"Hottest Year Ever!"

Today is 21 September, the end of summer. For the next several days, the expected high temperatures here are in the low 60s. It’s been raining for three days. Rain is expected to continue for three more.

Apologies to all those living out past the dry line. We’ve got the cold, wet weather you’ve been dreaming of. We’ve had it for most of the last 10 years. We had three consecutive years of record rainfall. Consider what that means. The farmers around here are spending the fortunes they don’t have putting in drainage under their multi-hundred acre fields so the rain water will GO AWAY and stop drowning the crops. More of this sort of tractor are showing up:

Like this, but bigger and with more ground clearance.

Our local community pool didn’t get a whole lot of business this year. We had a couple weeks of hot in May and June, and a week or so in July. August was notably cooler than usual, with two weeks of highs in the 60s and low 70s.

I’m old enough to remember when the grass normally died of heat and thirst in August, and the temperatures routinely got into the low 100s. Now, it’s unusual to see the temperature reach 90 degrees more than three times the whole year.

And the newsweasels keep proclaiming, “It’s the hottest year ever!”

Quantum Madness

There is something in the teaching of quantum theory that drives people mad. It makes them unable to think coherently. A scientist can be going along, making perfect sense, then he gets to Bell’s theorem, and the train of rational thought immediately derails.

This video is the perfect example. The scientist has spent the previous 5 hours (this is the second video in the series) explaining how Einstein was correct about the explanation of quantum theory must be incomplete, because it is nonlocal. And then he explains how Bell was trying to explain Einstein’s argument about nonlocality, and used Bohm’s inherently nonlocal1 Pilot Wave theory to show how tests of quantum spin could show the “inherent” nonlocality of quantum behavior. And that’s how we get to this nonsensical chart. The chart is of tests of spin by entangled (opposite spin) particles tested by both Alice and Bob, who can each set up their detectors to align vertically, or be offset by 60 degrees.

The chart is pure gibberish. Aside from the two central lines, where coin tosses are made for “Alice 0”, and then the opposite result is shown for “Bob 0”, the data in the chart is utterly meaningless. Because the chart is conflating completely separate measurements, and jamming them all together.

You can have the central chart, where both Alice and Bob have their detectors aligned vertically. Their detections will always be opposites - down with up, and up with down. Perfect anti-correlation. This is not because of any “spooky action at a distance.” It is because, from the moment the particles were entangled, they held spin properties that were opposites - 180 degrees out of phase with each other. We don’t know what the baseline phase is, though. That’s the job of the detectors to find out. Which they do in an incredibly crude way - by making each particle go either up or down. It’s like taking a spinner from a child’s game, spinning it, and then declaring that if the pointer lands anywhere between 0 and 179 degrees, it points east, other wise it points west. Are we supposed to be surprised that the opposite end of the spinner points the other direction after each random trial?

The rest of the chart, though… is deliberately deceitful. He took coins, and flipped them, changing 25% of the answers from the “0” case for Alice and Bob. This is because, when misaligned by 60 degrees, detections will disagree from the expected (no offset) values 25% of the time. This is perfectly normal wave behavior, as defined by cos²(θ/2). So what we need is not one chart with four lines, but three separate charts, each with two lines - Alice compared to Bob at A0:B0, A+60:B0, and A0:B-60. (You can do even more charts if you want to turn the detectors the other way, but you’ll get similar results.)

And then we get to the “kill shot”. The scientist explains that at 120 degrees offset, A+60:B-60, the detections will disagree with the predicted (zero offset) values 75% of the time. And yet, his chart says they can only disagree half the time. Proof! Quantum behavior is nonlocal!

Well, no. That’s not what his chart says at all. If it did, it would disprove the very quantum theory that was used to create the chart. What he is saying is literally nonsensical - it makes no sense. Because you can’t make two separate 60 degree offset tests, and combine them to create one 120 degree offset test. That’s not how wave behavior works.  A+60 and B-60 have nothing to do with each other!  There is no causal correlation between them at all!  Should we really be surprised that a naive comparison between them disagrees with well established theory and practice?

To make 120 degree offset tests, you have to hold one detector steady and turn the other one 120 degrees, then make your measurements. Count up the detections, and voila! You will find that 75% of the time, they disagree from perfect anti-correlation. (They’re opposites, after all.)

