[Graybeard]

North ... All particles are always in motion. There is no 'still'.

The 'solar' particles you refer to began their journey to your skin millions of years ago. They were part of a fusion process (hi-energy collisions) being produced by the enormous effects of gravity at the centre of the sun. They were imparted enough momentum (energy) to endure all the collisions it took to work their way to the suns outer layer over millions of years. They then zipped across to the earth in nine minutes, some of them struck you. You absorb the energy of the impact.

This energy can be measured collectively as heat or thermodynamics but can also better be described as matter in motion.(IMO)


cool bananas ... greg

[north]

Originally Posted by Graybeard North ... All particles are always in motion. There is no 'still'. The 'solar' particles you refer to began their journey to your skin millions of years ago. They were part of a fusion process (hi-energy collisions) being produced by the enormous effects of gravity at the centre of the sun. They were imparted enough momentum (energy) to endure all the collisions it took to work their way to the suns outer layer over millions of years. They then zipped across to the earth in nine minutes, some of them struck you. You absorb the energy of the impact. This energy can be measured collectively as heat or thermodynamics but can also better be described as matter in motion.(IMO) cool bananas ... greg

and if we get to more depth , why does the Sun exist in the first place? lets just follow it back to where the Sun came from in the first place.

where did the Sun come from?

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by north where did the Sun come from?

Far out North ... I don't know where we are heading. The sun is the result of a disturbance in a cloud nebulae. The mechanics of this can also be described as matter in motion.

Suns are 'Fusion Engines'. When a gas nebulae has sufficient gravitational force (acceleration) to cause the gas at the centre of the gravitational force to travel at such hi speeds that when colliding they 'fuse' into heavier elements. Huge amounts of energy are given off. This energy counter balances the gravitational attraction. A Star is born, just like the movie. This star born out of a 'hurricane' within the centre of the nebulae now begins a journey thru space, leaving its parent nebulae (stellar nursery) gathering elements from supanovas laying all about the place .... this collection of elements (solar system) is eventually picked up by the gravitational attraction of a galaxy ....

This 'order' being created out of 'disorder' pays a high price by increasing the overall disorder in the universe. The universe is in a state of increasing entropy. From order to disorder is one way of looking at it. This also can be decribed as matter in motion.

cool bananas ... greg

[north]

Originally Posted by Graybeard Far out North ... I don't know where we are heading. The sun is the result of a disturbance in a cloud nebulae. The mechanics of this can also be described as matter in motion. Suns are 'Fusion Engines'. When a gas nebulae has sufficient gravitational force (acceleration) to cause the gas at the centre of the gravitational force to travel at such hi speeds that when colliding they 'fuse' into heavier elements. Huge amounts of energy are given off. This energy counter balances the gravitational attraction. A Star is born, just like the movie. This star born out of a 'hurricane' within the centre of the nebulae now begins a journey thru space, leaving its parent nebulae (stellar nursery) gathering elements from supanovas laying all about the place .... this collection of elements (solar system) is eventually picked up by the gravitational attraction of a galaxy .... This 'order' being created out of 'disorder' pays a high price by increasing the overall disorder in the universe. The universe is in a state of increasing entropy. From order to disorder is one way of looking at it. This also can be decribed as matter in motion. cool bananas ... greg

perhaps you are right BUT

I tend to look at this way ,

from a Cosmic Plasma perspective.

presented by Hannes Alfven ( the book is called " Cosmic Plasmas " ISBN # 9-0277-1151-

consider

this " smile " has not been put in by me , and I've tried to delete it , but it is stubburn. the last # number is 8.

[Graybeard]

Thanks North ... I looked up Hannes Alfven, tho not the book you mention.

His theory seemed radical in the 60s, then seemed to gain support, then lost it again when it was proven by the COBE satellite (1992) that the Cosmic Background Radiation did have a 'black-body' spectrum. Initially the CMBR was thought not to have a 'black-body' spectrum.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia This was due to anomalous results reported in 1987 by Andrew Lange and Paul Richardson of UC Berkeley and Toshio Matsumoto of Nagoya University that indicated the cosmic microwave background might not have a blackbody spectrum. However, the final announcement (in April 1992) of COBE satellite data corrected the earlier contradiction of the Big Bang; the level of interest in plasma cosmology has since fallen such that little research is now conducted.

I don't see how this supports your contention that Heat is an entity and not a measure of matter in motion?

Best of luck with it.

cool bananas ... greg

[north]

Originally Posted by Graybeard Thanks North ... I looked up Hannes Alfven, tho not the book you mention. His theory seemed radical in the 60s, then seemed to gain support, then lost it again when it was proven by the COBE satellite (1992) that the Cosmic Background Radiation did have a 'black-body' spectrum. Initially the CMBR was thought not to have a 'black-body' spectrum. I don't see how this supports your contention that Heat is an entity and not a measure of matter in motion? Best of luck with it. cool bananas ... greg

my contention is that Cosmic Plasmas are the essence of ALL matter and therefore space. and that the essence of Cosmic Plasmas and therefore Heat is friction.



anyway try this site

http://plasmascience.net/tpu/TheUniverse.html

what do you or anybody for that matter , think of this perspective

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by north couldn't though ,energy , be thought of in terms of heat or temperature. just a thought!

Same things, it's all scaling matter existing in different states of size and motions...

Lloyd

[north]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie Same things, it's all scaling matter existing in different states of size and motions... Lloyd

explain further

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by north explain further

Pauline Hanson ...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by north explain further

Hi North, I'd really have to know the basis of your thinking to answer further. Do you see the universe as scalar energy to scalar matter, or scalar matter to scalar energy? Most see it as energy to matter condensation. I and others on this forum see it as matter condensing or changing state to energy and other denser and thinner states of matter. Einstein long ago showed us matter and energy are two states of equivalent properties___E=MC^2. Which cart are you riding in___Energy first, or matter first? It's matter first, for me...

Lloyd