Climate Change

[ralis]

31 minutes ago, Old Student said:

There are quite a few, it's kind of inherent in the concept of a tipping point. In dynamics, equilibria are basins in state space. Think of state space as create a dimension for every variable of the system.  Then a point in the space represents a state.  The path of a point represents the change or evolution of that state through time.  When a system is in stable equilibrium, it is in a basin and on or moving towards an attractor, which is the equilibrium. The basin is due to the fact that if you move away from the equilibrium, since it is stable, you "roll" back down the basin surface to the attractor.  A basin boundary is place where if you roll past it, you roll out of the basin, typically into a new one. So if you roll just up to the boundary, you roll back, if you pass it, you do not. Crossing that threshold changes what the new equilibrium is.  If that equilibrium is, say, a much warmer planet, then once you pass into that basin, it won't matter what humans do anymore the climate will warm -- it will be what they call runaway warming.  And basin boundaries are complicated.  How complicated?  Every pretty picture you've ever seen from the Mandlebrot set is a picture of the boundary of that set's basin at zero. So once passed, it isn't certain you can return.

 

Some tipping points that will move us to much warmer climates are, e.g. the methane permafrost starts to melt, which means the CO2 equivalent in the atmosphere goes way up and keeps going up, and the climate warms pretty much until the fires start and the atmosphere permanently changes.  That's an extreme one and one of your positive feedback loops.  Others are more subtle.  If an area goes from glaciated to unglaciated, the weather overhead changes -- part of that vortex effect I was talking about with the melting of the ice in the Arctic and the Tibetan Plateau.  That doesn't come back when the climate cools to current levels because it takes an ice age to put that much ice down.  And it will not just change the water supply for 3 billion people, it will permanently change the monsoons in the Indian ocean, which affect the entire planet.

 

You have given me some homework reading which I appreciate. Will have some comments or questions later on.

 

Thanks!

[Kar3n]

1 hour ago, ralis said:

 

They failed to rake the leaves as Trump suggested.  Furthermore, forest management is much more complex, given the complex nature of that part of the biosphere.

You can try to politicize the facts and bring Trump into the equation all you want, but that doesn't change that if the FS had cleared underbrush the fires would not have spread like they did.

[ralis]

12 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

You can try to politicize the facts and bring Trump into the equation all you want, but that doesn't change that if the FS had cleared underbrush the fires would not have spread like they did.

 

I see you are an expert in forest management now. The problem with prescribed burns is that millions of acres are  involved which is an impossible task. Further, there are other variables in addition to undergrowth that are just as viable in terms of management and causes of fires. 

[Old Student]

14 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

You can try to politicize the facts and bring Trump into the equation all you want, but that doesn't change that if the FS had cleared underbrush the fires would not have spread like they did.

Would you like to tell people how?  Clearing underbrush from millions of acres requires what kind of resources, and should the resources have come from CalFire?  Seems to me they were fighting fires, which is now a year round occupation here mos

t years.  Furthermore, the fires started in fields, not in the forest.

 

As for,

 

16 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

the fires would not have spread like they did.

That's just trash.  The fires started because the winds were 80 knots.  They downed power lines, just like they do in a nearly category 2 hurricane anywhere in the world.  The fires also spread because the winds were 80 knots.  That's enough wind energy to carry embers up to 2 miles.  It's just junk to think that the fires spread on the ground when people could see the embers flying through the air.  The fire started miles away from Paradise, it was in Paradise in 2 hours.  Nothing travels that fast in forest floor brush.  The fire moved so quickly in Paradise that a traffic jam caused by everybody trying to leave resulted in people being incinerated in their cars.

 

We had no choice but to think about the fires 24/7 for weeks, we had canceled schools, closed businesses, a red sun at noon and air quality rated as dangerous to all.  For those of us who do science or do health, we were focussed on this fire and what was causing it and what was happening the whole time.  For somebody from back East to come walk through the forest with cameras rolling and falsely tell people that the problem was forest floor underbrush is just garbage.

 

The only "politicizing the facts" that's going on is an online rewrite of what happened.  What happened is that we were hit with an 80 mile an hour storm of 90+ degree air into brush and forests that hadn't seen a drop of rain since the Spring. Normally by that time there's one or more short showers that don't do a lot but ameliorate the dryness.  That season, nada.

[joeblast]

1 hour ago, Old Student said:

 

Some tipping points that will move us to much warmer climates are, e.g. the methane permafrost starts to melt, which means the CO2 equivalent in the atmosphere goes way up and keeps going up, and the climate warms pretty much until the fires start and the atmosphere permanently changes.  That's an extreme one and one of your positive feedback loops.  Others are more subtle.  If an area goes from glaciated to unglaciated, the weather overhead changes -- part of that vortex effect I was talking about with the melting of the ice in the Arctic and the Tibetan Plateau.  That doesn't come back when the climate cools to current levels because it takes an ice age to put that much ice down.  And it will not just change the water supply for 3 billion people, it will permanently change the monsoons in the Indian ocean, which affect the entire planet.

its one thing to paint a picture of a seesaw, but there's a crapload of negative reinforcers on the system, so its really a matrix of stability as opposed to something that can arbitrarily tip over.  but if one keeps putting the cart before the horse, then it will lead to all sorts of incorrect predictions...as we've been seeing for 40 years running.  with the sun's contribution overcompressed, it allows for charlatans to play fast and loose with the extra room in the modeling - might make some scary graphs, but ultimately its lack of predictive rigor will rear its head and the doomers will eventually begrudgingly accept that without a decently predictive solar model, all of the long term predictions of the GCMs are nothing but GIGO.

 

Hansen directly tried convincing me in 2003 that man's inputs to the equations outweighed the sun's inputs - if that doesnt strike one as batshit crazy, then one has some very significantly flawed understandings of how the universe works.

Edited May 10, 2019 by joeblast

[Old Student]

11 minutes ago, joeblast said:

ts one thing to paint a picture of a seesaw, but there's a crapload of negative reinforcers on the system, so its really a matrix of stability as opposed to something that can arbitrarily tip over. 

I never said anything about a seesaw, that's the second time (first not here) someone has heard me say tipping point and thought I meant a seesaw.  I distinctly remember describing it as a ridge between two basins that you tip over into one or the other.

 

Yes there are "negative reinforcers" the problem is, we're blowing through them. And as you near the ridge at the basin boundary, the net effect of those reinforcers balances to zero, literally.

[joeblast]

3 minutes ago, Old Student said:

I never said anything about a seesaw, that's the second time (first not here) someone has heard me say tipping point and thought I meant a seesaw.  I distinctly remember describing it as a ridge between two basins that you tip over into one or the other.

 

Yes there are "negative reinforcers" the problem is, we're blowing through them. And as you near the ridge at the basin boundary, the net effect of those reinforcers balances to zero, literally.

proven on the low side, unproven on the high side, though....high side is where the model's conjecture is, it just doesnt really exist in the historical record as advertised.

Edited May 10, 2019 by joeblast

[Old Student]

1 hour ago, joeblast said:

Hansen directly tried convincing me in 2003 that man's inputs to the equations outweighed the sun's inputs - if that doesnt strike one as batshit crazy, then one has some very significantly flawed understandings of how the universe works.

You directly?  Like you asked him to explain it to you?  And you appear not to have understood the explanation.  Not worth my time if he couldn't do it.

[voidisyinyang]

9 hours ago, Old Student said:

Not really, it was an example of how a noncommutative geometry allowed the spectrum to completely define the geometry of the manifold.

 

Not sure what to make of "renormalization has been wrong". Renormalization is a technique.

 

No, I didn't claim that.  The noncommutative geometry Connes creates is his perturbation semigroup of operators which is an extension of the "commutative" geometry, so there is a natural embedding of the latter into the former.  The "commutative" geometry is within the noncommutative geometry, not the other way around.

(followed by quote from professor)

Seriously?  A quantum physics professor said that?  That sounds like Penrose's theory on quantum events accounting for the brain space problem.  UMass would have been a better place to take quantum physics.

 

Penrose's theory exists because there is a very real problem with current neuron theory -- it does not account for the storage capacity of the brain.  So Penrose postulated that maybe some quantum phenomenon was accounting for the "computing" as a way to increase the computing power and account for the storage.

 

It's an interesting theory, but I don't agree with it.  There is far more possible "space" in the brain after one discards the notion that all the brain does is fire synapses in response to signals based on the synapse long term potentiation or long term depression.

 

Still, it's strange that it would show up in a quantum physics class, other than in passing.

 

My quantum physics professor at Hampshire college was Herbert J. Bernstein. He's a top-notch researcher. Although I don't agree with his particular interpretation of quantum physics - well I agree with his take much more than I agree with most quantum physicists.

