Where did you find this definition of an entropic particle? Can you show me the forces? By the way I have a PhD in Astrophysics. Thanks, Giovanni
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:16 PM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > It is a ball of entropy known as a micro black hole. They make up 95% of > the universe. I think you should stick to music with a name like that > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Chem, >> I think you should stick to chemistry. I don't want to be impolite but >> which nonsense is this? >> What is an entropic particle? LOL >> Common. >> Giovanni >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:05 PM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> According to my Research & Theory: >>> >>> 1) The Earth has an entropic dark matter core and creates its own iron >>> and nickel. Geologists are way over their head trying to explain it away >>> as a bar magnet. >>> 2) The Earth's entropic core creates its own magnetic fields thru >>> annihilation and charged orbital dark matter and other particles >>> 3) The Earth's entropic core battery gets recharged as the sun spits >>> entropic particles at us triggering our weather and seismic events out here >>> on the crust. Many of the large particles coalesce with the Earth's >>> entropic core and also cool the Earth down >>> 4) We are just part of the colorful 5% crust. >>> 5) If you look at that Chandra X-Ray Matrix, the Earth is one of the >>> intersecting/nodal points connected to the Sun which is a larger nodal >>> point. >>> 6) The sun is about to get a millennial supply of orbital dark matter >>> from those two great comets coming . I just pray no nuclei break off and >>> come our way. Should be a good show either way. >>> >>> Stewart >>> darkmattersalot.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> There are many problems with this theory. >>>> One even if all these ideas would hold they could be applied only to >>>> later stages of the universe life because iron and nickel are created by >>>> massive stars and then released into space when they died as supernovae. >>>> >>>> Also consider that iron and heavy materials are very rare exactly >>>> because only very massive stars can produce these materials. >>>> Furthermore what you call natural magnetism is not something that >>>> occurs so naturally for dust in space. >>>> On earth natural magnetized material become magnetized because of the >>>> Earth magnetic field. Look up how magnetic rocks get magnetized in wiki: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_magnetism#Thermoremanent_magnetization_.28TRM.29 >>>> >>>> You need a huge dynamo magnet like the one at the core of the earth to >>>> magnetize small things like rocks. >>>> >>>> The dynamo magnet is created by plasma that rotates at the center of >>>> the Earth and creates by induction a magnetic field. The fact that there is >>>> iron at the core helps to make the magnetic field stronger and helps to >>>> carry the electrical current of the plasma but it is not the source per se >>>> of the magnetic field of the earth. The sun doesn't have iron at the core >>>> and it has a very strong magnetic field. >>>> >>>> The iron ended up at the core of the Earth because it is heavier >>>> than silica and the other lighter elements that make the earth crust. >>>> >>>> Gravity is the dominant force at astronomical scales because it acts on >>>> everything not special materials (like in the case for magnetism). Yes, it >>>> is weak but when you are dealing with huge quantity of stuff that dominates >>>> all the other forces in particular because electrostatic charges tend to >>>> neutralize themselves coming in pairs and magnetic forces are produced by >>>> moving charges and decay rapidly. >>>> >>>> And so on... >>>> The theory makes not much sense in physical terms. Sorry. >>>> Giovanni >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:55 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> The vortex-l group of individuals have a great deal of knowledge and >>>>> open minds that I enjoy prodding on occasions. This morning an unusual >>>>> concept came into my mind which resulted in a hypothesis that I would like >>>>> to put forth. >>>>> >>>>> Suppose that the universe is organized by the influence of magnetic >>>>> attractions between materials such as iron and nickel that can be >>>>> permanently magnetized instead of gravity, at least in the formative >>>>> years. >>>>> We all know that gravitation is by far the weakest force within the >>>>> universe so why should we assume that such a modest effect would dominate? >>>>> My hypothesis is that this concept is entirely backwards and that the >>>>> basic structures are formed by magnetic influences. After the magnetic >>>>> effects have completed their portion of the task the gravitational >>>>> influence completes the puzzle. >>>>> >>>>> Picture a region in open space that has a large collection of dust >>>>> and gases. It is certain that many specs of iron or nickel laden dust >>>>> exist within this region and that many of these posses natural magnetic >>>>> fields. The attraction due to the magnetic field would dominate the net >>>>> attraction between these particles by an extremely large margin. As time >>>>> progresses the magnetized portions would strongly attract and then >>>>> collect >>>>> together into larger magnetic units. This should occur far faster than >>>>> gravitational collection due to the enormous difference in forces. >>>>> >>>>> So, masses such as the earth's core come together quickly and >>>>> consist of large concentrations of iron and nickel and any other magnetic >>>>> materials. The same would occur in the early formations that eventually >>>>> become other planets and stars. When the collection of magnetic materials >>>>> is mostly completed, then it would be natural for the less magnetic matter >>>>> to be gravitationally concentrated toward these large metallic centers. >>>>> >>>>> In my model, it seems likely that pebbles held together magnetically >>>>> should withstand much more pounding in collisions than those merely >>>>> confined by gravity. This difference in cohesive strength should further >>>>> tend to result in large magnetic bundles at the expense of those formed of >>>>> other materials. With this in mind, it seems likely that all the planets >>>>> that form in a region of space that contains the metals that can be >>>>> magnetized will grow an iron like core first and quickly until these >>>>> materials have been swept clean of the region. This process is then >>>>> followed by the gravitational attraction of the metal cores to the gasses >>>>> and other materials. >>>>> >>>>> The same type of influence should be exhibited throughout the >>>>> universe at large. Some of the formations have appearances that seem >>>>> unusual if gravitation is the prime force at work. Gravity does not >>>>> generate shapes with spatial directivity to the degree that magnetic >>>>> attraction does. Gravity only pulls items towards each other in a >>>>> straight >>>>> line. Magnetic materials generally have a dipole field or a complex field >>>>> that is composed of the addition of many such dipoles. >>>>> >>>>> If we consider that my hypothesis results in the collection of the >>>>> magnetic materials rapidly and dominantly throughout space, then each of >>>>> these would tend to influence others of their kind in the near vicinity. >>>>> This should dominate the early formation of matter that eventually leads >>>>> to galaxies, etc. I suppose that it is a good thing that the magnetic >>>>> fields of iron masses falls off rapidly with distance due to the dipole >>>>> nature or the universe might be dominated by truly enormous collections of >>>>> magnetic core objects. The shorter range of these dipoles compared to the >>>>> monopole of gravity allow what we observe today. >>>>> >>>>> Is it possible that the enormous black holes at the centers of >>>>> galaxies began in this magnetic manner? It would not be difficult to >>>>> imagine that most of the iron and other magnetic materials would be swept >>>>> together first and fast if present within a nearly created dust cloud. >>>>> Once a core has been established, it should easily dominate the remainder >>>>> of the cloud and attract the gasses by its quickly formed gravitational >>>>> field that reaches far into space. >>>>> >>>>> Another idea to consider is that the strong magnetic field at the >>>>> core of the black hole reaches out far enough to impart directivity to the >>>>> motion of materials moving in the direction towards its center. Any >>>>> smaller magnetic masses would be pushed or pulled by the mother field of >>>>> the hole into directions that tend to follow its field pattern. The >>>>> smaller magnetic components would then impart some of this force upon the >>>>> gases and other materials by direct coupling among them. As the total >>>>> combination of materials approach the hole, the kinetic energy imparted >>>>> upon the mass send it past the north or south polar region into orbit. It >>>>> is premature to attempt to define the structure of a black hole under the >>>>> influence of magnetic effects until a more complete picture emerges. >>>>> >>>>> I can visualize the wild and amazing behavior that would be imparted >>>>> upon a gas with magnetic particles immersed within as it approaches a >>>>> large >>>>> magnetic black hole. Once the gas is turned into a plasma by the heat and >>>>> forces applied, it would possess a tremendous electric current induced >>>>> within by the motion through the hole's magnetic field. Great forces >>>>> could >>>>> occur that may result in the beams that are seen emitted by the galactic >>>>> center black holes. Perhaps someone could allow a super computer the >>>>> chance to predict this behavior. >>>>> >>>>> The hypothesis is supported by the known core of the earth. this is >>>>> known to be composed of iron and nickel. >>>>> >>>>> Meteorites are composed of various materials. The metallic ones >>>>> have a large concentrations of magnetic matter within that may have >>>>> collected together rapidly at the formation of the parent body. >>>>> >>>>> The shape of the clouds associated with the enormous explosions of >>>>> super nova tend to be non symmetrical on many occasions with patterns >>>>> associated with dipole or quadrapole fields. >>>>> >>>>> Do other vortex members see support of reasons to believe that this >>>>> hypothesis is not workable? I am seeking inputs from our esteemed members >>>>> that might help to put this puzzle together. >>>>> >>>>> Dave >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
