Sergey D. Sukhotinsky's Blog

Message-ID: <BLU138-W162A830E10DF6B665ECCF5DBE60@phx.gbl>

From: Sergey Sukhotinsky <sukhotinsky@live.com>

To: Sergey Sukhotinsky <cognitive.walkthrough@gmail.com>

Subject: The Double Moon Formation. The "Condensation/Ejected Ring" Concept. (The Formation Of Multiple Satellites Of A Celestial Object).

Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:33:42 +0700

--

   From my previous post "The Formation Of A Satellite Of A Celestial Object By The Differentiation Of Particles' Speed Vectors." < http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/10/formation-of-satellite-of-celestial.html > it seems that it's impossible to deny that when the material was gathered to create Earth, some part of it did not go to the center, instead it kept on orbiting around it to start creating Moon. The question is, what percentage of the Moon's body was added by the mechanism? Did not exist another mechanism to add the material to the Moon?

   The mentioned mechanism can be attributed to the Condensation Theory, as the ring of the outer stuff and the stuff inside the ring started to condense almost at one time. But the question remains, can't the process of condensing of inner stuff cast off more rings? (In the mentioned above my previous post "The Formation Of A Satellite Of A Celestial..." I wrongly used "disk" word instead of "ring", my language problem, sorry.)

   It seems the gravity force can make the inner stuff to cast off another one or more rings. What would be the effect of the differentiation of the inner stuff by its density? Maybe I, Sergey D. Sukhotinsky, the author of this post am missing something, but the effect of the differentiation would be increased speed of rotation to keep angular momentum. If the viscosity of the stuff is significant, the outer layer would be rotating fast enough to get ejected on Equator. New ring would be formed.  

   The rings are not parts of the Geodynamo. But, probably, are affected by the Geodynamo's magnetic field that gets reversed from time to time. That's why, probably, their orbits were inclined relative to Equator plane. Accordingly, the Earth's Equator plane got inclined relative to the plane of Solar system. Over time the rings condensed into two or more moons. The "moons" collided eventually due to the gravitational interaction with the Earth and each other.

   The idea described above in this post and in my previous post "The Formation Of A Satellite Of A Celestial Object By The Differentiation Of Particles' Speed Vectors." < http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/10/formation-of-satellite-of-celestial.html > looks like to be valid on a bigger scale: not only for the formation of satellites of planets, but also for satellites of stars, - why not to think that the material for an innermost planet was ejected by the process described in this post?

© 2011 Sergey D. Sukhotinsky.
http://sukhotinsky.blogspot.com/
http://weblogs.asp.net/SergeyS
--- 

Message-ID: <BLU138-W24BA1248B352BCA35B5A95DBFC0@phx.gbl>
From: Sergey Sukhotinsky <sukhotinsky@live.com>
To: Sergey Sukhotinsky <cognitive.walkthrough@gmail.com>
Subject: The Formation Of A Satellite Of A Celestial Object By The Differentiation Of Particles' Speed Vectors.
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 03:55:03 +0700
-- 

   In my previous post "Hawaii Convergent, Part 2. Introducing The Concept Of Geofracture (not Plate) Tectonics." < http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/10/hawaii-convergent-part-2-introducing.html > I proposed the concept of the interdisciplinary study on formation and evolution of the Earth's upper solid layer. As the main driving force of the formation and evolution is suggested to be by Moon/Sun, I need a concept when and how Moon was formed. Upon searching for the concept, I could not find any that would fit my vision; probably I should had searched more; or just let's try to develop the concept:
--
- The stuff around the (now) Earth's orbit gets gathered into the gaseous pre-Earth.

- The particles are colliding, thus loosing their speed through radiation.

- The particles that happened to stay high on the circular orbits, are getting less and less likely to be disturbed by a collision because particles with "wrong" orbits are getting trapped by the mess in the center; the trapped by the mess are losing their speed and getting down onto the lower orbits.

