MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Santa comes to Family Court

Filed under: Law & Courts — JohnPotter @ 5:06 pm Fri 24th December 2004

Santa Clause visited the Waitakere Family Court on Christmas Eve to deliver a present for the Judges and court staff. In some European traditions, children who are very badly behaved are said to get a lump of coal instead of presents – this Family Court received a whole bag!

Santa Clause

Afterwards, Santa joined Union of Fathers protesters across the road from the court. He said that he was very upset that so many children would not see their fathers this Christmas because of the court’s unjust rulings. “I have met up with the Ghost of Christmas Future, and he tells me the future for the NZ Family Court is not looking good”, he told MENZ Issues.

“Next year I might have to encourage more Santas to come down from the North Pole and let the court know how unhappy we are with their performance.”

Union of Fathers chairman Jim Bagnall said: “we’re here today to ensure that children become the source of co-operation, not conflict.” He is very critical of organisations and individuals who make their money from encouraging disputes when relationships split.

Also protesting outside the court was Sonia Robinson (holding the purple banner in the photo below), who is active with Fathers 4 Justice in the UK. She said has been delighted to find so many like-minded activists on the far side of the world. She said that next year after she returns to England, she and some friends are planning to get arrested at one of the many protests orchestrated by F4J.

Kerry Bevin
Sonia - Fathers4Justice UK
Union of Fathers outside Waitakere Court
Ben Easton

84 Responses to “Santa comes to Family Court”

  1. Peter Burns says:

    Don’t Quit
    When things go wrong as they sometimes will,
    When the road you’re trudging seems all up hill,
    When the funds are low and the debts are high
    And you want to smile, but you have to sigh,
    When care is pressing you down a bit,
    Rest if you must,but you don’t quit.
    Life is queer with its twists and turns,
    As everyone sometimes learns,
    And many a failure turns about
    When he might have won had he stuck it out;
    Don’t give up though the pace seems slow –
    You may succeed with another blow –
    Success is failure turned inside out –
    The silver tint of the clouds of doubt,
    And you never can tell how close you are,
    It may be near when it seems so far;
    So stick to the fight when you’re hardest hit –
    It’s when things seem worst that you must not quit.

    VC 216 Lith in Italy

  2. DJ Ward says:

    I got some presents today.
    Unfortunately my daughter let out her secret.
    But it’s purchased anyway.
    I think I got the last one in town.
    A foot bath, machine.

    I also have a party 3 days after Christmas for my partner.
    So I get to see family and friends.
    Have dinner, and a few drinks.
    Got some fireworks as well.

    I went to see a friend.
    In my darkest moment he was all I had.
    All my hope was gone.
    Only he was left to cheer me up.
    So I fled my persecution.
    Into the night, across the land to get to him.
    To sit next to him.
    To cry.
    Got lost unfortunately.
    And slept where I fell.
    In the night I found the tree in the dark.
    It was the dark where there is no light.
    Electric fences, are not easy to see in the dark.
    I found a few.
    Today I went to sit next to him.
    At his grave.
    But I didn’t find him.
    He is there, but went the wrong way.
    I found many others instead.
    And a view.
    The land and the river.
    People driving by beeping there horns.
    Paying there respects to the dead.
    Families tending to graves.
    Graves with no names.
    And graves time has forgotten.
    I found a dream I once had.
    I had sat at the same place before.
    There hiding.
    A small wooden cross.
    The weeds growing, concealed.
    But words in bold.
    John bro.

  3. DJ Ward says:

    I shall write something profound.
    For tomorrow.

    It can only be like Jack Black.
    A tribute, of an explanation.

  4. DJ Ward says:

    Not what I intended to write.
    Apologies for mistakes.

    There is physics.
    Laws that sit above physics.
    And the point.

    The universal theorem.

    The point.
    1: There is only one.
    2: Nothing cannot be nothing, unless it cannot exist.
    3: Anything that exists is an emotion.
    4: All emotions exist as equal and opposite emotions.

    So this is digital (1,2) and analog (3,4).

    1: Numbers do not exist.
    Only one.
    Humans measure but it cannot be measured.
    Be certain of this.
    No matter how hard you look you will find nothing the same.
    No matter how identical you make things.
    Even to the atom perfect.
    Try then, make the electrons, perfect to the atom.
    2 apples plus 1 apple = 3 apples.
    True but only in context.
    For no apple be the same apple as another.
    There is only this apple and that apple.
    6=6 just as 1=1.
    The number 6 has no context. Rule 2 and 3.
    6=6 just as 0=0.
    You can write 6 meters.
    But you cannot measure it.
    It must be 6 plus, or minus, as argument to rule 2.
    So is one thing 6 long.
    Your unit of measure can be 6, IE one.

    2: This is zero.
    Be certain of this.
    Think of the sine wave.
    No matter how hard you look you can’t find zero.
    Zoom in as much as you like.
    The line crossing the line.
    You can never zoom in enough to find where it crosses.

    3: This be Mass, and Energy.
    This be Time and Distance.
    And all things created by them.

    4: I have taught you this, as best I can.

    So this.

    E=MC, ignore the squared as it’s numbers.
    Energy and Mass, are equal and opposite emotions to Distance and Time.
    Rule 1
    E/M= one and D/T= one
    E= one, and M= one, and D= one, and T= one.
    So Humans measure and find the speed of light.
    A limit to Distance to Time.
    So then this must be true.
    The limit of Time to Distance.
    300,000,000 T/D squared. (A)

    It is possible that all these exist.

    So this. “the distance of 2.66 billion light-years between GN-z11 and the Milky Way at the time when the light was emitted increased by a factor of (z+1)=12.1 to a distance of 32.2 billion light-years during the 13.4 billion years it has taken the light to reach us.”

    So A/ year equals 2.85 billion years.
    The limit of distance for light.
    Light cannot travel further.
    Gravity cannot travel further.

    There is resultants to this. Observation.
    My assumption is it will appear bigger, but trend to showing no energy.

    I apologise for my math skills. I have looked at that assumption and got numbers similar to observation. But brighter minds are needed for the equations.

    The most important sentence on this subject.

    “And other seeds fell into good soil and produced grain, growing up and increasing and yielding thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold.”

    Indicating while he had great arguments, he couldn’t do numbers naturally. Rule 1.

    The point.

    I my dreams, in the deepest of depths.
    I found the point.
    It be the atom.
    It be the sun.
    It be the galaxy.
    It be the universe.

    I am not certain of that but it is what I saw in trying to define the Big Bang.
    I found the point, and everything was relative to it.
    But I saw many points.
    My original output was.
    Nothing is something, and something cannot be nothing.
    At 16 or 17 years old.
    The voice mocked me.
    “Tell them, Tell them.”
    No way was I telling anyone, nothing.
    I knew I didn’t have the answer.
    It was a dead end.
    I could feel it.

    Assumption is all things exist in the observable universe.
    And they are all things created by the Big Bang.
    But that object (example) has moved outside of the distance limit.
    Logic dictates it no longer exists, but exists. Rule 2 and 3.
    Kinda like a photon.

    We are the observer, the point.
    We look left and see an object at the limit.
    We look right and see an object at the limit.
    But the object at the left cannot see the object at the right.
    If you went to the limit, and took another step.
    Earth would disappear.
    You would know not only that Earth existed.
    But the other object at the opposite limit as well.
    Just kidding.
    Look at a moon ring.
    Like the rainbow.
    Isn’t the moon the point, and you observe it.
    Just as it observes you.

    I don’t therefore see a Big Bang.
    But recycling in supernova.
    Creating large atoms, from small.
    And detonation of black holes.
    Turning energy back into mass.
    Fission, and fusion of the atom.
    I don’t see a beginning or an end.
    But many beginnings.
    And many ends.

    My perception of the photon.
    I have imagined being the photon.
    I searched for where I would arrive.
    I experienced no time to get there.
    But it took forever.
    It shakes Distance and Time.
    Rippling through space at the speed of light.
    The stronger it shakes, the more energy it has.
    So, guessing.
    My instinct is telling me it’s a dead end.
    So more thinking, to find out.

    Distance and time are opposed to mass and energy.
    It can bend light.
    In my mind Mass rejects Distance and Time.
    But Time and Distance, are constants. Rule 1.
    Time and Distance become compressed. Rule 1 arguments.
    Mass is not attracted to mass. Rule 4.
    Mass rejects Time and Distance.
    Time and Distance rejects Mass.
    Moving towards the most compressed space.
    The big object creates the most compressed space.
    While in proportion it also moves towards the small object.

    Distance and Time is the vacuum of space.
    It is nothing.
    It is a solid that is distorted by Mass.
    It wants to be the solid that is not distorted.
    One could assume at the point it is most compressed.
    At the distance of eternity it is the least compressed.
    Hence like the solid glass lens, curved.
    It can bend light.
    I came to the decision it was a solid at the age of 32.
    But also saw it as a dead end.
    So more thinking.
    It was in a moment of trauma that I suffered so much for.
    The first time that I went to get help.
    I came home, after going to 3 places.
    I asked myself the hardest question.
    For my mind to escape, knowing it was trapped.
    What is the vacuum of space.

    I get a little bit confused with energy in the relationship pertaining to gravity. Most likely I have not read something. Or it’s not involved as it’s also the opposite to mass.

