June 8, 2016

Phoenix arising again from the cosmic ashes?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , , — zankaon @ 7:15 pm


Nuclear synthesis occurs for over 90 seconds, or 10² in comparison to Planck time of 10^-43 seconds, thus seemingly 45 orders far removed from r_m modified global radius minimum of modified global trajectory and of 3-volume minimum. Still 31 orders from Electro-weak energy scale of ~10^-12 seconds to Planck scale? Nevertheless cosmic time i.e. large scale peculiar velocity, Hubble parameter (changing 3-volume), and fermion mass spectrum are all exponentially changing, in SRM Spiral Rotation Model; thus shortening cosmic time duration to high entropy transition stage of r_m. The latter an entropic caldera of quanta interactions and extreme manifold deformations i.e. sea of gravity waves? Is this the ‘world’ we came from; forged in a cosmic crucible?

zankaon MSM page Planck scale


June 21, 2017

Cosmic entanglement: Do we detect and experience only a small fraction of universe’s total energy?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — zankaon @ 1:46 pm

For massive neutrinos and Big Bang fermion mass spectrum, and for assumption (comparing density number of hadrons/baryons to neutrinos?) that most of mass is carried off by neutrinos, then most of mass\energy of universe(s) 3-volume becomes no longer descriptive, until Big Crunch. Then only for extremely rapid turn around of BC to BB, is total mass/energy of universe and System revealed. Thus is what we see, detect, and experience, just a small fraction (10^-3?) of such total mass/energy of ‘universe’?

see zankaon site

June 10, 2017

Acheulean vs Oldowan tool kit?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — zankaon @ 5:40 pm

Is the former just characteristic of our species?

However Neanderthal roots probably are exceedingly deep. For example, homo sapien and homo erectus jaw bone would seem more similar than that of Neanderthal’s.

Neanderthal, based on it’s robust physique, was probably always a big game hunter; hence the usage of acheulean tools (i.e. spear points, after fire hardened points etc.). Also homo sapien, and homo erectus (eventually?), must have been in part hunters; hence use of acheulean tools. Therefore​, acheulean tools (any such findings) would not seem specific to our species.

April 20, 2017

Planck scale: Simulation of randomness?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — zankaon @ 9:20 am

Might deformations of manifold on Planck scale, serve as a simulation of an approach to randomness? Then for finer than Planck scale, might one have further refinement of such randomness approach, by utilization of rational set? Such as Cantor’s ternary set, of ever removing middle ⅓; or of a 3-dimensional version of Weirstrauss function?

However since the primes are clustered, so too the rationals; thus are the rationals not so suitable in a simulation of any randomness of deformations of a manifold? Rather such deformations would seem to be intermittently clustered both spatially and temporally.

A physically related concept, entropy, seems in prusuit of randomness; that is the former expressed as the macrostate characterized by the greatest number of microstates. So entropy is ever trying to spread out energy into a uniform distribution; yet never attaining such goal; consistent with no heat death scenario for the universe?

Is heterogeneity, rather than homogeneity, for Big Bang nucleosynthesis, another example consistent with no attainment of perfect randomness?

So it would seem that since there is no perfect randomness, thus there is always information; even for mathamatics, such as Ramsey theory? Would this then seem consistent with Modified Set Model MSM generality: the alleged ongoing maximizing of cardinality of sets, such as for entropy and information, in comparison to alternative scenarios?

see zankaon’s  SRM/MSM website

March 26, 2017

Motion of a manifold

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — zankaon @ 10:33 am

Would observed and interpreted motion of a manifold (i.e. ‘universe’) alone imply multiplicity?

For example, for our universe, any motion would seem to require the influence of at least another disjoint surface i.e. manifold. Hence any large scale peculiar velocity of our Local Group with respect to Cosmic Background Radiation CBR would per sae seem to indicate multiplicity; that is, more than just one manifold.

March 20, 2017

Can manifolds change; or are they invariant?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , — zankaon @ 5:12 pm

Manifold concept can, in a simplified sense, be refered to as just a surface. Thus shape is irrelevant; hence change in shape is not pertinent.

