L O O K I N G - - L E F T W A R D

This is Thursday August 25, 2011. Tomorrow is women’s sufferage day, the day on which women were given the right to vote in 1920. It was pointed out yesterday that it was many feminists who worked behind the scenes to abolish slavery and to get the thirteenth amendment passed. But then they were betrayed in the fourteenth, which restricts the privileges of citizenship to males, or something like that. This issue over negro equality split the women’s movement. Throughout most of our history we have had segments of the population that were way ahead of their time. Of course in 1968 the book The Population Bomb came out that is still ahead of its time. But Thom Hartman points out that in areas of the world where women have rights comparable to men, that birth rates drop dramatically and the population crush is eased. Obviously as time goes by the overpopulation of the world will be that “elephant in the tent” that nobody has wanted to talk about lately. This David Seroda guy who was on the radio this afternoon claims that we are actually an under-regulated society and he’d like to see a bunch of new laws passed. My response is that we have enough on our plate now with no need to complicate things further. Our task is to keep either Mitt Romney or Michelle Bachman or Rick Perry from beginning President next year. Apparently there is some constitutional question as to what happens if the Vice President becomes incompacitated. Dick Chaney wrote about this in his book. I’d say that in his case it might not be a bad idea to just forget we even had a Vice President for the time being. Of course you all know these people are puppets of “someone”. Mitt Romney two months ago had admitted there in fact WAS global warming. Just yesterday he pretty much flip flopped on that position saying that there isn’t now. One caller on the radio this morning made the preposterous statement that “the carbon dioxide molecule does not absorb heat”. Of course ALL molecules on the earth absorb heat. The link between CO2 and the green house effect is pretty overwhelming. As in the case of a car with closed windows, the light gets polarized on the way in, and then it can’t get out for the very reason that is is polarized. The key figure is 350 parts per million CO2 as the danger point when we get global warming, and we are past that mark already and it is rising. Trying to reason with anybody on the far right is pointless these days. It looks like we’re just going to have to elect Rick Perry as President and watch the economy fall apart far unimaginally worse than it is now. Now these Republicans want to eliminate the 2% FICA discount on the payroll deduction, apparently because it’s mostly poor people that benefit here.

However there are certain things this country can do right now to make this a better place, and as a bi-product it also raises revenue. Thom Hartman states that other countries such as Germany get around the terriff question by imposing a value added tax on their own citizens, but then if the product is exported there is no VAT at all, so the product is sold as a deep dish discount. Dr. Levy said a few days ago that its useless to have zero percent interest rates- - if the value of our dollar is dropping on the international markets. Once again Dr. Levy betrays his complete ignorance on economic issues. A dropping dollar is a thing most to be coveted because it tends to make our goods more competitive on the international markets, and well as tending to keep foreign goods out. This is why countries like China endeavor to keep the value of their currency artificially low. But there are certain “health issues” that David Seroda pointed out that our government could help with. For instance the prices of pork and beef are artificially low because we subsidize the corn feed industry. And giving grain to an animal is energy intensive and wasteful. Another energy wasteful thing is this ethanol nonsense, and we give subsidies to farmers in Iowa for that, too. I would not at all mind a final tally on election where Iowa was in the ranks of the other side. And the other area where we subsidize the corn industry is this whole area of corn syrup which is less healthy and more addictive to us than is cane sugar. So if you want to get a decent bottle of Coke, go to Tijuana. Also they are planning to put virtual ads in our history books children learn in school. Now they are going to put in overt plugs for the oil and coal industries, saying how wonderful these products are. Of course another way to conserve energy, if we want to do that is just say that corporations who order these big private jets go back to, say a twenty year depreciation schedule rather than a five year schedule. A well maintained aircraft will easily last twenty years. Another thing we could do is say that churches have to pay taxes along with the rest of us. Jesus said to pay your taxes. Paul in Romans 13 essentially said to pay your taxes, as well as to obey all other government laws passed. I think we can at least be “religious neutral”. Christians tend to have large families and children are tax subsidized. But I’m amblvelent on this one. Because supporting a dependent is a much more responsible thing to do than abandoning him to society. I know that conservatives hate the idea that Anybody would have to go on food stamps. Someone on the radio, perhaps the Rush substitute guy, said that “If all these people on welfare went out and got a job we would cut the unemployment rate dramatically” or something, and how having a “safety net” is a conspiracy to drive the unemployment rate up. I think it was Hartman who said that now only 66% of the able bodied men out there are actually employed and this is the lowest percent this figure has ever been since it was instituted. We can address all of these areas after we are out of the current recession.

AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR SPONSOR

Michelle Bachman presents- - - A new

Product line from Schvansson dinners- -

"Michelle Bachman's Iowa Corn Dogs".

So fresh they still have that barnyard smell to them.

For people who want to "Eat Out" with the beat of them.

A BLAST - FROM THE PAST

I went down for one cup of regular and one cup of black coffee from Laura. The birds started making strange noises when I approached. It just occurred to me that one reason why my spirit is not higher is because some people’s idea of good news is not other people’s idea. Some people, shall we say, take bad news “too well”. I don’t know what kind of “compartmentalization” was going on in George Bush’s mind when he sat there in Sara Soda Florida reading “My Pet Goat” to those second graders. Aurie Fleisher comes to him and informs him there had been a second plane hit and “America is under attack” and President Bush just sits there continuing to read. After the first plane hit a building his response was something like “Well, that guy sure must have been a bad pilot”. It’s kind of like Uncle Bob’s letters that I read through in Dad’s bedroom one time. One October 1971 one said that Nana may well be confined to her bed for the rest of her life, and do you know of any good Funeral Homes? Just for a time frame, Nana’s “decline” didn’t take place till that Thanksgiving. It has always bothered me that our family responds so WELL - - - TOO well, to really bad news. I remember it was the previous month of September 1971 that [no name] shared Jesus with Nana, and she kept saying “God bless you” and I think they read passages from the Living Bible. On the other hand in the summer of 1978 you never saw Mark Bove so agitated and depressed as he was that summer. He was a popular youth director who had Bible Studies bulging with new people all the time. But he’s thinking ‘Hell, I didn’t drop out of Princeton theological seminary for this!” Not to play arm chair psychiatrist of anything but do you perhaps think there was a time when Adolph Hitler had not yet resolved to invade Poland. And I imagine from the moment he made that decision in his mind, his whole spirit lightened and he said “We’re going September first, crank up the propaganda films”. These are the ones they showed in theaters depicting Polish men as brutish with pig-like features. Do you know how these “Marcus Crises” occur? Are they long and protracted with plenty of "lead time". As though extensive time has passed - and finally family members make statements like “You should have solved this problem as of yesterday!” or something. Let’s take the alcoholism diagnosis. That was Thursday March 4^th 1999. And yet from the tone of the conversation that day you’d think it had been an ongoing topic for years. So don’t blame me when I say “I have no idea when the next “crisis” is coming from. It depends when they spring it on me. They will say something out of the blue- - some wild theory- - and suddenly the world stops until it is solved. Family members are “in their element” when there is bad news. Good news only bores them. And my saying with them now is “let sleeping dogs lie”.

HAVING NEITHER CAUSE NOR PROVABILITY

First of all I’d like to clarify how I use certain words. When I refer to “materiality” I refer to whether the subject has mass and material existence as we know it. When I use the word “physicality” the subject may not be material. It could be, for instance as the Pearly Gates or the Golden Streets of heaven. Well, you guessed it. I come against the special relativity theory because it’s primary propositions lack either cause or provability. We will concede the speed of light as a proven. But the rest of it, all the stretching and shrinkage stuff- - is hogwash. Also I fail to find reasons why objects other than light cannot exceed 186,000 miles per second. Picture the following example that’s simple enough for anybody to follow. Picture a planet like earth- - with a satellite going around it at a distance of 200 miles. Now picture another satellite going around the planet that’s always 180 degrees on the clear other side. Obviously the two satellites never see each other, but that’s not the point. Both of these satellites are neither accelerating nor decelerating and both are traveling at a constant speed with no immediate danger of orbital decay. Both are in what we would call a state of localized weightlessness. Any astronaut will attest to this. Now let’s just add one thing- - the Sun. The sun exerts almost no gravitation in comparison to the earth, which is but 200 miles below them. But somehow when a satellite comes over on the “evening” side of the earth, light from the sun is now traveling 18,000 miles faster and the satellite on the morning side of the earth light from the same sun is traveling 18,000 slower. It has to because those on board ship “measure” the speed and it has to be the same for both. One is traveling tword the son and the other traveling away from it. What is wrong with this picture? In terms of the train signal analogy- - last evening I decided to bone up on this example. Excuse me. To be politically correct it’s “Boehn up”. The example centers on some radio beacon device, like a remote control dev ice. And when it signals- - lights at the head of the train and back of the train flash. Given an odd number of cars, this device would probably be in the center of the middle car, being an equal distance from both flashing red beacons. Now if the signal goes off just as an observer standing at the station is there- - there would be a slight delay before the light began traveling from the red beacons. This is the time the radio signal would take to get to both ends of the train. Now according to Einstein- - people riding on the train would see both beacons flash simotaniously, but the person standing at the station would see the approaching beacon first. There is a simple explanation for this. Since the train has moved in the time it took for the radio signal to travel half the length of the train in each direction, the rear red beacon would now be closer than the front red beacon to the person on the platform. A better test would be if the train were crossing our viewer just as both lights flashed. In such a case- if the viewer saw both lights at the same time- - it would mean the speed of the light received by his eyes would be identical. However the “sending speed” would have to be different with each beacon. This whole idea of “light received” as the key rather than “light sent” is a strange one. But it's always the criteria used.

YES, THERE IS A "LIMIT" TO WHICH THINGS CAN BE 'PUSHED'

New and Improved with Clarifications and Amplifications

I make use of the Ether theory to explain all these apparent light irregularities. However I am not one hundred percent confident in my view. My problem with the Ether theory is the same one they had over a hundred years ago. “How come there is NEVER any ether wind”. My theory suggests the possability that it's there but somehow where YOU are for some metaphysical reason, it's never there. One might well say "Something is wrong with my TV, it's working perfectly". Perhaps it's supposed to be that way. Some subjectivists have suggested that "You can't prove ANYTHING exists and that it's all a perception of each individual mind and each mind is in its own "certain reality". Some claim some sort of metaphysical link between "The cosmos" and the deep recesses of the mind. One is almost forced into a Wayne Dyre world of “My Space” and “Your Space”. Einstein invariably talks about "the observer" as opposed to "this is how it really is". One might be tempted to laugh at this except Einstein has a doctrine of "You are always in the perfect viewing area at the stationary center of the universe". Hence Einstein's logic enables those so inclined to regress to a pre Copernican view of the Universe. (Selah) I have dabbled with this sort of thinking that each brain lives in its own metaphysical world and that “Your World” may be different. This is unscientific and non objective. But desperate times call for desperate measures. How does either the approach or recession of a receiving object- - able to determine the speed light is SENT at? Einstein says of course "being sent" is immiterial, but how you "receive" the signal. Also I said in a recent posting I thought that there would come a point in travel through Ether that one would encounter a non circular gravitational field that you were at the Center of and traveling with. I'll explain my view on this in a second. However in Einstein's model this would never happen, but you could go on accelerating till hell froze over. Such a continuous state of accelerating and getting nowhere seems strange to us. Take it up with Dr. Albert. But in my theory you “run out of Ether” at a certain point. One question is whether you get some early warning indications one is "running out of Ether" something that happens suddenly. I've thought about this since this afternoon and concluded that there would be no "warning" your localized gravitational mass field was no longer circular. The theory being that forward light is "slow light" and backward light is "fast light". I have used these terms to explain the machinations of the Ether which is indeed mysterious. The "motor boat" analogy deals with this wave compression and expansion but this analogy is not entirely without flaws. Since atomic particles are governed by a whole different set of forces than are EM waves propigating through Ether, if your vessel did NOT change its physical dimensions - there would come a point at which you would approach an absolute limit of light speed, alias the end of the ether. Because in my version energy applied to a material substance (mass) will always increase the speed by a proportional ammount, and that this relation of energy applied to speed never varies. Hence it's only a matter before the MPS crosses a certain number and your "out" or whatever. Just as in the case of earth's gravity - light has a fixed "escape velocity". And just as with rocket stages - - a fixed and certain ammount of propulsion is needed to achieve it. To use a rather simple analogy to explain this distinction between matter, which is substance, and light, which travels through space, think of a billiard game. You know the game is won by predicting all the geometry of the impact and the force required to hit the ball. The balls bounce off of other calls. Now let me ask you. Could this game of pool be played just as effectively in a vacuum? Yes, it could. Nothing would be altered. Sure you hear the sound of the balls clinking in the room, but the sound you hear is not "causal" on the primary forces acting on the balls. As such atoms and molicules have no relation to the "physics of light speed".