- Fallen down particles eventually form liquid Earth; but the "coherent" (so to say) by the vector of speed, particles form disk around Earth above Equator.

- The disk is not a part of the Geodynamo anymore, but, still, probably is getting affected by the Geodynamo's magnetic field that gets reversed from time to time. That's why, probably, the Moon's orbit got inclined relative to Equator plane.

- The particles within the disk are getting condensed due to the gravitational interaction, the chunks are gathered into the Moon eventually, so the pattern we see on the Moon's surface may not necessarily all be due to collisions with asteroids, some "big picture" formations probably could be the result of the process of the chunks gathering.
--   
      The described above process of the formation of the Moon by the differentiation Of particles' speed vectors could probably work for other celestial objects; Saturn probably still is in the process with it's disks. On a bigger scale the concept could probably be applied to the relation between Sun and the planets, or even between stars in a star system.

Sergey D. Sukhotinsky.
http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/
http://sukhotinsky.blogspot.com/
http://weblogs.asp.net/SergeyS/default.aspx
---

Message-ID: BLU138-W6990FC2FFFC5180FD81B7DBF80@phx.gbl
From: sukhotinsky@live.com
To: cognitive.walkthrough@gmail.com
Subject: Hawaii Convergent, Part 2. Introducing The Concept Of Geofracture (not Plate) Tectonics.
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:21:30 +0700

Software industry to address Plate Tectonic.
   With the "Model First" concept a developer still needs to suggest a model. What if a model were to be built automatically, based on a set of observations? That's probably too fantastic in a general case. But, does a special case exist to justify it? I think, yes, this can be Plate Tectonics, Earth Science.

   The very nature of Earth Science is that it's impossible to reach the depths of the Earth to see directly what's going on there. So different models exist to explain the tectonic processes. The most widely accepted one is Plate Tectonics. Phrases like "is thought to be", "is widely accepted", "is postulated", etc are not uncommon within the model. The mainstream of the model does not take Earth as a rotating body at all and one could find other issues with the model on the closer look at it.

   Software "Model First" evangelists are scientists, for sure. They are the most advanced specialists to handle future "Behavior First" concept. So, the question is, why have Software and related industries wait for "Earth Science" scientists to figure out which model fits better the geology/geophysics observations? Why not to help them to convert the stream of ongoing observations into the process of building the relevant model? The best professionals to handle the task belong to software industry.

   Let's name some reasons why Software and related industries may consider participating in building the relevant Tectonic model of the Earth:

a) Software industry:
1. The industry possesses the best professionals to handle the task. The task spans both "Model First" and "Behavior First" domains. It would be only natural for the industry to jump on the train, running one of the AI rails.
2. Good knowledge of possible future seismic events is vital to the industry.

b) Electronic Components and Electronic Devices industries:
1. Steady supply of materials is vital for the industry. Plate Tectonics is not only about how do continents move. Plate Tectonics is also about how do the deposits of elements form and where to dig them. (See "Porphyry Copper. More On Reshaping Pangaea (Gondwana)" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/07/porphyry-copper-more-on-reshaping.html ), some ideas were left behind the post.)
2. The same as the point 2 for Software industry.
3. The industries could provide the hardware that is optimized to address the task.

c) Other industries, to name a few: auto-, mil- related, etc.
1. A set of reasons including some of those mentioned above.

Suggesting Active Boundary Plate Tectonics model.
   Probably I would not post it if I, Sergey D. Sukhotinsky, the author of this message had not developed the draft of new concept of Plate Tectonics. The concept, in my opinion, is quite promising as I found it to explain the tectonics-related observations quite nicely. The story started on 26-Apr,2011 when I posted a request to "Tectonics & structural geology discussion list" <GEO-TECTONICS@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> to review new concept of forces behind continental drift, post #5932 on 26-Apr,2011 and post #5955 on 3-May, 2011.