Manifold can be rendered as continuum; that is an inbetweeness quality, wherein one has a mapping of nearby elements of respective sets. Can one even have a minimum number (3) of elements required to define closeness and inbetweeness?

So can a manifold change; that is change it’s continuum? Or add additional inclusiv.e new continua vis a product space construction, giving successively a new higher dimensional space?

Would bifurcation and merging of manifolds be impossible, even of same continua? Exemplified by no merging of hot Jupiters’ with respective star, even over billion of years? Thus also consistent with no coalescence of compact objects? Also would above be compatable with no bifurcating of manifolds, as in eternal chaotic inflation, nor with merging of 3-branes, nor of patches of different manifold arising within a given manifold, nor of non-manifold suddenly appearing i.e. singularity etc.?

Thus are manifolds stable? Thus no creation nor destruction of manifolds. Hence for example, consistent with a divergent set of entangled always disjoint manifolds?

Would all of this seem consistent with concept of manifolds being truculent, and difficult to deal with? As if  they want to be left alone; perhaps because they are not capable of change i.e. always invariant? 

Modified Set Model at HTTP://

March 4, 2017

Drilling into martian glaciers, with a drone?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , — zankaon @ 1:33 pm

One or two surface glaciers have been detected on Mars, perhaps covered with debris to some depth; uv broken down surface of such Martian rock ice? Earth-like ice should not be there, due in part to low atmospheric pressure. Hence the case for an altered ice i.e. martian rock ice, with an altered (strengthen) bond between water molecules; taking on the appearance of rock, but of a lesser density. One could drill into it, and compare densities (amperage as a proxy) with an earth ice model, and also utilize infrared spectroscopy of bond nature.

But the glaciers represent a small target, from orbit. Perhaps one could land within ~50-100 miles, and launch a large enough drone to not only get to the glacier, but also to drill into it.

Martian atmospheric pressure of 3-5 millibars would seem to preclude propellers. Instead one could utilize small rockets and/or simple non-combustible gas cartridges, since only Newton’s 3rd law applies.

Old Martian geological formations would seem consistent with flow of a fluid – presumably liquid water. Whereas the glaciers in question seem to have a freshness, newness to them; perhaps wind sweept, with minimal regolith, or none? Might uv effect give an irregularity (from sublimation) to surface; or might subterranean hard smoothness be retained? High resolution photography, as a minimal objective?

The moon’s regolith seems some what like pancake flour; with a stickiness secondary to no atmospheric molecules. Whereas on Mars, one has a dust patina; air molecules intersperse such particulate matter.

If like earth ice, then such glaciers could not exist on the surface. So would this seem consistent with a physical phase change for hydrogen bonding between water molecules? Perhaps the rheological outflow might be somewhat like slow motion hard surface being squeezed out, due to subterranean compression forces? 

WATSON: A Wireline Ultraviolet Raman and Fluorescence Spectrometer for Subsurface Organic Detection in Northern Ice Sheets 

WATSON is a deep UV Raman and fluorescence instrument intended to detect, characterize, and map the distribution of organic material in subsurface ice.

March 3, 2017

Earliest life forms?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , — zankaon @ 3:27 pm

Recent reports suggest microbial life in ancient hydrothermal vents in rocks ~3.77- 4.28 Byrs ago – Nuvvuagittuq Supracrustal Belt (NSB). However is there the possibility of a later date infusion of fluid rock material?

For example, for Gunflint trail formation and vicinity, one has ancient shield rocks, but with later volcanic intrusion rocks, associates with the Mid-continental rift ~1 Byrs ago.

Just one billion years is an enormous geological time span, wherein almost any thing can occur. Animalia (such as sponges) might have arisen approximately 1 billion years ago; an almost inconceivable span of biological evolutionary time. 

So nature has had an enormous amount of time to try all possibilities. That is, a temporal series can be transformed into an ensemble of all spatial realized states. But is this sufficient? There also must be preservation, stability, allowing for an accumulation of mass, in regards to structural or functional elements; such as stabi!ity of amide bond for between amino acids (condensation dehydration polymer formation)?