    What then of the Atom.
    The question for me is.
    It is viewed as positive and negative. Rule 4.
    Obviously, Distance and Time are involved.
    Obviously, Mass and Energy are involved.
    I will zoom in.
    It does have remarkable similarity to a galaxy.
    Can humans pass my ruler please.

    Hey look.
    Elements have flavours of emotion.

    An object absorbs its colour.
    Emitting the opposite colour.
    Absorb no colours it is white.
    Absorb all colours it is black.
    You see it, but do not see it.
    You see what is not it.

    Assumption becomes an object emitting energy.
    Is hot but wants to be cold.
    Absorbing energy.
    Is cold but wants to be hot.

    Is south but wants to be north.

    Is positive but wants to be negative.

    These is obviously maths.
    I need to think more about some things.
    Natures curves for example.

    They are just fantastic.
    For personal reasons.


    Did you see the moment of clarity Satan.
    “Yes my sons cup is nearly full”
    Fool did you not see Satan.
    That when he saw you, he saw me.
    That I was hiding in the darkness.
    That he is my Son.
    His cup spills.
    I be heaven, and you are hell.
    I be peace, and you be wrath.
    I be the truth, and you be dishonest.
    “No it is my love that has no bounds.”
    Hypocrite I say.
    You love to hate.
    I love to love.
    You are suffering.
    I am paradise.


    Damn fate just intervened.
    My Son opened his present.
    The mother conspired against me.
    And I underestimated his memory.
    He was still happy.
    But I missed joy.

    A some point I will write more.

  5. DJ Ward says:

    Left my alarm clock out in the shed, this.
    My partner heard it, I did not.
    I am thankful.
    For her keeping watch over me.

  6. DJ Ward says:

    I wrote Trump2024 because Trump2020 was already taken.
    Sorry for all involved. Done elsewhere.
    Well before the election as well.
    I like WOT.
    Takes my mind off things.
    I’m just fractionally better than average.

    I have found myself deleting what I’m writing.
    I’m tired, so don’t want to make mistakes.

    I am pleased.
    I have had my say.

    During writing this stuff I made a mistake.
    My mother told me she would visit.
    And I hardly see her.
    But I was elsewhere because I put this stuff first.
    And my family lost so much of my time.
    I am so sorry for my family.
    They think I love this machine.
    And do not know me.
    What my work is.
    The have seen but not heard.
    Endless, what are you doing with your life.
    To be honest.
    Right now.
    I don’t know.

    I will make a point of seeing my mother.
    I will be seeing my father.
    And having a nice Christmas.
    I will get my partner something.
    She thinks she has all her presents.

    She does not believe me.
    Despite what she has seen.
    She will struggle this Christmas.

    I very rarely pray.
    But when I do.
    I mean it.
    I will pray for her.

  7. DJ Ward says:

    I have experienced the most amazing things in the last few days.
    There is so much to explain.
    But I will leave that for another day.

    The sun is rising.
    On a new day.
    I feel ready to face the world.
    My fears are gone.
    And I shall be strong and good.
    I know I will make mistakes.
    But I know that I will try my best.
    I know my future is what I make.
    That my intent is good.
    So it shall reward me.
    With good things.

    I have met my mother.
    And seen my father.
    I got a wow from my son.
    And the look of shock from my daughter.
    And my partner watched over me.
    When I needed her most.

  8. tony says:

    Nice , positive attitude . Good on you

  9. DJ Ward says:

    Interesting subject as I have thought about how to speed up rotation of planets.
    The obvious, like a large asteroid would be to attach a rocket to it to make it spin.
    Creating artificial gravity at the surface.
    Most likely a method used to slow the spin rate down, for capture etc.

    You could force the moon to spin.
    The problem with the moon is its day length is too long.
    That’s a huge task but possible.
    The realistic option is a railway, solar panels, and electricity network 180 deg plus around it.
    Then you have free power continuously.

    How you land on objects is an influence.
    If you always take off in one direction.
    But land in the other.
    You speed up the rotation speed of the object.
    Or slow it down.

    Venus if it was significantly increased in rotation speed is interesting to me.
    All it needs is bugs to create high temperature solids.
    Not gases at high temperature.
    It will still take a long time until liveable habitats exist on the surface.
    But possible with time.

    I have also come to the conclusion that you cannot get to another star without taking small asteroids for resources.
    Including as resource for propulsion.
    And deceleration.
    You could go without an asteroid.
    But I struggle to see survival like that.
    Unless it arrives to established things.

  10. DJ Ward says:

    I am doing well with my argument and it’s more in depth.
    So nearly finished.
    Was looking for answers, so looked at my physical writing.
    There is quite a few poem type arguments.
    Where the argument in the background.
    Is slightly dirty, describing sex etc.
    So good to read for the argument.

    When I spoke the argument for the existence of the universe it to was poem like.
    But but more blatant equal and opposite words.
    Luckily this ones about two atoms, clearly not sex.
    Or suns, galaxy’s, universes colliding.
    They crash onto each other, but carry on into space.
    Eventually they would lose velocity.
    Going back and forth until they become one.
    One can assume as a possible resultant.
    That small bits may fly off, as a result of the collision.
    So a good science argument.
    The word coaked was the emotion of to unite.
    The poem includes the moment two points become one.


    Awkward moments in the dark.
    Not knowing where to start.
    Cold feet a funny start.
    Shiver in the dark.

    Chance meeting don’t suppose.
    Coaked from a distance.
    Cant offer no resistance.
    Cares disposed.

    Never met before.
    A primitive charm, I can’t explain.
    Causing actions, I can’t refrain.
    Personality we both explore.

    Cant seperate us apart.
    But together we both depart.
    To awkward moments in the dark.
    Not knowing where to start.

  11. DJ Ward says:

    I have had good thoughts today.

    When I wrote #4 I did not know what I was supposed to write.
    #5 was written, randomly.
    Trying to download, my conclusions.
    About the distance limit, and Universal Theorem.
    Defining in effect Gravity.

    I see far more now.
    Of possibility of unknown, misinterpreted things.

    I spent about a decade, looking at energy creation.
    Stirling engines, and other energy/mass experiments.
    To keep my mind occupied, rather than thinking about life.

    While I can describe a system that creates free energy, it does have a high capital cost. Essentially manipulating, heat pumps, and Stirling engines.

    But I see a new possibility now. #5 leads me to the conclusion that in the same way that heat pumps work, that an electrical pump is possible. For to long I have been a bit aimless in my personal life. With renewed hope, I shall start again.

  12. DJ Ward says:

    At some point, I will need to explain 5 better.
    So something I wrote in my 20s.
    When I wrote it, it was a science argument.
    Of a lost planet, independent.
    Trapped in eternity, in the universe.

    Broken down and old.
    My spare parts can’t be sold.
    Things are getting cold.
    And death is taking hold.

    Time is but a fold.
    In a life that’s not so bold.
    Of a story that’s never told.
    Good memories growing mold.


    To me the question becomes.
    When it is absolutely cold.
    Can the electron remain with the proton.
    Would it not self destruct.


    Churchill’s black dog has visited.
    A cruel companion, at the best of times.
    Yesterday was a harsh day.
    But to me, although it’s suffering.
    I can think out complex ideas.
    So today I stared making a new magnetics experiment.
    Highly likely to fail, investigating nothing.
    But thanks to my visitor.
    Only the black dog.
    Both the worst, and best of company.

  13. DJ Ward says:

    Number 5 can also be called God Theorem.
    In that God is all things.
    The Law governing all Laws.
    Also in effect, the Universal Theorem.

    So in effect.
    Someone like Jesus, new what compliant arguments were.
    So could explain nature, with the term God.
    And be correctly as his arguments were compliant.

    I personally have experiences I can’t explain.
    But to me logic dictates, no supernatural God.
    But an absolute one, as a Law of science.
    Governing all things, even the supernatural.

    There remains, only one.

  14. DJ Ward says:

    Some arguments for #5

    If the universe exists. Rule 1
    It must also not exist. Rule 2 and 4
    But exists. Rule 1 and 3

    The physical evidence.
    The distance limit defines, the visible universe.
    But you have placed yourself at its centre.
    Logic dictates there must be many centres of the universe.
    Mass that exists in my universe may not exist in yours.
    Existing and not existing at the same time.

    The argument becomes.
    Is every centre of the universe of identical mass.
    Therefore one could predict gravity acting on a distant body.
    By mass that to you, does not exist.

  15. DJ Ward says:

    The argument has become complex so I will write it down.

    You have a sphere of influence.
    The other object, has its own sphere of influence.
    So two intersecting spheres of distance and time.
    It has a volume of space known to both.
    A volume known to one but not the other.
    And a volume known to the other but not the one.
    Beyond that is unknown.
    But could be considered uniform.
    The more defined, knowledge of things around you.
    Obviously the distortion of that uniform space.
    Created by mass, becomes more accurate.
    With more knowledge of it.

    Certainly however.
    You the centre of your own universe.
    Seem to ignore it.
    Are you not, still.

  16. DJ Ward says:

    What we see happening, may be the opposite.

    How confusing, is the moon travelling around earth.
    It rises in the east, and sets in the west.
    Does the sun, not do the same thing.
    Does the universe, not rotate in the night sky.
    Certainly it is the observer, who is at its centre and stationary.

    Even the direction of rotation, around the sun.
    Is only, a point of view.
    Change north and south, and one changes direction.

