392 Lasha + Big Bang + Ether. Belarus to resettle the Chernobyl area

Lasha + Big Bang + Ether. Belarus to resettle the Chernobyl area

(1) Re the Freud quote, Lasda says that "doctoring" is needlessly strong
(2) Big Bang consistent with ongoing creation (Why, then, persecute dissidents?)
(3) Mani and the Big Bang
(4) & (5) The return of Ether: Space is a medium, filled with matter that is normally transparent
(6) Belarus to resettle the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone
(7) Belarus to Repopulate Chernobyl Exclusion Zone

(1) Re the Freud quote, Lasda says that "doctoring" is needlessly strong

From: darkmoon@theoccidentalobserver.net <darkmoon@theoccidentalobserver.net> Date: 11 October 2010 22:17

Xanadu says

October 11, 2010 at 4:49 AM

Peter: Thank you for sending me this interesting material. The only thing I disapprove of strongly is your subject heading, "LASHA’S BLOG: SHE ADMITS THAT SHE DOCTORED THE FREUD QUOTE."

Dear Peter, I did no such thing! and I would ask you to post this comment of mine next time you refer to the subject online. I admit that I deliberately left out the qualifier and I gave my reasons for doing so—the need for keeping captions to pictures pithy and to the point so as to capture the reader’s attention—but the word "doctoring" is needlessly strong. It gives the wrong impression: of intellectual dishonesty. And how can I be guilty of such a crime when I admit freely that I left out the qualifier for the reasons I gave? The most I am guilty of, Peter, is slipshod scholarship. (But even that I do not admit to, since I apply other standards and use other less rigid criteria.)

(2) Big Bang consistent with ongoing creation (Why, then, persecute dissidents?)
From: John Craig <cpds45@bigpond.com> Date: 07.10.2010 12:37 AM

Interesting stuff. Cosmology constantly comes up with new things. 

However I don't see why you suggest that an ongoing creation view, rather than a big bang view, requires any change in how one views time. Hawking in his 'Brief History of Time' argues that the big bang theory was consistent with ongoing creation - because the universe could expand and collapse repeatedly. And a non-big-bang view of ongoing creation does not mean that there was never a beginning to that process.

Reply (Peter M.):

Paul Marmet <Paul.Marmet@Ottawa.com> wrote to me:

{quote}
Einstein Universe requires that it was created from absolutely nothing. Therefore, our universe has been created following a "cause" which had to exist before the beginning of time! No mass-nergy conservation.
{endquote} http://mailstar.net/science.html.

Ongoing creation - an eternal universe - is the idea behind Hoyle's rival Quasi-Steady-State theory.

Academia requires Imprimaturs and Nihil Obstats just as the Catholic Church did.

Halton Arp was forced to leave Caltech - and the US - for defying Big Bang orthodoxy. He had to move to the Max Planck Institute in Germany.

Louis Essen, inventor of the Atomic Clock, exposed Einstein's errors in his "thought experiments" in his article Relativity <http://www.btinternet.com/~time.lord/Relativity.html>

"The other glaring mistake occurred in the course of one of his thought experiments. Einstein had never made any actual experiments, as far as I can find, and he certainly had no idea of how to compare clocks."

He gives a succinct explanation of the errors in his later article RELATIVITY - joke or swindle? <http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/Essen-L.htm>

But, returning to the earlier article, Essen there describes the threats made to force him to conform:

{quote}
I had rather naively thought that scientists would be glad to have an explanation of the confusion which had existed for so long and would at least pay some attention to my explanation, since I had more practical experience in these matters than all the relativitists put together. But I was wrong. No one attempted to refute my arguments although they justified Einstein by repeating his thought experiment and his mistakes in different forms. I was, however, dropped some pretty broad hints that if I continued to criticise the theory my reputation and career prospects were likely to suffer. It was only a sideline to my experimental work but I found it so interesting that I did not feel like dropping it, and felt that it was very important that the theory should be exposed. My Director was good about it and said he had no objection himself as long as I did not involve the NPL. I was beginning to realise that scientists could be just as irrational as anyone else and having accepted the theory as a faith without understanding it they closed their minds to argument. They also tried to suppress opposition and two of my papers after being accepted by the referees were mysteriously never published.