   The concept "Active Boundary Plate Tectonics" is based on a few suggestions. Below are some adapted excepts from my post Item #6247 24-Aug 2011 12:35 - A message on Active Boundary Plate Tectonics.<GEO-TECTONICS@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>, the post in full is at the end of this message:)

---
- the suggestion that under the deformations the transition layer between crust and magma propagates in the direction of lower temperature;

- the suggestion that if the transition layer reached surface, it would build either:
a) divergent boundary if enough cooling of the surface were present (water layer over oceanic floor, say East Pacific Rise);
b) convergent boundary if the transition layer reached atmosphere (not enough cooling), I'd say - Hawaii. The upper layers of magma is getting spoiled by sediments and nearby chain of underwater volcanoes can't build the strong (divergent) boundary. (We assume the region to be under compression, not extension.)

- some other suggestions to be discussed later;
---

   The derived ideas range from geographically very local to the planet-wide ideas:

- Big picture on continental formation end evolution, (my (somewhat outdated) blog post "Continental Formation And Evolution Revisited". ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/05/continental-formation-and-evolution_18.html ))

- Latest super-continent Pangaea layout. There was a post on this list #6165 (13-Jul, 2011) "Request for links to resources on alternative Pangaea layouts." The proposed layout was to place Australia, India, and NZ on the West of South America. Australia to be connected to "Atacama desert" region, India's cratons to be places on the North-West of Australia. NZ to be connected to South America below Australia. One of the evidences was the location of porphyry copper deposits, (my blog post "Porphyry Copper. More On Reshaping Pangaea (Gondwana)".( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/07/porphyry-copper-more-on-reshaping.html ))

- Mountain formation. (my blog post "Formation Of Mountain Ridges by Broken Process Of Subduction" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/05/mountain-ridges-formation-keeping-it.html )). Tibet/Himalaya formation mechanism was suggested - by the series of "broken processes of subduction".

- Intra-continental tectonic processes. Some evidences of divergent processes within continents were pointed out: - my posts "The Snake River Plain As A Divergent Boundary" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/06/snake-river-plain-as-divergent-boundary.html ), "Diverging Processes Within Las Vegas Valley" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/07/diverging-processes-within-las-vegas.html ), "Diverging The Southern Death Valley" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/06/diverging-southern-death-valley.html ), "Evidences Of Diverging Processes Within Tibet Mountain System." ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/08/navigate-to-abdipasa-turkey.html ), "Ural-Putorana Diverged, Suggesting The Global Mechanism" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/08/ural-putorana-diverged-suggesting.html ), "Evidences Of Old Diverging Process Within North Anatolian Mountains. ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/08/navigate-to-abdipasa-turkey.html )".

   It was suggested that the diverging processes were behind the "Flood Basalt" events. The Snake River Plain divergent process was suggested to correlate to flood basalts on the North and on the South of the plain. The event of diverging Ural from Putorana was suggested to be one of the primary cause of Siberian Traps flood basalts (my blog post "Ural-Putorana Diverged, Suggesting The Global Mechanism" ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/08/navigate-to-abdipasa-turkey.html )).

  The most exciting for me was my work on my post "Black Sea. Some Thoughts On Its Opening And On The Origin OF The Crimean Mountains." ( http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/2011/08/black-sea-some-thoughts-on-its-opening.html ) The post was about that the divergent boundary - the Shatsky Ridge separated the Crimean  Mountains off the Pontic Mountains. Some evidences were discussed.

Why not "Model First" ideologist to take care of Plate Tectonics model?

Thank you,
Sergey D. Sukhotinsky.

---

Item #6247 (24 Aug 2011 12:35) - A message on Active Boundary Plate Tectonics.
<GEO-TECTONICS@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
Subject:  A message on Active Boundary Plate Tectonics.
Reply-To: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list <GEO-TECTONICS@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:35:17 +0300
 
Dear GEO-TECTONICS list members,

   On 26-Apr,2011 I posted a request to review new concept of forces behind continental drift, post #5932 on 26-Apr,2011 and post #5955 on 3-May, 2011. I would agree it would be better to prepare a work, publish it, and then to discuss it on the forum,  For some reason I got no option to go the standard way. Let me to sum up what I've done since then in a short message. I am not sure I'll have an opportunity to continue the work (though I'll be trying to continue it).

   The initial concept did not transform too much. As for now, the concept "Active Boundary Plate Tectonics" is based on the next suggestions.

- the suggestion that under the deformations the transition layer between crust and magma propagates in the direction of lower temperature;

- the suggestion that if the transition layer reached surface, it would build either:
a) divergent boundary if enough cooling of the surface were present (water layer over oceanic floor, say East Pacific Rise);
b) convergent boundary if the transition layer reached atmosphere (not enough cooling), I'd say - Hawaii. The upper layers of magma is getting spoiled by sediments and nearby chain of underwater volcanoes can't build the strong (divergent) boundary.

- third suggestion to be discussed later;

   The derived ideas range from very local geographically to planet-wide:

- Big picture on continental formation end evolution, (my blog post "Continental Formation And Evolution Revisited".)

- Pangaea layout. There was a post on this list #6165 (13-Jul, 2011) "Request for links to resources on alternative Pangaea layouts." The proposed layout was to place Australia, India, and NZ on the West of South America. Australia to be connected to "Atacama desert" region, India's cratons to be places on the North-West of Australia. NZ to be connected to South America below Australia. One of the evidences was the location of porphyry copper deposits, (my blog post "Porphyry Copper. More On Reshaping Pangaea (Gondwana)".)

- Mountain formation. (my blog post "Formation Of Mountain Ridges by Broken Process Of Subduction"). Tibet/Himalaya formation mechanism was suggested - by the consecutive "broken processes of subduction".

- Intra-continental tectonic processes. Some evidences of divergent processes within continents were pointed out: - my posts "The Snake River Plain As A Divergent Boundary", "Diverging Processes Within Las Vegas Valley", "Diverging The Southern Death Valley", "Evidences Of Diverging Processes Within Tibet Mountain System.", "Ural-Putorana Diverged, Suggesting The Global Mechanism", "Evidences Of Old Diverging Process Within North Anatolian Mountains.".
   It was suggested that the diverging processes were behind the "Flood Basalt" events. The Snake River Plain divergent process was suggested to correlate to flood basalts on the North and on the South of the plain. The event of diverging Ural from Putorana was suggested to be one of the primary cause of Siberian Traps flood basalts (my blog post "Ural-Putorana Diverged, Suggesting The Global Mechanism").

   A few words in conclusion. The proposed concept of Active Boundary Plate Tectonics seems to be quite efficient concept. It could be used to explain not only intercontinental tectonic processes, but also to explain very local intra-continental tectonic processes.

Thank you.
Sergey D. Sukhotinsky.

--
PS.
   The most exciting for me was my work on my post "Black Sea. Some Thoughts On Its Opening And On The Origin OF The Crimean Mountains." The post was about that the divergent boundary - the Shatsky Ridge separated the Crimean  Mountains off Pontic Mountains. Some evidences were discussed:
- Matching mountains on Anatolia (Dongelce) and Crimea (Laspi) side. The rectangular mountain structures can be found only in this "bent" part of Pontic Mountains.
- Matching mountains all over the divergent mountain system (Yalta, Crimea to match Aydincik-Doganyurt, Turkey; Feodosia, Crimea to match Caylioglu, Turkey; Novorossiysk-Anapa, Russia fit Carsamba, Turkey).
   The mechanism that diverged the mountain system was discussed. The origin of deep see locations around Laspi was suggested.

   I posted about two dozens of posts on Plate Tectonics on my blog http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com. Now I've made most of the posts private, but still on-demand are available the timestamped editions of them and their drafts that are stored in the cloud.

(I think, some day the blog platform host will introduce the feature to make public the saved editions of a blog post.)
 
 

2011-04-14

Basically the idea is to let a user to record a pattern of some repetitive event coresponding to some physical or non-physical entity, upload it to servers (say, Google's), apply an expert algorithm over the uploaded pattern to get the characteristics of the physical or non-physical entity. The algorithm is to be stored on the servers, but it can be downloaded and run on the client, say, in Javascript.

To illustrate the idea:
Imagine someone has bought an air conditioner. And he wanted to monitor its working parameters from time to time. A new airconditioner has a certain vibration pattern. Any even potential failure would show in the changed vibration pattern. So he would get his mobile device, attach a vibration sensor to the air conditioner, measure the pattern, send it to the servers. The algorithm would compare the pattern with the patterns supplied by the air conditioner manufacture, and the expert statement would be generated about the health of the air conditioner motor and compressor parts. The sensors can be universal to be attached to many different devices, or stationary, that is specific to a device and placed (or even built-in) in the device. The communication between a handheld and the sensor can be wireless, infrared or of any other kind.

The pattern can be of any physical or non-physical origin: vibrational, sound, electromagnetic etc, etc (even behavioral). A proper pattern can talk a lot about the underlying processes.

The scope of the entities to be monitored is virtually unlimited, just to name a few:
- Vehicles: cars - many points to monitor, bicycles, scateboards;
- Home applience,
- Industry-related set-ups: wind or steam tourbines, any kinds of engines, compressors etc;
- Bridges, roads under the repetetive load;
- Human body - a lot of ties with the specific charecteristics;
- etc, etc;

Just an idea, quite obvious though.

A system box to contain the next blocks:

- "System" block - basically this is a MotherBoard shrinked to one chip plus a number of fast optical interfaces, say Intel's Thunderbolt, plus some usual interfaces, USBs for example. The "MotherBoard" should not feature neither PCI bus, nor RAM interface. But some basic video would be nice to have on-board. Ideally, this System block should be "System-On-Chip" capable to run simple tasks in stand-alone mode.

- CPU block - one or more Intel or AMD CPUs with some super fast RAM on-board;

- RAM block - a block with some GBytes of DDR3+ RAM;

- Storage block - an HDD or Solid Disk Drive;

- Other blocks (Video, for instance);

To start with, I'd like the box to contain 4 System blocks, 4 CPU blocks, 4 RAM blocks, and 4+ Storage blocks. Each System block should be physically connected to many other blocks (the more the better) through the fast optics (Intel's Thunderbolt). As the dynamic inter-system allocation of the CPU/RAM/Storage is a matter of rather distant future, it would be nice, to start with, if the configuration were defined in the Box BIOS. Some System block would take over the Box BIOS and a user would configure the Box on power-up.

So, if needed, a user will allocate all the resourses to just one system, let's call it "power gamer" mode, or it will be just 4 independent PCs - "Office PC" mode. Or a user will allocate one system to "Real Time Op System" to monitor some industrial process, one system to provide database back-up, the rest resourses - to handle Business Logic and UI.

The main idea is that, as the fast and cheap serial interfaces by Intel are getting closer to reality, there is no need in that Printed Circuit Board called MotherBoard anymore. A physical Box can contain many blocks, the block can be arranged into required configuration on the power-up of the Box, or in the future cofigured dynamically "on the run" between different operating system.

That's it, why not have separate Windows, Mac, Linux systems to collabore in one box?

What is the best strategy to learn a new language, - to take courses, - to study books on grammar, style, usage, - to listen to audio? That’s the kind of a question every educated person asks himself/herself. The learning curve is expected to be smooth, to let the focus of a person’s main activity stay unaffected.
So, can a big IT company revolutionize the way how people learn and use languages?

The “Common Intermediate Language” concept sounds very promising. People use a lot of languages in their everyday life. Languages are different, but what the languages describe - people, world, relations between people and world are basically the same. Why not introduce Human Common Intermediate Language (HCIL) to describe that?