So, you need two new charts, each of two lines - A0:B-120, and A+120:B0. Once you do that, you’ll find a 75% disagreement. Exactly what basic wave theory predicts, whether the particles somehow “magically” influenced each other instantaneously, or whether the two particles were simply created with opposite properties, which you are now measuring for the first time.

Bell’s theory is logically incoherent. Bell’s inequality proves nothing more than that a cosine wave and a triangle wave are different. Well, duh! Nobody sane claims they are identical in the first place. But then again, those brainwashed and gaslighted by the Copenhagen interpretation can’t quite be said to be truly sane any more, as they must hold logically contradictory “facts” in their minds.

QED

Copenhagen interpretation delenda est!

1

Huh. I never heard about this part before. You learn something new every day.

The geometry of energy and the conservation of rest mass

Here is the reference particle drawing for this lesson. It has a rest mass of 0.25 max, and is moving to the right with a celerity of 0.25. That makes the green triangle angle relative to the purple rest mass an angle of just over 14 degrees, which gives it a velocity (to the right) of about 0.2425 the speed of light. That gives it an alpha factor (perceived passage of time) of just over 0.97, the inverse of which is a gamma factor of just a bit over 1.03.

What is celerity? It’s what you add instead of velocities in relativity. It’s really just the tangent of the angle for which sine is the velocity and cosine is the alpha factor. It’s also velocity divided by alpha, which is equivalent to velocity times gamma.

By PAR - Own work, CC0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=66751798

The first thing to understand about these diagrams is that the vertical axis represents energy. So celerity is a direct measure of energy. So is mass. Unlike kinetic energy (KE = ½mv²), mass (E = mc²) is not halved.

The second thing to understand is that alpha is a horizontal scaling factor. It’s not correctly drawn here, because that’s hard, but you get the idea. As a particle speeds up, it shrinks side to side. Or at least it does from the perspective of other particles not moving along with it. It, of course, always thinks it’s stationary.

The third thing to understand is that the rest mass is conserved. What does that mean? It means the area remains constant. As celerity increases, the vertical leg of the mass rectangle increases in direct proportion to gamma. But the horizontal leg, decreases directly in proportion to alpha. The area remains constant because a scaling factor of α * 1/α = α/α = 1. Thus, even as the apparent mass energy increases by gamma, the rest mass remains constant.

The kinetic portion of the total energy ends up being the area of the dashed green triangle, shown above by the solid green rectangle. If you take half of that, you get the velocity, by no coincidence at all.

What’s the point of the green dashed lines below and above the total energy level? Those represent internal energy differentials due to the motion of the particle. This is where blue and red shift come from. Compared to the baseline of a particle sitting motionless, or directly to the side of a moving particle, a photon emitted forwards gains energy. A photon emitted rearwards loses energy.

QED

And as always, Copenhagen interpretation delenda est!

Relativistic Doppler Shift

The standard formula for relativistic Doppler shift is: 

√((1 + v/c)/(1 - v/c)).

This multiplication factor describes the stretching out of wavelengths (reduction in energy) for light emitted from a body moving directly away from you, or the increase in the frequency (increase in energy) of light coming directly towards you. In this model, a positive velocity is moving away from you, and negative one towards you. To get the factor for frequency instead of wavelength, negate the signs for the velocity or take the inverse of the output.

For a body moving away you at 0.5c, a photon’s wavelength will increase by a factor of 1.732051. For a body moving towards you at the same speed, a photon’s frequency will increase by the same factor.

How does this work in the geometry of the particle model of gravity and motion? The factor for the wavelength of a particle moving away you (thus, decreasing in energy) is determined by taking the gamma factor (the stretching out of time, showing energy loss for a photon) and adding the inertial energy of the particle: 

1/cos(asin(v)) + tan(asin(v)).

The get the factor for the wavelength of a particle moving towards you (increasing energy), subtract the energy from the gamma factor. Remember, a wavelength factor smaller than one shows an increase in energy.

To get the factor for frequency instead of wavelength, reverse the sign or take the inverse of the output. This really makes sense, because a photon’s frequency is directly related to its energy. It makes sense that a high gamma factor, showing a reduction in the perceived time of the source, would reduce the energy of any photon it emitted (regardless of direction), just as its inertial energy in your direction would add to that photon’s energy, and reduce it when traveling away from you.