I was not entirely without support and was invited to write an article by the Oxford University Press. It was not so comprehensive as they hoped, since I was not able to devote as much time to it as I would have liked, and lacked the secretarial assistance of my department, but it was accepted and published as one of their Research Papers (No. 5). The Director of the Royal Institution also invited me to give one of their Friday Evening Discourses. This was quite enthusiastically received and I had many letters of congratulation, although, as I noticed with some amusement, most of them were written on private notepaper and not on the paper of their organisations as one would normally expect.
{endquote}

(3) Mani and the Big Bang

From: Cyril Glasse <acmealethia@gmail.com> Date: 08.10.2010 02:03 PM Subject: Rerek = Roerich

The "Rerek" of the Shnirelman article on Neo-Pagan myths (unearthed cities) is Nikolai Roerich (also called Rerikh) 1874-1947, a Gnostic style painter with a definite theosophical bent. There is a museum of his paintings on West 107th Street Manhattan, and another in Moscow. He created the "Roerich Pact" signed by a number of countries for the preservation of culture, particularly in time of war.

Regarding Ether and the Michelson-Morely experiment, it assumed that "ether," a term coined by Huygens, was material. Actually it is part of the theory of reality (in the West that of Scholastic Philosophy) which says that God is Being and Beyond Being, which contains "within itself" and "below itself" the world of Angels, which contains below it the "subtle world" and below that the material world. It is an intellectual construct. According to this, the physical world "floats" so to speak in a "subtle" world. This is a concept only. If it is materialized it yields theosophical delusions like Rudolf Steiner and quantum mechanics. By itself it is an elegant theory which is philosophically coherent. However, to measure a concept physically in order to "disprove" it is to mix metaphors.

The Michelson Morely experiment tried to measure a concretized idea. But the Michelson-Morley experiment definitely marked the discarding of the classical theological-philosophical theory by scientists, and divorce from all notions of a higher reality, without discussion of an alternative framework which led to its substitution by a materialist and dualist theory, which is that of the Big-Bang. A non-dualist religious philosophical universe was replaced with a dualistic one. What science claims to be science is actually another religion.

The Big Bang is what Mani taught in the third century. He said the world came into existence because Darkness, to which he assigned a positive existence, (to treat nothingness as a reality is the essence of Dualism as is "Anti-Matter"), attacked Light; Light created the world which is his Substance mixed with the purported substance of Darkness.

Thus according to Manicheism, and de facto a number of contemporary religions and materialist theories, as well as the Big Bang, the world in which we live is two divinities mixed up in other. Mani was pseudo-scientific theology and the Big Bang is pseudo-theological science. When speaking of the Big Bang it would be proper to attribute it to its original, or oldest known proponenent Mani himself, rather than to some Dualist scientists of the twentieth century.

Communism- Hegelianism-Marxism did not propose a creation theory as such, but it too, with Light and Darkness represented by Thesis and Antithesis is a form of Neo-Manicheism, along with Existentialism (which Hans Jonas recognized as Gnosticism in the "Gnostic Religion." Necessarily for modern science, matter and anti-matter are divine; without origin, without cause, and in themselves, intrinsic reality. The God of Quantum Mechanics is not a interesting God; it is the God of a Junkyard. You cannot get away from some idea of God, not necessarily with a long beard living in the sky and concerned with human problems, but as an Abstraction, the mother of all Abstractions, which is is necessary to avoid divinising matter and the material world.

(4) The return of Ether: Space is a medium, filled with matter that is normally transparent

http://forum.hydrino.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=263

GUT-CP Gravity

by JohnEB on April 8th, 2010, 3:41 pm

The following is from Robert Laughlin's published book entitled A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down (2005)

http://www.isepp.org/Pages/05-06%20Pages/Laughlin.html

{Laughlin is Professor of Physics at Stanford University; he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics in 1998}

A Different Universe

... It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise was that no such medium existed. The idea that space might be a kind of material substance is actually very ancient, going back to Greek Stoics and termed by them ether. Ether was firmly in Maxwell's mind when he invented the description of electromagnetism we use today. He imagined electric and magnetic fields to be displacements and flows of ether, and borrowed mathematics from the theory of fluids to describe them. Einstein, in contrast, utterly rejected the idea of ether and inferred from its nonexistence that the equations of electromagnetism had to be relative. But this same thought process led in the end to the very ether he had first rejected, albeit one with some special properties that ordinary elastic matter does not have.

The word "ether" has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. In the early days of relativity the conviction that light must be waves of something ran so strong that Einstein was widely dismissed. 8 Even when Michelson and Morley demonstrated that the earth's orbital motion through the ether could not be detected, opponents argued that the earth must be dragging an envelope of ether along with it because relativity was lunacy and could not possibly be right. The virulence of this opposition eventually had the scandalous consequence of denying relativity a Nobel Prize. (Einstein got one anyway, but for other work.) Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry.

It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with "stuff" that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.

