Monday, November 2, 2020

Hubble Tension the Emssivity of the Universe

Could the Hubble tension between the CMB (Hubble value of 67) and the supernova Hubble ladder (value of 73) be the emissivity of the universe given the detectors of the CMB are thermo-electric? Thermoelectric devices all produce bell-shaped curves called blackbody curves and they all have the emissivity correction problem.

If we assume the ladder method is correct and there is a systematic (emissivity) error in the CMB map, what temperature would the universe have to be to make the two have a Hubble constant equal to the ladder method? That difference, I think, would be the emissivity of the universe. And that would be an acceptable solution as all things have an emissivity reading, why not the universe?

Friday, September 4, 2020

A Fractal Theory of Quantum Foundations

Finally, after 12 years of working, last night I posted my quantum fractal paper; in it, I address the big questions of physics with a simple, modern, and well-known geometry, the fractal. I feel a little nervous actually, it appears noone has ever done this. If I can get some (financial/grant) support on it I'll take it to publication, rewriting and adapting it to suit — which is all too much for me here and now on my own. Besides, I want to work with the atmosphere stuff, where I use real quantum mechanics to reveal how the infrared atmosphere really works; way more exciting. Actually, there is still work to be done with the fractal: 'a theory of knowledge' from it. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343999170_Making_Sense_of_Light_and_the_Quantum_by_an_Experiment_on_an_Isolated_Emergent_Fractal https://www.academia.edu/43989373/Making_Sense_of_Light_and_the_Quantum_by_an_Experiment_on_an_Isolated_Emergent_Fractal https://vixra.org/abs/2008.0228

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Is our skin colour evidence of Einstein's photoelectric effect and the (energy of the) UV photon?

I think I touched on something profound today in class: is our skin colour evidence of Einstein's Nobel Prize work, the photoelectric effect and the (energy of the) photon? What he established was 'light' photons increase in energy, in punch, as the frequency increases, and particularly after the ultra-violet (pardon the pun 'particularly' - he is the father of Quantum mechanics in the same work he he).
Before the UV frequency the energy of the visible light, the IR (heat), microwave, and radio - diminishing to being very weak. Our skin colour, from this work by Dr Nina Jablonski, is determined by our ancestral exposure, or not, to UV - it's UV that kills us, and we adapted/evolved colour to protect us.
You may ask why we were talking about this in econ? It was to do with health systems and merit goods - here's to them.

Saturday, October 13, 2018

Quantum Mechanics and Raman Spectroscopy Refute Greenhouse Theory

I've gone back to the drawing board, noticing and frustrated I was not getting the attention I demand from what I have uncovered. I have split my paper into two, and it works; the first I share here, and the second - on how the GHGs are really only the thermoelectric gases and is flawed - I will work on now. 
N2 and O2 (the '99%' non-GHGs) have QM predicted spectra, and 2338 and 1556 cm-1 respectively and these are observed by Raman Spectroscopy, IR specroscopy's complement instrument. Do not mess with quantum mechanics! 
Raman laser spectroscopy (not to be confused with the Raman effect!) makes IR spectroscopy redundant: it measures very accurately the QM predicted positions and temperatures!! of N2 O2 CO2 CH4 H2O spectra and more. What is more, the N2- CO2 laser operates on the QM absorption of its one spectra mode. N2 absorbs IR and responds, else no facial surgery. And can you believe it, with this CO2 laser it is N2 that is the gases that 'heats' the CO2. I have found the CO2 laser works for IR photons too. Game set match! Why hasn't someone else seen this before me? This needs a working group to develop a paper to take this to the world; I can't take it any further, or write it better.

Quantum Mechanics and Raman Spectroscopy Refute Greenhouse Theory

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Koch Snowflake Area paradox: it's infinite I say.

I don't agree the area of the Koch snowflake is finite as claimed. The calculation may give the result of finite number - from a fixed point - but as the system is iterating infinity, as is assumed, the area of each added triangle will be real, and these areas infinitely diminishing - asymptotically. 

If we were to zoom into the 'last' iteration area size where the area goes finite, I am sure we would 'see' iteration continuing and with this diminishing added area.

Infinite Series and convergence.
There seems to be a paradox here, a practical result conflicting with a calculated result. I think in reality it is both: these infinite series must go on (converging), presenting ever diminishing values, and thus the 'limit' must be irrational, not finite. But I am not going to challenge the finite calculation, I have not the authority or ability to do that. Interesting.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Presenting my work.

For the first time in 2 years I taught my beloved demand theory and drew the demand curve; the first time since I've written my fractal theory 'of everything'  . In the last 5- 10 minutes of the class I showed part of what I have discovered: a window into, and link between 'reality' and quantum world through a geometry. 
Funny thing is, they said they got it. 



Monday, August 28, 2017

Raman Infrared Atmosphere Facebook Dialog with PhD Physicist

The following is a 'rapid fire' dialog I recently had with (theoretical physicist) Dr. Tom Rodolfo Lee and (award winning) graduate physicist Julian Ingham on the Albert Einstein Facebook site, from 20th of August 2017; before, and following the U.S.A. total eclipse . The dialog that reveals my complete theory and backing evidence on what I think is the incomplete infrared greenhouse theory of the atmosphere. In it I withstand, best I can, brutal rebuttals from scientists - experts - in their field. In the end they do not respond to my claims and evidence.