What if (on what we see???)

What if we could revamp all there is in the universe? lets face it we
have known for decades that there is more to the universe than what
meets the eye. If we could convert the dark energy into pure matter it
would comprise 65% of more mass of the universe,and we also have to add
in dark matter that makes up 30% My point of this What if post is we
just see a few percent for the bit of matter we can out there This to me
is very profound. it is so very sad. I fear we might not be able to
detect EM energies beyond 17 billion light years,and our universe could
be so much further out than that.and its accelerating expansion might
have reached c or better Trebert

On Apr 25, 6:12*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
What if we could revamp all there is in the universe? lets face it we
have known for decades that there is more to the universe than what
meets the eye. If we could convert the dark energy into pure matter it
would comprise 65% of more mass of the universe,and we also have to add
in dark matter that makes up 30% * *My point of this What if post is we
just see a few percent for the bit of matter we can out there This to me
is very profound. it is so very sad. * I fear we might not be able to
detect EM energies beyond 17 billion light years,and our universe could
be so much further out than that.and its accelerating expansion might
have reached c or better * Trebert

Detecting EM energies beyond 17 billion light years is at best a
technological distraction from the local demise of our solar system,
which at any time could be put at risk from whatever should merge with
our sun, to that of the what-if the fast evolving Sirius ABC should
merge and go supernova on us.

What I'm saying is that we don't have to look very far in order to get
a real observationology eye full of cosmic what-ifs, especially if
you'd care to entertain the notions of our somewhat recently acquiring
Selene as our moon, and appreciating the relatively newish planetology
of Venus.

According to Steve Willner, the nearby stellar creation or
assimilation of something like Sirius ABC transpired fairly quickly,
say within 10 some odd million years if all goes according to plan,
along with most of its protostellar disc remainders having dissipated
within only a few million extra years.

On Apr 24, 1:10 pm, (Steve Willner) wrote:
The collapse time scale for an idealized giant molecular cloud is
about a million years. Real clouds collapse slower than that by
perhaps a factor of 10, probably because of internal gas turbulence.

You can see that the time scale is likely to be much shorter than
"billions of years" by observing that something over 90% of baryons
are incorporated into stars.

Protostellar disks form in a few hundred thousand years and dissipate
in a few million years. For galactic disks, formation time scales
are a few hundred million years. No "billions" at all.

This means that a minimum 12,000 solar mass molecular cloud which gave
birth to the original 12+ solar mass of the Sirius star/solar system
took perhaps as little as 15 million years to complete the process, as
of perhaps no greater than 300 MBP.

Meanwhile, our solar system was supposedly fully established and
extremely nearby or even situated within the very same molecular
cloud, and yet somehow managed to avoid any kind of interaction or
benefit from such a nearly cosmic event of collapsing baryons.

Perhaps Steve Willner along with a good computer simulation can
further improve our understanding of this nearby stellar formation
environment of such a horrific molecular cloud, of perhaps at least
12,000 solar masses, that supposedly didn’t affect us.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Apr 25, 6:12*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
What if we could revamp all there is in the universe? lets face it we
have known for decades that there is more to the universe than what
meets the eye. If we could convert the dark energy into pure matter it
would comprise 65% of more mass of the universe,and we also have to add
in dark matter that makes up 30% * *My point of this What if post is we
just see a few percent for the bit of matter we can out there This to me
is very profound. it is so very sad. * I fear we might not be able to
detect EM energies beyond 17 billion light years,and our universe could
be so much further out than that.and its accelerating expansion might
have reached c or better * Trebert

I noticed that our resident rabbi Saul Levy keeps taking away your
Google Groups gold stars. There's apparently no limits nor remorse as
to what such Zionist Nazis will do.

~ BG

Arthur C. Clarke knew this a long time ago: all that dark matter is
really countless dark monoliths...

name Do not see how monoliths can be considered in with dark matter.
Is not a monolith a block or rock? TreBert

On Apr 25, 2:58*pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
name * Do not see how monoliths can be considered in with dark matter.
Is not a monolith a block or rock? * *TreBert

Good grief, it's only a joke.
~ BG

On Apr 25, 6:12*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
What if we could revamp all there is in the universe? lets face it we
have known for decades that there is more to the universe than what
meets the eye. If we could convert the dark energy into pure matter it
would comprise 65% of more mass of the universe,and we also have to add
in dark matter that makes up 30% * *My point of this What if post is we
just see a few percent for the bit of matter we can out there This to me
is very profound. it is so very sad. * I fear we might not be able to
detect EM energies beyond 17 billion light years,and our universe could
be so much further out than that.and its accelerating expansion might
have reached c or better * Trebert

The “what if (on what we see???)” is not even remotely close to what
we get.