QED

And as always, Copenhagen interpretation delenda est!

Relativistic energy addition

One of the “oddities” of special relativity (SR) is that velocities don’t add in the way you would expect. Given a relativistic pirate ship traveling at 0.2c from your perspective (v), firing a cannonball straight forward at 0.3c from its perspective (u’), how fast do you see the cannonball moving (u)?

The SR formula for the addition of two velocities v (your perspective) and u’ (their perspective) is: u = (v + u’)/(1 + vu’).

Plugging in the numbers, we get u = 0.471698c.

How does this work with my particle and energy model of gravity and motion? Perfectly well, once you consider the geometry (well, trigonometry) of the situation.

Here, as a reminder, is the handy diagram of trig identities.

https://blog.prepscholar.com/verifying-trig-identities

In special relativity, the speed of light is always constant and defined as one. That lets us use the trig circle to define terms in a different way. Since the hypoteneuse is c (1), velocity is sine and time dilation (Lorentz alpha) is cosine. (This is the fundamental principle of SR.) Since every particle is the exact same size, energy, velocity, and acceleration are all related, with energy being equivalent to the tangent (sin/cos) of the angle. Remember, only energies are real. Everything else is derived. But we can’t see energy, so we are usually forced to do things backwards.

So, how do we add energies in a geometric way using this knowledge? Carefully, with an eye towards the definitions. We know the velocities (sines). That gives us the time dilations (alphas). That gives us the energies. But we have to remember that the cannonball’s time dilation is measured from the ship’s time dilation. Just like you cannot directly add the velocities, you cannot directly add the energies.

The velocities (sin) add. The time dilations (cos) multiply. Energy (tan) is total velocity divided by total dilation. That’s the secret to relativistic energy addition.

Given the ship’s velocity from your perspective (v) and the cannonball’s velocity from the ship’s perspective (u’), we can define angles x and y such that x = arcsin(v) and y = arcsin(u’). We want to find the velocity of the cannonball from our perspective (u).

The definition of tangent: tan(a) = sin(a) / cos(a)
The relativistic addition of energies: tan(z) = [sin(x) + sin(y)] / [cos(x) * cos(y)]
u = sin(atan(z))
u = sin(atan( [v + u’] / [ cos(asin(v)) * cos(asin(u’)) ] ))

Plugging in our numbers for v = 0.2c and u’ = 0.3c, we get x = asin(0.2) and y = asin(0.3). That gives us tan(z) = 0.534951, so u = 0.471698c.

QED

And, as always, Copenhagen interpretation delenda est!

The source of gravity, inertia, and time

Let’s begin with the formula. We assume there is a field of potential energy, from which all other energies are withdrawn. It has a large but finite constant value (U₀) at every point. The potential energy at a point outside a particle is the total potential energy minus the total energy of the particle (E) divided by the distance (r) from the particle in relation to the radius of the particle (r₀).

U = U₀ - E(r₀/r), where r ≥ r₀.

If we take the gradient (slope) of this curve, we get acceleration, which we call gravity. The instantaneous acceleration (over the minimum possible time, t₀) at a point is a velocity, as a fraction of the speed of light. This determines the Lorentz alpha factor at that point, which is the subjective passage of time. The faster you go, the slower you perceive time passing. Perceived time is to speed as cosine is to sine. (This is the fundamental relationship of Special Relativity. Yes, it really is just the Pythagorean Theorem.)

The energy gradient inside a particle ( a fixed amount unless altered by external gradients) is the particle’s own velocity (instantaneous acceleration), which determines its alpha factor. Below we have a stationary (red) particle of mass energy 0.25U₀ being accelerated to the left (dashed green) by an external gradient (blue).

Notice the blue curve is not affected by the particle at all. Locally, energy is not conserved. (However, our test particle creates a gradient which accelerates the particle causing the blue curve, so the total system balances.) Also notice how the acceleration is not influenced by the particle’s own mass/energy. Drop a feather and a hammer on the airless moon, and they both fall the same way.

