Author Background - These Public Services

People sometimes see the great diversity of subjects that are presented in these Public Service pages, and they wonder who is behind them. Is this guy so arrogant that he thinks that he knows the final answers to so many serious problems of society? Is he delusional in thinking that one person could reasonably understand these diverse subjects? Is he a "jack of all trades and master of none" who is just blowing hot air about subjects that he barely comprehends? Or is there a chance that he could actually understand some of these subjects?

I HOPE that the reality is near the last option! Is it actually likely that I totally understand all these subjects? Probably not! Many of these subjects have been studied by the world's greatest minds for hundreds of years! THEIR discoveries enabled most of the devices and insights presented in these web pages. The likelihood that a single person could absolutely solve even one would be significant. solving many of them? Pretty close to inconceivable.

I DO see the need to explain an extremely important fact here. Virtually all of modern human existence is based on ASSUMPTIONS and DEBATES and ARGUMENTS as being the driving structure for any improvements or advances. However, when one is educated as a Theoretical Nuclear Physicist, and especially at a top-quality University such as the University of Chicago, there is a MANDATORY zero-tolerance of sloppy thinking! It is simply unacceptable to be SPECULATING or making wild assumptions regarding ANYTHING! The very concept of a DEBATE simply cannot occur within serious Theoretical Physics!

No one seems to understand why I have never been willing to participate in Forums or Debate Groups or Social Groups on the Internet. The people who DO participate in such things generally seem to bring THEIR OWN OPINIONS regarding whatever subject, where they intend to ARGUE WITH EACH OTHER, seemingly constantly. They seem to consider such interactions to be DEBATES, but virtually all the participants are NOT actually knowledgeable regarding much of what they argue their attitudes about! So, to a Theoretical Physicist, such Forums tend to seem to be simply a lot of uneducated people arguing about subjects they have little clue about! EVERYONE seems to have their own OPINION about things like Global Warming, and a lot of people feel the need to express those opinions, to each other. Participants who happen to be extremely aggressive might seem to dominate such arguments, but it is NOT because they are knowledgeable, and in fact, they generally know only bits and pieces of what they try to talk about.

Within Nuclear Physics, such empty discussions are seen as a total waste of time! ONLY when someone can present the MATH and LOGIC of any statement, might it actually be considered as potentially credible! Exactly the OPPOSITE of a DEBATE. In fact, NO attitudes or opinions are considered to ever have any value at all! Only FACTS, MATH and LOGIC. NOTHING else matters to a Theoretical Physicist!

So why all these pages?

Well, first, I have discovered that by being given an education in Nuclear Physics by the University of Chicago, they gave me a preparation to know how to learn! So, recently, when I needed to (re-)learn some organic chemistry to be able to decently analyze the energy processes involved with photosynthesis and organic decomposition, it only took a couple months of heavy study to become decently competent in that field, such that the analysis of Global Warming and even to be able to know that the (free) devices offered to heat domestic hot water and the entire home will work as desired! It does NOT mean that I could handle all of advanced Bio-Chemistry, just the specific areaa of it that I needed for this research. Ditto for an assortment of other fields, as they have become necessary in various researches for these presentations.

It has long been my observation that the bulk of intelligent minds tend to approach problems from pretty much the same directions. There is a tendency to climb on the backs of scholars that have gone before. This is certainly a good concept, and it represents the vast majority of advances in science and society in recent centuries. However, I think it sometimes causes later researchers to funnel their thinking along the same lines as those earlier giants. I see the possibility that assumptions made by those earlier giants are simply assumed to be true, without serious challenge.

I think that this universal approach can unintentionally introduce limitations and biases regarding their later assumptions and conclusions. Hey, for 1800 years, the ancient Greek Aristotle's view of science prevailed! I have to think that many of the later people who followed him must have contemplated things like a non-flat Earth and maybe even one that could move! But nobody dared question the great Aristotle, who everyone knew could not possibly be wrong about anything!

Most people are not aware that only around 200 years ago (1780), a highly respected scientist gave a Presentation at a Scientific Conference where he explained that winds are created from the inside of the Earth, as the "Earth breathes!"

Public Service
Categories
Self-Sufficiency - Many Suggestions

Environmental Subjects

Scientific Subjects

Advanced Physics

Social Subjects

Religious Subjects

Public Services Home Page

Main Menu
E-mail
This general tendency probably encourages large numbers of INCREMENTAL improvements in theories or products or even social systems. However, when a problem is approached WITHOUT feeling any need to "stay within the lines", and if really strict logic is used and extreme care is applied regarding locating and using solid facts and being really careful regarding any necessary assumptions, the possibility exists where some entirely new concept might arise. This DOES happen once in a while, but all researchers are so trained to assume all previous research was sound, that it is somewhat rare. Worse, everyone in Academia is forced to Publish or Perish, and it turns out to be far easier to publish a Paper which is a slight improvement of an existing concept than to try to start from scratch with something which will not easily be accepted by peers. Peer review is a central part of getting such Papers published! If researchers are not in Academia, they are generally employed by some large Corporation, which insists on effective performance regarding creating profitable products! This causes few people to be in the position of being totally free to be creative!

Related to these comments, consider the following: Edison invented the incandescent light bulb around 1880, which has been IMPROVED many times but we are essentially still using the SAME technology! When Duryea and others invented the internal combustion engine around 1885, it has certainly been IMPROVED many times, but essentially our modern vehicles still use that SAME technology! Aircraft? Improved, but essentially from the 1903 Wright Brothers! Electricity generation? Improved but essentially from 1900 Nikola Tesla. Locomotives. Steamships. Storage Batteries (a hundred more obvious entries here). We seem to thrive on making INCREMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS on accepted and proven technologies! Probably because that is the greatest assurance of making massive amounts of money!

But then there are people who invented the transistor and the laser and radio and television and the Internet and the microwave oven. Those sorts of things generally represented DIFFERENT APPROACHES to existing problems. Why don't we even consider that more often?

Is it really because we are so fanatical about making sure we make loads of money that people don't dare "go outside the box"? Yes, I can confirm that when you try "new and different" it OFTEN totally fails to do what it is desired! AND it immediately receives derision and insults from peers. I experienced that big time around 1980. At the time, no one seemed to really care much about environmental issues or the terrible wasting of the treasures that the Earth provides us. I had recently learned that Electric Powerplants were all only around 30% efficient! I had noticed the immense amounts of heat that they (then) dumped into rivers and lakes, as it was getting publicity regarding huge amounts of growth of plants like algae clogging up lakes and rivers and killing fish. Authorities eventually banned their dumping that heat into water and forced all Electric Powerplants to build Cooling Towers and other ways of dumping that heat into the atmosphere instead.

But once I learned of how terribly inefficient all of those Powerplants were, I spent several months learning and studying whether anything could be done to improve them. I discovered that there was ALREADY established technology and even devices which would have greatly improved the situation. IN 1980, ALL ELECTRIC POWERPLANTS COULD HAVE BEEN MODIFIED TO SUPPLY TWICE THE AMOUNT OF ELECTRICITY TO THE PUBLIC FROM THE SAME AMOUNT OF COAL BURNED! I thought that was significant! Apparently, I was alone! In my excitement, I contacted around two dozen other Physicists I knew, to see if they agreed with my research and findings. ABSOLUTELY NONE OF THEM saw any reason at all in even reading my information! I realized that we Physicists tend to only have interest in THEORETICAL concepts, and it is pretty universal that PRACTICAL subjects are considered too mundane! It is rather funny to watch Nuclear Physicists (who want to only study theoretical things) make endless insults about Nuclear Engineers (who design things like nuclear powerplants) as being ignorant and inferior. And their insults for Nuclear Technicians (the people who OPERATE Nuclear Powerplants) are beyond belief!

So I guess I should have known that they would not have much interest in matters related to improving the efficiency of Electric Powerplants. But, still, it was amazing to find that NONE would even "waste their time" in reading my work! But in addition, that effort on my part caused many of them to immediately dis-respect me as a Nuclear Physicist! There, in my mind, I thought I saw a way that we could be burning up only HALF the coal to produce the same amount of electricity, and absolutely no one seemed to care! Coal was cheap and plentiful, and there was yet very little publicity about the environmental consequences of burning coal.

Apparently, I was supposed to learn from that to shut up and go away! And to IGNORE all such things and to ONLY do research in theoretical areas of Nuclear Physics and Astrophysics, the ONLY two areas in which I was apparently ALLOWED to study!

