Wobbly Universe

At the NASA web site the following description is found about a polar map of Jupiter.

This map of Jupiter is the most detailed global color map of the planet ever produced. The round map is a polar stereographic projection that shows the south pole in the center of the map and the equator at the edge. It was constructed from images taken by Cassini on Dec. 11 and 12, 2000, as the spacecraft neared Jupiter during a flyby on its way to Saturn.

The map shows a variety of colorful cloud features, including parallel reddish-brown and white bands, the Great Red Spot, multi-lobed chaotic regions, white ovals and many small vortices. Many clouds appear in streaks and waves due to continual stretching and folding by Jupiter's winds and turbulence. The bluish-gray features along the north edge of the central bright band are equatorial "hot spots," meteorological systems such as the one entered by NASA's Galileo probe. Small bright spots within the orange band north of the equator are lightning-bearing thunderstorms. The polar region shown here is less clearly visible because Cassini viewed it at an angle and through thicker atmospheric haze.

Image Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute

Jupiter polar map produced by NASA from photos taken December 11-12, 2000.

It is clear that there are several types of features that repeat around that planet at fairly regular intervals. There are regular white spots about half way between the pole and equator, and much closer regular notches nearer to the equator.

Several of these features are marked on the map below, and in some places where the pattern is not clear it is continued until it links with the same pattern further around.

Jupiter polar map showing harmonics of 12, 24, 72 and 144.

The smaller wave pattern is made clearer in the following magnification. There is a Full size image of Jupiter available at this same scale at NASA.

A magnification shows the regularity of the wave identified as the 72nd harmonic.

It so happens that there is an explanation based on the harmonic formation of waves in a non-linear system that predicts that certain harmonics should be much stronger than others. It is called The Harmonics Theory and was developed by me, Ray Tomes. Here is a graphic showing the predicted relative power in various harmonics:

Predicted Strong Harmonics from 1 to 100 according to the Harmonics Theory

Quite clearly, 12, 24 and 72 (also 144 not shown on this graph) are expected to be strong harmonics. The reason that certain harmonics are stronger than others is that they can be formed in more ways. This type of behaviour is not observed in essentially linear systems such as a guitar string, where no harmonics are especially strong relative to their neighbours. But in 2 and 3 dimensional structures, especially nearly closed systems where standing waves can last for a long time, not only do harmonics form, but harmonics of harmonics.

This means that a wave that divides the planets circumference in 2 for example will itself have divisions which will therefore divide the planets circumference in 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and so on. Likewise a wave that divides the planet into 3 will form harmonics that divide it into 6, 9, 12 and so on. Because some numbers can be factorised in many more ways than others, these strong harmonics will be more evident when we see pictures of Jupiter or any other nearly closed system which can sustain standing waves for long periods of time.

Harmonics theory also makes predictions of much smaller waves (larger order harmonics) and these predictions are also found in cloud patterns on Earth. When applied to the entire universe, the theory explains why there are certain scales of distance at which structures prefer to form and these include galaxies, stars, planets, moons as well as cells, atoms and nuclear particles. Based on the predicted and observed patterns, it can be concluded that the universe is much larger than many cosmologists currently believe.

The title is just a fancy way of saying that some women seem to have four colour receptors in their eyes rather than the usual three. Actually some people also have a different set of three and this was known for some time before the discovery that quite a few women see extra colours than the rest of the population. Of course some men are missing a receptor and have only two and as a result are called colour blind. Compared to tetrachromats we are all colour blind.

[For Americans, some of the world spell color as colour and colorblind as colourblind and so on. This is just to help the search engines to find this page.]

"Oh, everyone knows my color vision is different," chuckles Mrs. M, a 57-year-old English social worker. "People will think things match, but I can see they don't." What you wouldn't give to see the world through her deep blue-gray eyes, if only for five minutes.

Preliminary evidence gathered at Cambridge University in 1993 suggests that this woman is a tetrachromat, perhaps the most remarkable human mutant ever identified. Most of us have color vision based on three channels; a tetrachromat has four.

The theoretical possibility of this secret sorority -- genetics dictates that tetrachromats would all be female -- has intrigued scientists since it was broached in 1948. Now two scientists, working separately, plan to search systematically for tetrachromats to determine once and for all whether they exist and whether they see more colors than the rest of us do. The scientists are building on a raft of recent findings about the biology of color vision.

This is from Looking for Madam Tetrachromat which goes on to describe the search for women who can see more colours. I guess that we men, and the rest of the female population just have to accept that some women who give interior design advice should be listened to so that the results are suitable for all people, not just trichromats and bichromats (or is that dichromats?).

According to The Science Show site, Robyn Williams states that each year the London Daily Telegraph gives a prize for science writing. The prize for 2004 junior winner was Caoimhe McKenna who’s 18 and who thinks she knows why women are so much better men at seeing colour coding and properly matching clothes. Here’s Caoimhe McKenna's winning piece.

As an Irish, teenage girl, I have often wondered if the world of colour that I perceive with my eyes is the same as that of others. Not only my fellow XX chromosome holders but also those holders of the X chromosome paired with the puny and rather ineffectual Y chromosome, commonly known as "men''. I wonder this as my father sets out to work in his mismatched tie and my brother with his odd socks, while my mother and I discuss various shades of colour to match our newly decorated living room.

Let me begin with a look at the history of our colour vision. We are descendants of nocturnal tree dwellers. Colour vision is thought to have evolved in our ancestors about 35 million years ago, giving them more opportunities to find fruit and leaves to eat. Humans have inherited a colour visual system that is dependant upon three forms of iodopsin, or colour pigments, each responding to light of a different wavelength region. Each form of iodopsin occurs in a different cone type and the relative stimulation of each type is interpreted by the brain as a particular colour.

I can see a demonstration of this when I get up close to my television; there are only three colours: red, green and blue. These coloured spots on the screen stimulate the colour pigments in the retina of my eye to different extents, so that when I stand back I can see all the colours of the rainbow. Maybe. All this is down to that amazing chemical iodopsin. Iodopsin is a pigment that like all proteins is coded for in the DNA of my genes. Interestingly the genes controlling the production of the pigments in the eye that enables discrimination of red and green is sex-linked.

The green and red genes encode photopigments that respond to different, overlapping regions in the middle-to-long wavelength spectrum and are adjacent to each other on the X chromosome. Strangely, the blue photopigment gene is on its own on another chromosome - feeling blue in solitude? This explains why the most common form of colour-blindness, red-green, is hereditary and why it affects about eight per cent of Caucasian males and less than 0.5 per cent of females.

I have two X chromosomes, one from my mother and one from my father's mother (thank you, girls). My brother has to manage with mummy's two photopigment genes on his X chromosome but I have four between my two X chromosomes. This is where it gets interesting.

One of my X chromosomes may have a slightly different green photopigment gene from the other and "X inactivation'' might happen. This well-known biological phenomenon causes some cells to rely on one X chromosome and other cells to rely on the other. I might have four different types of photopigment; blue, red, green and shifted green (or red and shifted red). All I need now for four colour vision (tetrachromacy) is a superior brain.

A recent paper by Kimberly Jameson, Susan Highnote and Linda Wasserman of the University of California, San Diego, concerning females who may have tetrachromacy shows amazing results. Up to 50 per cent of women are tetrachromatic and can use their extra pigments in "contextually rich viewing circumstances". For example, when looking at a rainbow, tetrachromat females can segment it into, on average, 10 different colours, whereas their trichromat brothers and sisters can see only seven, much as Isaac Newton's red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. Consequently, for those special tetrachromat women, this island that they inhabit may be seen in emerald, jade, verdant, olive, lime, bottle and 34 other shades of green. Apparently, men and women do see the world differently.

However, the tetrachromats among us should not think themselves too superior. If you want truly advanced colour vision it might be a good idea to become a bird. Pigeons, according to a paper by the late Francisco Varela of the University Hospital in Paris and colleagues, have five colour receptors and can process visual imagery up to 10 times faster than human beings. While we see a television producing smooth movement in realistic colour they will see dull flickering lights - this may be why you won't see a lot of pigeons watching Birds of a Feather.

In an article A Life More Colorful Cynthia Wood describes that "Jumping spiders are natural tetrachromats, with four kinds of receptors, and while there are no known mammalian tetrachromats, there are believed to be tetrachromats among birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians."

The normal human retina's color receptors are tuned to green, blue, and red. Working together, the three give us our colorful view of the world. When one or more of those color receptors is missing the result is color-blindness. The genes for our red and green color receptors are located on the X-chromosome, giving women a redundant set of receptor genes. This is why men are far more prone to color-blindness than women. In order to be functionally color-blind a woman not only has to be missing a receptor gene on both X-chromosomes, it must be the same gene on each one. The chances of this happening are so slim that only 0.4% of the US female population is affected. By contrast male color-blindness is far more prevalent with 8% of the US male population affected - 95% of them with red or green receptor problems. Color-blindness makes it difficult or impossible to distinguish some colors, depending on which receptor is affected. The term color-blindness itself is somewhat of a misnomer, since color perception is altered, not eliminated. True color-blindness, wherein a person can distinguish no color at all, requires a malfunction of all three kinds of color receptors, and affects only 0.003% of the population regardless of gender.