    Even the stationary human, is going it’s fastest.
    Do you not have velocity, as the earth rotates.
    It’s speed, travelling around the sun.
    And the suns speed, around the Milky Way.
    It’s it speed, through the nothingness.
    Is one not already, at the speed of light to something.

  17. DJ Ward says:

    Consider a human on earth, and an alien at the distance limit.
    The speed travelling apart so fast, it’s the speed of light.
    Yet the human is stationary, and so is the alien to itself.
    In the other direction to the human, is another alien.
    Also at the distance limit, also at the speed of light.
    Yet the human is stationary, and so is both aliens.

    How then is the human stationary, to both.
    Yet be travelling at the speed of light, in all directions.
    Be stationary, but see the universe travelling away in all directions.

    It implies, the universe itself is expanding.
    Which forces a new question, about the ruler we use.
    If the universe is getting bigger, then we must be getting smaller.

  18. DJ Ward says:

    I think about the subject, of the permeability of space.

    One can imagine a point in space, even a volume with no atoms.
    It is truthful to say, there is nothing there.
    It therefore, must be also false that there is nothing.

    Yet if you imagine a tiny ball, an all direction camera.
    It can see all the universe, continuously live streamed.
    Despite being nothing, it experiences everything.

    Logic would dictate, as the ball gets smaller interactions decrease.
    Until it becomes, the point.
    Where there is no, interactions.
    Which should be a limit, or constant in size.

    Everything then exists, and does not exist at the same time.
    As there is an eternity, of points.

    You have things, near translucent.
    Yet a thin sheet, can block out the sun.
    You have things, that have very magnetic properties.
    Yet some things, hardly react to a magnetic field.
    You have things, that easily carry electricity.
    Yet many things, get described as insulators.

    It seems atoms, can do strange things to it’s environment.
    Each atom giving the space it occupies, a permeability value to each Force..
    You can pick your value, when you make things.

    The vacuum of space is the reference, to the extremes.

  19. DJ Ward says:

    #5 is still difficult, to explain.
    But an easy example, that children can grasp exists.
    With a toy, the little bouncy ball.

    By releasing the ball, gravity is allowed to act on it.
    It falls towards the bigger mass, gathering speed.
    In nearly an instant on hitting the floor, it changes direction.
    Returning, to the persons hand.
    Yet the marble will dent the floor, and make a loud noise.

    There is only one ball, rule 1.
    It certainly exists, rule 2.
    It exists as mass, with energy, stuck in time, a distance from the floor, rule 3.
    It had the emotion of falling, then the emotion of rising equally, rule 4.

    The properties of the bouncy ball, a good choice to show no loses of energy.
    The properties of the marble, a bad choice showing other emotions.
    Instead of bouncing high, it just made more noise.
    In choosing what ball to drop, one is choosing if one dents the floor.

  20. DJ Ward says:

    If one can create an emotion, at a place and time.
    The equal but opposite emotion, is made at another place and time.
    If one were the left hand, then the right hand must also then exist.
    If one goes up the hill, one must come down the hill.
    The start of the trip is the bottom, and the end is the top.
    But the start becomes the top, and the end the bottom.
    If one finds a buried coin, did one not bury it.
    If one shoots a bullet, it will hit the target.
    Stationary at one place, then stationary at another.
    One may enjoy the crime, but not the sentence.
    A moment of caring, can create a smile.
    The happy person, in turn caring for another.
    The bad events, cause people to be charitable.
    Charity can cause, dependency.
    Dependency, results in people being less charitable.


    (Thinking out loud, so little will be correct)

    Something is neither hot, or cold.
    It only feels the emotions, of its surroundings.
    While you are the same temperature, the day is hot or cold.
    The water put in the jug gets hotter, but colder in the fridge.
    No drop of water is now hotter, or colder than all the other drops.
    To the water, the person who boiled the jug got colder.
    The water has less energy in the fridge, so other things appear hotter.

    Temperature acts like gravity.
    It spreads out, into the universe.
    Matter, getting in its way.
    The sun feels hotter to earth, so is it’s gravity stronger.
    Than to Mars with the sun feeling colder, so is it’s gravity weaker.
    The sun, remained the same temperature.

    Something with gravity, also has temperature.
    Mass cannot change, so gravity is constant.
    But it’s temperature can change, dramatically not affecting gravity.
    But it does change time, that something experiences.
    If it’s hotter, time goes slower for the atom.
    At the limit of hotness, time must stop.
    At the limit of coldness, time must go it’s fastest.

    The atom experiences constant vibrations, in the same time.
    Like speed as in temperature, it thinks itself is stationary.
    It is the only one.

  21. DJ Ward says:

    The interesting part is, there was no prior thought to #21
    I started trying to write anything, and it came out that way.
    I only stoped to check, if temperature affected gravity.
    The question or conclusion wasn’t a thought, prior to its writing.
    If you are surprised, so am I.

    It feels like I opened a door, with new questions.

  22. DJ Ward says:

    If you heat a rock, in a fire.
    The outside becomes hot, while the inside is cold.
    Eventually the inside is as hot, as the outside is hot.
    Yet if you set it aside, taking it from the fire.
    The outside becomes cold, while the inside is hot.
    Eventually the inside is as cold, as the outside is cold.

    If there was no radiation, what is critical mass.
    For the centre to be hot, and the outside cold.

    If you aim for a perfect size, turning a shaft.
    The metal was room temperature, but is now hot and bigger.
    One cannot trust ones size, if one is trying to be exact.
    One could do the maths on its size, but every step has an error.
    One should wait patiently, for room temperature.

    Why the does the atom, take up more space.
    In convection, the hot is less dense.
    And the cold, is more dense.
    So a hot atom, uses up more space.

    What then is space, if it’s not distance and time.
    The hot atom, going more distance using less time.
    Distortion more, yet it’s gravity is the same.

    In convection, the colder atom appears heavy.
    But it’s mass is the same as the hot, appearing lighter.

  23. DJ Ward says:

    I had a good argument thinking, and forgot how it started.
    Luckily I have remembered, a little bit but a sentence.
    Time has a magical existence, as you cannot see it.

    Certainly you can say, that’s not true.
    You can have two clocks, then seperate them by speed.
    One is stationary, while the other used energy to have speed.
    When they are reunited, the clocks are different.
    To alter time a little, you must use lots of time.
    Or travel at ridiculous speed, using unobtainable amounts of energy.
    The bigger the mass, the more energy needed.

    It would then also be the case, for distance.
    You can’t actually see it, despite the argument of estimating.
    Even when you get the ruler out, how accurate are you.
    Zoom in to your perfect surface, a mountain range of atoms.
    Even the clock, is never actually 12:00.
    Try then to find, when the hand crosses the line.
    Can you not measure, or time things.

    Only the mathematician, creates the point in time.
    That they then, measure from.

    That was also not my argument, but similar.

  24. DJ Ward says:

    I started something I couldn’t stop, by writing #20.
    The first argument in #21, showing I realise I’m not in control.
    That I have started making, equals and opposites.

    It starts with, “ #5 is still difficult, to explain.”
    So that immediately, made the opposite comment.
    An easy example, children can understand.

    Further back in time by memory.
    “ Dare not let him speak, or he could say anything.”
    And I recognise that happens, with #22.

    So #21 is made, because #20 was made.
    Being a difficult example, even for adults.

    #21 has no prior thought, and I don’t know if it’s correct.
    And that creates the opposite, but equal in #24.
    With prior thought, but also I don’t know if it’s correct.

    #22 is a comment, from one side of the door.
    #23 is a comment, from the other side of the door.

    What is next, remains a mystery.

  25. DJ Ward says:

    An interesting question is the mass difference, of the Neutron and Proton.
    And in looking for the answer, something is blatant.
    And whenever I start from there, it has lots of questions.
    The electron, and positron.
    As there mass, is identical.
    There energy, is identical.
    There charge, is identical.
    They both, have spin.
    But magically all that disappears, when they collide.
    Remaining are two things, with mass, charge, and spin gone.

    It had gravity, then did not have gravity.
    Can it not have gravity, then have gravity.

    Is the frequency of the ejected energy, related to the rate of spin.
    Revolving at the speed of light, to immediately being the strait line.
    But now positive, and negative in equal measure.

    The universe, must then consume mass.
    Positrons created, but all destroyed by electrons.
    But that can’t be the case, otherwise we would have no electrons.
    Instead we have, just as many as we have protons or neutrons.
    Where are all the positrons.

    The electron and positron, is a very Universal Theory compliant phenomena.

  26. DJ Ward says:

    I did say #11 was science, like the electron and positron.
    “Cant seperate us apart.
    But together we both depart.”

    I have found an example, easy to show children.
    Tell the child, that your finger can bend light.
    And ask them can they see there finger, do the same.
    With two eyes things are blurry, but you still see all.
    You can go out of focus, with two see through identical fingers.
    But get them to close an eye, and things disappear from sight.
    Clearly light is not bent, by the finger.

    With a curtain and the sun, create a wide beam of light.
    Place a coin perpendicular to the light, its round shadow in good focus.
    Try then the child, to just about touch the coin.
    Certainly the shadow shows, light was bent by the finger.

  27. DJ Ward says:

    Trying to understand the Big Band, is difficult.
    How do you reconcile, the Proton or Nuetron.
    Why are they all identical, and how where they made.

    Maybe it had no mass, only being energy.
    In an instant all the energy, became mass without energy.
    The creation of mass, and it’s opposite mass.
    The result, an instant release of energy.
    As anti mass, got consumed.

  28. DJ Ward says:

    I obviously did little edits, on that comment.
    Bang, not Band.
    I get so many little arguments, I can’t write them all.

    If the event spread, just slower than the speed of light from a point.
    If the energy then ejected, caught up with the creation of mass.
    Would the creation of mass stop, having an inherent limit of mass.

    If the original mass is only energy, so it then started without gravity.

    So a black whole is a candidate, for a Big Bang.
    It turns itself into only being energy, without mass.
    So is there a limit of mass, so it then becomes all energy.
    So it then, goes Boom.

    What remains of the site, of the original event.
    Did itself, keep going Boom.
    Until it run out, of energy.
    The original, now a unfindable normal black hole.


    If time, caused distance to be created.
    Then energy, caused mass to be created.

    Maybe there was, nothing.
    And because there was nothing, it was something.
    And made the mirror image, of itself.

  29. DJ Ward says:

    Magnetism, is an interesting subject.
    It behaves like gravity, but it’s not the same.
    In that it’s force, travels trough space the same way.
    So whatever space is, it has more than one quality.
    One allowing gravity, one allowing magnetism.

    The objects mass, has an unchanging force of gravity.
    But a mass, can change its magnetism.
    Some atoms are good at it, some are not.
    So the atom must have a more north, and more south side.
    While other atoms, are not assembled unbalanced.
    Charging a magnet, lines all the atoms up.
    The mass then having a long lasting, magnetism.

    Space itself, must have direction.
    Or that space has no direction, but magnetism gives it direction.
    The balanced atom, unaffected by it.
    The unbalanced atom, affected by it.

    So space may be compressed, by gravity.
    But have direction, due to magnetism.

    Gravity being very weak, a magnet strong for it’s mass.


    A question would be, the path of a polarised object.
    Is the iron asteroid rarer, from being sucked into magnetic fields.
    Non magnetic objects, just experience gravity.

  30. DJ Ward says:

    Like Johnny Depp, beaten and told not to cry about it.
    I am strongly arguing, about what I have written or like his case done.
    So unless I have evidence like Depp, my arguments are meaningless.

    I may have told the truth, but it was already known.
    At least then, I added to the proof.
    I may be wrong, but someone must prove I’m wrong.
    Is that already known, or is that an unanswered question.

    At least I wrote them down, for my own reference.
    Because I’m not at dead ends, I know I can do better.
    It was not easy to get to the state of mind, to write them.
    At least I have something to ponder, for some time.

  31. DJ Ward says:

    I have been reading, about the Neutron.
    How it’s not actually, a neutral particle.
    It is a negative magnet, and the proton a positive one.
    So one can assume, they want to stick together.

    If one added up the forces, of the nucleus of the atom.
    Because the proton and neutron, are not equal but opposites.
    An atom is inherently then magnetic, with a resultant spin.

    Could an atom be anti magnetic, repulsed by a magnetic field.
    Adding neutrons to the atom, to tip the balance negative.

    What medium, is the magnetic field affecting.

  32. DJ Ward says:

    I have been watching, a lot of science videos.
    The effect of the internet, is immense.
    Where science was restricted, now everyone can have it.
    Not confined to the library, or University.
    Even the third world, has the same opportunity as me.


    I found an argument about symmetry, interesting.
    As the opposite exists, with particles.
    They are asymmetric, with properties.
    The electron is negative in charge, but it has no positive.
    The proton is positive in magnetism, but it has no negative.
    Yet at our scale, those things have symmetry.
    I assume you can’t make, an asymmetrical magnet.

    Or is that, an error in thinking.

    If symmetry was compulsory, the opposite must exist.
    And the opposite, is inherently not the same.
    With molecules we evolved with one, and not the mirror opposite.
    Evolution may have sped up, the more asymmetric we became.
    Certainly life creating gender, is the reason we are here.
    If symmetry made things identical, life wouldn’t exist.

    Life could not choose, one version over the other.

  33. DJ Ward says:

    It think I have made progress, with a subject.

    The beginning is the point.
    Therefore the universal theory starts.
    Time must exist, and it attempts to make distance.
    The point becomes all energy, and attempts to become mass.

    But there must be many points, all now black holes.
    If the point were to exist, but evidence shows many points.
    Was the original distribution uniform by distance.

    If the universe was endless, where is the galaxy’s going past us.
    If the furthest away, is going incredibly fast away from us.
    Then the person two furthest aways.
    Would see a galaxy, going incredibly fast towards us.
    We don’t see that galaxy anywhere.

    By attempting to make distance, the universe expands.
    Logic would say at the distance limit, it expands at the speed of light.
    Every galaxy still thinks, it’s standing still.
    Just as every point, thinks it’s stationary.
    Then the universe could be endless.

  34. DJ Ward says:

    If expanding at light speed, was true.
    We should be able to see, evidence.
    Expansion, must be even across the universe.

    Firstly to avoid to much maths, it’s logical.
    Assuming the distance limit, is 2.85 billion years.
    So in one year, length increases by one year.
    So 1/2.85 billion of a light year, per light year.
    The same for a light second, as for a year.
    We have the moon, as a test.
    It is about, a light second away.
    So each year, the moon travels that far away.
    300,000,000 meters / 2.85 billion = 0.105 meters.

    So that’s similar, to observation.

    When it was closer to earth, it traveled away slower.

  35. DJ Ward says:

    So due to it actually being 3.78cm, not 10cm.
    The difference must be caused, by tides or other things.
    The moon loses energy, and falls by slowing down.
    So tides or other effects, are negative 6.22cm.
    We are somewhat lucky, the overall figure is positive.
    And small enough not to cause, the moon to fly away.

  36. DJ Ward says:

    I had interesting thoughts, and need to write them down.
    It starts with, what is it.

    In the beginning, there was nothing.
    But as nothing is something, and something can’t be nothing.
    Something, is created first.

    So one must consider, what is also nothing.
    A law is nothing, but is something.
    Inherently, there is only one something. (Rule 1)

    Since it’s something, and something cannot be nothing.
    Then something, must be something that’s nothing.
    The only option, is the point.

    The point forces, the creation of new laws.
    Since it’s nothing, and everything.
    Zero is created, and the first emotion is created.

    The point, cascades out of control.
    It attempts to become, one at all things.
    All energy and all mass, all time and all distance.

  37. DJ Ward says:

    So one of my conclusions, was the vacuum is a solid.

    Since time and distance, exists everywhere.
    Inherently the vacuum, is made of it.

    If mass was to instantly exist, it’s in reference to other mass.
    It has a distance, to other bits of mass.
    That proves, distance does exist.

    Energy travels, at the speed of light.
    It goes distance, but requires time.
    Air, has a speed of sound.
    Water, has a speed of sound.
    Even heat, travels in metal at a speed.

    Therefore light travels, in the media of distance.
    Distance, has a speed of light.

  38. DJ Ward says:

    So time, must have a distance limit.
    An object must have existed, within the limit to see it.
    It’s light arriving at us, much longer than the start distance.
    Is the thing at the edge of vision, defines the universes age.
    Is the very edge, not then infinity or all time.

    And if that’s true, because the speed limit is true.
    Then it’s opposite, must do the same thing.
    There is a mass limit, and an energy limit.

  39. DJ Ward says:

    I have tried to work out gravity, for a cause.
    But got a slightly different argument, in the process.

    When I imagine mass, being the absence of space.
    I can then imagine, space being displaced.
    Being displaced or nothing, causes space to be compressed.
    As we see evidence, of curved space by mass.
    Every particle, having its own effect.
    Technically you can measure, every particles presence.

    At a distance a collection of atoms, looks like one thing.
    We measure the moons effect, with one calculation.
    Yet it’s made of near infinity, of particles.
    As mass increases, so does the compression of space.
    So to does the compression, of the particles.
    The sun compression, allows nuclear reactions.
    More extreme neutron stars, and other exotic things.

    How compressed then, is the black hole.
    Mass so compressed, it’s all nothing.
    Space itself doesn’t exist, inside the black hole.

  40. DJ Ward says:

    I was listening to a physics person, on the Big Bang.
    In microscopic time, space instantly expanded.
    Far faster, than the speed of light.
    Reaching the observable universe, in no time.

    The opposite argument, is expansion at light speed.
    A star at the beginnings edge, is now 13.7 billion years away.
    Happening in all directions, stars still at the centre.
    Stars near the edge, see it has an end.
    While we somewhere, can’t see an edge..

    The distance limit, restricts our view.
    We see a spherical view, our universe.
    But in both arguments, we only see a small part.

    If the physics guy is right, the universe goes to infinity.
    Or it’s 27.4 billion years, in diameter.
    Our tiny planet, in a tiny part.

  41. DJ Ward says:

    I think there is an error, in saying 27.4 billion years.

    If over the distance limit, space expanded at light speed.
    Space could expand, to the distance limit.
    The edge, matching the expansion rate limit.
    But when it continues, to two distance limits.
    It’s edge goes light speed, plus light speed.
    In reference, to the centre of the Big Bang.
    And at three limits, it’s three light speeds.

    But the edge, is only travelling light speed.

  42. DJ Ward says:

    Geez, I made another error.