For example, adsorption to a surface, or confined by gels, and/or a dryer environment. Perhaps nacent pre-biotic chemistry beneath a biofilm of a marine surface? Thus co-evolution of stabilizing preservation conditions, factors etc. would seem to be of equal importance.

Astrobiology Science Conference 2017 (LPI Contrib. No. 1965),

PREBIOTIC CHEMISTRY IN CHEMICAL GARDEN STRUCTURES AT HYDROTHERMAL VENTS:  THE IMPORTANCE OF GELS AND GRADIENTS.  L. M. Barge1 , O. Steinbock, J. H. E. Cartwright, NASA , Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena CA 91109, USA (; Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4390, USA; Instituto Andaluz de  Ciencias de la Tierra, CSIC−Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

February 27, 2017

Entanglement of past, present, and future?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , — zankaon @ 7:04 pm

Utilizing wide-angle perception i.e. entanglement, might the above three be more inextricably intertwined than thought?

That is, in addition to our brief moment on the stage of life, might we also be part of a very large set; perhaps even divergent?

If the latter is also so, then might one have reoccurance of the same, and also variants, life experience (genetic and cultural)? This would be consistent with the concept of MRT, Modified Replication Time (1).

For a divergent set, might one transform a temporal series of such life experiences into a spatial ensemble, inclusive of endless repetition of the same life experience, as well as endless variations?

Hence are we limiting our perception in considering just 1 element i.e. self, of perhaps a divergent set? Are we both finite, and also concurrently, infinitesimal? A play that never ends?

… hold infinity in the palm of one’s hand
W. Blake

1. see MRT in SRM Spiral Rotation Model, and on zankaon web page.

February 26, 2017

Imagination – just an epi-phenomenon?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , — zankaon @ 4:40 pm

Might imagination be more than just an apparent extra consequence of a larger more complex brain? That is, perhaps nature has discovered and selected imagination as a stable evolutionary strategy, enhancing replication for more complex cognizant species.

Likewise for more complex cognizant exo-species? Hence, by analysis, is the tradition of storytelling, and it’s sequelae i.e. literature, poetry, and media, widespread throughout the universe?

February 9, 2017

Modeling and gravitational potential tapering – any implications?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , , — zankaon @ 2:43 pm

Might gravitational potential, instead of inversely dropping off, have a different (exponential like?) tapering off? Differing, electric field, and also radioactivity, appears to suddenly drop off? Thus is there precedence for differences in decreasing field strength, and decrease in other phenomena?

Might such rendering be consistent with the continued apparent gravitational binding of Proxima centauri in it’s triple star system, even though seeming through calculations, being too far away from other 2 stars? Likewise is gravitational potential seemingly too weak, via calculations, to keep our moon in orbit? Hence might our gravitational potential have a different gradual tapering off, not reflected in our calculations or modeling?

Thus rather than inversely dropping off, there would seem to be tapering of such potential far out; for example the Oort cloud, and Proxima centauri with a period of ~500,000 years, consistent with ~15,000 AU distance to alpha centauri; all part of a triple system. And perhaps even further outward – a neutrino belt?

Might more accurate modeling of such potential involve expansion as a series, with just inverse fall off as the zero term? Again tailoring such expansion series to suit any empirical findings, such as above?

Is Proxima centauri’s distant from it’s binary companions at approximately that of Oort cloud? Based on above, it would seem closer in when compared to Oort cloud estimates. Yet might there be the possibility of a large mass nearer to Oort cloud distance?

The Oort cloud (not spherical symmetrical?) is assumed to be comprised of just cometary mass scale. However the potential and curvature at such distant would not be influenced by the mass of objects at such distance. Hence could one have an undetected gas giant (historically related to Uranus’ tilted axis?) at such distance, and even a red dwarf, say .08 solar mass; neither one apparently affecting the rest of our stellar system? Or might long period comets we detect, be the result of (and consistent with) destabilzation by a gas giant or red dwarf nearer to Oort cloud?

A red dwarf mass could be detected in the infrared, including infrared spectroscopy. An invisible gas giant might only be detected by occultation of a background star(s).

Older Posts »

Blog at