http://www.mclink.it/mclink/astro/ids/lib/spettro.htm http://www.byteman.it/mazzone/page3.htm l onsigli del irrcE : fare un corso di alpi/mo: commenti alle sue parole : veder i miti che cambiano mettersi in condizione di vedere le proprie priorita' spostarsi tutto alle spalle . Il vedere il vuoto .. PEr cosa significa. Un istruttore .. fare passi una alla volta in modo crescente con una persona che ti segue e ti fa capire le traiett,, piu' idonee. i consigli .. la comunicazione.. tutto puo' essere visto in una luce di reciproco scambio di informazioni io forniro alla mia comunita' tutte le informazioni che mi vengono in mente sfruttando le mie caratteristiche che sono quelle di scalare le montagne all'incontrario. Partendo dall'alto per scendere dal basso ma questo non si puo' fare se non si e' pratici delle primordiali regole di scalata basso alto.. Io normalmente ho scalato paretilibere a picco sul mare non coinvolgendo nessuno tantomeno Il prof. onirom non e' nel miostile ropere le palel io ho solo irazni non mi saluta forse si sente minacciato da ualcosa o da qualcuno. io del resto faccio del mio meglio per avere idee.. annin strocchi 3474444380ÿbabbo 5882782 59647475 330538861ÿandrea srtocchi 3356476358ÿriccardo foschi 3477566076ÿpaolo foschi 335 6327980ÿmarco ufficio 85264455 ÿfederico toto 3485310382ÿiemma 3393975848ÿpaolo giradiniere 3385956478ÿstipendi uff 57372969ÿtonino 3471093960ÿscuola malaspina 5404224ÿada 5430985 cell 3403963113ÿtaddeo 3398090735ÿvenere net 0636001021ÿitwg 0583909531ÿscambio venezia ÿcasa mobile 8811418ÿmontagna vittomasei086448134ÿciclope 3382406431ÿdelia 3475190447ÿgianluca 3391703775ÿgiorgio 3336362108ÿpelaia 3381494512 5085584ÿmichela 3488802785 7806871ÿragno tecnico wall streat 3478296820ÿsergio 3477635652ÿraffy ufficio 68308951ÿalit 3385975713ÿtaxi 5551ÿunipoll 800247724ÿpmpili usl spiche 5121631ÿrinaldi luigi 3395883680ÿusadomani 3391654864ÿbarca affitto330ÿÿassicurazione minu 3385414768ÿanni verdi 5571903ÿ ÿ ÿÿÿÿ`ÿ bbathena colosseoÿfrocio 3494033070 ÿ48930601 merulana 227 ÿshirone@ele.uniroma3.itÿantionori spicologa 4872383ÿfrancesco 3478157188ÿfilippo cesena 3482280371 0547331137ÿgreco 330291444ÿines 330943ÿele 547372261ÿgiovanni 3391703775ÿmagda 3493102709ÿfabbro 3389834712ÿbettini scrittore matto 069637279ÿsokilociv anniverdi 5582229 /22264ÿphp mauro 3284553202ÿdsaewoo officina 55260264 ÿÿÿÿ A No. "Antigravitation",i.e. "Gravifugal force Theory" stems from the Newton"s"Theory of Gravitation", and, consequently substantiates it, but in unexpected way. Q Discovering supra-light particles and nucleospinal reactor, you buried Einstein? A No, it is not correct. The main part of "Theory of Relativity" is perfectly accurate, but it is not talking about the world and events beyond man`s being (events in the world), as Einstein himself and the physicists came after believed. Rather, it deals only with the distortions of man's perception, just like Epicycles Theory favored by Ptolemy, which was better, and more precise, experimentally proved than Einstein`s theory. Epicycles are also distortions of man's perception, distortions caused by movement of Earth - paralactical illusion on the sky. Einstein is Ptolemy of our age. Him misconception regard reality of certain phenomena caused known incomprehensibility of the "Theory of Relativity", and misconception regard a top velocity of light. Light does not exist. Velocity c is a "transference constant" of vacuum or space. People will travel through universe much times faster than light, and information much times faster than people. .... Now you can clearly see that I am not "New Copernicus" or "New Einstein", or something like that, but rather poor New Aristarchus. Q Why "poor"? A Because I will also have to wait many centuries for full affirmation of my theories. You probably know that Aristarchus discovered true Heliocentric structure of Solar system. Him discovery was re-discovered and affirmed 17 centuries after, by Copernicus. " Globus, 22. 3. 1993. podkletnov 3 3 2.48% podkletnov gravity 4 2 1.65% antigravita 5 2 1.65% gravity and htsc 6 2 1.65% inflazione spiegazione 7 2 1.65% manuale ansys 8 2 1.65% sistema di fuga 9 1 0.83% acquilone 10 1 0.83% ansys manuale 11 1 0.83% antigravita' 12 1 0.83% antigravitational 13 1 0.83% basket-ball italy 14 1 0.83% bed and breakfast rome italy 15 1 0.83% bibbliografia sulla comunicazione esterna nelle organizzazioni 16 1 0.83% cable and wirless 17 1 0.83% cache:br2f8bjtjcec:spazioweb.inwind.it/antigravity/corrisponden 18 1 0.83% chimica fisica 19 1 0.83% club tennis 20 1 0.83% compressore portatile1 637 90.87% pressione arteriosa 2 6 0.86% antigravità 3 3 0.43% podkletnov 4 2 0.29% antigravita 5 2 0.29% antigravitational 6 2 0.29% antigravity 7 2 0.29% levitazione 8 2 0.29% nikola tesla 9 2 0.29% sistemi antigravitazionali 10 1 0.14% acquistare i libri 11 1 0.14% aimstar 12 1 0.14% antigravita' 13 1 0.14% antigravitazionale 14 1 0.14% bbeuropean 