Something is not right here

Further and further into "Curiouser and Curiouser", there seems to be some paths which are already made through the mountains of data. I suppose that it really is the fact that data is easy, coherent answers are a whole other animal. Here is the link to the code.

Also I am building kdeedu from source and making some extensions, just because I can. It is the bundle that contains kstars and I really like the interface, but it isn't exactly what I want. It doesn't have enough "trek" in it. It seems so cold and functional, without a way to make it more virtual and presentable, like integration with Google moon perhaps or even export real data to blender as models. IDK, needs some extra Beetlejuice perhaps, or a way to play music that matches the atmosphere. I want to hear "Day Oh, Day ay ay OH, Daylight come and me wanna go home, ...." when I align to Betelgeuse. Seriously, sound and animation might be a way to present more information in less space. Now I am thinking python interface between this and my zim wiki to act as a multiplexer or pipeline between this and my graphing and equation manager.

Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80004005' [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (Connect()).]SQL Server does not exist or access denied. /dr1/connection.js, line 10

The first obstacle to actually getting the data. I am not sure that I really need to know the javascript file name and code line and doesn't it know whether it exists or not? Seems to be one of those self-aware issues.

default_url='' with command line: ./ -q "select top 2 ra,dec from star">queryhtml.html

And it gave me this in CSV and not HTML.

ra,dec 249.98567442,-0.03138817 249.98564831,-0.08235547

ra,dec 249.98567442,-0.03138817 249.98564831,-0.08235547

I had a strange feeling that somebody is going to announce an answer to the "dark matter" catch all catch phrase. I would guess that this will bring somebody out of the woodwork. It is possible to see the effects of some people without any knowledge of their existence. I often look at a computer design and realize that I know the engineer that created it. Like a DaVinci painting, the true artist has a style that is reflected in their work. There are answers already for parts of the puzzle, I would guess that somebody is busy doing some simulations as I write to give some general visual expression and coherence of the concept. I would guess that it will be less than a month.

Based on some preliminary calculation and rough analysis, it seems that something is very wrong with the concept of looking back at the "big bang" and stating that remote galaxies are located in time near the beginning of the universe. It does depend on the expansion, the scale of the universe, the velocities, and numerous dependent facts, but there is something strange about this that does not compute and it isn't a misunderstanding about space-time.

This may not be the best way to represent the image, but there are so many factors involved that an accurate model in 2 or even 4 dimensions would give no great insight. The zone between the light cone and the present is the universe as it actually exists and that is quite a bit different than what is observed.

Relativity of relationships in space as well as light time can be a real bear to portray because it is infinite and factorial. By changing perspective, every fact in the universe is changed. It would seem that the idea that it is even possible to observe the events as proposed is paradoxical. This is nothing new, as much of physics can appear to be paradoxical without complete understanding of the underlying process. The topology of 4 dimensional space does not follow the same rules as 3 space and though some things would seem to be paradoxical under cursory analysis, they represent real repeatable and measurable process and thus are not excluded. They may be excluded as inconsistent with one method, it is not proved that methods are not a subset of more convolute process.

There are some deeper understandings to be had in this analysis as it relates to the nature of light itself and how it is generated or arises. The existence of a characteristic spectrum of Hydrogen would most certainly depend on the existence of Hydrogen. Thus, it would be absurd to say that one was looking back beyond the origin of atomic matter using the spectrum of Hydrogen as a landmark, for example.

It does supply some considerations about what would be characteristic of a model that conformed to a point origin and the beginnings of atomic matter as well as its structure and consistency. I find several serious logical flaws in the boom, then magic approach. If matter and anti-matter were equally likely as is proposed, then how exactly does the isolation of positive and negative charge lead to such an even distribution of protons and electrons? It seems to me that too many complications are being glossed over as magic.

It would seem that the process and explanation is very much like I would expect if Archimedes were asked to explain the origins of life. He might have been very intelligent, but you can't knit a CPU from off the shelf yarn, it requires that special stuff with the magic smoke in it. IMHO some critical pieces are missing or the explanation has too many turtles and too few high notes.


Automated Intelligence

Automated Intelligence
Auftrag der unendlichen LOL katzen