Written by Charles Douglas Wehner

Continued from page 1

Sorepparttar hand of a child can spin a spinning-top (the energy required is small). However, canrepparttar 127673 hand of a child putrepparttar 127674 Universe into orbit around that spinnin-top, and at several times or several hundred times per second?

Spin-orbit duality breaks down somewhere.

One can userepparttar 127675 "Law of Conservation of Energy" to avoid such absurd notions as a child settingrepparttar 127676 Universe in motion. However, we must consider RELATIVITY.

Newtonian mechanics says that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Einstein's relativity says that energy can be destroyed. If there is MATTER, such as an ELECTRON, it has REST-MASS. Here we must already say "AT rest - RELATIVE to what"? However, we will leave this point unanswered, because this article is very general.

According to Relativity, a tiny increase in speed from rest of that electron will give it energy HALF M (V squared), where M isrepparttar 127677 rest-mass. This energy will be destroyed by being incorporated intorepparttar 127678 mass ofrepparttar 127679 electron. So using M2 (C squared), we can compute M2.

Asrepparttar 127680 electron goes faster, by an identical tiny increase in speed, its energy is HALF (M+M2) (V squared), then HALF (M+M2+M3) (V squared) and so on.

Whenrepparttar 127681 Moon is travelling at 65 thousand miles per hour, this compares with light travelling at 669,600,000 miles per hour, approximately.

Light travels therefore at a speed about TEN THOUSAND times faster thanrepparttar 127682 Moon.

The change in mass is proportional to C-squared, just asrepparttar 127683 energy of motion is proportional to V-squared. So speeds of one ten-thousandth of that of light (four places) will deliver energy equations that are accurate to EIGHT.

It would be nonsense, however, to use my antigravity equations to TWENTY places of decimals and to expect all places to be valid.

We see relativity creeping in, and upsettingrepparttar 127684 mathematics - but inrepparttar 127685 Earth-Moon system it is still imperceptible. That is why I usedrepparttar 127686 "Law of Conservation of Energy" to deriverepparttar 127687 results -repparttar 127688 errors are still small.

The Moon is a quarter of a million miles away from Earth. So is we multiply this by ten thousand we get TWO-AND-A-HALF THOUSAND-MILLION miles. This is about 26.8 Astronomical Units. At this point,repparttar 127689 orbital velocity is similar torepparttar 127690 speed of light, and Einstein says thatrepparttar 127691 mathematics breaks down.

So if we considerrepparttar 127692 hand of a child spinning a top, and INSIST onrepparttar 127693 conservation of energy, we must adjustrepparttar 127694 expression HALF M (V-squared) as we move away fromrepparttar 127695 child's top.

Eitherrepparttar 127696 mass M of bodies must be adjusted to become less and less,repparttar 127697 further away we go (RELATIVITY MASS), orrepparttar 127698 velocity V of bodies must become less and less as we move away fromrepparttar 127699 spinning body (RELATIVITY VELOCITY).

It makes a kind of sense to choose to alter V. However, this is composed of two fundamental units, distance D and time T, where V=D/T.

We cannot alterrepparttar 127700 distance, because it is Pi timesrepparttar 127701 diameter ofrepparttar 127702 "orbit". So if D cannot diminish, T must INCREASE.

What this means is that a perceived time T is actually LONGER at that distant place than we had known.

So we need TIME DILATION to deal withrepparttar 127703 breakdown of spin-orbit duality at relativistic speeds.

Fortunately, linear particle-accelerators have successfully slowed down time until mesons that lived for just a microsecond could be studied for SECONDS.

So Einstein's time-dilation has been PROVEN.

The conundrum of spin-orbit duality breakdown has delivered a similar result. Einstein has been vindicated again.

Charles Douglas Wehner

Charles Douglas Wehner was born in 1944. He was a technical author, a design engineer and the manager of a photoelectrics manufacturing company.

Eugenics and the Future of the Human Species

Written by Sam Vaknin

Continued from page 1

Modern eugenicists distance themselves fromrepparttar crude methods adopted atrepparttar 127672 beginning ofrepparttar 127673 last century by 29 countries, including Germany, The United States, Canada, Switzerland, Austria, Venezuela, Estonia, Argentina, Norway, Denmark, Sweden (until 1976), Brazil, Italy, Greece, and Spain.

They talk about free contraceptives for low-IQ women, vasectomies or tubal ligations for criminals, sperm banks with contributions from high achievers, and incentives for college students to procreate. Modern genetic engineering and biotechnology are readily applicable to eugenic projects. Cloning can serve to preserverepparttar 127674 genes ofrepparttar 127675 fittest. Embryo selection and prenatal diagnosis of genetically diseased embryos can reducerepparttar 127676 number ofrepparttar 127677 unfit.

But even these innocuous variants of eugenics fly inrepparttar 127678 face of liberalism. Inequality, claimrepparttar 127679 proponents of hereditary amelioration, is genetic, not environmental. All men are created unequal and as much subject torepparttar 127680 natural laws of heredity as are cows and bees. Inferior people give birth to inferior offspring and, thus, propagate their inferiority.

