Secret Squirrel first here examines outlined ideas on changing the electoral system and expounds why these ARE unsuitable........he will then go on to explain First Past The Post system in use, and why..........it IS good, but also what the problem with it is.
So without further ado here are proposed system changes and why they are...........utterly and completely and for all time, ridiculous and utterly and completely UNACCEPTABLE.
* Party-list proportional representation (party-list PR). Under this system, parties would list candidates they are standing for election. The public would then vote for a party and the number of candidates elected would depend on the percentage share of the vote the party received across the area. The idea is that the party?s representation in Parliament would reflect the level of support it has across the country.This is interesting, a form of dictatorship as it were, the people have no choice of a candidate up front,the candidate elected thence becomes unseen......does it matter then..................yes it does, it is a dictatorial format of system......the candidates themselves then have no format of own policy nor thought with respect to government whatsoever.The party leader will pick whomever he wants willy nilly.
* Alternative Vote (AV) Under AV candidates are ranked by preference, and those preferences would be counted where no candidate had won 50% of the vote. However, we have already voted against introducing AV after a referendum in 2011 when 67.9% people rejected it and, as a result, we kept FPTP.This is useless, if I choose, say the conservatives, I want the conservatives to win, to be Prime Minister also, NOT a say Labour candidate,nor UKIP etc.
* Alternative Vote Plus (AV+) This would see the voting system described above brought into use, but with an additional regional vote, which could force parties to campaign in places other than marginal seats.This is useless, if I choose, say the conservatives, I want the conservatives to win, to be Prime Minister also, NOT a say Labour candidate,nor UKIP etc
* Single Transferable Vote (STV) Under STV each person gets one vote which they can transfer from their first-preference to their second-preference.So, if your preferred candidate has no chance of being elected or has enough votes already, your vote is transferred to another candidate in accordance with your instructions.This is useless, if I choose, say the conservatives, I want the conservatives to win, to be Prime Minister also, NOT a say Labour candidate,nor UKIP etc,I don't want my vote transferred to a Labour, or UKIP or whatever.
What's wrong with first past the post, as in example
Candidate Party A 4000votes
Candidate Party B 3500votes
Candidate Party c 1000votes
Candidate Party D 50votes
So, sanely the will of the majority in that constituency is clearly Party A candidate, and he wins. Tell me why should Party B matter at all, so what they got 3000votes(which tallies in the total popular vote).Sanely UKIP got 4 million votes,one seat BECAUSE in one constituency the majority of voters selected UKIP,and only there, in others they came close, but lost, but added to the total of popular votes as they were spread so round and about....but face it, sanely, a loss is a loss, a looser is a looser.The popular vote is a direct reflection of the popularity of the winning Prime Minister.There have been elections in Canada and America, using the First Past The Post system, as in the will of the majority in any constituency, where the sum total of the winning leadership(example we shall call it Prime Minister), where the seats totalled the MAJORITY for government, BUT the popular vote numbers were greater for the loosing party (parties)....why.. Well quite simply it means the constituencies are NOT equally balanced with respect to the numbers of voters in a given constituency,there is no balance as in Constituency A has 5000 voters, whilst constituency B has 2000 voters constituency 3 has 1000 voters,as examples, so obviously, here if all vote the same,yet differently, B&C can elect 2 conservatives,exampled, A will vote and place Labour, BUT Conservatives win due to numbers, not of voters BUT seats, due to constituency,voter imbalance with respect to representation by population NOT being equal,(recall they vary in size between 21,837 to 89,519 voters) as in constituencies vary wildly in terms of NUMBERS OF VOTERS IN EACH! Therein you see, lies the rub, NOT having representation by population and so there is this imbalance in voter representation by population. There it is explained, and you know the cure, the voting constituencies must be redrawn in terms of a certain stated population of voters in each, being equal in all.There it is, the problem,why there is a problem, and the solution to the problem. Squirrel has the answers,electoral reform, redraw the electoral maps such that all constituencies have equal voter numbers in each and every one,and so it becomes, representation by population, as it was intended to be.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,
MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Saturday, May 9, 2015
Secret Squirrel On UKIPS Election Complaint.
