|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
On Jul 20, 6:54 am, The Ghost In The Machine
wrote: In sci.physics, BradGuth wrote on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 04:25:02 -0000 .com: On Jul 19, 6:49 pm, The Ghost In The Machine wrote: So OK, we have a fluid Earth. How, precisely, does that allow the Moon to be captured from Sirius or from Venus? Good grief, it really doesn't. Earth being sufficiently fluid is what simply allows the gravity of sol and that of our moon's combined tidal energy to keep Earth's mostly fluid planetology in motion, and thus unavoidably kept a little extra warm and toasty (mostly from the inside out), although the friction associated with the moving of our badly polluted oceans and atmosphere is certainly added right along with the little extra worth of secondary IR/FIR that's also contributed by way of our unusually massive and nearby moon. It's called "Global Warming" or GW, and for the most part it's extensively via friction. An interesting answer, actually. Not sure I believe it without some calculations, which I'm not all that sure how to do at the moment. Boiled down, the Earth's flexing (as though it were a rubber ball) as it rotates under the Moon is partly responsible for global warming. I have no idea how to estimate the heat generated by that flexing. Well folks, it's all about good old Earth and moon science that we obviously seem to have been failing rather badly at. Yet supposedly we've walked on that unusually passive moon, but only at the times when Venus was invisible and when the moon's surface looked exactly like a terrestrial guano island that was getting rather nicely xenon arc lamp spectrum illuninated to boot. Apparently their physics laws of photons, albedo and of unfiltered Kodak film worked entirely different while on that salty old moon of ours. BTW, where otherwise than into our mostly fluid Earth do you suppose all of that horrific tidal forced energy is going, if not into creating heat? The only thing that could possibly have been beneficial of Earth's fluid nature is on behalf of folks on either orb having survived the lithobraking encounter that helped establish our seasonal tilt, and having deposited so much of that salty ice along with whatever complex DNA within or having otherwise intentionally come along for the ride of getting away from a somewhat pesky binary star system that had just recently gone red giant, thereby migrating a few spare items into a somewhat passive and reasonably nearby solar system like ours. I'm thinking that's where the first use of phrases like "Christ almighty" and "thank your lucky stars" came to past. How's that? Needs more salt. :-) Erm, I mean, work. Then go right ahead and put the salt of your fully interactive 3D orbital simulator and of its supercomputer to work, because that's exactly what sort of "work" it needs. BTW, the public already owns dozens of such spendy supercomputers, plus all of the necessary interactive orbital software that's well suited for accommodating this retro astrophyiscs task. - Brad Guth |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
If Venus is NOT too hot to touch with that Ovglove, then it's NOT too
hot for other established forms of our applied technology, and that's not even for the likes of computers made of micro cold-cathode vacuum tubes becomes fully doable, especially since the required volume and/ or of whatever mass isn't the least bit of a compromise on behalf of our doing Venus. ICs on diamond have also been fully within thermal and pressure spec. Many forms of complex life that coexist on Earth have long since demonstrated their expertise or DNA/RNA intelligence of having survived as complex species, as well as for their having survived much longer than us humans, and often within environments that would be downright lethal to our humanly frail DNA. Some existing forms of this complex life actually lives on CO2 or survives within CO2 saturated environments as is. So why exactly is Venus continually touted to us as being so off-limits? The newish planetology of Venus is actually offering a solid win-win for the likes of sustaining intelligent or even complex plant life, whereas CO2 via applied physics can actually be converted into the raw elements of a fuel, CO and O2 (similar to what plant photosynthesis has to offer). A relatively slight compression ratio applied to the CO2 loaded atmosphere of Venus turns it into its liquid phase, which then becomes an extremely effective refrigerant. Otherwise that rather nicely geothermal preheated gas of CO2 can be technically managed on behalf of becoming directly suitable for sustaining intelligent other life, such as us within our artificial anti-greenhouse abode or efficiently cruising along within our composite rigid airships. Catalyst could help turn CO2 into fuel 18:00 15 March 2007 NewScientist.com news service Tom Simonite http://www.newscientisttech.com/arti...into-fuel.html A new catalyst that can split carbon dioxide gas could allow us to use carbon from the atmosphere as a fuel source in a similar way to plants. "Breaking open the very stable bonds in CO2 is one of the biggest challenges in synthetic chemistry," says Frederic Goettmann, a chemist at the Max Planck Institute for Colloids and Interfaces in Potsdam, Germany. "But plants have been doing it for millions of years." Plants