? 1e100 photons per atom ?
In publication there’s a research paper suggesting 300 photons/atom/
sec can be artificially generated by X-rays. In other common words,
the spontaneous photon emission via secondary/recoil interactions is
where photons beget photons, and perhaps there’s no real upper limit
other than half or perhaps double the frequency of the arriving energy
that a given atom encounters. Each atom in free space also seems to
intelligently respond and/or function as a fifo node, meaning “first
in” ”first out” transference or the complex entanglement process of
managing arriving photons, that’ll exit the atom and continue to
migrate at exactly 180 degrees from their original point of encounter.

In addition to whatever cosmic lumps of matter/antimatter that
suddenly materialized like a God fart, as extremely dense/compressed
matter and energy that’s originally packed within black holes and
white/clear holes of matter/antimatter, on average there's trillions
upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being
continually created and radiated from within most every cubic light
year, of course most of which are those photons we can’t directly
visualize. Go figure as to the amount of cosmic data that should be
endlessly available per any given cubic light year/sec, or for that
matter per cubic second (27e24 m3) or even per given m3/sec, whereas
the numbers and wavelengths of those photons is telling us what kinds
of atoms exist.

One cubic second = 27e24 m3
One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3
Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3
Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms
(or if you like to use 0.1 atom/cm3 = 1.7e86 atoms)

Our relatively passive sun supposedly radiates 1e45 monochromatic
photons/sec (based upon 500 nm), plus offering whatever mystery
gravitons or quantum string like waves of gravitational force. Of
course there are all sorts of photon wavelengths to deal with, so
there’s no objective way of our ever telling how many simultaneous
photons/sec actually coexist. Supposedly at 1 hz there’s 1.786e24
photons/joule divided by the given photon wavelength. In other words
there’s supposedly fewer UV photons/joule than UR photons/joule, but
all inclusively there’s still 1.786e24 photons/joule and thus making
our 4e26 joule sun worthy of contributing perhaps 7.14e50 photons/sec.

(update/correction) Supposedly we have 2e24 significant photon
emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours
(many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwarfs and many others
are truly impressive giants), and that’s suggesting roughly 1e-9 star
per cubic light year, along with more stars being formulated and/or
recreated on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon
trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions/sec taking
place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of
their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/
recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those
kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass and finite
energy of this universe remains essentially unchanged. For the
moment, and because more stars are continually being discovered, I’ll
use a conservative basis of 1e25 stars, each offering an average
energy outflux of 4e26 joules per second that’s conservatively worth
1e45 photons/sec (instead of the all-inclusive 7.14e50 photons/sec).

Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ?.??e?? new photons/year

Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77

Per given billion years makes that tally worth 3.15e86 photons

Per 100 billion years = 3.15e88 photons, and so forth.

1e100 photons/universe:
Don’t forget to multiply everything by another good million fold if
you happen to like the average cosmic density of 0.1 atom/cm3, instead
of the average 0.1 atom/m3, because that would make it worth 3.15e94
photons per 100 billion years (not including secondary/recoil photons
or whatever else is generating and/or reacting along with those
original cosmic photons). If we do an all-inclusive photon
quantifying effort, we could easily be looking at a cosmic population
of at least 1e100 photons, along with always more per each and every
second on the way.

In other words, it can be safely and conservatively stipulated there
has been and stall always be far more photons than atoms, especially
if you’d care to include those pesky interior FTL quantum tunneling
photons coexisting within all forms of physical matter.