People approaching the "edge" of the Universe know it, of course, if they look out at the pattern of stars. In fact they know at the rate they are getting "closer to the edge" this process can't go on forever. A "stationary" observer would see an eliptical gravitational field developing, but not you who is aboard ship. You would continue to view your own gravitational field as perfectly spherical If you used light to measure light, you'd never pick up on your own field distortion even if it were to occur. In fact with local measurement things would "be as they always were" in keeping with Einstein's theory. However there would come a point when "everything would collapse". In your case if would be when there was "nothing in front of center". It would be like a center of gravity thing with a wood block leaning. Or a building that collapses. Or a tree that fell. Such things happen suddenly. Since there would no longer be any pretence you had a gravitational "radius point", is said point departed from your physical locality- - as I said a few days ago you would literally "lose your mass". Carrying out gravity in the same logic pattern of optics we've explored, in fact there may even be a period of, dare I say it "negative mass" you'd experiance. To understand this you must read what happens optically at this "thresshold point" for this to make sense to you. Then hopefully, it will. In the same way we referred to the optics of the thing as going through a translucent on which there is a projected picture - - so this "flip flop" phenominon goes with gravity. Like with light - - if you traveled faster than IT could - - - you would be running through it backwards - - - and hence a temporary reversal in Force. But for Einstein, he never has to face the question of “What comes after you leave the Ether?”

The Wickipedia article lays out a plan by which space travel to distant stars is still possible. Let's be modest and take a star that isn't all that distant in the over scheme of things, the star Reigel, 900 light years away. Betelguese is 600 light years away. To state it simply even if you planned to dialate time by a factor of one hundred, so you could survive the trip, you would STILL have to spend more than one hundred years, four times, or 400 years, in cycles of acceleration and deceleration as follows. This would have to be "real time" as YOU experiance it inside the ship, not "earth time", which would be much longer. You spend the first "one to ten" years accelerating your one G of acceleration to get you 9/10 the speed of light. You spend the second "ten to one hundred" years accelerating at one G to 99/100 the speed of light. But now since you haven't been traveling at mock 100 the whole time you have to accelerate a little more. Half way there you have to repeat this whole process in deceleration mode. Then on the return trip you again repeat this acceleration and deceleration twice more. So all in all your ship has to contain enough fuel to be able to accelerate to the speed of light four times over. You planned on a six year trip there and a six year trip back and a three year layover. But you find that "cost overruns" could even make this relatively simple trip much longer. But the Wickepedia pipe dream still poses a problem, which is "how could you even THINK you were traveling a hundred times faster than you in fact are- - since Einstein says that no subjective speed check can exceed light speed?