" (Makes me wonder about Kirchhoff's laws, which Larson accepted, because blackbody radiation would be totally dependent on the material of the container--and Kirchhoff insisted it was independent of the container. That just cannot be if thermal motion is INSIDE the time region.)"
Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille: On the Validity of Kirchhoff’s Law
I have been working to get Larson's Monograph on the Liquid State typeset and republished, as the original text was done on his old typewriter and is difficult to read (not to mention, OCR). If you do read the original papers, the funny character that is a slash, backspace and dash is actually a "+" sign, which Larson did not have on his typewriter.
During the proofreading, I had a chance to review the states of matter, of which there are 4 in the RS: solid, liquid, vapor and gas. These also have corresponding inverse states, as Nehru documents in his astronomy papers, where thermal motion moves into the 2nd unit of heat. The primary differences between Larson's model and conventional ones is that Larson makes "heat" a property of the atom, not the aggregate. Each atom has a temperature and corresponding "state."
The way it works is straightforward; in the solid state, all three scalar dimensions are dominated by net, inward motion (gravity). As thermal motion in the time region (inward in time, outward in space) increases, the outward motion will cancel out the inward, gravitational motion in one dimension, then two, then all three. When gravitational motion is canceled by thermal motion in a dimension, the atom is no longer "stuck" on that axis and is free to move about. The more thermally-free dimensions, the more degrees of freedom--the states of matter. (Makes me wonder about Kirchhoff's laws, which Larson accepted, because blackbody radiation would be totally dependent on the material of the container--and Kirchhoff insisted it was independent of the container. That just cannot be if thermal motion is INSIDE the time region.)
The other interesting point was that our determination of things like melting and boiling points is somewhat arbitrary; Larson indicates that only 30% of the atoms in a solid need to be in a liquid state (1 freed dimension), to be considered a "liquid." The percentage accounts for what we'd call viscosity. (The lower the percentage, the higher the viscosity). Superfluids end up being a 50/50 mix of liquid and vapor states (vapor not being recognized).
So what does this have to do with stars? Well, I've been trying to re-work a simulation of star clusters, based on substantially lower gravitational limits and the consequences thereof. What is beginning to happen is that stars are acting just like giant atoms, where the gravitational limit is the unit space boundary. All the stuff outside the limit acts much like the electron cloud around the atom, and the stars begin to link together based on the SAME thermal properties exceeding gravitational motion, per scalar dimension. So stellar aggregates (clusters, neighborhoods, etc) both look, act and have the same physical relationships as molecules and atoms in an aggregate at various temperatures.
But--it's reciprocal from atomic thermal motion, because we're dealing with spatial aggregates (localized in space) whereas atoms are temporal aggregates (localized in time). So what you end up with is a solid at the center (the sun) and a decreasing "viscosity" of motion as you get further out from the sun, going through the remaining three states of matter, ending at the gravitational limit where motion becomes equivalent to a gas (no gravitational attraction--progression only).
Larson, himself, noticed the similarity between galactic behavior and water--his whiskers going down the drain while shaving gave him the idea that galaxies were condensing and consuming stars, not creating them. Nehru commented in his dialogs that globular clusters have a structure similar to a heated solid (stars mostly in the solid state, with a few in the liquid state). The correspondence here is very high, and has some interesting consequences.
Knowing this, one can use Larson's concept of inter-atomic distances and chemical bonding to determine distances between stars and their orientation to each other, as the macrocosm is reflecting the microcosm. If you look at a photo of the center of a globular cluster, then look at a photo of atoms in a liquid state--it looks the same.
I'm only scratching the surface here right now, but thought I'd report my findings so far.Forums:
The Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey data has helped astronomers learn how fast the universe was expanding just 3 billion years after the Big Bang.
The LADEE spacecraft is scheduled to crash into the Moon's surface on or before April 21, but it will continue gathering data as it descends to lower orbital altitudes.
Reposting this as directed from Antiquaits fora,
Found this picture when google searching light passing through a drop of water, in order to get an idea of perhaps why we see the twinkling of stars, and this little gem came up.
Thanks to this post I had an opportunity of knowing the experience to know the work of David Hudson's with Orbitally Rearranged Monoatomic Elements "ORME´s".
Which appreciate it since I am a follower of Wilhelm Reich's theories for over 35 years and have also found that the substances found in the expedition to the Arizona desert and call Orene and ORITE were ORME´s
Gracias a este mensaje tuve oprtunidad de conocer la experiencia de conocer el trabajo de David Hudson's con los elementos monoatomicos orbitalmente reorganizados "ORME´s".
Lo cual agradezco mucho ya que yo soy seguidor de las teorias Wilhelm Reich desde mas de 35 años y asi he averiguado que las sustancias que encontró en la expedicion al desierto de Arizona y que denomino ORene y ORite eran ORME´s