The relatively recent and sudden creation of the absolutely vibrant
and extremely active Sirius star/solar system of 12 original solar
masses suddenly evolving itself right next door, if not on top of us,
so to speak, would have been a truly good example of where such
deductive observationology of photons would have been highly cosmology
or astrophysics insightful, especially informative from those photons
we can’t see.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Apr 25, 6:12*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
What if we could revamp all there is in the universe? lets face it we
have known for decades that there is more to the universe than what
meets the eye. If we could convert the dark energy into pure matter it
would comprise 65% of more mass of the universe,and we also have to add
in dark matter that makes up 30% * *My point of this What if post is we
just see a few percent for the bit of matter we can out there This to me
is very profound. it is so very sad. * I fear we might not be able to
detect EM energies beyond 17 billion light years,and our universe could
be so much further out than that.and its accelerating expansion might
have reached c or better * Trebert


The “what if (on what we see???)” is not even remotely close to what
we get, because we see perhaps all of 0.0001% of the cosmic EM
spectrum.

? 1e100 photons per atom ?
In publication there’s a research paper suggesting 300 photons/atom/
sec can be artificially generated by X-rays. In other common words,
the spontaneous photon emission via secondary/recoil interactions is
where photons beget photons, and perhaps there’s no real upper limit
other than half or perhaps double the frequency of the arriving energy
that a given atom encounters. Each atom in free space also seems to
intelligently respond and/or function as a fifo node, meaning “first
in” ”first out” transference or the complex entanglement process of
managing arriving photons, that’ll exit the atom and continue to
migrate at exactly 180 degrees from their original point of encounter.

In addition to whatever cosmic lumps of matter/antimatter that
suddenly materialized like a God fart, as extremely dense/compressed
matter and energy that’s originally packed within black holes and
white/clear holes of matter/antimatter, on average there's trillions
upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being
continually created and radiated from within most every cubic light
year, of course most of which are those photons we can’t directly
visualize. Go figure as to the amount of cosmic data that should be
endlessly available per any given cubic light year/sec, or for that
matter per cubic second (27e24 m3) or even per given m3/sec, whereas
the numbers and wavelengths of those photons is telling us what kinds
of atoms exist.

One cubic second = 27e24 m3
One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3
Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3
Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms
(or if you like to use 0.1 atom/cm3 = 1.7e86 atoms)

Our relatively passive sun supposedly radiates 1e45 monochromatic
photons/sec (based upon 500 nm), plus offering whatever mystery
gravitons or quantum string like waves of gravitational force. Of
course there are all sorts of photon wavelengths to deal with, so
there’s no objective way of our ever telling how many simultaneous
photons/sec actually coexist. Supposedly at 1 hz there’s 1.786e24
photons/joule divided by the given photon wavelength. In other words
there’s supposedly fewer UV photons/joule than UR photons/joule, but
all inclusively there’s still 1.786e24 photons/joule and thus making
our 4e26 joule sun worthy of contributing perhaps 7.14e50 photons/sec.

(update/correction) Supposedly we have 2e24 significant photon
emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours
(many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwarfs and many others
are truly impressive giants), and that’s suggesting roughly 1e-9 star
per cubic light year, along with more stars being formulated and/or
recreated on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon
trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions/sec taking
place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of
their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/
recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those
kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass and finite
energy of this universe remains essentially unchanged. For the
moment, and because more stars are continually being discovered, I’ll
use a conservative basis of 1e25 stars, each offering an average
energy outflux of 4e26 joules per second that’s conservatively worth
1e45 photons/sec (instead of the all-inclusive 7.14e50 photons/sec).

Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ?.??e?? new photons/year

Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77

Per given billion years makes that tally worth 3.15e86 photons

Per 100 billion years = 3.15e88 photons, and so forth.

1e100 photons/universe:
Don’t forget to multiply everything by another good million fold if
you happen to like the average cosmic density of 0.1 atom/cm3, instead
of the average 0.1 atom/m3, because that would make it worth 3.15e94
photons per 100 billion years (not including secondary/recoil photons
or whatever else is generating and/or reacting along with those
original cosmic photons). If we do an all-inclusive photon
quantifying effort, we could easily be looking at a cosmic population
of at least 1e100 photons, along with always more per each and every
second on the way.

In other words, it can be safely and conservatively stipulated there
has been and stall always be far more photons than atoms, especially
if you’d care to include those pesky interior FTL quantum tunneling
photons coexisting within all forms of physical matter.

The relatively recent and sudden creation of the absolutely vibrant
and extremely active Sirius star/solar system of 12 original solar
masses suddenly evolving itself right next door, if not on top of us,
so to speak, would have been a truly good example of where such
deductive observationology of photons would have been highly cosmology
or astrophysics insightful, especially informative from those photons
we can’t see.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”