theory shows we have this with our star system, and would suggest we need to find other star systems with habitable planets to see if they have them and relate them to ours if they do so as to reveal a higher truth as to how and why we are here, and what our purpose might be.
*****************************************************************************************
Click here to read Ancient Aliens, UFOs, and Spacetime Operators (June 05 2024)
UFOs in 1952 hovered over the capitol for two weekends, fighter jets were scrambled. Washington is at the same 37 parallel that I found connected to UFO activity and is the path of the star vega (See above paper). I just learned about this and it turns out since then the US has built its important facilities on that latitude, including Area 51.******************************************************************************************
My paper below is centered around UFO's in Manitoba, Canada. It would seem the place is active again:Click here to read Ancient Aliens, UFOs, and Spacetime Operators (June 05 2024)
This book consists of three papers, two dealing with extraterrestrials and UFO’s, and one a theory for reality that plays a role in the papers about extraterrestrials and UFO’s.
*****************************************************************************************
Do The Moonmakers Exist And Is The Moon Important?
My paper “The Earth A Habitable Planet As A Solution To The Wave Equation” solves our planetary system with the Schrödinger wave equation. It may even solve what it means to have habitable star systems in general and leads me to consider the possible existence of what we could call “The Moonmakers”.If the Earth Day gets longer, it will have less cooling and get warmer. If the Moon’s orbit gets larger it may be it will less effectively hold the Earth’s tilt to the Sun, and we could lose the seasons and end up with temperature extremes bad for life. It may be that a condition for complex intelligent life on Earth is:
r_planet/r_moon = R_star/R_moon
The more immediate problem before us is catastrophic climate change (global warming). Since the industrial revolution we have greatly increased the amount of the heat retaining gas CO2 in the atmosphere. Parts per billion have gone up from about 200 to 400. Trees make some of this and some of it is necessary, or the Earth would get to cool, but too much, the tipping point is considered 350, and the Earth will warm beyond what is necessary for life to be as successful as it has been. A less immediate problem is the Sun is warming by very small amounts over time. In 2 billion years it would warm to the point that it would boil away the oceans. A star with the mass of our Sun will stay on the main sequence for 10 billion years, after which it will deplete its fuel and and expand beyond Earth orbit and start burning the by-products of its earlier fuel. This should happen in about 5 billion years, at which point it would seem Mars, further away from the Sun than the Earth, might become the habitable planet. A star with half the mass of our Sun, a red dwarf, can last 80 to 100 billion years on the main sequence, longer than the current age of the Universe 13.8 billion years. We have found an Earth sized planet in the habitable zone of such a star, the TOI 700 system, and we expect to find a lot more. Red dwarf stars are the most populous in our galaxy. However, because they are cooler, the habitable zone is closer in, meaning the planets are probably tidally locked with the stars they orbit, meaning their days are the same as their year, just as the day of our moon is the same as its month, these bodies always having the same face toward what they orbit. Thus for a habitable planet around a red dwarf, one side is always extremely hot and the other extremely cold. The habitable region of such a planet would be where night meets day on its surface, the twilight zone.
There is a great mystery surrounding our moon, it has a very low density, meaning it has a low mass for its size, and it is considered very large and massive for the Moon of a terrestrial planet like the Earth, which is more typical of a moon orbiting a gas giant like Jupiter or Saturn.
Because of the strange mass of the Moon and its unusual occurrence around a planet like the Earth, and its unusually nearly perfect circular orbit, it has been suggested by some scientists to be hollow, even a hollow spacecraft, put there to help life by holding the Earth at its tilt to its orbit. When we went to the Moon, NASA dropped the launch stage for the lander on the Moon, and they measured the seismic activity. It rang for an hour like a bell, as if it were hollow. The Earth doesn’t do this, some say because of all the water on its surface dampening it, others say only something hollow could ring like that.
This makes me think of a science fiction short story be Arthur C. Clarke, The Sentinel, which was the precursor to the movie 2001. It had in the first mission to the Moon, two astronauts finding a glistening object atop a mountain on the Moon. They climbed up to it and broke the protection barrier surrounding the sentinel, which was a large monolith monitoring Earth. They said call Earth and tell them to expect visitors. They realized in breaking the seal, it would stop communication of the sentinel with its makers, making them aware that we figured out how to get from Earth to the Moon.
In 2001 the movie large monoliths were put on the Earth and the Moon to monitor human progress. The monolith makers seeded the Universe with life and put monoliths on the planets to monitor the progress of life and to give it evolutionary nudges when needed. Perhaps the Moonmakers, if they exist, if our Moon is really a hollow spacecraft holding the Earth at its tilt to its orbit to make life possible, perhaps they put it there because we are supposed to figure that out, go there, enter the craft and move the Moon when needed to be in an orbit that counters the factors that are not beneficial to life that are underway. Perhaps the Moon is something that can be moved to adjust the climate of the Earth.
Our equation in this paper for the Earth orbit does not depend on the Moon’s distance from the Earth, only its mass. The Moon slows the Earth rotation and this in turn expands the Moon’s orbit, so it is getting larger, the Earth loses energy to the Moon. The Earth day gets longer by 0.0067 hours per million years, and the Moon’s orbit gets 3.78 cm larger per year.
Our wave equation solution may only use the Moon’s mass but the equation for kinetic energy of the Moon to kinetic energy of the Earth times the Earth Day equal to about one second:
(KE_moon/KE_earth)(EarthDay)=1.08 seconds
which we connect with the equation where the proton gives one second:
Equation In Proton Radius and Proton mass gives one second.
This holds for when the Moon was at a distance from the Earth such that it appears the same size as the Sun, which means:
r_planet/r_moon = R_star/R_moon
Which is when the two equations above for one second connect to our wave equation solution to the Earth.KE_planet=(sqrt(n))(R_star/R_moon)(G,M_planet,M_moon,h_star)
The Moon at its inclination to the Earth in its orbit makes life possible here because it holds the Earth at its tilt to its orbit around the Sun allowing for the seasons so the Earth doesn’t get too extremely hot or too extremely cold. We see the Moon may be there for a reason.
****************************************************************************************
Does A Prebiotic Path To Life On Earth Exist
I have waded through the literature and the limiting factor is phosphate compounds.
In order to have life you need the 20 genetically encoded amino acids. DNA and RNA synthesize these into the proteins life needs. Miller and Urey simulated a hypothetical early Earth with the constituents water, methane, ammonia, and hydrogen mixing them together in a bottle and passing a current. They produced 11 of the genetically encoded amino acids, but not all of them.
Life also needs DNA and RNA. To have this you need the sugar ribose, phosphates, and the nucleobases adenine, cytosine, guanine, thymine, and uracil. Prebiotic paths, paths before life existed, to these nucleobases, exist, but they have to combine with ribose to make nucleosides, and these have to combine with phosphates to make nucleotides. There exist prebiotic paths to nucleotides, but they have to polymerize into long chains and the reactions required to do this use phosphate compounds that we know did not exist on early Earth. This is the main problem in trying to explain life on Earth. Phosphates are rare on Earth, life needs them for nutrients, and they are the limiting factor in Earth ecosystems that determine life density.
One could suggest life arose on planets that were rich in phosphates, evolved into intelligence, and polymerized nucleotides in a laboratory and put them on Earth.
The problem also that arises though, is the sequencing of the nucleobases into a complex set of instructions for synthesizing amino acids into the proteins life needs. We don’t know how such a set of instructions, the genetic code, could evolve into existence.
Further problems arise in the fats, or lipids; they make up a big part of the cells that make make up life that house the DNA and RNA.