Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Citizens Of The World !

Dear Global Citizen,

Our goal is to voice and represent Concerns of the Citizens !
We want to work for WORLD PEACE and your participation by contributing your Views and Articles is welcome !!
Also we can use this Forum to discuss various issues of Current Affairs , Science , Research and Sports !!!
Feel free to post and invite your friends too.
Please contact me in case of any difficulties and with suggestions.
Post your Views/Articles to :
Thank you,
Yours Truly,
Wg Cdr Thomas Walker

Friday, January 20, 2012

Universe , Physical Laws and Life !

We live in an Universe and Observe it and experience its Effect on us by its CURRENT STATE ! 

Assuming , perhaps Mathematics is Powerful enough to Model the Entire Universe [or Universes and Vast Emptiness] and distinguish between and map the STATES through which the Entirety Traverses [Like a State Machine] wherein all Particles , Atoms , Compunds etc Interact with each other under the influence of Nature’s Forces all the Physical Laws of which are still not fully understood by us [Humans] ! Each State has Matter , Energy and Fields of Forces spread across the Canvas of THE UNIVERSE !! 

Mathematically predictable mostly [though UNCOMPUTABLE] and Accurate if Possible Accidental Collisions between Celestial Bodies etc. are taken into Account too !!! 

But the greatest Impact on the States which can Turn it Totally Unpredictable may be by the EFFECTS of Life and Living Systems on the REST OF THE UNIVERSE such as My Twiddling my Thumb , A bird striking across the Sky , A whale making a Jump, An Engineering Feat , An Army moving or An Atom bomb Exploding etc. which can happen Randomly by the WILL of a Set of Totally Independent Actors Causing Changes to the STATE OF UNIVERSE !!!! 

That is the REAL POWER OF LIFE !!!!!

Redshift and Blueshift !

Correct me if I am wrong !

I understand electron goes around the Nucleus of an atom. All atoms are interacting weakly with Gravitational Forces and Strongly by Electromagnetic Forces etc [I know there are many Theories] and generally form part of a Planet/meteor/asteroid or moon ! Any such entity revolves around a Star and the Star-System revolves around the Center of a Galaxy and perhaps Each Galaxy revolves around the center of the UNIVERSE !! 

That being the case when the Hubble Telescope is receiving and interpreting the Spectroscopic Dispersion of the Light coming from anywhere we need to realize that the OBSERVER is on a EARTH BOUND Platform and the OBSERVED LIGHT emanates from a SET OF SOURCES at a DISTANCE IN THE DIRECTION OF PROBE and CONTAINS LIGHT FROM SOURCE which will ALWAYS BE AT A RELATIVE SPEED WITH RESPECT TO THE PLATFORM OF OBSERVATION WHICH ITSELF IS MOVING IN A DIRECTION AND SPEED UNKNOWN TO US !!! 

The intra distance may be increasing CAUSING REDSHIFT if it is coming from a star of a galaxy moving away from the center of the Universe as interpreted. But it can be also from a star within this side of the Center of the Universe but is GOING AROUND ITS GALAXY SUCH THAT THE DISTANCE IS INCREASING FROM THE OBSERVER. Therefore, REDSHIFT OR BLUESHIFT CANNOT DECIDE ON EXPANSION OF THE TOTAL UNIVERSE !!!!

Also, I think every bit of light emanating has its source from a PARTICLE REVOLVING AROUND A NUCLEUS and THEREFORE IT IS A MUST TO BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH WITHIN THE BUNDLE OF RAYS RECEIVED to have any reasonable INTERPRETATION of TRUTH about the SOURCE !!!!!

Why seek an END TO EMPTINESS ? Why is this Kolaiveri Di ??

Walker's Theory on Universes !
Hi, Why MAN wants to find an end to EMPTINESS ?
Why should there be a limit to the SPACE - TIME Continuum ?
Therefore , THERE ARE MANY [perhaps countless] UNIVERSES !!!!!

Walker's Equation and Theories :

Scope and Concepts of Research to be undertaken

I state herewith the broad outline of the Research planned.

  1. Universe and Cosmos : The origin. Size, nature and structure of our [and other Universes if present] are not correctly understood now and confusion prevails. Even Einstein’s Theories have been hotly contested [Einstein Hoax website] and we need to observe,measure,analyze and conceptualize universally acceptable Physical Laws and Explanations. This will also include complete understanding of Energy, Light,Particles,structure of matter,mass energy conversions,speed of light and beyond.
  2. Life and Organisms : What are the causes of aging and how to maintain the organic machine - to overhaul periodically [removal of unwanted /dead tissues and substitute with new] and increase life.
  3. Peace and Welfare : Intelligent solutions to Human Conflicts based on creed and greed. Intelligent methods for Resource Utilization [Power Generation etc.],Ecological Conservation, Clean Water/Air/Living [especially in India/cleaning of rivers]

In addition all my expertise in Computers and software will be used wherever needed and researched upon too. 