The main requirement to HCIL will be that it must be parsed and translated correctly by some software tools into any of the main Human Languages. That’s the key point: one way correct automatic translation. HCIL must also be human readable (and understandable). The phonetics for HCIL is not required, but probably HCIL would benefit of it greatly.

So, for HCIL we would require one way correct automatic translation. The opposite way, from a human language to HCIL, the quality automatic translation is impossible in a general case. If it is not possible for any text, then why not give writers a choice to write a text the way it could be parsed by some automatic tools into HCIL. After such parsing into HCIL the author would read the text in HCIL, make sure everything had been parsed correctly, and would tag the text as “HCIL compatible”.

Thus, a writer, once having written a text, can be sure the text could be read and understood correctly in a hundred of other languages.

It would be great if the diagram of the process of parsing writer’s text into HCIL would be available to the reader.  The reader would be able to check out what Language rules had been applied, and if needed, would follow supplied links to the reputable Language reference sources. That can be very effective way to learn languages especially if audio representation of the text is available.

Summing it up:
- Human Common Intermediate Language (HCIL) needs to be developed.
- The main requirement to HCIL is that it must be one-way automatically parsed and translated correctly into most Human Languages.
- The writer must be supplied with automatic tools to check if his text is “HCIL compatible”, that is, the text can be correctly parsed into HCIL.
- The reader should be supplied with the diagram of the process of parsing writer’s text into HCIL. The diagram should contain all the necessary links to help a reader learn the writer’s Language to understand the process of parsing. The audio representation of the texts and links to phonetic rules would be great.

These 3 items: CPU, RAM, Videocard are logically pretty much decoupled from the rest of the PC System Unit. And when the RAM will be getting nonvolatile, - I don't see why this "brain" should not get physically decoupled from the rest of hardware on the Mother Board. I'd call the rest of hardware - the "spinal column".

That logical "spinal column" would actually be a small PCB, say of nano ITX format with the single (or so) chip to control all the peripherals and provide very basic video and very basic CPU power. So, that without the "brain" it would be equal to "Celeron"-based PC just to be able of doing some office work or so.

This block should feature some fast backbone to get connected to "brain". The "brain" - a set of one or more PCBs to hold powerful integrated circuits - FPGA or CPLD with their RAM. These "brain" blocks should be universal in the future and may or may not contain video connector. The running application would reconfigure FPGA/CPLD "on the fly" to address its current needs - max performance or whatever like it was described in my previous post "Blank-Powerful-Client Architecture" http://weblogs.asp.net/sergeys/archive/2009/08/25/blank-powerful-client-architecture.aspx.

Imagine a client is based not on a CPU like Intel Core, and not even on a GPU like the one built in a video card by NVIDIA or AMD/ATI. Imagine a client's main brain were some CPLD or FPGA, that could be configured dynamically.

 In other words it would be sort of GPU, that is devided not into 250 "hard-wired" processor units, but rather into 100 000 elementary parts of that 250 units. And you can download the cofiguration into the CPLD/FPGA to force it to be 250 graphic processors, or  force it to be 1000 of just 16 bit general purpose processors, or whatever configuration the current running task is demanding.

Such CPLD/FPGA  hardware is universal, so they could be mass produces (much more than GPUs) and thus be cheap. And also, since the CPLD/FPGA  technology evolves, the number of elements will be getting virtually unlimited. So, why should we "hardwire" CPU architecture? Just download the architecture "On-Demand" to target the current task.

The concept resembles somewhat Visual WebGui "Empty Client Architecture". The client also can be very lite on software initially. The point is that the client is very poweful in terms of hardware and the hardware is very cheap and universal. Microsoft, in my opinion, should rethink the concept of Operating System to address the hardware revolution.

The lowest level of Op System in the future would be not operating a "hard-wired" CPU, but rather gathering the Processor Matrix from a huge set of available elementary blocks and then to build from some repository the most appropriate higher level Software System. The repository could be local, of course, and the client could be autonomous, but, in the future, the communication to some "Cofiguration Knowledge Center" would become more and more vital.