With reference to searching for tetrachomats in humans, Cymthia Wood goes on to examine the question of whether having the two types of colours receptors in the two X chromosomes would be matched by the necessary brain development to use them ...

Dr. Gabriele Jordan of Cambridge University may have answered that one. She tested the color perception of fourteen women who each had at least one son with the right kind of color-blindness. She set up a test where the subjects had to manipulate and blend two wavelengths of colored light to produce any hue they liked. They then had to match their own results a second time. With normal color vision, several different combinations would match any given hue, with a tetrachromat the possible combinations to produce a visible match would be much reduced. Dr. Jordan reported that two of the fourteen women showed exactly the results she would have expected from a tetrachromat. At least one of the two women reports having a different sense of color from the people around her, with both better color matching and better color memory. While not completely conclusive, this initial study has so far provided our best candidates for natural human tetrachromats.

This is an interesting subject, and I note that the wikipedia article on primary colours does mention tetrachromats, but as other species

To generate optimal color ranges for species other than humans, other primary colors would have to be used. For example, for species known as tetrachromats, with four different color receptors, one would use four primary colors (since humans can only see to 400 nanometers (violet), but tetrachromats can see into the ultraviolet to about 300 nanometers, this fourth primary color might be located in the shorter-wavelength range and would probably be a pure spectral magenta rather than the magenta we see which is a mixture of red and blue).

However there is a wikipedia article on tetrachromacy also which states:

Tetrachromacy is the condition of possessing four independent channels for conveying color information, or possessing four different cones, one other than RGB. Organisms with tetrachromacy are called tetrachromats. For these organisms, the perceptual effect of any arbitrarily chosen light from its visible spectrum can be matched by a mixture of no less than four different pure spectral lights.

The normal explanation of tetrachromacy is that the organism's retina contains four types of higher-intensity light receptors (called cone cells in vertebrates as opposed to rod cells which are lower intensity light receptors) with different absorption spectra. This means the animal can see colors beyond those of a normal human being's eyesight. In practice the number of such receptor types may be greater than four, since different types may be active at different light intensities.

Tetrachromacy has not yet been confirmed in any mammals, though it is likely that it occurs in some birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles, arachnids and insects. Humans and closely related primates normally have three types of cone cells and are therefore trichromats (animals with three different cones). However, at low light intensities the rod cells may contribute to color vision, giving a small region of tetrachromacy in the color space.

It has been suggested that women who are carriers for variant cone pigments may be born as full tetrachromats, having four different simultaneously functioning kinds of cones to pick up different colors.[1] One study suggested that 2-3% of the world's women may have the kind of fourth cone that lies between the standard red and green cones, giving, theoretically, a significant increase in colour differentiation.[2] Although further studies will need to be conducted to verify tetrachromacy in humans, at least one tetrachromat has been identified - "Mrs. M," an English social worker, was discovered in a study conducted in 1993.[3] Variation in cone pigment genes is widespread in most human populations, but the most prevalent and pronounced tetrachromacy would derive from female carriers of major red-green pigment anomalies, usually classed as forms of "color blindness" (protanomaly or deuteranomaly). The biological basis for this phenomenon is X-inactivation.

To take a colour blindess test if you want. Sorry, we can't give you a tetrachromat test because your monitor only has 3 colours. :-)

This article will put forward a view which will be considered radical by experts in physics, climate, human behaviour and probably many other fields. However that does not make it wrong. The fact is that something like 99.9999% of humanity have never been exposed to the thinking put forward here and so it has never been thoroughly tested for its validity. So you, Dear Reader, have a chance to be one of the very few who has a new way to look at things. If seriously considered, this approach will gradually cause connections to be seen between many aspects of the operation of the Universe and as a result the affairs of humans.

As background to the main argument I will present a few pieces of evidence that are relevant. They will seem like they are disjointed at first, but I will show how they make an undeniably strong argument.

1. Climate varies on many different time scales. There are fluctuations of hundreds of millions of years in climate that have major consequences for the type of and distribution of life on Earth. On this longest scale we are presently in one of the colder periods known as ice ages. There are variations of tens to hundreds of thousand years known as the Milankovitch cycles and we are now in a short inter-glacial that is due to end quite soon and return us to the prevailing ice age conditions. There are shorter cycles of hundreds to thousands of years that are not as strong as the others, but still sufficient to cause the rise and fall of civilisations as they make that little bit of difference in how hard it is for people to stay alive. When the going is easier, humans have spare capacity that they turn to culture and other activities than just staying alive. There are shorter fluctuations from decades to years and less, and we call these weather rather than climate. Still, they relate to the yield of crops and other important results in terms of human survival and comfort.

2. Measurements of variations in the Sun are strongly correlated with climate change on Earth. Although this is denied by some people who want to blame global warming totally on human activity, it is really self evident. If the Sun's heat output varies then it must affect temperatures on Earth. But further, it is demonstrated by many scientific papers. These variations are on many scales and many are known to be correlated with climate. There are also orbital and rotational variations of the Earth with respect to the Sun that play a part.

3. Humans have produced far more CO2 and other chemicals into the atmosphere in that last century or two than at any previous time in recorded history. Many people are concerned that human activity will detrimentally affect our environment and push it into some terrible positive feedback that makes the Earth a much more unpleasant place to live. If this happens it will be too late to try and reverse things, so it is wise to be cautious.

4. The evidence put forward regarding climate change an global warming has been highly politicised. This is because of fear and greed. The green faction fear the destruction of our habitat and so look at things with a biased eye to try and find that cause everywhere. The industrialists want to make profits and greed leads them to try to deny the problems. Scientists who write reports are often financed by or sympathetic to one group or the other, or have some additional agenda. Scientists are no less biased than other people, suffering from the same mental weaknesses of desire for income, desire for security and adherence to what they learned at home or school even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

5. Studies of electromagnetic fields (EM) effects on humans find that extra-low frequencies (ELF) can influence human reaction times and emotions. This is not surprising, because these ELF waves are in the same range as human brain wave rhythms. Waves that are slightly faster than normal brain waves can cause faster reaction times while slower ones cause slower reactions. This is quite an expected result as it is common physics for frequencies to entrain systems that have nearby frequencies through resonance. Additionally, other research has shown that people have more accidents when there is strong natural ELF just below the normal human brain wave frequencies. Again, it is no surprise that something that slows the brain and reactions down will cause more accidents, as our bodies move just as fast but our thinking does not keep up.

6. There have been studies that show that war has present cycles of period 11 and 22 years, just the same as sunspots have. The peaks occur at the same time. It is known that the Sunspot cycle cause big variations in the output of various frequencies of radiation and particles which arrive soon after at the Earth. The Solar output affects the Earth's EM field, causing variations in geomagnetic activity as well as fluctuations in the Earth's natural EM oscillation known as the Schumann resonance. This is the period at which the earth's EM field oscillates and it is right in the middle of the human brain wave frequencies, a fact that is probably not coincidence. Is it any wonder then that human behaviour is affected by the Sun, and that humans get more "uppity" and fight more wars at those times that the Sun is causing more agitation of the earth's EM oscillations and human brains too?

Taking all of the above together a pattern begins to emerge. Humans are more active when the Sun is more active. This applies to centuries long cycles as well as shorter ones. The peaks of all the major civilisations over the last few thousand years have been when the Sun is hotter and the earth also hotter. Cold periods have caused bleak periods where sometimes even the recording of history seems to almost die out. Now the question that naturally results from all this, but which no-one has asked:

Is extreme human industrial activity with its possible environmental aspects part of a natural cycle that follows from extremely high Solar activity in recent decades?

In other words, instead of looking for a human OR Solar cause to climate change, might we not see that Solar changes affect humans and that both affect the climate together? If we take away our normal judgments about human behaviour (a big ask I know) then we might see that humans are just pawns or cogs in the whole process. This is not to excuse that behaviour, but to explain its origin. We might still need to take action to change ourselves if we wish to avoid problems, but it should be action based on proper understanding of how we fit into the grand scheme of things.

I know that I will already have pushed many people into an uncomfortable idea, whether they be on one side or the other of climate debate. But sides are not useful, understanding is. And I will press on to the final step in this logic:

What if the Sun, like humans, is just a pawn or cog in the cosmic dance of energies?

This requires a leap of understanding that will need evidence that is beyond the scope of this article. However it can be shown that some of the Sun's has cycle periods are related to wider aspects of the structure of the Universe. The huge geological cycles that show in terrestrial geological formations are closely related to the waves of galaxy distribution in space. The Sun too is dancing to the Universal Cosmic rhythms that pervade the entire Universe. The entire Universe and everything in it is nothing but vibrations of energy, from sub-atomic particles through to galactic super-clusters, all are of the same essence.

In the future I will present further articles that will explain much more about these logical conclusions and show that there are very sound scientific reasons for this view. Whenever I have presented this material to people at conferences I find that it is well received, because people have a feeling for it that they cannot put into words.

In a paper with the title Experiments with rotating collimators cutting out pencil of α-particles at radioactive decay of 239Pu evidence sharp anisotropy of space, S. E. Shnoll, I.A.Rubinshtejn, K. I. Zenchenko, V.A.Shlekhtarev, A.V.Kaminsky, A.A.Konradov and N.V.Udaltsova report on their continuing physics discoveries which in my (not so humble) opinion shows up serious thinking errors in modern physics.

The anisotropy of space referred to in the title means that the properties of space are not the same in all directions. There have been a number of reports in recent years that question the isotropy of space, but this paper reports on results in the laboratory on Earth that clearly show effects in a reproducible form.

The experiment shows that the alpha particles coming out when radioactive plutonium decays do not come out equally often in all directions. The direction is influenced by the relative orientation of the laboratory apparatus to each of the Earth, the Moon, the Sun and the distant Stars or Galaxies. This result is not expected in standard physics and suggests that things are not as random in quantum events as they are believed to be.

Before looking at the exact nature of this experiment it is worth first reviewing the experiments that lead the researchers to look at things in this way.

I met the authors of this paper in Pushchino and elsewhere in Russia in the mid-1990s when I visited their laboratory to find out more about their work and was also invited to give a seminar on my Harmonics Theory. Simon Shnol is the head of the Biophysics Laboratory at Pushchino. Alexander Konradov was at Moscow University and unfortunately died several years ago. Natalia Udaltsova moved from Pushchino to California about a decade ago. I will mention some of my own work related to these experiments which was confirmed by Dr Udalsova later on. Unfortunately the English speaking world has not taken sufficient notice of these important Russian results.

By the mid 1990's, the Biophysics laboratory had already established some important findings. Their work may be seen as a continuation of the work of Giorgio Piccardi who found that certain chemical tests do not behave the same all the time but vary with cosmological factors. There is a long tradition of investigating Cosmological factors in Russia where A Chizhevsky was an important pioneer. The Russians have found that not just a few chemical and biological factors are affected by cosmological configurations, but that indeed all biological, chemical and physical measurements are subject to fluctuations and that these fluctuations have a common cosmological origin.

In a typical experiment, the Pushchino Biophysics laboratory takes regular measurements of the rate of decay of a Plutonium sample. From a series of consecutive measurements they make a histogram. Naturally this histogram obeys the laws of statistics of a Poisson distribution for an expected set of random events. However there is something else going on that is not random. When the histograms are compared to other histograms taken at the same place at different times, it is found that more similar histograms result after 24 hours, after 27 days and after 365 days. Careful measurements show that there is similarity after both 1440 minutes (exactly 24 hours) and also after 1436 minutes. These two periods are the periods of the Earth's rotation relative to the Sun and to the distant stars and galaxies. The other periods show that the Sun and Moon configuration relative to the earth is important.

Many physicists do not want to know about or acknowledge such results because they might be seen as giving support to astrology which to them is a truly shocking thing to have to concede. Let me make it clear that these are real physics results and that supporting astrology is not the motive.

In these latest tests, the physicists decided to slowly rotate their apparatus relative to the Earth so that the rotation of the earth was cancelled out. When they did that the 24 hour period of similarity in histograms disappeared. Then they tested with the apparatus rotating 3 times per day in the same direction as the earth. This resulted in similar histograms every 359 and 360 minutes, being 1/4 of the original 1436 and 1440 minutes. The reason for this being 1/4 with 3 rotations per day is that the Earth's actual rotation is also occurring so that the apparatus is really rotating 4 times per day relative to the stars.

Quite clearly the experiments show that atomic phenomena are sensitive to the inertial frame of the universe and also to the direction of the Sun and Moon in the sky. There is no means for these things to be communicated to atomic phenomena in standard physics.

However when the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) is understood as all particles being composed of real standing waves in space, then the results make a lot of sense. If particles are standing waves in a tensile medium then the fabric of space is vibrating around all particles, and the direction of that vibration at any location is transverse to the radial direction. Wherever there is a massive concentration of particles such as in the Sun, then the combined effect of all the particles leads to space vibrating in the tangential direction relative to the Sun. This vibration directly leads to the equations of General Relativity and explains the bending of light by the gravity of the Sun without any need for non-Euclidean geometry. It also leads to the expectation that rotating objects such as the earth will notice variations in the vibration from all cosmological sources.