Posts by Chris Coles 92 posts • joined 9 May 2007
What if, instead of a universe ~13.4 billion years old, we enjoy a steady state universe many trillions of years old . . . then it becomes much easier to imagine a inordinately slow process where, as here with the solar system; the energy from the sun's solar wind has, over the full life of our solar system, blown off the surface of all surrounding planet and large mass objects atmospheres, sufficient fine dust particles, much of which will, inevitably, be organic . . . to explain what has been discovered on another object in outer space. Then add that a visible galaxy is the accretion disc for the Galactic Core Object at the centre of the galaxy, so over such immense timescales, all that mass is eventually re-distributed to form new galaxies . . . which have thus spread the dust throughout the universe . . . now we have a method of distribution that is based upon immense timescales.
Again, with the mass of the sun providing a gravitational field sufficient to support a proportion of the dust blown off of the inner planets being captured by the sun . . . might serve to explain why the surface of the sun, taking consideration of the timescales; has the same properties as the dust particles from the asteroid sample?
And, again, add that the sun is not in a static location; instead it moves in orbit around the galaxy; as also all of the rest of the solar system. Remember, when you sit in front of your TV over Christmas, you are actually moving sideways at up to 1,000 Km's per hour; plus add the motion of the entire solar system orbiting the galaxy. Now, again, add dust clouds in space from the destruction of previous galaxies . . . give clear evidence of many ways dust with organic origins can be delivered over immense timescales. Food for thought?
A The Register already knows, it is my firm belief that the signing of the Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty, which allows the US to simply list any technology that they believe is being worked on by ANY UK, (and Australian), facility; must be handed to the US without even any paper trail; which treaty now makes us a technology colony of the US . . . That we are no longer an independent nation free to develop our own unique defence technology industrial base. Now take a close look at the above list of technologies . . . and realise that is exactly what the treaty describes. So this is simply an extension of the colonisation of our nation; and you can bet your bottom $ that the US is the leader of this new guidance; not parliament. We have been colonised; this is simply an extension of that process; designed to take full control of the national inventive capacity.
Your answer follows an earlier mistake on your part. You were referencing Dominic Cummings who to my mind is a classic case of failed morality. Yes, at first sight he seemed to have what it might take to bring in needed change; but instead he has failed the test by suddenly turning against the very people that opened the door for him in the first place, no doubt with an associated grand income to boot! Then following with flying off into a world of recriminations. What we need are level headed people that care about an orderly debate; wildly lashing out; because he did not get his way; has destroyed his credibility.
There is no crazed herd of elephants, and your perception of an answer is similarly misconceived. So my answer is again . . . NO!
Yes, by all means let people know that you are not backing down; but throwing bricks through the opposition window does nothing but bring on further trouble. The misguided need to be brought to understand their mistake, in a manner that allows them room for reflection, and the need to change direction.
It is also important that I add that my personal experience of the American people is very positive indeed. They are very generous and I have over the years made great friendships with people that I admire. This debate is not about the underlying American belief in freedom; to me, this is all about what I believe to be the failed mindset of a few misguided individuals, who have to be brought to accept that they are wrong; that they must change direction.
Then you have accepted the complete collapse of the rule of law? yes, law! Why would I open with such a statement? Because every action of the inventor comes very strictly; within an fully agreed framework of national law and interlocking international law.
Instead, what you are telling everyone that reads this debate . . . the primary driving force of . . . recent events . . . is to, as you so succinctly put it: "remove such nationalistic citizenship rights via signed paper treaties"
So your message is we must all accept that from now onward; Our personal intellectual input must no longer be seen as a means to create new business/employment opportunities within our own nations under our own personal leadership; ergo; classic industrial competition . . . returning the British nation back to the level of great success we attained during the majority of the last century . . . that instead we have to accept that there never will be any further need for such attainment because we must now accept . . . "the stealthy shadows of secure shade and alongside the leading businesses involved."
That all present suppliers must from now onward be preserved . . . so excuse my asking . . . Under Whose control? And for that matter; why remove competition? Surely the true answer is that as you and your masters in Virginia want to prevent any competition with your own national champions? That the concept of free enterprise competition from what is your closest ally is an anathema, (someone or something cursed, reviled, or detested).
And if we take what at first glance seems odd; the deliberate theft of 15 copies of a new book describing a completely new way to look at the subject of gravity . . . from the UPS depot in Philadelphia; was in fact; a complete rejection of EVERY international law regarding . . . copyright . . . intellectual property . . . forcing the understanding that we have no option but to come right back to my previous point; that this whole debate is nothing to do with the points you have been trying to make above . . . it is all about retaining absolute complete control over every other nations to retain your perceived advantage.
Now we have to return to your statement above:
"Or is it a past failing of the Private/Pirate Business Sector not exercising its Available Options with the Presentation of Novel Opportunities to the Public Sector for Greater JOINT Leadership?"
The important phrase is: "exercising its available options" . . . which clearly to repeat; are an anathema. The available options are, first and foremost free trade, which in turn is fully underpinned by intellectual property law in the form of copyright and patents, which are owned by the originator, the author and inventor; who, under law, retains the right to act within their own personal moral compass; to do their best to improve the lot of the citizens of their nation.
Always remembering . . . there is no such thing as "Leadership" when faced with the actions of absolutely corrupt civil servants who have completely turned their backs on both their own nation . . . and the rule of the law. You want people like me to present novel opportunities to a clearly deeply corrupt Public Sector, and seem so surprised that I will not do that. To repeat; I will NOT do that.
For the record, this is the question I tried to present to an EAG dinner debate Wednesday 12th December 2012 "Delivering Security in an Age of Austerity"
During the 1980's Israel developed a new ground attack fighter, VERY similar to the US F16, called the Lavi, which ultimately contained a lot of US defence technology. But that development led to concerns that doing business with an Israeli company would result in ideas and designs being appropriated without proper compensation; when the US supports a foreign competitor.
Airpower Journal Vol. IV, No. 3, (Fall 1990): 34-44
In 1995 eight Special Ops Chinook helicopters were ordered by the UK MOD, but the contract did not include access to security codes which were to have been created, without Boeing's involvement, by the MOD to reduce costs. That contract omission in turn became a very long story taking many years to resolve resulting with a first flight in 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wki/Boeing_Chinook)(UK_varients)
Such difficulties, caused by the absolute, and, dare I say it, admirable commitment by the US; to retain complete control over its defence technology; led the US to propose a new Defence Trade Cooperation treaty between the UK, (and Australia), to achieve fully interoperable forces which was signed into existence by the US Congress in 2007.
On the face of it, this is an excellent treaty, removing many previous obstacles to UK MoD access to US defence related technology.
The problem is; for the individual British private inventor; this treaty is an abomination.
What it has done in effect is remove my British citizenship, my right to defend my nation; and replace it with a right presented to the US to take any new technology I might create; and use it for their own purposes:
"without a license or other written authorization".
[For clarity; the Treaty reads:
ARTICLE 2
Purpose
This Treaty provides a comprehensive framework for Exports and Transfers, without a license or other written authorization, of Defence Articles, whether classified or not, to the extent that such Exports and Transfers are in support of the activities identified in Article 3(1).
ARTICLE 3
Scope
(1) (d) United States Government end-use].
All the US need do is list any technology and it automatically becomes subject to the treaty.
But this has much wider implications; as my interpretation reads that, from now onwards; the treaty precludes the UK from ever again developing its own unique defence technology base.
We have become a defence colony of the US.
Two points:
1. Many of us, outside of the MoD "charmed circle" have felt for some decades now that the UK executive government does not have our interests in mind at all; that the civil service only cares for itself, first and foremost, with the wider interests of the nation following a long way behind. This treaty illustrates that perfectly. We have been summarily "Rolled Over" and have agreed to a very one sided treaty that; if it had been presented to a strong organisation, visibly dedicated to the development of a long term British industrial defence structure; invented, designed and manufactured by British inventors and designers; they would not have accepted it. Instead, once again, they traded British long term potential for a short term fix from the US defence industry.
2. On the other hand, British inventors have grown to understand that the US does not abide by international treaties such as the Patent Cooperation Treaty and that within the US, today, the rule of law is moot.
That the government of the United States is quite prepared to ignore their own law, if that will suit their own purposes. (Chapter 12, The Road Ahead from a Grass Roots Perspective).
I say this to the UK government:
You sir, are the leader of the Royal Navy, and not the leader of the civil service, so this is a little unfair; but we outside can see no one acting as the leader of the United Kingdom executive government; which in turn seems weak and leaderless; so I ask you to please take my concerns inward with a view to establishing who exactly IS supposed to lead them; and to strengthen their moral, ethical and leadership structures with a view to returning this once fine industrial nation; Great Britain; back to full strength.
Lastly to the United States:
You claim to be the world leader; the strongest nation; but that in turn presents the responsibility to defend the rule of law; dare I say it; beyond any other related responsibility. What I see is a nation being driven down a dark alley by a defence industry dedicated to always winning by force of arms; when the rest of the planet yearns for peace.
At the end of WW2 you forced the UK to abandon it's colonies; yet here, with this treaty, you have colonised the inventive and industrial capacity of the United Kingdom.
That treaty is an abomination and must be revised to permit the British inventive spirit to once again prosper and succeed.
Chris Coles
www.chriscoles.com
Having had the remarkable experience of, having voiced my concerns at the Royal Society introduction of the new European Commissioner for Science and technology, and having attended the first of two OECD conferences in Paris, where I asked, as always . . . questions; I watched a full on team, (doing exactly what we often see in a movie), moreover, in a quiet dead end street in Combs la Ville in France . . . a string of black vehicles, light aircraft flying low overhead, lots of people from their vehicles walking down either side of the street looking over the hedge into my elder sisters garden where I was staying . . . only to find myself, the next appointed time for the OECD, having being stopped at the introduction desk, only to find myself marched out of the OECD between two security guards; letter delivered to my home here in the UK telling me they do not like me asking questions and never to attempt to try and attend ever again.
Considering no one ever reported my concerns, acknowledged by Mrs May, I assume a D Notice was presented to editors from your department. Oh! Yes! Your department; your use of the word Abomination gives you away. Have you yet read the second full page of my question that I was unable to present verbally?
If what I am describing is such utter rubbish . . . why bother?
Each time your answer seems to verbally point in both directions . . . leaving me to wonder why?
The United Kingdom has been colonised; we no longer have full control of our proudly home grown technology, and dare I say so, all because a small group of absolutely corrupt employees in your department . . . gladly received the buckets of silver cast at their feet.
I will NOT work with such corruption. Period!
Not one sign of anyone with the courage to strip out the corrupt and put matters right since.
Not one sign.
So you were there that night, but as I passed the rest of my question to the First Sea Lord, am I to assume you have neither had access to my full question; nor had read and fully understood the underlying implications of the treaty?