 

Quote

 

Spin Precession During Interferometry of Fermions and the Phase Factor Associated with Rotations Through

Radians

HJ Bernstein - Physical Review Letters, 1967 - APS

A proposed experiment which combines spin precession and two-slit interferometry of
unpolarized neutrons is analyzed. The analysis elucidates the connection with a possible
observation of the phase factor (-1) associated with the rotation of a half-integral spin particle …

 

 

When you say that the noncommutative is an "extension" of the commutative - the point I am emphasizing is that Connes use of music as the formal logic of the noncommutative phase is actually based on using "two notes" as frequency. I gave the example already - this is actually from Pythagorean orthodox music tuning - from before Philolaus even (and therefore before Plato and Archtyas). So math professor Luigi Borzacchini proved that in fact Western math originates from the wrong music theory - and is, as he states, the "guiding evolutive principle" of western science. Philosopher of science Oliver L. Reiser called this music drive of western math, the "music logarithmic spiral." A term from Esther Watson (daughter of Thomas Watson) who discussed this research with Einstein.

 

Here's Connes again:

Quote

 

There is something even simpler which is what happens with a single string. If we take the most elementary shape, which is the interval, what will happen when we make it vibrate, of course with the end points fixed, it will vibrate in a very extremely simple manner. Each of these will produce a sound....When talking about a string it's a straight line. ... They are isospectral [frequency with the same area], even though they are geometrically different....when you take the square root of these numbers, they are the same [frequency] spectrum but they don't have the same chords. There are three types of notes which are different....What do I mean by possible chords? .... The point [zero in space] makes a chord between two notes. When the value of the two eigenfunctions [2, 3, infinity] will be non-zero. ...The corresponding eigenfunctions only leave you one of the two pieces; so if there is is one in the piece, it is zero on the other piece and if it is non-zero in the piece it is zero there...You understand the finite invariant which is behind the scenes which is allowing you to recover the geometry from the spectrum....

 

Our notion of point will emerge, a correlation of different frequencies...The space will be given by the scale. The music of the space will be done by the various chords. It's not enough to give the scale. You also have to give which chords are possible....The only thing that matters when you have these sequences are the ratios, the ear is only sensitive to the ratio, not to the additivity...multiplication by 2 of the frequency and transposition, normally the simplest way is multiplication by 3...2 to the power of 19 is almost 3 to the power of 12....You see what we are after....it should be a shape, it's spectrum looks like that...We can draw this spectrum...what do you get? ... It goes up exponentially fast...What is the dimension of this space?...It's much much smaller. It's zero...It's smaller than any positive.... Musical shape has geometric dimension zero... You think you are in bad shape because all the shapes we know ...but this is ignoring the noncommutative work. This is ignoring quantum groups. There is a beautiful answer to that, which is the quantum sphere... .There is a quantum sphere with a geometric dimension of zero.

 

 

So in other words - it's a kind of unified field theory that also includes integrated humans as living quantum computers. Ian Stewart is part of this research plan also. But - this is something I exposed after finishing my master's degree - and so I dubbed it the "Actual Matrix Plan" - back in 2001. So based on that plan then nuclear radiation is considered to be a type of spiritual evolution that humans need to adapt to - "medical hormesis."

 

So actually there is a better spin of the Hameroff-Penrose model - put forth by Jack Tuszynski's research team in quantum biology. https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-chiral-asymmetric-quantum-potential.html

 

I did a blog post on it - but you have to scroll down past my intro quotes to get to the actual blog post.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332530309_Theorising_how_the_brain_encodes_consciousness_based_on_negentropic_entanglement

 

To get back to Bernstein - he also developed a noncommutative phase technology that is being tested by NASA as nonlocal quantum correlation signals via satellite. So superluminal quantum entanglement signals - but the particular "spin" he puts on it (in contrast to the Chinese) is to utilize a noncommutative phase topology.

 

So then that quote you were surprised about - I actually sent that to Nobel physicist Brian Josephson - and he thanked me for it. But Josephson, with whom I corresponded, is now focused on acoustic resonance also and is now also studying noncommutative phase math via the colleague of Eddie Oshins (who made the Neigong connection) - math professor Louis Kauffman.

 

https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-dirac-dance-and-aharonov-susskind.html

 

Eddie Oshins makes reference to the Aharonov-Susskind-Bernstein Effect.

 

Quote

However, Bernstein [24J and Aharonov and Susskind [25] argued that this was not necessarily the case under all ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYBqIRM8GiY

 

So essentially Daoist Neigong - as Eddie Oshins realized - is literally a Macroquantum relativistic training via quantum biology. So the body moves of the training - is literally a recreation of the noncommutative phase resonance.

