Chem, please give some references and sources for your entropic particle definition. Thanks, Giovanni
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Giovanni Santostasi <[email protected] > wrote: > 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
