Say what you want to about Nicole Walker. She may be a first rate whore- - but she isn't "easy". FBI agent Raphael Hernandez has got the bee in his bonnet that Nicole knows something really damaging about Elvis Di Mira son of Stephano Di Mira. And he is correct. Nicole has made multiple CD Roms of a conversation between Elvis and his father to the effect that Elvis kidnapped his own daughter and told the biological mother that the child was in grave danger and once led her to believe she had been murdered. He was very cruel to her. Now the mother and Elvis are contemplating nuptuals as the relation between them has improved markedly and she has her little girl back. Raphael decided the way to get to Nicole was to butter her up and tell her they are two of a kind and pointed to the relation between between Elvis and Samantha (the mother) as the undoing of them both, who were the losers. But Nicole wasn't biting. No matter how drunk he tried to get her to the point of falling down, she never let the big secret pass her lips, even though she had one of the CD's right there in her purse and Raphael never knew it. It's almost akin to David getting Uriah drunk and sending home from battle to have sex with his wife to cover up his own misdeeds. But Uriah kept his vow of celebecy on the battle field and slept on cushions on the front porch. The thing is that Nicole does not want to reveal her secret about Elvis because she's been paid the not insubstantial sum of five million- - dollars - in an off shore account. Also Elvis knows the reason why Nicole was snooping around the mansion to begin with is because she wanted to find out out if Elvis or Stephano had evidence against her in another crime. This one is of framing her ex boyfriend's lover for attempted murder with bogus DNA and help from a very unsavory doctor. If this fact ever came to light Nicole's name would be even uglier than it is. There is a saying among Taoists: Those who Say- - don't Know- -and those who Know- - - don't Say. I guess I don't know much because I like to blab a lot.
Dr. Laura, the shrink that has been gracing mid day talk shows for several decades, now has announced she will be going off the air in five months when her contract runs out. Laura says she wants to regain her right to "free speech" he has lost now, and says she wants to "be free to speak her heart". I don't think I want to know what that is. Personally I think Laura Slchlenger is a big drama queen blowing this apparent "dismissal" all out of proportion. She regards it as some sort of vast left wing conspiracy of the stations' sponsors and viewers. She used to be really good at what she did but she has become increasingly eccentric in her later years - making some really off the wall remarks.
Not only are all our young people overweight and having cholesterol problems at a young age, now we hear they are all going deaf from listening to I Pods day in and day out at volumes around eighty decebles. People don't exercise common sense. They talk about the fifteen hundred calorie burger- - well one of those isn't going to kill you- - for instance as your only meal of the day. People assume people eat these things all day long or something, and that would never happen. People complain about salads with anything but oil and viniger dressing on them. If you're going to get concerned, get bothered about their lack of government and civics knowledge. I would not let a sixteen year old vote. They let eighteen year olds vote in 1972 and they elected Richard Nixon. It was young people, like on the Wally George show, that put Ronald Reagan in the White House. Delaying voting just a bit has its dividends.
Thom Hartman wants to double social security payments to those over 65. This is because SS payments are below the $18,000 annual salary for the poverty level income. Hartman argues that having that extra money in circulation would have economic dividens and provide a degree of insilation from the recession. Actually the first thing we can do is lower the retirement age to sixty for starters and then try fifty-five. This will reduce the number of workers vying for the same job and will reduce stress in older workers who fear getting fired because they can no longer do the work. Removing that income level cap of a hundred thousand to pay in to the thing would to me be the most obvious solution to a whole host of problems. According to Hartman, once you stop buying "material things" like houses and cars, and instead start making "investments" perhaps in overseas accounts, then it's time to tax more of that money. There was a person on Hartman's show today who said that increased taxation of his $500,000 salary would reap an unnecessary hardship on his family. Give me a break!
I would now like to do additional rumination about what hyper light speed would be like and how it would be perceived, about which I wrote last night. We all know about how they like to watch drag races in close quarters in the Lucerne Valley in the desert. But now suppose a car were racing down the road faster than the speed of light and it was dangeling ropes. And one of these ropes brushed up against you. Now as the car continued to speed along the rope would continue to brush up against you. (ropes are going off in all directions) This is a very long rope. Now the question is- - is where the rope first touched you the first or last time that an “outraying of light” would come in contact with you. Picture little lights in the ropes and all the lights are moving at uniform speed all out tword the ends of the ropes. Would the light closest to the car be the first or last light emitted? It would be the last. All the other spots along the rope would have been emitted first. But the light that was closest to the end of the rope and hence first sent, would be the last one to touch you. This is a graphic demonstration of the principle that you would indeed view all such “transmissions” in backwards sequence.
I would now like to cover another example that may have popped into some viewer’s minds. They say “You overly complicated the image about hyper light speed”. They would say “Just look at this star constellation- - and all the stars in this constellation are light-years apart. But if a light source traveled from two such stars separated by vast distances in short order, like say a half hour- this would be amazing and prove hyper-light speed was achieved.” I will concede that for instance- - an object traveling from left to right and now just right of your meridian- - would still be visible. But for instance- -an object traveling ten times the speed of light would not be visible at an eight to one “Sine” angel of how-many degrees. Maybe twenty. The further away you yourself were from the constellation- - the farther out front the actual object would be in the present tense.. Because light takes time to travel a longer distance but to you the viewer the angle would become smaller. I will repeat that light can never exceed 186,000 miles per second. Remember from previous postings that sub light forms round “Universes” and super-light-speed forms hyperbolic Universes. These are Universes obviously that go mainly one direction, and virtually zero in the opposite direction.
The mathematical model on the previous post is what I call the “through the looking glass” approach. Each side of the looking glass views the one on the other side as in some alien dimension. The speed of light is a denotation of zero on our chart. At a positive one on our chart light has slowed down considerably. The speed of light slows to 10,111 miles per hour at an exponent of .76. I was surprised by this figure myself. Those of you wondering about the whole log and hyperbolic tangent thing, here’s what happens on each side of log zero. What I do is flip-flop the numbers on the other side of zero. I’ll do this after dinner. If we take that 10,111 figure and [subtract it from] the speed of light we get [176,000] miles per second. That’s how it works. Dividing with two renders a log of .94 and a devisor of 120,173 or about half the speed of light so our final figure would be [66,000] - - miles per second. On the positive side of the ledger this is how we do the math. On the negative side of the ledger where the demarcations are -1 and -2 for instance, we do it differently. A negative one is viewed in hyperspace as twice the speed of light and a -2 is seen as three times the speed of light as seen from hyperspace. We use the log figures to deduce the speed as seen in sub light space. We get rid of the negative tangents and make them positive. The .76 figure renders our 10111 [subtracted from] light speed for our [176,000] miles per second. And at the -2 figure we get our [66,000] miles per second, modeling the math from above, only switched around. Eventually we get close to a log one, [186,000 subtracted from 186,000] and get zero (mps.). Perhaps you are thinking that all this would work out much better if we used subtraction rather than division because we would end up with zero and not one. That’s a very good point. At that rate at negative one we would have the speed of light less the figure of 10,111 or about 176,000 mps. I can live with that. We can do it. The figure at either two or negative two would be about 166,000 miles per second. OK. The point is for each side to see the other as “the other side of the looking glass” and to see the speed of light itself AS the looking glass. Capish?
No comments:
Post a Comment