 

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by voidisyinyang

[Old Student]

2 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

the noncommutative phase is actually based on using "two notes" as frequency

Yes, exactly!  So the way the "ordinary" notes (the geometry that "commutes") is embedded in the two note frequencies is that for each (single) frequency there is a copy of the entire set of ordinary notes attached, making up all the two note frequencies that have it as a (let's say) 2nd note, and in fact there is one that is attached to silence (frequency of zero) is indeed one of them and represents all the single note entries in the two frequency bigger space.  That's called a tensor product space and the noncommutative space is a space whose basis is the eigenfunctions created by the perturbation semi-group which is a subspace of that tensor product space, with the properties that they are all of unit size (same volume maybe?) and all self-adjoint (if the operators are compact as well, their eigenfunctions create a basis for the space, some operators can be proven the same even if they sometimes aren't well behaved). So it sets up to have a basis of the space of his two-note geometry.

[voidisyinyang]

8 hours ago, Old Student said:

Yes, exactly!  So the way the "ordinary" notes (the geometry that "commutes") is embedded in the two note frequencies is that for each (single) frequency there is a copy of the entire set of ordinary notes attached, making up all the two note frequencies that have it as a (let's say) 2nd note, and in fact there is one that is attached to silence (frequency of zero) is indeed one of them and represents all the single note entries in the two frequency bigger space.  That's called a tensor product space and the noncommutative space is a space whose basis is the eigenfunctions created by the perturbation semi-group which is a subspace of that tensor product space, with the properties that they are all of unit size (same volume maybe?) and all self-adjoint (if the operators are compact as well, their eigenfunctions create a basis for the space, some operators can be proven the same even if they sometimes aren't well behaved). So it sets up to have a basis of the space of his two-note geometry.

 

Thank you for your explanation. Now I would like to share that the same explanation exists again from music theory itself, just as Connes has explained. So when he uses "notes" and 2 note "chords" - he is not speaking as an analogy.

 

so first I'll find part of that Connes quotes again.

Quote

there is a marvelous mathematical structure that is underneath the law, not a value of a number, but a mathematical structure

 

So as Connes states, as I already quoted, the "law" or "mathematical structure" as noncommutative phase is actually provided by music theory - as the formal logic.

 

So Professor Richard McKirahan did an analysis of Philolaus showing that Philolaus introduced the mathematical term for geometric magnitude into music theory. So when Philolaus did this, he was relying on his "lyre" to set up the acoustic scale.

 

So you mention the values of the zeroes - so then the issue in music theory, as it is normally learned, relying on the symmetric commutative math (that originated from music theory), is that Philolaus flipped his lyre around in order to lie about the value of the zeroes.  So in other words in order to create the first logarithmic equation with the Perfect Fifth plus the Perfect Fourth = the Octave then Philolaus had to use a "double octave" that covered up the noncommutative phase.

 

So what was established was that the octave as 0 to 12 then has 8/12 as 2/3 wavelength with 3/2 frequency while then 0 to 8 has the 3/4 wavelength as 6/8 with the frequency as 4/3 or 8/6. So then the geometric magnitude could be set up as commutative by then stating 4/3 (8/6) PLUS 3/2 (8/12) = 2 (12/6).

 

So then now as it is taught - normally - I call this the "bait and switch." But the overtone series is different than the harmonic series. So you can have 3/2 as an overtone but if you use 4/3 as an overtone of the same "root tone" or root tonic - then the problem is that the 3 in the denominator is not a harmonic of the 1 as the root tonic based on the same pitch. So the harmonic series already relies on the assumed logarithmic geometric ratios but the overtone series does not.

 

So in music theory this is also called the "Phantom Tonic" because if you look at the geometric ratios then the 2/3 as subharmonic is also a Perfect Fifth but it is the geometric ratio of F to C while 3/2 is the Perfect Fifth as C to G overtone harmonic. So then when Philolaus "doubled" the 3/4 of 6/8 he was using a different value of zero as zero to 8 for the geometric wavelength in order to create the geometric magnitude of 4/3 for the octave value of 6 to 12 as the 2. So that is how the commutative logic of Western math was created.