(5) The return of Ether: Space is a medium, filled with matter that is normally transparent

From: Israel Shamir <adam@israelshamir.net> Date: 08.10.2010 08:46 PM

The Israel Test, by George Gilder (2009) published by Richard Vigilante Books
reviewed by Robert Sungenis

http://www.catholicintl.com/articles/Book_Review_of_The_Israel_Test_2.pdf

{p. 17} But Special Relativity was soon found to be inadequate. As physicist Lee Smolin writes:

"Special relativity was the result of 10 years of intellectual struggle, yet Einstein had convinced himself it was wrong within two years of publishing it. He rejected his own theory, even before most physicists had come to accept it, for reasons that only he cared about … "51

Simply put, Einstein failed to include the phenomenon of gravity in his Special Theory and without it the solution he proposed to Michelson's experiments was as good as false. So Einstein had to invent another theory. He called it the General Theory because it was supposed to be more comprehensive. But two things happened on the way to the theatre. First, Einstein found that in order to give the General Theory any semblance of coherence, he needed to include the ether he had rejected in his Special Theory. In 1916 (the year after he invented GR)  Einstein wrote:

" … in 1905 I was of the opinion that it was no longer allowed to speak about the ether in physics. This opinion, however, was too radical, as we will see later when we discuss the general theory of relativity. It does remain allowed, as always, to introduce a medium filling all space and to assume that the electromagnetic fields (and matter as well) are its states … once again 'empty' space appears as endowed with physical properties, i.e., no longer as physically empty, as seemed to be the case according to special relativity. One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity."52 ...

{p. 18} Second, Einstein's math also told him that the speed of light that he said was constant in the Special Theory (so that he could keep the Earth "non-constant," i.e., moving) could no longer be constant in the General Theory, for gravity can make light reach any speed it desired. As Einstein himself said: "In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. ... its results hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g., of light)"53 ...

There's more. Einstein then discovered that the equations in his General Theory led to an unstable universe. Einstein's original formula kept the universe from collapsing (with a little help from the infamous fudge factor L that he dubbed as the "cosmological constant"), but this solution was unstable, since the adjustment would then result in an expansion of the universe, which in turn would increase the repulsive force and decrease gravity, and thus increase the expansion exponentially. Conversely, the slightest contraction would result in a premature collapse of the universe. Nobel laureate Robert Laughlin explains the problems in terms of our old friend, ether:

"The closet of general relativity contains a horrible skeleton known as the cosmological constant. This is a correction to the Einstein field equations compatible with relativity and having the physical meaning of a uniform mass density of relativistic ether. Einstein originally set this constant to zero on the grounds that no such effect seemed to exist. The vacuum, as far as anyone knew, was really empty. He then gave it a small nonzero value in response to cosmological observations that seemed to indicate the opposite, and then later removed it again as the observations improved."55

... Laughlin reveals the inherent problems such theories will face:

"The view of space-time as a nonsubstance with substance-like properties is neither logical nor consistent. It is instead an ideology that grew out of old battles over the validity of relativity. At its core is the belief that the symmetry of relativity is different from all other symmetries in being absolute. It cannot be violated for any reason at any length scale, no matter how small … .This belief may be correct, but it is an enormous speculative leap."56 ...

51 Lee Smolin, Discover Magazine, September 2004, p. 38.
52 Albert Einstein, "Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitätstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung dargestellt," Morgan Manuscript, EA 2070, as cited in Ludwik Kostro, Einstein and the Ether, Aperion, 2000, p. 2. For a good summation of Einstein's reasoning in regard to reviving the ether concept, see Galina Granek's "Einstein's Ether:  Why Did Einstein Come Back to the Ether?" Apeiron, vol. 8, no. 3, July 2001; "Einstein's Ether: Rotational Motion  of the Earth," Apeiron, vol. 8, no. 2, April 2001; Ludwik Kostro, "Einstein and the Ether," Electronics and Wireless  World, 94:238-239 (1988). Kostro writes: "the notion of ether was not destroyed by Einstein, as the general public  believes" (ibid., p. 239); "Lorentz wrote a letter to Einstein in which he maintained that the general theory of  relativity admits of a stationary ether hypothesis. In reply, Einstein introduced his new non-stationary ether  hypothesis" (ibid., p. 238). ...
53 Albert Einstein, Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, authorized translation by Robert W. Lawson,  1961, p. 85. ...
55 Robert B. Laughlin, A Different Universe, p. 123.
56 Robert B. Laughlin, A Different Universe, pp. 123-124.  ...

(6) Belarus to resettle the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone

Plans for post-Chernobyl resettlement

Researched and written

by World Nuclear News

13 August 2010

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Plans_for_post_Chernobyl_resettlement_1308101.html

The government of Belarus has announced a masterplan to bring areas evacuated after the Chernobyl accident back into general use.

