Wednesday, April 26, 2017

My Mother is Dying

She has Parkinson's and is in pain much more often. She can barely walk and can talk more clearly when not with her medications on full blast. Her vision is okay and can see things with glasses so she can see my face, but I am really going through emotional hell right now. I am going to use the most powerful emotion, grief, to not only work though this long good bye, but to heal from many past traumatic events. I love her with all my heart, which makes it that much more difficult.

In all of this I am getting back my humanity which was taken from me when in the Marines and from my childhood neglect and abuse. That is what I want more than anything right now. I want my humanity back, and by god, I am going to get it back. I need my humanity so that I can express my true self, a man who is gentle and loving, and genuinely feels his own heart beating again.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Painful Life Lessons

I am going through a very painful period of life where I learn to navigate grief and feelings of sadness I was not allowed to express all my life. It is family and self related, so I will be taking as much time as I need to handle these very deep, in your face, emotions and thoughts. For those who do not know, I was raised in a household where negative emotions were always brushed under the rug. As a grown man, I have been learning those *negative* emotions are not negative. They are house cleaning emotions which allow you to function as a human being. Not allowing someone to cry or be sad is robbing them of their dignity and humanity. This, I think, is the series of lessons that I was not allowed to experience as a child/teenager and even a younger man. It quite interesting to realize that I am finally doing this, as a 32 year old man.

For those who also do not know, I have major PTSD from my childhood abuse and neglect and from the Marines combined. So combine that with not knowing how to clean house with sadness and expressing other *negative* emotions, and you'll get the emotional wreck I am right now. If I could just get a handle on learning how to use sadness in a good way and as a tool to help regain my dignity and humanity so that my brain can get cleaned up, I can experience the richness of life and the interpersonal human connectivity I was denied for my entire life. It feels as if my true self, my heart, has always been denied real, in depth feelings. If anybody else feels like this, you are not alone. Find someone to let your guard down with, to be vunerable around, they can help you.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Accretion Friction Braking in Stellar Metamorphosis

Accretion Friction Braking in Stellar Metamorphosis

Jeffrey J. Wolynski
Jeffrey.wolynski@yahoo.com
April 11, 2016
Cocoa, FL 32922



Abstract: It is required in stellar metamorphosis to brake material so that it loses the momentum that would prevent coalescence. In order to do any sort of accretion in outer space, the material has to clump together slowly and be pulled together and heated significantly. Even the slightest momentum with gaseous matter, dust, 1 cm sized particles or 1 km sized asteroids would prevent accretion and result in a further disintegration or deflection of the material. Explanation is provided.

Two rocky asteroids the size of school buses travelling at an extremely slow velocity of 25 M.P.H. relative to each other colliding would result in an explosive event on par with a couple pounds of TNT. Two school bus sized asteroids slamming into each other, (which is establishment’s version of planet formation) travelling at even the relatively slow orbital velocity of Neptune would yield an explosive event with the destructive force of many tons of TNT. Both velocities would completely prevent anything larger forming among the two objects, which leads us to the question, how exactly do rocks clump together in outer space? The answer is that they do not. You do not build planets in outer space by slamming rocks together at any appreciable velocity, because they will bounce off each other like billiard balls or obliterate each other like artillery shells.
             Since planets are not formed by rocks slamming into each other at any appreciable velocity, how exactly do we end up with giant differentiated metal/rocky objects the size of the Moon or Mercury? Surely they are comprised of rocky material, so the rocks and metal got there somehow! The answer is quite simple. Since planets are not formed by rocks slamming into each other in outer space, there has to be a way for rocks to lose their momentum so that they can reach the same spot in outer space, as well, that momentum also has to be somehow transferred to heat so that the rocks can melt and clump together with other rocks making larger, completely solid, homogeneous objects. To slow any size rock down so that accretion can happen, you can slow it down with friction. Where are the places in the galaxy that giant 1 km sized asteroids can be slowed down with friction? It is clearly NOT other 1 km sized asteroids, they are too small, they would zoom right past each other because outer space is too large of a place for collisions of that type to happen in any appreciable amount. The place for friction braking of the asteroid is in young and intermediate aged stars. There we will find that the star has enough inertia to prevent any object from pushing it around, meaning that all the momentum of the asteroid will be completely absorbed once it hits the star’s atmosphere. The enormous friction braking will heat up the asteroid, subsequently melting, vaporizing and even ionizing large portions of it so it then can be sorted out and differentiated into the central regions of the star. As well will spur enormous amounts of chemical reactions, but that is for another series of explanations.
Placing the star as the location for planetary accretion solves multiple issues. The star can absorb the momentum of the asteroid with friction braking, melt/vaporize/ionize the asteroid completely, sort the material based on mass and other properties in the internal regions, prevent heavy material from escaping (core formation via physical vapor deposition), and even clump all size asteroids from vaporized iron particles all the way to Ceres sized behemoths. Not only that, but it can do this to trillions of these rocks because the gravitational field of the star can grab significant amounts of interstellar shrapnel, as well the star has an extremely large surface area compared to a plithy asteroid. A very large surface area and gravitational field significantly increases the statistical probably of collisions.

What this all means dear reader is that the location for planet formation is inside of stars. Those bright objects you see in the night sky are not nuclear furnaces, they are planet ovens. The Discovery Channel, National Geographic magazines, Scientific American articles, documentaries about big name astronomers and astrophysicists are all wrong when it comes to stars. The only thing cooking in a star is a planet. Matter synthesis happens in active galaxies or AGNs, events which actually have the energy required to fuse matter at high velocities, and in gargantuan quantities. We should demote the stars from nuclear furnaces, and promote planets to being ancient stars. This simple realization is required that way we can do good science and not rely on outdated theory which struggles to explain even the high school basics, such as explaining how to make rocks lose their momentum in outer space by having them hit other objects with vastly larger masses and how useful simple concepts such as friction are. Let us get back to the basics. 

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Venus's Age and Heat on Thundebolts Forum, Stellar Metamorphosis

White is my writing. Red is Sketch, purple is quoted from somewhere else.

Link to Thread

Venus is at least twice the age of Earth, and Earth at least 10-20 times older than Jupiter and Saturn.





If Venus is so old, then why is Venus so flaming hot?

Venus is indeed warm, but more so than early sci-fi authors suspected. The surface temperature is ~860 F (460 C) -- [highlight]hot enough to melt lead![/highlight] The air is thick and steamy, too. ... A runaway greenhouse effect is what makes Venus even hotter than Mercury!

Can Global Warming be affecting Venus?
I thought of asking Al Gore, but he would probably just say 10,000 scientists couldn't be wrong :-)


Saying Venus is hot is not included in stellar metamorphosis simply because Venus is the entire object in this theory. Venus's atmosphere on the other hand gets hotter the deeper you go until you reach the surface. It is similar to saying, "The propane torch is hot." Sure it is where the flame is, but the bottle and nozzle are relatively cold.

In this theory, Venus has a hot atmosphere, that is true, because its trapping the heat like a giant thermal blanket, trapping radiative and convective heat. I would say that 860 F temperature is quite hot, but as a whole, take the blankie away, and Venus would be a cold dead world depending on which side was not facing the Sun at any given moment. In this theory, Venus is a dead world. No volcanoes, no strong magnetic field, no surface magma. Venus is well past her prime, and well into her twilight years. Shes a great, great grandma.

She is a prime example of what Earth will resemble in her twilight years. The case to be made is that Earth will die, with or without us, and will resemble Venus eventually many hundreds of millions of years into the future. Of course, that is what is predicted by stellar metamorphosis.


Venus is a dead Earth.