The primary problem is; what do you mean by the term HMG? Yes, anyone can be certain that there are many under that heading who are fully professional, and importantly; care about such inputs to HMG. The continuing problem being that some of us out here have also come to the firm conclusion . . . that there is a very hard core of absolute corruption there as well.
As for your use of the word "Subjugation", may I be so bold as to suggest that, having read the treaty, you also go purchase a copy of Enough Already, Time to end the war on terrorism, by Scott Horton. So far, 20 years of subjugation has cost the lives of millions of innocents.
Life has taught me that it is vital never to deal with the corrupt; as one only creates further corruption by doing so. You might consider that it is equally important to step forward to find out why people like me have made that decision . . . not to deal with them; where good old fashioned common sense dialogue should have then stepped forward to assuage the expressed fears . . . which remain undiminished.
There is always more than one side to a debate, which requires both sides to be heard and fully understood; what I received was a full on "silence him", leaving me to ask myself why?
This statement troubles me as it would seem no one has told him about The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty: "This afternoon, I instructed the @CMAgovUK to investigate the proposed acquisition of Ultra Electronics by Cobham to assess any national security concerns
The UK is open for business, however foreign investment must not threaten our national security
(1/3)
— Kwasi Kwarteng (@KwasiKwarteng) August 18, 2021"
The very last day of Tony Blair's premiership, we signed over to the United States the right to list ANY technology that might be being developed in ANY UK government facility; at which point, we have to hand it over, for free; not even a paper trail. At that precise moment, we were, very effectively; colonised by the United States Central Intelligence Agency. We no longer own ANY technology; as all new developments, if so listed; have to be given to the United States.
Given being the operative word.
This debate is a classic example of smoke and mirrors to cover up reality; we are no longer a nation; we are, very simply; in exactly the same place as Hawaii was before being subsumed as a new State into the United States. Since, just about every important industrial group has now been bought by US corporate interests . . . so everyone, get real and live with it.
They already have discovered a lot of imperfect evidence of life on Mars. Perseverance has been designed to find the necessary incontrovertible evidence. They have achieved immense success in landing the rover. Now, all we can do is wait for the evidence to be discovered.
He needs to take a moment of his busy day to research Long Run Out Landslides off the coast of Hawaii; from which he will discover that there is a long history of gigantic landslides off the Hawaii islands, any one of which would have eliminated the human population . . . if there had been any at the time. That the strip of land (45 miles long by 14 miles back up from the sea shore) below the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory is sliding towards the surrounding ocean, as until recently, the associated volcano's have been adding ~ 1 million tons of lava to that area every day since the early 1980's. https://www.livescience.com/25293-hawaii-giant-tsunami-landslides.html
My original comment made some time ago on The Times, London web pages remains valid; that the control of trim is always under the complete command of the pilot and should never introduce any form of external input from what would have to be recognised as a "second pilot". All aircraft fly under a simple rule, the pilot flying hands over the flight controls to another pilot with the phrase; "you have control" to which the other pilot then responds; "I have control". Introducing a new "pilot in command", a computer system, not under the full control of the "pilot in command" to manage the trim system is a doomed concept and should never have been permitted. Now I made this point as the new wording for the certification reads;
"The new flight control laws now permit only one activation of MCAS per sensed high-AOA event, and limit the magnitude of any MCAS command to move the horizontal stabilizer such that the resulting position of the stabilizer will preserve the flightcrew’s ability to control the airplane’s pitch by using only the control column. This means the pilot will have sufficient control authority without the need to make electric or manual stabilizer trim inputs. The new flight control laws also include FCC integrity monitoring of each FCC’s performance and cross-FCC monitoring, which detects and stops erroneous FCC-generated stabilizer trim commands (including MCAS)." (page seven; Department of Transportation [4910-13-P] https://www.faa.gov/foia/electronic_reading_room/boeing_reading_room/media/737_AD_2019-NM-035fr.pdf )
If I understand this paragraph correctly, it removes any possibility of commanded changes to the trim. Again, there is no report that the necessary changes have been made. So all we have so far to date is the requirements delivered by the FAA, and not a note to describe the changes have been made by Boeing.
If all anyone does is to set out to try and fix the existing structures and cables, then the first thing to accept is that the entire structure must be at end of life; that every part of the support structure will have to be replaced new. As another has already mentioned, that would necessitate a close down of some years. Turning to the 900 ton platform, would it not be a better solution to completely re-design the structure using light weight composites, and then re-design the support structures to account for the new loading? It may well be that the re-design would end up the cheaper solution; as well as creating a longer life for the resulting structure. Much better to start again with a clean sheet of paper and work out a design that will last to the end of the century.
Once you hand another organisation, outside of your previous total control, in house system; surely, you are from then onwards, you are a hostage to fortune, as now you do not have any control over new appointments to your supplier's management. Then add, what a missed opportunity for the nation. We were taking back control of the nation, and a great starting point would have been allowing the BBC to create their own; British nation style AWS system . . . to underpin their world status as a broadcaster. And add all those jobs for our young citizens, forming a part of a new UK industry, supporting the development of the BBC world wide.
This was my email to ofcom.org.uk April 14th 2020
Dear sirs,
As the original inventor of the camera phone with GPS, US patents: 5,712,679 January 27 1998; 6,181,373 January 30 2001; 6,469,735 October 22 2002, Japan Patent: 2896930, (and others), all originating from an original UK patent office filing January 1989; and then having set out to create a Video911 service in the USA early 2001 and for three years having attended many wireless industry conferences throughout the USA and also in Europe; then having during that period had opened the debate on a new structure for the universe, publishing The Universe is a Cloud, Some Raw Food for Thought early 2002; followed that up in 2017 with The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus Proton Energy, (copies in major libraries, but not currently available as adding new chapters), which sets out a completely new electromagnetic structure for the proton - I feel I am able to add to the debate on the subject of the effects of waves of electromagnetism upon the human body.