The recent 'State Program on Overcoming the Consequences of Chernobyl, 2011-2015 and the period to 2020' contains the details of a $2.2 billion plan. It marks a change in Belarus' policy with regards the 1986 accident at Chernobyl in Ukraine from rehabilitation to recovery.

'At the heart of public policies to combat the effects of the Chernobyl disaster is the transition from post-accident rehabilitation measures to the restoration and furthering of socio-economic development in affected regions, creating in them a more attractive environment for life.'

'Effective use of the contaminated territories is an important task that must be addressed through special projects aimed at development of the affected regions, the establishment of industries, providing design and production of self-sustaining and profitable products.'

The focus of the work will be within the Gomel and Mogilev regions, from which over 137,000 people were relocated. A primary measure will be to reduce fire hazard in the overgrown areas while some 14,000 contaminated objects hastily buried by previous governments are to be removed and about 5600 contaminated or broken-down buildings must be demolished.

Initial infrastructure requirements will mean the refurbishment of gas, potable water and power supplies, while the use of local wood will be banned. Schools and housing will be provided for specialist workers and their families ahead of wider socio-economic development. Free meals will be provided for students in the areas and there will be incentives for qualified professionals in healthcare, education, housing and utilities.

Overall, some 21,484 dwellings are slated for connection to gas networks in the period 2011-2015, while 1368 kilometres of road will be laid. There should be ten new sewerage works and 15 pumping stations. The cost of the work was put at BYR 6.6 trillion ($2.2 billion), split fairly evenly across the years 2011 to 2015 inclusive.

Food and forestry

The area of agricultural land that could come back into use totals over 10,000 square kilometres.

A suite of protective measures are to be set up to allow a new forestry industry whose products would meet national and international safety standards. A radiation monitoring system to support this would ensure workers are not be put at risk.

The feasibility of agriculture will be examined in areas where the presence of caesium-137 and strontium-90 is lower, 'to acquire new knowledge in the fields of radiobiology and radioecology in order to clarify the principles of safe life in the contaminated territories.' Land found to have too high a concentration of radionuclides will be reforested and managed to prevent their spread to neighbouring areas.

In April last year specialists in Belarus stressed that it is safe to eat all foods cultivated in the contaminated territories. However, consuming certain amounts of wild mushrooms, berries, game, milk or meat from cattle could take an individual beyond the internationally accepted limit for public exposure of 1 mSv per year. Grain and legumes are acceptable for use from all regions apart from a few places in the worst-affected Gomel region.

As well as bringing about the re-use of previously abandoned land, the learning by Belarusian scientists should allow the better targeting of medical care for people thought to have been affected by the accident as well as improve living standards overall. Social and medical measures are to be stepped up for the 1.4 million people the government has under health surveillance and there will be an end to the distinction between clean-up workers and people exposed due only to their location in the days after the accident.

Protective measures will be put in place for 498 settlements in the area where average annual effective radiation dose may exceed 1 mSv per year. There are also 1904 villages with annual average effective doses between 0.1 mSv and 1 mSv. The goal for these areas is to allow their re-use with 'minimal restrictions', although already radiation doses there are lower than background levels in other parts of the world. The most affected settlements are to be tackled first, around 2011-2013, with the rest coming back in around 2014-2015. ==

Ever decreasing circles

Between 2000 to 2010 the area of agricultural and domestic land contaminated by caesium-137, strontium-90 or both has decreased by 21% from 12,970 to 10,210 square kilometres.

(7) Belarus to Repopulate Chernobyl Exclusion Zone
by Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski*

July 28, 2010

http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/Chernobyl_repopulation.pdf

On July 23, Novosti, Interfax, Interia, other Belarusian, Russian, and Polish news agencies announced that the government of Belarus decided to resettle hundreds of thousands of people back into the 2,000 ghost-villages in the Chernobyl exclusion zone and other “contaminated areas” from which they had been hastily removed 24 years ago. Assuming 100 persons as the population of one village, the scale of the resettlement might be about 200,000 persons. ...

The “contaminated areas” were defined as those where fallout of radioactive cesium-137 was above 37 kilobecquerels (kBq) per square meter. In the Soviet Union, this covered more than 140 000 square kilometers of land. But the Chernobyl fallout also reached many other countries. Cesium-137 fallout of more that 185 kBq/m2 was found in Austria. Bulgaria, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, Greece, Romania, Switzerland, and Turkey. People in those countries were not relocated. A cesium-137 level higher than 37 kBq/m2 corresponds to an annual dose of 1.6 millisieverts (mSv), or about a half of the average natural radiation dose in these so-called “contaminated areas.”