Notice also that the particle is accelerated by the external gradient, but then retains this acceleration. This is why the Schwarzschild equation has two factors in the direction towards the attractive body: one for time (enormous, but decreases with speed), and one for space (minuscule, but increases with speed). Time flows much, much faster than distance does for relatively slow moving bodies, so the accumulated acceleration is much, much more of a factor than the instantaneous push of local acceleration. Light has double the expected curvature near the surface of the sun because it’s travelling distance r₀ in time t₀, so the internal and external accelerations are equal. Mercury orbits the sun a tiny bit faster than expected because it’s traveling so very quickly, and even more quickly nearest the sun. Also, the gradient across the diameter of a particle is always greater than at the central point. However, this difference is only really noticeable as you get close to the attractive body and the slope increases. Newton was fooled by the small angle approximation, which holds in everyday experience.

A highly observant reader might notice that these curves are somewhat different from the accepted values in General Relativity. (At the surface of the Earth and Sun, the values predicted differ at the ninth non-zero digit, a quantity several orders of magnitude smaller than current measurement errors.) Schwarzschild based his equation on the escape velocity of a particle approaching a body. At r = 1, this can be greater than the body’s own energy, which is nonsensical. However, the accelerated particle reaches the speed of light at distance r = 2 from a black hole mass, at which point the two particles impact each other (each having a radius of 1) and stop, there being no more energy to draw from. (You can’t have less than zero energy remaining in the field.) So, it’s not actually a contradiction. It’s merely incorrect to assume the energy of a body can be more than the actual energy of the body, and that the energy of a body can be more than the available energy. To give him credit, the concept of fields had yet to be invented, and energy still isn’t a well defined concept more than a century later.

Yes, every particle has the same radius r₀, with an inside and outside separated by a discontinuity. Why? Because Planck and Heisenberg said so. So does the geometry of 1/r, its derivative, and its integral. When combined with the finite total energy of U₀, this prevents infinities and singularities. A black hole is a thin region of maximal energy density surrounding a spheroid of zero potential energy.

You might have noticed the energy gradient (units: kg m²/s²) is being measured over a distance (m) in a time (s).  That gives momentum (kg m/s).  The mass (kg) is somewhat unimportant, as we convert it directly to energy (E = m c²).  It has no gradient, but it does take up an important amount of space, defining the size and shape of a particle!  And empty space has no mass, and thus no momentum.  So we can redefine energy (anyrgy?) for our purposes to ignore the kilograms and be simply m²/s².  

Empty space has energy gradients, and given the fixed speed of light and the fixed size of a particle, these gradients directly correlate to velocity.  However, we aren't truly adding velocities.  We are adding energy gradients.  They're not the same thing, although they appear to be at low energies.  The small angle approximation strikes again!

What are U₀, r₀, and t₀? I don’t know. A good guess is that they are based on the Planck units. If so, then U₀ ≈ 1.9561×10⁹ J, r₀ ≈ 1.616255(18)×10⁻³⁵ m, and t₀ ≈ 5.391247(60)×10⁻⁴⁴ s.

Door handedness and swing

Today’s nearly useless except when it’s absolutely necessary bit of knowledge:

Doors are normally described as they look and function from outside the room the door protects.

• Visible hinges on the left = left handed (LH) door, as you open it with your left hand, handle points to the left, door swings to the left.

• Visible hinges on the right = right handed (RH) door, as you open it with your right hand, handle points to the right, door swings to the right.

• Door opens towards you = standard (no modifier). Hinges are on your side.

• Door opens away from you = reverse(R). Hinges are on the other side of the door.

A door with the hinges facing you on the left side of the door, handle on the right, door swinging open towards you and to the left, is a left-handed (LH) door. The same door as viewed from the opposite side would be right-handed reverse (RHR).

Pumpkin Muffins

    I’ve been making pumpkin mini-muffins for decades. Everybody loves them. Nobody else ever seems to make them. I have no idea why. They’re great any time of year.

    This recipe uses a large (29-30 oz) can of pumpkin, and makes around 8 dozen mini-muffins. Cut recipe in half for a small can (14.5 oz). For a moister (also chewier and more pumpkiny) small batch, use a small can and a half. Yes, you can use cans of pumpkin pie filling to punch up the flavor level. Yes, you can add a half teaspoon of pumpkin pie spice. Play with the recipe. Make it your own.