    When the Big Bang starts, it’s at light speed.
    That must be the case, for any mass or energy.
    Maybe time and distance, went to infinity instantly.
    But mass and energy, are opposite being limited.

    So when it expands to the distance limit, it’s two light speeds.
    It’s speed, plus the expansion of space behind it.

  43. DJ Ward says:

    I have been thinking, about my writing #5.
    Because I found it very difficult, to work out.
    I wrote it in two attempts, with sleep and work between.
    I know writing the laws, involved little edits.
    So when I started, I didn’t know the outcome.
    For just one day of writing, it was a relief to finish.
    From the start, it was nearly two months to do.

    At the beginning, I quickly got the first law.
    But not in context, of its religious meaning of one god.
    It was purely a result, of the argument on numbers.
    I’m not a religious person, but I did recognise the rule.
    To not poison my thinking, I avoided the bible completely.

    Some days later, I made myself start reading it.
    If the bible was correct for rule 1, did it have any other rules.
    Of the little I read, one comment stood out.
    And was the basis, for working out the other laws.

    “A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. A good tree can’t produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can’t produce good fruit.”

    Rule 1, you are judging one tree.
    Rule 2, the tree exists.
    Rule 3, the tree is made of mass and energy.
    Rule 4, the emotion tree has equals and opposites.

    I doubt however, the writer new rules 2 and 3.
    Other than existing, or not existing.
    Zero wasn’t a concept, at the time.
    Or ideas of mass, or energy.
    Rule 1 and 3, may have got confused.
    But the writer was definitely taught, rule 4.

    I have no doubt, Jesus had a fully compliant output.
    The level of understanding, is a mystery.

  44. DJ Ward says:

    Ultimately humans, will need to be sustainable.
    Or find ways, to cheat nature.
    Because that’s all human are, exploiters.
    Petrol an example, of exploiting fossils.
    Yet it’s not hard to see, the end result.
    Humans will collect, the carbon dioxide.
    Combine it with water, and make hydrocarbons.
    So I can see humans, recovering from atmosphere changes.
    With a full range, of energy options.

    It looks like a hard problem, but really there is solutions.

    I have found a hard question, on the 2 slit experiment.
    Years ago, I know I had an argument for it.
    Not that I solved it, but it was a logical look at it.
    I cant put it together, from an old memory.
    I will have a try again, after some thinking.

  45. DJ Ward says:

    I have been reading, to better understand things.
    I have noticed a problem, with E=Mc2

    If an atom has lots of energy, but loses a photon.
    The photon has no mass, but the atom must have lost mass.
    Otherwise the equation, no longer balances.
    An atom absorbing a photon, must also increase in mass.
    But I assume hot objects, weight the same as cold objects.
    The atom trades velocity for energy, the mass not changing.
    But the equation has changed, if E of the atom changes.
    E=Mc2 must only be actually true, at absolute zero.

  46. DJ Ward says:

    This is where I’m up to, not that I think it solves things.
    So more thinking needed, with a few ideas.

    Quantum Entanglement, is bizarre to say the least.
    I can understand it, if particles are right next to each other.
    One gets spin, then the other has the opposite spin.
    If one is affected, then so is the other.
    But as they go apart, there seems that no force exists.
    The forces of magnetism or gravity, or charge are tiny.
    But the particles are still acted on, by the other.
    It is also a very yes, or no phenomenon.

    Rule 2, Nothing cannot be nothing, unless it cannot exist.
    Since we know entanglement, is not nothing.
    Then something exists, that we don’t know exists.

    Rule 3, Anything that exists is an emotion.

    Because not entangled exists, entangled must exist.
    Because entanglement exists, is it not everywhere.
    Anything that splits in two, is entangled.
    Until one is acted on, then the link is broken.

    If the link breaks, both experience it at the same time.
    The link is always, one long.

  47. DJ Ward says:

    I have a crack in a concrete slab, between the house and shed.
    And have walked over it, thousands of times.
    It has become helpful, in doing arguments

    It starts as two cracks, becoming one crack.
    Then for a metre or so, stays as one crack.
    Then like the start, becomes two cracks again.
    It is a very two dimensional view, almost logical.
    It even looks like lightning, far from a straight line.
    But the crack has depth, so it is also like a chaotic wave.
    Not hard to see arguments, playing with particles.
    The intersections being points, that are events.

    I have tried using it, in evolution arguments.
    Just as important, is when the analogy fails.

    The two cracks are the cell, and mitochondria.
    They join becoming one, for some time.
    The cell creates gender, with two separate paths of evolution.

    In evolution, how long is the single line.
    It can only represent, the individual.
    The mother and father, at the point creates the child.
    The child then multiplied, with two children.

    If the argument is about humans, as a species.
    The points still exist, as we have a common ancestor.
    All of us go from common ancestor, to common ancestor.
    Hundreds of them, in life’s long history.
    There is still a line from point, to point.
    But is it really a continuous line, point to point.
    Who is this person that’s the point, for humans.
    Among the billions, there is only one.
    Or is the genetics travelling mixed, not just as the individual.
    Not a logical path, but a wave of genetics in time.
    Then for an instant, humans become the point.
    Everyone to then exist, coming from that point.

    Is that itself wrong, with evolution with many points.
    Are you the point, for chromosome five.
    Who are these people, all twenty three of them.
    Points of time, that 100% of us are related to.

    We all evolve, from the common ancestor.
    But do we also all evolve, into the next common ancestor.
    After all we are all related, to the next point.

  48. DJ Ward says:

    I will have another try at that problem, at some point.
    The good part is, I am having some good arguments.
    My instincts keep telling me, it’s the experiment.
    As questions about the experiment, expose the error.

    Anyway I have an observation, that’s interesting.

    If you upscale the 2 slit experiment, what happens.
    Imagine 2 long rectangle holes, in a wall.
    And you throw fast cricket balls, to see what happens.
    The ball goes through, or it hits the wall.
    It may hit the edge, flying on a different path.
    But certainly, you know what slit it used.
    It doesn’t matter at all, about being a wave.

    There must be a size limit, to the experiment.

    In the experiment, the observer is the problem.
    Try then be the observer, of the experiment.
    Are you not one, yourself the experiment.
    Two holes, letting in light.
    Pause for a second, at how astonishing sight is.
    Are our eyes just the observation, at the slit.

    How the hell, can we see things.
    Make sense of the image, with a continuous image.
    Man made computers, have a lot to catch up.
    Have you noticed, you can’t zoom in.
    But you can judge distance, to things.
    Even with an eye closed, your mind can do it.

    How then does the object, tell us it’s distance.
    Just by my mind and eyes, looking at it.
    What information did light carry, to let me know.
    Creating a 3D environment, in your mind.
    Stand on a hill, everything is communicating with you.
    Every blade of grass, kilometres and kilometres away.
    Between you and the blade of grass, is near infinite things.
    Atoms, and countless other photons travelling.
    Just as if you were at every spot, it amazingly got to you.
    Move, and your image changes.
    Yet the light, traveled in a strait line.

    Amazingly, you can guess it’s distance.

  49. DJ Ward says:

    We perceive existence, from the presence of mass.
    So it must also be true, from the presence of energy.

    If that’s true, then it’s opposite is true.
    The presence of distance exists, as something.
    The presence of time exists, as something.

    Does everything that exists, then must be due to mass.
    Are there things, that are only distance and time.
    We could not see it, as it has no energy.

  50. DJ Ward says:

    I have found I can’t make myself, think of new arguments.
    They just seem to happen, and I then try to write it down.
    Or in actually most cases, I start writing not knowing the conclusion.
    I haven’t tried, going over my arguments.
    There’s got to be mistakes, or better arguments.
    I should find some time, doing some holiday reading.

    An example, is these comments from #5.

    “Isn’t the moon the point, and you observe it.
    Just as it observes you.”

    Because that does happen, to be the case.
    The light from you arrives, when light from them arrives.
    Just as it observes you, you observe it.
    There is no time delay, with each other’s present.
    Aliens on another star look at us, at the same time we look at them.
    You see there past, at the same time they see your past.

    Light therefore travels in time, and cannot change the past.
    The present must be a truth, and can’t be changed.

  51. DJ Ward says:

    This is from #18.

    “It implies, the universe itself is expanding.
    Which forces a new question, about the ruler we use.
    If the universe is getting bigger, then we must be getting smaller.”

    In arguments about expansion, they don’t talk about us.
    How the expanding universe, actually exists for us.
    You cannot say, it’s affecting those galaxies.
    But not affecting our galaxy, as we aren’t special.
    Whatever’s happening to them, must be happening to us.

    So is the meter, in real terms changing.
    Or is the ruler the same, but distance grows.
    Minutely, the distance between atoms change.
    Does a wave get shorter, or longer with time.

    You could argue the extreme, the point.
    At the point, there is no change.

  52. DJ Ward says:

    I had some technical issues, like a forced holiday.
    This is a comment that failed to post, but I kept.
    It doesn’t say anything special, more stating the obvious.
    The Universal theory, must apply to everything.
    Hidden in the background, of everything happening.

    Nothing cannot be nothing, unless it cannot exist. Rule 2.

    It is real that a person, can be asked to be still.
    Sit them on a chair, even get them to hold breathing.
    Observe them, certainly they are still.
    Get it right, the photographer gets a crisp image.
    But because of rule 2, they cannot be actually still.