One sad problem these days is that whenever anyone brings up the possibility of going-outside-the-box, the US Government steps in and sticks hundreds of billions of dollars of risk in the middle. Like the Bush Administration deciding (with extremely little actual research or thinking) to use up ONE-THIRD of all US CROPLANDS for an adventure to produce Ethanol to supply a MAXIMUM of around 3% of the vehicle fuel that US drivers use up, with the consequence that US food prices have already started to skyrocket. Wait until there is a weather problem!!! No one seems to have even thought about the disaster to our food supply (and its costs) which will occur then, a crisis of astounding nature. And all to try to produce enough Ethanol for around 3% of our motor fuel needs. (So, if someone is going to criticize ME for some concepts that might seem unusual, at least I have generally researched the performance of it AND the consequences and effects, something that our government seems either unwilling or unable to do!) I wonder how long it will be before they will figure it out that Ethanol was a MONUMENTALLY STUPID idea to try on such a large scale.

It would have been fine for a "hobby scale" experiment. But to be endangering the American food supply is simply beyond comprehension!

I wonder when they will eventually realize that they have created a bizarre environment which INTENSELY ENCOURAGES bootlegging and moonshiners! (The alcohol that moonshiners made from corn used to be called ? You guessed it, Ethanol (or grain alcohol)! The alcohol sometimes made by moonshiners out of tree parts is different, Methanol (wood alcohol), and is actually deadly, but that Methanol happens to be a popular motor fuel for racing vehicles). Both can be effectively used in vehicle engines.

So even the "brilliant new idea" of massively producing Ethanol, is actually an operation which is VERY old and well established and that was extremely popular and profitable during the Prohibition days of the 1920s. NOW our government has established an environment which will certainly encourage millions of people to start their own backyard distillery! Whether desperately poor people who lose their homes will make it to sell for motor fuel (at a few dollars a gallon) or to sell some of it as liquor (for maybe $60 per gallon), the groundwork is now set for millions of people to start doing that. Do our leaders ever read the papers to LEARN about such news as from the 1920s?

As it happens, I have NEVER had any interest in "making incremental improvements" in existing products. An example: In 1973, when there was a MidEast Oil Embargo, a lot of people started buying Potbelly and Franklin woodstoves which were around 25% maximum efficiency. That was a lot better than the 11% maximum efficiency that a fireplace has, but again, those are technologies from 1760 (Franklin stove) and even earlier for the others. At the time, I really didn't know a thing about woodburning or woodburners, but the necessity of seeing my uninsulated three-story 80-year-old farmhouse get LP gas rates that suddenly doubled, became the mother of invention! I decided to spend several months in Designing and Engineering my own woodstove, of which there was to be exactly ONE ever made! Before I built it, weeks of massive calculations indicated that it should be 81.7% efficient. The number was so much higher than any existing product that I immediately assumed that I had made a math error in the 57 sheets of calculations. I considered doing all the calculations again, or trying to find the error, but I eventually decided that it would be quicker and easier to simply learn how to weld and build it out of scrap steel! I was sure that it would work rather well. When I did build it, it turned out to generally have around 83% overall efficiency, although sometimes it was as low as 80%. Apparently the calculations did NOT have any major error in them!

It was my intention that there would EVER be EXACTLY ONE of them, the one in MY house! I never intended or wanted to build or sell any of them. In fact, I had to teach myself how to weld in order to build mine in the backyard of my farmhouse!

But other farmers who were paying huge winter heating bills somehow heard (from the driver of the LP gas truck) that I was no longer buying any more LP gas, and many started annoying me to get such units for themselves! I made a few just to get people to stop bothering me! But that caused even more people to know about them. About 18 months later, I finally conceded that I was IN BUSINESS, then being faced with many hundreds of more units to build for people!

(My JUCA woodstove is STILL unique in the business, and my design from 1973 is still of much higher efficiency and is much cleaner burning than any other product yet sold by anyone! Go figure!)

It really seems clear that virtually no one ever wants to "take a chance" with anything unusual. UNLESS they think it is PROVEN and also can potentially make them piles of money! Over the years, roughly 25 small companies tried to steal the design for my woodstove. Unfortunately, none of them had sufficient Engineering Education to understand why some things are critically important, and they each failed to make products that came even close to JUCAs. One guy even pretended to be a new dealer, where he bought one each of five different JUCA models (around 1978). Someone later told us that he took the brand new JUCA units home and cut them each apart so he could copy the piece sizes to try to make his own! We found out because he got sued for selling very dangerous products!

It is sad that virtually no one today seems to have any ethics! Around 2001, I contacted the city of Venice Italy to offer them FOR FREE a method where they should be able to physically raise the entire region around Venice at about an inch per month. Instead, aggressive promoters had convinced them that ONLY they could save Venice, by the city (and Italy) paying them around $3 billion for some foolish (Moses) sea gates. I had explained that I did not want a dime, but that they could TEST my concept for a total investment of maybe $3,000! The promoters did not like me, as I was endangering their $3 billion! But no one ever seemed interested in even trying my concept, even though I had fully described it to a number of University Researchers who were considered experts. So I was quite surprised to find that three years later, three of those SAME Padua University researchers (Nov 2005) were in the BBC News as trying to get Venice to give THEM around $140 million for MY CONCEPT! Weren't they supposed to at least tell me they were stealing my concept, or graciously offering to share their upcoming fortune with the person who had actually invented it? Wow! And what do you try to do to go after several University Professors in Italy, when I seem to have no real way to now even get their attention? Hmmm.

In the recent several years where I had felt it safe to disclose my unusual Water Pump for Third World Villages, and also the Seawater Desalinator for Third World Villages, to specific people (who generally assured me that they are Christian and highly ethical), the majority (over 90%) of those people, immediately upon receiving all the necessary information, told me that they were "changing their plans". Each one of them then described that THEY HAD DECIDED that they FIRST needed to get really rich, by SELLING my pumps rather than giving them away the way I have insisted. Once they become multi-millionaires, each has told me, that THEN they would be able to get SOME pumps and desals to needy villages! That is in absolute conflict with what I had insisted their attitudes to have been about NMY invention!

An amazing number of people seem to feel very free to use MY inventions as though they were their own!

Didn't the ancient Greek Diogenes have trouble finding an honest man? Wow! I can relate!

A significant sized company approached me in 2007 regarding an unusual golf training device that I had invented around ten years earlier. They showed massive interest, but then once I had disclosed all the important things, they very suddenly told me that they had changed their plans. In fact, they told me that the decided to HIRE a LOCAL ENGINEER to do the necessary advanced Engineering for my device, rather than joining forces with me as they had told me just days earlier! I guess once you get a stupid person to give up all the valuable information, you don't think you need him any more! However, he was probably wrong on that one. As it happens, I am among around a dozen true experts on Gyroscopic Engineering in the world, and even for me the the calculations take a lot of time and effort. For them to think that they would be able to hire a local Engineer, expecting that person to have world-class knowledge on that specific subject, seems nearly certain to result in that Engineer needing to spend several years in advanced study (as I had earlier done regarding gyroscopes and precession). So I suspect that company screwed up in deciding to try to cheat me out of sharing in my own invention! (For the record, there ARE some attempts now being made regarding companies trying to do such things (based on MY concept of 1997), but they are so badly designed, with apparently NO Engineering at all behind them, that they each have shown themselves to be total failures. Some of those attempts at products are SO bad that they are designed in ways that ABSOLUTELY ELIMINATE any possible chance of the necessary effect even occurring! But each of those companies insists that they are ready to make many millions in profits, from such garbage attempts at products. Sort of amusing!)

Even inside the field of Nuclear Physics (the field for which I was educated in College at the University of Chicago), I think the same thing (of a total lack of truly creative approaches) sometimes occurs. Around 1935, a Physicist named Hideki was thinking about the nucleus of atoms and that they certainly contained many positively charged protons, which all electrically repelled each other. It was already known that there was more material in the nucleus of nearly all atoms, and earlier (1930) Physicists had concluded that they must be "neutrons", electrically neutral objects that pretty much just take up space to separate the protons. Hideki did the simple calculations and found that no known force could counteract the repulsion of the protons from each other, so he described a "Strong Nuclear Force" which MUST exist to allow atomic nuclei to avoid instantly coming apart! Most of modern Nuclear Physics is all firmly based on Hideki's assumption and conclusion. Recently, in some investigations on some other matters inside the nucleus, I believe I have come upon extremely strong evidence that neutrons probably do NOT exist inside the nucleus, and that a Strong Nuclear Force is unnecessary in describing the stability of atomic nuclei! I believe it is certainly now provable that Hideki was completely wrong in his assumption and conclusion! Since most of modern Physics is based upon that, it is terrifying to think what might happen to our field if my research regarding that is correct! I have actually wished that I was wrong, and I have done everything possible to try to find flaws in my reasoning, but it seems absolutely sound! Interesting!

I now have the impression that Hideki had ASSUMED that neutrons existed inside the nucleus, since all Physicists of the time had accepted that concept, and so he saw the need to find some way of explaining stability. And ALL Physicists (apparently) who have followed have simply accepted that he was right! I no longer think he was! I see this as an example where things seem really "obvious" (neutrons seem to exist inside the nucleus) (a Strong Nuclear force MUST exist to keep protons from flying apart), while a different explanation might have equally explained the evidence that had been found.

In this case, I believe the evidence actually supports a structure where "loose" protons AND loose electrons exist inside the nucleus instead of their being bound together as neutrons, which are essentially just a proton and an electron stuck together. It gets somewhat complicated! But it would have HUGE implications in the field of Theoretical Nuclear Physics.

It is actually FAR more logical! (There is a presentation in this Domain on that subject, which most people would find boring and complicated!)

Here is another, also in Physics, but this time in Astrophysics. Einstein had many incredible insights, including that matter and energy are equivalent ( E = m * c2 ). That insight caused him to realize many other new concepts, specifically that things behave rather strangely when anything approaches the speed of light ( the Theory of Relativity ). It has been proven countless thousands of times that time seems to slow down (although not actually noticed) when a velocity is near the speed of light. By the 1960s, an assumption was made (which I am now certain was completely wrong!) to extend that concept to something that nearly everyone is now familiar with which is generally referred to as the Twins Paradox. Allegedly, a twin that leaves the Earth in a spaceship and travels at near the speed of light to a distant star and then soon comes back, would be physically less old than his twin that remained on Earth. Much of the story is certainly true, regarding the time slowing during the CONSTANT VELOCITY part of the trip. But no one seemed to have ever considered the "TOTAL experience" of the traveling twin! Say that both twins were taught well by their parents and they eat three meals every "day". I see this: The twins have lunch together on Earth, and they both look up (with instruments) and confirm that the star Alpha Centauri is 4.3 light years away. The one gets in the spaceship, quickly accelerates up to near the speed of light. Relativity says that he would not notice anything unusual, EXCEPT that he would see A.C. to only be one light week away, really close! So he eats 21 meals in the spaceship (one week of food) and he gets to A.C. What is wrong with that (which is now in nearly every school text book)? HIS experience is what! His own log book entries (every hour) show that one week ago, he was 4.3 light years away from A.C., and now he arrived there. So he would be able to "prove in Court" that he had just traveled over 200 times faster than the speed of light! (And all Physicists agree that is impossible!) So even though Time Dilation is certainly true, the Twins Paradox certainly has to be completely wrong! (There IS a logical explanation of this, which does not contradict any physical law and which is actually VERY logical! It is among the pages in this domain.) (It has to do with a very opposite effect occurring to the traveler AS HE WAS ACCELERATING, where he had to age extremely rapidly [as seen by Earth] [without anything seeming odd to him].

And yet another from within Physics, one that really astounds me that no one seems to have noticed! You may have heard of neutrinos, really tiny particles that are thought to be created in huge quantities in the processes by which the Sun produces its massive energy (called nuclear fusion). Neutrinos are thought to be able to pass entirely through almost everything without ever hitting anything or otherwise being affected. Fascinating Physics classes discuss the hundreds of neutrinos produced by the Sun which pass through your eye every second, but then CONTINUE to pass entirely through the entire Earth without being affected at all! Only a rare neutrino is believed to actually run into anything, and experiments have been operated for around 40 years to try to detect those rare events. (The experiments are all done down in very deep mines to reduce the chance that anything else could cause the effects they are looking for.)

That is ALL the background you need to know! Various Physicists have made certain assumptions regarding the exact nuclear fusion processes that are occurring in the Sun (see the Sun Works presentation for the details), which each therefore predict HOW MANY neutrinos should be being created and how many should then be detected in those experiments. And then they argue amongst themselves because the very small number that is detected is NOT in very good agreement with any of their theories (usually by a factor of two or five either way).

They all have made a HUGE BLUNDER in their thinking! They all ASSUME that all the detected neutrinos are coming from the Sun!

But even 180 years ago, an Astronomer named Olbers realized a brilliant thought! He didn't understand why the sky was dark at night! He realized that with many billions of stars in our Milky Way Galaxy (and far more billions of stars that he then was not aware of!) that it is possible to show geometrically that in ANY precise direction that you could possibly look, at some distance there must be a brilliantly glowing star along that line-of-sight. So Olbers (correctly) realized that the night sky SHOULD BE brilliantly bright! It actually took several decades before Astronomers realized that the ONLY reason that is not true is that there are clouds of dust and gases that ABSORB a lot of light and radiation! (Did you know that we cannot see any of the stars that are near the center of our own Galaxy? There is so much intervening gas and dust that we do not have any way of seeing them!).

See the connection? Our Sun is NOT the only star that operates by nuclear fusion, they ALL do! So ALL stars should also be spitting out astounding numbers of neutrinos in all directions. In ANY direction one might look, there should be some star that is shooting neutrinos at us! AND, since neutrinos can easily pass through the entire Earth without sweat, they certainly would pass through gas clouds and dust without any problem!

So, simply applying the Olbers Paradox to neutrinos, we should be receiving IMMENSE numbers of neutrinos FROM ALL DIRECTIONS and not just from the Sun! Very simply, this says that we SHOULD BE receiving around 200,000 times as many neutrinos from ALL stars as the ones that ALL Physicists think about which come from the Sun!

It seems to me that DUH is the only possible comment!

But even today, Physicists are arguing over which is right regarding differences of a factor of two or five regarding the number of neutrinos that the Sun is creating, regarding the detector experiments! It seems to me that they should INSTEAD be thinking about WHY they are not detecting 200,000 times as many! I see that as quite funny!

It seems to me that the logic of this is really quite obvious, and if we Physicists are anywhere near as smart as we tend to try to claim, SOMEBODY should have realized this long ago and tried to analyze data that is ridiculously different from what should be expected!

(Sorry about getting sort of "technical" for a moment, as it is something Physicists sometimes do!)

One more, NOT in Physics! As a Christian, I have profound trust and belief in the Bible. In some areas, people think they find some references that they say conflict with "modern science", with the "Six Day Creation" being one of the ones often mentioned. I personally do not see a conflict there, but the discussion is fairly complex (part of which was published in the Ziggurat of December 2005). (In fact, the fact that the 14 specific events mentioned in Genesis 1, composed 3300 years ago, have only recently [the past 100 years] been confirmed to be in the correct sequence by science. For an ancient writer to have faked Genesis 1 without God's help, the odds against him getting the sequence so correct are something like 40 billion to one!) But I also noticed something that I have no clue about, and which I have never seen ANYONE even ever mention! Moses lived somewhere around 1275 BC. God gave Moses two "tables" (stone tablets) with the Ten Commandments written on them. Everyone knows that! What confuses me is that we humans had not then yet invented any alphabet (the first was just then being invented) and no organized written language yet (written Hebrew was developed around 300 years after Moses). There were certainly stone symbols developed in Mesopotamia and Egypt (pictoglyphs, petroglyphs, heiroglyphs, cuneiform) (essentially stylized picture drawings) but they were definitely not sophisticated enough to present any advanced concepts such as the concept of Honoring the Sabbath or the sexual implications of one of the Commandments. There WERE certainly VERY complete ORAL languages in regular use.

Researchers have so far discovered seven separate systems where picture writing evolved into word writing (Sumerian, Egyptian, proto-Elamite, proto-Indic, Cretan, Hittite, and Chinese). Chinese was developed after Moses lived, and is the only one of them still in use today, and three of the others have not yet been deciphered. Hittite was also developed after Moses lived, which seems to suggest that only Sumerian(/Old Akkadian) and Egyptian hieroglyphic symbol systems were available candidates! (Akkadian later developed into its subsequent dialects of Babylonian and Assyrian. Both of those dialects existed, as oral languages, in a crude form, at the time of Moses, but each developed into sophisticated written languages at least 200 years after Moses lived.)

But evidence suggests that both of those symbolic systems (cuneiform and heiroglyphics) did not yet have the required sophistication to adequately present the concepts of the Ten Commandments. I wonder how many symbols would be necessary to express "Honor the Sabbath" which is actually a rather sophisticated statement. It might make sense for some modern expert to try to express that statement in Egyptian hieroglyphic symbols or in Akkadian cuneiform, and then have some other expert try to understand the Sabbath concept from the symbols. I suspect that a LOT (many hundreds???) of symbols may be necessary!

I have offered this challenge to experts in hieroglyphics for several years, of creating a series of symbols that supposedly express the Honor the Sabbath concept, where the symbols would then be sent to a DIFFERENT expert to try to interpret. IF the second expert translates the symbols into the correct (sophisticated) meaning of Honor the Sabbath, I would buy their argument. Not otherwise!

The very large number of hieroglyphic symbols is in tremendous contrast to the few Ancient Hebrew words required. Only four Ancient Hebrew words were involved in the Sabbath Commandment: zakar (Strongs 02142, remember); Shabbath (Strongs 07676); yowm (Strongs 03117, day); qadash (Strongs 06942, keep it holy).

Christians and Jews rarely note that Moses lived around 1275 BC but that the texts he Taught were (necessarily) only ORALLY transmitted for about 300 years (15 generations) before they were finally written down (by Scribes, in Ancient Hebrew or Palaeo-Hebrew) around 1000 BC. So it is never really even noted that there was NO "written record" of ANYTHING Moses Taught, until around 300 years after he died. So I suppose it is natural that no one (then) would have had specific concern regarding whatever was written down on the stone tablets!

(There are also many modern Christians who simply assume that Moses personally and physically "wrote down" all the extensive text of the First Five Books of the Bible. Such people are under the misconception that some written language then existed! But IF Moses were actually to have done that, rather than ORALLY transmitting those texts, he would have required a LOT of time to chisel many tons and thousands of pieces of stone blocks! At the time, he had far more important things to do, specifically, trying to keep all the Israelites alive! Moses was certainly the "author" of those Books, but only in an ORAL TRADITION sense. It remained to around 300 years later before they were actually able to be written down [by unknown Scribes] in Ancient Hebrew [once that written language was invented].)

In any event, the simple question regarding what language God used in writing down the Ten Commandments on the Tablets, devolves to the fact that there was NO existing language which even the educated Moses could have understood! As a Devout Christian, I have NO doubt that there IS some logical explanation for this! I just find it strange that no one seems to have ever even considered the issue!

Here is a non-Christian example of the same sort of thing. I am astounded that NO ONE seems to have ever tried to examine this one! Especially since even an Elementary School student should be able to learn the necessary info and do the necessary thinking to see that there seems to be a problem! OK! It was only just over 100 years ago that anyone had ever found any fossil bones of dinosaurs, and it was only around 80 years ago that researchers had figured out what the larger dinosaurs must have looked like (then called a Brontosaur). HOWEVER! There are countless stories from the Middle Ages, such as St. George and the Dragon, which seemed to describe creatures that sound remarkably similar to large dinosaurs! How could the people of 800 years ago KNOW or GUESS that there could have been such giant creatures that looked at all like that? Yes, a thousand years earlier, the Roman Caesars searched the world for unusual animals like lions and tigers and giraffes to kill in their public shows. But they could not have ever found any dinosaurs! (which had gone extinct 65,000,000 years earlier, with the larger ones having gone extinct far before that!) What is the explanation for this? Were the writers of the Dark Ages simply brilliant in foreseeing that giant creatures would eventually be found to have lived millions of years before us? It seems rather astounding to believe that! So did they just make guesses or what???


Even as a small child, I tended to look at the world from a unique and creative perspective. This perspective seems to allow me to sometimes see different possibilities in solving problems. Those commercials about "going outside the lines"? That has ALWAYS been me! It has never been a conscious effort to do so, but just a seemingly natural condition!

I'll give a few examples:


OK, yes, there are flaky ideas, too. I have always loved to drive, and several of my cars have been in nearly all 48 States! So I get to some town that I have never been before and want to have breakfast. My "rule" is to stop at the first restaurant that has a woman's name in it! Martha's Diner would do. Nancy's Restaurant, fine. NOT any Corporate restaurant chains. Why? I figure that if a woman's name is displayed on a big sign, in a small town, they SHE must feel some personal responsibility to keep her name from looking bad! So the food SHOULD be really good! It seems to have worked more than 99% of the time! Ah, if it is later in the day and I am hungry, or if I first got to a motel, I pull out the Yellow Pages and look in the Restaurants category. I look for whatever restaurant has the BIGGEST word "lasagna" displayed! I LOVE lasagna! The reasoning is that IF they went to the trouble of including really large type for the word lasagna, THEY must think it is especially good, or they feel that a lot of customers might come in for it. In either case, I take it as a clue that they may have the BEST lasagna in the area! Around 90% of the time, that seems to have worked well!

On the topic of food, I am really good at eating it but really lousy at preparing it. My mind has always tended to be actively thinking about a wide range of technical subjects, and I have thereby caused some peculiar situations. I may qualify for a Guinness Book of Records category if they have one for the most cooked TV dinner. While I was in Grad School in Physics, I was working on immensely difficult homework. On a bathroom break, feeling hungry, I lit the kitchen oven and tossed a TV dinner in nearly exactly at noon. And then I went back to work on the homework assignment. Around 3:45, another bathroom break and I noticed the smell of roast beef as I passed the kitchen! It was REALLY well done, but the baked potatoes were rather crunchy.

I never really perfected making even hamburgers, and while I was in Grad School, roughly once in every ten times of trying, I would get violently sick, enough to consider going to the Health Center! Whenever I had had hamburgers 8 or 9 times, I would get really nervous!

In my own realm, I eventually came up with my own cookbook! It was only a short paragraph!

IF a (ANY) food needed to be heated before eating, use the oven. Set it to ANY temperature between 300F and 450F, it doesn't matter. Put the food on the center rack for anywhere between 10 and 30 minutes, it doesn't matter. Eat it.

I eventually added an extra line! IF the food was in a can, like green beans or beets, poke a hole in the can first!

I NEVER got sick following that cookbook!


These assorted examples are meant to show that the "obvious" approach to a problem is not always the ONLY approach. More than that, an alternate approach might exist that more simply or easily or quickly offers a solution to the problem. It might even turn out that the "traditional" answer is not correct, and that only some alternate approach is capable of coming up with the correct answer.

For some reason, throughout my life, I have tended to see the world from such different perspectives! Combined with a College Degree in Physics, and a natural curiosity, I have always had a tendency to explore many subjects. Since these unusual approaches often occur to me, I then often find it necessary to study some new field, in order to determine if my approach might be valid and if it gives a solution that matches the traditional solution to the question. Usually, I find that they match up fine, and I had just found some unique way of confirming something that people already knew. I suppose that represents a lot of wasted effort. Friends sure seem to think so! But I think there has been value to me in doing this sort of thing. The fact that, usually, my conclusions perfectly matches things already known (by other methods) has tended to give me confidence that my approach has some validity.

THEN, when I get results that do NOT match accepted knowledge, I have to consider two possibilities. They really are right, and I made some blunder of assumption or logic or mathematics; or there might be a new insight like those included in these web-pages. As mentioned above, it would be awfully arrogant to seriously think that my solutions for these many subjects are better than those of the "experts" in those fields. Many of these pages have been included here because I just cannot figure out where my error must be, as to why my results don't match the accepted knowledge. In each case, I attempt to present the logic and arguments and assumptions that I used in arriving at my results. It seems likely to me that, in some of these specific subject areas, an expert will someday come along and explain where my error lies. No problem, there!

Are these pages all right? Not a chance! That's not my intent. I hope to offer alternate approaches for analyzing some subjects or problems. In many cases, these are problems that are generally considered enigmas. In some cases, I have already found that they DO work! In other cases, experimental confirmation of benefit has not yet been done. In yet other of these presentations, particularly the Theoretical Physics and Geophysics and Astrophysics presentations, ultimate confirmation of one theory over another may elude mankind for Centuries!

In addition, if kids and teens (who often seem to think like I do!) get confidence in knowing that there is someone else who generally thinks outside the box, wonderful! If someone else then gets confidence to "think creatively", cool! But they should also realize that the odds are that most of the time they will be wasting their time in doing thinking that lots of people before them have already thought through! And that dreaming things up can be of no value, UNLESS you then RESEARCH existing information to see whether there is any possibility that you might be right!


NOW, there is a caution that MUST be applied whenever you try to use logic to solve any situation! IF you need to rely on any information from any other source (specifically the Internet) you MUST somehow confirm that it is actually true and correct! Sadly, there are millions of web-site, especially blogs, which APPEAR to present actual facts but which instead express the OPINIONS of the owner of the web-site or blog. To use such information as a starting point will just get you really bad conclusions. There are endless numbers of such examples. I happened to discover that there were no actually correct explanations for how a toy gyroscope works (so I made a web-page on that subject). Ditto for why the sky is blue, or why people are not 12 feet tall, or other stuff like that. There are some web-sites that are very bizarre but which have gotten such great acceptance that I don't see any way to actually prove they are wrong! Such as the people who actually think the Earth is (rapidly) growing in size, or those who have weird ideas of how and why airplanes can fly!


I can mention another ancient-history anecdote related to this. When I was a High School Freshman, I was required to read a short story about a John Colter. He was certainly a real and amazing person, who was part of the Lewis and Clark Expedition that first explored the American West around 1805. But he chose to separate from the group and was eventually assumed dead, only to show up years later alive. HE WAS ALONE for those years! Certainly, he must have had many difficult experiences in finding ways to survive. There were a couple Tribes of Indians that certainly would have tortured and killed him if they could have.

However, the story that we read described how Colter was chased by Indians such that he had to run continuously for fifty miles (and faster than any Indian brave could run to catch him) and that another time where he got a hollow reed to be able to breathe while underwater in a river and that he stayed underwater for over 24 hours straight! The story described countless super-human feats in an endless list of astounding experiences that Colter had done.

Even as a young kid, maybe I was already becoming a good scientist! I was VERY suspicious about the accuracy of such unbelievable accomplishments! MAYBE he could have actually done ONE such feat that defies credibility. For a white man to outrun dozens of Indian Braves seemed pretty amazing to me. For him to have run continuously for fifty miles (TWO consecutive Marathon races!) seemed hard to believe, too. To try to get sufficient air IN and OUT through a small hollow reed for 24 hours straight seemed similarly amazing. I had used a snorkel tube, much larger diameter, and I knew how much extra effort there was in breathing, AND that less air/oxygen was able to enter the lungs. So I thought about the PROOF of these many things. THERE IS NONE! All those stories were provided by John Colter himself, as there were no other human witnesses. Even at that young age, I was tempted to wonder if Colter might have "wildly exaggerated"! If so, it apparently actually worked, because he is famous and his book apparently sold pretty well. Much of his fame may have come from his participation in the famous Lewis and Clark Expedition, but still, he survived and apparently accomplished those many things. No one today seemed to have ever doubted how precisely accurate his stories were. As a scientist, and especially as a Physicist, I would now discard virtually all those incredible stories of Colter, at least in the Herculaen form in which he presented himself. Yes, there probably were aspects of truth in most or all of his stories. He probably WAS chased by some Indians, and may used a reed while underwater for a few minutes. Separate from such claims, he was still a very impressive person, as attested by many others in the Lewis and Clark expedition, and others who knew him. He probably didn't actually need to do all that exaggeration! He would still have been forever famous.

As an analytical person, I notice something else that might have significance. Nearly every city in Wyoming was named after some early explorer, and in most other Western States as well. There are very few TOWNS named Colter, and they seem to all be rather small. If he really was the incredible hero that he presented himself to be, wouldn't enough people have believed him to WANT to name lots of big cities after him?


Not-so-ancient-history example that is similar: Maybe six years ago, a man e-mailed me regarding some of my web-pages. He started out announcing that he was a Nuclear Physicist upon whom NASA heavily depends. But then when he started out "explaining to me" a wide assortment of "corrections and improvements" for my web-pages (my Degree was in Nuclear Physics), I was mystified regarding why he often referred to wrong ideas, wrong logic, and wrong facts! The conversation continued for several months, where there were often such peculiar statements. But since he had introduced himself as a Professor of Physics, how could I seriously question such things? But he would always have the most extreme boasts! He IS the head of the Boy Scouts for the State of Texas! He enabled NASA to be able to design the Apollo Moon rocket! He ran dozens of massive businesses, each of which accomplished astounding things! The President of the United States often called him for guidance on many things! I believe he told me the Pope did as well. He also once described an event that I could identify as having happened around 1933, where he was central! I started to really wonder about the credibility of all the incredible things he constantly bragged about, since I did not see how he could be describing an event from 70 years earlier where he was allegedly already a prominent adult!

As a College Professor, I am aware that one's time is pretty occupied! How did he have time to LEAD Troops of Boy Scouts on extensive wilderness hikes, and run all those businesses, and all the rest? So I eventually used the College e-mail address he always used to identify the College. First, it was NOT a major College but rather a Community College. The Dean I talked to told me that they did not even HAVE a Physics Professor! And when given the man's name, it took him a while to identify him! It turned out that the guy was a MAINTENANCE MAN, who apparently had been in trouble for harassing some of their students! The Dean assured me that the guy NEVER had been a Professor of anything, and that he was extremely old. Since I had tended to believe the claim of being the College Professor because his e-mail was FROM a College system and he had given himself a Title, the Dean was very surprised about that. He even said that the guy had not even had any authority or permission to even USE the e-mail system. The Dean apologized to me and assured me that I would not be further bothered by that man.

It would appear that the man was somewhat delusional regarding his own importance, and he never seemed to resist making outrageous claims regarding is capabilities and accomplishments. According to that Dean, the man had been homeless until that Community College had hired him as a part-time Maintenance man as an act of charity.

You may have noticed that fishermen tend to describe huge fish they caught, men describe the movie starlets they have dated, etc. It seems to be part of human nature to exaggerate as much as can be gotten away with! For a Physicist, that is frustrating! In order to build any credible accurate data base, facts and events need to be trusted, reliable and confirmed by external sources! When that confirmation does not exist, how can you know that a John Colter did not exaggerate?


I hope you see the point of this. If someone TELLS you that the Earth is round, or flat, do you really KNOW if they are telling you the truth? If someone tells you that cigarettes are bad for you, or red meat, or Cyclamates, or atmospheric pollution, or that there is Global Warming, is it actually the truth, or is it just that person's opinion? As a scientist, it is centrally important to KNOW which of these is true or likely. Otherwise, you cannot build any logic, and get any useful conclusions. THAT is what science actually is!


A central part of my life has always been to somehow try to improve my little corner of the Universe. As one person, it has always seemed daunting to touch any but a few lives.

Shortly after college, and a Degree in Nuclear Physics, I wound up living in a hundred-year-old farmhouse that had been abandoned for about 7 years. It had no insulation and 11 major rooms, in a NASTY climate of northern Indiana. After getting large Propane bills, for heating only part of the first floor of that house, I designed a woodstove with all the sophistication that a creative Physicist could manage. I never wanted to be in that business or any business. My intent was to make a grand total of ONE woodburner! I expected that my life work would involve doing research in some lab somewhere.

After the woodstove worked so well that I heated the entire large three-story farmhouse while using a total of one gallon of Propane during an entire winter (and that was for kitchen cooking), word got out. I eventually built a few, just to get people to leave me alone, and sold them at exactly what the materials cost me, $365.08. When those people told their friends, I eventually realized that I was in business. Within a year, I was 1600 units behind on production!

I didn't really enjoy being in business, but I knew that I was enhancing the lives of all the families that got them, and I thought that maybe that's what I was born to do. My company made a BUNCH of them, well over 25,000!

That motivation, and my creativity and my Physics background, combined with a financial freedom (because of the stoves) to explore such areas, allowed me to pursue many projects and therefore learn about many subjects. Many more ideas had occurred to me over the years, but I just have little interest pursuing anything that does not clearly have potential benefit to society, to Nature, or to God in some way. (A few of the projects described in my Public Service lists are a little borderline on this, but there were many other projects that had even less redeeming value, and I basically dismissed them. They tended to be things that would likely make lots of money, with that as their only goal.)