Secret Squirrel has heard of UKIP , which was totally kippered and filleted in the past election,getting only 1 seat and not yet being able to have it's party leadered voted in to office. Indeed, they got 4 million votes, and only 1 seat, which meant that UKIP had a smattering of support scattered about merely thither and yon across the length
and breadth of England but not concentrated in any one place enabling it to get a seat.
That's how the system works, so many voters in any particular constituency will vote one lad in from the party the majority choose, coming close doesn't count you see. This IS the system which is employed world wide in democracies, and no cry baby party, nor cry baby party leader can and should be able to change it...........it is THE system and it works,that is how it works.UKIP’s Nigel Farage called for an end to first-past-the-post elections after the party was left with one elected MP despite a 13% share (the UK’s third-highest) of the vote.
The Green Party also had a 3.8% share of the national vote and just one seat and the
Lib Dems were left with 8 seats with a 7.9% share.
Meanwhile, other smaller parties benefited from FPTP(First Past The Post--majority wins). The SNP secured 56 seats with just 4.7% of the national vote share.
There's nothing wrong with the system of voting, just that the distribution of voters versus constituencies is not correct, rather it is not representation by a specific number of population......as is self evident in the Scottish ratio 56 seats with just 4.7% of the national vote.
But the popular vote was split between the two major parties, with the Tories at 37 percent and Labour at 31 percent according to latest count of votes broadcast by BBC.
Ukip claiming 83 seats should've been had for 4million voters goes with a ratio of 48,193 persons to a seat..........
This Figures to 15,951,807 voters having voted for Cons to give 331 seats,but actual votes totalled 11,334,920 or 34,244 voters per seat......and hey the SNP got 56 seats off of 1,454,436 voters at 25,972 voters per seat.......
the Labour got for 40,292 voters per seat at 9,347,926.
Why doesn't the division of seats in parliament reflect the popular vote?
The Electoral Reform Commission has been trying to change the system for years, running a referendum on electoral reform in 2011. But British voters rejected electoral reform in the poll. All that could be and needs be done really is to redraw the electoral maps, such that the electoral constituencies have a basic equal number of
voters,regardless of whether new constituencies are then created. If all things were fair and equal, there being 46,500,000 eligible British voters, for a total of 650 seats that would be a constituency requirement of 71,538 voters to each and every one starting in applied balance,but it just isn't so. However UKIP which received spread out support thinks it should get to select itself, or have a candidate selected on the basis of vote received broad spectrum,ridiculous. Also ridiculous is a proposed system of selecting two candidates a first and a second, BUT that would mean a selection of another party, NOT the one you desire and hence your selected party(and thence leader), could loose the election.......not what you desire.The British system divides the country into legislative districts with each being represented in parliament by a single MP.
If a number of parties contest a seat in a district, the winner is the candidate who receives the most votes within the district.One winner of the majority of the votes, the rest loosers,nothing wrong with that is there, No, I should say not.
Let's look at UKIP's sour grapes complaint, now population wise, we combine the populations of Birmingham,Leeds,Sheffield,Bradford,Liverpool,Manchester,and Bristol to total 4,059,771 of what UKIP would say are their votes, but rather than giving UKIP 83 seats as they claim they should have, they here get 29 seats, BUT face it, the people here didn't vote UKIP, UKIP support was spread out thither and yon and totalled to 4million, and so what of it, loosers are loosers, winners are winners.It goes by whom the people vote for,the majority of the people,he wins, the others loose, because their votes were less. And so it should be and is and should remain, the will of the majority in any given constituency,loosers don't count, nor do their numbers of votes, regardless as they lost.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,
MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-engineering.
and breadth of England but not concentrated in any one place enabling it to get a seat.
That's how the system works, so many voters in any particular constituency will vote one lad in from the party the majority choose, coming close doesn't count you see. This IS the system which is employed world wide in democracies, and no cry baby party, nor cry baby party leader can and should be able to change it...........it is THE system and it works,that is how it works.UKIP’s Nigel Farage called for an end to first-past-the-post elections after the party was left with one elected MP despite a 13% share (the UK’s third-highest) of the vote.
The Green Party also had a 3.8% share of the national vote and just one seat and the
Lib Dems were left with 8 seats with a 7.9% share.
Meanwhile, other smaller parties benefited from FPTP(First Past The Post--majority wins). The SNP secured 56 seats with just 4.7% of the national vote share.
There's nothing wrong with the system of voting, just that the distribution of voters versus constituencies is not correct, rather it is not representation by a specific number of population......as is self evident in the Scottish ratio 56 seats with just 4.7% of the national vote.
But the popular vote was split between the two major parties, with the Tories at 37 percent and Labour at 31 percent according to latest count of votes broadcast by BBC.
Ukip claiming 83 seats should've been had for 4million voters goes with a ratio of 48,193 persons to a seat..........
This Figures to 15,951,807 voters having voted for Cons to give 331 seats,but actual votes totalled 11,334,920 or 34,244 voters per seat......and hey the SNP got 56 seats off of 1,454,436 voters at 25,972 voters per seat.......
the Labour got for 40,292 voters per seat at 9,347,926.
Why doesn't the division of seats in parliament reflect the popular vote?
The Electoral Reform Commission has been trying to change the system for years, running a referendum on electoral reform in 2011. But British voters rejected electoral reform in the poll. All that could be and needs be done really is to redraw the electoral maps, such that the electoral constituencies have a basic equal number of
voters,regardless of whether new constituencies are then created. If all things were fair and equal, there being 46,500,000 eligible British voters, for a total of 650 seats that would be a constituency requirement of 71,538 voters to each and every one starting in applied balance,but it just isn't so. However UKIP which received spread out support thinks it should get to select itself, or have a candidate selected on the basis of vote received broad spectrum,ridiculous. Also ridiculous is a proposed system of selecting two candidates a first and a second, BUT that would mean a selection of another party, NOT the one you desire and hence your selected party(and thence leader), could loose the election.......not what you desire.The British system divides the country into legislative districts with each being represented in parliament by a single MP.
If a number of parties contest a seat in a district, the winner is the candidate who receives the most votes within the district.One winner of the majority of the votes, the rest loosers,nothing wrong with that is there, No, I should say not.
Let's look at UKIP's sour grapes complaint, now population wise, we combine the populations of Birmingham,Leeds,Sheffield,Bradford,Liverpool,Manchester,and Bristol to total 4,059,771 of what UKIP would say are their votes, but rather than giving UKIP 83 seats as they claim they should have, they here get 29 seats, BUT face it, the people here didn't vote UKIP, UKIP support was spread out thither and yon and totalled to 4million, and so what of it, loosers are loosers, winners are winners.It goes by whom the people vote for,the majority of the people,he wins, the others loose, because their votes were less. And so it should be and is and should remain, the will of the majority in any given constituency,loosers don't count, nor do their numbers of votes, regardless as they lost.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,
MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-engineering.
Monday, April 27, 2015
Secret Squirrel Calls For Electoral Reform In Britain.
Secret Squirrel Calls For New Electoral Reform Regulations.
Secret Squirrel calls for new regulations.............Mayoral elections, and indeed all elections at all levels, should require,manditory that said person running for election, and if elected, MUST be a British citizen in the very least, if not in fact British born......Secret Squirrel came to this conclusion on the threat of an American retread, as it were, Bill De Blasio,a Mayor of New York, an American City, might well run for election to the Office Of The Mayor Of London.........Squirrel was NOT pleased.
There is another election rule which Squirrel wishes implimented, on the resignation of a Prime Minister,for example, that within THREE (3) Months of said resignation,removal,ouster, or sadly incapacity of sorts or a death of same, that there be an election held............let the people decide their selected Prime Minister, not having one directly NOT elected to the position hold sway and swagger over them.
So says Squirrel.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL.
Secret Squirrel calls for new regulations.............Mayoral elections, and indeed all elections at all levels, should require,manditory that said person running for election, and if elected, MUST be a British citizen in the very least, if not in fact British born......Secret Squirrel came to this conclusion on the threat of an American retread, as it were, Bill De Blasio,a Mayor of New York, an American City, might well run for election to the Office Of The Mayor Of London.........Squirrel was NOT pleased.
There is another election rule which Squirrel wishes implimented, on the resignation of a Prime Minister,for example, that within THREE (3) Months of said resignation,removal,ouster, or sadly incapacity of sorts or a death of same, that there be an election held............let the people decide their selected Prime Minister, not having one directly NOT elected to the position hold sway and swagger over them.
So says Squirrel.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL.
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Secret Squirrel Recommended Project,Giant Roller Coasters for England.
Secret Squirrel Recommended Project,Giant Roller Coasters for England.
Secret Squirrel is working behind the scenes encouraging the development of this project,knowing a very good thing when he sees it,being England's Greatest Living Engineer,The Great Engineer of the Day,(Ishambard Kingdom Brunel, you may just roll over in your grave if you don't like it.). Here look the Japanese are proceeding in the category of Science » Technologies and discoveries,note the headline,
Japan to turn into one giant roller coaster.
Japanese engineers have developed a new type of transport that runs on gravity power. Engineers decided to use the idea inherent in roller coasters - a train car with passengers accelerating downhill and gathering energy for the next rise. These trains will have no engines and transmissions, which will greatly reduce their weight. Japan has rather complex terrain, and is experiencing a significant power shortage, especially after the government decided to phase out the use of nuclear power plants. The combination of these two factors prompted a group of designers working under the guidance of the Mr.Yoshihiro Suda with the Institute of Industrial Research, University of Tokyo, to develop a commuter train that would be moved by the force of gravity (and weight of passengers). The new development will be cost-effective and fast.
When developing a new miracle of transportation, the engineers decided to use the roller coaster principle. They thought that if they build such a "rolling" road, it can move train cars that will not need an engine because the weight of the cabin with passengers will make them move to the next station. The train will be lifted by an automatic lift every 10 meters. After that it can run 400 meters, using only the force of gravity. The speed of the descent should reach around 60 kilometers per hour. Of course, for the fans of extreme attractions this speed would seem snail-pace-like as the steepest roller coaster carts can reach the speed of 200 kilometers per hour.
However, the engineers did not need such speed. When moving downhill at the speed of 200 kilometers per hour, it will not go that far because after exceeding the speed limit of 60 kilometers per hour the train rails friction increases in an avalanche-like fashion. At a roller coaster this problem is solved, because the trailer is moved by an electric motor, but the design of the Japanese engineers suggests that there is no engine in their train. The only energy it will need would be for driving the lift.
However, that amount of energy will not be particularly significant. The lack of motor and transmission not only dramatically reduces the cost of this form of transport, but also reduces the weight of a car. Roughly speaking, the train does not need to expend energy to carry itself. Lifting this light car will be very easy. According to the inventors' calculations, with a load of 50 percent of the maximum, the power expenditure per passenger kilometer will be equal to 226.8 kJ. This is three times lower than that of a bus in the steady state, and two times less than that of a conventional train. In addition, construction of these vehicles will not require purchase of land and will reduce road network because the tracks can be routed over highways, and partially pedestrian sidewalks. Head of the project believes that this might be the most energy-efficient transport system.
It is estimated that the new transport system that its creators called Eco Ride will have the capacity to transport 2-2.5 thousand people per hour and its average speed would be 20-30 miles per hour with a minimum turning radius of 15 meters and a maximum gradient of 13 degrees. In this case, the speed is calculated considering all stops. The stops will be located a little over the highway, so getting to them and almost losing speed, the train will be able to save energy in order to move to the next part of the road at the next section of the route. Interestingly, the idea put forward by the Japanese engineers was not only the most original, but also most carefully thought. It won against the idea of an alternative urban cable car project because Eco Ride routes do not require steel cables. In addition, at transport roller coaster cars cannot hang in the air if a motor stops because the force of gravity cannot be shut down.
A test track Eco Ride is already operating in China. Incidentally, it is used not only as an experimental platform, but also as a tourist attraction. While tourists are enjoying the new entertainment and technology, economists are calculating the cost of Eco Ride construction. They believe that it will cost $20 million per kilometer.
For the Russians this would seem too expensive,and the Russians are more sour and dour than a Scot so unlikely to do it just for the fun of it, but the Japanese realize that in fact it is cheap,face it the Japanese are cheap, their food is cheap, their tech is cheap, the internet is full of Japanese women doing porn, their women are cheap (also on the High Streets). When constructing roads in Japan one has to consider earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides and mudslides, which requires a lot of money. One kilometer of light rail metro in Tokyo is ten times more expensive than that of Eco Ride road. This is why Eco Ride was recognized not only as super-efficient but also extremely cheap.
Several Japanese municipalities are already interested in Eco Ride system, and after all the tests are completed construction of this road will commence. If all goes as calculated by the inventors, two years from now train cars running roller coaster style will be the most popular Japanese commuter transport, replacing buses, subways, and even ordinary trains. In other words, the entire Japan will turn into a roller coaster.
Anton Evseyev
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/14-12-2012/123177-
japan_roller_coaster-0/
Pravda.Ru
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq_brr1RiBY
video is at above url.
There is more to be found on this as well,yet another headline reading.....
Eco Ride-energy-saving automated short-distance transportation system
Eco Ride an energy saving transport system based on the working principle of a roller coaster will be tested in Japan in October 2008. Senyo Kogyo and Senyo Kiko will built the Eco Ride test line in the Chiba Experiment Station of IIS in Chiba Prefecture, Japan. As the system eliminates the need for a drive unit on the cars the size and weight of the cars can be reduced. This will lead to a reduction in the size of the railroad, the supporting structures and the stations, etc. The construction cost of Eco Ride per kilometer is about 1/10 of the cost of a small-size subway, or 1/5 of that of a monorail or a new transit system in Japan. Eco Ride consumes less electricity and will be the ideal choice for automated short-distance transportation system with a total railway length of up to 10km.
This explains it, it DOES need a lift unit every so often,but peanuts cost in electricity.
Eco Ride operates using the height difference on the railway. Drive units to pull the cars up are installed at various points on the railway so that the Eco Ride can obtain the potential energy to run. This is the same principle as a roller coaster. Senyo Kogyo and Senyo Kiko specialize in the construction and sale of amusement facilitiesetc.
England could do well to invest in this..........Imagine we could have roller coasters running all about English cities and in the country side, and all the while we have a really good time, we get our transport to destinations done,have a good time, and have the roller coasters really consume peanuts worth of electricity.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Secret Squirrel On Technology Failing Us.
A prototype Airbus, at a fly itself demonstration,comes down for
landing......and keeps coming down,finally flying itself to a landing in
the forest beyond the runway, killing everybody on board.The Airbus was
the first fully electronic automated plane, with no eletromechanic
controls or cables.
During their first commercial record of a landing, they lost an aircraft and a team of pilots and technicians due computer problems on board.
See it here.......at.......https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEf35NtlBLg
Air France, A330,flight 447, breaks apart in the air, after clogged pitottubes which determine airspeed confuse the CPU flying the machine, the pilots being unable to sufficiently override and fly the aircraft,the confused plane flying itself improperly,breaks up in mid air during a storm.The plane's computer system reported a series of technical problems about four hours after takeoff and immediately after entering a large storm system a few hundred miles from the far eastern coast of Brazil,flew itself to a crash condition.
Similar A321 plane malfunctioned four months ago, an AIRBUS A321 operated by Lufthansa went into a deep dive after key sensors iced up and fed the aircraft’s systems false data four months ago.
According to Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine, the A321 – a stretched variant of the A320 – was travelling from Bilbao to Munich on November 5 with 109 people on board when it dropped at a rate of 3,000ft per minute. The crew only regained control of the aircraft after “switching off on- board computers”.
THE GERMANWINGS plane that crashed into the French Alps earlier today was an Airbus A320,it flew itself right straight down and in to the ground, plunged from its cruising height of 40,000 feet to 6,200 feet in 8 minutes.
It was also the model of AirAsia Flight QZ8510 - the aircraft that crashed while en route to Indonesia to Singapore last December, killing all 162 on board. It flew in to a storm, and then flew itself in to the sea.
We may never know why runaway Toyotas suddenly seem to be everywhere. The scariest possibility, however, is that faulty computers are driving some victims to their deaths with frightening randomness. Suspicions that an elusive software glitch in computer-controlled throttles is to blame.
The standard rule of thumb, advice for the best of times..........KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid............the more the mechanical, the more easily controlled,the more easily maintained. The more a CPU and electronics handles things,the more programmers handel things, the more software handles things, the more things are that become utter disasters.Remember with electronics,
"Nothing can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,..........
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP(Dunny On The Wold).,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
During their first commercial record of a landing, they lost an aircraft and a team of pilots and technicians due computer problems on board.
See it here.......at.......https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEf35NtlBLg
Air France, A330,flight 447, breaks apart in the air, after clogged pitottubes which determine airspeed confuse the CPU flying the machine, the pilots being unable to sufficiently override and fly the aircraft,the confused plane flying itself improperly,breaks up in mid air during a storm.The plane's computer system reported a series of technical problems about four hours after takeoff and immediately after entering a large storm system a few hundred miles from the far eastern coast of Brazil,flew itself to a crash condition.
Similar A321 plane malfunctioned four months ago, an AIRBUS A321 operated by Lufthansa went into a deep dive after key sensors iced up and fed the aircraft’s systems false data four months ago.
According to Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine, the A321 – a stretched variant of the A320 – was travelling from Bilbao to Munich on November 5 with 109 people on board when it dropped at a rate of 3,000ft per minute. The crew only regained control of the aircraft after “switching off on- board computers”.
THE GERMANWINGS plane that crashed into the French Alps earlier today was an Airbus A320,it flew itself right straight down and in to the ground, plunged from its cruising height of 40,000 feet to 6,200 feet in 8 minutes.
It was also the model of AirAsia Flight QZ8510 - the aircraft that crashed while en route to Indonesia to Singapore last December, killing all 162 on board. It flew in to a storm, and then flew itself in to the sea.
We may never know why runaway Toyotas suddenly seem to be everywhere. The scariest possibility, however, is that faulty computers are driving some victims to their deaths with frightening randomness. Suspicions that an elusive software glitch in computer-controlled throttles is to blame.
The standard rule of thumb, advice for the best of times..........KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid............the more the mechanical, the more easily controlled,the more easily maintained. The more a CPU and electronics handles things,the more programmers handel things, the more software handles things, the more things are that become utter disasters.Remember with electronics,
"Nothing can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,..........
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP(Dunny On The Wold).,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Monday, February 9, 2015
Secret Squirrel PROVES The Speed Of Light CAN Be Exceeded,Just NOT By Light.
It is NOT a well known fact that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light,merely the belief by scientists,and Stephen Hawking, who have misinterpreted, and have not seen that the actual proof that the speed of light CAN be exceeded HAS been proved, by mathematics,mathematical equations, and by logic as being so, by Einstein as a direct matter of fact and mathematical equation, and by Squirrel, by logic.
Now the speed of light, (or the speed of a photon) in a near-perfect vacuum is exactly 186,282 miles per second. We perceive photons (light) traveling at this speed because they are massless, or have no ‘weight’ (but they do have kinetic energy, more on that in a bit). Light itself cannot go faster than 186,282 miles per second, but the photons that normally travel at that speed can be slowed down. An example of this can be seen in water where light is slowed to 3/4th of its normal speed.So light can be slowed, as can anything, speedy or not.Einstein once called the speed of light The Universe's speed limit. Is this a speed limit that can be broken?
Each of the letters of E = mc² stands for a particular physical quantity. Writing them out in full we get:
Energy = mass x the speed of light squared
In other words:
E = energy (measured in joules, J)
m = mass (measured in kilograms, kg)
c = the speed of light (measured in metres per second, ms-1)
In order for the equation to be correct we need to "square" the term c (the speed of light), i.e. we multiply the speed of light by itself: hence c² is the same as c times c. This allows us to be write the equation in another, slightly unusual, but equally correct way:
E = m x c x c
The equation tells us that energy and mass are the same thing, and how much energy is contained in a given mass, or vice versa. In other words, mass is really very tightly packed energy. That energy and mass are really the same thing is quite an extraordinary claim and seems to go against two laws that had been established by scientists before Einstein came along:Einstein showed via his now famous equation was that mass and energy are in fact the same thing.
Converting one into the other doesn’t therefore violate either of the two conservation laws. Both quantities are conserved, although the state of the mass/energy may have changed. Energy becomes mass, mass can become energy (forms of), but have the same qauntity as it were, but a change of proper form.
Well it does state, you know that one becomes the other, mass, becomes energy, only when it is accelerated to the square to the speed of light (the speed of light times itself, for the required value), hence 34,700,983,524 miles per second, very much faster than light eh! Whot! Indeed it is! Yes, but it is NOT light which has attained this speed of direct violation, the mass has reached that velocity and become energy............so we can conclude the speed of light isa limit of speed of light only, and has not to do with anything else but light, so,the speed of light can be exceeded, but not by light itself. So Einstein's equations, by simple logic, are correct, and he is correct that the speed of light is a speed limit, BUT it is not imposed on everything only on light itself, everything else can achieve different and varying acceleration and even yet exceed the speed of light when suitably acted on............you see else the equation E=mc(squared), doesn't work you see, simple logic dictates that, else the equations are wrong,so IF the equations are right,then Secret Squirrel is right, and we can then achieve the square of the speed of light as the proving equation has been suitably supplied by Einstein, merely being misinterpreted.It's been proven, argue with the irrefutable logic of it. So says Squirrel.
Secret Squirrel,(MRL).
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering,
MP,Dunny On The Wold.
Now the speed of light, (or the speed of a photon) in a near-perfect vacuum is exactly 186,282 miles per second. We perceive photons (light) traveling at this speed because they are massless, or have no ‘weight’ (but they do have kinetic energy, more on that in a bit). Light itself cannot go faster than 186,282 miles per second, but the photons that normally travel at that speed can be slowed down. An example of this can be seen in water where light is slowed to 3/4th of its normal speed.So light can be slowed, as can anything, speedy or not.Einstein once called the speed of light The Universe's speed limit. Is this a speed limit that can be broken?
Each of the letters of E = mc² stands for a particular physical quantity. Writing them out in full we get:
Energy = mass x the speed of light squared
In other words:
E = energy (measured in joules, J)
m = mass (measured in kilograms, kg)
c = the speed of light (measured in metres per second, ms-1)
In order for the equation to be correct we need to "square" the term c (the speed of light), i.e. we multiply the speed of light by itself: hence c² is the same as c times c. This allows us to be write the equation in another, slightly unusual, but equally correct way:
E = m x c x c
The equation tells us that energy and mass are the same thing, and how much energy is contained in a given mass, or vice versa. In other words, mass is really very tightly packed energy. That energy and mass are really the same thing is quite an extraordinary claim and seems to go against two laws that had been established by scientists before Einstein came along:Einstein showed via his now famous equation was that mass and energy are in fact the same thing.
