Why Phi: is the Moon a phi balloon?

Let’s take a virtual trip to the Moon with an idea of Johannes Kepler to guide us. In this image we have the Moon placed next to the Earth – what are we seeing?

The triangle has one side running from the centre of the Moon to the centre of the Earth, one running at right angles to it from the Earth’s centre point to the edge of the Earth, and the third side completing the triangle.

Since it’s a right-angled triangle, the third side is also the hypotenuse of a Pythagorean triangle. But it’s a bit more than that too.

According to NASA’s Moon factsheet, the ratio of the equatorial radius of the Moon to that of the Earth is 0.2725.

That means if the Earth radius is given a value of 1, the Moon radius will be 0.2725 on the same scale (i.e. as a ratio), making a combined Earth+Moon radius of 1.2725, which is almost identical to the square root of phi (1.27202) – a 99.96% match.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/moonfact.html

What energy sources will we be using in 2064 ?

The question is prompted from reading this report on the BBC website:
‘World’s Fair: Isaac Asimov’s predictions 50 years on’

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27069716

Tesla’s concept of free wireless electricity never made it to market, but maybe one day…

An obvious one might be the fusion reactor, as Asimov foresaw: “An experimental fusion-power plant or two will already exist.”

Chances must be good (?) if schoolboys can already build their own:
‘All my friends think I’m mad’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10679744/British-schoolboy-13-becomes-youngest-to-build-nuclear-fusion-reactor.html

More likely is the commercial development of methane hydrates as an abundant energy source, if or when shale gas has run its course or is politically a no-no:
‘Methane hydrate: Dirty fuel or energy saviour?’

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27021610

Or we could all be spurning fuel technology, piling on the thermal clothes and going around on bicycles, hoping the sun shines and the wind blows ;-)

Greenpeace succeed in achieving nothing. First oil.

Image Gazprom.

First oil has been shipped.

 

Story from Moscow Times.

Why The IPCC Is Wrong About Bio-Energy

oldbrew:

.
.
Being wrong about things seems to be a way of life at the IPCC.

A UK committee of MPs demanded the brakes be put on biofuel crops last year, but the IPCC is obviously not listening to that. They seem oblivious to reason sometimes – or was it most times?

Former petrol station selling wood for burning

Originally posted on Carbon Counter:

So, the IPCC has released their report on climate change mitigation. Naturally various people are in spin-mode. Greenpeace’s “journalism” wing have “ 15 key findings from the IPCC mitigation report .” Unsurprisingly the findings that do not suit Greenpeace’s agenda are not key.

And some journalists are doing a woeful job in doing their job. Damian Carrington of the Guardian tells us that the IPCC have concluded that mitigating climate change is “eminently affordable.” Meanwhile in a separate story the Guardian reports the IPCC telling Mr. Carrington that they are not allowed to make such conclusions.

But instead of hectoring journalists and complaining about the inevitable platitudes doled out in response to this report, I will instead suggest that the IPCC needs a good kick up the arse.

Consider what they say about bio-energy in the summary for policy-makers.

The table on page 18 informs us that…

View original 473 more words

Councils choking on wind farm applications

The rush to build onshore wind farms is getting too much for some rural councils.

One spokesman in Scotland says:
‘Our community council felt overwhelmed by the number of wind farm proposals being planned for our area.’

Official policy seems to be ‘the more the merrier’ –  avoid application backlogs.

So councils are under pressure to say yes and say it soon, squeezing the timetable for due democratic process.

Full story here:
Dumfries and Galloway councils seek wind farm moratorium

‘Fifty community councils from across Dumfries and Galloway have called for a moratorium on planning consent for wind farms in the region.’

Greenland – Raised Beaches

oldbrew:

.
.
Another thought-provoking analysis. Raised beaches are of particular interest in the planetary theory currently being developed by various contributors to Tallbloke’s Talkshop.

***
Thanks to Tim Cullen at Malaga Bay for this piece. Raised beaches have been found also at Hudson Bay and connected with planetary periodicities, e.g. by Rhodes Fairbridge.

http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen2/Rhodes.html

Another intriguing feature discussed here is ‘the other Grand Canyon’ under the ice in Greenland.

Originally posted on MalagaBay:

The Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition [1910–1911] provides a very intriguing summary of the raised beaches that had been discovered in Greenland.

These discoveries enabled the Encyclopædia Britannica to conclude that “the whole of this large island has been raised, or the sea has sunk, in post-glacial times” and that “the upheaval has been greater in the north”.

