|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
recalibrating whether Cosmic incoming rays equals flow rate of Amazon
Below is an old post of mine dating back to 2007 for
the 2nd edition of this book. This is a post in which I am trying to link Dirac's new radioactivity to create the Solar System and in particular the planet Earth by saying that the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts is what is actually creating Earth. Dirac sought supporting evidence by a receding Moon of 2cm/year. I seek supporting evidence by the rate of Cosmic incoming rays as equal or near equal to a flow rate of the Amazon River discharge. So if those two rates are nearly equal, then it is not a coincidence they are so much the same rate of flow. --- quoting old post of mine about flow rates --- Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.math, sci.chem From: a_plutonium Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:06:31 -0700 Local: Sun, Sep 2 2007 11:06 am Subject: #31i the flow of 1/6 Amazon River in Cosmic Rays to create Earth over 5 billion years ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS a_plutonium wrote: Gladly I was mistaken. Looking through this website: http://www.int.washington.edu/PHYS55...hapter8_04.pdf They give a figure for Cosmic Ray Intensity at 1/cm^2 sec ,or, 1 ev/ cm^3 They say that most Cosmic Rays, or 90%, are protons and about 9% are helium nuclei. I saw no Intensity figure for Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts on that website. But I think I can get 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute from the figure 1/ cm^2 sec and then some. So what we see here, is how to create and build Earth from purely just the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Rays that impact Earth every minute of over day and year. So we never needed a Nebular Dust Cloud to create our Solar System when it can be created purely from the Cosmic rays impacting on the astro bodies of our Solar System. So what I need to create and then build Earth over 5 billion years is a flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts of about 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute which is the same as 2.5 billion kilograms per minute. The Amazon River has a flow rate of 12 billion liters per minute, and keeping in mind that a liter of water is a kilogram of water. So we can have a mental comparison of what we need to replace the Nebular Dust Cloud theory. So is the flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts about on the average of 2.5 billion kilograms per minute, roughly 1/6 of the flow rate of the Amazon River? I would think so, because every lightning bolt that strikes Earth is accompanied or created from a "Cosmic Ray leader strike". So Cosmic Rays are very abundant. And the Amazon River is tiny compared to all of the surface of Earth. So if you want to spread the mouth of the Amazon River over all the surface of Earth then it is rather easy to see that Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts could easily provide the mass of Earth over 5 billion years. --- end quoting old post of mine --- So I need to see how close together is the flow rates of the Amazon River versus the incoming Cosmic Rays. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
recalibrating whether Cosmic incoming rays equals flow rate of
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Below is an old post of mine dating back to 2007 for the 2nd edition of this book. This is a post in which I am trying to link Dirac's new radioactivity to create the Solar System and in particular the planet Earth by saying that the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts is what is actually creating Earth. Dirac sought supporting evidence by a receding Moon of 2cm/year. I seek supporting evidence by the rate of Cosmic incoming rays as equal or near equal to a flow rate of the Amazon River discharge. So if those two rates are nearly equal, then it is not a coincidence they are so much the same rate of flow. --- quoting old post of mine about flow rates --- Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.math, sci.chem From: a_plutonium Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:06:31 -0700 Local: Sun, Sep 2 2007 11:06 am Subject: #31i the flow of 1/6 Amazon River in Cosmic Rays to create Earth over 5 billion years ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS a_plutonium wrote: Gladly I was mistaken. Looking through this website: http://www.int.washington.edu/PHYS55...hapter8_04.pdf They give a figure for Cosmic Ray Intensity at 1/cm^2 sec ,or, 1 ev/ cm^3 They say that most Cosmic Rays, or 90%, are protons and about 9% are helium nuclei. I saw no Intensity figure for Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts on that website. But I think I can get 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute from the figure 1/ cm^2 sec and then some. So what we see here, is how to create and build Earth from purely just the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Rays that impact Earth every minute of over day and year. So we never needed a Nebular Dust Cloud to create our Solar System when it can be created purely from the Cosmic rays impacting on the astro bodies of our Solar System. So what I need to create and then build Earth over 5 billion years is a flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts of about 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute which is the same as 2.5 billion kilograms per minute. The Amazon River has a flow rate of 12 billion liters per minute, and keeping in mind that a liter of water is a kilogram of water. So we can have a mental comparison of what we need to replace the Nebular Dust Cloud theory. So is the flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts about on the average of 2.5 billion kilograms per minute, roughly 1/6 of the flow rate of the Amazon River? I would think so, because every lightning bolt that strikes Earth is accompanied or created from a "Cosmic Ray leader strike". So Cosmic Rays are very abundant. And the Amazon River is tiny compared to all of the surface of Earth. So if you want to spread the mouth of the Amazon River over all the surface of Earth then it is rather easy to see that Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts could easily provide the mass of Earth over 5 billion years. --- end quoting old post of mine --- So I need to see how close together is the flow rates of the Amazon River versus the incoming Cosmic Rays. A flow rate of 2.5x10^12 grams of water per minute translates into 4 x 10^10 grams of water per second A proton rest mass is 1.67 x 10^-24 grams So I have 2 x 10^34 protons per second. The cosmic rays (protons) as given is estimated as 1/cm^2 sec Now if the Earth volume is used at 4/3(pi)(r^3) with a radius of 6.3 x 10^8 cm, we are talking about 10^24 So I am caught short by a factor of 10^10. However, if we consider that neutrinos have a tiny rest mass. And if we consider the contribution of Cosmic gamma ray bursts, I think we can reach a flow rate that matches 2x10^34 protons per second. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
recalibrating whether Cosmic incoming rays equals flow rate of
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped) A flow rate of 2.5x10^12 grams of water per minute translates into 4 x 10^10 grams of water per second A proton rest mass is 1.67 x 10^-24 grams So I have 2 x 10^34 protons per second. The cosmic rays (protons) as given is estimated as 1/cm^2 sec Now if the Earth volume is used at 4/3(pi)(r^3) with a radius of 6.3 x 10^8 cm, we are talking about 10^24 So I am caught short by a factor of 10^10. However, if we consider that neutrinos have a tiny rest mass. And if we consider the contribution of Cosmic gamma ray bursts, I think we can reach a flow rate that matches 2x10^34 protons per second. I do not know the cosmic contribution of gamma rays is in the above calculations. And looking in Wikipedia on neutrino rest mass I find data of 0.0027eV^2. Also I find that cosmic-background-neutrinos as 56 per cubic centimeter. I believe the shortfall above of 10^10 is made up with the neutrino flow. Although some cosmic gamma ray bursts are the equivalent in energy of entire galaxies. So I may have a difficult time of suggesting that the entire shortfall of 10^10 protons per cm^2 sec is due to a gamma-ray event. Seems to "ad hoc", but then if someone has measured the average Cosmic Gamma Ray event flow, it may just make up for that 10^10 shortfall without ever needing to look into neutrino rest mass. I wish Dirac were here, right now, for he would probably instantly straighten the above out. That is why he was the most preeminent physicist of the 20th century because within those pages of his book Directions in Physics, pages 74 to 81 are the most important messages of physics that carries physics from the 20th century into the 21st century. Only two physicists of the 20th century are the vanguards of where physics is going in the 21st century and they are Dirac with his "new radioactivities" and John Bell with his "superdeterminism". And all other physics was either dead end or misguided such as general-relativity. Dirac looked for his new radioactivity in the recession of the Moon by 2cm/year. I am looking for Dirac's new-radioactivity by how Earth was created via the steady flow of Cosmic rays and gamma ray bursts (possibly neutrino contribution). Correct me if wrong but I remember reading that the 2cm/year Moon recession was already verified in the 1990s. Remarkable that not only is Dirac's book ignored, his vanguard future vision of physics ignored but even when his 2cm/year Moon recession is verified as true, it is also ignored. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
recalibrating whether Cosmic incoming rays equals flow rate of
On Jul 18, 1:45*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote: Below is an old post of mine dating back to 2007 for the 2nd edition of this book. This is a post in which I am trying to link Dirac's new radioactivity to create the Solar System and in particular the planet Earth by saying that the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts is what is actually creating Earth. Dirac sought supporting evidence by a receding Moon of 2cm/year. I seek supporting evidence by the rate of Cosmic incoming rays as equal or near equal to a flow rate of the Amazon River discharge. So if those two rates are nearly equal, then it is not a coincidence they are so much the same rate of flow. --- quoting old post of mine about flow rates --- Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.math, sci.chem From: a_plutonium Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:06:31 -0700 Local: Sun, Sep 2 2007 11:06 am Subject: #31i the flow of 1/6 Amazon River in Cosmic Rays to create Earth over 5 billion years ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS a_plutonium wrote: Gladly I was mistaken. Looking through this website: http://www.int.washington.edu/PHYS55...hapter8_04.pdf They give a figure for Cosmic Ray Intensity at 1/cm^2 sec ,or, 1 ev/ cm^3 They say that most Cosmic Rays, or 90%, are protons and about 9% are helium nuclei. I saw no Intensity figure for Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts on that website. But I think I can get 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute from the figure 1/ cm^2 sec and then some. So what we see here, is how to create and build Earth from purely just the Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Gamma Rays that impact Earth every minute of over day and year. So we never needed a Nebular Dust Cloud to create our Solar System when it can be created purely from the Cosmic rays impacting on the astro bodies of our Solar System. So what I need to create and then build Earth over 5 billion years is a flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts of about 2.5 x 10^12 grams per minute which is the same as 2.5 billion kilograms per minute. The Amazon River has a flow rate of 12 billion liters per minute, and keeping in mind that a liter of water is a kilogram of water. So we can have a mental comparison of what we need to replace the Nebular Dust Cloud theory. So is the flow rate of Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts about on the average of 2.5 billion kilograms per minute, roughly 1/6 of the flow rate of the Amazon River? I would think so, because every lightning bolt that strikes Earth is accompanied or created from a "Cosmic Ray leader strike". So Cosmic Rays are very abundant. And the Amazon River is tiny compared to all of the surface of Earth. So if you want to spread the mouth of the Amazon River over all the surface of Earth then it is rather easy to see that Cosmic Rays plus Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts could easily provide the mass of Earth over 5 billion years. --- end quoting old post of mine --- So I need to see how close together is the flow rates of the Amazon River versus the incoming Cosmic Rays. Archimedes Plutoniumwww.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Use the flow of solar electrons/m2/sec as a starting point. As a whole, our relatively passive sun is roughly losing or giving off 3e12 kg/sec, much of that is in the form of electrons. However, also remember that electrons tend to naturally repel one another in a very big way. ~ BG |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
recalibrating whether Cosmic incoming rays equals flow rate of
On Jul 18, 12:20*pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote: Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped) A flow rate of 2.5x10^12 grams of water per minute translates into 4 x 10^10 grams of water per second A proton rest mass is 1.67 x 10^-24 grams So I have 2 x 10^34 protons per second. The cosmic rays (protons) as given is estimated as 1/cm^2 sec Now if the Earth volume is used at 4/3(pi)(r^3) with a radius of 6.3 x 10^8 cm, we are talking about 10^24 So I am caught short by a factor of 10^10. However, if we consider that neutrinos have a tiny rest mass. And if we consider the contribution of Cosmic gamma ray bursts, I think we can reach a flow rate that matches 2x10^34 protons per second. I do not know the cosmic contribution of gamma rays is in the above calculations. And looking in Wikipedia on neutrino rest mass I find data of 0.0027eV^2. Also I find that cosmic-background-neutrinos as 56 per cubic centimeter. I believe the shortfall above of 10^10 is made up with the neutrino flow. Although some cosmic gamma ray bursts are the equivalent in energy of entire galaxies. So I may have a difficult time of suggesting that the entire shortfall of 10^10 protons per cm^2 sec is due to a gamma-ray event. Seems to "ad hoc", but then if someone has measured the average Cosmic Gamma Ray event flow, it may just make up for that 10^10 shortfall without ever needing to look into neutrino rest mass. I wish Dirac were here, right now, for he would probably instantly straighten the above out. That is why he was the most preeminent physicist of the 20th century because within those pages of his book Directions in Physics, pages 74 to 81 are the most important messages of physics that carries physics from the 20th century into the 21st century. Only two physicists of the 20th century are the vanguards of where physics is going in the 21st century and they are Dirac with his "new radioactivities" and John Bell with his "superdeterminism". And all other physics was either dead end or misguided such as general-relativity. Dirac looked for his new radioactivity in the recession of the Moon by 2cm/year. I am looking for Dirac's new-radioactivity by how Earth was created via the steady flow of Cosmic rays and gamma ray bursts (possibly neutrino contribution). Correct me if wrong but I remember reading that the 2cm/year Moon recession was already verified in the 1990s. Remarkable that not only is Dirac's book ignored, his vanguard future vision of physics ignored but even when his 2cm/year Moon recession is verified as true, it is also ignored. Archimedes Plutoniumwww.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Our Selene/moon is also losing mass (much of it in sodium), and it's otherwise highly electron and/or positron charged (the public funded science for this is strictly taboo/nondisclosure or need-to-know). ~ BG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WHAT IF (on cosmic rays) | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 41 | December 19th 08 06:31 PM |
supernova cosmic rays | Ray Vingnutte | Misc | 6 | November 5th 04 10:42 AM |
Possible Origin of Cosmic Rays Revealed with Gamma Rays (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | News | 0 | November 5th 04 05:54 AM |
Possible Origin of Cosmic Rays Revealed with Gamma Rays (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 5th 04 05:53 AM |
Cosmic Rays...Then and Now | jojo | Misc | 4 | September 15th 03 05:46 PM |