Dry ingredients

4 cups all purpose flour

2 cups sugar (yes, I know sugar is generally consider to be “wet”)

1 tsp salt

2 tsp cinnamon

1/2 tsp nutmeg

1/2 tsp allspice

1/4 tsp clove

1 tsp baking soda

2 tsp baking powder

1 standard bag of chips (chocolate and/or peanut butter, or butterscotch)

Wet ingredients

1/4 cup milk (activates the baking soda) (I use vanilla almond ‘milk’.)

1 cup vegetable oil

1 large can pumpkin

1/2 tsp vanilla extract

Preheat oven to 375° F.

Mix dry. Mix wet. Mix the two together until thoroughly combined.

Spoon into generously oiled (cooking spray) mini-muffin tins.

Bake in the middle of the oven for 13-14 minutes.

Let cool for 10-15 minutes before removing from the tin onto a wire rack.

Store in a sealed container to retain moisture. (Pumpkin will stain some plastics.)

    This started out as a cookie recipe, back in the dim and hazy mists of time. You can make regular sized muffins by increasing the cooking time to 20-25 minutes.

Enforced Errors

We in my neighborhood have been having massive problems with Amazon deliveries for the last month. Somebody finally stopped the Amazon delivery driver and asked him what changed. Why are so many (nearly all) packages being delivered to the wrong houses?

Back on May first, Amazon rolled out a new delivery app to their drivers. It shows where each package is to be delivered. The drivers are tracked, and their tablets record and report back via the app where each package went.

None of the delivery locations match up with the addresses on the packages. The driver knows this. The app doesn’t care. His boss will fire him if he delivers to the actual address instead of where the app tells him to.

This is what happens when the platform decay of technology interacts with the bureaucratic mindset. Everybody in the field knows the system is broken. Nobody in management cares. Amazon makes its money selling digital services these days. Actually delivering physical goods to customers is a side business relegated to the low performing managers.

Short Suspense

Once upon a time in the Army, our masters at V Corps in Germany would produce a memo every Tuesday, instructing all subordinate units what was expected and required of them the by Friday of following week. This memo would be duplicated, with appropriate numbers of copies placed in each directly subordinate unit’s mailbox cubby.

Our Brigade would pick up their mail on Mondays. (Notice that Monday, in this context, falls nearly a week after Tuesday.) They would then place our memo in our cubby in their mailroom. 40 miles away from us. I picked up our mail on Thursdays, and returned it to our Battalion in the afternoon.

Thursday is Sergeant’s Time, when every unit closed early, by decree of the Corps Commander.

Every Friday morning, the Platoons were told by the Companies what they had to get done before close of business. This normally consisted of a whole series of tasks that were generally expected to take 2 or maybe 3 days to accomplish.

Every week went the same. Every Friday was a madhouse of stress and pulling things from our posteriors to satisfy arbitrary requirements in insanely short timeframes.

We got good at it. We got really good at it.

One year, the Corps held an awards ceremony, inviting every major subunit (Battalion and above) commander. We eventually received our invitation to this gathering, along with our award, a week after it occurred. Go figure.

We received a unique, double-sided award plaque. On one side was an award for being the best unit in the Corps at making things up as we went along. On the other side was an award for being the worst unit in the entire Corps at planning anything in advance.

Random means "We have no idea."

What quantum mechanics leaves out of its "randomness is fundamental" picture is the state of the entire rest of the universe.  Equations for quantum states generally cover only one or a very low number of particles, interacting (or not) with a very limited environment.  The equations leave out the near-infinitude of states required by the generator to create the particles in question.  They completely ignore the near-infinitude of states required for the detector to function.  They ignore as irrelevant the near-infinitude of states of the surrounding apparatus.

Why?  Because the math is much, much too hard, and the measurements are essentially impossible to make to the precision required.  Therefore, "randomness is fundamental to the quantum mechanical process!"

Copenhagen Interpretation delenda est!

Flag Day

You're a grand old flag

You're a high flying flag

And forever in peace may you wave

You're the emblem of

The land I love

The home of the free and the brave

Every heart beats true

'Neath the red, white and blue

Where there's never a boast or brag

Should auld acquaintance be forgot

Keep your eye on the grand old flag!

Home security cameras

I'm going to say this up front - most home security camera systems are a waste of money.  Cameras don't truly deter crime any more - they provide a record of events after the fact.  And most cops don't care enough to actually use the video.  And lots of criminals wear masks these days, after the covidiocy made them acceptable in public.

That being said, if you really want a home video surveillance system, never, ever have indoor cameras.  Remember, in case of an actual event, the entire system will become evidence.  Do you really want video footage of everything you've been doing inside your own home made public record and examined in court?

Never get cameras that automatically record audio, either.  In many states, recording audio without the permission of all parties is a crime.

Never buy a camera system that sends ANYTHING out to the internet.  "The cloud" is just somebody else's computer.

All that being said, there are a few features you want to look for in a home security camera system.

One of the things you want to look for in a camera is an in-unit SD card.  They're not perfect, but local storage always works, even when the network goes down.  You'll want one that accepts UHS rated cards, if you can find one.

Another thing to look for, especially in places like Florida, is a wide dynamic range (WDR).  That means the camera can get decent pictures of a man standing in the shadows on a sunny day.  It also helps at night, when there are other light sources potentially blinding your camera to what's right in front of it.

Pan-Tilt-Zoom cameras are great as backups to the standard fixed view cameras.  Don't make them your primary cameras, because the PTZ features only work when you're actively using them.  Most people will use them once, then forget about them, and leave the camera zoomed in on where the squirrel (or woman in a bikini) was six months ago.

You want a wired system.  Trust me.  Yes, I understand you don't really want to cut more holes in the outside of your house.  No, you really don't want to run all those cables through your walls and across your attic.  But you do want your cameras to keep working for years, and that requires power.  The battery powered ones don't last any time at all, and you're not going to remember (or want) to get up on a ladder and change them out every month.  Did I say month?  I meant week.

Larger than life

Some men's lives seem remarkably improbable.  These "larger than life" figures appear over and over throughout history.  These are the "great men" who change the world, for better or worse.  Leftist historians (the children of Marx) say that there are no great men, only the inevitable, scientific progression of history.

Pfaugh!

Please follow this link and read about Prentiss Ingraham, the man who fought in seven wars before the age of 30, then went on to befriend Wild Bill Cody and invent the Western novel genre.

Post-Modern Education

The modern high school curriculum is misunderstood, even by the teachers. Geometry does not teach math. It teaches logical reasoning. By the same token, science classes don’t really teach science. They teach that the world is understandable, that effects follow from causes.

That being said…  I recommend a completely revamped form of primary education, focused on the 4 R's.  Reading, 'Riting, 'Rithmetic & Reloading.

I really do believe that primary school education should be limited to between the ages of 8 and 13. (Let the younger kids run around and play.  Family time is incredibly important.) You can teach the entire basic curriculum to children during those five years. It should include math (through basic algebra and statistics), English (reading, writing, literature), history & geography (taught together as stories of time and place), science (the basics plus logic), civics (including taxes, banking, and the political & legal processes), media literacy (how to tell when you’re being scammed), the arts (vocal & instrumental music, dance, drawing & painting), and life skills (home economics & child care, wood & metal shop, pottery, crocheting & sewing, laundry, cooking & baking). Daily gym classes for all (they need to move, and they’ll also learn the importance of teamwork and being a good sport.) Then you separate the kids into different groups by talent, interest, and sex for further education to age 16.

The top 20% of boys and 10% of girls (yes, I mean this seriously) go to college prep, formerly known as high school. A third to half should fail out of this process and move on to technical training.

The average middle get apprenticeships.

The bottom 20% get shovels, rakes, hoes, and brooms.

Group activities like sports, band, choir, dance, and theater continue to the age of 16 as well. You can’t do all of them, but you do have to participate in at least one of them. Each community shall create monthly activities to get the young men and women together in a chaperoned but fun environment. Bring back formal dancing (square, line, ballroom, folk, etc.) and roller skating! Add in junior versions of SCA/HEMA and ROTC, along with riflery & archery. Camping, fishing, hunting, gardening, farming, and animal husbandry should be offered as available and appropriate to the region, climate, and time of year. A reformed and restored version of Scouting would be appropriate and encouraged.

In my more perfect world, each school day would begin with recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance and the Lord’s Prayer.