Normal soil contains about 50 natural radioisotopes biologically much more dangerous than cesium-137. Their total activity in the top 10 cm layer of soil is 400 kBq/m2 (Jaworowski 2002), which is more than 10 times higher than the Soviet “relocation limit.” The promoters of the 37 kBq/m2 limit probably did not consider this fact. They also did not take into account that in many countries, where the natural radiation dose rate reaches to as much as 100 times greater than the average annual radiation dose received by inhabitants of the so-called “contaminated areas” in the Soviet Union, no increased incidence of neoplastic diseases and genetic disorders was ever registered. Just the opposite: The health of these populations is better than in countries with low natural radiation background. Compared with other noxious agents, ionizing radiation is rather feeble. Nature seems to have provided living organisms with an enormous safety margin for natural levels of ionizing radiation—and also, adventitiously, for man-made radiation from controlled, peacetime sources (Jaworowski 1999).

The current decision of the government of Belarus is an important political event which may bring a positive change in acceptance of nuclear power by the public. It probably results from years of studies reviewed by UNSCEAR which show that the Chernobyl catastrophe caused a minuscule risk for the general population. The only fatal victims were among the employees of the power station and rescue workers. There is no increase of neoplastic mortality among these workers, nor of cancer incidence and hereditary diseases among the inhabitants of “contaminated areas”(UNSCEAR 2008).

Ultrasound monitoring of the thyroid gland is carried out each year for almost all inhabitants in the so-called “contaminated areas.” As a result of such enormous mass screening, up to now a total of about 5,000 thyroid cancers have been detected in children and adults from the “contaminated areas.” This corresponds to 0.1% of the population living there. Most of these cancers are “occult thyroid cancers” which do not cause clinical symptoms, and have nothing to do with the radioactive iodine-131 dispersed from the Chernobyl reactor. The normal incidence of occult thyroid cancers in the population of Belarus is 9%; in the United States 13%; and in Finland 35%. About 90% of thyroid cancers are curable. In many thousands of Swedish and British patients who have received doses of radioactive iodine-131 much higher than the doses absorbed by people in the “contaminated areas,” no increase in thyroid cancers was detected, but rather the opposite: a 38% deficit of cancers among the Swedish patients, and 17% deficit among the British ones.

Calculating by unit of energy produced, the Chernobyl catastrophe caused 0.86 deaths per gigawatt-year of electricity produced, which is 47 times less than for hydroelectric power stations (40 deaths per GWe-year), including the 230,000 fatalities caused by the 1975 collapse of the dam on the Banqiao river in China.

The government of Belarus took into account the recommendations of a report jointly published in 2002 by four UN organizations: the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF). World Health Organization (WHO), and United Nations Office for Coordination of Human Affairs (UNOCHA). In strong words, the report stated that the enormous effort and billions of dollars spent on mitigation of the effects of Chernobyl accident, did not produce a positive result, but rather aggravated the situation of 7 million people defined as “victims of Chernobyl,” and petrified psychological effects of the catastrophe and of the wrong Soviet decisions. The report recommended that the three post-Soviet countries and the international organizations abandon the current policy, based on the misguided expectation of mass radiation health effects, which led to the useless expenditure of giant resources. The report presented 35 practical recommendations needed to stop the vicious cycle of Chernobyl frustrations, social degradation, pauperization and the epidemic of psychosomatic disorders. In practice, the recommendations suggested removal of all the restrictions that had been imposed. Most important among them was that the relocated individuals should be allowed to return to their old settlements. ...

References

Z. Jaworowski, 1999. Radiation risk and ethics. Physics Today, Vol. 52: pp. 24-29

Z. Jaworowski, 2002. Ionizing radiation in the 20th century and beyond. Atomwirtschaft- Atomtechnik, Vol. 47, pp. 22-27.

Z. Jaworowski, 2010. Observations on the Chernobyl disaster and LNT. Dose-Response, Vol. 8: pp. 148-171 http://dose-response.metapress.com/media/h147e148jftulncqvwxydff147/contributions/140/143/145/142/03523n6276303212.pdf

UNSCEAR, 2000. “Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation.” United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000, Report to the General Assembly. Annex J: Exposures and Effects of the Chernobyl Accident, pp. 451 - 566. United Nations.

UNSCEAR, 2008. “Health effects due to radiation from the Chernobyl accident” Draft report A/AC.82/R.673, pp. 1-220. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/indepth/big-day-out-with-sydney-bull-sharks/story-e6frewr9-1225872735929