use the energy of sunlight to cleave the relatively stable chemical bonds between the carbon and oxygen atoms in a carbon dioxide molecule. In photosynthesis, the CO2 molecule is initially bonded to nitrogen atoms, making reactive compounds called carbamates. These less stable compounds can then be broken down, allowing the carbon to be used in the synthesis of other plant products, such as sugars and proteins. In an attempt to emulate this natural process, Goettmann and colleagues Arne Thomas and Markus Antonietti developed their own nitrogen-based catalyst that can produce carbamates. The graphite-like compound is made from flat layers of carbon and nitrogen atoms arranged in hexagons. The team heated a mixture of CO2 and benzene with the catalyst to a temperature of 150 șC, at about three times atmospheric pressure. In a first step, the catalyst enabled the CO2 to form a reactive carbamate, like that made in plants. Oxygen grab The catalyst's next useful step was to enable the benzene molecules to grab the oxygen atom from the CO2 in the carbamate, producing phenol and a reactive carbon monoxide (CO) species. "Carbon monoxide can be used to build new carbon-carbon bonds," explains Goettmann. "We have taken the first step towards using carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as a source for chemical synthesis." Future refinements could allow chemists to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels as sources for making chemicals. Liquid fuel could also be made from CO split from CO2, says Goettmann. "It was common in Second World War Germany and in South Africa in the 1980s to make fuel from CO derived from coal," he adds. The researchers are now trying to bring their method even closer to photosynthesis. "The benzene reaction currently supplies the energy that splits the CO2," Goettmann says, "but in plants it is light." The new catalyst absorbs ultraviolet radiation, so the team is experimenting to see if light can provide the energy instead. - In addition to the natural and/or artificially forced photosynthesis process, there is simply nothing all that hocus-pocus or otherwise insurmountable about CO2, of our converting it into the raw elements of CO/O2, or directly utilizing the CO2 itself as refrigerant. As long as we've got unlimited local energy that's renewable and essentially everywhere to behold while on Venus, as such there's no problems whatsoever with taking advantage of all that nifty CO2. The amounts of dry and thus passive atmospheric S8(sulphur) are easily managed, capable of safely coexisting or being diverted and/or extracted and thus removed from whatever ongoing applications of utilizing and/or the converting of CO2 into pure elements of CO and O2. This argument or ongoing rant means that Venus has been technically doable as is, and that you don't have to be hardly much smarter than a hot rock in order to accomplish the task of surviving on Venus. - Brad Guth |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
On Jul 21, 9:07 am, Bob Officer wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:36:52 -0500, in alt.astronomy, Bill Snyder wrote: On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 06:32:35 -0700, Bob Officer wrote: On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:28:51 -0500, in alt.astronomy, Bill Snyder wrote: On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:50:34 -0700, Bob Officer wrote: On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:10:51 -0500, in alt.astronomy, Bill Snyder wrote: On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:45:20 -0700, Bob Officer wrote: On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:24:20 -0000, in alt.astronomy, BradGuth wrote: roups.com On Jul 6, 12:07 pm, BradGuth wrote: roups.com On Jul 6, 10:14 am, BradGuth wrote: roups.com On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote: groups.com Brad, Stop talking to your self, it is a sign of mental instability. Sign, my ass; in the Guthtard's case it's somewhere between a neon-lit billboard, and skywriting with letters a mile high. What ever it is, it is a sign. In dealing with the Guthbot, one simply has to remember the three simple rules which govern our existence: RULE #1: Everything which is A) bad, or B) hard to understand, or C) incompatible with Bishop Ussher's chronology, like 9/11, or quantum superposition, or the theory of evolution, is a product of the Evil Jewish Conspiracy. (Yes, Part A includes the Nazis, and earthquakes, and Paris Hilton. Yes, Part B includes Apollo 11, and relativity, and Form 1040. Yes, Part C includes isotope dating, and archaeology, and Zsa Zsa Gabor. What did you think we meant by "EVERYTHING?") RULE #2: Anybody who laughs at Rule #1 is part of the conspiracy. RULE #3: Anybody who says that Rule #2 is crazy is part of the conspiracy. Those sound familiar? They have to do with discussion of Zeta-noids and Nancy Lieder don't they? Not to my knowledge; if I was borrowing from anyone, it was unconsciously. IT is an old theme. When you examine some people's ideas and question them, the start lashing with cries of conspiracy. It seems to be a strong theme in many of the Kooks we see today. Just keep these fundamentals in mind, and you and Brad and his friends can keep having happy and fruitful discussions until you are all as old as coal. Nice little Ed Conrad reference you slipped into the mix. Is he still trying to sell his "coal" on e-bay? Oh, Brad is an admirer of Ed, although I'm sure they're Just Good Friends, really. No surprise, there. As for Ed's marketing, a cursory search didn't turn anything up, but it seems unlike Scamrad to give up; maybe he has it on there under a some disguising description. I suspect E-bay pulled the auctions. there is some sort of liability involved, maybe. Conrad is in my Scorefile and seldom see anything from him directly. he seems like a very broken record... -- Ak'toh'di Why are Yids and others like yourself so deathly afraid of the truth? - Brad Guth |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
