scientific-thoughts

I watched the recent UK channel 4 programme trying to repudiate the hypothesis stating that man was responsible for global warming , and was frankly fascinated with part of the discussion. Amongst quite a lot of dross and scaremongering were a few star items. Firstly there was a presumption that global warming was a direct function of the sun's activity . A minor argument for this is that the sun is by far the major factor in the earth not freezing , never mind warming ! The major argument , however, is that there is a close correlation between sunspot activity/solar flux and the earth's temperature [Dr Landsheit et al] . {see graph} As I understand it [ being hopelessly out of date with statistical analysis] , there is a close correlation here up till the start of 1900, when the correlation starts to break down and after 1950 other factors seem to be coming to the fore. This was also mentioned in The Sterns report which agreed that the above was very likely true up ...

Well I thought up this theory a couple of years ago and became soooo excited working stuff out , then I listened to a radio 4 show where a don from cambridge was discussing exactly the same subject !! It ranges from exceedingly trivial to quite profound, the problem is finding the questions.. rather than getting the answers . My ideas became formed , when I left my car on dark cold night and nearly wet my pants with the sooo urgent need to urinate. In mid stream, I wondered why this phenomenon occurred and overnight came up with the solution . Basically , the idea is that evolution has formed certain genetic imperatives in our body , to help survival . So once you find the question , you have to formulate the reason why its in our genes. In case you havent worked out the above yet ... In stone Age times , the main reasons for going from warm to cold is either entering water or leaving a warm cave/building. In the latter, it helps the clan hygiene if people urinate outside rather th...

I postulated this theory about 30 years ago [ I think 3 quarks had been found by then and thought it was too complicated] so started thinking of the ideas given below. Every discovery since then seems to have slotted neatly [usually] into this theory as ive come across them anyway ..... I started out by looking at first principles as it seemed to be a good place to start .... Well a theory to be accepted , has to predict and explain at least if not more than present knowledge. We start with 2 assumptions, namely : The Universe started The Laws of Thermodynamics hold Not *too* controversial , or maybe it is [ the first isnt necesarily a prerequisite , but does make it easier to explain] Why did I thinkof this idea ? Well, years ago , as quarks were found , it was 3 , then 4 and is now , I believe 12. To my mind, this is excessive and we seem to be missing a stage beyond this level we have found. Im not dismissing quarks , just i feel they are built of other 'stuff' Na...