Numerous raised beaches and terraces, containing shells of marine mollusca, &c., occur along the whole coast of Greenland, and indicate that the whole of this large island has been raised, or the sea has sunk, in post-glacial times, after the inland ice covered its now ice-bare outskirts.

In the north along the shores of Smith Sound these traces of the gradual upheaval of the land, or sinking of the sea, are very marked; but they are also very distinct in the south, although not found so high above sea-level, which seems to…

View original 2,723 more words

A new Lunar thermal model based on Finite Element Analysis of regolith physical properties

Article by Peter Morcombe (gallopingcamel) with some assistance from Tim Channon.

While investigating Nikolov & Zeller’s “Unified Theory of Climate” it seemed odd that professional scientists could not agree what the temperature of an airless Earth should be. Given that one needs to know this in order to compute the Greenhouse Effect (GHE), I tried to settle the question by analyzing the Diviner LRE data that accurately mapped the Moon’s surface temperature. This effort failed as my spreadsheet could not handle even the “Level 3” data. The Diviner team did much better and showed that the Moon’s average temperature is 197.3 Kelvin.

While the temperature of the Moon is now known with impressive precision, would an airless Earth have the same temperature or would the different rates of rotation have an effect?

Climate change: what we don’t know

oldbrew:

………….A good attempt to try and see through the fog of the ‘climate wars.’

Originally posted on Climate Etc.:

by Judith Curry

This past week, there have been several essays and one debate that provide some good perspectives on what we don’t know about climate change, and whether we should be alarmed.

View original 1,043 more words

Roger Helmer: The Energy Muddle and the €uro Elections.

Guest post from Roger Helmer, MEP for the East Midlands.

The Energy Muddle and the €uro Elections.
by Roger Helmer MEP 17-4-14

I recently heard that a senior spokesman for the UK energy industry had suggested that the success of “smaller parties” in the forthcoming Euro elections could be problematic for the energy industry.  I took this as a veiled reference to UKIP.  The quote, as I’ve been given it, reads: “An outcome which would undoubtedly be difficult would be if the European Parliament becomes composed of a large number of smaller parties, because when that happens, coherency is not as good.  Although energy is a competency which still sits with separate countries, there is a chunk that is decided on a pan-European basis which we could see get in quite a muddle.”

Asked to comment, I had several observations (no surprise there!).  First, what’s a “smaller party”?   With hard work and a fair wind, UKIP may well win the largest share of the UK vote, and be the largest UK delegation.  Not a “smaller party” at all in Brussels terms.

Raghu Singh: Success with reworked Constructive Model of Gravitation

Talkshop readers will remember that some time ago, we had a guest post from Raghu Singh about a gravity theory he has been developing. Since the discussion here, Raghu got his paper published in the General Science journal and received a lot of feedback. That led to some reworking and he has now re-written his paper. The latest version of his model has had some theoretical success. In email Raghu tells me:

“My primary goal has been to explore gravitational radiation. More than one theory can explain several gravitational phenomena – except gravitational radiation, which one and only one theory shall explain. Physics does not have that one experimentally confirmed theory of gravitational radiation as of now. Astrophysicists claim, rightly so, that there are indirect evidences of the existence of gravitational waves, but those are not evidences on the physics of gravitational radiation (i.e., its emission, propagation, structure, speed, and polarization).

I used the revised model to calculate the orbital shrinking of pulsars PSR B1913+16, the results are astonishing. The model yields 3.71 mm/period; general relativity yields 3.5 mm/period. This is the ultimate test for any gravitation theory. Hulse and Taylor received Nobel Prizes for applying general relativity to the orbits of PSR B1913+16

Physics has been waiting for several decades just to detect gravitational radiation; must it wait longer? Our increasingly vast knowledge of the strong nuclear, the weak nuclear, and electromagnetic interactions notwithstanding, deciphering gravitation is essential to the survival of the species beyond the solar system and the Milky Way – as the great Professor Hawking would like to say.

A Constructive Model of Gravitation

Raghubansh P. Singh

Abstract
The paper presents a physical model in which mass fields and momentum fields mediate gravitational interactions.

The model addresses: Gravitational interaction between masses, between mass and energy, and between photons; Gravity’s effect on spectral lines, time periods of atomic clocks, and lengths of material rods; Gravitational radiation; Mercury’s orbital precession rate; and the Pioneer effect. Of particular importance, it calculates gravitational radiation power emissions from the moon, the planets of the sun, and the binary pulsars PSR B1913+16. It reflects upon time.

The model rediscovers the initial predictions of general relativity. It makes new predictions: