My Ideas

Since light is a wave we should conclude that the photon that leaves an object is not the same photon that arrives.  We only know that if one photon leaves then only one photon can arrive.   So there is a chain reaction in which there is a path but it's not necessarily a straight one.    There is a single path though of one to one interactions.    What if a wave consisting of a single photon is actually a chain reaction where a photon interacts with an electron which then interacts with an electron.   The distance between each interaction is the wavelength.  The number of interactions is the frequency.     This makes me wonder though how it would be possible for the interactions to be so perfectly periodic.    Who knows if a photon will encounter an electron at a particular point.  If you substitute the electron for another type of particle say a electric photon.  As if there were a photon for the ...

There seems to be an almost mathematical property of light.   Where light can be in two states.  Either it's a ray or it's being diffused.  It's almost always forming rays though even when diffused.  However you could say that diffusion is about destroying a ray.  A ray carries information about it's origin in the wave-fronts which comprise it.   If it passes through glass it's giving incorrect information about it's origin because the rays have been altered by being offset.   This itself is the result of diffusion.  Light diffuses around the atoms in a glass (because the wavelength is larger than the distance between atoms)  There seems to be something about light that makes it hard to diffuse. Diffusion takes place when light passes through a slit smaller than it's wavelength.  This is true of all waves.  A ray is a series of wave-fronts stacked up to form a ray.  An analogy would be a building.  Imagine a ta...

One thing I've encountered in trying to learn things is that one thing will be essentially similar to another and without realizing it the two have the same properties. You can memorize the outline and have an idea of what a book of the Bible is about and yet can you tell how the different books differ from each other.  It's easy if the books recount events but in the Letters of Paul can you say what each book is about as opposed to the others?   How do the books differ from one another?  This is differentiation and something I think we need to do more of. The interactions of light with matter.   I can read about absorption transmission and reflection?  I rarely come across an explanation that includes all three and as a result of not taking into account all of them we may create an explanation for one that contradicts the explanation of the others.  Even now though I have a hard time coming up with an example because I've thought about all...

You don't need to know a Christian by his fruit.   The key is to know the church by it's fruit.  If the church produces bad Christians then go to a different church.  You can easily tell if a church is loving when choosing a church as an outsider since how they treat you is easy to determine. It's easy to love those who love you.  What's hard for them to love you if they don't know you so if a church treats you the outsider with love then it's probably a good church.  The Bible isn't about confusion.  It's confusing to tell whether a christian himself bears good fruit or not.   We aren't here to judge individuals.  What purpose does that serve other than to make us judgemental?   You know a church by it's fruit.   That way if the members treat you badly you aren't judging them you are judging the doctrine of the church that produced them.  There's no judgement involved of people only the doctrine which is inanima...

Why you would want to do acrylic over oil:  Frazetta would do under-paintings in oil.   Oil under-painting can be done in one color only.  Not burnt umber paint and white but just burnt umber only.   You can draw white lines with the handle of the brush you can wipe off white areas with a rag and just keep working that way till the under-painting is perfect.  Being able to draw white lines with no paint whatsoever is a huge advantage when doing under-painting.    Plus the under-painting looks gorgeous by itself.   It occurs to me why not use acrylic on an oil painted whiteboard?  Or you could do masking with acrylic paint if it comes off so easily.   You could also do scratch-board techniques.   And if that doesn't work then maybe you can do acrylic over oil.  I wonder if it would make interesting textures.   Maybe there's a clear gesso you could apply to an oil underpainting.  It wo...

I've been researching about waves for a  while now and the very nature of all waves is somewhat counter intuitive.   Waves don't have that many characteristics but they do have some odd characteristics.   Take diffraction for instance.   When a wave of any kind passes through an aperture of a size less than the wavelength the wave will diffract or spread out in all directions.   However if the aperture is larger than the wavelength the wave continue on as if it were  a ray.   The reason it does this is that a wave is not a particle but many particles that are perhaps vibrating regardless of the wave direction. Wave causes a bunching up into a crest or a depletion zone called a trough.   Both are potential energy.   The energy is usually in the crests and the troughs.   Basically a wave is a configuration where stuff gets bunched up or un bunched and what those things want to do is become de-bunched un-depleted as...

I'm interested in how 3 materials: Metal Glass Paper Interact with light. Have you ever thought about why metal is shiny while paper is not?  Why does light travel through glass but is stopped by metal?    I've been trying to nail down these things in my mind.  I looked at different articles and watched a number of videos but they only confused me because they seemed to contradict one another or oversimplify like they will tell the difference between 2 of the 3 but leave the one ambiguous.  I was most confused about reflection.   If absorption means the electron is raised to a higher energy state then I assumed that reflection meant it didn't get raised but then I would become more confused when they said glass is clear because the electron didn't get raised at all.    So I understood the difference between absorption and transmission but what is reflection?   Most articles only covered two of the three cases.  So...

Why is probably the best question we can ask because it's quickly answered.   If teachers would just explain why rather than telling how students would all be geniuses.   A lot of times you can ask a teacher why and they wont have an explanation.  But at least "I don't know" acknowledges that it's a good question.     They can explain the what (the definition).  And how as in: (How it works).  How to use it.  How to solve problems involving it but rarely do they cover "Why it is the case and all the little questions that pop up.   Let me give an example.   I have a question on my mind right now. Why does light go through glass and not get reflected like with metal.   I have a hypothesis and that is that the atoms are too close together in metal.   It's not so much that they are too close together but that the angle of refraction is so extremely high.   Take a diamond for example.  Did y...

A lot of the great minds had friends they actually talked about their own fields with. My friends and I in college didn't really talk about programming. This one really smart guy would always be explaining programming and teaching others but he was a bit of a loner even though he wasn't nerdy.  I'm sure he got a really good job but imagine where he would be today if he had had a bunch of friends he talked about programming with. So many people just want to talk about other things besides their field. Einstein I bet actually talked about physics with his friends outside school. I know he had a group of guys. I know he and Maleva Merick would study together and she helped him a lot because she went to this other school where they were teaching modern stuff while Einstine's school was way behind and disagreed with all that controversial stuff and she had been exposed to.   She was his link to the stuff that really mattered and the stuff he later figured out for us....

Governing factors determine the shape of things. An Islands shape is determined by what sticks out of the water but  my life's shape is determined by other factors.   One can control the shape of a tiny low island very easily.   It would take an upheaval to control the shape of a continent because so much of it sticks out of the water and much of it's coastline is cliffs.   Its hard to control the shape of a cliffy coastline.  It's changing because the cliffs often have landslides but you can't stop the landslides and only a little slides down at a time. Yet an Island that is low to the water and close to sea level can be shaped by man himself.  This is being done in the Netherlands (though it's not an island its very low land.  Netherlands means lowlands.  They are so low that some of the land is below sea level.  It's kept from being underwater by the dikes.  By building dikes they can vastly increase the land area.  ...

Quantum theory reminds me of Ptolemaic theory. They are both human-centric. They both require that all this crazy wild nutty stuff happens in the background. Neither is eloquent but like Ptolemaic Theory in it's day, Quantum Theory is the best anyone can come up with.   It's one of the few theories without a person's name attached to it.    It's as if no one wants to be associated with it.      I just say this because maybe it needs to be demystified a bit.     They did check to see if something was going on.   We know it contradicts relativity in some way but I'm not sure how.   I guess it's because relativity seems more continuous and quantum theory is so tiny.   They probably don't need to coincide because relativity is about big things and quantum theory is about very small things and in the middle we have Newton.    Maybe Newton is the missing link or the grand ...

I'm wondering if the reason that the outside of the galaxy rotates at the same speed as the inside isn't because the galaxy is a young galaxy.     The reason it is believed that the inside should rotate faster than the outside is because the inner planets of a solar system orbit at a faster speed than the outer planets.  They have to because if they didn't the greater gravity near the sun would cause them to fall closer to the sun.  Would they fall into the sun or reach some asymptotic orbit?  That's for another paper however it makes sense that the inside should rotate faster than the outside.   Like I said if they do not they will fall toward the sun. Since we are now comparing the Milky Way and other galaxies with the solar system then lets ask ourselves if this is a fair analogy.    It does seem fair because in fact there has been found a solar system that actually looks like a galaxy.   This solar system is though...

I don't know if I've mentioned this but it it occurred to me that most things have a length.   Our bodies are not a mere point in space but they have height width and depth.   What if our footprint in time has a length.    It would mean that we exist in a time segment rather than a point in time.   We don't exist at all times but we exist within a range of times.   Maybe we exist a second in time.  perhaps we exist a microsecond in time.     Suppose we can focus on a time in the future or the past.    This would perhaps explain the phenomena of deja vu.   For some reason our focus is on the past and we re-experience the future a fraction of a second after it happened. What if by continuing to focus on our earliest moment we can actually turn time backward.   We could essentally by continuing to do this travel back into an earlier point in our own lives similar to what Kitty Pri...

What about a game that combines different types of games so that the monsters are actually humans.   For one player the game is a quest where you must make it through many levels.  For another it is an RPG.  for another it's a multiplayer team map.  These all work together seamlessly so that the person on the quest just feels he's going up against extremely realistic AI.   What inspired me with this idea is the Friday the 13th game in which the players actually want to be Jason.     If players want to play the bad guy then why would we need AI bad guys?    Consider the Tower Defense game.   Isn't the tower defense just an inverted quest game.  In the quest the player is trying to overcome obstacles to save the princess and in the other the player is trying to create obstacles.   I suppose a combination quest and tower defense game would be a good place to start in the hybrid games arena....

I read that article and it's ridiculous. Millions of GI's walked through the concentration camps. The Holocaust has eye witnesses. People have written long firsthand accounts about it. The Jews actually were expelled over and over and the Holocaust is just another example. Even after the war the USA didn't let the Jewish refugees in. The only reason they are in Palestine is because the UK had the power take it from someone and give it to them. Basically no one wanted them and so we gave them Palestine and perhaps took it from those who lived there because that's how the Modern world does good deeds. We give people what doesn't belong to them. Yet the Muslims took it from someone and why not base it on history as they never forget the "Crusades". I mean if they're going to use ancient history then the Muslims are shooting themselves in the foot. How can anyone say there is no Holocaust. If there is one thing we know for sure is that people...

According to Jesus a person "Born of the Spirit" is a wildcard.  No one knows where he comes from or where he is going.      I often feel my life has jumped the rails.  Whatever my purpose in life is I must have gotten off track somewhere and I'm no longer anywhere near where I was supposed to be but then on the other hand maybe that's the whole point.   Maybe Jumping the rails is a greater purpose than fulfilling your purpose in life. I base this on the verse: "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit." John 3:8.

Hopefully this isn't going to be dry reading.  I think I wrote a similar article somewhere but couldn't find it.  I should probably get some charts to make it work.  I could have called it dating with charts because to make use of this strategy you need population charts particularly of the kind called pyramids.   They are called pyramids because they are shaped like pyramids at least they used to be.  They are actually no longer perfect pyramids and if they were actual pyramids this technique wouldn't really matter and would be of very little help to women.  Today population pyramids have become more like population space needles or sideways barbells. I came across this in the 1990s. I had heard someone say "Nature likes to make girls"  I guess this is because he'd heard that there are more women than men in the world.   I lacked confidence so I thought I'd look into this matter because it seemed so unlikely that I would ever get a gi...

One of the major flaws in low budget movies is walking.   The audience is forced to sit through long periods of watching the characters walk from here to there.  Normal movies don't have this because they have enough story to fill the whole hour and half.   Low budget movie makers are so focused on their lighting and angles and the craft of making film    It may be that they are so in love with the craft that they can see the beauty in someone going for a walk and they feel that their technique will truly make each walk about an artistic statement in and of itself.  Another possibility is that they forget the most important ingredient: the screenplay. It may not be the fault of the producers though.   The problem may lie in the fact that Hollywood buys scripts.  Screenwriting is actually a lucrative vocation simply because if you write a good script it will sell.  You can write an amazing novel and it might never be publishe...

Draw finished drawings right from the start. This is only a trick and not really what you would think of as something a pro would do however. It works because random thoughtless art is better than most artists techniques and hard work. You can think things through and through but for most artists they aren't going to improve on random chance. There probably is a technique that improves on random chance but I'm not sure I've figured it out and I'm not sure anyone has. Anyway Travis Charest would draw finished art right from the start and it looked amazing. It saved time too. Stick figures are good if you are just learning and they are always good but so is finished drawings right from the start because the less you erase and the more precise your lines the easier it is to draw the next line in the perfect spot. Random placement of figures will look really good most of the time because in the end even when you are doing roughs you are attempting to create ...

You talk about balance of the buildings but what is hard to do is to make things look natural and irregular. It's so easy in a drawing to make things appear contrived and unnatural. It's hard to make things look natural because you are drawing on a flat surface and it's so easy to balance things and fill up empty areas with your pencil but if you were using a 3d drawing tool like 3d studio or blender you would be hard pressed to fill up every square inch of the panel. Balance isn't really the wrong way to put it but if you're balancing large objects with small objects so that they look natural but aren't you then trying to create imbalance? I think balance is what you are really trying to avoid. To me a balanced composition is a symmetrical composition and a contrived one. They say you can balance a large more central object with a small one way to the side but that's pretty complex.   A photo will look bad if the photographer leaves ...