A proton is well known, (regardless of my own input to the debate), to be entirely comprised as a form of electromagnet entity. What seems to have been lost is that everything is formed from protons; not just the wires connecting a transmission aerial as a form of metal; your eyes reading this, your fingertips that touched the typeface of the keyboard; even the keyboard itself. Everything, the air you breath, the water you drink, the saliva on your tongue, your tongue itself, the grass you walk across, the bricks forming the walls of your home, the concrete from which your offices are constructed. Everything is constructed from tiny electromagnetic objects called a proton.
When the likes of BT describe how their new 5G wireless modem can fill your home with such signals; passing through solid walls as though they are not there; as though invisible to the wireless signal; while that seems a true statement, in truth, each and every single wave of such energy, has to pass right through the electromagnetic attachments between each proton, in turn, directly affecting every one of those attachments, whether in a brick, solid concrete; or you.
Close by me lives a friend who is still recovering from the removal of two massive tumours in his brain, which I am sure were caused by the effects of holding his wireless telephone against the side of his head, and that wireless telephone was designed at a much lower level of such effects, than the new 5G systems being deployed today.
My home has no wifi, everything is connected with wires; I do not own, nor ever carry; any form of wireless telephone; why? because my own research, and deep understanding of the effects of such systems, has brought me to believe that, as the rise of energy levels, (and associated immense rise in frequencies), associated with the modern telecommunication industries, increase; they pose an ever greater danger to human health.
Mention has been made of the BBC, both on your web pages as also in recent reports about OFFCOM. It is my profound belief that the BBC has become "captured" by outside corporate interests, to the direct detriment of an open debate about these effects. That the BBC is not presenting truly investigative journalism; but instead, the PR output of such major industries, and more besides; to the long term detriment of the stature of the BBC. That is a very sad state of affairs.
Please note, I am not doing this to provoke any form of violence against such industries, or their installations; I am absolutely against any such action. What does concern me is that for many years now, it has been the order of the day to sweep knowledge of such effects under the proverbial carpet. But the longer that continues, the greater the long term backlash caused by such effects, becoming ever more visible to the general population.
It is my belief that OFCOM should immediately set into motion a complete; and absolutely independent, investigation of the effects on the human body; while at one and the same time; advising a moratorium on any further installations. To enable such, OFCOM as well as the likes of the BBC, and others, are going to have to put to one side the negative inferences against those, such as Dr Joseph Mercola, who has recently published EMF*D 5G, Wi-Fi & Cell Phones: Hidden Harms and How to protect Yourself; that are highlighting their own understanding of what is occurring. (I have no commercial interest of any form with Dr. Mercola).
It is my profound belief that there are immense dangers associated with the deployment of ever higher frequencies and energy levels of all wireless systems, and that these dangers must be recognised and appropriate actions taken to protect the general public.
As you will see, I have copied this to my local BBC TV station.
Yours sincerely,
Dear sirs,
further to my email to you 14th April, 2020 I now add the formal brief of Children's Health Defence to the United States Federal Communications Commission, FCC.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Joint-Brief-7-29-20.pdf
Again, I have no commercial interest of any form with Children's Health Defense.
I repeat my final paragraphs of my earlier email to you:
It is my belief that OFCOM should immediately set into motion a complete; and absolutely independent, investigation of the effects on the human body; while at one and the same time; advising a moratorium on any further installations. To enable such, OFCOM as well as the likes of the BBC, and others, are going to have to put to one side the negative inferences against those, such as Dr Joseph Mercola, who has recently published EMF*D 5G, Wi-Fi & Cell Phones: Hidden Harms and How to protect Yourself; that are highlighting their own understanding of what is occurring. (I have no commercial interest of any form with Dr. Mercola).
It is my profound belief that there are immense dangers associated with the deployment of ever higher frequencies and energy levels of all wireless systems, and that these dangers must be recognised and appropriate actions taken to protect the general public.
As you will see, I have copied this to my local BBC TV station.
We need to go back to the point where it became obvious; that to remain civilised, we must always be able to access our, indeed, every-bodies work.
We take a book for granted; every book printed, every written document that has been collected, every fragment of papyrus is conserved to enable the passage of thought to be retained over the ages. What changed was an uncivilised attorney came up with the idea that a company, such as, but not just Microsoft, could remove the right to access of any work created by anyone who had purchased their software. A good parallel would be for an 18th century manufacturer of bone china cups and saucers, deciding that, to increase sales, they would employ people to climb through the windows of the homes of every single household that had previously purchased their bone china; to destroy it. For a start, that would mean that there would not be any old bone china left to use today; every single purchase would by now have been destroyed.
A good example was the recent decision by Microsoft declaring that their software Paint, was no longer to be "supported"; except what they did, in addition, was to effectively destroy every single image previously created by inserting damage to all those images. In my opinion, that was a crime, a criminal action against humanity; that was effectively saying that we are removing access unless you pay us, every month, for access to your work . . . for ever! That decision made Microsoft totally uncivilised!
It was these problems that drove the creation of free software, where dedicated groups of individuals set out to allow humanity to retain access to their work.
No one can work forever for free; sooner or later, a normal business model has to be implemented to allow the people doing the work to be able to enjoy a normal life, earn their keep, pay their bills, create a home, marry and bring up their children. That is a normal life for the vast majority.
So there is only one proviso; they must NEVER try and prevent access to documents; always remain dedicated to the concept of a civilisation who retains knowledge for the benefit of future generations.
This is a much wider problem than simply a matter of who owns what; this goes right back to a series of decisions made decades ago that are linked to the changes made to the function of what were then called "savings institutions". Immediately post WW2, while the government was deeply in debt, we saw the creation of many new companies that became bywords for the inventive and industrial capacity of the UK. Then, most new companies were formed from the investment of savings held by the people; savings that were guided by the local community stock brokers. Using my experience as a guide, anyone thinking of starting such a new business was almost certainly also a customer of their local stock broker; who in turn would put you into contact with others surrounding them who had funds available to so invest. Your new company was thus locally owned, initially entirely by the founders, then with the addition of funding from their surrounding community. All such new companies were thus locally owned and managed. Again, the mark of success was sufficient cash flow, created by a combination of the achievements of the employees in producing a successful product, allied to a increasingly prosperous surrounding community able to afford to purchase the product. As always, in any business, increased production requires ever increasing access to the working capital to expand that productive base, and your local bank, (then there were many such in each community), was where you went for such access.
Longer term anyone wishing to take the business further, you had to be able to deliver secondary success in two vital aspects; regular delivery of good dividends to the existing shareholder base, and by regular I mean that you had to show that you were focused upon that aiming point above all others - your share holders always received good dividends; the second requirement being strong management, clearly holding the entire company concept together in the interest of both the quality of the employees and the success of the product on your chosen market. If you could fulfil those requirements, you could approach a savings institution, who would in turn spend a great deal of effort to check your company out; that it fulfilled their requirements. At that point, the savings institution would buy a proportion of the shares of the company; but of much greater importance, the company was essentially delivered to the people with savings, as a safe investment for granny. That purchase by the savings institution ensured the respectability of your ongoing business prospects.
That in turn was the base foundation of the entire industrial economy. The longer term investment of our industrial economy came from such investment.
All that came to an end when we were forced to abandon our colonies and the leadership of those colonies were repatriated and they in turn decided to combine all our best industries into large publicly owned, (government owned), businesses. British - everything! But they all failed because they were from then onwards managed by bureaucracy and they needed ever more funds to keep up the illusion of success. sic!. and someone came up with the great idea that the rules underpinning the savings institutions should be changed to suite the need to use the otherwise, savings of the people, normally invested in either the savings institutions holdings of industrial shares; or indeed their own purchases of those shares using grannies box of money under her bed.
From that moment the entire function of the savings of the nation was diverted into the needs for further government funding; savings were from then onwards, increasingly diverted to be used entirely for the purposes of bureaucracy. Today we live in the fallout of those disastrous decisions where there are no spare savings available to be invested in our own industry; ergo the increasing use of the phrase- inward investment.
The UK lacks adequate leadership within it's bureaucracy which has become in my opinion, completely corrupted by their access to those savings over so many decades. The problem can only be solved by fundamental changes that it would seem no one has the courage to set into motion.
OK, so money disappeared, missing from the daily accounts; large sums of it too. But money never disappears, particularly when it is represented by numbers on a screen; 2 + 2 always equals 4. If the software says the money is not there then the software itself has taken the money; if the software has taken the money, then the money has to arrive somewhere. In the past, scams, for this is really what we are describing here, were well known, the 25th supermarket checkout being an excellent example. If money disappeared from their accounts it had to end up somewhere else; so, where did the money go?
Yes, I do understand that the missing money may never have been under the control of the sub postmasters; that it was an illusion created by the Horizon software. So who had reason to lose money via the software? As I see it, there is a very much deeper problem that is not being addressed here. Software showing losses from the tills, against sales over the post office counters; where it is now established that the sub postmasters were not stealing from those tills, means that money was placed into the till, but the software for the till showed a proportion was not there at the end of the day; presumably by adding to the sales total within the software; above that physically entered into the tills by the post office staff. If the software added to the till total, and the accounts of the head office showed such losses; then someone has to have had reason to allow the software to both at one and the same time, show increased turnover, (relative to the losses recorded), and make the losses disappear, by deliberately accusing the sub postmasters of stealing the money, when they arrived at the head office.
That is fraud. Someone steals a reward for increased sales; when the increase was a result of, (deliberately? ), faulty software, then blames the failure to actually deliver the increased sales, as cash return to head office, on to the theft of the increase by the sub postmasters. That is a deliberate act of criminal fraud and they MUST be prosecuted.
As if suggesting that not being educated was never any form of personal attack; then saying that I accused you of bigotry, when all I did was suggest that saying a lack of formal education discredited me, was a new form of apartheid and then you use the word "crank"and run away with a "Bye". My personal opinion is that you have been taught to run away from new thinking; that is not a personal attack if that is a true reflection of the statements you have made. Disagreements have been a significant part of science for centuries. Try reading The Man Who Knew Too Much by Stephen Inwood; you will learn that you are simply a reflection of how real science has worked for centuries.
So, now reflect that the conventional description of the relationship between the proton and the electron does not conform to the rules for electromagnetism, as laid down by James Clerk Maxwell; or, again, that Hooke's Law does not provide a full description of the forces within any spring and that the demonstration of such presented to the Royal Society in 2011 has recently been upgraded and will be presented soon.
You live within a steady state universe that is entirely electromagnetic and Newtonian; get used to it.
Nice of you to forget that some of the greatest strides forward were made, not by conventional scientists, but amateurs. But then you believe in scientific apartheid, "the man must be a fool as he has not the right colour of education". The foreword for the book was written by someone that is now President of a major US university, not that that will interest you with your head proverbially buried in your own version of apartheid having been taught by rote; not to look at new thinking, but to denigrate it at every opportunity. Very impressive!
The experiment, or at least the most recent was delivered to the Royal Society during 2011. That has also been added to the book as a part of a chapter titled Misunderstanding Isaac Newton. Again, an earlier experiment to show a beam of light would be diverted by a large mass resulted in my being given a 950 Kg steel bar that now resides beside the wind tunnel in the basement of the Mechanical Engineering department at the University of Houston.
Again, why does no one want to review the book if it is so utterly stupid, as it would be an easy thing to do; except that, as I see it, they who have received it dare not do so, and that does include the BBC, (two copies), and the Royal Society. There is also a copy in the British Library and every major national library, including the Bodlian. Go have a read and then come back and comment.
As I understand gravity, having written a book on the subject, gravity is a result of the positive electromagnetic force field of the proton extending beyond the orbit of it's electron, (which is a part of the electromagnetic force field structure of every proton), to attach, (under the rules laid down by James Clerk Maxwell, A positive field will always seek to attach to the closest negative potential, or extend to infinity), to the negative potential of any adjacent proton's electron, as that adjacent proton rotates past; with the constant movement of all protons within mass causing such attachments, and subsequent detachments, to reflect the energy level of the mass.
Inertial mass is caused by the same attachments, as within solid mass, to attach to all adjacent mass. Thus gas molecules are always similarly attached to each other by the same mechanism, regardless of distance. As such, these Gas Molecule Attachment Force Columns, extend from the planet surface to attach to any other mass object and provide the force necessary to resist movement.
Gravity is simply an electromagnetic force field attachment between all protons and the attachments, (and subsequent detachments caused by the rotation of each proton), create the photons reflecting the energy level of that local mass. The same mechanism creates inertia.
"- Dreadful documentation, support and "knowledge" on the internet. A million forums and how-to's full of garbage."
Could not agree more. MINT is delivered with everything one needs other than being able to purchase documentation that gives a complete listing of the packages and how to use them. Not everyone that moved from MS to Linux has a background in software; no one seems to care about those of us that just want to use the software for other purposes than self congratulation.
Gravity is a constant and there is no one trying to say that gravity can be disconnected. In which case, the force of gravity must exist throughout the universe. If a force called gravity exists throughout the universe, then the space between mass in deep space; cannot be empty. If space is not empty, then every photon traveling through space must be traveling through the force called gravity. So the challenge was to describe what gravity is and how it worked.
Mass is formed from protons, thus, for the gravitational properties of mass to exist, the proton must be gravitationally connected to another proton. But we are told that the negative electron balances the positive proton and as such, all gas molecules, (especially including all gas molecules in space), are thus free to travel without contact with each other. Ergo; Ideal Gas Law tells us that temperature and pressure are related to the speed of impact of the gas molecule upon the walls of the container. Again, nucleosynthesis demands the speed of impact between atoms of mass as the primary driving force for the creation of elements. So now we have to accept a mismatch between science and logic. Gravity cannot be disconnected and thus is always a force between protons; yet gas molecules are totally disconnected from each other.
From that starting point, it came to me that there is no such thing as a Black Particle; a particle with no external observable field, that if we can observe the proton it must exhibit an external field; and thus the modern depiction of the electromagnetic properties of the proton within a gas molecule, do not conform to the rules for electromagnetism, as laid down by James Clerk Maxwell. That a positive field always seeks the closest negative potential or extends to infinity and that, as the gravitational properties of the Earth extend beyond the Moons orbit, then a small proportion of the positive field of the proton, must extend beyond the orbit of the proton's electron and that in turn, brings the electromagnetic force field of the proton into conformance with James Clerk Maxwell. In which case, the next closest negative potential must the an adjacent proton's electron. Logic demands the question; is gravity caused by the surplus positive electromagnetic force field of a proton, extending beyond the orbit of that proton's electron, to attach to the next closest proton's electron?
If that logic is correct, then deep space is full of the electromagnetic force field attachments between all the protons, forming the nucleus within all the gas molecules, in deep space; and thus all photons must be traveling through these electromagnetic force field attachments. In which case, Red Shift denotes distance traveled by the photon, rather than speed of movement of the source of the photon. That in turn drove the creation of a completely new model for the electromagnetic force field structure within the proton; that now fully complies conformance with Maxwell.
Ergo the title: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus Proton Energy.
Anyone flying any form of conventional aircraft, gliders are a very good example; know full well that the air we fly in is regulated primarily for safety reasons. When we fly, we know before we take off that there are areas of the sky that we are not permitted to enter. Yes, we can still enter if we fully comply with the accepted regulations. The entire system is designed to prevent collisions between aircraft. It is that simple, we all agree to abide with the regulations because our lives depend upon everyone else also doing the same thing for the same reason. To understand the overall problem, may I suggest that every drone owner visit their local gliding club and buy a copy of the relevant, (to their considered drone flying location), 1/4 million air flight chart which will show in full detail where and where not they can fly in safety. It would also make sense if they also, at the same time, purchase a copy of the relevant flying laws which will always also be available at their local gliding club. To find you local gliding club use the BGA British Gliding Association web site www.gliding.co.uk Better still, go learn to fly a conventional glider, a wonderful sport, and make friends for life at the launch point while learning why the rules are there in the first place; to protect lives.
Over many years, anyone following the rulings delivered by the appeal court will have come to the conclusion that the next step for the employees is to take this to the House of Lords; Now called The Supreme Court. It is certainly true that many appeal court rulings have been reversed.
Long ago I formed the personal opinion that the appeal court, for their own reasons, leaves matters open to be taken on to the Lords for a final ruling.
"You can describe the universe with forces (Newton) or you can describe the universe as curved space (Einstein). It's not a matter of either one being "wrong"; they are incommensurable descriptions and both are useful. Feynman's 12th Lecture:
Characteristics of Force "
To stay within the remits of the rules for discussion here, I have to do my best to strip this debate down to a very basic level. Ergo, to start, these are the two quotations I will use from the Feynman lecture:
“To push the molecules only slightly closer together requires a great force, because the molecular repulsion rapidly becomes very great at distances less than d. If the molecules are pulled slightly apart there is a slight attraction, which increases as the separation increases. If they are pulled sufficiently hard, they will separate permanently—the bond is broken.”
“This particular illustration does not describe correctly the way in which Einstein’s geometry is “weird,” but it illustrates that if we distort the geometry sufficiently it is possible that all gravitation is related in some way to pseudo forces; that is the general idea of the Einsteinian theory of gravitation.”
In the first quotation; “the bond is broken” In the second; “ but it illustrates that if we distort the geometry sufficiently it is possible that all gravitation is related in some way to pseudo forces”.
But gravity between all the mass remains in place at all times. If that is so, then it becomes impossible for the bond, (gravity), between molecules to be broken. It is this simple anomaly that has become the bane of science ever since it was created. Einstein could not define the origin of gravity, as Feynman himself admits; “the origin of these forces remains obscure.” So Einstein created a solution involving pseudo forces, the distortion of Space Time.
Thus this has been a debate in front of everyone since Einstein, including Feynman, to provide a solution to the true origin of the force of gravity; the bond that is NOT broken.
Gravity is caused by the positive electromagnet force field of each proton extending beyond the orbit of that proton’s electron, to attach to the closest adjacent proton’s electron. The “bond” is never broken and as such, conforms fully to the laws of electromagnetism as laid down by James Clerk Maxwell.
The sudden hole in the clouds will be caused by the same thing with a hurricane eye, right at the centre of the rotating hurricane; only in this case it is the attachment of the gas molecules in the atmosphere, forming Gas Molecule Attachment Force Columns, (gravity is caused by the attachment of gas molecules to mass), between the Earth and the Sun forming a vortex, no different than any other vortex is caused by a rotating mass within an atmosphere. Simple!
"Such requests are futile, as groups like the UK’s GCHQ are usually exempted from FoI laws."
Some years ago I had an interesting conversation, over the telephone, with Lord Denning, then Master of the Rolls, (he was always listed and did indeed answer the phone when called). He made it crystal clear, everyone answers to the law; no one can be excluded from the law of the land; all laws apply to everyone; so this statement is entirely wrong and indeed; unlawful.
My previous understanding of the nature of deep space was that there are indeed atoms of various elements widely spaced apart, but that they are separated and act as individual atoms. Indeed, deep space has often been described as having particles emerging and then disappearing under rules long ago laid out in Quantum Physics; yet here, and frequently recently the rules have been changed to permit the publication, (without contention), of the following phrase: "When the ejecta smash into the starbirth's surrounding gas".
A gas is surely a quite different external environment in deep space? To my knowledge, the only book, (an e-book), published that describes exactly why we can make that change in perception, has never been reviewed by anyone, the author was shunned and as such the book was removed from availability to await funding for publication as a normal hardback book.
Returning to the wonderful image; no mention has been made of the seemingly vast expanse of space that has been obliterated by a dark cloud mostly beneath the main image. If we were dealing with an event on this planet, when we see such a drifting cloud we would naturally assume that the cloud was drifting away from the event as a cloud of dust that blocked out the sun. But how does that drift occur in deep space?
There must be an external gravitational influence, causing the resulting dust cloud to drift, as though within a moving homogeneous gas atmosphere surrounds the entire display...... IN DEEP SPACE!
There is much more to this image than has been reported here.
Rather than argue for or against, why not add some new thinking? If this paper is correct, then we also have to take into account the action of the sea at sea level. If, say, sea level had been stable for the last 3 million years; while the Eastern Seaboard had risen 35 metres; then every tidal estuary would be situated within a 35 metre escarpment on each side of the bay. However, anyone that has, for example, spent some time in Washington DC will be able to tell you that the land surrounding the tidal levels of the sea does not have 35 metre escarpments on each side.
Yes, sea levels have both risen and fallen during the last 3 million years. What AGW proponents argue is that sea levels have never been higher, (during the period CO2 was between 180 and 300 ppm), than today; and as such, with a steady rise in the surface levels of the ES, we ought to be able to observe the interaction between the rising land and the action of the sea; at sea level; constantly eroding the rising land.
A shoreline, 35 metres above present sea level, but with no erosion caused by the sea between the present sea level and the old shoreline, to my mind, seems to point to either a sudden rise in land levels or a sudden drop in sea levels; where erosion cannot become a factor.
Was that scenario taken into account in the research?
Joerg is correct to point out that "creating a simulation based upon assumptions" is a childish fantasy.
The underlying problem is the assumption that the laws of physics are immutable; laid down on stone tablets.
There is at least one much better explanation of the forces involved with the formation of the arms of a galaxy that has been out there for more than a decade; but it has not been reviewed because the new thinking challenges the assumptions laid down on those stone tablets.