 

So then Math professor Luigi Borzacchini states in his 2007 published article, that he first developed in an academic math forum in 1999, that there is a "cognitive bias" against music theory as the origin of Western math - or "logistics." And at first the music theory as noncommutative phase was the empirical truth but was a "negative judgment paradox" and so it could not be talked about since there was no external visual measurement to confirm it. So then once the transfer to geometric ratios as magnitude was established then the music theory origin was covered up. Professor Borzacchini (he's now retired but I sent him a math equation back in 2001 - based on music ratios - and he said the math was good). So Borzacchini states in his published article that the vanishing of the music origin of Western math is "astonishing" and "really shocking."

 

As I already stated - he calls this music origin from noncommutative phase into the commutative math to be a "deep pre-established disharmony" due to this negative judgement paradox that created the infamous paradoxes in mathematical logic (that remain unsolved). And so then he calls this "Plato's Computer" as the "evolutive guiding principle" of science - to artificial intelligence.

 

So music theory as listening to music is actually meditation - what you have referred to as TING in DAoist Taiji training. If you study... the book "Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality" - it states that the left ear is yang qi while the left eye is yin qi. So this is because in meditation the left ear listening is right brain dominant. So quantum physicist Manfred Euler has modeled the phase coherence between the right and left ear listening as being the same as the double slit experiment as the foundation of quantum physics. Science has proven that humans can hear up to 10 times faster than Fourier Uncertainty - and so this phase coherence is not just nonlinear but also noncommutative phase. The highest pitch we hear externally then "shifts" a perfect fifth in the root tonic perception - as has been proven recently. And then this pitch when listened to internally then resonates the brain as Ultrasound as a whole - as the Hameroff Model has emphasized. The ultrasound frequency then is the strongest amplitude resonance of the microtubules that are piezoelectric. So the ultrasound frequency has 3000 times greater electromagnetic amplitude of the microtubules, as corroboration of Hameroff's model. I've corresponded with Dr. Hameroff and and with the Indian physicist in Japan who did that study on the microtubules.

 

So my point is that the Daoist Neigong as Ting - meditation - this is actually the empirical truth of reality and was known by the ancients and also relied on quantum biological negentropy or relativistic quantum biology. My contention of this was then corroborated by Eddie Oshins - or rather I discovered he had made the same claim - when he worked at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. And so then I have corresponded with math professor Louis Kauffman - I posted the link to youtube on the "Dirac Dance" - which Kauffman first filmed with Eddie Oshins as a "handshake" of the 720 spin. So Oshins argued that in fact the movements in the training of internal martial arts are in fact based on noncommutative phase resonance from the foundation of reality.

 

That was also my contention - based on studying the book Taoist yOga: Alchemy and Immortality. So for example there is an exercise called "moving of yin and yang" and the key is to put the left hand facing the lower body and the right hand facing the upper body. So since the left hand for males is yang and lower body is yin and the right hand is yin for males and upper body is yang - this completes the 720 degree noncommutative phase spin to activate the Yuan Qi energy of the Universe.

 

that's just one example. Another is in full lotus for males the left leg should be on top in order to store up the energy.

 

So then Yiquan is another example - the secret of the standing position in Yiquan is that you visualize the energy from the right hand to the left foot and left hand to the right foot. I discovered the WEsterners were teaching this Yiquan standing training WITHOUT teaching the noncommutative phase secret of what to visualize! haha.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by voidisyinyang

[Old Student]

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

Now I would like to share that the same explanation exists again from music theory itself, just as Connes has explained. So when he uses "notes" and 2 note "chords" - he is not speaking as an analogy.

 

In terms of Fourier eigenfunctions (eigenfunctions of the Laplacian) no, not an analogy as long as you take any kind of vibration to be a "note".  The theory doesn't have to be applied to a Laplacian or Dirac operator, in which case you can decide for yourself whether you want to call it music directly or an analogy to music.  Personally, I have no problems with analogies and metaphors, they make up the basis of all language, and probably of all thought.  Be aware that in some of what Connes is talking about, those notes are points, and in some they appear to be strings (as in string theory not as in musical strings, but they were named that by analogy to a real string vibrating).  You also need to be aware that when a mathematician says a point in a space, or a point in a phase space, it can be pretty much anything at all, the collection of them plus some structure to the collection makes a space.

 

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

So as Connes states, as I already quoted, the "law" or "mathematical structure" as noncommutative phase is actually provided by music theory - as the formal logic.

I believe the precise statement is, "...is actually provided by a music theory."  His statement is that taking the underlying point structure of his geometry to be chords, the laws of physics become a music theory, i.e. a theory of what chords to use when and where.  Also please understand that there is a whole superstructure of spaces and groups and algebras and operators over each point in these mathematical spaces.

 

Do you have a reference for the ultrasound and tubule stuff?

[joeblast]

17 hours ago, Old Student said:

You directly?  Like you asked him to explain it to you?  And you appear not to have understood the explanation.  Not worth my time if he couldn't do it.

No, specifically, I asked him why so little of his content involved analysis of the sun, where he pointed me to a single paper he wrote that tangentially mentioned TSI and he then proceeded straight to telling me that doesnt really matter though since TSI basically doesnt change much to be concerned with, and it was moot also because his calculations proved beyond a doubt that man's influence on the climate had overtaken the sun's influence on the climate.  And dont worry about whether the predictions are correct, because solar cycle 23 and into 24 were going to be absolute ragers. 

 

But of course neglected to try and rationalize the cogdis of a raging solar cycle being necessary to help drive his fantasies about the climate.

 

At any rate, he was wrong about 23, wrong about 24, and has a terrible track record of el nino predictions, so yeah...that set of interactions told me that James Hansen is a zealot chasing a predetermined conclusion and really doesnt have any interest in his conjecture being wrong at all.

Edited May 11, 2019 by joeblast

[Old Student]

 

 

38 minutes ago, joeblast said:

I asked him why so little of his content involved analysis of the sun, where he pointed me to a single paper he wrote that tangentially mentioned TSI and he then proceeded straight to telling me that doesnt really matter though since TSI basically doesnt change much to be concerned with, and it was moot also because his calculations proved beyond a doubt that man's influence on the climate had overtaken the sun's influence on the climate.

 

https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/total-solar-irradiance-tsi-datasets-overview

 

Did you see the above link?  If you can successfully show why that very periodic and not remarkable cycle is causing long term warming (long term being with respect to the time period of that TSI cycle data), then you can show that Hansen was wrong.  But unless you're seeing something that isn't really there in that data, you can't.  It just doesn't support any long term increases.  That's what he was trying to tell you.  You're dead set on trying to prove something other than human created emissions and human created changes to the environment are causing the increase in heat.  He has the data that the heat isn't being created externally. He knows his stuff on that, he's a planetary climatologist. So if anyone is a zealot chasing a predetermined conclusion, it would seem to be the person who grabs any graph he can of other people's data without reading other people's explications of their data and tries to prove humans aren't doing this. We are. There are too many of us putting out too many wastes and tearing up too much nature.

 

So like I said, I don't think I can do better explanations than Jim Hansen, he's kind of very good at explaining things to people. So if you didn't understand it when he said it, there's no hope I'm going to get through to you.  I don't know how old you are, but odds are that Hansen was studying TSI cycles when you were in grade school. He knows them very cold. Tony Heller doesn't, he's a quack.

[joeblast]

1 hour ago, Old Student said:

 

 

 

perhaps we should shrink the context a little further   and maybe if we zoom properly, we can avoid seeing things like when algore tried telling everyone co2 went right along with temperature instead of it being a climate response....oh wait, we cant have that being a climate response mechanism since that's one of our declared primary drivers!  likewise here you have chosen a context that is tiny enough that the question cant be answered sufficiently  - I dunno, maybe you knew you were asking a loaded question, maybe not.

 

its too bad you dont want to see the holes, but such it is when people have been baptized into the religion.  Hansen is a quack, Schmidt and Mann are quacks, and the quacks made a concerted effort to pervert the peer review process and crowd out any dissent, rejecting science in the process.  there's not much need to discuss the quackiness here with followers of quacks who arent interested in any context that doesnt show humans caused all these problems.

 

they missed out on academia on this one

 

cuz that's where the co2 catastrophe is being pushed from, our friendly neighborhood private syndicate

 

too bad the chicago climate exchange already failed because not enough real people actually believe that bullshit

Edited May 11, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

On 5/11/2019 at 10:36 AM, Old Student said:

 

In terms of Fourier eigenfunctions (eigenfunctions of the Laplacian) no, not an analogy as long as you take any kind of vibration to be a "note".  The theory doesn't have to be applied to a Laplacian or Dirac operator, in which case you can decide for yourself whether you want to call it music directly or an analogy to music.  Personally, I have no problems with analogies and metaphors, they make up the basis of all language, and probably of all thought.  Be aware that in some of what Connes is talking about, those notes are points, and in some they appear to be strings (as in string theory not as in musical strings, but they were named that by analogy to a real string vibrating).  You also need to be aware that when a mathematician says a point in a space, or a point in a phase space, it can be pretty much anything at all, the collection of them plus some structure to the collection makes a space.