Even if this were true - which is at best debatable -repparttar 127681 question is whetherrepparttar 127682 inferior specimen of our species possessrepparttar 127683 inalienable right to reproduce? If society is to bearrepparttar 127684 costs of over-population - social welfare, medical care, daycare centers - then society hasrepparttar 127685 right to regulate procreation. But does it haverepparttar 127686 right to act discriminately in doing so?

Another dilemma is whether we haverepparttar 127687 moral right - let alonerepparttar 127688 necessary knowledge - to interfere with natural as well as social and demographic trends. Eugenicists counter that contraception and indiscriminate medicine already do just that. Yet, studies show thatrepparttar 127689 more affluent and educated a population becomes -repparttar 127690 less fecund it is. Birth rates throughoutrepparttar 127691 world have dropped dramatically already.

Instead of cullingrepparttar 127692 great unwashed andrepparttar 127693 unworthy - wouldn't it be a better idea to educate them (or their off-spring) and provide them with economic opportunities (euthenics rather than eugenics)? Human populations seem to self-regulate. A gentle and persistent nudge inrepparttar 127694 right direction - of increased affluence and better schooling - might achieve more than a hundred eugenic programs, voluntary or compulsory.

That eugenics presents itself not merely as a biological-social agenda, but as a panacea, ought to arouse suspicion. The typical eugenics text reads more like a catechism than a reasoned argument. Previous all-encompassing and omnicompetent plans tended to end traumatically - especially when they contrasted a human elite with a dispensable underclass of persons.

Above all, eugenics is about human hubris. To presume to know better thanrepparttar 127695 lottery of life is haughty. Modern medicine largely obviatesrepparttar 127696 need for eugenics in that it allows even genetically defective people to lead pretty normal lives. Of course, Man himself - being part of Nature - may be regarded as nothing more than an agent of natural selection. Still, many ofrepparttar 127697 arguments advanced in favor of eugenics can be turned against it with embarrassing ease.

Consider sick children. True, they are a burden to society and a probable menace torepparttar 127698 gene pool ofrepparttar 127699 species. But they also inhibit further reproduction in their family by consumingrepparttar 127700 financial and mental resources ofrepparttar 127701 parents. Their genes - however flawed - contribute to genetic diversity. Even a badly mutated phenotype sometimes yields precious scientific knowledge and an interesting genotype.

The implicit Weltbild of eugenics is static - butrepparttar 127702 real world is dynamic. There is no such thing as a "correct" genetic makeup towards which we must all strive. A combination of genes may be perfectly adaptable to one environment - but woefully inadequate in another. It is therefore prudent to encourage genetic diversity or polymorphism.

The more rapidlyrepparttar 127703 world changes,repparttar 127704 greaterrepparttar 127705 value of mutations of all sorts. One never knows whether today's maladaptation will not prove to be tomorrow's winner. Ecosystems are invariably comprised of niches and different genes - even mutated ones - may fit different niches.

Inrepparttar 127706 18th century most peppered moths in Britain were silvery gray, indistinguishable from lichen-covered trunks of silver birches - their habitat. Darker moths were gobbled up by rapacious birds. Their mutated genes proved to be lethal. As soot from sprouting factories blackened these trunks -repparttar 127707 very same genes, hitherto fatal, became an unmitigated blessing. The blacker specimen survived while their hitherto perfectly adapted fairer brethren perished ("industrial melanism"). This mode of natural selection is called directional.

Moreover, "bad" genes are often connected to "desirable genes" (pleitropy). Sickle cell anemia protects certain African tribes against malaria. This is called "diversifying or disruptive natural selection". Artificial selection can thus fast deteriorate into adverse selection due to ignorance.

Modern eugenics relies on statistics. It is no longer concerned with causes - but with phenomena andrepparttar 127708 likely effects of intervention. Ifrepparttar 127709 adverse traits of off-spring and parents are strongly correlated - then preventing parents with certain undesirable qualities from multiplying will surely reducerepparttar 127710 incidence of said dispositions inrepparttar 127711 general population. Yet, correlation does not necessarily imply causation. The manipulation of one parameter ofrepparttar 127712 correlation does not inevitably alter it - orrepparttar 127713 incidence ofrepparttar 127714 outcome.

Eugenicists often hark back to wisdom garnered by generations of breeders and farmers. Butrepparttar 127715 unequivocal lesson of thousands of years of artificial selection is that cross-breeding (hybridization) - even of two lines of inferior genetic stock - yields valuable genotypes. Inter-marriage between races, groups inrepparttar 127716 population, ethnic groups, and clans is thus bound to improverepparttar 127717 species' chances of survival more than any eugenic scheme.

Sam Vaknin is the author of Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West Lost the East. He is a columnist for Central Europe Review, PopMatters, and eBookWeb , a United Press International (UPI) Senior Business Correspondent, and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory Bellaonline, and Suite101 .

Visit Sam's Web site at

    <Back to Page 1 © 2005
Terms of Use