Converting one into the other doesn’t therefore violate either of the two conservation laws. Both quantities are conserved, although the state of the mass/energy may have changed. Energy becomes mass, mass can become energy (forms of), but have the same qauntity as it were, but a change of proper form.
Well it does state, you know that one becomes the other, mass, becomes energy, only when it is accelerated to the square to the speed of light (the speed of light times itself, for the required value), hence 34,700,983,524 miles per second, very much faster than light eh! Whot! Indeed it is! Yes, but it is NOT light which has attained this speed of direct violation, the mass has reached that velocity and become energy............so we can conclude the speed of light isa limit of speed of light only, and has not to do with anything else but light, so,the speed of light can be exceeded, but not by light itself. So Einstein's equations, by simple logic, are correct, and he is correct that the speed of light is a speed limit, BUT it is not imposed on everything only on light itself, everything else can achieve different and varying acceleration and even yet exceed the speed of light when suitably acted on............you see else the equation E=mc(squared), doesn't work you see, simple logic dictates that, else the equations are wrong,so IF the equations are right,then Secret Squirrel is right, and we can then achieve the square of the speed of light as the proving equation has been suitably supplied by Einstein, merely being misinterpreted.It's been proven, argue with the irrefutable logic of it. So says Squirrel.
Secret Squirrel,(MRL).
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering,
MP,Dunny On The Wold.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Secret Squirrel Presents A Plan To Run Amtrak On Time.
Secret Squirrel knows considerable about the railroads, and indeed, America's in particular. Squirrel romped about Europe, taking trains, in Germany, Squirrel made a 5 minute train exchange, as in 5 minutes BETWEEN trains,and Squirrel noted that German trains ran on time, like clockwork, arrival and departure,the Deutsche Bahn. Squirrel has taken trains in Canada as well,The Via Rail, not stolen of course, but has rode them, and they have been on time. Squirrel has noted that there are timing problems with trains in Britain, but they are all privatized, foreign owned as such and there really is willy nilly no real control over them beyond paying ever increasing rates the government said would'nt occur when they privatized British Rail.
However, America's AMTRAK, does really have a central authority as the passenger trains,The Amtrak, is owned by and operated by, GOVERNMENT, the Americans didn't,haven'and have stated they won't, PRIVATIZE The Amtrak, as they wished Britain's rail privatized,thinking it wasn't a good idea for THEM, but was for the British government. Squirrel suspects the American government was up to no good for the rails, and the people of Britain when it told the British governmnet to privatize British rail. Well, so now there is a central authority to control things, idiot or not depending on your view of the American politicians,the government.
Now Squirrel knows, what happens in America, is that each and every freight train has priority over The Amtrak where ever the Amtrak is or runs, on all rail lines.The net result is The Amtrak waits on a siding for a freight to pass it,of course, increasing the time it is late. Well, Squirrel suggests timing The Amtrak, the different routes and noting the average late time,start to end. So, knowing that, we now redo the schedules,using the sensible actual time rates, and publish those for the Amtrak schedule. Now, there are times IT MAY,be still actually late, but nowhere's near by as much now, and the schedule can be further modified to reduce even that. Also the train,The Amtrak, may now actually also arrive ON TIME or, even yet EARLY!, In deed the latter two have a 66% odds,or 33% each on chance early or on time! And only a 33% LATE!!Huzzah!
Huzzah!Huzzah!Hooray for Squireel, solving The Amtrak lateness problems!No need for the American government to thank Squirrel, hands across the puddle eh whot!!! Of course Squirrel mentions, that the same could be applied in Britain for notably late,always late,British trains, but then Britain doesn't own them,as the Americans do,so the British government can do nothing about it, UNLESS, the British Government, wisely follows The American lead, and PRIVATIZES British Rail, come now,the Americans can hardly object.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)