I was saved as a Christian when I was 19. It was an astounding and unexpected experience, which occurred while I was calmly sitting in a movie theater with my girl-friend watching the trailers before the movie began. Words could never express that incredible experience. After it happened, I turned to my girl and told her that we needed to leave so that I could find a Church somewhere to get Baptized. (I did not then understand very much about Christianity and Churches!) She had no clue of what I was talking about, and she told me how much she had looked forward to seeing that movie. So we stayed, but I didn't even notice the movie as I was so astounded by the amazing thing which had just happened to me! Ever since then, my religion has been important to me. I became a Pastor of a tiny non-denominational Christian Church in 1996. For the record, Non-Denominational does NOT mean that we do not believe things or have weird ideas, but rather that we believe ONLY a "Core Christianity" which is solidly based on things the Bible actually says or clearly implies. In other words, a Non-Denominational Church does NOT express opinions on whether Immersion Baptism is REQUIRED, or Pouring Baptism, or Sprinkling Baptism, or of Trine (triple) Baptism, bot only that Christian Baptism is required.

I soon realized that my unique set of motivations and talents would allow me to be an Instrument in His Work, by creating the BELIEVE site on the InterNet. (I had previously created a smaller version of it, that fit on a floppy disk, to give to anyone who wanted it. In 1994, I tried to give it to Willow Creek Community Church to get them to make 22,000 duplicate diskettes [which would not have been terribly expensive], so they could be FIVEN to all their Congregation members as a Christmas present that year! How often does a Church GIVE Christmas presents to its Congregation? Unfortunately, Bill Hybels and his staff did not see value in what I proposed. But I still have great respect for them!)

It took me about 2.5 years of more than full-time effort to assemble and initially program the entire BELIEVE structure. Having done all that, my hopes were modest. My ultimate hope was that a SINGLE person found enough value from BELIEVE to either renew his/her own Christianity or to become a Christian. THAT would have made it all worth while!

I had long been distressed by the bias of information presented by many of the Churches that I was aware of. Each one seems to be so terrified that someone would leave their Church and go somewhere else, they tend to say bad things about all competing organizations (and their beliefs). I truly hope their motivation was other than the income in the Collection Plate, but I worry about that.

As a result, I went to extreme effort to select the BELIEVE presentations to be informative, honest, accurate, complete, and as unbiased as possible.

From 1992 through early 1997, I made duplicate BELIEVE diskettes a few at a time and simply handed them out to various people that seemed to potentially be interested in its contents. During those four years time, I handed out a total of around 400 diskettes. I even gave a few to a couple Cops!

I signed up for a Free Trial of AOL in January 1997, as I had no idea what the Internet then was! AOL provided 2 megabytes of space for a person to upload personal notes or pictures or whatever. I didn't have anything to upload, but it occurred to me that the BELIEVE floppy diskette program fit on a 1.44 Megabyte floppy disk, so I uploaded it. In the first month, around 400 people accessed that file. As many people in one month as I had handed out in the previous four years! Seemed interesting!

So I learned a bunch about the Internet and making web-pages. I never "promoted" the BELIEVE site in any way, no advertising, no exchanging links, no accepting banner ads, nothing. It's really hard to logically see how 19,000,000 people visited BELIEVE in 2006 and 23,000,000 people visited BELIEVE in 2007! How did they find it? (Mostly through search engines, but I had NEVER tried to get Yahoo or Google or the others to even list BELIEVE! My personal theory is that I was simply supposed to create the web-site, and then the Holy Spirit would (somehow) get people to find it! It seems to be working!

This will certainly be an ongoing activity for the rest of my life, and it is a joy! As BELIEVE is getting better known (now about 100,000 hits each day), the responsibility feels even greater.


Around 1998 or 1999, someone in ABC News gave me the personal e-mail address of Peter Jennings, the Anchor of the Nightly News. I would rarely bother Peter, but occasionally there was some aspect of Physics or logic that I thought might be useful to him for his program. He was always remarkably pleasant, but as such a busy person, generally very brief when he responded.

I suspect that he "tolerated" my occasional e-mails, and occasionally used some fact or insight in his program, always then sending me an e-mail to thank me. That whole situation seemed to change late in 2001.

In the Fall of 2001, a few weeks after 9/11, there were a number of letters mailed with Anthrax powder in them. When it was clear that no one seemed to be able to locate the source, a possibility occurred to me. In some way, the mailer had to seal the envelope. If he licked it, then DNA from his saliva would be in the glue that dried to seal the envelope. Due to the great danger of the powder, that seemed unlikely. If he did NOT lick it , then he needed to use a sponge or some other method to wet the glue. For a few seconds, that wet glue was exposed to the air in the room he was in. It is well established that in the air around every person (including you right now!) there are microscopic scalp and skin particles suspended in the air. Each of those tiny particles contains your DNA. I thought that during those few seconds that the glue was wet, maybe one or more such scalp or skin particles had fallen from the air and got stuck in the glue. In either case, an extreme microscopic analysis of the glue might then provide some DNA of the unique person who sent the letters. I mentioned this to Peter Jennings, and he thought it was an interesting thought. In his position, he was able to immediately call the FBI to ask if they had done such testing. They had not! But during the next few hours, they apparently did, and they reported their findings to Peter, since he was the one to alert them to the possibility. The FBI told Peter that they did not find any scalp or skin cells embedded in the glue. Peter quickly informed me, and it was clear that he was really feeling good about having alerted the FBI to a concept that they had not even thought about. From then on, Peter seemed to take my e-mails as extremely important and valuable! I believe the FBI, of course, but it seems amazing that there were NOT EVEN ONE such microscopic particle anywhere in the glue, because there are so many millions of such particles constantly in the air around each person that I would think that there should have been many thousands of possible cells, all too small to see with the naked eye.

But in any case, when Peter reported the destruction of the Shuttle, and that NASA was sending thousands of people to Texas and Louisiana to investigate the parts they could find, I suggested to Peter that the actual destruction certainly began several minutes earlier, when the Shuttle was still over the Pacific and then over California and Arizona. I suggested that the most IMPORTANT debris might be found out there. A few minutes later, Peter stated that on the live news, and an hour later, NASA was sending crews out to California and Arizona!

There were other such interactions with Peter, most of which were regarding far less important facts or logic or science. Sometimes I would see some ABC Reporter make an inaccurate scientific statement, and I would mention the slight flaw to Peter. I hate to think how he confronted that Reporter, because Peter liked to pursue perfection, but very shortly, either a segment or a statement would add the necessary clarifying science.

I truly miss Peter, as he was a remarkable man, not just as a celebrity but as a human being.


Sometimes, it is very frustrating to try to do good things for others! In June 2000, I happened to notice that OVER 300 SPIKES had completely come out of a two-block stretch of railroad through the middle of Thornton, Illinois. I thought that was frightening, as those spikes are critically important in keeping the rails exactly in the necessary places so a train would not derail. But NO ONE in the Village government or in the Railroad management or in around a dozen governmental Agencies ever showed the slightest interest! In 2007, I did another and more accurate count and discovered that there were 900 spikes that were completely missing and another 700 spikes that were at least 3" loose. Sixteen hundred previous secure spikes were not doing anything now! There has been very little keeping those rails in place, and NO ONE has ever even made any attempt to repair it by driving in any new spikes in those EIGHT YEARS!

It is as though everyone was WAITING for some disastrous northbound train derailment sent hundred ton railroad cars through around 20 homes that would certainly have been crushed! Even the News media seemed to have remarkably little interest! In June 2007, I sent an e-mail alerting the CBS TV station in Chicago about this (19 miles away). They finally sent me an e-mail back SEVEN MONTHS LATER in February 2008. And would they send a news crew out that 19 miles into a suburb? No! They told ME to take a bunch of photographs and send them in to their Station! It appears that UNTIL there is a disaster which occurs, even the News Media has virtually no interest!

There was yet another amusing anecdote from my attempts to keep some people from dying. In late 2008, a Reporter from a different Chicago TV station finally responded to my concerns of 2007 to them. He also never bothered to actually come out to LOOK at the incredible danger which existed. But he DID make a phone call to the railroad that someone was concerned, and apparently he implied that the TV station was considering sending a crew out to videotape the tracks. Apparently, that was sufficient! THAT EVENING, there were apparently MANY CREWS who showed up who worked on the tracks throughout that night! They did not actually do any good quality repairs, but they did pound in all the spikes which would have looked so dangerous to the public in a TV news report! And a few months later, in early December 2008, nearly ten years after I had started to try to warn about this danger, more thorough crews spent several days replacing 196 rotten ties and adding some new spikes. There are still hundreds of spikes which have again started lifting out, but I suspect it is moderately safe for a while!

Hurricane Katrina also demonstrated that, where DOZENS of knowledgeable researchers had tried to alert the New Orleans government and the Louisiana government of tremendous dangers (including some notes from me in 2003 and 2004) with absolutely no response or interest. It was only after Katrina actually killed a lot of people that anyone seemed to care! Frustrating! So I can only wait for WHEN a bunch of derailed 200,000 pound railroad cars go roaring through a neighborhood on the other side of town. I really feel a RESPONSIBILITY to try to save those people's lives, but in over 8 years of trying, I certainly have not gotten anywhere!

In fact, a very high Executive in the US government bureaucracy THREATENED ME when I tried to alert him to the missing spikes danger (in 2007). On the phone, he wanted to know my exact street address so he could have me arrested! He demanded that I "turn myself in" for having been within 120 feet of the railway! How did he get his job? If what he said was actually true, then around 30 entire houses in this one small Village are all in constant violation, as the entire BUILDINGS are within 120 feet of the tracks! This man is the SUPERVISOR of the entire REGION around CHICAGO regarding Railway Safety! How could he be so incompetent as to not even know what the Laws are (actually TWELVE feet, which I had already known and had not violated)?

And when a Citizen (me) called him to try to alert to a SEVEN YEAR danger, his immediate response was to defend the railroad and insist on having me arrested? He ANNOUNCED to me that EVERY WEEK those tracks were CAREFULLY INSPECTED! Wow! If such Inspectors could not see ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED missing or bad spikes in just a TWO-BLOCK LONG stretch of tracks through the middle of a town, I can only guess that the Inspectors must have White Canes and Seeing-Eye Dogs! (I did NOT turn myself in for arrest, although that might have been amusing enough that the Chicago TV stations might have actually THEN shown some interest!) (Footnote to this: In the first week of December 2008, work crews spent about two days in doing the better repairs, replacing those 196 railroad ties, which had all rotted out to where spikes could not stick in them anyway. So at least the safety issue for those families is now somewhat solved.)


Pitch for getting an education in Physics! People think that such an education is only for dorks who cannot do anything else in life. Here are some examples of where I was able to benefit from my Physics education in "real life".

I doubt if I had ever seen a pool table before I was 17 and started attending the University of Chicago. One of the Professors had a habit of using billiard balls as visual examples in describing how atoms and molecules bounced off each other and other such things. Since I commuted to classes, there were times when I had free time on campus and another Physics student took me to a pool table in the basement of a dorm building. Between what the Physics Professor had described and his suggestions, I got to be a fairly good pool player quite quickly. One day, a new guy showed up and asked if I wanted to play a game. He had to explain the rules of Straight Pool (14.1 continuous) to me, and he asked if I wanted to break. Being young and stupid, I quickly accepted, but was not able to call any shot to get a point. He then sank around 95 balls (score now 95-0) before I had another chance to shoot. I called and sank two, before it was his turn again and he then sank the remaining 55 to win 150-2. It was humiliating! But he apparently saw some potential in my game. He showed up again the next week and I was able to score around 25 that time. He then chose to TEACH me an immense number of very advanced things in pool, and he was giving me more "homework" than the Physics Professors were! Here is an example: I would be required to drop a one-inch square piece of white paper on the table BEFORE each shot, and the cue ball was required to touch that tiny area AFTER each shot. It FORCED me to do a very thorough analysis of the shot, which turned out to probably be the most important part of pool that I ever learned! Here is another lesson: He pointed out that the cue ball is 1/8" larger in diameter than any of the other balls on the table. He then pointed out that the cushions were at a height that was exactly half the diameter of the numbered-balls height. He explained that assured that those balls would therefore NOT ever be launched from the table. But he then pointed out that because the cue ball is larger, it IS possible for it to get launched off the table. He then impressively demonstrated! He stood at the head of the table, and fired the cue ball down to the cushion at the foot of the table, while casually raising his left hand onto his left shoulder. When the ball hit the foot cushion, it got launched back toward him and impressively plopped into his waiting hand. He told me that by the following week, I had to be able to show that to him! (I did!)

The point was mostly that the shooter can have immense control over what happens on a pool table! He also mentioned that he occasionally "accidentally" had a cue ball fly past the ear of a jerk opponent. The opponent never knew that that was intentional, or probably even that it was possible!

There are many people who spend three or six hours every day in bars and pool halls practicing. They become extremely good shotmakers. But in my lifetime, it has been very rare that any of them could beat me! Even though it was sometimes a year since I had played! How could that be? Remember the white paper? Whenever it was my shot, BEFORE I would shoot I would evaluate whether I could make a shot or not, and in either case, I would determine EXACTLY where I wanted the cue ball to end up. It it was going to be a made shot, the cue ball would be lined up for an even easier second shot! I could then run a number of balls. But if it was a shot that I did not believe I was going to make it (due to lack of practice) I would always make sure that the cue ball wound up in some HORRIBLE location, like behind some obstructing ball and five feet away from any easy shot! At least 50 opponents complained that I was the luckiest player they had ever seen, where they NEVER got any good clear shot! THEY always thought it was luck! I would just smile! They clearly had no idea that there was virtually no chance that they could win the game!

If I would enter a bar that had pool tables, I would usually put a quarter on the table, the indication that I wanted a game. I would then play until I lost, which was often until the bar closed. EVERYONE wanted to have their chance at this incredibly lucky guy! And most of them were FAR better shotmakers than me because they practiced all day every day. So I always knew that I could not afford to ever let them have an open shot. Every once in a while, I would make a mistake or the opponent sank shots on an opening break where he would win. Then I would not play any more that day! Since none of those opponents knew the Physics behind all pool shots, it was really an extremely unfair situation. But all their egos were so big from their knowledge that they could make any shot always made them think they were going to win. By the way, I have never believed in gambling, so none of those games ever had any money riding on them.

A good Physics education enabled me to win many thousands of pool games in my life. Against guys who KNEW that they could not lose! A few women as well. One particular woman was clearly an extremely good shotmaker. Her friend had told me that NO man had beaten her in more than two years! That comment made me be even MORE careful. I would make a shot or two, and then the cue ball would roll into some terrible place, where it was then her shot! Over and over and over! After she lost five games in a row, she was becoming physically angry and her game went downhill. A week later, she showed up at the same bar again and came up smiling and linked arms with me! I think she had figured out that there were things about pool that I might be willing to teach her! (but I didn't, as it would have required too much Physics!)

Different situation: Driving back from Upstate New York to Chicago, on the Michigan Interstate, at around 2am during winter. I was driving around 80 mph, and there was no traffic whatever. I happened to notice a mirror-like reflection in the road ahead, and so I wondered if there might be any black ice forming. I lightly touched the brake pedal and saw the speedometer instantly drop to zero, with no stopping effect on the car at all. I realized that I had a very serious problem, as I was on absolutely glare ice! The car very gradually rotated so I was soon sliding straight sideways. This was REALLY scary, as if I would encounter a dry patch of pavement, the car could instantly start rolling over and over and over! So I knew that I needed to get the car pointed forward again. Physics saved me that night! I knew that there were two DIFFERENT coefficients of friction, one Static and one Dynamic and that there were rarely the same. After a few seconds, I realized that I needed to Apply the Parking Brake, which then locked up the REAR wheels, while still allowing the front wheels to possibly rotate. I tried to steer the front wheels so that they had a chance to start slightly rotating, which they apparently gradually did. The difference between the coefficients of friction of the front and rear tires then gradually caused the car to turn back the other way, where the headlights were again somewhat pointed forward! I knew that I could NOT use the brake pedal, because that would again allow it to spin without any control, but I steered to try to keep the headlights forward as the car very slowly lost some speed. Over a distance of just over a mile, the car continued to slide that way, but where I actually had some limited ability to aim it, to keep it on the pavement. I finally got down to around 20 mph, and released the parking brake and then drove for several miles at that speed. I was pretty scared, and I fully realized what I had just managed to avoid! I soon encountered an area where several dozen cars and semis had lost control and were in various ditches, in some seemingly serious accidents. State Police were already starting to arrive so they didn't need me. I fully believe that if it were not for Physics, I would have certainly been another one of those terrible accidents, one that might have occurred at 80 mph. Thank you, Professors!