 

I believe the precise statement is, "...is actually provided by a music theory."  His statement is that taking the underlying point structure of his geometry to be chords, the laws of physics become a music theory, i.e. a theory of what chords to use when and where.  Also please understand that there is a whole superstructure of spaces and groups and algebras and operators over each point in these mathematical spaces.

 

Do you have a reference for the ultrasound and tubule stuff?

 

For the sake of maintaining this thread on "climate change" - you can see my blog for more details - http://elixirfield.blogspot.com and it also links to my ex-blog http://ecoechoinvasives.blogspot.com 

 

You ask for references. I have a 2012 free pdf book that has 725 scholarly footnotes - so you can just word search it for references on ultrasound. Or just search my blogs. thanks

 

I think we have a different understanding of what Connes means. That's ok. My long quote of him actually pieces together several different works where he discusses music. I first encountered his work on music in his book "Triangle of Thought" - (2002) - so I read that when it first was published, around that same time. At that time, I also thought he was just being "metaphorical" or as an analog. But since my background in music theory - I guess you'll have to trust me when I say that Connes is the only one pointing out something that I figured out on my own also - that the noncommutative phase origin of music theory, that Connes calls, (2, 3, infinity), is actually also non-local. So he calls it's a geometric subspace that creates time but it is also a noncommutative phase as an eigenfrequency matrix spectrum. So it's before the square root is created as a commutative spectrum.

 

So Connes likes to practice Chopin on piano - he is obviously biased towards Western music. So he doesn't realize that what he is describing, what you call an "extension" of commutative math, already exists in the nonwestern music logic of Orthodox Pythagorean tuning. So he describes this truth, again, when he switches around 2 to the 12th and 3 to the 19 as 2 to the 19th and 3 to the 12. So when he switches those around he is showing how they are noncommutative.

 

I give a couple other examples on my blog - there is a book on quantum and music - that I cite - stating the same thing. So I realize what you are saying about the difference between "hearing" sound. But first of all - we have to scrap the Western assumption that music has to depend on a vibrating string that has a symmetric commutative logarithmic logic to it. Connes disproves that. So then I recommend considering that Connes is stating that at "zero" time there is already a noncommutative phase, that he calls, (2, 3, infinity).

 

So in Daoism - the Single Perfect Yang is the same thing. So Yang is the Perfect Fifth but as 2/3 it is C to F and as 3/2 is it C to G. So for the commutative WEstern science model then the 2/3 as C to F had to be covered up and denied. Archytas only uses 3/2 and not 2/3 - why? Because his logarithmic equation takes the "subharmonic" of the Perfect Fifth - what Philolaus called the "subcontrary" and instead calls it the Harmonic Mean as 4/3, by doubling it back into the same octave. I already described how Philolaus first did that and then ARchytas relied on the equation Arithmetic Mean x Harmonic Mean = Geometric Mean Squared.

 

So that is the foundation of WEstern science that first covered up the empirical truth of the noncommutative phase origin of reality. But in nonwestern cultures this "cover up" never happened. My contention is that the ecological crisis is because Western science imposes the opposite form of entropy onto ecology due to this wrong "root"' or foundation of mathematics, and then extends that wrong root, as the "music logarithmic spiral" into higher dimensions.

[ralis]

Regarding CO2 uptake of trees as well as all plant life has been touched upon in this thread awhile back. As I stated previously, all plant life have an upper limit of CO2 uptake and if this limit is breeched, there are ramifications as stated in current research. Tampering with evolutionary parameters has consequences! 

 

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10174-4

Edited May 17, 2019 by ralis

[Old Student]

On 5/13/2019 at 2:01 PM, voidisyinyang said:

You ask for references. I have a 2012 free pdf book that has 725 scholarly footnotes - so you can just word search it for references on ultrasound. Or just search my blogs. thanks

I really meant give me a reference to the articles (perhaps by Hameroff and the Indian physicist in Japan) on which the following statement is based. As in what is the name of the articles.

 

On 5/11/2019 at 6:44 AM, voidisyinyang said:

The ultrasound frequency then is the strongest amplitude resonance of the microtubules that are piezoelectric. So the ultrasound frequency has 3000 times greater electromagnetic amplitude of the microtubules, as corroboration of Hameroff's model. I've corresponded with Dr. Hameroff and and with the Indian physicist in Japan who did that study on the microtubules.

 

I found something for you that I think would help you understand the Fourier process and how it generalizes:

 

Sorry for the embedding, I meant only to include the link. Pay careful attention to the way the picture is described by adding circles to the approximation.