    If you define the chairs surface, as still.
    How exact is the emotion, higher or lower.
    Just the persons heart beat, is an effect.
    The chairs materials, with the emotion of flexibility.
    The earth below it with miniature shaking, from earthquakes.
    The land up or down, with tides from the moon and sun.

    Zoom out and speed up the solar system, and watch the chair.
    Measure the emotion, left or right for the chair.
    Measure the emotion, higher or lower.
    Measure the emotion, closer or further.
    Zoom out then, doing the same for the galaxy.
    Certainly the emotions are equal, due to the chair being still.
    Try then measure the emotions, when you move the chair.

    The chairs surface cannot be still, as it’s always higher or lower.
    If the chair goes higher, it must go lower.
    Zoom in then and find the exact moment, the line is crossed.
    The chair is still, but must also be higher or lower at the same time.

    There is only one chair, rule 1.
    The chair exists, rule 2.
    It is made of mass and energy, rule 3.
    The emotion chair, has equal and opposite emotions, rule 4.

    Are you still or moving in space, and can you prove it.
    Certainly you travel at high speed, within the solar system and galaxy.
    If the speed of light is a constant, what is its reference point.
    Light would then travel faster or slower to you, depending on its direction.
    Why isn’t there tens of thousands of Km/s difference, easily measured.

  53. DJ Ward says:

    It seems only a matter of time, before a good planet is found.
    What then for humans, a second earth is just waiting.
    It would mark a point in time, when planning begins.
    Even if it just theory, of what is needed for an attempt.
    Based on your speed, you can now define travel time.
    You can then design the spaceship, to last the journey.
    At 41 light years away, that’s still 410 years at 10%.
    The volunteers, all die on the trip.
    Generations must be raised, passing on knowledge.
    How expert must the passengers be, to then colonise a planet.–and-it-is-very-similar-to-earth

    Maybe that can’t be the plan, being to difficult.
    Maybe the targets to find is tiny planets, and asteroids.
    Far easier to land on, so you can get resources.
    Building from there, then trying to colonise a target planet.
    You would first need to make, a spaceship using society.
    Itself from raw resources, able to make new spaceships.
    That I’m guessing, is a few thousand years away.


    What is the escape velocity, for gas in space.
    At what density will a could, collapse due to its mass.
    At what density, will it continue to expand.

    There must be a minimum mass, to form a star or planet.
    Even if it’s a very dense gas cloud at the beginning, it can’t collapse.
    It could be the first stage of objects, could not have made planets.
    Any cloud collapsing, then can only make stars.
    They explode, creating large solid objects.
    They being the seeds for planets, in the second generation.

  54. DJ Ward says:

    Since the Big Bang, is an assumption.
    Can you think, of the beginning being different.
    Then could you prove, one or the other.

    What if all space, was the Big Bang.
    Not the point in space, detonating.
    With all things spreading out, from a centre.
    But matter came into existence, in all directions to infinity.
    Having a constant, beginning density.
    The cloud collapses, into infinite suns.
    Those then detonating, into new clouds.

    You therefore, are the centre of the universe.

  55. DJ Ward says:

    If the beginning was uniform, then the image would be uniform.
    Background radiation, would have no more or less dense area.
    But only for the instant, that things were created.
    The further in time you get, the more chaotic the image.
    The furthest in time you can go, is the present.
    Now look at the results, how organised space is.

    If space also expands, at a constant rate.
    Then space has doubled in size, many times.
    The background radiation is space, but not like the present.
    The age of the universe, divided by the distance limit.

    How is it possible, to have the Big Bang.
    Certainly we went in a direction, from its centre.
    The universe would be brighter on one side, and darker on the other.

  56. DJ Ward says:

    I’m stressed out, with some little panic attacks.
    So changing the subject, is a good thing to help.
    For me it’s science, science is my place to escape.

    What if all the universe, had no advanced thoughts.
    No creature like humans, to perceive it exists.
    Can the universe, then actually exist.
    It would start, and come to an end.
    But it would not be observed, to have evidence.
    How can something not perceived, then also exist.
    Maybe the universe, has happened infinity times.
    Never ending up, actually existing as an idea.

    Maybe humans, are more special than they think.

  57. DJ Ward says:

    I have been thinking, about the 2 slit experiment.

    If the detector, can detect the particle.
    How exactly, does that communication take place.
    The particles sharing energy, with the detector.
    And changing, the experiments result.
    What happened to the particle, for its path to change.
    It must be a force of nature, it outputs as a curve of probabilities.
    One distribution, or the other distribution.
    Something very yes, or very no happens.
    If the detector is off why does the particle, not still react in the same way.
    The observer circuitry says a photon arrives, they still arrive when it’s off.

    Anyway a different subject, airplanes.–green-air-travel-trailblazer

    I do think for long haul planes, this is the energy option.
    Short haul can be batteries, with drone planes.
    The plane however, is a flying bomb.
    Not much different, to present planes.

    Hydrogen making, is a good battery option.
    In an electricity network, excess energy can make hydrogen.
    Irregular generation types can make hydrogen, helping network stability.

    Bit by bit, humans make hydrogen.
    Little by little the hydrogen escapes, escapes even the atmosphere.
    Age upon age will pass, but earth will lose its hydrogen.
    Tick tick goes the clock, it cannot be stopped.

  58. DJ Ward says:

    Out of interest, I did some calculations.

    It gives a good conversation, on a big problem.
    It’s hard to see, how huge humans impact is.
    One degree Celsius, doesn’t sound like much.
    But the article talks of oceans, and they are not tiny.

    So the question is, how much energy is that.
    For an ocean making a storm, trying to lose one degree.

    The formula for kWh, (4.2 x litres x temp change) / 3600

    Each cubic kilometre of ocean, has 1.667 billion kWh of energy.
    That’s just one degree, and there’s millions of cubic kilometres.
    The storm just a little bit, a small escape of energy.

    When is peak ocean temperature, and what’s that like.
    Certainly it’s not Gods fault, humans did it.

  59. Dj Ward says:

    Got that wrong, it’s 1.167 billion.
    Going from calculator to writing, my memory failed me.

  60. DJ Ward says:

    I have been thinking, about a contradiction.
    About being stationary, in the vacuum of space.
    If time and distance is a solid, then how do you move.
    You are stuck in it, thinking your stationary.

    Imagine two black holes, they are going to collide.
    For a billion years, slowly taking aim at each other.
    Gravity slowly, pulling them together.
    Both thinking they are stationary, the other moving.
    They have a collision speed, so what’s happening.

    Try then say, the speed of light is constant.
    If one is moving, it has speed in one direction.
    Light leaves you faster, in one direction.
    Light leaves you slower, in one direction.

    If light always leaves you, at a constant speed.
    You cannot be moving, so what black hole is moving.

  61. DJ Ward says:

    I’m trying to take my mind, off events.
    So when I can, I try do science arguments.

    I have written, about the permeability of space.
    I think, I made mistakes in the argument.
    So I do look, at the subject.

    Is it true, you cannot see something.
    Unless there is a permeability change, in space.
    A galaxy is less permeable, so we see it.
    An object is less permeable, so we see it.
    We don’t see air, but zoom out and you see it.
    The astronauts see, the thin layer over earth.

    Or is it only, an energy argument.
    Space filled, with super cold objects.
    Space at 3 degrees kelvin, the objects at 3 degrees.
    You cannot see it, in the background.

    Permeability, changes the direction of light.
    Think of the lens, the shadows of rippling water.

  62. DJ Ward says:

    Today has been a good a day, I found a new subject.
    And that doesn’t happen, very often.
    It is good for another argument, about having original thoughts.
    Do humans, actually really have them.
    An original idea, really just a new combination of ideas.
    It was known in its parts, but not in its entirety.
    Like inventing zero, when we new of nothing.
    It’s concept mathematically was new, but it wasn’t new.

    Then in our own minds, it’s completely new.
    Certainly it’s new, if you never knew it.
    But in reality, others already know it.
    It was an original thought, but also isn’t at the same time.
    How would you know, if it’s an original idea.

    This is in that category, I’m certain it’s a known thought.

    Think of the atom, about to eject a photon.
    Probability is exceeded, and the photon is ejected.
    How did it eject, and in what direction.
    What dit it eject from, the electron or nucleus.
    In what direction, does it go in.
    What property remains, what is lost.

    Imagine the electron, travelling at light speed.
    It has mass, so can’t escape the nucleus.
    But the photon, is only energy or momentum.
    Does it then just go in the direction of the electron, at release.
    Tangent to the atoms surface, not from its centre.

    Is it perpendicular, to the atoms centre.
    Magically coming into existence, ejecting in a definite way.
    Does it go in any direction, from the electron.
    Even travelling, trough the atom itself.

    Imagine it’s perpendicular, and released from the electron.
    It would escape at light speed, in both directions.
    Maintaining is momentum, the same as the electron.
    It would have tangent momentum, and it’s release perpendicular momentum.
    Photons would eject, at 45 degrees to the atom.

    Logic then asks, how does the atom catch the photon.
    The electron must catch it, tangent to it.
    Can the electron catch the photon, going in the other direction.

    Energy or momentum, doesn’t get lost in the argument.

  63. Ministry of Men's Affairs says:

    DJ Ward. You clearly hold the World Record for the most consecutive replies to a post at MENZ Issues. This one has 53 uninterrupted replies, and indeed 60 of the total of 63 replies here are yours. Prolific, fantastic.