   My theories and Ideas about the Universe - Wg Cdr Thomas Walker

The following are my theories and Ideas about the Universe :
This is my Original thinking and therefore I request the International Community to record this fact [as I have not bothered to publish this anywhere else]

We think as Truth what we see , observe , feel , experiment with , test , verify and then proclaim it as Theory . Philosophy and TRUTH.

This can only be a relative Truth as many things/facts may be beyond our reach [too many light years away for any physical contact including viewing] , perception or even imagination.

Also, we can only imagine about what we can experience and associate with which is proven by the fact we imagine God to be in Human form etc.

Theory 1:
About color : Color is in the eye of the beholder, therefore what I see as red [told by my parents that this is red] may very well give inside me [my brain] the impression and impact of what someone else gets by seeing the color Green or some other animal [say dog] sees and here lies perhaps the reason for color preferences. There is no way to compare this impact/impression with each other and verify.

Theory 2:
Limit of Space/Emptiness : It is alright to seek a limit on matter/substance but why seek a limit on emptiness or nothingness. So space [in terms of Euclidean dimensions] has to be unlimited. Let us take a straight line going to infinity in both the directions. Nothing can end this process [as if something ends it what is beyond it which has to be something else which too will get termed as space] and if what is told as space-warping and bending of space takes place to result in an egg-shell shaped universe, even then what is beyond this egg in the stated theoretical direction which does not care for the enormous reputation of Einstein ?
Therefore there can be no limit to Space. Analogously as we know there is and there could be no limit to Time too. It is endless too.

Therefore Universe is endless [even if whether Big-bang theory is true or not and there is a limit to the amount of matter within the confines of our known universe] and if our universe does have an egg-shaped limit there could be many more similar Universes beyond [beyond gravity of known matter] and therefore there will be many more Universes to fill up the remaining empty spaces.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Time and its need. Also, why at all must the light travel?

Dear Dick,

I wonder how I can try and convince you of the need use and reality about
'Time' or 'Time Stamp'.

I am sure you must be following certain line of thinking on the subject and
proposing your ideas based on such findings. If you have any background
material on your ideology you may share with me.

As of this instance, I have this to state about what 'Time' means to me.

It is of course a dimension and a steady scale measuring the aging Process ;
of everything Universe, you and me.

If I may say so, you seem to discount the relevance of 'Time' and view
Universe as a 'System' like 'Automata' in Computer Science where the
'System' remains as it is unless some external input is received. Between
such instances equivalence prevails and 'Time' is static.

Well,then even the best design of computer is based on a real-time clock for
controlling every step.

In a real world[our universe] a lot of things happen in a steady rate.
The sun blowing out its rays,carbon decay,light traveling etc and etc which
requires us to measure and 'time stamp' every occurrence for correlation.

Why should you have an objection to it?

Because the Universe taken as a whole can never remain same between instants
however minutely interspaced.

I really wonder what is the 'compelling reason' for light to 'travel' or
Why at all it is starting - where it is headed to from its origin.
But I don't object to it. We just have to understand.

If we can find this reason and the cycle of 'cause and effect' we may reach
somewhere. That is, what exactly is the cause of 'emission of light', 'where
it is headed to' and 'what is its aim'?

Maybe it is just obeying the command "Let there be light".