[voidisyinyang]

11 hours ago, Old Student said:

I really meant give me a reference to the articles (perhaps by Hameroff and the Indian physicist in Japan) on which the following statement is based. As in what is the name of the articles.

 

 

I found something for you that I think would help you understand the Fourier process and how it generalizes:

 

Sorry for the embedding, I meant only to include the link. Pay careful attention to the way the picture is described by adding circles to the approximation.

 

yeah - that's a cool Fourier vid. thanks.

 

https://phys.org/news/2014-01-discovery-quantum-vibrations-microtubules-corroborates.html

 

Quote

The recent discovery of warm temperature quantum vibrations in microtubules inside brain neurons by the research group led by Anirban Bandyopadhyay, PhD, at the National Institute of Material Sciences in Tsukuba, Japan (and now at MIT), corroborates the pair's theory and suggests that EEG rhythms also derive from deeper level microtubule vibrations.

 

So I did correspond with this scientist - he is very nice.

 

Quote

Thank you so much for your kind note. I think I am against self-similarity and symmetry, anharmonicity is the key.... I think no human could be rebuilt from scratch because of one factor. The initial phase values of clocking Bloch spheres are unknown. Every thing in this universe is a clocking Bloch sphere.

 

Anirban Bandyopadhyay

5:54 PM (4 hours ago)

https://www.elsevier.com/about/press-releases/research-and-journals/discovery-of-quantum-vibrations-in-microtubules-inside-brain-neurons-corroborates-controversial-20-year-old-theory-of-consciousness

Quote

Microtubule is six times bigger than single protein tubulin yet is 3000 times more electrically conductive than single tubulin protein
Information for us is a time cycle that can be modeled in particular geometric shapes. It is all about one rhythmic vibration that arises through integration of geometries using 2,800 frequencies over 10^20 Hz.

Edited May 18, 2019 by voidisyinyang

[LAOLONG]

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/health/2019/02/05/north-magnetic-pole-shift-orig-vstop-bdk.cnn

[joeblast]

On 5/23/2019 at 10:12 PM, LAOLONG said:

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/health/2019/02/05/north-magnetic-pole-shift-orig-vstop-bdk.cnn

 

when jupiter's great red spot loses momentum, the bands of atmosphere start to grind away at it

 

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

thanks for your help again. I also did a semester studying conservation biology in Costa Rica (1992, school for field studies). Thought you might be interested in how the arctic is about to go ice free: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2591.0;attach=125457;image  Then the Eastern Siberian Arctic Shelf methane will "unload" (Dr. Natalia Shakhova). So the global warming will keep accelerating in its rate. We had a dearth of mosquitoes since the arctic jet stream kept stuck low - in northern Minnesota - so freezing nights into mid-June. I would follow Dr. Carmen Solana who publishes as Sam Carana at http://arctic-news.blogspot.com

[joeblast]

here's something that's actually sensible

http://www.opinione.it/cultura/2019/06/19/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-antropico-clima-inquinamento-uberto-crescenti-antonino-zichichi/

Edited July 3, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

7 hours ago, joeblast said:

here's something that's actually sensible

http://www.opinione.it/cultura/2019/06/19/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-antropico-clima-inquinamento-uberto-crescenti-antonino-zichichi/

 

Wow the head of that petition is funded by the petroleum industry! hilarious.

Quote

He took part in the project - sponsored entirely by oil companies - also the University G. D'Annunzio of Chieti, first on the list Uberto Crescenti, then rector of the University.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://dorsogna.blogspot.com/2011/02/ubaldo-crescenti-e-il-majella-petroleum.html&prev=search

[joeblast]

wow you're blinded by "science" (and cynicism)

 

and when I say "science" I mean it in that acted out shouted out way that Jon Lovitz used to strike that posture and say "Acting!!!" on SNL

Spoiler

I mean really, "AGW" "climate science" is like watching another thrilling episode of Master Thespian at this point, its a joke

 

 

but fact of the matter is, it doesnt matter who sent the messenger, your ilk have had blinders installed to keep the sun out of your eyes

 

and if you must resort to logical fallacies in order to entertain your folly, then surely your position is not a winning one

 

its only a matter of time before co2 catstrophe conjectureism is laughed out of even academia, drew.  the globalists and banksters are going to lose and there will no longer be perverted money keeping this ridiculous poppycock idea afloat.  it'll be great when banksters lose academia and can no longer pervert the minds of the young.

Edited July 4, 2019 by joeblast