    The Guinness Book might publish this record.

    Sorry for breaking the consecutive series. If we knew how to place this reply at the top among the few others who have commented here, we would do so, in order to allow your stream of consciousness to continue unscathed.

    We can send a small prize if we know where to send it.

  64. DJ Ward says:

    I’m doing, penance.
    Paying a debt to society, that I can’t pay.
    My thoughts, are all that I can give in return.

    I put them here, as I can’t remember them.
    As quickly as I learn, I forget arguments.
    If I can’t give a bag of coal, I’ll give the opposite.

    A 17 year old me, is very proud of my arguments.
    Somehow things, work far better that he expected.
    He didn’t have a clue, how to explain anything.

  65. Downunder says:

    I’ve said to you before that this is not the way to do this, infesting the comments. Ne an author and State your case.

  66. DJ Ward says:

    Science is a mans thing, with many presents given in time.
    Not to say women, never do well in science.
    Women may be inventive, who invented fire for example.
    Who invented lots of things, in our world.
    Who even knows the future, for science and new ideas.

    Think of the gifts, that Plato gave.
    Socrates dying for them, and Aristotle.
    What present, did Newton give humans.
    Mendal was ignored, and Darwin hated.
    Do we not think, Einstein was genius.

    For men, we have something to celebrate.
    It is us men giving gifts, and we keep on giving.
    I don’t care of my arguments, even if mine are only entertaining.
    I write them anyway, for my own reasons.
    One day maybe I will collect them, these are easy to find.

  67. DJ Ward says:

    Today I felt for a second, the emotion of elation.
    Not for solving anything, but a feeling of understanding.
    Like there’s a door that’s locked, but at least I found the door.

    Anyway, I have an interesting example for #5.

    Imagine a light bulb, with an off and on switch.
    In the circuit, is a variable resister.
    You can go from dim, to bright.

    Rule 1, is on.
    Rule 2, is off.
    Rule 3, is more complex.

    It has energy, you see a photon.
    It has mass, it’s a physical light bulb.
    It has distance, you are one distance from it.
    It has time, taking one time to get to you.

    Rule 4, is our interpretation of emotion.

    If the resistance is high, the light is nearly off.
    If the resistance is low, the light is fully on.
    The light is on, rule 1.
    How close to it being rule 2 off, is the light.
    Can you zoom in, to the line crossing the line.
    If you zoom out, it may look like zero light.
    Is fully on, infinity light to actually be rule 1 on.

    But it can be warm, or cool.
    It can have the emotion, of warmer or colder.
    Is it a hot light, or cold light.
    How are we describing, what we see.

    It’s only the photon, that you detect.
    How exactly, can it then have different emotions.

  68. DJ Ward says:

    What is direction, is it even a thing.
    We imagine direction, because we measured it.

    If an object is travelling in space, in a straight line.
    Look at the line, is it travelling left or right.
    But what if you then, look from the opposite side.
    What was left is now right, and right is now left.
    What was up, is now down.
    What was positive, is now negative.

    Can you decide it’s direction, when your always wrong.
    The object without direction, because it thinks it’s stationary.

  69. DJ Ward says:

    Why does 2H + O = H2O

    The hydrogen, has properties.
    The oxygen, has properties.
    Then magically joined, they make new properties.
    It had emotions as elements, now it has new emotions.

    The universe begins, with no intent.
    There is only, mass and energy.
    To create the Oxygen, things went bang twice.
    Once to create everything, then supernovae.

    How could the beginning, know oxygen would then exist.
    Why is it oxygen, with constant properties.
    One oxygen atom, the same as another.
    Why has any element, it’s own properties.

    Why isn’t it, just positive or negative.
    Why constant layers of electrons, why wavelength outputs.
    Why taste and texture, metallic or not.
    How can any of it be from a plan, it’s all accidental.

    Can you then go to the start, predicting the outcome.
    Every elements properties, was destiny and always inevitable.
    Water was always, going to exist as the emotion water.
    This universe identical, to any other universe.

    The Big Bang, has then inevitable outcomes.
    So I don’t see, universes with different rules.
    No different speed limits, or mass limits.
    No different elements, and always resulting in water existing.

  70. DJ Ward says:

    Since it’s Sunday, why not look at it.
    What are things, can science explain it.
    Everything to me, is a science argument.
    If there’s no science argument, it cannot exist.
    Theory is not accepted, if there’s no physical evidence.
    So can something exist, and also not exist.
    Certainly science is full, of completely new ideas.
    We had no idea, that something exists.

    For example there is no theory, for the word of God.
    You can’t tell, if your writing it or not.
    You can’t tell, if your reading it or not.
    Yet everyone claims, there religion is the word of God.
    We have no theory, and we have no physical evidence.
    Nobody claims, it’s not written by mans own hand.
    One has to assume, it does not exist as a thing.

    The New Testament, is full of compliant arguments.
    Amazing in 2000 years, humans can’t work it out.
    The whole thing, is one big science argument.
    The word of god, is laid bare in arguments.

    We know nothing, more than we know things.

    What is Christ, what is that science argument.
    Even Buddha says he returns, what is that.
    What is enlightenment, or suffering the sins of humans.
    The Holy Ghost, certainly must be just fantasy.
    What is the helper, what is Yahweh the suffering human.

    If you can solve one, does that solve the other mysteries.

  71. DJ Ward says:

    I can get #68, a little bit further in the argument.

    If the light is infinity, and you are infinity distance away.
    You would see no light, but you should see infinity light.
    So if you zoom out, on is off.
    If you zoom in, off is on.

    An example, of an equal and opposite.
    Look in a mirror, your right hand is your left hand.
    Both your own image, and your mirror image exist.
    Just as if you make a positive, you make a negative.
    You make a north, you make a south.
    You make an off, you make an on.

  72. DJ Ward says:

    Making predictions, generally is a mistake.
    Flipping a coin, an example of 50:50.
    Even a miracle can happen, stopping on its edge.
    So looking into the future, is always guessing.

    I came across arguments, about space law.
    Who owns things, and can claim land or objects.
    Is it governments, that claim things.
    USA and China, laying claim to parts of the moon.
    Administration on earth, it’s citizens just subjects.

    Is it the corporate entity, claiming asteroids to mine.
    The business building a city, on Mars.
    The spaceship owner, running a shuttle service.
    The small asteroid, declaring itself a nation.

    What should we stop from happening, and let happen.
    Ownership of things, is a great financial incentive.
    At some point, ownership must happen.
    The moon will be colonised, and become independent.
    Land ownership inevitably, will be the same as on earth.
    Nations and business, family’s and citizens will all own some.

  73. DJ Ward says:

    I like the subject of evolution, as it’s inevitable.
    Science can replicate, any conditions of space.
    A soup of elements, has predicted outcomes.
    You can intentionally create, the building blocks of life.

    Statistical miracles exist, just as the element has a half life.
    The building blocks with time, will begin life in a collision.
    Joining together just right, as an inherent start to life.
    Statistically everywhere in the universe, life has begun.

    The next steps of evolution, was billions of years.
    The first cell and adaptions, even gender has a start.
    A long and lost list of statistical miracles, went into making us.
    If you don’t think your lucky, it’s impossible you exist.

    The odds so great, you are a statistical miracle.
    No matter the argument, there is only ever one of you.

  74. DJ Ward says:

    At some point in time, evolution is sped up.
    Those that don’t adapt, becoming extinct.
    We reference the dinosaur, and an asteroid strike.
    But there is countless events, since then.
    Asteroids causing short ice ages, then volcanos.

    So for humans, there is a defined event.
    Two hypothetical events take place, in our evolution.
    All of us related, to a single individual.
    Only one X chromosome survives, or only one Y.
    Or only a tiny group, survives as X or Y.
    Humans in effect one species, or actually a handful.

    I think science of DNA, will give us the answers.
    Evolution of DNA, occurring at a defined rate.
    The measured change, let’s you measure time.
    Can those events, be attributed to events on earth.
    Where was this first modern human, on planet earth.

    The species extinct, except for one family.
    Huddled in a cave with fire, the winter extreme.
    All the humans elsewhere, have died.

  75. DJ Ward says:

    My thinking, has become a bit random.
    So I’m getting arguments, out of nowhere.
    They are complex, so I won’t remember them.

    You have three bowls, each filled with water.
    One at 30 deg and one at 10 deg, but also one at 20 deg.
    To the 30 deg, both are colder.
    To the 10 deg, both are hotter.
    But the 20 deg is both hotter and colder, at the same time.

    But is that argument, actually flawed.
    The percentage gain from zero kelvin, are different.
    The change from 20 deg looks identical, but actually it’s not.
    If temperature was a line, each deg increases the line by so long.
    A 10 deg gain is not as much, as a 10 deg loss to the line.

    What is temperature, because it’s supposed to be energy.
    By saying temperature, we say it has this much energy.
    Energy is photons, but we imply that the atom has one energy.
    We measure it, and call it temperature.
    What if it’s millions or billions, of photons.
    Zooming around the atom, to give random temperature.
    High energy photons, and low energy photons.

