Mike C

To be honest about it, yes, they do play a role in industry. BUT the question I bring up is the distribution of the wealth that the workers actually create even though they are considered unimportan because they can always be replaced. Well, government can also replace capitalism. So capitalism is also easily expendible. The worlds largest corporation is the US government and the head CEO has a salary of only $400,000 to show for his effort. Compare that to the earnings of some CEO's that range into the multimillions. And when they get bounced out for incompetence, some get severence packages in the hundreds of millions . It is the inventors that create the start up industries and sometimes they get not much in return.. Mike C

I am not interested in other opinions that require reading books that I do not do and have the ambition to take the time required. That title 'Super Capitalism' mey be applied to the 'new world order' that got hit by the Islamic sacrificial terrorists on 9/11. This not only got us involved in a new war, but it has ravaged our economy lately with the bankruptcies, worker sactrifices and other problems. Mike C

My posts all have given reasons for what I write. My understanding of astronomy and cosmology is based on a personal library and 20+ years of discussions within local astronomy clubs and websites. I welcome criticism as long as it is honest and without preduduce. Since my posts are 'new science', I cannot cite any other sources except my own educational self study. An example of establishment science is that they all seem to accept the BBT that I consider to be CosmoGONY . Mike C

When you read my posts, you will always notice a reason given for the article. I do not just dream up articles without some real reason for doing so. I will post some other articles there that will be of interest. These will also create some lively discussions, I'm sure. Mike C

Well, I recognize that capitalism has a say in organizing new industry and the work of designers, engineers and other such personel. But my primary claim is the downsizing of the workers to such lowly levels that is not warrented. A more equitable distribution of the wealth is good for a prosperous economy. Thanks. Mike C

I do NOT endorse communism. If you read the entire article, you would notice that I refuted communism as the source of my Brand of Socialism. It is based on the Constitutional mandat of promoting a 'peoples reprentative government'. Mike C

Well this is a surprise. Thanks. One thing about this site is that I am blocked from new posting and can only reply. I intend to stay on the SF-Original since I have other new posts I can enter their. Thanks again. Mike C

Can you explain what effect this time variance has on the universe? I just do not see how this would effect the current workings of the universe. In othr words, whats the point of these tiny abberations? Mike C

Our country is governed by a government elected by the citizens. Who granted him the right to own any land? Who built the equipment that he uses for drilling for oil? The workers made that equipment originally. This is 'tangible equipment made by some other industry. Our country and its industry is a working partnership harvesting natures wealth. There should be a better and more equitable distribution of this wealth. Mike C

No, It isn't the reason of my criticizing capitalism. It is simply that the distribution of the wealth is being kept by the people that do the harvesting of these 'natural' goods and keeping practically most of the wealth for themselves. In the US economy, the top earners have incomes of about a HALF billion a year while the minimum wage earners have incomes of about 15,000 a year. This is a ratio of 99+ to one. Since this is a lopsided distribution of the wealth. our economy is sinking into a depression and evening out to the third world level. So this UNequal distribution of the wealth that the workers actually create is my complaint about capitalism. Mike C

Well, I do not concern myself with nuclear physics because this is the result of the fission and the fusion bombs. I think that these bombs were a big factor in the promotion of the BBT. But my opinion on the Doppler RS observations is that the implications of these observations were accepted while at the same time, they were replaced by the EoS that does not have any preliminary evidence for its support. Also, there is other evidence that refutes the space as the cause of the Cosmological RS. That is the main reasons why I went off into a new direction. As far as evidence is concerned on my opinions, I cite the current basic physics as reasons for my interpretations. That is all I can say about my postings. Mike C

These tiny effects could result from flying through the Earths magnetic fields since the effects do not match. Such tiny changes are inconsequencial regarding cosmology IMO. Mike C

The capitalist is simply harvesting the oil created millions of years ago by using the workers to restore it for him. Likewise, the harvesting of trees is another similar way of harvesting capital Nature has created. Technically, he does not create it. Justs harvests it for himself by using others. So he claims most of the resulting wealth for himself! I do not question his share of this wealth since he has claimed it to a degree. The question is how much does he deserve and how much does the workers deserve? The US Constitution mandates taxation. Do you say he does not owe the government any taxes? I say he does. Mike C

There are two forms of physics, the observed basic physics that we see and is based on the Heliocentric line of scientists up to Bohr and then the man made physics based on the BBT and the nuclear research line of particle physics. What you say Craig, is the latter type that is not commonly spoken of. prerer to stikto phot6ns. Thanks. Mike C

Well yes, science is the object of study while the scientists determine what to teach. The people in power are the ones that determine what to teach. But dollars and religion can influence them. An error they teach is the flow of electricity in solid state electronics that ellectricity flows from positive to negative. The OPPOSITE is true. 'Positive here identifies with the popes and their church. And the proton identifies with the priests? Ha ha. Mike C

Influence dollars can control the content. This is a form of censorship. This says about the samr thing. Mike C ..

I do not quite understand who is stealing from who and giving to who? As I have said, the only people that create the 'real tangible wealth' are the workers (hands). Mikle C

YES ! Science can be hijacked like government are with INFLUENCE dollars. Mike C

The only people that truly earn their money are the working people. Brains do NOT create any REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH. This RTW is the kind of wealth you can see and feel. Ideas and dreams or greed does not represent REAL money. Only HANDS create the RTW that we all want like the houses, cars and etc. Brains can only conceive what they want but they need a pair of hands to create the real substance. Incidentaly, 'fangs and claws (capitalism) is waging war against 'HANDS' (workers) to reduce them to nothing but a commodity to be used at their conveniece and then discarded. Mike C

You mean the 'people bombs' that the OT promotes with the Islamic religion as an example? Mike C

I thought this should be ressurrected because of its inportance to all USA citizens.

To All: I just posted a new article at a competing science forum so the admin here has edited my post remove the mention of it! Mike C

I am not talking about the GBP. Do the stars radiate these GB photons? I asked C1ay to define the form of energy the regular photons carry and I get no replies. These are just replies. I can't post new articles. Mike C

There are a lot of such happenings in Nature. The Creator GOD herself has created the carnivores, diseases, poison plants, the food chain in the oceans and seas to prevent anyone specie from exploding in numbers and possibly other such controls. Mike C

That link defined the meaning of photons as 'momentum and energy'. I agree with this definitions. We can understand the meaning of momentum but how do you define the 'energy' that is being transferred through space? There are many types of energy. How do you define the word energy in this case? Mike C P. S. I have made a 'tremendous' new discovery regarding the Planck Constant but cannot post it because Tormod is blocking me from new posting. Can you convince him to remove that 'block'?