15 1 0.14% bed breakfast londra 16 1 0.14% big bang 17 1 0.14% boe sonore 18 1 0.14% budget accomodation glasgow airport 19 1 0.14% campo conservativo 20 1 0.14% come costruire fuochi artificialilevitazione 7 2 2.90% lisa lopes 8 2 2.90% paris hotel las vegas 9 2 2.90% podkletnov 10 2 2.90% wester union roma 11 1 1.45% accomodation paris 12 1 1.45% alberghi in england 13 1 1.45% antigravit 14 1 1.45% antigravita' 15 1 1.45% antigravitational forces 16 1 1.45% antigravity superconductor smoke 17 1 1.45% antigravità 18 1 1.45% astrophisycs movies antigravity 2 6 8.70% antigravità 3 2 2.90% bed 4 2 2.90% espagnolo 5 2 2.90% haarp podkletnov 11 2 1.54% propulsione 12 2 1.54% sesso selvaggio.com 13 1 0.77% antigravitational system 14 1 0.77% antigravity scheme 15 1 0.77% antigravità fisica 16 1 0.77% ayax 17 1 0.77% battello energia solare 18 1 0.77% buy superconductor disk antigravity 2 3 15.00% antigravità 3 2 10.00% distorted gravity 4 1 5.00% aerodinamica ipersonico 5 1 5.00% antigravita 6 1 5.00% are electromagnetic forces conservative 7 1 5.00% atronatico 8 1 5.00% documentazione and wirless 9 1 5.00% nikola tesla* 10 1 5.00% programmi haker per cell 11 1 5.00% propulsione al plasma 12 1 5.00% russian antigravity 13 1 5.00% schema antigravitazionale 14 1 5.00% tesla Paul G. Allen e dal responsabile Ufficio Tecnologie della Microsoft Nathan P. Myhrvold (http://www.text-mining.it/demo/formdemo.html) Rare Earth Debate Part 1: The Hostile Universe posted: 07:00 am ET 15 July 2002 When the book "Rare Earth" was published two years ago, it raised a great deal of controversy among astrobiologists. Written by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee, the book's hypothesis suggests complex life is rare in the universe, and may even be unique to Earth. If life does occur elsewhere, the authors contend, it will only be in the form of single-celled microbial life such as bacteria. This debate, a 5-part series beginning today, will cover a variety of topics prompted by the Rare Earth hypothesis. The moderator is Michael Meyer, the NASA senior scientist for astrobiology. Michael Meyer: Thank you for joining the first in what we hope will be a series of Great Debates. Before delving into the vagaries and specifics of planetary and biological evolution, and into a discussion of whether we are unique or common, it might be useful to set a baseline for at least one prerequisite for complex beings -- life itself. This leads to the first question: Other than on Earth, is there life in our stellar neighborhood? Peter Ward: There is a cultural assumption that there are many alien civilizations. This stems in no small way from the famous estimate by Frank Drake -- known as the "Drake Equation" -- that was later amended by Drake and Carl Sagan. They arrived at an estimate that there are perhaps a million intelligent civilizations in the Milky Way Galaxy alone. The Drake and Sagan estimate was based on their best guess about the number of planets in the galaxy, the percentage of those that might harbor life, and the percentage of planets on which life not only could exist but could have advanced to culture. Since our galaxy is but one of hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe, the number of intelligent alien species would be numbered in the billions. Surely, if there are so many intelligent aliens out there, then the number of planets with life must be truly astronomical. But what if the Drake and Sagan estimates are way off? If, as could be the reality, our civilization is unique in the galaxy, does that mean that there might be much less life in general as well? In my view, life in the form of microbes or their equivalents is very common in the universe, perhaps more common than even Drake and Sagan envisioned. However, complex life -- animals and higher plants -- is likely to be far more rare than commonly assumed. Life on Earth evolved from single celled organisms to multi-cellular creatures with tissues and organs, climaxing in animals and higher plants. But is Earth?s particular history of life -- one of increasing complexity to an animal grade of evolution -- an inevitable result of evolution, or even a common one? Perhaps life is common, but complex life -- anything that is multi-cellular -- is not. Chris McKay: There is no solid evidence of life elsewhere, but several factors suggest it is common. Organic material is widespread in the interstellar medium and in our own solar system. We have found planetary systems around other sun-like stars. On Earth, microbial life appeared very quickly -- probably before 3.8 billion years ago. Also, we know that microbial ecosystems can survive in a variety of environments with liquid water and a suitable chemical energy source or sunlight. These factors suggest that microbial life -- the sort of life the dominated Earth for the first two billion years -- is widespread in the stellar neighborhood. David Grinspoon: It is always shaky when we generalize from experiments with a sample size of one. So we have to be a bit cautious when we fill the cosmos with creatures based on the time scales of Earth history (it happened so fast here, therefore it must be easy) and the resourcefulness of Earth life (they are everywhere where there is water). This is one history, and one example of life. When our arguments rest on such shaky grounds, balancing a house of cards on a one-card foundation, we are in danger of erecting structures formed more by our desires than the "evidence." Frank Drake: I think this is an occasion where that old principal of good science, Occam's Razor, is helpful. Apply Occam's Razor to the question of the origin of life on Earth. We look at the Earth, and with regards to that origin, as best we know, no special or freak circumstances were required. It took water, organics, a source of energy, and a long time. Deep-sea vents are the current favorite and a reasonable place for the origin. But even if they weren't the culprits, the chemists have found a multitude of other pathways that produce the chemistry of life. The challenge seems to be not to find the pathway, but the one that was the quickest and most productive. The prime point is that nothing special was required. There will be a pathway that works, on Earth and on similar planets. Then, by Occam's Razor, the origin of life on Earth is nothing more than the result of normal processes on the planet. Furthermore, life should appear very frequently on other Earth-like planets. There will be microbial life nearby the solar system. Donald Brownlee: While there is hope and even expectation of nearby extraterrestrial life, the goal of "Rare Earth" was to point out that the universe is fundamentally hostile to life. Most planets and other places in the universe clearly could not support any type of Earth-like creatures. The universe is vast, so there may be many Earth-like places, but they will be widely spaced, and if they are too widely spaced they will be isolated from each other. What fraction of stars harbor Earth-like planets with Earth-like life? Is it one in a hundred, one in a million, or even less? Even the most optimistic have to admit Earth-like environments must be rare. In our book "Rare Earth," we suggest that extraterrestrial life is likely to be near but that complex animal-like life is rare and will probably not be found close to us in space. A major question about life relates to the environments needed for its formation and long term evolution. Unfortunately Earth is our only successful example. Predictions of life elsewhere are problematic; presently there is no detectable life elsewhere in the solar system. David Grinspoon: I am not convinced that the Earth?s carbon-in-water example is the only way for the universe to solve the life riddle. I am not talking about silicon, which is a bad idea, but systems of chemical complexity that we have not thought of, which may not manifest themselves at room temperature in our oxygen atmosphere. The universe is consistently more clever than we are, and we learn about complex phenomena, like life, more through exploration than by theorizing and modeling. I think there are probably forms of life out there which use different chemical bases than we, and which we will know about only when we find them, or when they find us. An obvious rejoinder to this is, "But no one has invented another system that works as well as carbon-in-water." That is true. But to this I would answer, "We did not invent carbon-in-water!" We discovered it. I don?t believe that we are clever enough to have thought of life based on nucleic acids and proteins if we hadn?t had this example handed to us. This makes me wonder what else the universe might be using for its refined, evolving complexity elsewhere, in other conditions that seem hostile to life as we know it. Frank Drake: All evidence of the most primitive steps in the first 700 million years of chemical evolution on Earth is apparently lost. We grope towards understanding of that profound gap in our knowledge by working backwards, hypothesizing that there once was an RNA world based on self-catalyzing RNA. But this system evolved from something else, and led to the esoteric DNA-protein world. As David Grinspoon rightly points out, we are not remotely smart enough to hypothesize ab initio the system of the DNA-protein world, or even the RNA world. It was handed to us on a silver platter. This should be a strong warning that we are over our heads when predicting what might have taken place on other worlds. Give us knowledge of another independent origin of life in space, and the doors to great progress in this field may open. Return Wednesday, July 17 for Part 2 of the Rare Earth Debate, when participants discuss how far (or how close!) alien life might be. Would you believe -- the Moon? Meanwhile, join in the debate.