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 inclusive 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 — zankaon @ 1:33 pm

One or two surface glaciers have been detected on Mars, covered with debris to some depth. 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.

March 3, 2017

Earliest life forms?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — 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.For example, adsorption to a surface, and/or a dryer environment. Thus co-evolution of stabilizing factors etc. would seem to be of equal importance.

February 27, 2017

Entanglement of past, present, and future?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , — zankaon @ 6:04 pm

Utilizing wide-angle perception I.e. entanglement, might the above 3 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).

December 23, 2016

Infusion of idealism?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — zankaon @ 2:48 pm

October 19, 2016

A sense of rhythm – a stable evolutionary strategy?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , , — zankaon @ 4:28 pm

Was the first musical instrument, a bone with holes in it i.e. a recorder? Or perhaps beating 1 or 2 bones/sticks on a suitable surface? But not currently for a chimpanzee, since a lack of rhythm for any such activity. Hence the requirement of rhythm to convert noise making to musical sound.

Would chanting (with a nascent sense of rhythm) seem more primitive than commencement of language sounds?

Might a developing rhythmic sign language, enhanced selection for fine motor control, and hence cerebellar development, go hand in hand?

Would a distant journey be easier with a rhythmic cadence, as now?

Was our species’ upside breakout (i.e. dominant population expansion) ~200,000 years ago, related to selection for cerebellar development i.e. new connections?

Hence might rhythm, and accompanying cerebellar brain connections, development, and/or their takeover, be required for initiation of music and language? Thus was the road to music and language a rhythmic one – a stable evolutionary strategy, relating more to cerebellum than just neocortex development?



October 16, 2016

Supernova – fission explosion? A precursor neutron star?


Cassiopeia A        NASA / JPL/ Caltech

Might one consider any SN1987 precursor star as a predominantly fusion star, as a source of energy; wherein one has gravitational collapse to a critical mass density, and then fission process commencing and predominating? Higher mass element nucleosynthesis would require free neutrons; thus wouldn’t nuclei fission be required?

If there is no detectable precursor star, might this be consistent with just a solo neutron star acquiring additional mass, or internal dynamics leading to run away explosive fission process i.e. supernova? Perhaps an internal/external circulating plasma in magnetic field of such neutron star, and redistribution of energy (magnetic reconnect – entanglement ?), leading to instabilities, such as localized change in neutron density?

What might be consistent with a supernova precursor being a neutron star? Since the supernova database continues to get bigger (including association with most long duration GRB), might one eventually match it to x-ray binary database (Chandra) in order to notice overlap of any SN with planar patch for x-ray binary? Then, if practical, see if a binary star is still there. If present, then might SN have originated from secondary compact object of x-ray binary?

Could one then consider the odds of any such alleged association, by comparing respective x-ray binary and gamma ray burst databases for association; such latter comparison, currently null?

Might another approach to any supernova remnant SNR, be to look for any motion of luminous star very near to SN1987 co-ordinates; within 1/2 arcsecond? That is, SN are anisotropic, as revealed by their effective absence in globular clusters. Therefore would any stellar motion  be evidence of a precursor binary? Also utilize infrared spectroscopy, looking for any remnant object, as elaborated on, below?

Shock waves expanding at 10s of thausands km/sec; whereas stellar natal kick might be at just ~1000 km/sec.? For the latter velocity of any possible surviving star of 1987 SN possible binary, for over 30 years, at a distance of ~165,0oo lyrs, what would be the angular displacement; discernable?

As critical mass density (sufficient for sustained chain reaction)  is reached, might one also have an energy density associated with eventual red dwarf formation? Perhaps the latter not just a remnant, but consistent with a fission process, contributing additionally (or solely) to what we detect as a supernova explosion?

Stars contain an abundance of iron (as per spectroscopy), not unlike earth and stellar nebula. If cosmic rays are predominantly iron nuclei, them might this also be consistent with a supernova fission process, including (mainly?) iron? But where is iron in a SN explosion? One has evidence of nickel and cobalt; both next (in atomic number and weight) to iron in Periodic Table. Are iron nuclei being utilized and consumed as a fissionable fuel in such SN explosion and element synthesis?

Might such considered fission process (perhaps iron doped with .1% uranium?), trigger off a supernova explosion, rather than just being an accompanying process? Might additional energy released be mainly massive neutrinos? In terms of energetics, is most of energy released in supernova explosion from neutrinos? Does fission process generate more neutrinos, as well as heat, than fusion?

Is the energy scale for SN limited to just 2 fermion generations (i.e muons) or might one have higher energy levels associated with fermion mass spectrum? What energy (mass density) scale is associated with (if) neutrino trapping; approximately same as for neutron (nucleon) degeneracy? But less than short duration GRB energy scale?

If higher energy scale, as for fermion mass spectrum, then one would seem to have left over higher generation massive neutrinos. Assuming no decay nor annihilation, and comparatively limited nucleon absorption, might our galaxy (including dark matter halo?), Large Magellanic Cloud, and solar system’s neutrino belt, contain a smaller fractional number of such more massive neutrinos, in addition to electron neutrinos?

Might a supernova explosion description be more than just release of gravitational potential energy, and more than just a bounce off an energy (i.e. mass density) nucleon (?) surface (simulations not consistent with such bounce?); and more than just a fusion process, since fuel has been markedly reduced? Instead might such explosion represent a qualitative and quantitative shift to a predominant fission process, with also perhaps a remnant, suggestive of such switch?

What is the most likely outcome of a supernova – no remnant? Might any database of supernova remnants (SNR) contain a compact object; a significant portion of original massive star? Would a pulsar be part of any such SNR database? Might likelihood of compact object be mass (10-15 solar mass?) dependent? What percentage of neutron stars are pulsars? If there were a supernova remnant, might it be of a lesser mass, such as red dwarf mass?

Or if a neutron star were a SN1987 remnant, then wouldn’t there be central x-ray detection, from strong magnetic field, near infall to magnetic pole? Might one have both a SN precursor neutron star, and also a somewhat lesser mass NS? But would there be sufficient fuel for SN in such scenario?

Could a supernova explosion sometimes leave behind a red dwarf remnant (i.e. SNR) fission star (such as .04 of 4 solar mass precursor), usually detectable only in infrared? Would infrared spectroscopy enable detection of such an object?

For example, might infrared spectroscopy distinguish between heat of expanding gas shell and an interior remnant source? Even if the site of SN1987 is obscured by gas clouds, inter-stellar debris etc., still might infrared spectroscopy reveal an object at SN1987 co-ordinates? Whereas gas clouds, and other diffuse infrared sources, might just reveal a slight non-specific pattern.

Thus would any such infrared spectroscopy detection (and thus revealed object?) seem consistent with the significance of a fission process in initiation of explosiveness of supernova phenomena?

Periodic Table

Chandra images

Theory of core-collapse of supernovae


Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at