"Dick" <> wrote in message
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 18:06:50 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <N:
> dlzc1 D:cox> wrote:
> >Dear Dick:
> >
> >"Dick" <> wrote in message
> >
> >> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 06:11:46 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com
> >> \(dlzc\)" <N:
> >> dlzc1 D:cox> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Dear Dick:
> >>>
> >>>"Dick" <> wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>...
> >>>> Nothing going forward in time, either. Just "now," a
> >>>> series of new moments of now. Negative time is
> >>>> history, future time propositions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Clocks are very useful for making comparisons,
> >>>> but they do not observably measure "time."
> >>>
> >> Change in space. Time is a standardized metric as is
> >> a yardstick, but I can see what the yardstick measures.
> >
> >You cannot see space. What you see is what light brings you from
> >objects.
> >
> Space is as real as it gets, which may be limited. However, I do more
> than see light from objects, I can touch them.
> >> What does the clock measure? Take a clock apart and
> >> show me the "time."
> >
> >Take a ruler apart and show me space.
> The ruler is tangible and complete as is. It does the same thing a
> clock does, it provides standardized, uniform units for comparison.
> The difference, I can see and touch what the ruler measures.
> I can neither see nor touch "time." My experience of "now" time finds
> it not uniform.
> >
> >So you agree that either space or time is independent, and the
> >other (time or space) is dependent?
> I must have missed something, I don't recall saying anything such, I
> don't even know what you are saying.
> >You are of course aware that NIST and the international community
> >chose time as being independent, and allow time and c to
> >establish space... Whether or not you agree with that particular
> >choice.
> Your word, not mine "chose time as being independent."
> CNN reported, this morning, scientists have managed to "teleport" a
> bunch of molecules. Interesting to see where this leads.
> "The experiment involved for the first time a macroscopic atomic
> object containing thousands of billions of atoms. They also teleported
> the information a distance of half a meter but believe it can be
> extended further."
> Science News also carried the article.
> What happens to your "time" if light and matter can be teleported?
> >David A. Smith

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Re: Let us be positive and find solutions

Yes friends,

Thank you for the responses.

Of course it is to do with my fundamental beliefs and ideas and goes towards
proving them.

Universe could be endless and limitless as anything which tries to
physically bound an Euclidean straight line has [if it is real] to fall in
the space which otherwise could be the extension of the same 'straight line'
it is trying to limit.

And the universe could be origin-less too. Unlike mortal beings.

Now, I do understand the virtues of negative and imaginary numbers, but they
all play with respect to some real thing . Or else they all become

So, all these negative and imaginary numbers, or dimensions are to be
considered only in a relative way [for calculation and recasting] but never
amount to any substance.

You can't say 'x' number of [ x = pure imaginary or negative number] grams ,
second or meters some mass,occurrence or spacial volume and be serious about
it unless your statement is in relation to some true existence.

So, let us take the obvious case of mass.

Can you tell me what you understand by a non-positive mass.

I wonder how even Einstein got carried away into believing about 'Time

So, let me make my patented statement.

There is nothing called going back in time; except in one's imagination.


"dlzc" <> wrote in message
> Dear donstockbauer:
> wrote:
> > N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
> > > Dear Researcher:
> > >
> > > "Researcher" <> wrote in message
> > > news:4521cdea$0$19702$
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Let me explain what I mean.
> > > >
> > > > Consider this : None of the fundamental dimensions can
> > > > ever be negative.
> > >
> > > Dimensions are an abstraction. Each degree of freedom can be
> > > described by any real number.
> > >
> > > > Mass, Length and Time can never be negative.
> > >
> > > Why? Because it allows *relative* measurement?
> > >
> > > > Nothing can exist with a negative mass or a sub-zero
> > > > length or be able to go back in Time.
> > > >
> > > > Once this is understood and applied in all calculations
> > > > we [humans] stand to find real solutions and reach
> > > > understanding in all that is boggling us so far.
> > >
> > > Actually no. By artificially limiting ourselves because *you*
> > > don't like negative numbers is a step backwards.
> > >
> > > Just look at what the imaginary numbers gave us... among
> > > other things sin and cos. And imagnary numbers are
> > > based on negative numbers.
> >
> > Sounds like Researcher is getting at that constructivistic
> > methods should be adhered to and we'd avoid the
> > Spiellberg-level Fairyland that physics has become,
> > encouraging endless debate.
> Researcher's point is similar to one I made long ago. If the Universe
> is finite, why do we use an infinite number set to represent it? An
> answer is, a tape measure is usually "longer" than the things we ask it
> to measure. It still works.
> As to the "Fairyland", that is where the advances in Science come
> from... the bleeding edge of fantasy. Because Newton doesn't get us to
> the stars. Nor does Einstein... well there was this manhole cover...
> As to debate, Don nothing would stop you from debating, would it? If
> we don't debate, Science becomes static... an anchor, rather than a
> sail.
> David A. Smith

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Fw: Toward understanding the Double Slit Experiment, pt. 1

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Walker" <>
Newsgroups: alt.astronomy,sci.physics.relativity,alt.sci.physics
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: Toward understanding the Double Slit Experiment, pt. 1

> Some ideas :
> Do photons need to be necessarily single or in some numbers, can't they be
> fractional?
> An atom or such structure can exist without being in a state of motion.
> can a photon exist without being in a state of travel.
> So, there is fundamental difference between such entities which needs to
> considered while dealing with them.
> An unified theory of matter - energy continuum is needed to be visualized
> and experimented upon.
> Any proposals?
> Thomas Walker
> "Y.Porat" <> wrote in message
> >
> > Ralph Hertle wrote:
> > > Re: Toward understanding the Double Slit Experiment, pt. 1
> > > alt.astronomy
> > > sci.physics.relativity
> > > alt.sci.physics
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Y.Porat wrote:
> > >
> > > [....]
> > >
> > > > -------------------------------
> > > > Dear Mr Kinane
> > > >
> > > > you are asking about entring one photon!!
> > > >
> > > > while me and apparently you as well
> > > > do not know
> > > > what is** one** photon !!!
> > > > what is a single photon definition??
> > > >
> > > > before starting walking we have to learn how to crawl
> > > > ist that ??
> > > >
> > > > TIA
> > > > Y.Porat
> > > > --------------------------------
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Y. Porat:
> > >
> > > If questions are a measure of intelligence then you are a genius.
> > >
> > > The religionist creationists and the Doppler-Hubble creationists,
> > > and maybe other sorts of expansionist creationists, base all their
> > > conclusions either upon the Bible or upon the Apparent Red Shift
> > > of EM spectral light frequencies.
> > >
> > > They adamantly refuse to consider the interaction of photons
> > > and electrons regarding interactions and velocity differentials.
> > >
> > > They are totally intellectually closed on that topic. By that they
> > > refuse to gain information regarding, not the origin of the
> > > universe, but its cause insofar as the identity and properties
> > > of the existents that continue to exist, however changed due
> > > to their properties or potentials.
> > >
> > > What is more, they refuse to accept that the entity that is the
> > > photon has any identity whatsoever, albeit, except for a few
> > > magnificently discovered properties of photons, e.g., refraction
> > > and gravitational influences, and more.
> > >
> > > They actually don't have any idea at all about what the photon is,
> > > and yet they make stupendous pronouncements regarding
> > > suppositions of the assumed causes of the universe.
> > >
> > > They don't even know what the properties of gravity existents
> > > are, much less what the substance of matter or energy is.
> > >
> > > They are intellectually and factually bankrupt.
> > >
> > > More so, they have not opened their eyes to see that the
> > > universe exists continually, that is everything that exists, - e.g.,
> > > would you believe, without start, interruption, or end, continually.
> > > The universe simply continues to exist and its plural existents to
> > > function according to their natural properties.
> > >
> > > You said it right.
> > >
> > > Scientists, especially astronomer creationist cosmologist
> > > physicists, have no clue whatsoever what a photon is.
> > >
> > > They posture madly about the supposed original
> > > discontinuities of the universe, qua their assumed
> > > creationism, this or that nothingness, let alone about what
> > > universal termination is, and still they don't even know what
> > > a photon is.
> > >
> > > Or any of the existing existents of existence.
> > >
> > > The gentleman has asked the question.
> > >
> > > What is the photon?
> > >
> > > Ralph Hertle
> > ----------------
> > Thank you Ralph
> >
> > now to be more precise the key question is:
> >
> >
> > it sems that people speak about a 'single photon' whithout knowing
> > about aht they are talking
> > without that definition all the talking about a single photon is
> > nonsense physics
> >
> > so ??? waht is the above definition????
> > does a photon that is emmited from Radium is the same as that form
> > say nickel evn if the frequescy of them are the same
> > to be even more specific :
> >
> > is the **duration of emittance** is the same in radion 'single photon'
> > as in say Kalium 'single photon ' ????!!!!
> >
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > --------------
> >

Fw: General Relativity and Still Objects

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Walker" <>
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: General Relativity and Still Objects

> Because every bit of matter tends to move towards its gravitating center
> which is the center of earth in a local way while altogether they move
> towards the solar system's gravitational center which simultaneously moves
> towards the galactic center and so on and so forth towards the center of
> total Universe which maybe in fact more than one Universe or which could
> termed 'Entirety' [including our Universe {known and visible} and if they
> exist more such Universes]
> Thomas Walker
> "Danny Dot" <don'> wrote in message
> news:AN1Dg.3167$
> > I understand GR explains motion under a gravitational field a curvature
> > space. I have NO problem with this. The bending or light during a
> > eclipse proved GR correct.
> >
> > But how does GR explain a stationary object exerting a force while on
> > surface of a planet?
> >
> > --
> > Danny Dot
> >
> >
> >
> >