See how a Physics education can be useful in normal living?


Future

I see the possibilities of other things on the future horizon. Several of the inventions presented are either in production or moving toward that. Several others await my having the time to put more time and effort into researching them. If one or more of them become newsworthy, I hope that it might be possible to find a way to spread the Word of a family values (Christian) approach to life (NOT necessarily strict adherence to the Faith as presented by some Church), through the media coverage of such an operation. It seems to me that it could be nice for people to know of business ventures that are not exclusively out to squeeze every possible dollar out! Maybe for encouragement to many other people who would want to have similar motives!

Three recent (2005) "projects" might do some good. The one is a totally free method of measuring "average body density" to a precision of better than one part in a thousand, in a fun and simple two-minute activity! I hope that if kids find this a fun activity, where they do it each week, they might have an extremely precise way of monitoring the Bodyfat Percentage, such that Childhood Obesity (and Adult Obesity, too) might be reduced. The unique part of that is that the kid might have a "game-like competitive motivation" to become more aware of junk foods and exercise.

The second is a new and rather simple type of water pump, which is far more efficient than existing pumps and also does not require any electric motor to run it. My hope is that an American family might be willing to spend $50 for local materials to build such a pump, and then another $50 to ship the pump to some remote village in a Third World country which desperately needs safe drinking water. My hope is to completely bypass the Military-Industrial-Complex, and have individual American families "save the lives" of a whole village of desperate people.

Americans are very generous people. Many make donations of $100 to the Red Cross or the main Charities all the time. But then we hear that the Red Cross decided to spend hundreds of millions of the 9/11/01 donations to buy themselves new computers and office equipment!

I was very disillusioned regarding giant Charities around 1984. A young woman I was then dating had a photograph on her refrigerator door, of a very cute little girl. She proudly described to me how she sent in around $20 every month for her (even though she could NOT afford to do that as it reduced the amount of food she could buy for herself and her small child.) The child's name was shown and also the country in Africa where she lived. Also, she received letters from that child, one of which was also then on the refrigerator. As a scientist, I was mystified as to how a very young girl in Africa who had never attended any school had had the ability to compose an impressive letter (in English!), but I never brought that up! As it happened, I was still a world-class volleyball player, and nearly every weekend I was on various volleyball teams that traveled to play in Tournaments all over the northern Midwest. So we would regularly show up at people's apartments extremely early in the morning, for the drive to where the tournament would be. While the player was still waking up and getting ready, I happened to notice on TWO different refrigerators, the EXACT SAME photo of the same very cute little girl that my girl friend had on her refrigerator! But the name was different and so was the country! However, the LETTER was EXACTLY the same, word for word, as the letter on my girl friend's refrigerator. At first, I assumed that I was wrong, that they were just SIMILAR photos and letters, so I memorized some aspects of them and checked when I got back to my girl friend's apartment. No. They WERE the EXACT SAME photo and letter. It was total deception! Each of those women really believed that they were sending money that they really could not afford to send, to support a specific cute girl. I never had the heart to tell any of them about that deception, but MY attitude toward giving to such Charities took a really dark turn!

That deception continues to this day! That Charity has now changed its name to something different, which tends to make me a little suspicious, but they still brag about helping such kids for over 70 years.

But consider the following, the next time you watch such heart-rending TV commercials. Countless DIFFERENT sources talk about spme countries having extreme poverty in that their average daily survival relies on just TWO DOLLARS PER DAY. Remember that when you see those extremely effective child commercials which assure you that YOU WILL SAVE ONE CHILD with your $19 each month (or 60 cents per day). Are you starting to see the deception? But that same organization was one which got a lot of negative publicity regarding the fact that THREE-FOURTHS of the money they receive from people like you goes to pay for those many very expensive TV commercials and for their Executives salaries of many millions of dollars each. (That MIGHT be the reason that they changed the name of their organization, to try to get away from those facts of their terrible efficiency of using your money.) But if YOU are only sending in 60 cents per day for the one child, and they use 3/4 of that to make impressive TV commercials and air them many times every day, and they certainly have plenty of multi-million-dollar Executives, that gets the amount that actually is left for "your child" to only be about 15 cents per day. Now if TWO DOLLARS is considered not enough for many of the world's people to live on each day, then the promoters really should be expected to explain how the 15 cents per day that YOU provide is supposed to be providing all the amazing things that the TV commercials claim? The commercials are quite impressive, talking about an abundance of food, of pure water, of now being able to attend school and be prospering there, and more. And they apparently rely on the fact that few viewers see the ridiculous lack of logic in their claims, which are certainly outright lies. But they get away with it because viewers are so moved by the sad sights in the commercials as well as the amazingly cute kid, who happens to be wearing brand new, perfect clothing, and apparently no regulatory organization wants to go to the trouble of looking into the total deception they have been doing for at least 40 years. Their Lawyers probably have assured them that as long as they help A FEW children, they probably cannot be sued. But NO VIEWER would send in that $19 each month if they actually knew that they were only one of a HUNDRED people sending in money for that one single (very lucky) kid!


I am trying to provide a way that an American family might PRECISELY KNOW where their dollars are going! THAT FAMILY identifies a needy village, and THEY write the address on the box! Seems to me that represents a 100% efficiency of the donation!

My hope is that if even just 1% of American families choose to do this, which is around 700,000 families, they might then provide around 700,000 remote villages with life-saving safe drinking water! And NO ONE would be out more than around $100! I guess we will see if anyone chooses to actually do this, or whether it is actually doable. Many businesspeople insist to me that it will not work, and they give lots of reasons, usually involving government, military, or business corruption somewhere along the line. Maybe they are right! But it seems to me that if even ONE pump actually gets through to ONE remote village, the effort will be worth trying. The alternative is the status quo, of allowing countless millions of people to have horrible diseases due to having to drink sewage water, and all the rest.

The third recent invention is a simple, easy and inexpensive method by which any family on Earth can entirely heat their home and provide domestic hot water, without needing ANY fossil fuels to burn! If a lot of people would choose to use the (free) plans I provide, quite a substantial reduction of Global Warming effects might be achieved, almost immediately. In addition, all those homeowners would no longer have any heating bills either for their house or for their hot water!


There are at least a dozen more projects that have not yet been included in the Public Service pages. Hey, there's only one of me! And, as long as BELIEVE exists, and is supported financially by my projects so it can continue (forever???), I am one happy camper! (And NO, I do NOT encourage or want "charitable donations" for such things, and prefer that people "give generously" to their local Church or Charities [or to make a pump!])


It now seems possible to me that one person MIGHT be able to make a difference sometimes. I doubt that the political and business establishments would seriously consider some of these Public Service projects right now. My intent was just that, if and when they ever get to considering solutions to some problems decades from now, they might have an additional perspective available to them. For example, the panic that is certain to follow the media publicity regarding the upcoming permanent contamination of all of South Florida's community water sources, might be less of a panic if people realize that someone has calmly thought about and analyzed the problem years earlier.

Regarding BELIEVE, I feel strongly that any Instrument of the Lord should remain in the background, if possible, to allow the Glory of His Word to have the stage. That's why I didn't make a big production of who I am in the BELIEVE web-site.

I also hope that this text doesn't make it sound like I think I'm anyone unusually important. We're all the same, really, we just have different talents or skills, that's all. It seems that I have just put mine out on the table! Kind of scary!

And, if you have tried to work your way through any of my presentations, you already know that I have extreme limitations regarding compositional and literary skills! I hear endless criticisms about that, and all I can say is that I do the best I can, to present these assorted concepts.


Finally, I am potentially interested in either help or suggestions regarding some things! The Domain home page notes that a talented Electronics experimenter might be able to complete several projects, such as the Rape Prevention system or the Electronic Anesthesia, which my electronics skills sadly fall short of accomplishing.

There are three other specific concepts that might seem interesting to try to pursue. These three do not clearly benefit either society or the environment or the Lord, though, they just seem intriguing!

Pretty bored, huh? Sorry!

C Johnson



Link to the Public Services Home Page

http://mb-soft.com/index.html



Link to the Public Services Main Menu

http://mb-soft.com/index.html



E-mail to: Public4@mb-soft.com