Unlike the mainstream status quo that's continually constipated beyond
the point of no return, as for their having to **** those Yiddish infomercial bricks, whereas my observationology and deductive interpretations without my having such flatulence of painful bricks as based entirely upon the regular laws of physics and the best available science, is still every bit as good as it was 7+ years ago. Why otherwise is there so much Old Testament flak and the MIB damage- control gauntlet to deal with? Is it anti-Yiddish to openly think that Carl Sagan was more right than we'd thought possible? - Brad Guth |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
Besides Venus having been where all the newish planetology and
geothermal action is still kicking butt, what's this off-world spacecraft all about? (robotic obtained image or infomercial hoax??) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc7mkHtuLOs As I'd said before about this extremely weird and very artificial looking item which seems in fact quite old if not ancient looking, but otherwise at least offering an interesting notion to ponder, and especially attractive since I believe ETs and variously complex DNA had utilized our icy proto-moon on behalf of having survived their interstellar trek. However, the very best of our NASA still does not have such proven fly-by-rocket expertise (robotic or manned), nor have we the required rad-hard DNA or any of that totally nonreactive/ (spectrum insensitive) Kodak film that supposedly had such hocus-pocus **** poor DR(dynamic range) in that somehow it couldn't possibly have recorded Venus (even though Venus should by rights have been there and having been a brighter little speck of an item than any similar optical speck of Earth). Go figure. Unlike the mainstream status quo that's continually constipated beyond the point of no return, as for their having to continually **** those Yiddish infomercial bricks, whereas my observationology and deductive interpretations without my having to pass such flatulence of painful bricks, as based entirely upon the regular laws of physics and the best available science, is still every bit as good and as painless as it was 7+ years ago. Why otherwise is there so much Old Testament flak and their MIB damage- control gauntlet to deal with? Is it simply anti-Yiddish to openly think that Carl Sagan was more right than we'd thought possible? It seems that faith of one sort or another is what got us into most cold or hot wars, as well as this never-ending energy and GW fiasco in the first place, and it's this undertow of faith that's puppeteering on behalf of sustaining each of their status quo mindsets at all cost. Therefore, any possible revision of the past, present or future simply isn't allowed, no matters what. The anti antigravity cultism is simply another portion of that swarm like mindset that's willing to kill even their own kind in order to keep those various Old Testament lids on tight. Global warming has extensively to do with the lithobraking arrival of our moon as of roughly 12,000 BP. However, on the behalf of various lord/wizard/spook/mole/rusemaster (aka official Usenet naysayers), I'll gladly say the following again and again, with as much honest love and affection as I can muster in spite of the mainstream gauntlet of flak that's sustaining their status quo. Truth has always been in the swarm cultivated eye of the beholder, as well as it's also why we've got to live with the swarm mindset of our supposedly having walked on that physically dark and unavoidably anticathode nasty moon of ours, while all of that time Venus remained invisible as to any possible rad-hard Kodak moment to boot. Carl Sagan's constructive yaysayism was absolutely correct, in that there's endless possibilities of complex and even intelligent other life within the Universe. Unfortunately, the local realm of this crazy but otherwise vast universe seems rather unusually taboo/ nondisclosure rated, whereas the regular laws of physics that pertain to our terrestrial existence seem not to apply to other local planets or moons, especially if there's anything faith-based taken into consideration. Somehow, not even the honestly deductive interpretations on behalf of any exploration obtained image, especially if it's derived from a proper composite made of 36 radar looks or confirming exposures per pixel, is simply not allowed no matters what those interpretations have to offer, as not even the perfectly natural planetology of such a geothermally active and thus newish planet such as Venus can be openly shared without such topics taking on the lethal gauntlet of all that's faith-based and/or ulterior motivated past the point of no return. It's as though whatever laws of physics, the science of planetology and even biology that works on behalf of interpreting our terrestrial existence simply can not be applied on behalf of any other planet or moon (including our own moon that's simply need-to-know or entirely off-limits to anything except the NASA/Apollo holy grail). We can't even honestly contemplate utilizing our moon's L1, much less the relocation of our moon to Earth's L1, or forbid having anything to do with establishing POOF City at Venus L2(VL2) as our first truly interplanetary depot/gateway. It seems our one and only viable alternative is to accept the past, present and future as having been interpreted and thus scripted by the faith-based mindset or swarm like intelligence, that's clearly unwilling to look or even allow of others to look outside their mainstream status quo box. This leaves us with the one and only global domination options of war upon war until the last of whatever dissenting mindset has been eliminated. Being that we'll all have to accept whatever the upper most 0.1% of humanity has to say (or else), doesn't exactly leave all that many of us off of their NO FLY list. The ongoing swarm like manipulations of physics as having been made or otherwise forced to suit their faith-based interpretations of science, is simply the exposed tip of their badly polluted iceberg that's clearly melting rather nicely before our typically dumbfounded eyes. Those in charge of our mainstream media and especially of public textbooks and science journals that are permitted to exist are also those in charge of having established our past, present and future, that no matters what has to reinforce upon all that came before. Therefore, revisionism of any kind simply is not allowed, regardless of the truths or replicated scientific evidence that gets presented. Only of whatever allows the past to remain unchanged is permitted, and even that much usually has to conform to the prevailing faith-based mindset of those in charge. In other words, Carl Sagan would have to agree that it's far better to hide or exclude whatever truth(s), and/or to essentially lie your butt off than to rock thy mainstream status quo good ship LOLLIPOP, especially if that ship has a Jewish captain. How am I doing so far? - Brad Guth |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
"Bob Officer" wrote in message I find your racism and bigotry to be sickening. Then stop "religiously" reading his posts, you Deco dick sucker! Your Pal, HJ |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
"Bob Officer" wrote in message You are an idiot. You are a Deco dick sucker. HJ |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 08:36:59 -0500, "John \"C\""
wrote: "Bob Officer" wrote in message You are an idiot. You are a Deco dick sucker. You're not fooling anybody. Why don't you just come out of the closet, instead of making all the suggestive comments? -- Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank] |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
Where's the all-knowing expertise when it's needed?
Why is the cool location of Venus L2(VL2) so gosh darn complicated? Why is VL2 and Venus itself being kept so taboo/nondisclosure rated? Why are those pesky Yids still grasping onto your private parts? - Brad Guth |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove
According to wizard John Griffin (speaking on behalf of his fellow
brown-nosed Yiddish clowns): There are no faith-based cults on Venus. Too ****in' hot I replied; Perhaps that's a darn good thing. However, there's unlimited ice cold beer and pizza that once taken out of the freezer cooks itself before your dumbfounded eyes. BTW, you silly folks can always use any one of my robust composite rigid airships if you don't want to set a human hot-foot on that toasty surface, that's geothermlly forcing their newish planetology environment as being so freaking hot from the bottom up. BTW No.2 I also have those full body Ovglove suits that'll help keep your private parts just cool enough. - Brad Guth In spite of all the excluded evidence and orchestraded naysayism flak, it seems those darn old regular laws of physics actually do apply to the relatively newish planetology of Venus, and lo and behold it is at least technically survivable, that is unless your swarm mindset of such profound naysayism is not quite as smart as a hot rock. Notice how these all-knowing wizards of Usenet are continually having to pretend being atheists and otherwise totally dumbfounded past the point of no return. Notice how their Jewish controlled public media, plus that of our textbooks and even GOOGLE/NOVA are still unable to so much as break wind without letting yet another one of their nondisclosure lids get lose. Clearly the hocus-pocus of such infomercial skewed faithism is sucking and blowing in the wind of the nearby revisionism that's unavoidable. - Brad Guth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 154 | September 9th 07 11:41 PM |
AUSTRALIA. FARMERS IN TOUCH WITH GLOBAL WARMING CHANGES | Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times | Astronomy Misc | 9 | March 1st 07 08:53 PM |
A Little Touch of Harry in the Night! | Double-A | Misc | 1 | January 14th 05 11:30 AM |
MOON so low in the sky .. felt like I could touch it ... | Morehits4u | Misc | 16 | February 15th 04 02:21 AM |