As a British inventor that has just had a new patent granted, GB2447526, I can say a few things here that should be seen as relevant to the discussion. In the first place, it took the UK IPO very nearly 5 years to deliver the patent, while, at the same time, the Japan Patent Office makes a big thing that they do their best to deliver a patent within days. Their reasoning being that speed delivers a real, definable, competitive advantage to their nation. Here, my own experience shows us that the UK IPO seems to want to see something that they know and can immediately understand. So anything bringing forward new knowledge is suppressed rather than appreciated and they sit on it because they cannot understand new thinking; where in point of fact, true invention delivers something that NO ONE has ever before created.
The other side of the coin is well represented here. Many within modern society seem to believe that all IP is born from giant corporations that must be fought against; rather than recognising that all new IP is the birth child of a single individual who must have some mechanism to earn a living.
Another crucial aspect is there is no mechanism to deliver the equity capital investment that is essential if the originator is to be able to develop their original thinking. The only source being, yes you have guessed it; the giant corporation.....
The total failure of the UK executive government, the Civil Service, to stand up and protect the individual rights holder, is well represented in the ongoing indifference of the UK IPO. One only needs to remember Tony Blair telling everyone that his government was absolutely against "Individualism" to get an idea of the negative mindset inside Whitehall. Then add how the MOD nowadays will only deal with one supplier and we can see that a Parliamentary committee is very unlikely to be able to deliver any real change.
Until the UK economy completely collapses, (not that I wish such), I suspect no one will listen to anything a single inventor has to say; but for the record, the very first thing to do is close down several departments and retire the top 10 levels of the Civil Service. THEN we just might have a half chance of renewing past success as a manufacturing nation based upon Intellectual Property.
My problem is the funding for this 100 year space ship is provided by the utter idiots that are also developing a device to deliver a bomb to any point on the surface of this planet within an hour. People with that mindset should not be anywhere near ANY form of long term peaceful development of space technology.
And I do indeed mean it when I say; Utter Idiots.
For that reason, I will not associate myself in any way with the 100 year space ship program.
We need to find a way forward with long term space ship development that has, right at the heart of the operation; the peaceful development of space travel.
There are two separate "lines of evolution" of the genus Homo Sapiens, not one. Why do I say that? Because I, (and many around me here in the South of England), have a VERY distinct ridge of bone running from front to back down the centre of my skull; whereas others have a totally rounded, like an eggshell, skull form.
In the past, I was told my skull shape was caused by the manner of my birth and that it was due to the way the plates of my skull fused after birth. Now I have come to the conclusion that the whole idea of defining a different skull shape as a different genus became impossible due to the stupidities from WW2 NAZI experiments. Another reason being, (and you can easily try this for yourselves), that people seem to find it VERY difficult to feel the top of another individuals skull.
Be that as it may, considering the strength of the real difference between my skull shape and structure, to that of others with a totally smooth, rounded skull; I am convinced that I must be from a different line of evolution to the other skull form.
Again, my father is listed in Salt Lake City as a member of a family that "Lives to a great age", so, while I am 68 years old, I am also very fit and agile and thus expect to live to that great age. Oh! and he is also listed as a direct descendant of Princess Pocahontas; which makes me a Pow tan Red Indian Prince many times removed. :)
In which case, there is much more to learn that that presently posited.
Simply, why not also reach the conclusion that it is the temperature of the atmosphere that controls the quantity of cosmic radiation detected?
Without any corroborating evidence; it is entirely possible that we might conclude that the temperature controls the data, rather than radiation controls.
Having designed a Freeze Drying Microscope taking samples down to -100C I can tell you from direct experience, the problem they face is ice. It is quite amazing just how much moisture there is in air. Moisture that will, instantly, turn into ice. Remember, when aircraft engines were first created, they had to fit heaters to their engine intakes to melt the ice as it formed..... or the engine would promptly fail.
They make no mention of what they are going to do about the ice that will, inevitably, coat the entire cooler system. Ice is their Achilles heel.
"Europe lost its last global technology platform. "
Perhaps it will take the endgame of the long term demise of NOKIA to bring everyone to recognise; that the real failure in Europe, is the idea that all long term development, (and by association, government grant support), for new technology; must always be into existing large companies.
This saga is a classic demonstration of what you get, in the end, from a lack of competition. Instead of many new, small businesses, snapping at the heels of the likes of NOKIA, (and, moreover, in the right place to immediately take up the running as a market leader), you get stagnated management, unable to see the potential from their magnificent gold plated "offices".
Europe desperately needs a functioning system to feed new, free enterprise based, equity capital; into new small businesses, right at the grass roots of every nation. Until the EU recognises that need, all we are going to see is the same story, again and again.........
Considering that, with the help of Dr. Alan Jefferson, I became one of the "Honourable Mentions" for the Tour Eiffel de la Space Competition, in 1986, celebrating the Centenary of the design and construction of the Eiffel Tower, with our entry for The Space Chronometer; an hour minute and second hand in space to give Greenwich Mean Time to all humanity; one might be forgiven for asking why has it taken so long to try out such structures? And such a feeble one at that....
Our own was for three separate hands, hour, minute and second; 9Km, 6Km and 3Km in length, a control module at the centre of each hand and the same length cable, 9Km, 6Km, and 3Km to the other end to balance the rotation with each hand having a satellite at each end to drive their rotation. The rotation holding the hands out straight with the design being limited by the once every 60 seconds rotation of the 3Km long second hand on one side and the 3Km long cable balancing on the other, rotating around the central control module. Each hand a quite separate entity, each one behind the other to form a single clock face.
The whole providing an 18Km diameter "Clock in Space".
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1575232
Enjoy.
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022