    Or every atom has defined temperature, only this or that temperature.
    It can only eject energy or collect energy, as these photons.
    It has a definable collection, of different photons.
    You cannot then have exact temperature, like a 20 deg atom.
    How correct can it be, if it’s perpetually gaining energy.
    Just as it’s perpetually, losing energy.
    Just by measuring the atom, didn’t it’s temperature change.

  76. DJ Ward says:

    Going to a place is one thing, surviving is another.
    Just as humans went to the moon, they didn’t survive.
    They escaped death, by returning to earth.

    So that’s a question, for any going to a place.
    Going to Mars, or any number of small planets.
    Even to another star, it can’t be just going there.

    So logic dictates, there is no advanced alien.
    None that’s arrived here, or we would be colonies.
    No questions would exist, about aliens existing.

    We are on our own, local stars ours for colonies.
    Ships travelling hundreds of years, to get to a star.
    Starting the colony, then travelling to the next star.
    Slowly humans spread, taking life with it.
    Plants and animals, fish and insects.
    Humans must arrive, to things already there.
    Unmanned spacecraft, maybe even hundreds of them.
    All timed to arrive, at a similar time.


    So to colonise Mars, what’s the actual plan.
    To go there just to return, with no self sufficiency.
    Everything time limited, without constant supply.
    That can’t be the goal, just to achieve that.

    What if everyone joined in, even with little projects.
    No humans are needed, you just send stuff.
    All landing, in an agreed area.
    Hundreds of things, all available when the humans land.

    Things for making energy, things for processing air.
    A CNC lathe and a furnace, tools and equipment.
    Bolts and screws, electronic parts and circuits.
    All the things, so you can make things.
    A graveyard of parts, located and cataloged.
    You can solve a problem on earth, then go get the bits.
    If everyone committed to 1,000 tons total, imagine the possibility.

    If that happens, Mars will be more than a place to visit.
    In no time humans will test, having babies on Mars.

  77. DJ Ward says:

    I have had an argument, for some time.
    It makes an entry in #5, as a random comment.
    I get the argument occasionally, so it’s not going away.
    I haven’t tried writing it, because it’s nonsense.

    “Isn’t the moon the point, and you observe it.
    Just as it observes you.”

    That is a science argument, in my mind.
    The photon cannot leave, unless it can arrive.
    And I have tried, to prove the assumption false.
    That a photon, can go forever into nothing.
    Energy is perpetually lost, into space.
    Space becoming filled, with just energy.

    What then if the assumption was true, is there proof.
    Energy is not lost, it goes from one thing to another.
    So the universe cannot change, it’s energy constant.
    If it’s lost, explain where it’s gone.

    So while it sounds nonsense, as an assumption.
    Can a photon leave, if it cannot arrive.

  78. DJ Ward says:

    I’m under some stress, especially from work.
    Difficult tasks, and they only have me capable.
    Time frames are short, expectations are high.
    Maybe it’s for good reason, taking my mind off life.

    Anyway I have an argument, about a strange imaginary object.

    Imagine a marble sized object, floating in space.
    It has a special property, it absorbs energy.
    Doesn’t sound special, everything does that.
    Now imagine the object, not emitting energy.
    Nothing does that, not even the black hole.

    What temperature would it reach, if it couldn’t blow up.
    You can calculate by rate of temperature change, the universes energy.
    Absorbing everything, that interacts with it.
    You couldn’t see it, you would not see it emitting energy.

    If that is an analogy, for a black hole.
    What is the temperature, in the black hole.
    You may see it’s mass as gravity, but not see it’s energy.
    At what temperature, is the strange object limited to.
    Then the same for the black hole, a temperature limit.

    The black hole surrounds itself, with a galaxy.
    All of it shining light, towards the black hole.
    Insatiable, all the energy is disappearing.

    The point is trying to become, all mass and all energy.

  79. DJ Ward says:

    Energy is a strange thing, it appears from nowhere.

    Imagine your an object, travelling in space.
    You have a speed, but you don’t feel it.
    You can’t measure the energy, when you accelerate.
    You are the same, before and after.

    You stand still on earth, but go the speed of a bullet.
    If earth magically stoped rotating, you go flying.
    You instantly go super fast, but never accelerated.

    Imagine the object, going in a strait line fast.
    Following on the line, another object.
    Just faster, it bumps into the first object.
    But at the same speed, going the other way is boom.

    The first and second object, had the same energy.
    But one version of colliding, huge amounts of energy appeared.
    The objects released energy, the mass did not carry.
    What then was the energy, we did not see.

    I highly suspect, distance and time are involved.
    An object has mass and energy, but also distance and time.

  80. DJ Ward says:

    Today in court, worked out well.
    They called it, a judicial intervention.
    So what I expected, did not happen.
    I behaved myself, and have a new court date.

    The result is hopefully, more comments here.
    I don’t know when, even what subject the argument is.
    Apart from #5 which took forever, to work out.
    The rest are very random, because they are random.

    So this is an example, of just writing anyway.


    I had an argument, about space being a solid.
    That it is a thing, it’s not just nothing as the vacuum.
    We think we freely move in it, but we don’t.
    If we didn’t interact with it, we would go in a straight line.
    We don’t do that, gravity changes our path.
    Where is this thing, called gravity.
    What is the interaction, to change our path.

    We know that mass is involved, we can measure it.
    Distance is involved, we can measure it.
    Time is involved, as you have gravity waves.
    Energy is involved, the object is accelerated.
    Gravity is always on, it never goes away.
    Gravity even escapes, the black hole.

    If mass displaces, distance and time.
    An atom, has next to no gravity.
    It hardly displaces any space, with near no effect.
    Get a high mass star, the gravity looks insane.
    Stars for example, eating planets tearing them apart.

    It’s like gravity, is trying to put it back together.
    It flew apart, in the Big Bang.
    Distance and time, try to make it whole again.
    If distance and time go to infinity, but the universe has an age.
    The universe of mass, is a tiny speck.

    Explain why mass attracts, but does not repel.
    Are we not lucky, the other way creates nothing.
    Nothing would attract, making galaxies and stars.
    It attracts, therefore we can exist.

  81. DJ Ward says:

    I’m going on a holiday, with the family.
    So I’m having a little break, from writing.
    Haven’t been on a plane for a while, so that’s good.
    And it’s the first trip, for my children.
    It shouldn’t be as scary, as there go in a fertiliser plane.

    I at least found a good argument, trying to describe energy.
    So I can spend some time, with a good subject while I’m away.
    I have been thinking, about something we are certain about.

    energy = 1/2 mass x velocity^2.

    If the object comes to a dead stop, the mass gains that energy.
    It goes from one temperature, to a higher temperature.
    It has a speed limit, to when it goes nuclear.
    But imagine the energy released, by that limit.
    See there is something nonsense, about energy.

    Is that where energy, has disappeared into.
    It becomes, mass gaining distance and time.
    You can’t see the energy, it’s disappeared.
    It does not exist, yet it exists.
    Stop it, you are certain the energy exists.

  82. DJ Ward says:

    How perfect, is the universe.
    Newton described it as perfect, motion balanced.
    Something orbiting the sun, travels in a perfect way.
    You can define its trajectory, with a defined mathematical shape.
    Einstein showed us, things are not exact.
    The object travelling towards you, vs travelling away from you.

    What does that mean, to the object orbiting the sun.
    It starts with no velocity, at the orbits extreme.
    Then gains velocity, towards the sun.
    As it speeds up, it travels trough more space.
    Faster and faster, until it reaches the closest to the sun.

    Relevant to the sun, it now has enormous kinetic energy.

    It then travels away from the sun, getting slower and slower.
    Eventually it reaches the start, as if nothing happened.
    All that potential energy, disappears.
    Gravity can give energy, but also can take it away.
    At the start, it has gravitational potential energy.
    It’s stationary vs the sun, but the energy is enormous.

    If gravity, travels at the speed of light.
    You encounter more gravity, travelling towards it.
    You encounter less gravity, travelling away from it.
    Things get confusing, as to what’s changing.
    Do you go faster then slower, than Newton describes.

    But it is all relevant, to the sun.
    If the object was at the start, and the sun disappeared.
    It had enormous energy, but actually has itself none.
    Did the object have the energy, or did the sun have it.

    If you orbited with it, relevant to you it’s always stationary.
    It’s nonsense then to say, it had any energy at all.
    How can you carry, meters per second but be stationary.

  83. DJ Ward says:

    Time travel, is impossible.
    You can’t go backwards in time, that’s certain.
    And we can’t go faster, than we experience time.
    We can’t magically go forward, or backwards in time.

    Humans however, can actually do it.
    Do you not have a memory, going back in time.
    You can place yourself there, as if it’s happening.
    Can you not dream, of some future thing.
    You can place yourself there, as if it’s happening.
    It’s imaginary and not existing, but you can experience it.

    What if you go a step further, like a chain of people.
    You think of a person in the past, creating a story about them.
    You think of a person in the future, creating a story about them.
    But the person in the past, also created the story about you.
    And the person in the future, also created the story about you.
    No matter the time frame, everyone is the same person.
    The person of the future, is thinking of a person in the future.

    If you read a book, can you not become anyone.
    Be then the person, who is in the future.
    Report back in the present, on the story the person is making.
    If you write it down, do you not make them in the future.
    What then of the statistical miracle, of a soul travelling in time.
    The body may be different, but the person is the same.

    So time travel is impossible, as all of that is imaginary.
    Nature never planed for an enigma, the human mind thinking.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar